Torpedoeing the "Flagship"

[DonSchap]

SONY has pulled something entirely too crafty to suit my tastes and I'm going to tell you about it.

With the SONY α900, "The Flagship", due to premeire at Photokina 2008, in September, a lot of slick preparation has been going on under everyone's radar. One of those preparations is in regards to lenses that will be readily available for the FULL FRAME camera.

I just became recently aware that TAMRON has quietly pulled or is planning to pull the SONY-mount from the following two very significant lenses for the Full Frame camera body:

SP AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) (SONY-mount "pulled")
SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO (not pulled, yet. Don't want to be too obvious.)

The lenses will continue to be produced, but only for the Nikon and Canon mounts (You can check their website (http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/17_35mm.asp) to confirm this, under specifications).

They also have eliminated, entirely, the

SP AF 14mm f/2.8 LD ... which may be arguable, but still ... there goes the fixed wide-angle, too.

and then to cinch it, they eliminated the

TAMRON Adaptall2 adapter ring for SONY/Maxxum, leaving the other camera manufacturers still available, but thereby taking away the "Manual Focus" Adaptall2 alternative lenses from the SONY Alpha line.

While this may not seem too important, on the outset, you need to be aware that TAMRON has some of the best lenses around, in a rather reasonable price range, especially when mounted on the SONY, basically because TAMRON supplies many of the lenses for SONY (same glass just wrapped in the SONY label and casing). No, not the Carl Zeiss® or the high-end G beauties, but the basic DT line.

Unfortunately, without these two aforementioned lenses on the market, SIGMA becomes the only third party manufacturer of these ranges, as Tokina has not made a SONY-mount lens since 2005. I am not sure how long SIGMA has the license to keep making the SONY-mount, but I am pretty sure it is not "forever."

SONY is a major share holder in TAMRON. So, the question becomes: Why kill your own mount?

Answer: To make SONY lenses the only ones available for use on the Full Frame camera. The lenses that will be introduced for the "Flagship" will effectively be the only lenses you will be able to get for it, because TAMRON will no longer produce these two (three) basic wider Di-lenses in the SONY-mount.

It appears that they will continue to support the APS-C sensors with the Di-II lenses in the SONY-mount, but not the high-end glass. This, my friends, is purposeful PRICE CONTROL and monopolistic practices, which were supposed to be OUTLAWED in the United States.

They are effectively removing all of the low-cost options to operating the "Flagship." There will be no more $400 alternatives, just whatever SONY releases in their marketing plan.

If you have any designs on owning an α900 ... and want to arrest your immediate costs, my advice is to rapidly get out the wallet, locate someone that still has the aforementioned glass available ... and buy a pair. The alternative SONY lenses could easily exceed $1000 each.

Welcome to the world of SONY FULL FRAME. :eek:

Sorry to step up and expose this marketing coup ... but, this kind of thing is just wrong. :mad: Consider the whistle BLOWN!

BTW: Noticeably, the K-M AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 (D) suddenly disappeared off B&H Video's inventory. Guess who made that one, too?

SONY has effectively sunk all the opposition before the "Flagship" ever pulled into port.

[Rooz]

add that to sony's price fixing scam for retailers and you guys may be in for a rough ride.

[DonSchap]

Rooz, I have prepared myself for a lot of this, but others are just going to get "hammered" if they opt for the Full Frame camera. The initial outlay in lenses will be close to $5000, conservatively, just to cover the three basic zooms.

Don't be too surprised to see SONY offering the 28-75mm f/2.8 and the 17-35mm f/2.8-4 in their own casing ... at significantly more than $400 each. The 14mm f/2.8 is going to be easily near $2000!

You can be sure that Adaptall2 ring will never see the light of day, again. :rolleyes:

If you ain't payin' ... you ain't playin'

Man, it is always something with these guys, ain't it? Gas ... Glass ... the prices are soaring.

