The camera to beat:

Started Apr 25, 2014 | Discussions thread
GaryW Veteran Member • Posts: 8,858
Re: The camera to beat:

Mel Snyder wrote:

ttan98 wrote:

1prime wrote:

blue_skies wrote:

1prime wrote:

I quote from DPR: "The X-T1 is probably Fujifilm's best camera to date,....

Ok, Sony, your target has been set up, now take aim and fire! I'm tired of continually seeing a Fuji product with an 84% rating. By about this time you should be able to muster a competitor APS-C camera that will outscore the X-T1's 84%. Yes, the well price positioned A6000 is doing well for you with a better than 10% market position..... This is your chance to attain an extremely high DPR score and keep us NEX-7ers in your stable.

And yet, it seems like the A6000 would make a fine Nex-7 upgrade.  

At some point, it has to be considered that if the Fuji is that great and such a great deal, who cares what Sony does?  Just buy the Fuji.  Of course, all camera systems have their drawbacks too.  The grass is always greener....

DPR gives the Nikon D7100 an 85% -- maybe that would be better than the Fuji.  You'd also have more of a selection of lenses.  I think the typical Fuji buyer probably likes the exclusivity of not being part of the crowd, kind of like a Volvo owner.  

-- hide signature --


I don't know, Don.

  • Fuji X-T1 + 'kit' lens: $1,699
  • Sony A6000 + 'kit' lens: $800

Sure, the X-T1 scores higher, but it should be compared with the A7, not the A6000.

The A6000 will sell a ton more -- these are vastly different price-points, and going over $1000 is going to be really tough for most people to get past.   And, I agree, if you get into the A7 price range, you have to consider the advantages that that might bring.  But DPR only ranks the A7 as an 80%/Silver, so it's obviously no good.  

Kudos to Sony for bringing a full-feature top-of-line spec APS-C camera out for $650 (body only).

  • In terms of market share: Sony 1 - Fuji 0
  • In terms of bragging rights: Sony 0 - Fuji 1

Pick your horses...

And there is room between the A6000 and A7 for either/both an A7000 and A6...

-- hide signature --


Henry, Thanks for your reply. I tend to agree with your conclusion that there is room for something along the lines of an A7000 without or with hump. My point is "wouldn't it be lovely" if Sony achieved the the bragging rights to go along with their increasing market share. Implicit in this accomplishment would be a solid APS-C camera with all its bells and whistles well fastened. That is, enhance the room for improvement on the A6000. And l think Sony can do that at a price between the 2 comparative cameras you mention. Don

-- hide signature --


Also Sony should provide better quality lens than its kit lens 18-55mm, something similar to Fuji's very well received lens, 16-55mm f2.8 at a reasonable/affordable price unlike the Sony's Zeiss 16-70mm at $1000. Until Sony starts developing then release that lens I wouldn't buying more Sony body.

Why couldn't you buy a body-only A6000 and add the 16-70 and be at the same price-point as the Fuji?  Or do you want Sony to make a kit lens that is better than the 16-70?  That would seem odd and unnecessary to me.  Or if you mean that Fuji's kit lens is better than Sony's 16-70, I guess I'd have to see a comparison to believe that there would be a significant difference, but that certainly should be something to consider if purchasing a $1700 system.

Sony can never beat Fuji on quality or price

1.Fuji is a top optical company. It doesn't have to pay a logo license fee to anyone, or to hire an outside firm to design their lenses, or have contractors make the lens components. On a $1000 lens, that probably saves them $300. Unlike Sony, it's been making lenses for more than 70 years.

In addition to CZ, you'd think Sony would have some leftover Minolta know-how.  Anyway, if you mean that $1000 is too expensive, Sony wouldn't attempt to sell a lens for $1000 unless they actually could sell it.  I'd rather have some Minolta-style lenses that are good bang-for-the-buck, but Sony seems to be focusing on the higher-end right now.  Oh well!

2. Sony is under the gun from shareholders - specifically activist investor Dan Loeb, who is whipping them mercilessly over profits. Dan owns 7% of Sony shares, more than all the management and board combined.

OK.  Are you saying he'll force Sony to make poor decisions to make short-term profits?  Or?

-- hide signature --

Gary W.

 GaryW's gear list:GaryW's gear list
Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Sony Cyber-shot DSC-V3 Sony Alpha DSLR-A100 Sony Alpha NEX-5 +10 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow