This sounds promising?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
Euell Veteran Member • Posts: 3,464
Re: More absurdity
1

Off The Mark wrote:

JohnNEX wrote:

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?

No, I have not. Can you provide links to the articles, which would be at least a dozen to be 'numerous'?

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?

Which lenses are missing, other than the f/2.8 standard zoom and a tele zoom? I think Sony has the edge on primes over Fuji. The line-ups are at least broadly equal. When people whine about the lack of lenses for Sony E, they really just mean the lack of a 16-50 f/2.8, one lens. I think that lens will come this year.

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?

Sony a6000 outsells Fuji cameras year after year. Sony knows that whiners on internet forums constitute a tiny fraction of their aps-c market. The market is Western grandpas wanting to take stills and 4k video of their grandkids playing soccer and Asia tourists, both wanting something small and light. They won't look on internet forums and they won't buy large f/2.8 lenses. Every single contributor to this forum could move to Fuji and neither Sony or Fuji would notice the tiny change in their sales.

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?

'High end' here means a6000 rather than a3000. It does not mean a6500 rather than a6300.

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

They are cheap to make?

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

Because A mount is a great system with excellent lenses which are falling in price and Sony wants to keep those people using Sony cameras. Doesn't seem that mysterious.

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?

Maybe a few more, but not a huge amount. This is just something that enthusiasts on forums want to believe. Enthusiasts on forums are almost entirely irrelevant. We are not the market.

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?

Yes. The a6000 still sells like hotcakes. They just watch the money roll in while they work on their professional FE cameras and lenses, which is where the real market share wars are. Their aim, as they have repeatedly said, is to be a major part of the professional camera market, with Canon and Nikon, hence going hard on FF and largely ignoring APS-C. Now they have established a clear lead in the pro mirrorless market, Sony may come back to APS-C, but Sony doesn't 'need' to compete with Fuji and they don't need to 'respond' to the XT3.

It appears that you have completely missed the point of this thread.

When the original poster said "This sounds promising," they were referring to developments in APS-C cameras and lenses.

It's obvious that SOME people want them.

Why is that so hard for you to understand???

Right on.  Simply because Sony may have focal lengths covered doesn't end the discussion.  What Sony is particularly missing are top quality APSC lenses, including faster, better zooms that are optically well corrected.  Of course, the current lens lineup for the most part isn't awful, but in looking at the test data (DxOmark e.g.), we see that there is obvious room for improvement. See, for example, how much better the Sigma 60mm f2.8 performs than any Sony APSC lens, as well as most of the FE lenses. And, it is small, light and inexpensive.  Surely, Sony can do better.

 Euell's gear list:Euell's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS 7D Sony a6000 Sony a6500 Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM +12 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow