(SR4) Sony testing various fullframe prototypes. Nikon DX3 competitor coming (with built-in grip)
Image on top shows the Nikon D3X which could get competition from Sony!
As you know Nikon fullframe cameras do use sensors made by Sony. (UPDATE: Nikon says their FF sensors do have a custom design but the D3X sensor and A900 sensor are very similar in specs). And we always had the feeling that Sony isn’t seriously competing against the famous partner. But this could change soon! According to our sources Sony is testing different fullframe prototypes. And we know for sure that at least two FF cameras will be announced in 2012. One of the tested prototypes is a high resolution camera with built-in grip aimed to compete against the Nikon D3X and Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III. Sounds like Sony is really planing to enter the (High) PRO market! One of our sources told us the prototype is based on the new Translucent technology and has a very high resolution sensor (Close to 40 megapixel!). Please keep in mind that we are talking about prototypes so specs are not 100% definitive yet. But I will keep you updated with all the news I can get.
P.S.: I also have a question for my sources, will Nikon still have a “priority” on the new generation of Sony sensors or will Sony don’t give any advantage to Nikon anymore? Thanks!
Linsk to the cameras mentioned in that post:
Nikon D3X at Amazon, B&H, Adorama, J&R, eBay
Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III at Amazon, B&H, Adorama, J&R, eBay
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
ZPk!Qg~~60_35.JPG)
zstan
2 years ago |I wonder how close can the prices be…..
yurilee
2 years ago |AWESOME!!!!!!!
Marc
2 years ago |I’m probably never going to buy a high-end professional camera, but I wish Sony good luck with entering that market. And I do think that competition in general is a good thing. Sony shouldn’t just leave the Pro-market to Canon and Nikon.
Selling large quantities of entry and advanced models is also a possible strategy, but what about Sony DSLR/SLT users that want to advance and maybe become professionals. At some point, they might have to leave Sony …
Good luck with entering the Pro-market and kick some Canon & Nikon ass
yurilee
2 years ago |If the translucent technology can bring the price down, it would be super cool! the competitive pressure would make the top models more accessible to enthusiasts!
Andrew Reid
2 years ago |Nikon make their own full frame sensors. The D3S has a Nikon designed CMOS, built by Nikon.
admin
2 years ago |That’s a long story Andrew. Nikon “claims” that the sensor is a bit different due the custom “tweaks” they made. De facto performance in RAW form the D3X and A900 is on par (they small differences are due the different AA filter).
I know form my soruces that Nikon uses Sony sensors as base and that they make their own tweaks on them.
CyberGene
2 years ago |There was an article with pictures of disassembling various Nikon cameras with sensor part numbers, etc. It was clearly shown that among Nikon fullframe cameras it is only the D3x which is using Sony sensor whereas D3, D700 and the newer one in D3s are designed by Nikon and manufactured by Nikon. When I have a little more time, I’ll find the link, it’s from nikonrumors.com site.
CyberGene
2 years ago |Here’s the link:
http://nikonrumors.com/2011/01/26/the-sensors-of-the-d3-d3s-d700-and-d3100-are-made-by-nikon.aspx/
john
2 years ago |“Nikon have announced that they designed the sensor. Nikon has no wafer fabrication capability so they outsource the sensor production, but they are keeping the foundry close to their chests, so close that we must speculate to identify the source. The obvious choice would be Sony, who build the sensor used in the Nikon D2X, however there are no Sony markings on the device, and the device structure is markedly different from the other Sony CIS we have analyzed. We considered Matsushita/Panasonic the device structure has similarities to the Panasonic CIS we have seen, but it is sufficiently different that we have doubts that it is theirs. Thus we are speculating who else could be the manufacturing source. I believe Nikon would stick with a Japanese foundry. An interesting possibility is Renesas, they have close ties with Nikon, supplying several imager processor chipsets, they have a patent portfolio in image sensors indicating they have active r+d in this field, and they have the fab capabilities.”
danny
2 years ago |Yes, the sensor they put in D3X is the same sensor in A900. But sensor in D3, D700, D3S built by Nikon. It’s different.
Thom Hogan
2 years ago |There’s no “long story.” It’s a pretty simple story.
* Nikon has designed and made (via a third-party fab) sensors for the following cameras: D2h, D2hs, D3, D3s, D700, and D3100.
* Nikon was involved with customizing design in conjunction with Sony for the following cameras: D1, D1h, D1x, D2x, D2xs.
* Nikon used Sony sensors with little or no modification for: D100, D40, D50, D60, D70/D70s, D80, D90, D200, D300/D300s, D3000, D5000, D5100, D7000, D3x.
Dulaney Ward
2 years ago |Thanks fo r this, Thom.
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |Much thanks Thom for the info
Iliah Borg
2 years ago |> De facto performance in RAW form the D3X and A900 is on par (they small differences are due the different AA filter).
