I don't understand this industry.

[JerryLove]

It could also be argued that they were in a crappy spot because of those Minolta flashes, and had to choose to alienate someone. Instead of alienate the Minolta diehards, they chose to alienate... well, everyone else, pretty much. No matter what, that shoe was an absolute failure in my opinion. It's about time they abandoned it, and as far as I'm aware, they have.

Put out a hotshoe with the needed contacts for either. Perhaps physically compatible with one and requiring an adapter for another.

Though this is actually a really good example of where the industry *did* standardize. Canon seems to want to sell me flashes, but they make flashes that work on other people's cameras and vice versa (or at least, that's my understanding. Never tried it... so I guess it's an assumption)

 

[minicoop1985]

In terms of standardization, I'm shocked nobody has mentioned the Pentax M42 mount. Right now, in my house, I have a Yashica, a Sears, and a Mamiya that are all M42 mount (note not one is a Pentax), and the lenses for the three are completely interchangeable. This is when the industry did sort of standardize lens mounts (OK, not STANDARDize, but a lot of companies used it) for a moment, then promptly... didn't.

JerryLove, what they could have done was to create an adapter that would work for both, but that would cost money apparently and make sense. Third party adapters are out there, though. Of course, they're crap.

 

[Solarflare]

Well ... in short, I dont understand this industry either.

 

[bribrius]

In terms of standardization, I'm shocked nobody has mentioned the Pentax M42 mount. Right now, in my house, I have a Yashica, a Sears, and a Mamiya that are all M42 mount (note not one is a Pentax), and the lenses for the three are completely interchangeable. This is when the industry did sort of standardize lens mounts (OK, not STANDARDize, but a lot of companies used it) for a moment, then promptly... didn't.

JerryLove, what they could have done was to create an adapter that would work for both, but that would cost money apparently and make sense. Third party adapters are out there, though. Of course, they're crap.

sears still makes cameras?

 

[ConradM]

Why put a second rate IS system into a first class system?

I could respond "ask Sony"; but I'm going to guess that the point was to reduce overall system costs.

By putting IS in the body, you buy it once, rather than for every lens.

I admit I am not familiar with disadvantages to the location of the IS.

If it were that great Canon & Nikon would not be the big 2 that they are. Build a better mouse trap and the world will indeed beat a path to your door.

Canon and Nikon are the big 2 because of their names. Sony is doing much bigger and better things right now. Take the a7r and a6000 for example.

 

[vimwiz]

Canon really annoyed me with the whole FD->EOS situation. I bet you a load of pros got burnt by that.

 

[JerryLove]

Canon really annoyed me with the whole FD->EOS situation. I bet you a load of pros got burnt by that.

Actually: Canon did put out an FD->EF adapter at the time, though it only worked on lenses over 200mm I've been told. Few were made and they are something like $1k on the used market now.

Or... there's an adapter for the EOS-M to run FD and FL lenses. I have to admit: I'm seriously considering adding that camera to the collection.

 

[vimwiz]

Oh, thats cool. Looks like the M doesnt require any corrective glass optics to make it focus to infinity and can just take a fit adapter.

I dont really too much tbh as it means us film shooters can get a ton of lenses for dirt cheap on ebay

 

[JerryLove]

Canon and Nikon are the big 2 because of their names. Sony is doing much bigger and better things right now. Take the a7r and a6000 for example.

I don't like the A7R.

Ignoring ergonomics: No phase-focus, 4fps, flash sync max 1/160, few working lenses, limited IS.

The 36MP sensor is nice, but that's also available in the D800; and personally, I'd rather have 20MP in the right setup than 36MP in the wrong one.

Add to all that: How long will Sony support this mount? Canon has used the same mount for 27 years. Will this get abandoned with only 1-2 lenses in existence?

 

[Newtricks]

Why are lens adapters so poor? It comes down to a simple matter of economics... why make an adapter that allows your major competitors lens to be used on your cameras?

An adapter that takes the big circle from a FF lens and reduces it to the small circle needed by a CF camera. if you make the adapter people will buy it once and convert every lens they have, besides allot of people like the crop factor, a 300mm lens on my D7000 has the perspective of a 450mm lens.

What are the big-two thinking in the mirror-less market? I know nothing about mirror-less and really don't care.

Since other companies are allowed to use their connectors (Tamron making EF lenses for example); why hasn't anyone made a competing body? If Sony (or for that matter, Nikon) put out a body that took Canon lenses... that would be interesting... Again why promote your competitors product when you want folks to buy yours? For Nikon to making bodies that took Canon lenses would be akin to shooting themselves in the foot.

These are just my opinions, take them as such.

Anthony

ps I was granted a patent on a fishing lure in 1990. What possible benefit would I have gained from allowing say... Rapala, to manufacture a hook system that worked with my lure when I was manufacturing the hooks myself?

 

[Braineack]

I think the solution is we, the people, take over all camera companies and force a monoploy so there's only one company to buy/produce products. In the name of fairness and the common good of course.

 

[ConradM]

I think the solution is we, the people, take over all camera companies and force a monoploy so there's only one company to buy/produce products. In the name of fairness and the common good of course.

Only if it doesn't have an archaic moving mirror and optical viewfinder. :mrgreen: