# A North American photographer gets the VIP treatment at Sony



## ahsanford (Jun 19, 2018)

Good read from a friend of mine at another site: 

https://www.slrlounge.com/the-sony-story-no-one-tells-not-even-sony-its-not-in-our-nature-to-snuff-out-the-fire/

He's not a Sony fanboy trying to win you over (not a current Sony user), but he's certainly intrigued with what they're up to. I found this a fascinating read -- how the imaging / sensor arms of the business are independent, their philosophy on trying and failing, their goals with growing the entire market while it is shrinking, etc.

He still doesn't explain why my hands hurt just _looking_ at an A7 with a GM lens on it :, but I appreciated his read of things there. 

Check it out?

- A


----------



## hne (Jun 19, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> Good read from a friend of mine at another site:
> 
> https://www.slrlounge.com/the-sony-story-no-one-tells-not-even-sony-its-not-in-our-nature-to-snuff-out-the-fire/
> 
> ...



That is indeed a nice read. I applaud Sony for trying to get a market share by growing the market. Still, I'm not comfortable helping them in the way of buying their products. Why? The Sony track record of building incompatible hardware (memory stick, anyone?), defective by design as well as compromise the security of and litigate its customers makes me keep some distance to the company: https://www.defectivebydesign.org/sony


----------



## littleB (Jun 19, 2018)

Memory stick, ATRAC, a hot shoe where central contact that does not fire the flash - this is all Sony philosophy.
As for beginning of the article, it very clearly reminds me of the book Gekaufte Journalisten by Udo Ulfkotte. I do not know its exact English translation, something like Sold Journalists. There is a story in this book how some Gulf country invited journalists, and paid all their expenses on the trip, every their wish was addressed. It is quite natural that those journalists wrote very positive feefback articles about that country, despite all the social problems of that autocratic country, and despite the fact that the head of the country was a tyrany.
Now I see that Rishi of DPReview went there. I would never call him unbiased, given that fact. It is quite natural for a human person, when given all the welcome treatment, to lose their critical point of view and become slightly biased, then the bias will gradually grow and then suddenly an independent journalist loses integrity completely and turns into what Ulfkotte calls a presstitute. This does not happen at once, its very slow and gradual.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 19, 2018)

It clarified the position of sensor vs camera divisions but told me little else. A company that builds its business on the sensor to invest in cameras and staffed with nice guys looking to the future. I didn't really see anything that would be different if you visited the Canon headquarters. 

I could interpret the article as 'Sony wanted to be in the camera business so developed a sensor because they lacked the nous to compete with Canon/Nikon and it was the only way to overcome the failings of their design'. That is probably very unfair but the article does little to negate it.


----------



## BeenThere (Jun 19, 2018)

Yes, an interesting read. Saying that Sony is more likely to take a chance with a product and see how/if the market accepts it, then quickly move on to another iteration. This tends to put their products at the bleeding edge of development with some abject failures and some spectacular successes. Canon and Nikon are more likely to let the market mature before venturing forth with a commercial product. Interesting times.

Also read the comments below the article for how some individuals are reacting.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jun 19, 2018)

BeenThere said:


> Also read the comments below the article for how some individuals are reacting.


About that... 

I thought "_OK, benefit of the doubt_" and all that, and rocked over to the website of the Sony zealot in the comments, Tim Driman, in order to understand what it was that "only" Sony was able to give him over Canon.

Not a _single_ image in any of the wildlife galleries (which is my "thing") I looked at made me think "Wow! Only Sony could do that. I'm in!" 

In fact, every last one could easily be achieved with any decent Canon camera/lens combo. Nothing "special" about them whatsoever. Certainly nothing that remotely supported his rambling, ranting zealotry.

But - and it's a big "but" - very odd colours in some of those shots...


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 19, 2018)

Mikehit said:


> It clarified the position of sensor vs camera divisions but told me little else. A company that builds its business on the sensor to invest in cameras and staffed with nice guys looking to the future. I didn't really see anything that would be different if you visited the Canon headquarters.
> 
> I could interpret the article as 'Sony wanted to be in the camera business so developed a sensor because they lacked the nous to compete with Canon/Nikon and it was the only way to overcome the failings of their design'. That is probably very unfair but the article does little to negate it.



I think if you walk into the article that Sony has their head screwed on backwards, this will do nothing to change that. 

My take home was that there is _some_ market method to the madness, there are TWO cooks in the kitchen (Sensors keeps imaging in the dark on some things) and -- yes -- you feel some humanity when you actually meet the humans that make things. On the last point, any visit to any manufacturing floor where folks are treated well usually leaves you feeling this way. One could imagine a trip to Canon / Sigma / Nikon / etc. would have ended with the same result.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 19, 2018)

BeenThere said:


> Yes, an interesting read. Saying that Sony is more likely to take a chance with a product and see how/if the market accepts it, then quickly move on to another iteration. This tends to put their products at the bleeding edge of development with some abject failures and some spectacular successes. Canon and Nikon are more likely to let the market mature before venturing forth with a commercial product. Interesting times.
> 
> Also read the comments below the article for how some individuals are reacting.



Yep. Kishore's called the A9 a statement piece more than a workhorse. It is more a shot across the bow of what Sony is capable of than it is a daily driver.

- A


----------



## BeenThere (Jun 19, 2018)

Keith_Reeder said:


> BeenThere said:
> 
> 
> > Also read the comments below the article for how some individuals are reacting.
> ...


Agree that the wildlife photography on his color-mirrorless page wasn’t awe inspiring. I’m not seeing the odd colors you mention except in some eyes in flash shots that were probably photoshopped in anyway. It’s hard to say if another camera could do the same without seeing the value range in post. I can rarely guess the camera that made an image by looking at a web rendition. Often is in post processing and large prints where difference can be seen.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 19, 2018)

ahsanford said:


> I think if you walk into the article that Sony has their head screwed on backwards, this will do nothing to change that.
> 
> My take home was that there is _some_ market method to the madness, there are TWO cooks in the kitchen (Sensors keeps imaging in the dark on some things) and -- yes -- you feel some humanity when you actually meet the humans that make things. On the last point, any visit to any manufacturing floor where folks are treated well usually leaves you feeling this way. One could imagine a trip to Canon / Sigma / Nikon / etc. would have ended with the same result.
> 
> - A



I am not saying that Sony has got their heads on backwards at all and in some respects, using the capital to fund the growth and development of their cameras is a pretty sound business strategy. 

Beyond that (not totally unsurprising revelation) I found little else of interest, and certainly no information about their strategy for camera development in itself - in fact the author was at pains to say Sony gave zilch away.


Yes, they are doing a lot of technological development but I am not sure that is the same thing as being tuned into photographers - they are primarily a technology company doing what tech companies do best which is release tecchy things. I have read several reviews (even by people who have switched to Sony) saying that the last thing you would describe Sony cameras is 'fun to use' - great tools but (as one said) they 'suck the fun out of it'. 
What is spun in the article as a willingness to try things, have many people criticise them as releasing beta products quickly superceded by the next model whereas a different view is that Canon does what photographers want which is release a camera that does what it is supposed to. In that respect are Sony really any more 'tuned into the psyche of photographers' than Canon? 
I am not even sure Sony are pushing the boundaries - many aspects of Sony cameras (IBIS, in-camera stacking, in-VF histograms etc) were, IIRC, released by other manufacturers first. 

The article has its interesting comments, it is just that I think when you read it back it is short on meat and I came away with the conclusion that Sony are 'nice people'.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 19, 2018)

littleB said:


> ...As for beginning of the article, it very clearly reminds me of the book Gekaufte Journalisten by Udo Ulfkotte. I do not know its exact English translation, something like Sold Journalists. There is a story in this book how some Gulf country invited journalists, and paid all their expenses on the trip, every their wish was addressed. It is quite natural that those journalists wrote very positive feefback articles about that country, despite all the social problems of that autocratic country, and despite the fact that the head of the country was a tyrany.
> 
> Now I see that Rishi of DPReview went there. I would never call him unbiased, given that fact. It is quite natural for a human person, when given all the welcome treatment, to lose their critical point of view and become slightly biased, then the bias will gradually grow and then suddenly an independent journalist loses integrity completely and turns into what Ulfkotte calls a presstitute. This does not happen at once, its very slow and gradual.



This has long been a problem in American journalism when it comes to business, sports, film, cooking, etc.

Many times these journalists are actually fans who cover an industry where they would personally like to be the people or companies they are covering. Companies like Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc., know very well how to manipulate these journalists. Just read any of the Q&As that DPReview publishes after a trade show. The companies set the ground rules and the "journalists" happily comply and never come close to asking any really difficult questions or attempt to verify what they have been spoon fed.

This particular article is no worse or better than any other, but at least it discloses that the writers were all there on a junket paid for by Sony, so people can take that into account.


----------

