Time and again,
Despite what a company may or may not do, the customers are what keep it afloat. All you have to do is see the mistake Minolta (1996) made when it bet the ranch on changing the advanced hot shoe design for its camera system. Many pre-1996 users felt pretty "betrayed" when there were not a sufficient amount of adapters (FS1200 or FS1100) to make their implementations of flash systems work with both the old ISO investment or the old with the new. Camera store owners also felt this technological pinch and quit carrying the brand. That's a pretty strong response, Rooz. I witnessed it and it is sad that this corporation apparently learned nothing from it.
SONY goes one even worse, by limiting their camera sales pretty much to online stores or boutique displays in the formal Sony Style stores. A professional, knowledgeable Customer Service is non-existent, as pimple-faced children step up and try to show you items you could care less about and/or are totally lacking any kind of formal equipment training they could share. That being rough enough for a fledgling camera competitor, but then changes to the heart of the very system that got them noticed... to only a static mirror or mirror-less technology, there again, leaving the-one-who-brought-you-to-the-dance standing alone, wondering... what went so wrong? This was not "Minolta reincarnated"... it was P&S technology run amok through an existing DSLR system... turning a DSLR-camera into a reduced-image producing hybrid.
No, betrayal may sound strong, but when expectations of "invested" users are not realized... and it seems quite clear what these customers expect from the company... to not provide it under this "adoption clause" is just cause not only for concern, but breach of implied contract. I suppose a "class action" effort by all these disgruntled users could be motivational to SONY, also. There has to be some actionable level that these "system investors" can take to finally get the camera they are asking for developed and delivered, instead of being forced to adopt the currently inferior-system foisted upon them without their common support or request.
Originally Posted by Rooz
Perhaps, a complete "buy-back" of all SONY or SONY-mount equipment, at the original price, might make for a nice starting negotiation point in such a legal argument, in order to facilitate this forced transition to a supported OVF-system.
The customers are asking SONY to step up and give them a competing OVF-FF-camera, so they do not have to lose their investment in lenses or whatnot. They are asking SONY to adopt a more professional approach so that they can compete in the business of photography... with real tools. What's changed... other than SONY's direction on these customers? No... you may find a number of words that cover this. You still get the same feeling of a double-cross, leaving in a position you do not want to be in.
Don, you're a nice guy but boy, are you miguided or what? Lots of emotive words in the last two pages but very little substance and lots of suppositions that do not hold up to scrutiny. I have no objection to your move to Nikon if you simply have to have an OVF; your choice, and Nikon make great cameras.
I'm quite happy where I am and in the end there will be no OVF in any camp. There is no doubt now that mirrorless cameras are the future or that mirrorless and OVF do not mix.
Lmao @ class action
Originally Posted by DonSchap
sales have exponentially increased, as has their market share and their CUSTOMER base since they went back to core business. They don't give a rats if a few disgruntled purists ditch the mount. There are far more happy Sony users than unhappy right now.
Don I think Rooz hit the nail on the head last page where he said you're now realising what Sony want to be is not what you desired them to be.
Quite honestly I could never understand how you felt that way about them. And I find it a bit insulting to say the Nikon is a rebadged Sony given it has a Sony sensor. There is so much more to a camera than the sensor, if there wasn't then there may have been some pro's using Sony.
Originally Posted by rooz
I do appreciate the support. Seriously, you are a hell of an audience and I wish I could take you with me.
I did not mean to imply that the Nikon was a re-badged SONY. What I meant was that SONY is inside the capturing aspect of the camera... and if you want to continue to enjoy what OVF shooting is and continues to be, with the 36MP sensor... the Nikon D800 is the only alternative. How you shoot is just as important as what you shoot. The new generations will have to get very used to seeing the world as SONY digital imaging presents it to you.
Your own eye is no longer in the picture, so to speak.
There's not much more an amateur like me can add on to what has already been said. But hey, here's my view on current SLT, mirrorless and EVF technology being used in Sony cameras and other brands of SLR alike.
Having just purchased the a65 and also expanding my knowledge on how to work a camera manually and take the images I want too; I agree that Live view and the EVF can take away from the photographic experience and make it seem less professional, due to the fact you can see your image before you've pressed the shutter release.
However, there is NOTHING stopping me from picking up a camera that has an OVF in order to keep in touch with what used to be the norm in SLR photography. I'm even investing in a film camera pretty soon and planning to develop my own images in order to appreciate what I see through my snazzy little EVF and spinny-roundy LCD screen that little bit more; in order to keep in touch with what has been and to also make me appreciate what I regularly shoot with.
I may be a 17 year old with what some may seem as a mere 'gadget' but Don (in particular), let me assure you that there are many other young photographers out there that are doing the same. I hope.
Do not let this...
one man's opinion decimate your fun with photography, okay? It is my opinion of how it is impacting MY photography and the last time I checked, it was my finger on the shutter release, making the determination of what gets taken... and what doesn't.
Hey, I do not want to rain on anyone's parade. My goodness, if the SONY "herd" wants this, then feast away!
Personally, I have been shooting far too long and, yes, I have, first hand, experienced the SLT-a77 and NEX7 "drawbacks," right at the WPPI Trade Show, using them on the most elegant lenses ever produced. I know this is not the direction I want my photography to run in. Sure, the bells and whistles gadgetry have an allure... but, I have not been conditioned or manipulated by P&S technology... and my expectations are definitely a lot different when I pull that shutter release, as I truly "witness" what it is I want to capture.
