roger alan wrote:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/585530036 … bilization


Competition for 5D Mk IV and/or D810 ??

Technically, yes.
In reality I think they did themselves a disservice by being so quiet about it for so long. All the energy and talk was on the Mirrorless so if anybody hung in there with the A99/A900/A850 they are looking at a good camera but I can't imagine that too many people hung in there.

Cool Hand Mike wrote:
Technically, yes.
In reality I think they did themselves a disservice by being so quiet about it for so long.........

I think you're probably right about that.

L o n d o n   F o g wrote:
Short answer...NO!

Way too limited options when compared with the big two!

Can you give examples of where the a99ii is lacking vs the Canikon big guns?

roger alan wrote:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/585530036 … bilization


Competition for 5D Mk IV and/or D810 ??

in my opinion this blows those other 2 out of the water. and about damn time they announced it too.
though that Fujifilm GFX medium format camera that was announced on the same day is fairly sexy in and of itself...

L o n d o n   F o g wrote:
Short answer...NO!

Way too limited options when compared with the big two!

name some areas where its lacking then, it has a lot of lenses, the same or better low-light, better resolution....   maybe you're just a canon / nikon fanboy

Cool Hand Mike wrote:

Technically, yes.
In reality I think they did themselves a disservice by being so quiet about it for so long. All the energy and talk was on the Mirrorless so if anybody hung in there with the A99/A900/A850 they are looking at a good camera but I can't imagine that too many people hung in there.

I'm too lazy to look up the article, but there was an interview on DPReview about 18 months ago with someone at the head of one of their various divisions where they essentially said that they weren't abandoning the A mount, but that it was no longer a priority.

They said that new cameras would still come out, but they would be fewer and further between, and there would only be a few models in the lineup going forward.

In other words, 'we won't force anyone to change mounts, but don't hold your breath waiting for all the newest tech.'

I can only assume that people unhappy with the slow release of A mount bodies did not read that interview.

Cool Hand Mike wrote:
Technically, yes.
In reality I think they did themselves a disservice by being so quiet about it for so long. All the energy and talk was on the Mirrorless so if anybody hung in there with the A99/A900/A850 they are looking at a good camera but I can't imagine that too many people hung in there.

+1

It may actually end up being very amazing, but, the ship has sailed.

Chris Q Photo wrote:
name some areas where its lacking then, it has a lot of lenses, the same or better low-light, better resolution....   maybe you're just a canon / nikon fanboy

Does this question really need answering?

Canon and Nikon own the market, there's nothing that even comes close to both systems for expandblity, legacy lenses, underwater work, astro photography, etc etc. Just as an example, well over 225 Nikon lenses can be used on any FX body.

The big two have been in this game since the 50's and 60's, Sony entered the dslr market, what 10 years ago? They are trying to muscle their way in to a market that is clearly out of their league! Sony as great a company as it is (I have had Sony TV's since the 80's, and love their products) may not be making these cameras, lenses, accessories in 10 years time, then what?

Personally I would never invest $$$'s in a system that might one day be totally obselete!

alessandro2009 wrote:
I think Sony should not waste energy/resource on this type of cameras.

Yes, exactly. Stick to providing Nikon with the best sensors and focus other energies into what they do best...namely TV.

roger alan wrote:
@Motordrive - I believe you mean a7RII which is 42MP. The a7II is 24MP.

When you say "IQ hit" due to the pellicle mirror, are you referring the 1/2 stop of light loss?

Yes, that's the one I meant. (I put a space in there)

The pellicle mirror costs a half stop of light, but also some resolution.
I haven't checked a chart, my guess is that it's a 10 to 20% difference in resolving power.

Motordrive Photography wrote:

Yes, that's the one I meant. (I put a space in there)

The pellicle mirror costs a half stop of light, but also some resolution.
I haven't checked a chart, my guess is that it's a 10 to 20% difference in resolving power.

I've not seen any other reference to loss of resolving power due to the mirror.  20% difference in resolving power? That's your guess? Got links to any info on this?

roger alan wrote:
I've not seen any other reference to loss of resolving power due to the mirror.  20% difference in resolving power? That's your guess? Got links to any info on this?

