The Fall of Nikon

shorty6049 · Dec 7, 2007

i was using my own photos though. i dont have an a700 to use, and i wanted to have some pictures of my camera. but that sigma lens is AWESOME. and werent you a sony user at one time???
( i may be thinking of someone different)

DSLR noob · Dec 7, 2007

Yeah you're thinking of someone different. I did get a 20D and sold my D Rebel XT so that might be the stepup you're thinking about. I know the Sigma lens is awesome, but lenses matter more than the body, therefore the glass should be the main attraction in a photo trying to beat out Nikon, however using a lens that the average Nikonian shmoe can go out and buy for his camera too renders the picture/ad/motivational poster/thing useless.

...............Still pretty though.

Also sorry to sound like a Nikon/Canon fanboy but this thread asked for it, the A series is a great series of camera, but sony is just picking up where Minolta left off, and is quite a few generations from being in a class with the 2 big dogs.

eravedesigns · Dec 7, 2007

DSLR noob said:
good photoshop, but Canon and Nikon still pwns joo!
(5D, 40D, 1D MkIII, 1DS MkIII, D300, or D3) > A700
sorry

P.S. should of used a pic of the A700 with Ziess glass, not Sigma)

Well the specs on the A700 almost out do those of the 5D besides MP. The only thing it doesnt have compared to the 40D is live view but who needs that and even though the 40D shoots 6.5 or something like that fps it cant do it until the card fills up like the a700 does at 5fps. You cant compare a MKIII to an a700 they are completely different categories. The D300 is good but its more expensive. The D3 is another category too of more professional cameras.

Look around you Sony must be doing something right because all the big retailers like Best Buy, Sears have taken the risk with Sony by carrying the Sony brand and you will always see a Sony ad in a magazine plus they are backed by Minolta technology and the amazing Zeiss optics which definitely match up to Canon.

Know your facts before you judge so fast J I will give credit to Canon and Nikon for building good cameras but you cant ignore how fast the Sony DSLR fan base has grown and how the features are actually good and not just for some amateur.

FrimpyEIBW · Dec 7, 2007

I'm thinking about getting an a100. To use it as a backup...But, it makes black and white pictures much easier. :mrgreen:

shorty6049 · Dec 7, 2007

i dont know if Sony is THAT far from being up there with the big dogs. I wasnt really trying to say anything with this photo though, just that i wanted the same thing, but in Sony, instead of nikon. so , to ME, it didnt matter what lens i used, becasue after all, i only have the 18-70 sony lens, and thats not exactly a great lens. I dont own any other sony lenses besides the stock lens because they're all a little too expensive right now. i mean, i guess thats fine if you guys wanna turn this into a brand war, but i'd like at least a FEW comments on the acutual picture. I've never made the claim that my camera is better than anyone elses, but the canon/nikon folks continue to insist that their cameras are better than EVERYONES.... why?

eravedesigns · Dec 7, 2007

DSLR noob said:
Also sorry to sound like a Nikon/Canon fanboy but this thread asked for it, the A series is a great series of camera, but sony is just picking up where Minolta left off, and is quite a few generations from being in a class with the 2 big dogs.

You do realize that Sony supplies most of the Nikon sensors so Sony has the technology and the lens base to become a top dog very fast. Once the flagship model comes out Im putting them equal with the top 3. The a700 is already matching if not beating some of the newer cameras plus the a100 had amazing reviews when it first came out.

Just watch I wouldnt under-estimate how quick Sony could get to the top

skieur · Dec 7, 2007

petey said:
Sony makes cameras now?