Despite that, the "never-going-to-be-made" a9xx DSLR... STILL would not be the "be all, end all" camera I really want to see and use. Sadly, it would have been the "natural" progression of the 36MP sensor, just like the Nikon D800 is, in my opinion. The SONY SLT-a99 is a clear departure from that. It is a little computer screen that you are viewing, not nature.
Simply put, the EVF LCD is an evaluative "screen shot" to judge your image on. The creative (or human) element has been "interpreted" and displayed for you, as the video processor manipulates the image. I suppose, it is creative in a whole other way... but, it is not my way... and that is where I feel something important and intangible is being lost. In a sense, it is as if the image has been "photoshop'd" by the camera, before it gets taken. In other words: "With a electronic viewfinder type device... THERE IS A DIGITAL CAMERA IN MY WAY!"
**Shrug** I guess you had to be there, as the "genuine moment" is... dimmished.
Enjoy your newest digital cameras, folks. They are more so, now, than ever before. Next, you'll be telling me how the camera (by itself) took a trip, somewhere, and you were able to capture images from the comfort of your computer laptop. Yeah, that's experiencing the "moment of creativity." You know something, been there, already... and done that.
I had gone that route...
Back in 2005, when Minolta went "belly-up" and was left on the roadside, looking rather dead, I purchased the beginnings of a Canon EOS 20D & Canon EOS-3 system. Over the next year, I built it up and began my formal education in photography, using it as a departure device from film photography. Only problem I found was that I was rather trapped into using a tripod for images requiring shutter speeds of 1/30 or less. Digital just seemed to show more camera shake and my "keeper" level stunk.
Then in 2006, SONY resurrected the Alpha-mount with the introduction of "prototype" anti-shake a100 camera. I bought into it, using my older Minolta lenses, and began increasing my "keepers" to something a bit more reasonable. Anti-shake really worked. I tried to contact Canon and see why they were not adding the anti-shake their camera body, but I was told, back then, by one of their engineers, that Canon would not make this move because they found an absolute financial boon in keeping it ONLY in the lenses. So, I endured the release of the EOS 30D and the 40D, still not getting this in-the-body anti-shake feature and decided that SONY should be the reasonable way out. In 2007, with the introduction of the a700, I realized that if I wanted to truly improve the kind of Alpha-mount lenses I had... supporting two systems was folly.
I quickly began the process of selling off the accumulation of nearly 20 Canon-mount lenses and the EOS 20D. I then replaced these with SONY-mount lenses and added the a700 and a850 cameras to my arsenal. Again, not having the resources or the will to concentrate on BOTH systems and since Canon simply would not back off their nefarious insistence at not adding anti-shake to their cameras played an enormous role in my doing that.
Anyway... since the demands of school had me trying all sorts of lenses and shooting styles, I decided to just go ahead and buy a series of Alpha-mount PRIMES and build up the ZOOMs to eventually cover most of the challenges (MACRO, landscape, portrait, event, aviation, architecture, indoor, outdoor, sports, and whatever else might be asked for.) While the first school, OCC, was using and referencing mostly Canon equipment and did not have rental. You could occasionally borrow an item or two, or using it in the lab, but that was rare. The next school, ILIS, was entirely Nikon. At ILIS, the students could actually check-out the equipment if they wanted to, but the student is entirely responsible for paying for the $xxxx lens you may have dropped. Why a "professional" the school does not carry "gear insurance" is beyond me.
For the sake of argument, I find that photography is a full-time effort, in my estimation... and if you have to always run off to check-out gear... you tend to miss things. Plus, running back and forth to the school for things you need to do a shoot from God-only-knows where, is expensive and time-consuming. Using the studio, it still represents and interruption, but it is doable. The real problem is that students should not be living in the studio... plus, there is only one. Scheduling becomes tedious.
I knew that if I wanted to continue using my SONY system as my system of choice... all of the supporting gear would have to be purchased and personally owned by me, because their is no convenient source for it. They even removed the SONY Style store, in the Mall next to the school, back in 2010. At any rate, I made the decision to buy it all... or what I could afford, for the most part. That new 500mm f/4 G SSM is definite going to wait, now.
Again, like Canon, Nikon does not have anti-shake in anything but its lenses. Since Nikon is already using the physically same-sized sensor that is in the a900/a850, it would be nice to see the SONY in-the-body stabilization added to the Nikon camera system. For argument's sake, it would just simplify things, enormously. The debate of which one is better would be totally eliminated, as you would then have BOTH available to you and could switch toi the lens, if it had VR in it.
Basically, the inital cost of going with a basic Nikon Full Frame (FX) package, using the D800 and the three basic zooms (16-35mm, 24-70mm & 70-200mm), a 105mm MACRO and a low-light PRIME (50mm f/1.4) would be right around $10,000 from B&H Video. I could save on the flash system by just getting a Nikon Adapter shoe for my Metz 76 MZ5 (man, I love this flash), for about $80 more. But still... that's easily $10,000 for adding the Nikon system, with out any further additions.
I suppose it is arguable doable, but it is maddening just for the sake of the mount.