I haven't found a link yet,

it is just my swag (scientific wild ass guess)

here is a Peta pixel link that lists 5% on an a55
http://petapixel.com/2011/08/29/sonys-t … y-up-to-5/

roger alan wrote:
OK, thanks for the link. I'll check that out.

a55 was the first SLT (for anyone who may not know). It had at least one (now) well documented bug relating to live view use in a studio setting.

Wonder if perhaps Sony has improved the mirror in the SLT since its intial release (a55) in 2010?

I think the light loss has more to do with physics than technology. They may have made incremental gains, but it will be more-or-less the same.

Legacys 7 wrote:
I shoot with the A99. My two A99 are the first generation. While I do have no doubts that the newer one blows mine out of the water, I see no justified reason for me to upgrade. And to be honest, I think that Sony putting out this camera had more to do with the users wanting it and less about Sony feeling that it's something you need, due to what I believe is Sony is focusing more on the mirror cameras. That is where their niche is at and where many non Sony users, have dropped their Nikon and Canon cameras for.

I think that eventually Sony will no longer use produce the A mount. To me it make sense, Plus, I'm wagering that they will get into the medium format field with the mirror system.

I totally agree

roger alan wrote:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/585530036 … bilization


Competition for 5D Mk IV and/or D810 ??

No... Just no... think Lens

L o n d o n   F o g wrote:

Yes, exactly. Stick to providing Nikon with the best sensors and focus other energies into what they do best...namely TV.

Their TV business was decimated when LCD/LEDs came out, that div was mostly sold off. Their walkman/personal electronics was destroyed by MP3 players. The only real profitable divisions Sony has now are Playstation and cameras. Their music and movie div are up and down.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/28/sony-jus … -hold.html

" Another bright spot for Sony is the gaming division which saw operating income rise 84.3 percent to 88.7 billion yen. In January, the company said that PS4 sales had topped 35 million and in its earnings release, it said an increase in software and hardware sales of the console helped offset the decrease in PlayStation 3 sales.

Its camera business also saw strong profitability which rose 72.7 percent. "

Legacys 7 wrote:
I shoot with the A99. My two A99 are the first generation. While I do have no doubts that the newer one blows mine out of the water, I see no justified reason for me to upgrade. And to be honest, I think that Sony putting out this camera had more to do with the users wanting it and less about Sony feeling that it's something you need, due to what I believe is Sony is focusing more on the mirror cameras. That is where their niche is at and where many non Sony users, have dropped their Nikon and Canon cameras for.

I think that eventually Sony will no longer use produce the A mount. To me it make sense, Plus, I'm wagering that they will get into the medium format field with the mirror system.

I own both the old and new A99. Lately I use the old one more just because of the file size and they seem a little easier to process. Don't get me wrong the A99II is great for many things but for some work the A99 is good enough .

Still very happy with the A mount but willing to consider the A9 as a 3rd or 4th camera as a remote it could be good. I am not too concerned bout the amount of lenses and the adapters seem to do a great job too even if that means only 14fps

moz photography wrote:
As much as I would want to purchase the new a99ii my a99v1 is doing a great job, I love the images out of it. there are some new features such as wifi / nfc I would like to have but I don't need them. The other issue I have is the price as many have pointed out a-mount is more than likely in decline the price of the new unit is a considerable increase compared to the first model, I get it that it has 4k video, better focusing but in order to be enticed to buy it a 50% price increase, I would want to be needing all the features not just wanting a couple.

wifi / nfc are much more useful with a smaller-size image.  I sold my a99 to move to mirrorless and I never use wife/nfc on my full-frame camera, just on the APS-C one.  I never used the dual-card slot on my a99 except as a cardholder so I would always have a spare if slot 1 filled up or gave the dreaded "error writing to card " message.  One of my colleages was the first a99ii shooter in Canada and he is very happy with it. but his was an upgrade from a77 so there's a huge diff.  the jump from a99 to a99ii is incremental and has a huge price increase.