new Sony DSLR releases

[Heidfirst]

just to give foghorn67 some ammunition ...

http://news.sel.sony.com/en/pr...slr/release/40522.html

A230, 330 & A380 look to be essentially just facelifts of the existing A200/A300 & A350 very much aimed at capturing the upgrading P+S/"soccer mom" (presumably market research says that's where the volume is) market rather than enthusiasts.

New kit lens, a new 50mm f1.8 (DT, so crop only not FF) & a couple of others.
These also appear to have an in-lens motor at a cheaper price than on any Minolta/Sony before so presumably micro motor rather than ring.

Also a new small flash.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Heidfirst

New kit lens, a new 50mm f1.8 (DT, so crop only not FF)

that seems... strange

 

[jpeyton]

Sad. They're relying on their name, not innovation.

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Heidfirst

New kit lens, a new 50mm f1.8 (DT, so crop only not FF)

that seems... strange

1 of the things that gets held against the Alpha system is no source for new cheap 50mm primes (Canon users' nifty fifty equivalent).
This provides it ( & in motorised focus form) whereas A900 users are expected to spring for the f1.4.

& the new kit lens looks to be optically quite an improvement over the old http://artaphot.ch/index.php?o...=view&id=175&Itemid=43

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Sad. They're relying on their name, not innovation.

I don't think that they have abandoned enthusiasts but that they have a fairly strong idea/roadmap of where they are going & for the moment that says gain volume (which is the entry level)/market share whilst manufacturing more cheaply.
These products are no doubt tuned for what market research said was wanted without incurring major hardware change costs.
Major changes would be expected in the next iteration - it's a bit like what Canon do or Intel's tic toc.

Rumour has it that the A700 stock is almost exhausted so perhaps it's replacement will be more exciting.

In other news Sony's $1 billion loss is starting to look good :roll: compared to Panasonic's $3 billion or Hitachi's $8 billion! :Q

 

[ElFenix]

i wonder if it really is crop only or if it turns out (like a several pentax DA lenses) that it works just fine on 35 mm sensors. it's not like there is a big weight constraint or design difficulty involved.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: Heidfirst
I don't think that they have abandoned enthusiasts but that they have a fairly strong idea/roadmap of where they are going & for the moment that says gain volume (which is the entry level)/market share whilst manufacturing more cheaply.
These products are no doubt tuned for what market research said was wanted without incurring major hardware change costs.
Major changes would be expected in the next iteration - it's a bit like what Canon do or Intel's tic toc.

Rumour has it that the A700 stock is almost exhausted so perhaps it's replacement will be more exciting.

In other news Sony's $1 billion loss is starting to look good :roll: compared to Panasonic's $3 billion or Hitachi's $8 billion! :Q

On the other hand, Nikon is tackling the bad economy by cutting production and reducing inventory. I was expecting an A700 revision, since Nikon is due to replace the D300 this year as well.

Originally posted by: ElFenix
i wonder if it really is crop only or if it turns out (like a several pentax DA lenses) that it works just fine on 35 mm sensors. it's not like there is a big weight constraint or design difficulty involved.

Agreed; it probably will work fine on a full-frame body. My guess is that Sony's design may have produced sub-par resolution results in the borders on a 24MP full-frame sensor, and they didn't want to associate this new 50mm lens with their professional full-frame camera.

 

[Munky]

Those look kinda ugly to me. Clearly targeted at the average Joe, rather than the photo enthusiast.

 

[Heidfirst]

couple of hands on previews:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1242619201.html
http://www.alphamountworld.com...230-a330-a380-previews

feedback on the Sony orientated forums has been quite positive whilst realising that the bodies aren't really targetted for your average forum posting/reading enthusiasts but to widen their appeal (DSLRs for Dummies .

the 2 new primes are generating quite some interest & the new small/cheap flash also turns out to have at least some controller ability too (don't think that the Canon or Nikon equivalents do?).

 

[ElFenix]

that brown/copper color is ugly

 

[Heidfirst]

it's a special edition at no surcharge & apparently it came top in focus group testing ...
if you don't like it buy the regular one

 

[AndrewR]

I was originally skeptical when the rumors are circulating, but the emphasis on the neophyte market is intelligent since that's where the numbers are. If Sony concentrates there and gains a large following, they increase the potential number of enthusiasts who will upgrade to the A700 and A900 and their successors (A700 is rumored to be coming this year, from what I've read).

The new flash looks very interesting especially once the controlling capabilities are revealed. A900 users are thinking that the new flash can serve as an inexpensive controller on their flashless body, rather than sacrificing a more expensive F58 or F42 (or the older ones).

I'm interested to see some full reporting on the optical quality of the new lenses. I don't expect Zeiss quality, but I hope they can perform well against their counterparts.

 

[Heidfirst]

The 18-55 outperforms the old 18-70 - see link already posted http://artaphot.ch/index.php?o...=view&id=175&Itemid=43.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the 50/1.8 betters the old 50/1.7.
The 30mm macro is apparently still being developed but again I would expect decent quality & the 55-200mm is presumably just the existing 1 optically but with a micro motor rather than screw drive & it's already noted for being better than would be expected from it's price (especially in cheaper Tamron form).

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: ElFenix
i wonder if it really is crop only or if it turns out (like a several pentax DA lenses) that it works just fine on 35 mm sensors. it's not like there is a big weight constraint or design difficulty involved.

Agreed; it probably will work fine on a full-frame body. My guess is that Sony's design may have produced sub-par resolution results in the borders on a 24MP full-frame sensor, and they didn't want to associate this new 50mm lens with their professional full-frame camera.

you could both be right http://www.lenstip.com/1714-ne...AM_-_sample_shots.html shows some vignetting in the corners on an A900 but definitely more than an APS-C only image circle.

 

[Deadtrees]

They are very.......ugly. What suprises me is that there's no video mode when it's targeting average joes.
Also, no AEL button??? Did I get it wrong or is there really no AEL button? Even considering that those cameras are for average joes, no AEL button sounds very terrible.

Anway, I'm not good at reviewing cameras made for average Joes and soccer moms but I find those new cameras terrible in terms of design, specs, and everything.
I haven't checked the prices and maybe that's the key here. If not, I don't know what to say.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Heidfirst
you could both be right http://www.lenstip.com/1714-ne...AM_-_sample_shots.html shows some vignetting in the corners on an A900 but definitely more than an APS-C only image circle.

that light falloff is pretty bad. looks completely dark in the extreme corners.

compare to the rather ancient nikon 50 f/1.4 near the bottom

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: ElFenix


that light falloff is pretty bad. looks completely dark in the extreme corners.

compare to the rather ancient nikon 50 f/1.4 near the bottom

The Nikon is an FF design though & this isn't - compare the amount of glass in the front element.
if you want a FF f1.4 Sony have 1 (& I think that the argument goes that if you have an A900 & want a 50mm that's what you will buy).
if you want an APS-C 50/1.8 for $100 Sony now have 1 & a 30mm/2.8 Macro (which of course will also do very nicely as a standard 30mm with a focal length pretty much mimicking the eye's view, iirc it's nearer to 45mm on 35mm/FF than the 50mm that Oskar Barnack had available).

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Heidfirst

The Nikon is an FF design though & this isn't - compare the amount of glass in the front element.
if you want a FF f1.4 Sony have 1 (& I think that the argument goes that if you have an A900 & want a 50mm that's what you will buy).
if you want an APS-C 50/1.8 for $100 Sony now have 1 & a 30mm/2.8 Macro (which of course will also do very nicely as a standard 30mm with a focal length pretty much mimicking the eye's view, iirc it's nearer to 45mm on 35mm/FF than the 50mm that Oskar Barnack had available).

well the nikon has a lot of glass in the front element because it's an f/1.4 and the sony is f/1.8

it just boggles my mind that sony would actually intentionally cripple a lens design like that. the only thing i can hope for is that this is a conscious design decision to get better across the frame performance than canon's 50/1.8 for similar money when used on crop bodies.