To be precise, Sony makes processors and Minolta makes well-designed cameras. The Sony Alpha 700 is a combination of both and most of the camera staff is from Minolta.

skieur

eravedesigns · Dec 7, 2007

skieur said:
To be precise, Sony makes processors and Minolta makes well-designed cameras. The Sony Alpha 700 is a combination of both and most of the camera staff is from Minolta.

skieur

I wouldnt say that so much about the a700. The a100 was basically what you just described but there is a lot of new staff in there who are making new lenses and developing the newer models. The CEO or something close to that position was laid off and he went to Pentax. You cant really tell who stayed and who went when Sony got Minolta but Im sure that Sony has a huge impact right now in the development of the a700 and the flagship model.

DSLR noob · Dec 7, 2007

eravedesigns said:
Well the specs on the A700 almost out do those of the 5D besides MP. The only thing it doesn’t have compared to the 40D is live view but who needs that and even though the 40D shoots 6.5 or something like that fps it can’t do it until the card fills up like the a700 does at 5fps. You can’t compare a MKIII to an a700 they are completely different categories. The D300 is good but it’s more expensive. The D3 is another category too of more professional cameras.

Look around you Sony must be doing something right because all the big retailers like Best Buy, Sears have taken the risk with Sony by carrying the Sony brand and you will always see a Sony ad in a magazine plus they are backed by Minolta technology and the amazing Zeiss optics which definitely match up to Canon.

Know your facts before you judge so fast J I will give credit to Canon and Nikon for building good cameras but you can’t ignore how fast the Sony DSLR fan base has grown and how the features are actually good and not just for some amateur.

5D is also full frame but I guess you forgot that, and I can compare the 1D series and the D3 as the thread is called "The fall of Nikon" when you say the fall of an entire company, you can pull the biggest guns out of their arsenal if you want, as for the 40D, you can fill the card if you set it to medium file size and tone it down to 5 fps like the Sony. Last thing, is lens and accessory support, enough said.

I DO know my facts and still stand by my post. I looked at the A700 specs when it first was announced and quickly lost interest as it looks more like a 30D competitor than a 40D competitor. Sony's "new" generation, is still behind by about a year.

DSLR noob · Dec 7, 2007

You know what, nevermind, I didn't come here to start a fight with Sony fanboys, the thread just has a title that seems like it wanted to start a brand war where it doesn't belong yet so it had to be put in its place. I didn't say My camera was better than yours don't misquote me by saying " All Nikon and Canon owners claim they are better than everyone else" I'm just saying as an ENTIRE SLR COMPANY they are, as far as individual cameras, I've said my opinions.

Taken from photo.net
--"The Sony Alpha A700 is priced at $1400, landing between the Canon EOS 40D ($1299) and the Nikon D300 ($1799). It does lack the "live view" system, which is present on both the D300 and 40D. It has a slower maximum frame rate (5fps) than either the EOS 40D (6.5fps) or the D300 (6/8fps). Both the Canon and Nikon DSLRs use a 14-bit A/d conversion system. Sony hasn't yet published details on the A/D converter in the Alpha A700, but I suspect it's 12-bits or they would probably have commented on it."--

see, it is still behind.

skieur · Dec 7, 2007

If you want to get technical, the Sony A700 is on the same intermediate level as the Canon 40D and better in resolution than the Nikon D200.
With a Zeiss lens on the front, it would probably surpass the resolution of any of the other intermediate level cameras.

skieur

shorty6049 · Dec 7, 2007

i called it the fall of nikon for fun. dont take it personally. remember, thats like defending your washing machine brand... nobody really cares in the long run. let your photos do the talking, not your camera. I just called it that because i thought it was a fun name, and i didnt know what else to call it.

shorty6049 · Dec 7, 2007

i think the a700 actually does have 14bit conversion though. What the hell. lets have a brand war. I'm in a fighing mood right now....

eravedesigns · Dec 7, 2007

DSLR noob said:
you can fill the card if you set it to medium file size and tone it down to 5 fps like the Sony. Last thing, is lens and accessory support, enough said.

The sony shoots 5fps at full setting until the card is full

And far enough if we were talking about a fall of a brand but I was just debating on the level of the a700 and not the brands current status.