« Remembrance Of Things—Part 1 | Main | The Woman Behind the Camera at Abu Ghraib »

Saturday, 22 March 2008


Sony certainly 'went to town' on that vertical grip!

Holy cow! Thats one big monster camera. Does it come with a truss? Discount vouchers for a physical therapist? Wheels?

Actually, John, I think it's smaller than the biggest Canons and Nikons.

Mike J.

The clear case to see the inner components is totally awesome. That camera is huge. My wimpy arms couldn't handle that monster.

Internationale Funkausstellung (IFA), fwiw. Finding this wasn't too bad, but IFA doesn't seem to think you need to know this (hint: the IFA page has an IFA glossary, and "IFA" isn't in there although "IFA convention" is, and this one doesn't define it).

KUTGW, GL, LOL, ToysR*s,GBA, and all that.

IFA propably stands for "Internationale Funkausstellung", a consumer electronics show in Berlin. See www.ifa-berlin.com for details.


It's definitely the Internationale Funkausstellung in Berlin, Germany's most important consumer electronics show. Perhaps my thinking is too subtle here, but by showing it either at IFA (consumer electronics) or at Photokina (photographic equipment) Sony will send a signal at least to German customers like myself about the market segment Sony wants to position itself in. Anyway, as I want to replace my trusty D7D, I can't wait to get my hands on this beast. On the other hand, neither my old Minolta glass nor my computing equipment will be up to the task of dealing with the 24 MP sensor, so I could easily switch to, say, Nikon, as buying a D300 plus the excellent new 24-70 will set me back less than buying the A900 plus the new Carl Zeiss. Perhaps the prices for the Alpha 700 will drop after the introduction of the 900, so I might get that one while waiting for the inevitable full-frame midrange model.

It's about time that others started to manufacture full-frame DSLRs! I, for one, cannot believe the hype about these new models from Nikon and Sony. Don't get me wrong, they are very capable cameras, and I'd love to own either on (or both!). The thing we have to remember though, is that Canon still is the only manufacturer with TWO full-frame DSLRs, one of which costs less than half the price of the Nikon D3, and has been available for well over two years. In fact, I have been shooting with my 5D for nearly two and a half years!

I know the new models are better, but so they should be (and the 5D successor will be right up there, too, let's not doubt that)! While I am glad that Canon finally have some competition in the full-frame arena, and prices will come down as a result, while camera performance and specs will go up, let's remember this:


I like the fact that all the controls (buttons, whatever...) are replicated on the motordrive, BUT!, oriented for vertical use. Smart, you don't have to rotate the camera when you want to check the technical data of what you just shot on the display.

Luc Novovitch

I like the fact that you can get it without the extra battery grip. Zeiss lenses and in camera IS are additional bonus points. Now, let's see if they deliver the goods with a few nice primes, and how good the viewfinder is. The older I get, the more important the view finder becomes. Additionally, I wonder if they will come out with a full frame 12 mp model like the D3? They already make the chip.

I find it really interesting that their on-package(?) advertising stresses the larger size of a full-size sensor versus an APC size.

Who are they advertising this camera to?

Madre en Dios! That 24-70 looks HUGE!

Over the past 15 years or so I have bought a lot of Sony's self proclaimed masterpieces, form TV's, DVD players, video's to stereo's to cameras. The specs look great, the style is fantastic but after a while they always seem to disappoint a bit quality wise...

It looks like the "Bad money drives out good" (BTW, this law known in the western world as Gresham's law is actually Copernicus's law. It was described by Nicolaus Copernicus in the year of BIRTH of Thomas Gresham)

It's the sony's flagship with the A350-style LiveView. Does it mean that Sony is up to offer a "professional" SLR which doesn't have real pentaprism viewfinder? Well, that wuold be somethink like professional-like cam.
That would be somethink similar to the A-200's bayonet, which appears as made of metal on the photos, but actually is made of plastic and only covered with metal ring.

The cheap viewfinders in expensive cameras is something I've already adressed in the Oly E-420 thread. Nowadays we have cams that are called "professional", but one can't change the focusing screen for himself. Now it appears the camera that maybe sacrifices the quality of the arguably MOST important system in the SLR for the ability to use it, like the cheap P&S.

OK! It's good, that there EXISTs the LiveView system. But it's only AUXILLARY. When I choose a camera I may check such auxillary abilities, but only in case, when the IMPORTANT factors are all good enough (and I don't ask for the best possible, just GOOD ENOUGH). In this order, not the opposite: IMPORTANT factors first, then the auxillarities.

IF it's true that A900 LiveView works the same way as in the A350 that would make the new professional Sony actually less professional, than it's less professional sister - A700.

I hope I'm too suspicious.

Once they've got the cost of the sensor down, I wonder if it's really any less expensive to manufacture APS size camera/lenses? They're sure as hell not any lighter nor smaller than real 35mm cameras/lenses.

Nice commercial too.



What are the specs on that huge Carl Zeiss lens?

Sony does make professional gear, their pro camcorders cost $85,000 to 100,000 without a viewfinder. The viewfinder is an extra $12,600. Oh, and that's without a lens either.

This camera is not in the ballpark of high end Sony pro gear.

I just wish that the lcd swiveled out. Live view without being able to see the lcd is pretty dumb.

Well, I can't wait to see it and try it myself. This camera may convince me to move to Sony. The body and grip are obviously inspired on the Minolta Dynax 9 model, which was a beast. It would be cool if Sony would adopt the Ti version as well :)

Several years ago you posted a piece about how you were loving your Minolta Maxxum 7D, particularly the built in anti-shake and you included a few dusk snapshots to illustrate the point.

Your comments were among the many inputs to my decision to stay with Minolta at that time and buy the 7D and I have to say I loved it for about 2 years. Recently however, I sold all (well, almost all) my Minolta gear and bought a Nikon D300. While I haven't yet gotten used to how much harder it is to control this beast of a camera or how unintuitively placed and named various controls appear to be (I'll get used to it - I'm sure), I am getting some splendid results and I had a similar experience to the one you recounted.

I don't normally like being the family event photographer but I was this Easter weekend, shooting indoors: 11 grandchildren clamoring around a kitchen table to dye eggs on Saturday afternoon. I wanted to shoot without flash so as not to interrupt and also because I preferred the gentle light streaming through the window. Because of the low-noise, high ISO capabilities of the camera (+ VR on my 24-120 lens) I was able to set the ISO to auto (not on the ISO control but deep in a menu). Some shots went as high as ISO 2000, but most were around 720. Also incredibly fast and accurate focusing... Beautiful shots I'm convinced I'd never have gotten with my 7D. Some had some noise in them, but they all cleaned up nicely in Camera Raw. Same story on Sunday at the Eater Egg hunt. Plus shooting group shots outdoors in contrasty light with a Polarizer and on-camera fill flash (guess I could have done that on my 7D, no problem).

Anyway - would I love to have smallish FF 24 MP Sony? I guess so. Do I regret having the Nikon now? Definitely not. Anyone in the market for a Minolta 24 - 105?

On the other hand, with that cheap-looking shiny plastic body, what appeal is there for those who also appreciate holding & using a fine instrument? Why do (did) Minoltas always have a cheesy look to them? Was that a factor in the company's failure, do you think?

Also about the viewfinder: if a professional flagship camera comes out with a 95% viewfinder at 0.80 magnification, I'll kill myself. Doesn't anyone remember the Pentax MX, the little camera with a viewfinder as big as life? Why oh why is the viewfinder no longer important on DSLRs?

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007