Well, de facto the difference in raw performance is 14 bits vs. 12 bits, noise level, very different color filtration.
john
2 years ago |To my knowledge the closest Nikon came to manufacturing their own sensors was this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LBCAST
and even “outsourced” the wafers.
Every so often I like to DESIGN cars.
My latest design was manufactured by Buick.
I designed it in 4 doors and a very nice brown color.
Thom Hogan
2 years ago |It doesn’t matter where a sensor is fabbed (manufactured), it matters who created the sensel and photosite structure (designed). See my post, above. Nikon has had complete design ownership of four complete sensors so far.
Andrew Reid
2 years ago |Sony build Nikon’s APS-C sensors not the full frame ones. http://www.eoshd.com/content/519
Alpha55
2 years ago |HIHIHIHI, you are WRONG!
Froo
2 years ago |Yeah, whatever. Sony did build the D3x sensor. If Nikon now makes sensors, it’s with licensed Sony designs; a company doesn’t just develop world-class skills overnight in a completely different area than their own. Of course Nikon people will spin this to their advantage. For example, Nikon firmware is now developed by a joint Nikon/Fujitsu company. Guess who makes Nikon’s processors? Fujitsu. Do they indicate this anywhere?
Carl
2 years ago |Do Sony? Heck, I’d bet most of Canon’s chips and some of their software aren’t in house jobs, either. It’s a completely normal business practice.
Froo
2 years ago |But of course, I completely agree! And Sony’s processors are probably made by Toshiba.
Mark
2 years ago |And Toshiba probably out source it to China.
Andrew Reid
2 years ago |Ah but I think Sony build the sensor. Nikon just spec it. Is that what you mean in the article? Nice rumour by the way, looking forward to the next Nikon and Sony FF.
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |and Toshiba outsource it from China?!
Andrew Reid
2 years ago |Can we have a way to edit our comments?
ed paul
2 years ago |lol, D3x, the most expensive camera by nikon, is using sony A900 the 24mp sensor.
admin
2 years ago |Yes, It’s going to be implemented this week!
Alfonso
2 years ago |Great! I hate leaving typos in my comments
Dulaney Ward
2 years ago |kalpurush :)
2 years ago |Thanks. It would be very handy
frosti7
2 years ago |whoooa..sony’s sensors development is leaving everyone in the dust…
voyager212
2 years ago |A couple of years ago, when Sony was introducing A350 (which I posses), I read some analysis telling that due to wevelangth of light there is no sense in packing more than about 14M pixels on an APSC sensor. Now I read that those sensors are to have 24 M pixels – can anyone comment on this ?
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Most lenses perform best on f/5.6
If we take this as an edge than 24 MPx on APS-C is a border where theoretical lens limited only by diffraction gives you one light beam per one pixel. In any resolution above this the Airy disc will be bigger than a single pixel. At 97 MPx on APS-C a single point of light will cover square 2×2 pixels giving you no advantage at all by increasing resolution any further.
Here’s a diffraction calculator in Polish, You pick Sensor, Resolution, than in results you’ve got point where resolution is limited by diffraction and below a point where single point of light covers four pixels.
It calculates resolution for real light beams, so if you’d like to know: At 24 MPx you are limited to: f/4.5 for red light, f/5.7 for green light and f/6.7 for blue light.
Carl
2 years ago |Diffraction is a bit of a dark art, as lens aberrations continue to decrease past the point of diffraction, and the optical degradation past that point is gradual, not sudden. The exact aperture of maximum image quality will vary a bit from lens to lens, and not be exactly the same for all lenses matted to a given sensor.
I find about f/12, give or take a stop or so, to work best with most of my lenses on a 24MP full frame sensor, but then again Minolta didn’t try as hard to reduce spherical and chromatic aberrations and vignetting as for example Zeiss do, and thus typically reach their optimum slightly later than some of their competition.
Still the rule still holds, smaller pixels means earlier onset of diffraction, which means less potential to stop down a lens to increase image quality, which means better corrected lenses are needed.
Maximus
2 years ago |Todays 16MP compacts with 1/2,33″ have a much higher pixel densitity than a possible full frame Camera with 40MP.
Full frame as almost 20 times more space than those 1/2,3″ sensors.
I know that this is not a fair comparrison in terms of image quality, but they exist and at ISO 100 they deliver OK-good shots.
SleepyHeadde
2 years ago |sounds good.
Gamagama
2 years ago |I don’t think Sony will stop selling sensors/building sensors to nikon, provided the huge sales of the pro camera compared to sony’s own ff models.. Business is business after all. Unless sony’s ff sales is really competing with nikon’s, which I don’t see it’s true at the two years
ed paul
2 years ago |+1 that is so true. not to mention, japanese loyalty is number 1. before sony brings in alpha, they saved nikon ass from closing down. nikon will never forget this, even if sony stop making sensor for nikon, i bet nikon will still rent a sony fab for make the sensors.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |This Nikon game is quite silly, as so are opinions of the Nikon users screaming that “NNNoooo, my camera doesn’t share sensor with Sony one!!!!!!!!1111″.
We’ve seen this crap for ages, including Nikon own promo materials with “Sensor designed by Nikon” where people tear down the camera and find out “Sony” signature in the back of their sensors, or when the tests results were surprisingly identical for same MPx count cameras while Nikon still claimed that they have their own Sensors.
Yes, Nikon decades ago designed some sensors with cooperation of external companies, most notably the D3s (cause noone wanted to produce such a low MPx sensor at the days), but it’s one of VERY few exceptions where Nikon actually did something mostly on their own…. no wait, they did not anyway, as Nikon doesn’t have any semiconductor manufacturing plants so some other company was actually making them.
Thom Hogan
2 years ago |I personally don’t care where a sensor came from or who designed it, though it is interesting to follow the technologies involved. Nikon themselves have stated something similar, saying several times that they simply pick the best sensor available for a product. There primary choices have been Sony, Foveon, Fujifilm, Kodak and their own sensor design group, which has been in existence since 1988. They chose Fujifilm in the time before the D1. Rumors say they almost chose Foveon for one camera (they certainly had a prototype testing it).
But Sony users have a different problem to contend with: why is it that Nikon has often (I almost wrote consistently) gotten the best looking results out of the Sony sensors? There’s more to image quality than just the sensor. The things you do downstream from the sensor and the demosaic you apply are also important.
john
2 years ago |@Thom Hogan
It doesn’t matter where a sensor is fabbed (manufactured), it matters who created the sensel and photosite structure (designed). See my post, above. Nikon has had complete design ownership of four complete sensors so far.
@Thom Hogan
“I personally don’t care where a sensor came from or who designed it, though it is interesting to follow the technologies involved.”
So it matters who designed the sensor but you don’t care??
“But Sony users have a different problem to contend with: why is it that Nikon has often (I almost wrote consistently) gotten the best looking results out of the Sony sensors?”
Thanks Thom for your insight.
Strange you are slumming it here on a Sony rumor site but I’m sure we will see a flood of input from those in CaNikon camps once Sony release there next cameras.
We will all anxiously await your full review of the next jointly shared Sony sensor.
Don’t you have some predictions to make on your blog?
Carl
2 years ago |Minolta supposedly also had Foveon prototypes.
The difference between Sony and Nikon/Pentax cameras using the same sensor are much smaller than they used to be, I guess because Sony has done a lot of catching up in the last few years. I’d struggle to be able to tell an image from an A580 from one from a D5100 outside of their different colour rendering.
ieR
2 years ago |they did, but technology during that time, was not that great. today (since technology has advanced) sony is doing research into that sensor. but with time, any technology can get better and mature to a point. i think DSLR is at a point where they max out MP, or shutter speed, etc. now they looking into DR/HDR/and gimmicks to boost their camera. but SLT on other hand, has a longgg way ahead.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |@Thom Hogan – oh… wow, I’m surprised you posted here after all. Well, it’s good, maybe by watching Sony related sites you’ll make your future predictions bit less silly than “Sony will be dropping full frame“.
“gotten the best looking results out of the Sony sensors” – well, it’s true, Software does a lot of things. Just take a look at leap Sony made with A550 (where supposingly DxO Labs helped Sony with denoising algorithms) – new sensor wasn’t even 1/4th of a difference in an image quality progress made with this camera.
But well, Nikon during last few years used to be the leader in high-ISO image quality – they had really big advantage out there over Sony in 2008 and yet – in very very short time Sony managed to jump up to the point where difference between Sony and Nikon cameras image quality are negligible – what you pay for now and what counts are additional features (eg. Magnesium body in D7000), not less noise in higher ISO as it used to be.
—
Oh, and again: What makes me laugh most is the fact that Nikon guys repel knowledge about their cameras using Sony sensors, not that “it’s thanks to Sony why you got nice pictures“, sure it’s not – but never the less being so Anti-Sony and negating obvious facts by Nikon users is ridiculous IMO. Good that in this year it changed a little bit when some notable Nikon community members made fools of themselves when it become publicly acknowledged that certain cameras actually DO use Sony sensors. Notably those from Tom’s very nice list.
araru
2 years ago |Top Pro model with or without OVF?
dork
2 years ago |shouldnt you be ashamed and shut up after all those fake propaganda regarding sony giving up full frame sensors?
instead youre keeping to spread your message how superior nikon and their “selfdeveloped” sensors from sony are.
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |Well, didn’t Thom imply SONY sensor is the heart of Nikon camera by his comment:
“gotten the best looking results out of the Sony sensors”
ed paul
2 years ago |those of you who have not really used SLT for a period of time, will never understand the why the claim “evf benefits outweigh the ovf”
Daniel
2 years ago |Interesting rumor…promissing!!
Rachnaroch
2 years ago |“And we always had the feeling that Sony isn’t seriously competing against the famous partner.”
And the A900 or A850 were what? They competed and they failed. End of story.
I hope this time they get better results.
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |a900/850 failed? Against which cameras?
It will take five more years for Nikon/Canon to compete against a900/850 at the price Sony has offered to it’s users.
gamagama
2 years ago |agree. A900/A850 isn’t failed i think. It opened a niche market which entertains the budget pros.. In the past, only rich/business professionals were able to buy those FF gears.. no one could expect a FF DSLR priced at 1500euros below.. many canikon users switched to alpha because of a850..
kevin
2 years ago |Perhaps not five years, but in three years they haven’t even come close. Has anyone ever looked at the fundamentals of what the competition can do? If you want a full-frame Canon to match the 1/250th sync speed and 5 fps burst speed of the a900, there’s just the 1Ds mkIII for $6k–and that camera has lower resolution and a smaller range of sensitivity. Want a Nikon? It’s $8k. The D700 can’t match the resolution or burst speed of the a900, and the 5D MkII falls short not just in those two, but in the sync speed as well.
jackau
2 years ago |it is only natural for Sony to throw out a Full Frame that reach over 36 mpx when APS-C can reach 24!!
they come off the same production line, just different cutting process, like that of LCD panels.
Thom Hogan
2 years ago |True. Similar, but not quite a perfectly analogous. Once you have a sensel that works well, you can create sensor of any size with it. You can even scale it to some degree. Sony has a very excellent sensel right now, and it should scale well for virtually all large sensor uses.
Steve
2 years ago |This is an old discussion, but if you believe the a850/a900 camera’s to be a Sony failure then you should ask the question why?
I think it to be very difficult to move a sizable number of professional photographers from Canon/Nikon in a single platform generation, and attempting to do so without a supporting optical line-up.
It took decade for Canon to move ahead of the lead Nikon started with its F line of 35mm cameras in the 1960, 1970 and well into the 1980’s so it’s not surprising that Sony failed to change this picture in three years with it a900 and a few Zeiss lenses.
That’s why Sony’s next step into the pro market so important, and not only for Sony, but for all of us that have an investment in the A-mount.
I like this rumor
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |I am not a tech pro but the market price Sony has offered for the a900 to it’s customers is a revolution to me
Carl
2 years ago |The belated Konica Minolta 9D arrives, and only seven years too late.
Seriously, though, I’m not surprised at all they have working prototypes of such a thing. The question is, whether they plan to bring them to market or not, which is a much harder call. Pentax has had fully working full frame prototypes out in the wild, but chose to do nothing with them, though Sony is thankfully not Pentax.
Anyway, while such a camera will no doubt be too pricey for me, if it brings more pros into the alpha system, that means more market for exotic lenses, so I gain indirectly from it.
Froo
2 years ago |Although Pentax’ full frame camera was based on the infinitely crappy Philips 6Mp sensor, and that’s why it wasn’t launched. It was based on the MZ-S, one of the cooler film cameras, and I’m kinda sad it wasn’t commercialized with a better sensor.
So, no, Sony is not Pentax, and won’t act the same WRT prototyping as they have much higher control over their sensor source.
Carl
2 years ago |There are plenty of images made with the Contax N Digital floating around the net. To my eyes, they are far from “infinitely crappy”, actually they’re quite nice, though obviously six megapixels isn’t a lot of resolution.
Kyocera and Pentax certainly had a lot of issues bringing the chip to market, but my take is that the problem wasn’t one of image quality, but something else. Unfortunately, I don’t have any inside sources to draw a deeper conclusion on the matter. If I did come across an N Digital at a good price, I’d happily take it as a second body even today. With the N-mount 85/1.4 I think I could make some nice web size images.
pancanikonpus
2 years ago |who use whose sensor is not a matter at all. Leica just an good example in its lineup. Never over emphasis it. Most important are the price and performance between Sony and Nikon lineup
Good Luck Sony!
Niklas
2 years ago |This is frikkin awesome!! I’d love a 40mp baby brother with 20-24mp, SLT (with flip-up mirror),and built-in grip! A price tag of around $2000-2500 USD would be sweet too.
Keep it up Andrea!
JACKIE CHAN
2 years ago |Even making a performance FF camera competing with NIKON and Canon, No SSM completed lens system (eso. super tele) is still useless.
horst
2 years ago |Here’s the rub : Sony won’t be PRO until they have their cameras and lenses in all the major equipment rentals on the world, have pro support stations everywhere and add a bunch of lenses .
The body really doesn’t matter much, it just has to be good enough.
john
2 years ago |chicken or the egg
Dulaney Ward
2 years ago |Exxactly; one step at a time. Sony is well aware of what they have to do, and they’ve been working on it.
Dulaney
harpo
2 years ago |Admin,
“P.S.: I also have a question for my sources, will Nikon still have a “priority” on the new generation of Sony sensors or will Sony don’t give any advantage to Nikon anymore? Thanks”
This may help in answering your question. Seems Nikon has significant news coming in August as well. A new D4 and D400 for the fall. Will be very interesting to see who gets out first and how the products compare.
