This sounds promising?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
jande9
jande9 Senior Member • Posts: 1,346
Re: More absurdity
1

Off The Mark wrote:

wb2trf wrote:

They do not need to dump the 16-50 and 55-210. This is merely what you want.

The general problem on this forum is that people turn their personal wishes into what they think are imperatives for camera companies. These pronouncements always seem crazy to me.

Although I don't understand why they are pursuing the camera market at all, they seem to be succeeding in their own terms while not following your advice.

Have you seriously not seen the numerous articles by various review sites out there lamenting the lack of quality aps-c lenses for Sony cameras?

Why do people on the Fuji forums who have moved from Sony to Fuji point to the quality and quantity of Fuji aps-c lenses being a major reason in why they moved?

Why do you think that Fuji has so many dedicated users? Do you think sony would not like to have those Fuji users buy sony cameras instead?

In the article on dc.watch that was cited by the original poster, Masaaki Oshima from Sony states that the demand is for higher-end aps-c cameras (and less demand for lower-end aps-c cameras). Do you think that people who want those higher-end aps-c cameras will want to use the 16-50 and 55-210 kit lenses?

Why is it that adapter companies like Sigma and Metabones have successful business models making adapters for Sony cameras?

Why does Sony still sell - and people still buy - the LA-EA A Mount to E Mount adapters?

Why does Sony still spend money to create firmware that improves the AF performance of such adapters?

Can you say that Sony wouldn't sell MORE cameras and lenses if they had better aps-c lenses?

Or do you think it is a good business strategy for Sony if people buy adapters and use either third-party lenses or buy used use A Mount glass that they bought off ebay?

Completely agree.  The cameras are great but the kit lenses are woeful.  My Pentax and Canon 18-55 were much better than my Sony 18-55.  My 55-210 is not sharp and my 18-200 is also not sharp, and that is not a cheap lens.  The pictures I have from my 6mp Pentax 100D with the Pentax kit are sharper than the pictures from my 24mp Nex 7 with the Sony kit.  There is something wrong with that.

Kit lenses are cheaper because they are slower, which I have no problem with, but there is no reason they should also be soft.

Does Sony intentionally make the kits that poor in order to drive people to their premium Zeiss lines?

Jan

 jande9's gear list:jande9's gear list
Sigma DP1s Sigma DP2 Merrill Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony E 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 OSS
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow