Reading mode: Light Dark

So, if you wanted a second system

Go to last post
Louis_Dobson said:
for heavyweight work, where would you go?
Click to expand...
If you mean serious heaveyweight work....Hassy with a digi back.....everything esle is a compromise.

For anything else the A900 will do it so long as the lenses will.....I was going to get the d700 but I dont normally need higher res and high iso at the sametime so the 1dmk2 will soldier on with the high iso role.

The A900 will drop in price I'm sure and I'll be waiting:-)
best
--
Geoff_R

'Always look on the bright side of life...'
http://www.fightwireimages.com
http://www.sportsshooter.com/members.html?id=7656
 
Not the company, but their commitment to photography.

Nikon will never abandon still photography. It's in their blood, and it's their primary competency. Neither will Olympus. If anything, those two companies have probably been the leaders in sensible enhancements for photographers. Nikon has restrained it's MP and returned to fine lens making, Olympus has put it's efforts into fine glass, and has pushed the envelope on small and precise, just like they always have.

Sony? They're in it for the money, and came out with a dslr to cash in on dslr mania. To them, photography is just a number on a balance sheet. To companies like Nikon and Olympus, photography is their roots, their reason to exist.

I confess to hearing the siren's song of the A900, but how long will they stick with a loss leader? Will they be able to supply precision glass for it in sufficient variety? And will they stay with it through the tough times ahead? I can't ever see Nikon getting away from it's roots. I can easily see Sony dropping dslr's if the drain on company finances continues.
 
amalric said:
John_McG said:
If the new 8MP's are any good
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=30270219

I wish someone could tell me for sure is they can compare with
compacts or not.

For DLSR I already have the E-510 and am happy (for now).
--
Click to expand...
As a 'second system' I have a Fuji F20 6 Mpx, which at 1600 ISO might
even be better than the E-410.
Click to expand...
It's a stunning camera. I look for a f30 or f31 for one year and I cannot find. I would by one in a heartbeat.
amalric said:
Some people here think that money grows on trees :)
Click to expand...
Me too, but not in my trees...
amalric said:
Am.
--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric
Click to expand...
--
Viorel
 
amalric said:
John_McG said:
If the new 8MP's are any good
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=30270219

I wish someone could tell me for sure is they can compare with
compacts or not.

For DLSR I already have the E-510 and am happy (for now).
--
Click to expand...
As a 'second system' I have a Fuji F20 6 Mpx, which at 1600 ISO might
even be better than the E-410.

Some people here think that money grows on trees :)
Click to expand...
if its made out of paper, it does :)
amalric said:
Am.
--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric
Click to expand...
--
Riley

no one notices the contrast of white on white
 
wasn't exactly like winning the lottery for them. It was a smart move since they didn't have to start from scratch in creating a mount or hiring lens makers though.

They own the video industry. I see photography as an extension or division alongside that really. Even then it seems they have kept it very old school with thier cameras, they skipped live-view or video recording for thier pro camera even when they obviously have the best available technology for it. Thier cameras don't feel like sony, many km fans will tell you it still feels like km without the buggy menus and hardware issues.

These camera companies may have had genuine intentions within thier roots and upbringings but they are very much in it for the money today and it shows in many ways. Canon with many of thier overpriced rehashed legacy based lenses, Nikon with a camera that is $5k more than it's twin brother that still offers a better vf and in-body i.s. , thier's a reason why canikon haven't offered in-body i.s. lets not kid ourselves here.

You are probably far more safe with sony in terms of having support for your equipment in the long run than you are with olympus or pentax for that matter, not to mention you'll always have access to cutting bleeding edge technology if needed, how long did E1 users wait for a replacement that arguably still didn't meet or exceed the competition in some ways?

The funny thing is your post makes it seem like sony's photo division has been catastrophic and that they are on the verge of dropping out. They make a killing with compacts and they've exceeded olympus and pentax for market share in very little time. Big companies can afford to lose money if it means that they are definitely going to have a big piece of the puzzle in the long run, companies like Olympus can't. Be mad fanboys but it's all very plausible.
TrapperJohn said:
Not the company, but their commitment to photography.

