Evaluation of A-Mount by a Top Sony manager

Started 11 months ago | Discussions thread
ActionPhotoPassion Senior Member • Posts: 2,857
Re: Evaluation of A-Mount by a Top Sony manager
1

toughluck wrote:

Gand-Alf wrote:

minoltak wrote:

There is an interesting article at SonyAlphaRumors about an interview with a top Sony manager talking about Sony's view of A-Mount during the times.

I did not know that A-mount was such a flop for Sony.

very-interesting-sony-manager-interview-a-mount-was-a-failure-they-were-close-to-join-mft-e-mount-original-idea-was-to-make-super-compact-cameras

I remember reading on this forum, and I happen to agree, that if Sony really did want to see the original Sony Alpha DSLRs have success on the market, they should have promoted it more or better. Not much was done in that area from the beginning. How many magazine ads do you remember reading about these products? Very few to none. Also, how many Sony executives or important spokesmen actually raved about this series publicly, or actually used it themselves?

Depends on the country. In Europe in general, and in some countries in particular (like Poland), Sony had reps and had recruited brand ambassadors to promote the system and had a lot of success.

Since Sony Alpha cameras had Konica-Minolta's general design, Sony executives were counting the days the original Alphas bit the dust and they could brand a camera as 100% Sony from the design on up.

Sony took over all KM assets, including all employees from the consumer photo department. Sony paid all their expenses moving from Osaka (Minolta headquarters) to Tokyo (Sony HQ). Sony spared no expense to make them feel welcome.

And that is happening right before our eyes. This is not my idea, rather it is what various people shared on this forum years ago while waiting for new cameras and lenses to be issued by Sony. And it looks like they were right.

85/1.4 ZA was a 100% Minolta design as a 2006 successor to 85/1.4 G (D) due to RoHS.

16-80 ZA and 16-105 were Minolta designs. 135/1.8 ZA was a Minolta design for a halo product from a few years earlier, but was shelved due to having no full frame camera design in the works. Sony revived it because at that time they planned the A900.

70-300 G SSM and 70-400 G SSM were probably not a Minolta original design (Minolta wanted a more compact successor to the 100-300).

A100 is a Dynax/Maxxum 5D with many improvements that would go into a 7D successor as well, which eventually materialized as A700. That, and A900 very much had Minolta roots. I'm fairly sure the A900 originally had a pop-up flash planned, but Sony — wisely — decided to release it without one and to make it very clear (which is why it was designed with the very prominent pentaprism hump).

Other cameras likely had their roots already in Sony. A200 is a simple evolution of A100. A300 and A350 were minimum effort ideas to respond to first generation live view cameras and to provide the highest resolution amateur DSLR. As such they were both brilliant and desperate. Once Sony had the appropriate products, they shelved these ideas and conformed to what the market expected.

SLT and mirrorless were born at Sony, but designed by the same culture that previously worked at Minolta.

Then those brandbassadors did a great job indeed... Never heard of any except for Gary Fong sorry...

-- hide signature --
 ActionPhotoPassion's gear list:ActionPhotoPassion's gear list
Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D Sony SLT-A58 Sony a7 Sony a77 II Sony a99 II +20 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow