NEW Sony DSLR's

shorty6049 · Mar 14, 2007

yea, you're right, i just have had experience with cameras which all included the built in flash... and i agree, if you have a high end camera like that, you'd probably keep it in a case locked in your closet or something, until you were going to go out to take pictures that would be of value, and for anything else , you'd maybe have a point and shoot or somethign... it makes sense

DSLR noob · Mar 14, 2007

if you are in a resturaunt and want to capture a memory, have a slim ultra-compact P&S in your pocket. This is a pro-body (or prosumer) camera. If you have the money for it, you have a backup camera. Also if you're shooting with it in ther first place, chances are you are a professional, and you have a minin photo studio in the trunk of your car, which'd have a flash.

eravedesigns · Mar 14, 2007

WAY TO HIJACK MY THREAD. THANKS

shorty6049 · Mar 14, 2007

lol, i think we're done here

Don Simon · Mar 15, 2007

eravedesigns said:
WAY TO HIJACK MY THREAD. THANKS

But your thread title was "NEW Sony DSLR's"... we were discussing one of the new Sony DSLR

If I was to say "everyone post here if you think oranges should be genetically modified so you can peel them easier and eat them on the train", that would be hijacking the thread

Mike_E · Mar 15, 2007

ZaphodB said:
If I was to say "everyone post here if you think oranges should be genetically modified so you can peel them easier and eat them on the train", that would be hijacking the thread

Actually, I think those oranges are called Clemintines (sp?). And the built in flash is for controlling your off camera flashes and the occasional daylight fill. Oh yeah, Lord what an ugly camera!

mike

rmh159 · Mar 15, 2007

Mike_E said:
Actually, I think those oranges are called Clemintines...

... yeah those things are deeeeelish! :drool:

DSLR noob · Mar 15, 2007

mmmmm citrus

Jeremy Z · Mar 15, 2007

I'm with fmw, the Zeiss optics will be the best reason to go with Sony. On the other hand, people say the same thing about Leica. So a guy saves his pennies for months and months to get a Leica body & lens, only to find out it will take him the rest of his life to get the lenses he wants/needs.

I've also had bad experience with the (cheaper) Sony products. One has to realize that Sony doesn't design all of their stuff, like they used to in their heyday of the 1960s through 1980s. They outsource the design of stuff that is so cheap to make that they don't want to waste their own highly-paid engineers.

Back in the day, the Sony name was synonmous to quality. But remember that Sony stuff wasn't inexpensive then either. It was a high-end brand; they didn't make any cheap stuff. Now, they put their name on cheap stuff, and their reputation is suffering, even though their high-end stuff is still the cream of the crop. (high-end home audio, pro audio & video, for instance) It's usually not consumer grade stuff.

Reliability-wise, I've found Panasonic to be better across the board.

I don't know if that Maxxum flash mount is a pro or a con.

shorty6049 · Mar 15, 2007

i hate it when you take your time taking the peel off of an orange, and then its not even that sweet...

Don Simon · Mar 15, 2007

Clementines are lovely but they're too small to count as food, and if you're like me you buy the wrong ones and they're half-full of pips. See erave, now we really have hijacked the thread :lol:

Jeremy, to be honest I have no idea what Zeiss optics means in this case... Sony have been using 'Zeiss' glass on compact cameras for years but I'm not convinced it had any inherent superiority. I'm not sure if Zeiss are actually making the lenses. They may be designing them though or at least approving the designs. Personally my interest in the Sony system was actually the Minolta glass - I hoped some of their designers would stick around. I guess it doesn't really matter who makes the glass or whose name is used as long as it's good. I think it must be good considering how much they're asking for them; I can't help thinking they would attract more customers if they dropped the prices a bit.

As for the proprietary flash mount, it shouldn't be a problem as the Minolta/Sony flash system is a good one and besides third-party flashes are available for this mount too.

dgs · Mar 15, 2007

I use an A100 and one of the sweetest things about it is the wireless flash. I believe that's the primary reason the onboard flash was included on the Maxxum 9 . . . it's an optical, not radio, system and the onboard flash is the controlling medium. On the other hand, my A100 doesn't have a flash synch socket . . . which it certainly should.

You can bet the "flagship" sony will have a sync jack <g> and probably bluetooth (or similiar) remote flash control.

firemedic0135 · Mar 16, 2007

I hope one of these new rigs has at least 5 fps ,and if so It is as good as mine.This a100 is soooo friggin slow,especially in raw mode.hangs up all the time after about 3-4 shots.(and yes I have a fast cf card). :drool:

Oh yeah and before I forget ....how about a grip that I dont have to order from hong kong grey market that looks like it will break in my hands?
I see the new ones have a grip so mabye they will make them now.

Don Simon · Mar 16, 2007

There was a grip for the 7 and a grip for the 7D - very nice grips too - so I can't see why there wouldn't be one for the new mid-range Sony. Plus a grip for the pro model is a given.