[Rooz]

in saying that, FF people generally dont mind shelling out for glass...as long as its up to spec.

[SONYNUT]

not to worry..my next camera wont be another sony

[DonSchap]

Apparently SONY doesn't want to see anything but SONY lenses on their Flagship.

Seems almost ...

[Panda Bear]

This is most disappointing news; thanks Don for informing everyone.

I understand the desire to control the brand name, and possible issues with quality control, but this is cutting off the future, IMO.

The Sony series has been the best alternative to come along in a long time, and especially during tough economic times, there are many of us who can't afford to go top shelf right away, in terms of time, money, or knowledge.

Any high end endeavor needs a path from entry level to ensure a healthy supply of new participants. You don't need the best equipment until you learn how to use the mid-range stuff well enough for their limitations to actually become limitations. And for a lot of us, we need the mid-range stuff to help pay for itself, and then the upgrade.

This can also discourage the advanced folks (like Don), whose' knowledge and experience are so helpful for those of us learning this stuff, and working our way up.

I hope Sony hasn't lost sight of the fact that there are many who aren't exclusively photo enthusiasts or professionals. For many, photography is an important part of a bigger picture (no pun intended). IMO, there are probably more customers to be had with a product line that facilitates a gradual upward path that is still of relatively good quality each step of the way.

Sony had that, and it's why some of us are Sony users now. Lets hope they don't throw that away. Though it wouldn't be the first time in modern industrial history.

:confused:

[DonSchap]

I spent the better part of last night searching for a lens that really should have been easily available, on the almighty Internet ... and could not find it. The lens listing had been stricken from Adorama and B&H Video. Not out of stock, mind you. It was as though it had never been made ... at least not for SONY/Minolta-mount. SONY had TAMRON kill the lens and as hard as I tried, there were none to be found ... anywhere. I know a number of people must have seen this coming, because they are sitting on their K-M AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 (D) just waiting for "opening day."

I knew when the 14mm f/2.8 disappeared off the TAMRON site, something was desperately strange. If there were one lens that the Full Frame crowd would want ... the WIDE GUY! Now, it's just ... GONE!

Those who haven't been so advised to this planned obsolescence will pay full freight for the "apparent" exclusive SONY offerings. Judging by the current crop of prices ... that will be a hefty ticket indeed.

Honestly guys, if this situation does not bother you ... you either have too darn much money or just are a dispassionate soul. You are seeing living proof of a conspiracy in marketing, directed straight the consumer. Nothing new, I suspect, but coldly blatant and should probably be challenged in court with a major class-action lawsuit. The sooner the better and get this out in the open ... for direct explanation and compensation for trying to "corner the market."

[David Metsky]

Nothing new, I suspect, but coldly blatant and should probably be challenged in court with a major class-action lawsuit.
I'm confused, what would be the reason for the lawsuit? Why does Sony or Tamron have any obligation to make specific lenses available for you at a certain price point?

[DonSchap]

The obligation is common and fair trade practices ... not designer commerce to artificially boost your own sales.

Manipulating TAMRON to purposely cutoff valid lenses ... because you have a new product and gaggle of your own lenses you want to exclusively push ... I am sorry Dave, that flies in the face of ethical operation. This is pure greed ... and we are really suffering as a nation ... no, as a world, because of it. This is so blatantly obvious, it has to be held up as an example of a problem that is being created ... not because of production, but to purposely manipulate market forces in ways that create mistrust and future decision-making.

I know I'm having second thoughts about going ahead with my purchase, considering this outrageous and calculated approach to controlling our craft. Business is business, but this is monkey-business.

Sure, I do not have to buy the product ... but will that solve this practice and stop it from going forward? No ... it has to be handled when it happens, or it just gets a pass and we all take it in the proverbial shorts. :(

The proof is there ... you can check the facts yourself. This practice should be stopped and held as an example of what not to do in industry. It is exactly to the heart of a monopoly. Sure, there is Canon and Nikon, as alternatves, but that is exactly what this is NOT about.