I’m assuming the D400 will be using the new 24mp a77 sensor while the D4 could be using Sony’s new full frame sensor?
http://nikonrumors.com/
john
2 years ago |Probably the real reason Sony delayed their A77 announcement.
ieR
2 years ago |maybe, MAYBE, sony is being nice and play fair to have a head to head competition with nikon? to release at the same time and see who will be superior? Maybe… this is daring.
or maybe MAYBE, nikon and canon went to Sony and beg them to ‘slow down’ the roadmap? because the two camp are suffering? so sony said Okay… MAYBE… maybe i am just a big alpha fanboy talking nonsense… lmao. (these comment is intentionally to piss photonut off)
Niklas
2 years ago |Andrea,
Do you have any clue as to how many megapixels the “low-res” version coming in 2012 will have? 24mp?
Thanks,
Niklas
Eric Calabros
2 years ago |“Why” Sony should compete with big guys in FF area?
I dont say Can’t, cause Sony is able to do that. the question is Why?
Why should I pay several thousands dollars for something struggling to be like the thing Nikon offers? it would better for Sony to put Innovation card on the table that changes the game, otherwise, photo community will continue to hear CaNikon stories.
Wing Wong
2 years ago |FF is important for a variety of reasons:
- no crop factor. The crop factor is great for shooting things far away, but for folks wanting to use their 70-200 for portraiture work, the cropping is a pain point. For wide angle landscape photography, this is highly desirable.
- better image quality and/or bigger image file. Generally speaking, larger photosites will yield better s/n ratios, though generally, you are also getting more MP on a larger sensor, which means better for cropping or blowing up.
- perception of quality or “Pro” bodies.
Minolta/Konica-Minolta had an effectively “Pro” body in the A900. Sony has allowed it to languish, giving the impression that they were going to only focus on the consumer market. There are plenty of brands that compete in that market. But that market is also associated with less than stellar image quality. Keeping an active presence or taking on the Pro market with FF pro cameras that deliver will reinforce the fact that Sony IS a competitor and relevant.
It should be noted that continuing development on FF with anti-shake IS progress and innovation.
john
2 years ago |“Why should I pay several thousands dollars for something struggling to be like the thing Nikon offers? ”
Because it’s still going to be several thousand dollars cheaper than Nikon and Nikon’s camera doesn’t support the lenses you own?
Jakop.com
2 years ago |Its about time if it’s true. I would love to see this happen.
emopunk
2 years ago |It makes perfect sense, Andrea. As you read on Nikonrumors, Nikon D4 and D400 are going to be announced in August. So we’re going to see same sensors of Sony A77 and A9XX used by Nikon that soon.
JSWinNYC
2 years ago |I’m a little confused about the title of this rumor – won’t this be a camera to compete with coming D4? Sony already has D3 competitor in a900? Yes, a900 doesn’t compete well with D3x in autofocus speed, or in JPEG quality (this is less of an issue for pros, excluding journalists, who are not likely using D3x anyway), but beats it in low ISO performance and clubs it in price?
A post above says the a900 is a failure? Use one seriously before making such a statement. Was the comment about the camera being a commercial failure? I think this is off the mark as well. It doesn’t sell as well as it’s big 2 counterparts, but that has much less to do with the camera than it has to do with perceptions about the camera companies, and people thinking about the camera system as a whole (lack of fast super teles). Sony knew this going in. I would say that the persistent sales of the a900 2 years into it’s life confirm what a success the camera is, and have given Sony the foothold into the pro market that the camera needed to establish. It takes a lot to get pros to look beyond the big 2, but I don’t know of any pro who has used the a900 and not been impressed.
And then there’s the question of whether or not it matters who designs/makes a sensor. The sensor is the most important part of the camera, it should go without saying. If a camera company doesn’t have access to the best sensor(s), nothing else much matters. I shoot full frame Canon alongside my a900 (less and less), and am moving to Sony because of a design issue with Canon sensors (banding). All of Canon’s cameras have this issue to a greater or lesser extent – some people work well with it, I personally think it’s a deal breaker. Nikon can pick and choose their sensors, and this offers some advantages, but very large potential problems. It is clear that Sony and Nikon are now serious competitors – what will that mean for both going forward? Since Sony has the sensors, it is likely more problematic for Nikon. Kodak is out of the business, so Nikon has very few places to turn. That has to be a concern for those thinking about camera systems.
Anyway, I very much look forward to a full frame SLT ASAP, please.
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |@JSWinNYC
Very well put and thought out.
Steve
2 years ago |I love my a850
I have never understood why so many posters on this site complain about Sony not having a professional quality camera.
And the a900 is also a very good camera at a very completive price.
My RAW images with my Zeiss lenses are as good as any Canon only Nikon beats it in high ISO shots in my opinion.
I think it because many readers can’t spend $2,000 for a camera and that have never used it.
The OVF on this camera is wonderful nothing like the a580 or some other cheap camera.