Nikon will never abandon still photography. It's in their blood, and
it's their primary competency. Neither will Olympus. If anything,
those two companies have probably been the leaders in sensible
enhancements for photographers. Nikon has restrained it's MP and
returned to fine lens making, Olympus has put it's efforts into fine
glass, and has pushed the envelope on small and precise, just like
they always have.

Sony? They're in it for the money, and came out with a dslr to cash
in on dslr mania. To them, photography is just a number on a balance
sheet. To companies like Nikon and Olympus, photography is their
roots, their reason to exist.

I confess to hearing the siren's song of the A900, but how long will
they stick with a loss leader? Will they be able to supply precision
glass for it in sufficient variety? And will they stay with it
through the tough times ahead? I can't ever see Nikon getting away
from it's roots. I can easily see Sony dropping dslr's if the drain
on company finances continues.
Click to expand...
--
Oldschool Evolt shooter
 
1) Sony are buying market share by flogging the thing under price. That's a chance to rip the barstewards off (I hate Sony). I bought the original 1986 VFR on the same basis, and never regretted it. After three years of VFR ownership, wonderful bike, never put a foot wrong, I even ended up quite LIKING Honda.

2) Sony make loads of horrible stuff that I don't want (televisions and all that junk for people who like to remove their brain in the evening). That means they'll still be there when the market collapses. Nikon are less diversified...
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
 
TrapperJohn said:
Nikon will never abandon still photography. It's in their blood, and
it's their primary competency. Neither will Olympus.

I confess to hearing the siren's song of the A900, but how long will
they stick with a loss leader? Will they be able to supply precision
glass for it in sufficient variety? And will they stay with it
through the tough times ahead?
Click to expand...
So? If you bought into the fourthirds system a number of years ago, say you got a couple of E1 cams, a 14-54, a 50-200 and am FL50 or two.

The E1 got outclassed in many ways long ago, so many were forced to buy another camera, say an E3.

The focusing was still dreadfully slow with say the 50-200, so Oly brought out the SWD lenses, so you were forced to buy these to get any advantage here.

If you wanted wireless flash capability like the competition, you had to dump the FL50 and buy the r version. Hello ... you've just gone and replaced EVERYTHING.

The A900 is here and now, and so are lenses for it. Even if they don't make another camera ever, at least you are shooting at nearly 25MP today with very decent IQ indeed. If that's what I needed, I'd rather be doing that than what so many here seem to do which is to keep clutching at straws that some incredible new technology is going to allow the production of a fourthirds sensor which will blow away the competition and let them shoot at 20+ MP with low noise and good DR. Because the way its looking, it just aint going to happen any time soon. And if it does, then there's the whole diffraction thing to consider. And the way history is writing itself, something else will crop up that will mean that you'll have to change almost everything you've bought in the past regardless, so worrying about the longevity of systems these days seems a fairly pointless thing to do, even if in the past it was.
 
Louis_Dobson said:
kills it dead instantly for me.
Click to expand...
Are you sure you can't get a nice little screw in wide angle adapter or something?

(that's half said tongue in cheek, however some of those things have occasionally been fairly decent)
Louis_Dobson said:
But I'm not averse to something LIKE that. Nobody makes quite what i
want though.
Click to expand...
I'm sure if you shot with an S5 for example, you'd want the DR of that camera in your E3 (or D3 come to that) yet you consider this (sometimes considerable) inadequacy acceptable ?

I'm being deliberately provocative of course, but the general pint I'm making is serious, and I myself can't fathom out exactly what is the ideal system to use in every situation :-(
 
Big Ga said:
I'm being deliberately provocative of course, but the general pint
I'm making is serious, and I myself can't fathom out exactly what is
the ideal system to use in every situation :-(
Click to expand...
You are not alone:-) but I tend to go with the one camera I reach for most of the time, the 1dmk2, now if I had a sony a900 thats as quick and as surefooted as the 1dmk2 with the high iso performance of the D3 I'd be there:-)

The little s5's have proven to be great for us but weddings are'nt our big payers and I cant afford to c*ck up on the other stuff so the 1dmk2 tends to go everywhere. I posted further down this thread I'd probably get a a900 but its more likely to be a good 2nd hand 1dsmk2....bit less res better high iso performance, got the lenses and the flash system. From what I've seen of Adam's upsized 1dsmk2 samples there's not a lot in the resolution department between it and the a900 anyway.

best
--
Geoff_R

'Always look on the bright side of life...'
http://www.fightwireimages.com
http://www.sportsshooter.com/members.html?id=7656
 
It is some compact for sure. I have a small many years old power shot and surprisingly I do use it more often than I thought I would. The images print just fine. I am now even thinking to add G10 for casual small weight shooting but I am not in a hurry, at least till spring. I am not a pro, do not sell my work (only sometimes give away prints as presents), and there is no need for me to impress no-one with the camera I carry. As my wife says - show me how you use it ;) You get the drift I hope.

As for Sony yes, they do impress big time. Which can only be a good thing - more competition, more options, lower prices (hopefully). The lenses, they will have them, and most likely sooner then many think. In addition, and since they inherited the mount, they continue receiving an enormous support from the third party makers, which Olympus in comparison do not. Sony today seems like a very good alternative to all levels, and I think it will only get better. They sure have the potential to make it work the best the want it.

--
http://photo.net/photos/sngreen
 
Both the E3 and the D3 are compromises I like every day. I suspect a G10-alike may be just too far down the light-but-no-headroom road.

The G1 may be the answer, when the lenses appear.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
 
I've used the A900 with the 16-35mm and 70-400mm at the A900 launch. As a former Contax user I trust Zeiss completely, the large poster size prints at the launch were exceptional, I lik Sony ergonomics and controls, and the price is quite good in comparison to the competition.

They also have a very trick new flash that rotates around the lens access so your shadows are always natural whether in landscape or portrait that is a must.
But I'd still keep the Olympus gear for press work.

Doug B
 
Louis_Dobson said:
go, let me know. I have a shed load of Nikon lenses, so maybe we
could cut a deal...

Just an idle thought at the moment.
Click to expand...
Well, could be an option, never know... I need to think through all this for the future.

Have not decided on building up the Nikon-kit yet. I am very interested in the 50mm AF-S, if I get it, both my Sony 50mm 1.4 and the PanaLeica 25mm will go for sure. The future of the A-700 depends on me keeping the A-900 ... need it as a backup only.

Ahh, too many choices... problem is, I like all this gear, they served different purposes, but having 3 systems just for personal use can not be justified.
--

E-3, E-510, ZD 7-14, ZD 14-35SWD, Leica D 25 f1.4, ZD 12-60SWD, ZD 35-100 f2, ZD 50-200SWD f2.8-3.5, EC20

A-900, A-700, 20 2.8, G 35 1.4, 50 1.4, Zeiss 85 1.4, Zeiss 135 1.8

D-700, 14-24mm, 105mm VR macro
 
To be honest, at this point it's unlikely, but I'll let you know if things go that way. Te Oly has been my main personal system and I like it a lot, so will stay most likely. So it's more like a battle of the FF cameras at this point... Hmmm, high-resolution or low light...
--

E-3, E-510, ZD 7-14, ZD 14-35SWD, Leica D 25 f1.4, ZD 12-60SWD, ZD 35-100 f2, ZD 50-200SWD f2.8-3.5, EC20

A-900, A-700, 20 2.8, G 35 1.4, 50 1.4, Zeiss 85 1.4, Zeiss 135 1.8

D-700, 14-24mm, 105mm VR macro
 
ProfessorX said:
To be honest, at this point it's unlikely, but I'll let you know if
things go that way. Te Oly has been my main personal system and I
like it a lot, so will stay most likely. So it's more like a battle
of the FF cameras at this point... Hmmm, high-resolution or low
light...
Click to expand...
Well I guess if you do a lot of low light Nikon it is. So Louis can get his A-900 :-) Thanks for the reply. Ill be watching the E-3 and see if it drops more and more by the end of January.
ProfessorX said:
--
E-3, E-510, ZD 7-14, ZD 14-35SWD, Leica D 25 f1.4, ZD 12-60SWD, ZD
35-100 f2, ZD 50-200SWD f2.8-3.5, EC20

A-900, A-700, 20 2.8, G 35 1.4, 50 1.4, Zeiss 85 1.4, Zeiss 135 1.8

D-700, 14-24mm, 105mm VR macro
Click to expand...
--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top