I contend that it is, perhaps, just the initial step to finally eliminate the third-party lens makers altogether. Bits and pieces of the industry needlessly go to dust, leaving everyone paying very controlled prices and having to continue to tolerate the nefarious schemes of the bigger corporations.

How about this? If this was such a great idea, why didn't anyone say anything about it? The cloak of "behind the scenes manipulation" of an emerging market is wrong on so many levels. Personally, a protest at Photokina would be perfectly justifed about something like this. Bring the public up to speed about how wonderful it is to be "cut-off at the knees", right before they buy their new toy.

[David Metsky]

Manipulating TAMRON to purposely cutoff valid lenses ... because you have a new product and gaggle of your own lenses you want to exclusively push ... I am sorry Dave, that flies in the face of ethical operation. This is pure greed ... and we are really suffering as a nation ... no, as a world, because of it. This is so blatantly obvious, it has to be held up as an example of a problem that is being created ... not because of production, but to purposely manipulate market forces in ways that create mistrust and future decision-making.
All this may be true, but I don't believe any of it is actionable. Ethics and law are two different things. It has nothing to do with monopolies either, you can always buy a camera from plenty of other companies.

It may suck, it may be lousy business, but I don't see where you have a legal leg to stand on. Your recourse is to take your business elsewhere.

[cdifoto]

Next stop...Nikon!

[DonSchap]

Next stop...Nikon!

Oh Don ... LOL. As if!

I suppose I could make some calls, downtown, to see what legal recourse there is to this type of chicanery. I hate to always be the pile-driver in these situations, but we all are dealt one hand to play with. I believe in tackling issues to seek the truth and understanding. If there are mitigating reasons for deleting the SONY-mount from selected TAMRON lenses, then fine. But, if this is just a clever maneuver to milk even more money out of the customer, then these people are on a different level of doing business. The fun will stop and the pursuit of justice should step up and do the job we pay them for.

After glancing at the "European Union microsoft competition case", there may be some precedent that can be established to force a reversal of this situation. Anyway, here's the situation as I see it.


Initial Complaint

In 2008, Don Schap said that SONY was blocking its competitors out of the lens market through anti-competitive practices. The complaint centered on the forced discontinuation of several specific TAMRON lenses, at the time, which required mount licensing for the lens type to the supplier of SONY’s licensed mount, whether or not the unit actually would be used on the upcoming “Flagship” camera body.

This complaint also sighted that APS-C sensor lenses (henceforth referred to as Di-II) were continuing in production, maintaining the SONY-mount and targeted toward a different line of SONY DSLR camera.

The complaint also included the specific discontinuation of the previously available TAMRON Adaptall2 collar for SONY/Maxxum, depriving all SONY DSLRS from using Adaptall2-style lenses, while the remaining camera manufacturer’s collars were still available to the consumer for Adaptall2 lenses

Relief sought

Immediate availability of SONY Alpha/Minolta mounts on any sighted TAMRON Di-lenses and the availability of the Adaptall2 collar for SONY/Maxxum to the buying public.



I have no problem seeing them actively correct this kind of issue. Nobody should.

[David Metsky]

I have no problem seeing them actively correct this kind of issue. Nobody should.
Again, this is a purely business decision in a non-monopoly market. I don't see where you have any standing here, Sony is entirely in their right to change the market by restricting the number of lenses they make, raising the prices on the remaining ones, and discontinuing products. They think they can make more money this way, and they may be right.

It sucks if you wanted to buy lower priced lenses, but that's what the free market is all about. Sony didn't have to license the lens mount technology to anyone if they didn't want to. Market forces, not the legal system, will address this issue.

[DonSchap]

True enough ... my main motivation was to alert the prospective "A900-buying" folks that they had best get their TAMRON glass as soon as possible, because it is disappearing. SONY-glass will ALWAYS be there ... to empty out your wallet in grand fashion, so there is no need to worry about that. You pop the cash, they will pop the glass.

37787

[Rooz]

how many tamron lens' have you ever seen on a 1D or D3 ? hell i havent seen many tamron/ sigma's on a 5d.

[David Metsky]

True enough ... my main motivation was to alert the prospective "A900-buying" folks that they had best get their TAMRON glass as soon as possible, because it is disappearing.

I agree that getting the news out is a worthy goal and one that deserves to happen.

[DonSchap]

Rooz ... SONY people are, by nature, a little more of a hodge-podge of glass than Canon and Nikon types.

TAMRON is the strong leader in that regard ... and seeings that TAMRON and Minolta were very close in lens production, it makes sense.

Full Frame and 35mm-film are definitely closer in third party than Canon and Nikon camera systems, because there hasn't been a full frame up until now.

I have to admit ... if I have $10,000-15,000 to just toss away on new glass, I'd buy the killer SONY bag o' glass ... but, darn few folks are in a position to do that. They are slowly working their bag up in quality and can't just drop that line of credit for a camera system.

Oh, you occasionally have your "CW" .. and what not ... but that's the exception, certainly not the rule. It takes time to get used to the new camera and be able to turn out superior results that can be sold for profit.

I guess we shall see what reported sales turn out after Photokina.

[Rooz]

Rooz ... SONY people are, by nature, a little more of a hodge-podge of glass than Canon and Nikon types.

thats cos they havent been around long enough to establish a long lens lineup. and the fact that they have never attempted to appeal to the pro photographer. if a pro ever buys a sony i doubt they're gonna be mounting a tamron lens to their camera when there is a far superior zeiss lens on offer.

i dont disagree with your point that this is a bastard move from sony, but put in perspective...not sure it really makes that much difference in reality to those that opt for a FF dslr.

[DonSchap]

Fair enough ... not having a choice seems a little over the top. Like SONY wants to make darn sure no one even tries to shoot their new toy through ... less then the primo glass.

In a way, makes some sense ... in others ... totally uncool. I will be anxious to see some comparisons. Then, my friend ... the truth will out.

[cdifoto]

Why'd you switch to Sony again?

[DonSchap]

So I could use my old glass ... guess those days are ... OVER!!!


Nah ... it was all the shakin' going on with the Canon ... and having to pop for IS-equipped lensing ... of which there are only just so many and most are priced up there in the clouds. Back in 2005, I had my eye on the KM-7D ... but then the wheels flew off Minolta ... and they were ABSORBED. In the mean time, I wanted my digital SLR ... and opted for the Canon EOS 20D. Then, after 18-months, the SONY A700 arrived ... the final APS-C ... and all was well. My stint with Canon was over and I was back into my old bag o' glass.

Without having the comparisons, though ... this is all just fluff. I've been pretty content with what I have been able to acheive with most of the TAMRON glass. I've got a couple decent lenses ... but, I suppose there is a shift coming ... far more pricey, which I really had hoped would come down a bit.

What I find amazing is how many people lined up on the SONY side of the argument ... taking the direct hit to their own financials, rather than support the idea that something rather devious and crafty was going on. SONY's got 'em. Just like the Canonites ... in for a penny ... in for several thousand pounds.

Off we go, it's Saturday.

[cdifoto]

I don't agree with Sony but it's not exactly a surprising move by them either.

[djmft44]

So what you're saying is that if I buy a new sony, even now I won't be able to get the really good lenses. Jeff said in his review that he doesn't care for one of the lenses included in the kit. Sigh, always a little late.

[DonSchap]

djmft44 ... this is concerning the new A900 "Flagship" camera to be introduced in September. Were you planning on buying one of these?

From your posting, I would imagine you more in line for the other models. There are plenty of SONY lenses out there.

[djmft44]

You're right, I'm sorry. Cheers, Dana