Sony introduces A 2 Series (a 1:1 frame)

Roger

Roger

Member
Staff member
The site's in Korean, I used babelfish to get most of it:

http://bbs.danawa.com/view.php?nSeq=393 ... teSeq1=409

When ' grass frame size confrontation ' America lwu U seeing the point which the complaint which is becomes marking in the lenses which are exhibited but in the exhibition hall, newly is announced phul the lag swip the DSLR tries 35mm as being grass frame emphysema of film size carefulness su ley guess.

The Sony phul lag which is opened to the public to the P&I swip the model. 1:1 grass frame one possibilities...?



Well, maybe Canon will push forward the 5Ds now. Maybe they'll move up their plans for the 40D successor. But competition is great. Too bad Nikon probably isn't going to get Sony's sensor.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting. Sony's been making noise about becoming a serious player in the DSLR market for a while ... offering a low-cost full frame competitor to Canon would be a big way to do it.

I've heard as well that Canon has a number of "upgrades" that they've been sitting on, waiting for the right time to release. I'd say shortly after Sony announces a full-frame would be a good time to announce the logical upgrade to a 5D. Take a little wind out of the Sony sails.

I don't know that the Sony announcement impacts Canon's market share much (since I don't think Sony is seen as a "pro" brand .... yet), but it certainly ought to scare the bejesus out of Nikon, who is fighting fiercely to grab that "home" DSLR market in the $500 - $1200 range. When the average suburban housewife heads up to Best Buy to buy a fancy new camera, you can bet the sales people there will be pushing Sony as a brand.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"jcvalenti" said:
I don't know that the Sony announcement impacts Canon's market share much (since I don't think Sony is seen as a "pro" brand .... yet), but it certainly ought to scare the bejesus out of Nikon, who is fighting fiercely to grab that "home" DSLR market in the $500 - $1200 range. When the average suburban housewife heads up to Best Buy to buy a fancy new camera, you can bet the sales people there will be pushing Sony as a brand.
Click to expand...

It will because Sony offers in-camera stabilization, something Canon & Nikon haven't done yet, mostly because it would require a large area for the sensor to move around inside (and more moving parts) with telephoto lenses. And the in-lens OS is better.

But Sony has 100% of the Minolta Maxxum line, so they have access to all of the old lenses which is something the other brands like Pentax, Olympus (first to live view dSLR!), Sigma (if they ever release the Foveon SLR) don't have. Plus Minolta's film technology to incorporate into their line. I heard about what Sony was planning on doing when they bought the KonicaMinolta camera division, for some reason I was thinking 2008 rather than late 2007.

But Canon has the pro market pretty much cornered - they are lacking in the areas you mentioned - the entry level, and low level prosumer. Charging $2700 for the top of the line prosumer camera, which is now over 18 months old has limited their market share when Nikon's top prosumer is about $1600 if I remember correctly. But there are/were no other FF sensors on the market.

This is probably mean the beginning of the supposed plan to bring FF to the lower prosumer level, and the XXD series to FF. (40D would be the 5DN, and the 5D would be replaced by the 3D)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is interesting. I read a post a while back by someone arguing that full frame sensors would always be more expensive because of the manufacturing process.. I think the idea was that you can cram more sensor sites into a sensor of the same size without significant cost increases, but a bigger sensor takes up more of a silicon wafer, or something like that, you can't make as many at a time or the material costs are higher or whatever. So it was sounding like there shouldn't be significant decreases in the cost of full frame cameras.

Perhaps they're getting their manufacturing volume up and are benefiting from economy of scale?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually I think it is probably the other way around.

Current sensors are getting very close to limits of current physics with light splitting, etc.

Either it has to go like Foveon and not have to split the light into three/four parts for each color, or you get a bigger sensor for more MP. Since Foveon is only up to 14mp and ISO up to 1600 (look at their night shots...all at ISO and most over 2 second exposures), the best other way is to make the sensor bigger.

But then we'll get to the point where humans can't make an optical element that can hit every sensor, in which case more MP isn't going to matter.

By then I'm sure we'll have the 0.001 MP Multiplexed Camera with one pixel that moves around to capture the image.
 
Ya'know, I always wondered why the heck we were still stuck with bayer pattern sensors when all the high end video cameras use triple CCD setups with a seperate sensor for each color fed by light split by a prism. I mean if it would have meant needing a larger body to house the workings I'd have accepted it.. I've never been happy with the bayer pattern system, I had hoped that the Foveon concept would create another alternative but so far it's not looking like a perfect solution either. I haven't seen the results of the SD14 though.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top