Sony Alpha DSLR

Big Mike · May 12, 2006

Sony is venturing into the DSLR world.
http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/news/articles/story_7867.html

Don Simon · May 12, 2006

Thanks for that, very interesting - I'm currently looking into these since they take the Minolta AF lenses. Would like to know how much KM were involved in the development, though I'm sure Sony themselves have the skills to produce a very good camera body. I'd actually be quite confident buying a DSLR from Sony, after being happy with the build quality of my Sony compact. Would be happier however if I knew KM had helped with things like the metering and AF which are the best things about my Minolta. Since that website doesn't say a lot more than what Sony have already released, I'll be very interested to see what other information comes out about these cameras. I'm now torn between one of these and a Pentax, since I stubbornly refuse to buy anything I don't already have at least one lens for.

Big Mike · May 12, 2006

I'm a Canon guy so I won't be getting a Sony DSLR...but I'll be interested how to affects the DSLR market. If they come out with a really great camera...at a great price, then it should affect prices across the board.

Sony has been making sensors for most of the companies, including Nikon and Canon. Canon makes their own large sensors but I think Sony may have made some of the small digcam sensors for them. Anyway, their sensor technology is good, lets hope they couple that with good glass and camera technology.

What would be really good, is if Sony came out with an affordable full (35mm) frame sensor. That would be really good for us all.

Wally · May 12, 2006

Interesting read. I would not hold my breath if I were you about an affordable full frame DSLR. I just do not think that will happen for a very long time if ever. With the release of the 30D and all the new EF-S lenses that Canon is putting out they plan on staying with APS sized sensors for a long time. Then you have Nikon which does not even make a full frame DSLR.

Sony will compete very will on the lower end of the DSLR market. The same people who buy 350D/Rebel XTs from Canon, and the D50 from Nikon. I think they will have a very hard time making inroads into the pro market, where Nikon and Canon have very deep roots and have had for a long time.

kelox · May 12, 2006

Thanks Big Mike. KM lives on!!!!!!!!!!(only repackaged)

usayit · Jun 8, 2006

OOOOoooo.. Sony Alpha looks to be so good right now...

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/sonydslra100/

* 10 mpix CCD from that of the Nikon
* whole lense line from Minolta
* Camera body basic design ala Minolta
* Antishake in body
* A new set of lenses due to come out with CARL ZEISS GLASS!! OMG!

They've got my attention! All this merging of technologies could possibly give Canon a run for their money. Talk about entering into the market with a bang.

Bob_McBob · Jun 8, 2006

Too bad the lens range is less than compelling. $600 for a TC... ouch.

RoRoCo · Jun 9, 2006

I have the DSC-R1 and I love the camera... I need to wait on the DSLR (for money and no current needs reason)

I am very surprised Sony left out some of the "sexiness" of their cameras and went for the traditional SLR body look. I know it is only aethethics, but if anyone is into aethetics...photographers are...

usayit · Jun 9, 2006

I could see some people paying huge prices for Carl Zeiss lenses in the future. I would assume two things must happen. First, Sony has to come out with a Professional level DSLR that can complete with the likes of Nikon and Canon. Sony's name has to become known for its photographic equipment. Two, the Carl Zeiss lenses comming have to live up to their well deserved name.

Hey... nutty people pay $2000+ for a 35mm Leica lens... why not Zeiss/Sony

Big Mike · Jun 9, 2006

RoRoCo said:
I am very surprised Sony left out some of the "sexiness" of their cameras and went for the traditional SLR body look. I know it is only aethethics, but if anyone is into aethetics...photographers are...

I don't know how much Sony actually had to say about this camera. From what I heard, it's been in development much longer than Sony has owned it. It's basically still a Minolta design. Maybe the next one will be a lot more 'Sonyish'

Don Simon · Jun 9, 2006

usayit said:
OOOOoooo.. Sony Alpha looks to be so good right now...

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/sonydslra100/

* 10 mpix CCD from that of the Nikon
* whole lense line from Minolta
* Camera body basic design ala Minolta
* Antishake in body
* A new set of lenses due to come out with CARL ZEISS GLASS!! OMG!

Cool. I'll buy one and paint the KM logo over the Sony. :lol:

I would definitely consider it, though I hope they don't insist on using their proprietary memory sticks etc, and don't try to make me use special Sony software that's anything like the abomination that comes with their mp3 players.
Oh and I see 1600 iso, 3200 would be nice.

Soocom1 · Jun 9, 2006

Hate to say it folks, but this is what I was afraid of.

This is AMC-Harley Davidson all over again.

1: A 10 Mpx sensor. OK good start. Why APS-C when Nikon (my apologize I misspoke, it is Cannon) has already started incorporating the full sized sensor? (don't give me this B**S** about cost.) If you are or ever have been in manufacturing, you would know this is bull. This is just a cost savings for the manufacturer, and doesn't cross over to the consumer that much. Trust me on this one, I worked for Motorola for 10 years.

2: 1600 ISO? My 7D has 3200 already! Why step down? In addition, why not go further and offer an ISO range down to 25? Or 12? Nikon does 50 ISO on thier 5600. And thats a point and shoot!

3: $1000? Now? Come on. If they want that magical 25% market share they have been blathering about, they wont get it with an under performer at $1000.

4: Memory stick adapter is fine. CF I and II/Micro-drive, good. Why not go all the way and offer the full course of memory cards.

5: The platform is the 5D, and it appears (at least right now) that they might not offer anything else that'll step up to the plate, like a 7D style platform, or even the much ballyhooed 9D that all of us KM nuts wanted so badly.

Personally, I may wind up switching to the Nikon system after all. The cost seems a little high to me for what is being offered.
Sorry folks, but this is a huge let down for me. Personally, I think both Minolta AND Sony blew it on this one.

Don Simon · Jun 10, 2006

As for having an APS-C sensor I don't see that being a particular disappointment, since you have to spend quite a bit to get a full-frame sensor with any brand. The small ISO range is disappointing, although to me not quite as infuriating as Pentax's irrational fear of letting us go below 200 ISO.

I wouldn't know who to blame since I don't know to what extent it's a KM camera or a Sony camera; if it's essentially a KM product then I would be disappointed in them. I didn't actually check the price, $1000 is a lot to ask, and I definitely wouldn't buy one at that price (no doubt the policy for pricing in the UK would simply be to replace the $ with a £ as everyone else seems to). As someone who owns Minolta and Pentax film cameras and does so happily without feeling like I should own a Canon or Nikon instead, I'm disappointed that none of the Minolta/Sony or Pentax digital offerings seem to offer an equivalent to for example the Canon 20D (I guess some might say the Dynax 7D is as good, that's debatable).