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

well the nikon has a lot of glass in the front element because it's an f/1.4 and the sony is f/1.8

OK, compare the FF Minolta 50/1.7 to the APS-C Sony 50/1.8

it just boggles my mind that sony would actually intentionally cripple a lens design like that. the only thing i can hope for is that this is a conscious design decision to get better across the frame performance than canon's 50/1.8 for similar money when used on crop bodies.

Have they crippled it though when it's designed as a cheap lens for use on APS-C bodies?
They aren't aiming a $150 rrp/$100 street lens at people using $3000 A900s especially when they already have a 50/1.4 for them.
That image circle is considerably larger than it needed to be for APS-C & quite possibly to get better IQ by using the central part & avoiding the weaker corner/edge performance.

as someone once said "if the nifty fifty is so good why are there so many for sale s/h?"
The Sony has 7 blades v 5 on the Canon so hopefully bokeh may be better as well.
At any rate it's another thing crossed off the list of things that some people could hold against Sony DSLRs.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
it just boggles my mind that sony would actually intentionally cripple a lens design like that. the only thing i can hope for is that this is a conscious design decision to get better across the frame performance than canon's 50/1.8 for similar money when used on crop bodies.

This is Sony; I'm pretty sure that the decision had to do with maximizing profit and nothing else. As even their 50 f/1.4 doesn't review very well, I think there's room for a new CZ 50 to generate more revenue.

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: Madwand1

As even their 50 f/1.4 doesn't review very well, I think there's room for a new CZ 50 to generate more revenue.

DPreview don't seem to agree with you - sure it's not perfect but it's not bad on FF & probably the best on APS-C. http://www.dpreview.com/lensre...y_50_1p4_m15/page6.asp
A 50/1.4 (or even 1.2!) ZA SSM is something that I'm sure would have some people slavering though.

& having worked for Canon I can categorically state that they believe in maximising profit too

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: Heidfirst

Originally posted by: Madwand1

As even their 50 f/1.4 doesn't review very well, I think there's room for a new CZ 50 to generate more revenue.

DPreview don't seem to agree with you - sure it's not perfect but it's not bad on FF & probably the best on APS-C.

dpreview
Cons
* Very soft across most of the frame at wide apertures on full frame
* Bokeh chromatic aberration, most visible at wide apertures
* Vignetting at wide apertures on full frame (essentially disappears by F3.3)
* Corner softness on full-frame - never quite sharp even at F8
* Somewhat susceptible to flare

These remarks are not what I'd call "very good" for a ~$370 standard lens, supporting my claim that the 50 f/1.4 doesn't review "very well", and that there's room for a better 50 in their line-up. That said, I think I know what you mean in that other vendors' models have somewhat similar shortcomings, and the full remarks in the dpreview conclusion are more generous. There's subjectivity in such opinions, but I don't think that dpreview would entirely disagree with my remarks, and there is room after all to do better.

 

[Heidfirst]

we can both pick selectively
*Unusually good performance on APS-C even at wide apertures
*Excellent image quality when stopped down on both full-frame and APS-C
*Low distortion

as you say though if you read the whole conclusions you can see that DPreview basically said that they all perform similarly overall & that it's really no better or worse than it's peers.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Heidfirst
Have they crippled it though when it's designed as a cheap lens for use on APS-C bodies?
They aren't aiming a $150 rrp/$100 street lens at people using $3000 A900s especially when they already have a 50/1.4 for them.

i consider it crippled because 50mm lenses have been covering 135 sized frames since the dawn of 35 mm photography. there is nothing difficult about making a lens that can do so.

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

i consider it crippled because 50mm lenses have been covering 135 sized frames since the dawn of 35 mm photography. there is nothing difficult about making a lens that can do so.

If it fulfills it's design objective is it crippled?
It's a DT lens designed for use with APS-C format sensors & I'm sure that once we see some tests that it will prove to do that perfectly well.
Or do you consider any crop sensor only design crippled (in which case every system is guilty as they all have crop only optics)?