If I had an a580 I would want a EVF too, but the OVF on a pro camera like the a850 or a900 is better for pro work.
I hope the EVF on the a77 is better
PhotoNut
2 years ago |Blah, Blah, Blah again…..
For one thing, Nikon does not generally use Sony sensors in its full frame cameras. The only Nikon FF camera with a Sony sensor is the Nikon D3x. That is it! Why can’t you get your facts straight before posting something and you still leave it up there as if it is still under dispute. Come on…
Secondly, Sony absolutely has no support for professional photographers. There are is Sony professional services, it does not rent Lenses and it has very,very little retail space presence in the United States. In many states there are not even one or two stores where you can actually see or play with a fullframe Sony DSLR and professional lenses.
Sony has only *one* telephoto prime lens available (300mm f/2.8). There is no 400mm f/2.8, no 500mm f/4, no 600mm lens. Nothing!
I don’t think Nikon or Canon has anything to be afraid of from Sony when it comes to Full Frame professional cameras , accessories or related services.
And there is almost no way I would spend several thousand dollars on a fullframe DSLR only to get one with an EVF that is supposedly superior due to prism costs savings. When you’re spending $3,000 or more for a camera, I don’t think that you want the manufacturer to take away your 100% coverage pentaprism just because it wants to save $50.
To me, one of the worst things about DSLRs with EVF is that unless the camera is fully on, with the sensor and image pipeline continuously operating, you’re not able to see through the viewfinder. You cannot frame shots, look through a telephoto lens for photo opportunities or do anything else with the camera+lens without engaging the entire imaging pipeline. Then as this pipeline is being used at > 30fps, the sensor and associated electronics is getting hot so that when you finally do take your picture, you will get increased image noise from the heat + the reduction in light from the SLT mirror.
That is a ridiculous proposition for a professional. Imagine you’re covering a four hour event, with a normal (D)SLR, the camera is in standby mode and consuming very little power even though it is ready to take a picture in an instant of a second. The sensor is shutdown reducing heat and associated image noise. Only the bare basics of the camera circuits will be consuming power. If the camera goes to sleep, then even less circuitry will be operational. Yet, you can still frame shots via the optical viewfinder in preparation for taking a shot if required. You press the shutter button lightly and the rest of the camera wakes up in milliseconds, the focus and metering goes into action and you can capture a sudden event. Your battery will last a very long time as the power is only taxed when shots are actually taken.
However with the EVF camera, you’re quickly draining the battery as you scour the scene using the viewfinder and even though you never take any pictures. Finally when you decide to start taking pictures — perhaps it is a hot day — the camera starts giving you overheat warnings, the battery dies or you simply get excessive noise at high ISO caused by a hot sensor.
I don’t mind people have the option of an EVF and SLT. It provides some benefits for some users and probably gives larger viewfinder image on low end cameras used to pentamirrors.
But there is absolutely no reason to artificially limit photographers to a solution that degrades most still picture scenarios for benefits in video functionality that may not be desired to begin with. For example, I would trade fast video AF for slow contrast detect AF (like D7000)if it meant preserving the good OVF and removing the light robbing, image degrading SLT mirror.
In the end I just wish this site would stop publishing Sony PR astroturf articles masquerading as grassroots rumors. I find it so clear that almost all the legitimate rumors published here, including the A77 pictures, seem to come directly from SONY.
Tidbits here and there to create marketing buzz but in the end no real substantial and unbiased information that users want to know about to guide their purchase decisions or whether to jump ship from Sony.
harpo
2 years ago |Wow…I may not stick with the new Sony products, but at least I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt and not criticize them for something that’s yet to be released and reviewed. At this point it’s impossible to assume a FF SLT is going to have the same over heating or EVF issues as the a33 and a55. Just a lot of speculation on your part.
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |@PhotoNut
What’s up?
Not a good day?
One question to you – have you ever used a Sony dSLR/SLT?
Your comment doesn’t reflect that, sorry!
And,
What’s your prob if Sony feed this site?
Please don’t complain like a child mate:)
David
2 years ago |A lot of assumptions there photonut, lol.
Futile
2 years ago |Finally!
This is what I’ve waited for since my Film Dynax 7!!!!
I’ll have one please.
akclimber
2 years ago |Any word on whether Sony will introduce tilt-shift (or just shift) lenses to accompany the new FF cameras? I do ocasional architecture shoots and currently use a Canon 5D2 plus a 24mm TS-E Mk 2. I’d seriosuly consider jumping ship to a Sony FF DSLR (I’m already planning to switch from a Canon 7D to A77 for whale photography) but only if a shift or tilt shift lens was available. (I guess there’s a Schneider 28mm f/2.8 shift lens available with an Alpha mount but I’d like a bit wider).
Cheers!
Carl
2 years ago |If Sony stays in the business, I’m sure they’ll come out with a tilt/shift lens eventually. I doubt it’s at the top of their to-do list, though.
In the meantime, there’s a T/S adaptor out there for medium format lenses. It’s a little pricey, but some of the Mamiya 645 lenses are quite cheap for the image quality.
Dulaney Ward
2 years ago |Jump, Nut, Jump!
Rob
2 years ago |Sony’s cameras offer astonishing value – the quality for the price is great. We are benefitting from the increased quality and decreased cost of equipment, and Sony is leadint the charge in producing great equipment that’s within the reach of the most photographers. The authors at LL really have a great perspective on this topic. Say what you want about the A900 and Sony’s high end aspirations – this article argues that Sony and the 900 are an exceptional value http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/quality-vs-value.shtml
Genaro Diaz , fotografo de boda en galicia
2 years ago |I need one new camera FF by Sony.
Thanks.
knurd
2 years ago |Shouldn’t Sony be aspiring to compete with the D4 coming this year? Offer equal ISO performance and enable 24p and manual controls. Not that pros would use video all that much but it’s such a stupid thing to disable when your competitors are offering it on all of their models – pro or consumer.
Hopefully they keep one of their FF models relatively low in price and MP. I’d like to switch to FF soon without having to sell a kidney.
Rob
2 years ago |You want everything, and make it cheap. Sorry knurd, but it isn’t going to happen. Just out of curiousity, what can you pay? Remember, the D3X body goes for about $8500 – and an A850 ~$2000. Do you feel Sony should supply you with a fully functional pro body with world-leading specifications and movie making abilities for less than $2000? Don’t think that Sony can’t build a boffo body – their video cams go up into astronomical prices, and that’s what it costs for the best – and Sony CAN build the best, but you can’t afford it. Get real.
Steve
2 years ago |Rob, thats a common thing on the site, I often wonder how many posters are willing to pay the price for what they claim to want.
I too would like a Zeiss full-frame and fast 1.4 pro lens and not pay more than $600.00, but it’s not going to happen!
I see this all of the time from the a77 and NEX posters and I think many are going to be shocked to see the Zeiss lenses costing more than the camera.
Sony full-frame cameras are a bargain, and the current crop of Zeiss lenses and equal to and cheaper than Canon or Nikon most of the time.
If you don’t need a 40+ lens selection and other professional add-ons the Sony is a great choice.
Carl
2 years ago |That’s pretty much de rigueur on photography forums in general, and hardly something specific to this place.
Still, while it’s generally the case, it isn’t true of all of us. I have some nice G lenses, and am quite prepared to buy more if the lenses I want are made. That doesn’t mean on release I’ll strut into Sony Style and whip out a gold card, but I’ll put money aside over the course of months and then buy it when a good deal comes along.
knurd
2 years ago |Obviously you didn’t read my post correctly. The first part was talking about Sony competing against Nikons high end line and that they need to basically try to be a step ahead if they want to compete. The second part was my hope that Sony will make a lower model like a D700 or 5D for an affordable price because the SLT models have a smaller production cost. Another thing to bring the price down is having a body that’s not weather sealed or weather proof. Some of us don’t need that. So is it unrealistic for Sony to make a basic FF camera in the $1600-$2000 range (like a FF a55 or NEX)? No. It seems like quite a huge gap to go from an $1100 a77 to a $2300 a850. Why not bring something out that meets in the middle and also something that’s in the pro race with D3 at that price as well so everyone wins. I don’t think I’m being unreasonable here. And because you’re an FF Sony owner it doesn’t make you right or justify your rudeness. Forums are for discussion and in no way was I demanding a D3 Sony equivalent for the price of an aps-c camera.
acolyte
2 years ago |Eh? This is a forum? I thought this is where ignorant lurkers bash each other :p
FullFrame (24x36) NEX
2 years ago |SONY PLEASE MAKE A FULLFRAME NEX!!!
Lee
2 years ago |I have been starting my photography business with SONY Alpha set.
Still on going.
Waiting for more lenses.
BTW: any news about 35 F1.4 ZA version?
kysham
2 years ago |I don’t shoot at the telephoto range all that often. So the lack of a 400mm, 500mm, 600mm or even an 800mm telephoto fast prime lens doesn’t really affect me. I would really like to know how many people actually buy these type of lenses. Not saying nobody buys them, but how many? I am guessing more will buy the excellent 24-70 & 16-35 Zeiss lenses than the 500mm F4. So this complaining of the lack of telephoto fast primes really only affect a select few. I will also not be surprised if some of those who complained about the lack of telephoto fast primes in Sony’s range don’t actually own one in their own system.
I’m using the A850 with the 24-70 F2.8 & 85mm F1.4 Zeiss lenses for my shooting. And I can safely say that I can never get the kind of output I am getting out of this setup at the cost I paid for the equipment, if I was in Canon / Nikon camp. To me, the A900/A850 cameras is a great success. At the end of the day, it is the output I want at the lowest cost possible that matters.
Rob
2 years ago |@Steve and kysham,
I have an A770 with the Zeiss 16-80 and an 850 with Zeiss 24-70 and G70-200 (and a Sigma 100-300 F4), and would like to note to most folks that my lenses cost several times what the body costs. There’s no way I could afford this system in Canon or Nikon, and I’m pleased that Sony has chosen to spread the goodness to those in my earnings bracket. Minor alleged improvements in Nikon images are NOT enough to get me to jump ship. So, trolls can come in and imply as much as they like – the price spread is insufficient – i.e., Nikon is not delivering a product worth the 2-3x difference. Nikon users should wake up, and the people carping on this site should do the same.
Rob
2 years ago |Meant to say A700 – but also note that if the new FF is worthy, I’ll pick up another Zeiss – either an 85 or 135. The 24 f2 will also be considered.
Carl
2 years ago |It’s not so much that people buy these lenses as it is companies buy them, and their staff photographers use them. Pretty much every photo you see in the sport section of the newspaper is taken with one of those fast long lenses. The cost isn’t a problem when someone else is footing the bill.
Of course, if you’re in that field Sony and Pentax aren’t even options, even if you happen to shoot one of those brands for personal work. Canon and Nikon are the only options. If Sony wanted to compete in that market, I think they could find enough customers to make it work as they’re a big, well respected company with lots of experience in pro imaging. As it stands now, though, they’ve only got the lenses inherited from Minolta’s half-hearted attempts at competing in that field.
Zstan
2 years ago |I think Sony should try to create more tilt shift lenses instead of telephoto lens. Architecture photography is still quite a good area to tap into compared to motor sports and wild life which are dominated by canikons. Unless Sony can come out with a 500 f2.8 which weighs only 1kg I doubt people will switch. My 2 cents.
sonyboy68
2 years ago |Sony will launch tilt-shift lenses either.
Please just wait the new FF together.
Rob
2 years ago |Nice idea, but again I ask, what’s your budget? What equipment do you have already Zstan? Do you already have a number of high end FF lenses? Also, what’s your basis for saying that architectural lenses would outsell telephotos? Is this just hot air?
Tom_Tom
2 years ago |Carl what on earth are you talking about? :
” As it stands now, though, they’ve only got the lenses inherited from Minolta’s half-hearted attempts at competing in that field.”
Have you ever heard of the sony/zeiss 85mm 1.4 and 135mm 1.8? They are only among the top ranked lenses in the world period, and also a major contributing factor as to why some pros and semi pros jump ship to join sony. I agree Sony needs to keep building their lens line up, but I’m sure they are and it doesn’t happen over night.
Also about the News companies buying into sony systems, well thats most likely not going to happen anyway and I doubt that is top of the the list for the sony executives when they think of market strategy,, “yeah lets get that one little newspaper in town to buy a sony system” does that sound right?
Carl
2 years ago |If you had read the context of my comment you’d see I was talking exclusively about supertelephotos. There’s plenty of excellent shorter focal length lenses in the system and always has been.
If you need a 400mm f2.8, then Sony is a no go no matter how much you like the brand.
Rien Vesseur
2 years ago |Yes, yes, we can all be proud to have the brand of camera we have. This is nearly like discussion on the merits of a certain brand of beer. I am glad Sony got its act together with the A550 and I’m a happy user of that camera. But then came the A580. And now there is talk of no more APS-C DSLRs. And my wife’s A500 has problems with “First Frame Black”. And an A300 I had is now toast because someone spilled some Coke on it. And so on.
Compared to what my father paid for his Minolta 7000 kit in the eighties our APS-C cameras can do a lot more for a lot less money, but since we want it cheap the build quality is only mediocre. You can’t have your cake AND eat it, say the Brits.
You want a full frame camera at a reasonable price? Sony had it, it was called the A850 and it is now discontinued. Obviously it wasn’t THAT much of a commercial succes then. It would be nice if Sony continued investing into its camera division, because the synergies will continue to be available to the average hobby photographer. Then again, if Sony would see more commercial interest in dropping the Alpha mount altogether, I am sure they’d do so. No sentimentalities there. No illusions here.
Regards from Canada!
ieR
2 years ago |who said Sony will stick with plain EVF forever? hybrid Evf is in high consideration in Sony development. to be honest, EVF was a rush of work, but then, sony has experiences with EVF wayy long ago.
nikon is also working on hybrid OVF/EVF, aka, having HUD style on OVF. not sure its to be called EVF or OVF. or HVF
photonut: go buy urself a camera company and start making ur own BEST IN THE WORLD camera… shoo shoo.
REVENGE
2 years ago |*Yawn, just get the APS-C semi-pro model right.
emopunk
2 years ago |@ieR: I agree that hybrid would be the best solution, if it’s possible to make. Do you have any concrete informations about that? I would love to have a FF with a bright 100% coverage OVF and overlaid informations like histograms etc.. kinda like fuji x-100. Sbav..
Dulaney Ward
2 years ago |I think we’ll have a great EVF that almost everyone loves long before we have a “hybrid” that is really very satisfactory. So I believe that the future is with the EVF.