# "Sony Upsets full frame market"



## bholliman (Feb 25, 2016)

Not sure about the accuracy of the information, just ran across this and thought I would share.

http://www.heise.de/foto/artikel/Sony-G-Master-Objektive-Erste-Bilder-mit-FE-24-70mm-F2-8-und-FE-85mm-F1-4-3099466.html?hg=2&hgi=1&hgf=false

(article 2nd on this page, half way down)



http://www.++++++++rumors.com/sony-surpassed-canon-and-nikon-in-the-german-full-frame-market/


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 25, 2016)

For two months. In one country. Maybe. 

That proves it – Canon is *******!


----------



## johnnycash (Feb 25, 2016)

Misinformed people buying Sony gear and getting upset about their decision later when they discover what a pile of junk it is. That's meant by "Sony Upsets full frame market"


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 25, 2016)

I've been saying for years that Both Canon and Nikon are more concerned about Sony than with each other. 

There are a large number of people who see Sony as a premium brand, and will pay more to get one of their cameras.

It has nothing to do with quality or reliability, but perception of the buyers. Certainly, Canon, and Nikon are highly thought of, but Sony is someone who can cut into their share of the market in a serious way. If the market were expanding, it wouldn't matter, but its shrinking.

Sony has been dumping lots of $$ into sensors, and suddenly woke up one day to find their orders cancelled by cell phone companies that have cut production, or are dropping out. Cell phone ownership is saturated, and sales are tanking. The big money in sensor sales has been cell phones, so Sony lost money last quarter on Sensor sales.

Canon is in the best financial position of the three, and they are looking to invest in other areas that are related, but where they can be number one. Surveillance Cameras, for example, where there is a big market for high end equipment by governments, and large corporations who are willing to pay the high price for the best.

Canon is good at milking sales out of older products and turning in profits where others are losing. Don't expect Canon to throw a ton of money into a declining market, they will continue to keep purse strings very tight.


----------



## TeT (Feb 25, 2016)

Interestinggoogle did the translation, but it is clear enough) "The autofocus of the standard zoom works very quickly and quietly. The '85, however was the automatic focusing perceptible noises and also worked not quite as fast"

So the 85 is slow noisy and expensive...


----------



## tpatana (Feb 25, 2016)

TeT said:


> Interestinggoogle did the translation, but it is clear enough) "The autofocus of the standard zoom works very quickly and quietly. The '85, however was the automatic focusing perceptible noises and also worked not quite as fast"
> 
> So the 85 is slow noisy and expensive...



I'd be upset about that.


----------



## eml58 (Feb 25, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I've been saying for years that Both Canon and Nikon are more concerned about Sony than with each other.
> 
> There are a large number of people who see Sony as a premium brand, and will pay more to get one of their cameras.
> 
> ...



Completely agree, I've a owned, and still own, Sony Cameras, and for what I purchased them for, they work better than anything I've had from Canon, or Nikon. I own Canon & Nikon Cameras because they work better at the job I purchased them for than anything from Sony.

What Sony are doing is working on the areas that Nikon & Canon just don't seem to be able to compete in, smaller more feature full camera systems, and it's a mixed bag at present, but I can see Sony slowly eating into that Market that in the past has been all Nikon/Canon, I don't know if they can pull off an "Apple" here, probably not, but they are getting Market share, and the products are getting better, and they don't seem to be shy at putting the latest and best features into their Cameras, Nikon/Canon have always held back on the features until they seem to have to throw some innovation into the next iteration to save flagging sales, 5D2 with video, 5DsR with 50 MP sensor, 1Dx with 14fps etc etc.

Hope Sony can keep it up, keeps the big boys on their toes.


----------



## madmailman (Feb 25, 2016)

Don't about the full frame market but Sony for sure has upset me. I got one of their expensive Android TV's only to find there is only about 7 apps in the Play Store for it. 



P.S. And none of the apps are ESPN.


----------



## expatinasia (Feb 26, 2016)

I greatly admire what Sony has been doing to stir up the camera market, but one of their weaknesses is not just the limited number of quality lenses, the poor menu system etc. it is their longevity.

A few years ago, they had a great line of super-light high-end Vaio Z laptops. They weren't cheap, but they were packed full of power and had a good following of users. A year or so ago they sold off the company.

Not long ago they were talking about their Xperia Z mobile phones some of which had a 4K screen. Sony just this week said the Xperia Z brand is dead and is being replaced by their newly announced Xperia X-line.

While these are different divisions within Sony, it is still the same brand, and frankly I am sure it worries some people.


----------



## martti (Feb 26, 2016)

I am not sure how I am supposed to react.
Maybe I just watch some cat videos and update my FB status.
Why should I be concerned about the way the Germans use their extra money?


----------



## LDS (Feb 26, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Every 2 years Apple dumps its old phone and comes out with a new one (the inbetween is a minor bump.)



Apple has an habit to keep old models value high enough to make the brand still compelling for those who can't afford the latest one through the used market, which is fairly alive.

Thus it supports most older models in newer iOS releases - unlike other brands that stop support as soon as get the phone.

That's something which is far more important when it comes to a far more expensive camera system. Its support and value over the years is important.


----------



## kaswindell (Feb 26, 2016)

If you follow Matt Granger you might know that he uses Sony alongside his Nikon gear. He also has mentioned that the Sony has overheated on him on a number of occasions. I can only afford one camera system, and if I am going to haul my fat butt and camera up a mountain the camera better work, 100% of the time, period. If I were to consider something lighter it would be Fuji or Olympus, Sony doesn't make the short list at all, regardless of what the Germans are buying.


----------



## expatinasia (Feb 27, 2016)

dilbert said:


> expatinasia said:
> 
> 
> > Not long ago they were talking about their Xperia Z mobile phones some of which had a 4K screen. Sony just this week said the Xperia Z brand is dead and is being replaced by their newly announced Xperia X-line.
> ...



The Z-line of Sony Xperia phones only came out about 2 or 3 months ago!! There was big hoo-hah as it was the first mobile in the world with a 4K display.

My point here, is that it does not matter if you are buying an A7, RX1 or RX100 etc, it is quite a small investment.

But when they start making long pro lenses which cost US$ 7,000 or more to try and capture the sport photographer market, then the buyer will want to know that they are in for the long run, that support will be there for them.

I am not sure I would trust Sony in that regard.


----------



## martti (Feb 27, 2016)

I have had two Sony X-perias brick on me.
I would not recommend it to a friend.


----------



## bholliman (Feb 27, 2016)

Sony offers an interesting contrast to Canon and Nikon. Sony offers some innovative products with leading edge features and technology, but with poor product support, a less desirable user interface and limited "system" of lenses, flash equipment, etc. when compared with the big 2. 

For enthusiast willing to pursue features and technology and roll the dice on support and system, it's a nice option.


----------



## J.R. (Feb 27, 2016)

bholliman said:


> Sony offers an interesting contrast to Canon and Nikon. Sony offers some innovative products with leading edge features and technology, but with poor product support, a less desirable user interface and limited "system" of lenses, flash equipment, etc. when compared with the big 2.
> 
> For enthusiast willing to pursue features and technology and roll the dice on support and system, it's a nice option.



Aye, I've thought about getting a Sony at various points of time in the recent past only because of the novelty. After having used one, it isn't going to become my primary rig anytime soon.


----------



## nonac (Feb 27, 2016)

I don't trust the "brand" anymore. I've had Sony products (not cameras) fail me in the past, the most recent being a $2k+ TV that died within days of the warranty expiration. Sony will never see anymore of my money, I don't care how good the reviews are.


----------



## martti (Mar 2, 2016)

+1


----------



## Maximilian (Mar 2, 2016)

kaswindell said:


> ... If I were to consider something lighter it would be Fuji or Olympus, Sony doesn't make the short list at all, regardless of what the Germans are buying.


+1 lighter and smaller don't go together with FF. Only with smaller sensors and brands as suggested by you.

I am German - but maybe not a representative 
I speak a lot to other German photogs and Sony has no good overall standing although IQ and some features are recognized. 
And I have never met any professional here using Sony (studio, event, nature, sports). 
But as I said: maybe not representative.


----------



## moreorless (Mar 2, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I've been saying for years that Both Canon and Nikon are more concerned about Sony than with each other.
> 
> There are a large number of people who see Sony as a premium brand, and will pay more to get one of their cameras.
> 
> It has nothing to do with quality or reliability, but perception of the buyers. Certainly, Canon, and Nikon are highly thought of, but Sony is someone who can cut into their share of the market in a serious way. If the market were expanding, it wouldn't matter, but its shrinking.



I think the Sony brand still does have a bit of a draw to the tech head than Canon and Nikon lack but really I'm not sure this is an especially desirable part of the market.

As you say Canon and Nikon are good at exploiting the market for products over a number of years so investment tends to pay off well for them. The kind of people that buy Sony though tend to be drawn to the latest releases only which means constant investment in new tech.

Ignoring lower end compacts in the last decade Sony has most likely released more cameras than either Canon or Nikon and actually I wouldn't be supprized if they've released more lenses as well with the A-mount, E-mount and now FE-mount where as the big two have focused mostly on their core DSLR mount.

With the FE system generally its hardly supprizing that its increased Sony's turnover, its a new product targeting a previously unexploited market. The question becomes is it offering a return on investment.


----------



## msm (Mar 2, 2016)

Maximilian said:


> +1 lighter and smaller don't go together with FF. Only with smaller sensors and brands as suggested by you.



It does. Just not with those crappy 2.8 zooms. Instead look at the top quality small to medium size primes that are now available natively in FE mount.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 2, 2016)

msm said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > +1 lighter and smaller don't go together with FF. Only with smaller sensors and brands as suggested by you.
> ...



You mean like the FE 35/1.4, which is slightly lighter but also slightly longer than the Canon 35/1.4L II? Or the slow-for-a-short-prime FE 35/2.8 which is the same weight and 50% longer than the Canon 40/2.8 STM? Or maybe you mean crappy f/2.8 zooms like the FE 24-70/2.8GM or FE 70-200/2.8GM, which are the same size or larger than the Canon equivalents?


----------



## Maiaibing (Mar 2, 2016)

tpatana said:


> TeT said:
> 
> 
> > Interestinggoogle did the translation, but it is clear enough) "The autofocus of the standard zoom works very quickly and quietly. The '85, however was the automatic focusing perceptible noises and also worked not quite as fast"
> ...



Sounds like the Canon 85 f/1.2... although I don't find it "loud".


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 2, 2016)

Maiaibing said:


> tpatana said:
> 
> 
> > TeT said:
> ...



Yeah, the FE 85/1.4 GM is also 2.5 cm longer than the 85/1.2L II, although the Canon's extra 1/2-stop of glass makes it 200 g heavier.


----------



## msm (Mar 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> msm said:
> 
> 
> > Maximilian said:
> ...



I mean like crappy EF 24-70 2.8 ii with nasty nisen bokeh and annoying field curvature at 800grams when you can use ~300g 25/2 batis and ~300g FE 55 1.8 who both are sharper wide open, give at least 1 more stop light, have perfect flat field and much smoother bokeh. On top of that the Sony lenses are stabilized in a lighter full frame body than Canon can offer.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 2, 2016)

msm said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > msm said:
> ...



I'm glad you always have time to change lenses as subjects move. Why did Sony even bother with those f/2.8 GM zoom lenses? :


----------



## msm (Mar 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> msm said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



You can shoot moving subjects with primes too you know, why do you think sport shooters use 300mm and 400mm f2.8 lenses? And Sony bother because there is a demand for it. But obviously those lenses are not meant for the part of the market who want to keep size and weight down.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 2, 2016)

msm said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > msm said:
> ...



Missing the point, typical. When the player runs right up to the shorts shooter, does s/he keep using the supertele lens? No, s/he has a second camera – probably with a standard zoom. Is _a pair_ of Sony FF MILCs with prime lenses lighter than a single camera with a zoom?


----------



## msm (Mar 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> msm said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



If I shoot sports I don't shoot with a Sony mirrorless. Sports is a niche, most photographers shoot other things you know. So your digression is mostly irrelevant.

But to answer to your digression, I don't mind shooting action with a prime on my 1DX, I can't follow a player like with a zoom with a prime no but I find I often do not need to. Usually the best shots are when something happens and often that happens at a specific place so you can position correctly in advance. Of course there are situations where zooms are preferred too.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 2, 2016)

msm said:


> So your digression is mostly irrelevant.



To be clear, it was _your_ digression.


----------



## kaswindell (Mar 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> msm said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Sure, sports shooters use primes. And back in the days of film, so did everybody else, including me. I have 6 Canon FDn lenses, a 28/2.8, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2.0, 200/2.8, and 300/4.0 that I used with a motorized A-1 and an FTb to shoot a variety of subjects, including sports, but zooms today are so good you don't need to bother with the bother, and I, like many others, use zooms, including the guys from USA Today, Boston Globe and AP that were photographing the Georgia Tech/Boston College basketball game next to me last weekend. Sports shooters will use primes mostly on 300mm+ lenses when they need the large apertures to let them keep the ISO down (relatively speaking) and shutter speed up. And yes, all of them (but not me, sadly) had at least two 1DX/D4 class bodies, each with a different zoom.


----------



## msm (Mar 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> msm said:
> 
> 
> > So your digression is mostly irrelevant.
> ...



Eh... Who started to talk about moving subjects again?



neuroanatomist said:


> I'm glad you always have time to change lenses as subjects move.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 2, 2016)

msm said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > msm said:
> ...



We were discussing wide and normal lenses, and I was talking about people in general. You are the one who digressed into sports and supertele primes, then called it an irrelevant niche. Time to go get your metacognition checked.


----------



## msm (Mar 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> msm said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Except I didn't digress into sports, it was just an example which you digressed into.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 2, 2016)

msm said:


> Except I didn't digress into sports, it was just an example which you digressed into.





msm said:


> You can shoot moving subjects with primes too you know, *why do you think sport shooters use 300mm and 400mm f2.8 lenses?*



You provided the example. I thought using an example which you raised might better enable you to understand the point. Sadly but unsurprisingly, it didn't help.


----------



## martti (Mar 2, 2016)

Do you guys really have to spoil the ambiance here with your peeing contests?
Just asking.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 2, 2016)

martti said:


> Do you guys really have to spoil the ambiance here with your peeing contests?
> Just asking.



A thread entitled 'Sony Upsets full frame market' is a silly premise to begin with, there's nothing to spoil here. Just saying.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Mar 2, 2016)

They ain't cheap - and they're not that durable. Marginal ergonomics and minimal lenses. The financials are not great and Sony has a tendency to dump under-performing business units. Sony may have a bright future in imaging - professional television gear, sensors, and other ancilary stuff, but the efforts in prosumer photography is questionable. Like Samsung and Pentax our friends as Sony will continue to be an innovative but minor league player. Look for Canon, Nikon, Panasonic and Fuji to dominate for the next ten years.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 2, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> martti said:
> 
> 
> > Do you guys really have to spoil the ambiance here with your peeing contests?
> ...




But I digress


----------



## martti (Mar 3, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> martti said:
> 
> 
> > Do you guys really have to spoil the ambiance here with your peeing contests?
> ...




Silence is golden, golden
but my eyes still see


(Brian Poole and The Tremeloes)


----------

