No point really, if they don't bother to support the mount with new and useful lenses. Making a "pro" body (with I imagine "pro" pricing), with only entry level lenses is pointless. Perhaps Sony thinks we should all be using the FE lenses so that we have an easy transition to FF; but that's silly because of how big the majority of FE lenses are.
it's not "silly" for people who want better p.q., which is what you get with fe glass.
If I had a small-ish 16-50mm f2.8 and one or two more primes (notably a 100mm f2) I'd probably consider it. If they're really going "mini-A9" they're dead on arrival, since there's no point in sports ready AF, no blackout, fast frame rate, etc when your longest lens is a kit lens. If they're really going that route they need to at minimum add a 200 and 300mm prime (even f4's would be better than nothing).
you are clearly not a sports shooter, nor a bif guy.
because many of those people want a high mp sensor with a reduced fov, so that they can claim that it has more "reach" than a ff sensor body... and indeed, there is something to be said for that, if you are already having to crop your ff images.
the requirement for being a "mini a9", is for it to have a stacked sensor, like the a9 does, and those high-end sony compacts... if sony does that with aps-c, at the right price point, it'll sell.
Nope, not sports nor birding/wildlife. Fashion and beauty. For work I have FE glass and an A7RIII. For tests and just fun stuff I'd prefer not to lug around an extra 15-20lbs worth of gear through the deserts or up a 3mile incline trail.
you don't need a crop body to be light weight... the little Samsung 35/2.8 for example is an xlnt lens for landscape use, particularly on my old a7r body, which is light, and has better pq than any crop camera on the planet.
the af is pretty snappy as well.
Besides, who says that FE, or FE sized glass is a requirement for quality? Look at the Fuji system.
I have, no thanks, it's overhyped and overpriced, which is why we have Fuji owners bailing out of it for sony… Fuji af in particular leaves a lot to be desired.
I don't really see the point in desiring a "mini a9" with all the same tech...because looking at my A7RIII and my A6300 in had right now...the size difference is barely there. Assuming it really is a stacked sensor, at 20fps, with at least 24mp and top of the line AF...I bet the price is going to be well north of $2000. Add to that the fact that for your sports/bif photographer there aren't any decent telephotos other than the 400mm (ie. no 300mm 2.8 or f4, no 500mm 5.6, no 200-500 zoom, etc)
you are not up to speed on sony, at all.
here... go dig up the a9 adapted lens bif pics that alex phan shot, they are in other threads out there:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1558327
Now for a rapidly shrinking market,
sony is selling high-end compacts like the rx100 series, that have stacked sensors, in a compact market that's far more depressed than either aps-c or ff, because it's getting killed by smartphones.
so it seems that your generalizations about the marketplace are not correct.
The Samsung/Rokinon (and the Zeiss for that matter) are indeed small...but they're also f2.8. We need some faster lenses. They started off exceptionally well with the 35 and 50mm 1.8's, then just kind of abandoned it. 16, and 24 1.8's, and a 100mm f2 would fill out their lineup nicely with a range of FF equivalent covering 24-150mm. A lightweight tele (think 200 or even 300mm f4) and at least one f2.8 zoom is really all they need to say "Hey, if you're looking for small/light, and still fairly affordable...we've got you covered.". We're talking like 5, maybe 6 lenses here.
For every person you say is leaving Fuji, I can say one is leaving some other brand and not going to Sony either. For all the people who do buy Sony, a lot go for the cheaper "entry level" bodies. You can check Amazon (aka 2nd biggest retailer in the world) sales rankings for mirrorless cameras: In the top 10, the A6000 in various configurations is in 5 spots, including #1. The A5100 is also #6. So clearly the type of people who purchase mirrorless by and large are generally going for the budget options. With the exception of the #2 (A7III) there's no other high end cameras being sold, so you'd think someone would make "budget friendly" lenses appropriate for the size of the small bodies.
To your next point: If you want to adapt lenses then more power to you. I prefer native. There's no right or wrong with how you, or I for that matter fill out our kits. I don't however think that not A) shooting birds (sorry, I find that eagles don't pay as well as clothing lines) and B) using lenses longer than 200mm would qualify me as "not up to speed" with the system. If you're saying that adapted Canon super-tele's perform as good on Sony with an MC-11 or MB as they do on a their native bodies then I've got a bridge to sell you in lower Manhattan.
Even in the case of Mr. Phan, he's using an A9 which should at the very least be capable of delivering in that situation. The vast majority (in other words: ALL) A6XXX bodies at this moment have AF nowhere near as capable as the A9. If the A7XXX ends up having it, then that might be an option for the small percentage of people who shoot birds, both for a living and as a hobby....unfortunately that does nothing for the people that dont. I've looked into adapting and nothing is 100% perfect or as reliable as native. Your needs clearly differ from mine, so I'm not sure what we're even arguing about.
Also, we're not talking about Fuji AF, the discussion is on lenses. I'm not a fanboy or homer, so I can admit that there are in fact...other brands than Sony that make excellent glass. Fuji being one of them. You don't like Fuji's AF? Well then I guess you made the right choice shooting Sony....but again, we're not talking about the bodies...we're talking about glass. Considering the majority of photographers shoot something other than sports or BIF, needing A9 level af is unnecessary in most cases; a full lens lineup on the other hand can only be a positive. I'm not opposed to having both, but one without the other is pointless.
At the end of the day, it boils down to money. They can't sell many lenses if they don't make any. Maybe your friends and associates feel differently, but every person save for one who buys cinema glass only has said they either don't like their A6XXX series body, or have already sold it due to not having enough decent and affordable lenses. They could learn something from Nikon, who 5 years ago kept seeing declines in sales of DX bodies because they kept rehashing the D7XXX series and never released any new DX glass. Yes, a lot migrated to FF...but a lot also just abandoned the brand completely.
But whatever, you want a high end APSC body and good for you. I want more lenses, both affordable and high end options. You're likely to be happier with the outcome sooner than I. I've no desire to argue with you about it though...I've got a shoot tomorrow that I should be preparing for. Best of luck with your photographic endeavors either way
