The future of the Sony Alpha/Nex?

[mcraige]

I was reading thru news articles and ran across one on CNN/Money titled "The next step in the evolution of Sony" You can only read the introductory paragraph online without a subscription, but the CNN app on my iPhone included the entire article. It says:

"Sony will now seek opportunity in its digital imaging, mobile-device, and games businesses. The first holds promise as it transitions away from consumer cameras, for which sales are rapidly declining, and toward image sensors, which are seeing increased demand as they are used in smartphones (such as Apple's iPhone), tablets, televisions, medical devices, and cars. The second and third, bolstered by the Xperia and PlayStation brands, respectively, have each experienced more than 30% sales growth in the past year and serve as excellent platforms for content from Sony's other businesses."

If Alpha and Nex are considered a "consumer camera", this doesn't bode well for them. Thoughts?

 

[fractal]

I think they are referring to your standard "point & shoot" cameras. It seems from Sony's actions that they recognize the camera phone threat by doing the following;

1) Move their cybershot cameras more "upscale" with the RX1, RX10 and RX100 series of cameras.

2) Introduce the Q series of camera "lenses" that are used in conjunction with smartphones.

3) Introduce Full Frame mirrorless Emount. I'm sure it wasn't cheap designing and engineering the A7 and A7r camera. Plently of people said that a full frame sensor would be impossible in Emount. That tells me they remain committed to the ILC market.

4) Investment in new on sensor AF system first seen in the A6000 ( and likely in the new A77 replacement ).

It's yet to be revealed what their strategy is with their new Amount cameras, but I think they are going to pleasantly surprise people. We will certainly know more in a few months.

There is no doubt the sensor business is huge for Sony, but you are now seeing more competition from the Koreans. Perhaps Sony's strategy to offset that threat is to expand it's "higher margin"/advanced camera market share.

 

[zackiedawg]

Consumer camera market has always widely been considered the P&S market - even Sony's 'high end' RX cameras are considered Premium...and most reports on Sony's financials have indicated that the Interchangeable lens cameras and premium cameras have been one of their few bright spots. They indicated during their reshuffling recently that imaging/camera was one of the 3 primary businesses they will be concentrating on. The P&S camera market on the other hand is essentially dying, if not dead...and Sony is by no means the first (or last) to be looking at abandoning this market. Olympus already announced last year the end of its low end consumer P&S market - sticking only with high-end enthusiast cams...and Canon made the same announcement this week - no more lower-end Powershots.

 

[DSLRuser]

Sony took a good camera platform from Minolta in the mid 2000's and a ruined it.

In 2005 I was a Minolta Film Guy. So I bought the 7D (minoltas digital) and it was great till i dropped it. Minolta was a good brand and was set to challenge Nikon and Cannon as a legitimate 3rd option for a good camera.

By that time Sony aquired Minolta and was rolling out rebranded 5d and 7d's as alpha100 and alpha900. Long story but i was on vacation when i dropped the 7D so I bought an Alpha 100 to get buy. It was a 5d with sony stickers on it.

Sony has spent almost 10 years with little to no imagination on the DSLR cameras. No innovation. And has let Nikon and Connon run away with the market.

I switched to Nikon 3 years ago and never looked back.

 

[havoc315]

Sony has spent almost 10 years with little to no imagination on the DSLR cameras. No innovation. And has let Nikon and Connon run away with the market.

I switched to Nikon 3 years ago and never looked back.

Wow........ Sony has struggled in the dSLR market for many reasons. Some reasons within their control (lack of marketing, lack of lens development) and some beyond their control (consumer perception based on the dominance of Canon and Nikon in the marketplace)

But it's totally absurd to say that Sony has shown no imagination in the dSLR marketplace. They were the major camera maker to abandon the reflex mirror -- a move likely to eventually be followed by all camera makers in most of their cameras eventually.
Thus, they have been the leader in live view, EVFs, etc. They were the first to allow for full phase detection AF while in live view. They were the first to allow phase detection AF in video. They are the only "dSLR" that allows use of the viewfinder during video. They are the only 'dSLR' that allows for seamless switching between viewfinder and live view. They are the only dSLRs for under $1,000 --- heck, only for under $3,000 -- that can shoot at 12 fps with full auto focus. (The A77 costs $700 and can do it... the recently announced Nikon D4s shoots 11 fps and costs $6500. Obviously, the D4s is superior in countless other ways --- but 1/10th the price and a faster frame rate!)

I went from Minolta to the Sony A100 as well. And yes, the A100 was basically a re-branded Minolta digital camera. But it was still a perfectly decent camera for 2006. In fact, it was one of the first (if the not the actual first) dSLR to offer 10mp of resolution.

In the last year, Sony has mostly innovated in the non-dSLR market, but it is still a cross-over market for dSLR users. The A7/7R -- the first interchangeable lens full frame mirrorless camera. Other than the D800, the only 36mp full frame digital camera. The RX series -- compact cameras with bigger sensors.

Now, where Sony has failed in the last year or 2 -- They have focused on the mirrorless market, and they have neglected the dSLR-form. This isn't over the last 10 years -- It's over the last year or 2. They haven't released a new dSLR-style camera in over a year. There is a concern among some Sony shooters (myself included) that Sony *might* be abandoning their traditional A-mount. As Oly and Panny realized it didn't make sense to maintain 4:3 and m4:3.. Sony may not be seeing a reason to maintain A-mount and E-mount. All of their recent interchangeable lens camera announcements and innovation has been E-mount.

So to get back to the OP --- The "NEX" is alive and well. But it's no longer called NEX. They dropped the "NEX" designation, and now they are only calling it "Alpha." So the new Alphas--- with E-mount --- include the recent A6000 --- with AF faster than dSLRs supposedly. And the A7/7r -- Full frame in a mirrorless body.

As to their traditional Alpha dSLRs -- there have been rumors of an imminent release for a new camera for months and months. But until we actually see something, it is quite possible that the traditional Alpha dSLRs are dead.

 

[fractal]

Wow........ Sony has struggled in the dSLR market for many reasons. Some reasons within their control (lack of marketing, lack of lens development) and some beyond their control (consumer perception based on the dominance of Canon and Nikon in the marketplace)

But it's totally absurd to say that Sony has shown no imagination in the dSLR marketplace. They were the major camera maker to abandon the reflex mirror -- a move likely to eventually be followed by all camera makers in most of their cameras eventually.
Thus, they have been the leader in live view, EVFs, etc. They were the first to allow for full phase detection AF while in live view. They were the first to allow phase detection AF in video. They are the only "dSLR" that allows use of the viewfinder during video. They are the only 'dSLR' that allows for seamless switching between viewfinder and live view. They are the only dSLRs for under $1,000 --- heck, only for under $3,000 -- that can shoot at 12 fps with full auto focus. (The A77 costs $700 and can do it... the recently announced Nikon D4s shoots 11 fps and costs $6500. Obviously, the D4s is superior in countless other ways --- but 1/10th the price and a faster frame rate!)

I went from Minolta to the Sony A100 as well. And yes, the A100 was basically a re-branded Minolta digital camera. But it was still a perfectly decent camera for 2006. In fact, it was one of the first (if the not the actual first) dSLR to offer 10mp of resolution.

In the last year, Sony has mostly innovated in the non-dSLR market, but it is still a cross-over market for dSLR users. The A7/7R -- the first interchangeable lens full frame mirrorless camera. Other than the D800, the only 36mp full frame digital camera. The RX series -- compact cameras with bigger sensors.

Now, where Sony has failed in the last year or 2 -- They have focused on the mirrorless market, and they have neglected the dSLR-form. This isn't over the last 10 years -- It's over the last year or 2. They haven't released a new dSLR-style camera in over a year. There is a concern among some Sony shooters (myself included) that Sony *might* be abandoning their traditional A-mount. As Oly and Panny realized it didn't make sense to maintain 4:3 and m4:3.. Sony may not be seeing a reason to maintain A-mount and E-mount. All of their recent interchangeable lens camera announcements and innovation has been E-mount.

So to get back to the OP --- The "NEX" is alive and well. But it's no longer called NEX. They dropped the "NEX" designation, and now they are only calling it "Alpha." So the new Alphas--- with E-mount --- include the recent A6000 --- with AF faster than dSLRs supposedly. And the A7/7r -- Full frame in a mirrorless body.

As to their traditional Alpha dSLRs -- there have been rumors of an imminent release for a new camera for months and months. But until we actually see something, it is quite possible that the traditional Alpha dSLRs are dead.

Good post! Yeah, it's pretty hard to argue that Sony doesn't innovate. If anybody is slow to change it's Nikon and Cannon. As far as marketing goes however, Sony often leaves me scratching my head. They should have figured out a way to keep the Minolta name and after building a great brand name in NEX ( for some people, NEX was synonymous with mirrorless, which is a marketing dream ) they just dump it. A true *** decision.

One thing that leaves hope for the A mount line is that Sony said a year ago that they would not come out with new camera models just for the sake of small updates, the new A-mounts would be released with major upgrades. So we will wait and see.

 

[zackiedawg]

Sony has spent almost 10 years with little to no imagination on the DSLR cameras. No innovation. And has let Nikon and Connon run away with the market.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, and can like whatever brand they choose, or their reasons to dislike a brand.

However, I'd have to be of the opinion that this statement is about as far off the mark as it is possible to get. In fact, much of the criticism about Sony, even FROM Canon and Nikon shooters and fans, is that Sony has 'innovated' too much - they are constantly changing the entire form factor of DSLRs, adding technology that is completely unique to them, coming up with solutions to problems few people even knew they had, and if anything, moving to all-new technology, designs, and formats at too fast a pace, leaving some of those who wanted more 'old fashioned' stability frustrated.

On the other hand, Canon and Nikon have done nearly the opposite of innovating - they instead kept the almost identical form factors, almost identical controls, designs, features, and slowly evolved their DSLR lines, so much so that a blind person who last handled a Nikon or canon DSLR 6 years ago could pick up the new one and scarcely know they're holding a new camera.

So while you may have some other reason to dislike Sony cameras, or to feel abandoned by Minolta (ironically for being UNcompetitive with Nikon and Canon which meant they were dying off and gone - and their A-mount only survived because Sony was willing to buy it), innovation is far from the reasons to cite for disliking Sony interchangeable lens cameras.

I'm even using a 3 year old Sony DSLR (the last of the actual 'DSLR' designs they made)...and to this day there STILL is no DSLR by any manufacturer that can do what this model can - innovations such as being able to use full PDAF focusing while in live view mode with no performance degradation, capable of shooting 7fps in live view mode, with tilting LCD, having built-in frame stacking modes that can stack up to 6 frames together for noise reduction or rebuilding detail at very high ISO levels, on-screen inclinometer/levels, live histogram while shooting, in-body stabilization, built-in wireless flash control...some of these things other manufacturers are just now getting around to, and others are still unique. Meanwhile, Sony has innovated their way over to EVF cameras, translucent mirrors for PDAF video focus capability, mirrorless mount cameras, mirrorless full frame mount cameras, and further evolution of stacking modes, and more.

You are very unique if you think Sony has failed to innovate - every critic of Sony I know of, including previous Sony/Minolta shooters and lots of shooters of other brands, is constantly on Sony's case for innovating too often and too willingly, abandoning some of its early adapters with technologies that ended up being temporary solutions as they move on to ever more innovations.

But you are absolutely entitled to hold a grudge or dislike of whatever brands you want, and whatever reason, no matter how contrary it may be.

 

[DSLRuser]

Again, being a Minolta guy from the film days.I was excited to see Sony take over. Sorry. I desperately wanted to stay Sony so my Minolta glass didnt have to be replaced.

But when you look at feature for feature of the DSLR market (no mirrorless). Sony have done nothing features related that excited me. Live view and tilt screen are a step back if you ask me..

Now, I realize Sony provides the sensors for most cameras now days, but that is not the same as developing exciting new bodies and glass to compliment them.

mega pixals is not innovation.

Built in creative flash systems, high speed flash sync, multiple memory card slots, intervalometers, 1/8000th shutters, low light performance, 10fps shooting, these are examples of features that drive the market forward.

 

[havoc315]

Again, being a Minolta guy from the film days.I was excited to see Sony take over. Sorry. I desperately wanted to stay Sony so my Minolta glass didnt have to be replaced.

But when you look at feature for feature of the DSLR market (no mirrorless). Sony have done nothing features related that excited me. Live view and tilt screen are a step back if you ask me..

Now, I realize Sony provides the sensors for most cameras now days, but that is not the same as developing exciting new bodies and glass to compliment them.

mega pixals is not innovation.

Built in creative flash systems, high speed flash sync, multiple memory card slots, intervalometers, 1/8000th shutters, low light performance, 10fps shooting, these are examples of features that drive the market forward.

Sony's flash system is a step behind.
But High speed flash synch? Sony is just as good as Canon and Nikon. My A99 is 1/250.
Multiple memory card slots? Yup, my A99 has 2 slots.
1/8000th shutter? Check, the A77 and A99 both have 1/8000th
Low light performance? Well, Sony's innovation -- using a SLT mirror, has come at sacrificing high ISO performance. That said, DXOMark still rates Sony about equivalent to Canon cameras in high ISO performance. My A99 is quite comparable to other Fullframes up to ISO 6400.
10fps? My old A55 has 10fps! The A77 has 12 fps!

So most of the features you're talking about --- Sony has most of them.

In terms of glass.. there are holes in the Sony full frame lineup. But APS-C has matched Canon and Nikon. The Sony 16-50/2.8 is a truly magnificent lens. And there is no lack of top quality glass for FF or APS-C, thanks to amazing glass from Zeiss.

Not saying Sony is perfect -- far far from it. But your complaints seem quite imagined.

 

[havoc315]

For anyone who wants an incredible FF camera...

For a limited time, you can finally get the A99 at what I consider to be a fair price:

New for $1899..
http://www.ebay.com/itm/351011000015

24mp.... 6 fps at full resolution.... fully articulated LCD.... In many ways, it is a better camera than the Nikon D610 (much better live view, better video, more features) and the Canon 6D (higher resolution, more features, better AF system). (Though I'd personally rate it below the D800 and the Canon5dM3).

 

[zackiedawg]

But when you look at feature for feature of the DSLR market (no mirrorless). Sony have done nothing features related that excited me. Live view and tilt screen are a step back if you ask me..

While you may not want or need those features, they are still innovations on the traditional DSLR form. And all of the various features that don't excite you again are still innovations - just ones you apparently don't want to use or know about. However, there's nothing you've mentioned that's innovative in the Nikon or Canon DSLR lines - in fact, very little has changed in those lines going back even 10 years.

Now, I realize Sony provides the sensors for most cameras now days, but that is not the same as developing exciting new bodies and glass to compliment them.

No, it's not - but what you consider 'exciting new bodies' I consider the same exact bodies that have been out there for years. With Sony, I was able to find exciting new bodies that gave me new features, new abilities, and new form and design ideas that were different from everything else out there.

mega pixals is not innovation.

Noone ever mentioned megapixels as one. All manufacturers are constantly increasing megapixels - and for some types of shooting, it can pay dividends...but it's the ability to shoot in more conditions, with more control in camera, that most people consider innovative...and so far, that's been one of Sony's strongest advances.

Built in creative flash systems, high speed flash sync, multiple memory card slots, intervalometers, 1/8000th shutters, low light performance, 10fps shooting, these are examples of features that drive the market forward.

I own a Sony DSLR. Optical viewfinder. Wireless flash control. Multiple memory card slots. Excellent low light performance. Stacking modes that can let me shoot clean at ISO12800. Mine's only a mid-level body, so it's only 7fps - as a wildlife and bird photographer, that does just fine for me, paired with my lovely Minolta APO glass. Indeed, those are features that drive the market...but none of those are particularly innovative, since DSLRs have been capable of those things for a long time. There have been incremental increases in max shutter seed, and in fps...but not groundbreaking. And many of those things Sony has as well. What has truly driven the market forward were advances in video (like it or not, and I don't - but video on DSLRs is here to stay), live view (you may not want to shoot off an LCD all the time, but for tripod work, dark work, long exposure work, and awkward angle macro, tilt screens and live view have transformed photography and made much more creative photography much easier to achieve), image stacking which is a technique used in astrophotography for decades, but now possible right in the camera. And so on.

We're not arguing against Nikon or Canon - both have excellent products. The difference is that I see how Sony and Pentax also make excellent products, and you seem to have left Sony many years ago when they were in their fledgling DSLR outing, and formed a sealed opinion of them based on your feelings of being spited as a Minolta shooter...you really should be open to the idea that Sony is a very different entity than it was in the A100 days, and very innovative, even if you continue to not desire one yourself.

 

[Animagic!]

At the end of the day I am most worried about what is going to happen with the A Mount.

I like my Sony dSLR. I would like to continue using Sony dSLR's. However if the A Mount is discontinued then that is really going to suck. I'm going to feel pretty screwed sitting on top of all my A Mount glass. But if they keep the A Mount alive I'd be more than happy to keep buying A Mount bodies.

And as far as all this nonsense above goes... I decided to shoot Sony because of it's innovation. I love the SLT (despite craving low light performance) and the EVF. Peak focusing is a beautiful thing. I never realized how useful it was until this last weekend for Dapper Day. It worked extremely well for dark rides! I never thought I'd be shooting manual focus on dark rides until I started using focus peaking. It was also great for quick portraits and shooting shows like Fantasmic!

But all this up-in-the-air stuff with Sony has me concerned. Right now I've started branching out to other camera makers. My Pentax K30 really impressed me this weekend. My K30 with a 35mm f/2.4 lens performed WAY better than I expected. The colors are awesome. With the 35mm f/2.4 I was getting sharper images at lower ISO with way faster and more accurate autofocus than my Sony a58 with a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 was. I basically just kept a telephoto on the Sony all weekend and used the Pentax for all my low light needs. I was getting sharp images of Ariel on Voyage of the Little Mermaid at ISO 400 f/2.4 and 1/60 sec. My a58 at f/1.4 couldn't do that (I'm not sure why). If the Pentax had focus peaking and EVF like the Sony I would drop Sony so fast and go to Pentax! LOL

 

[havoc315]

At the end of the day I am most worried about what is going to happen with the A Mount.

I like my Sony dSLR. I would like to continue using Sony dSLR's. However if the A Mount is discontinued then that is really going to suck. I'm going to feel pretty screwed sitting on top of all my A Mount glass. But if they keep the A Mount alive I'd be more than happy to keep buying A Mount bodies.

And as far as all this nonsense above goes... I decided to shoot Sony because of it's innovation. I love the SLT (despite craving low light performance) and the EVF. Peak focusing is a beautiful thing. I never realized how useful it was until this last weekend for Dapper Day. It worked extremely well for dark rides! I never thought I'd be shooting manual focus on dark rides until I started using focus peaking. It was also great for quick portraits and shooting shows like Fantasmic!

But all this up-in-the-air stuff with Sony has me concerned. Right now I've started branching out to other camera makers. My Pentax K30 really impressed me this weekend. My K30 with a 35mm f/2.4 lens performed WAY better than I expected. The colors are awesome. With the 35mm f/2.4 I was getting sharper images at lower ISO with way faster and more accurate autofocus than my Sony a58 with a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 was. I basically just kept a telephoto on the Sony all weekend and used the Pentax for all my low light needs. I was getting sharp images of Ariel on Voyage of the Little Mermaid at ISO 400 f/2.4 and 1/60 sec. My a58 at f/1.4 couldn't do that (I'm not sure why). If the Pentax had focus peaking and EVF like the Sony I would drop Sony so fast and go to Pentax! LOL

Probably because the DOF at 1.4 was too thin, and therefore too hard to get a sharp image when you're in motion.
Your a58 is also higher resolution. If you view the images at the same size, should show similar low light performance. But if you pixel peep-- since the Sony has more pixels, any flaws will become more obvious.

But yeah, the k30 is a good camera. Better than the a58 in many ways.

 

[fractal]

At the end of the day I am most worried about what is going to happen with the A Mount.

I like my Sony dSLR. I would like to continue using Sony dSLR's. However if the A Mount is discontinued then that is really going to suck. I'm going to feel pretty screwed sitting on top of all my A Mount glass. But if they keep the A Mount alive I'd be more than happy to keep buying A Mount bodies.

And as far as all this nonsense above goes... I decided to shoot Sony because of it's innovation. I love the SLT (despite craving low light performance) and the EVF. Peak focusing is a beautiful thing. I never realized how useful it was until this last weekend for Dapper Day. It worked extremely well for dark rides! I never thought I'd be shooting manual focus on dark rides until I started using focus peaking. It was also great for quick portraits and shooting shows like Fantasmic!

But all this up-in-the-air stuff with Sony has me concerned. Right now I've started branching out to other camera makers. My Pentax K30 really impressed me this weekend. My K30 with a 35mm f/2.4 lens performed WAY better than I expected. The colors are awesome. With the 35mm f/2.4 I was getting sharper images at lower ISO with way faster and more accurate autofocus than my Sony a58 with a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 was. I basically just kept a telephoto on the Sony all weekend and used the Pentax for all my low light needs. I was getting sharp images of Ariel on Voyage of the Little Mermaid at ISO 400 f/2.4 and 1/60 sec. My a58 at f/1.4 couldn't do that (I'm not sure why). If the Pentax had focus peaking and EVF like the Sony I would drop Sony so fast and go to Pentax! LOL

Also used focus peaking on dark rides - it takes awhile to get used to it but once I did it worked very well. I think A-mount has a bright future but we shall see over the next few months.

 

[Animagic!]

Probably because the DOF at 1.4 was too thin, and therefore too hard to get a sharp image when you're in motion.
Your a58 is also higher resolution. If you view the images at the same size, should show similar low light performance. But if you pixel peep-- since the Sony has more pixels, any flaws will become more obvious.

But yeah, the k30 is a good camera. Better than the a58 in many ways.

That's something I have given a lot of consideration actually. I know that f/1.4 is very narrow. But comparing images that I shot at f/1.4 properly focused using MF peaking on the Sony and autofocused images at f/2.4 on the Pentax yielded unexpected results. On paper the Sony should have blown the Pentax away. But it didn't. The Pentax outperformed the Sony in every way. Despite the much wider aperture and the extra 4 MP of resolution the Pentax was much better in low light. MUCH better. The Pentax could produce brighter images at lower ISO with an aperture of f/2.4 than the Sony could at f/1.4.

Perhaps its a combination of lens and body but the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on the Sony a58 has been a bad low light set up since day one. It seems to do just fine in good light. When I shoot with manual focus it does much better. However the autofocus is pretty miserable, so much so that I'll MF anything f/4 or wider.

I also noticed the Pentax was much better with metering than the Sony. It always used the lowest ISO it could get away with to get an image. My a58, when in Auto ISO, either wants to shoot at 100 or 3200. It sometimes hangs out between 100-320 area. But after that it jumps straight to 3200. I don't think I've ever seen the Auto ISO use 800 ever. Every once in a while it uses 1600 or 1000. But Auto loves using 3200 all the time. And the stupid a58 won't let you set a minimum and a maximum ISO like most dSLRs.