The great Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8.
A trusted source shared a couple of interesting info. He knows for sure that the Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 lens announced at Photokina has been designed for new High megapixel cameras. He says the lens has been tested to resolve enough detail on a Sony 46 Megapixel Full Frame camera. And that camera will be announced the first quarter of 2015! It’s yet not clear if this is an A or E (or both) mount camera.
The source who told me this shared correct info in the past therefore I rank the rumor with an SR4 level (80% chance this is correct). There is a hot rumor time coming by end of this year and very early 2015. To not miss any of the upcoming rumors subscribe here:
RSS feed: http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/feed/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sonyalpharumors
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SonyAlphaRumors
GooglePlus: https://plus.google.com/104216500156717934391/posts
———
Message to sources: You can send me more info anonymously by using the contact form you see on the very right of your browser. You can also contact me directly at sonyalpharumors@gmail.com.
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
0 Responses
Andrea, the big question is the sensor Bayer or a new generation stacked sensor?
That is a question I hopefully can answer VERY SOON 🙂
It’s time to forget about the A mount. The future is with the E mount. It’s time for Sony to focus all their resources on their competitive advantage.
The excitement and tense discussions will be lost if that happens. Keep the A mount alive. 😉
Real improvements needed (better body, processors, accs) and all that is now forgotten because of this confusion. It is a great weapon for Sony. 🙂
Didn’t Sony focus on those improvements with the a77-2 versus the original?
It’s time to forget about the E-mount. Future is in the Medium Format. It’s time for Sony to focus all their resources on their competitive advantage.
”
It’s yet not clear if this is an A or E (or both) mount camera.”
This rumor is ranked SR4?
It is clear that Tamron only comes in A mount.
Nope. Like it happens with Samyang the Tamron can be made for E-mount too.
You mean like the 35/1.4 lens that Sony showed- SLR lens for E mount? 🙂
Who gives a toss? Well A-mount users might… still stuck with the poor 35/1.4 G.
I do. Size matters.
Nope. Not gonna happen. Tamron, just like Sigma, designs dedicated lenses for E-mount.
This one will certainly be released for EOS and F-mounts, probably also for K and A mounts, however it’ll never be released for E-mount.
I think Sigma just announced it wasn’t planning on making any FE mount lenses.
I was talking about regular E-mount, not FE. 🙂
And A-Mounts can go on E-Mount cameras… It’s not really that complicated now is it?
Tamron A-mount lenses work with LA-EA adapters. 😉
If the camera body is the BOTH of the “A or E (or both) mount camera.” three possibilities, the lens mount almost becomes moot!
If Sony introduces a 46MP, FF, “BOTH” (A & E) mount camera early next
year they will get my attention!!!!! I would even consider buying the
the 15~30 f2.8 lens to replace my crappy old 12~24mm Sigma. Hopefully, Sony
will bundle the camera and lens.
You made a typo:
Tamron 16-35 ….
15-30 😉
ops. Thanks
E-Mount and I switch… can’t handle this small things. Only own the A7R because I need it for my work… A-Mount just fits right to my hands
And E-Mount has what exactly to do with the way a camera fits in your hands?
He can’t get his hand in to wipe the sensor clean. 😉
So funny! All E-Mount cameras so far are build for smaller asian- or ladys-hands. With bigger, faster lenses those combos are strange to work with for hours. For Hobby or travelling they may be cool, but not for work.
A-mount seems built for for humorless pro wannabes.
Good.
Admin, is it ‘confirmed’ (in terms of rumors) that it will be FF camera and not MF? You published rumors about possible mirrorless MF camera which might use existing 50mp CMOS sensor – just thinking that it would be quite close 46 vs 50 (in terms of megapixels)
I thought Megapixel drooling BS was over… wrong!
The quest for better image quality is never ending, whether it be cameras, lenses, printers etc.
The megapixel count and the IQ are two different things, often mistaken to be the same.
Yes, in fantasy land. Not in the real world.
It’s exactly the opposite. It’s a fantasy to think that the higher pixel count will produce a better IQ. In the real world people know the difference between the BIGGER pixel and the smaller one.
Barry has just shot his load in his pants.
Barry will be back soon, the doctor had to give him a sedative to calm his nerves. Barry please report ASAP.
I think Barry needs more than sedatives.
One thing is for sure, this new sensor will make Barry as happy as a pig in $hit.
I think Barry IS a sedative.
@Admin
How likely is the availability of that cam in mid February?
And how soon is “Very soon”, are you having already some tidbits or no clue atm about the sensor?
It’s not more megapixels we need but cameras with better dynamic range and high ISO capabilities. Then that will show the market that Sony mean business.
They are already doing that. They did so with the A7S, yet this will make a MUCH bigger splash with it’s high MP… Apparently that is important.
Sorry I was talking a-mount. Really want to see something decent in a-mount that takes it up to the e-mount specs. Buttttt with more dynamic range.
Well SLT is going to continue to be an issue for high ISO performance for a while (not that in the real world it is). Not sure how much more DR is achievable nor how much we really need… DR has become the new obsession.
it IS an issue in the real world for some shooters. Or who really goes out and buys a huge 400 f/4 lens that just performs like a 4.5? Who is really keen to take nature or macro or sports shots of moving subjects with ISO 3200 when 2500 would already do, just because someone put a light-consuming device into the camera? Well …
As usual the discussion of SLT concentrates on ISO rather than the benefits that SLT brings.
If you can’t live without one-third stop of light then get a Canon, Nikon or Pentax, there is plenty of choice out there.
The difference of almost 1 full stop in ISO does make a difference. Especially when shooting weddings in low lit places. I am set up for Sony and have 8 a-mount lenses. I don’t want to use Nikon or Canon or anyone else. I just want a camera that competes with the rest in a-mount format.
The current a99 has great dynamic range, more than any canon I’ve used.
Stop talking out of your as$ Walter, it’s 1/3 of an f stop.
You’re wrong too. It’s approx. 1/2 stop, or more accurately 0.6 stops if I remember correctly.
30% or approx. 1/3 light loss is NOT the same as 1/3 stop.
This really is basic stuff, but nobody seems to understand it.
So the website Snapsort is wrong? It is them that are saying 0.9 stops.
Maybe we’re at cross purposes. I’m talking about light loss caused by the translucent mirror. You’re talking about the ISO difference between two cameras by two different brands.
Nikons generally have higher ISO performance (all else being equal) and they don’t have translucent mirrors.
Seriously, please stop that.
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D610-vs-Sony-SLT-A99. Look at the specs. It 0.9 stops. ALMOST (as said) one full stop.
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D800-vs-Sony-SLT-A99 again 0.9 stops.
Both the Nikon D800 and the D610 have almost a full stop better noise performance.
30% light loss does not equal nearly 1 stop. 50% light loss would be 1 stop.
I know that the SLT is meant to be 30% worse off for light loss but I’m assuming Nikon have a way of better processing the raw file as the NOISE difference between the A99 and D610 is (1550 A99) vrs (2980 D610) which is almost a full stop.
A performance like the A7s would be the dogs 🙂
Yes, Nikon have always got more out of Sony sensors in terms of ISO performance.
I can’t think of anyone who would seriously shoot macro at iso 3200. For sport, the af definitely outweighs the notional light loss.
It seem to be a serious issue with you and no one else. And that’s because your and idiot.
The exposure triangle settings on SLT cameras are no different to any other camera.
Sensor gain is boosted, nothing more.
And I bet it is 2nd quarter before it comes out. Rumors were for January then we the posts started to say Jan/Feb and now it’s first quarter (Jan/Feb/Mar). So really it will be June.
How many MP would a APS-C crop of 46 MP come out to?
About 20MP.
30Mpx
No.
46/2.25 = 20.44
I’m pretty confident this will be e-mount.
But more importantly…. So what?
46mp is a very impressive specification. But a totally irrelevant one to the vast majority of shooters. How big is the market for medium format cameras?
Improving AF (as with the a77ii and a6000), improving high ISO (the a99 lags way behind every recent ff), faster processor, are far more important factors. Once you get past the “wow….. It’s 46mp! Look at this extreme pixel peeping!”… It becomes so what?
The a7s… Nikon d4s, etc…prove that huge megapixels are not the be-all in high end cameras.
Outside of some fine art shooters and studio product shooters (essentially medium format type shooters), no professional will care about this camera. Maybe naive consumers will buy it simply because of the “wow.. It’s 46mp.”
I wish they’d go more in the direction of the a77ii— improving the core functionality, instead of banking on wowing with an irrelevant statistic.
What is wrong with options? As you stated there are plenty of choices but no high res option for a mount currently exists.
Nothing wrong with options. But given the other lineup deficiencies, this shouldn’t be the priority.
If you told me they were going to release a whole slew of cameras with better ISO performance, better AF coverage, deeper buffers, faster processors, AND also release a 46mp ff camera as but one option… Then I’d say “great to have options.”
The only deficiencies here are your mental ones, come back when you actually own a camera and tell us all about it. Until then STFU.
man, seriously, what’s wrong with you?
I own the a99, and the rx100. I have also owned the a55, a100, and non-Sony cameras. You seem to be a fanboy who knows nothing about photography — you just root for Sony to have a high “score” so you can jump up and down cheering, “yay Sony… Top megapixels.. Woohooo”
I worry about actual photography. Not cheerleading.
The a77-2 shows that Sony is putting in better processors, faster SLT AF and buffers. The AF coverage is independent of the sensor revolution. Will Sony cheap out and recycle an aps-c AF system for the full frame camera again? I’d like to think not but I’m skeptical.
Agreed…. They have made real strides in their APS-C cameras, but their full frame cameras are still comparatively slow and unresponsive. The A99 (which I use as my primary camera) has limited AF coverage, and a mediocre processor/buffer. (Not horrible, but not great). The A7 series isn’t known for being responsive or fast either.
The A6000 and A77ii are models of what Sony should be doing with fullframe. Neither of those cameras saw increases in megapixels over the prior generation.
I guess if it comes with A-mount, you’ll buy it xD
I don’t see myself going higher than 24mp in the foreseeable future. Id consider the d750 and the a7, but I already ruled out the a7r and d810 because I don’t want 36mp.
Why would you go with two FFs? I have a7 + a6000 and I’m pretty happy with that combo – I have more than enough pixels on the a7, and more than enough speed on the a6000 🙂
BTW: D750 has got a smaller buffer(16) than the a6000(23) 🙂
I want one body that meets my needs.
And you are misjudging the d750 buffer– that’s the buffer for 14bit uncompressed raw. For continuous shooting, Sony only uses 12bit compressed. You can switch the d750 to 12bit compressed, at which point the buffer gets 25 frames.
I think it’s 25 in FF and 30 in crop mode at 12bpp.
25 in full frame.. and 87 jpeg. So you can certainly debate what is most helpful. I mostly use continuous shooting for kids baseball. 11fps is more helpful if I really need to capture the moment the baseball makes contact with the bat. But if I want to track an entire pitcher’s windup, or the entire sequence of a player fielding the ball, the ability to shoot continuously at high FPS for 13 seconds in jpeg, 4 seconds in RAW, is more helpful to me than shooting 2 seconds of super high FPS.
You don’t even own a camera and no one cares what you might buy.
The fact of the matter is it will have better dynamic range and resolution than any other manufacturers full frame camera system, both A&E mounts. Get use to it being the standard of comparison, sorry for your loss fan boy.
Zoom cropping can be a very important tool.
Super-high MP is especially useful when the desire is to print, at a large size, an image that has been zoom-cropped, without up-rezzing.
That having been said, I agree that there are other equally-important deficiencies, especially now that excellent 24-36mp can be had, the biggest one IMO being DR.
36mp already provides substantial zoom-cropping and large-printing ability. Sure it could be improved, but at this point maybe DR is more important to the ultimately-displayed huge print image.
Yes, bracketing and re-combining can increase image DR, but that option is not always available.
It’s a tough call, even for myself, who zoom-crops and then prints at very large sizes.
Yes, at this point.. the only point of more MP isn’t really large printing. Already had plenty of MP for that. The only significant benefit is essentially to provide more “digital zoom.”
This is particularly useful in mirrorless E-mount cameras, so they can get more quality zoom without the need for bulky large telephoto lenses. (Another reason I suspect this will be e-mount).
But in terms of trade-offs and other deficiencies, getting more digital zoom isn’t a huge priority.
First off, you won’t even get more resolution out of 46mp unless you have the absolute best lens.
As an example, (I’ll use Nikon since they have a variety of tests lenses for 24 and 36mp cameras), take the fairly well-reviewed Tamron 70-300sp lens. According to dxomark, on the D600, it gets 10mp of perceived resolution. On the D800 — it still only gets 10mp.
The good consumer grade Nikon 18-35 — Gets 15mp of resolution on the 24mp D600. Upgrade to a 36mp D800, and it boosts resolution just a drop to 17mp.
These aren’t cheap bad lenses I’m talking about. They are mid-priced, well-reviewed lenses.
So first off, the massive increase in resolution will provide minimal benefit with most lenses.
Second, no matter how cheap memory cards may get, there are still drawbacks of those massive files. The A7 can shoot at a faster burst rate than the A7r, the D610 and D750 have a faster burst rate than the D810– because the files are smaller. Larger files make the camera itself slower. The large MP sensor is more expensive, but then it requires a larger buffer, which is more expensive, and a faster more expensive processor, just to keep up.
So a a larger MP camera becomes a much more expensive, and slower overall camera.
And those large files slow down post processing. When I used to open 16mp files in Photoshop, all edits were instantaneous. Then on 24mp currently, every time I make an edit or pixel peep a shot, I need to wait 3-4 seconds. Make it a 46mp file, and post-processing will become a time consuming bloated mess. I already know people who own the A7r and D810 who actually wish they had gone with the lower MP cameras.
So, do we want to spend a lot of extra money, on a slower camera, that will slow down our post-processing, merely to gain some digital zoom but only when used with the best lenses?
Yes, potentially, if what we do is art, rather than production.
This resolution would sell to artists, some product and commercial photographers, and to those people who just “want the best of everything”. How big is that potential market? I have no idea.
How big is the market for a normal res but GREAT “pro” tool for those who would defect from Canikon? I also have no idea.
Tamron is clearly an A-Mount lens, but maybe they tested with an adapter… Can’t rule anything out these days.
“First quater 2015” sounds like it might be in time for the big January announcement! Hopefully, they will only show A-Mount stuff. After the Photokina fiasco they need an announcement like that.
I would call it “annoyance” rather than “fiasco”.
It was definitely a mess, whichever way you look at it… Other than the qx, r100 iii and a7s, it was about lenses rather than bodies. The least they could have done was trail the new body (given that it wouldn’t have any impact in the sale of the bodies they were showing).
So it’s your personal annoyance.
The sony stand was quite ok. The have had a lot of activities/shows. Enough bodies and lenses to test. I extensively tested the A7S I am interested in. I had a chance to play with the FE 1635, with the 28135G.
The also offered a lot of Camcorders for testing.
I can imagine that the ones that were waiting for a new body or something special. But it was clear before the start of PK14 that there wouldn’t be something special. So what.
I think there was confusion this year about “first quarter.” Admin was saying that the a77ii would be January and it was really spring. January is not Sony’s “first quarter.”
And January isn’t exactly the time when major consumer products usually get announced.
46MP would be fine, but only if it comes with fast AF, EFC and UHSII support
(SR5) rangefinder style A9 series E-mount cameras in 2015
A9R ->46mp
A9 -> 36mp
A9S -> 24mp
—————–
All of them will do 4K in-camera, only A9S has slog2 and picture profiles.
A9 and A9S have silence electronic shutter, only electronic front curtain for A9R.
Sounds good.
I will take them all in a robust body. Except that the higher the pixel count, more silent the shutter ought to be.
Rangefinder? I doubt that.
I reckon A9 will be a larger E-mount camera – a hybrid of A7 and A-mount SLT cameras in terms of styling and ergonomics.
Recent FE lens announcements point to larger bodies on the way.
Sorry guys, but a 46MP camera is useless for most of us. For the 24x36mm sensors 24MP is already more than the main stream ever needs and maybe the sweetspot in terms of resolution. I like Sony for its innovations but do not like Sony for its half baken products with wow-effects. If Sony improves its cameras in terms of handling, usability and built quality then a 12MP or 24MP A7is camera would be very interesting, IF we get Pro lenses and a Pro flash system. But racing MPs only does not make a camera.
I agree – 24mp is plenty for my needs. That said, it’s horses for courses – 36mp offers more options for cropping and printing and 46mp even more so. Real question is whether they can overcome the af and shutter limitations of the a7r. No point sticking a 46mp sensor in an a7 body if you’re limited to using it on a tripod.
Thanks. We are spoiled anyways. For FF we need better high ISOs since the lenses are not fast, sharp and small at once. The higher ISO capabilities make up for late sharpness of the lenses, mostly from f2.8 on earliest. 46MPs will allow cameras for landscape shooters in good light only. Look at m43 and its fast AND sharp AND small lenses. These lenses allow enough DOF at low ISOs with its fast and sharp lenses wide open (at low ISO) and at 64MP pixels translated to FF. Thats how the game is. Therefore my conclusion that 36 , 46 and higher MPs are niche products as long tech does not leap forwards towards a high ISO high MP sensor with clean ISO3200 what I do not see in the near future.
Lol then move to crop, since you don’t need FF. And don’t tell FF users what they “need” or don’t need.
P.S. ISO 3200 is mighty clean on the A7R so maybe you don’t know what you’re talking about.
@Real, KJJ, not really to the point, but thanks for the input… I am not going to sell my FF, nor my m43 and both are capable cameras for it’s purpose. The point was, that I see no immediate advantage with 46MP for myself and maybe most of us. I prefer better high ISO on FF than max MPs and I am not going to carry Otuses to do high MPs justice. Your purpose may differ, no offense, this is just a hobby…
Nonsense! Stick with your tiny sensor point & shoot and stop preaching.
Sony has addressed this issue by creating 3 FE-Mount cameras, the a7, a7R, and a7S. Portrait work, landscapes, increased dynamic range, and the ability to crop with 46 MP will make a lot of people appreciate it. To a lot of people who don’t want to spend $6000+ for a MF camera, this suits them perfectly. With technology rapidly advancing, shooting high ISO at ridiculous resolutions will happen sooner rather than later.
Your opinion is useless and half baked, starting with the best sensor available is a great launch point. This new camera/sensor combination will set a higher standard for full frame photography leaving the competition to play catch up.
what about lenses? you need lenses to resolve so much resolution, otherwise it’s really just waste of pixels, or would you use it only with Otus (maybe Art from Sigma)?
That was my first thought but APS-C crop will be 20MP… Since we know how the FE lenses perform on 20 MP APS-C cameras (very good), 46 MP FF will be perfectly fine.
we already know that there aren’t many lenses able to perform at their best on 36mp sensors (either A7R or D800/810) you either need to stop down a lot or simply put up with not so brilliant performance. most of the shooter won’t notice until they put glass that can actually resolve that much but having a sensor which I can use only in limited way (at certain apertures) doesn’t make much sense to me
All of the FE lenses except the 28-70 kit lens perform just fine on the A7R and are still very good on say, a 24 MP A6000. So 46 MP FE will be fine. I won’t bank on A-mount lenses like the 35 and 50/1.4 holding up though.
on APS-C you’re using sweet spot of FF lenses, not the corners
1. See DxO acutance map
2. Compare a 70-80% acutance region on 36 MP FF with one on 20 MP APS-C. Notice it doesn’t change by much.
3. Try to find which FE lenses have less than 70-80% acutance in the corners. Oh right, only the kit lens.
4. Relax.
5. Finally learn that DXO got one of the worst lens testing procedures in the industry.
relaxing – no worries 🙂 i just would like to see development going slightly different direction, layered sensors as an example, the good old (now that quattro is out) Foveon X3 does indeed produce different results, and how so if it’s only 15mp? – that’s the direction to go in my opinion
The problem isn’t resolution per se, it’s the fact that abberations on older lenses are so much more noticeable when cropping on hi res sensors.
Ever tried a Beercan on an A77? That lens is really showing its age now.
Rushing to catch up?
Nikon introduced 36mp full frame dslr 2 years ago. Neither Sony a-mount nor Canon have shown any urgency to catch up. In fact, the a7s and d750 look to be better sellers than the a7r and D810. Among knowledgabe photographers, high mp isn’t much of a draw.
It’s great that you don’t currently own a camera Adam Brownnose, you can go right to the top of the food chain. Then you can work on becoming a “knowledgeable photographer” instead of a know it all blow hard.
Since Sony recently produced the 50mp for the Pentax 645Z, its highly unlikely this flavor the week camera will be an E-Mount. In my view it appears that Sony cut the same sort of deal with Pentax as they did with Nikon.
The medium format sensor will be used in a RX camera and the next FF camera will be an E-mount. How about the next FF camera after that one? Yes, it will be another E-mount. The next one? another E-mount of course. A-mount is dead.
A-Mount may be dead but I’m glad you were able to validate the MF will be in the RX. Who knew?
Not sure if your comment was irony or not. You don’t believe what people say on this forum?
No usable AF-C on E-mount.. or any mirrorless camera. 🙂
dSLRs and dSLTs are still going to be around for some time, at least for those which shoot moving subjects.
A7x are nice for landscapes or anything that doesnt move, but shooting sports with that? Good luck.. Best bet is SLT adapter and A7s. Which gives you pretty much what dSLTs have minus SSS.
“Which gives you pretty much what dSLTs have minus SSS.” – not really. It’s merely an AF module from A65 (which was sub-standard even at the day of release) that actually performs even worse in the adapter than it did on A65 itself.
It’s not that bad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr1yZCvWsbE
The A6000 will beat the A99 (I have both) in AF speed easily.
“In my view it appears that Sony cut the same sort of deal with Pentax as they did with Nikon.”
Can’t be, because Hasselblad and Phase One do use this 50MPx sensor, too.
Sigma lens (new) will be able to resolve enough resolution too. As they are tested on real 46 mpix testbench (otherwise known as SD1). Curious about Tamron tho..
SD1 is 46mp eq (according to Sigma originally 45mp and then later in a range of 30mp) but the sensor itself is 15mp 😉
Assuming it will be another A series camera similar to the A7R, I don’t care if it’s 46 or 146, if Sony doesn’t sort out the shutter slap problem, provide silent shooting and stop compressing raw files, I may jump ship. That said, I do loves my A7S 🙂
I think it’s pretty much a guarantee this will be addressed next go around.
Trivia: Just yesterday I was dreaming of MF, and to the point of budgeting. Still, the cost of a ‘good’ MF prime that I’d want is $5k!
Yeah, MF isn’t cheap, that’s for sure!
I’d rather see the cost of medium format come down. I’d be more interested in Sony making a fixed lens MF camera with 50 or more MP’s than some overpriced 46MP FE body. For that extra 10 percent in resolution and limited lens choices to truly take advantage of it I don’t see the point.
(not fixed please, not fixed please – personal opinion)
I think that I agree with this, the obvious question being the FL of the lens.
I like the idea of a huge MP fixed-lens MF in a smaller body, using a 35-50mm equivalent lens, and offering 2 conversion lenses, a WA and a moderate tele. I would be very tempted to buy that as an entire system (with a flash), if it afforded visual zooming of the screen image.
RX-1Super.
What I would really like to see is a medium format rangefinder style camera with fixed lens using the same sensor as the Pentax 645Z. It won’t come cheap but it will be something really nice…
http://photobyandrei.wordpress.com/
if it was a good fixed zoom lens or had the ability to have conversion lenses attached similar to the X100 then i would be all over this!!
make it a wide angle, preferly a 24mm FF eqivalent lens, and I’ll know what I want for christmas …
Fixed lens?? No way. Lenses are the only part of a camera that retains significant retail 5 years later. In 5 years your 15,000$ camera will be a dinosaur where as with interchangable you can still retain value in the lenses. No thanks. Besides why hobble people that way? I hate the idea of integrated lens cameras.
I think the full frame Sony will be an A mount camera. It would not surprise me if they actually introduced two new full cameras and a mirrorless APS-C A mount camera (for the low end) that will compete against the rumored mirrorless Canon Rebels.
And when you put this new 46mp camera on test charts, you will find out that its only 5% more resolution than a 36mp camera on the same charts. High ISO will test much worse than the 36.
Sorry…not trading ISO for resolution.
This thing will be the “anti-A7s” in many ways.
How many lenses do you own that will actually resolve 46mp?
I’m not really seeing the point of this. If anyone would want ultimate image quality than the step to MF or LF ultimately must be made. Sure, you can stick as much megapixels on an FF sensor as they do on MF sensors, but the MF quality won’t be there. The only benefits I can see now is increased cropping power.
Besides, 46 MP sounds like much but it is a meager increase from 36 of 30% which will not be noticable except when pixel peeping.
The main reason I didn’t get the A7R wasn’t because of the resolution, but because of the AF and EFCS. If or rather when they have got those fixed, the higher the resolution the better for me AFAIC. I would shoot a 46MP camera in 24 MP @ FF and 20 MP in crop mode. One camera. 2 sensor sizes. No need to buy an A6000 to pair with a FE camera.
Well, that idea sounds nice, except that Sony up to now fails to provide lower resolution RAW settings.
And Canon is apparently bringing out a high MP sensor & multi-layer sensor camera sensor too. This could be dead in the water before the high MP wars start again.
Hmm I’m sound like barrybyanimals
Yup I’m so excited I’ve put the word “sensor” all over the bl**dy place.
i would much rather have DR and high ISO then MP… lets stop the MP war… and lets start the DR war!!!
Sony really has been on fire for the last two years. Innovative products whereever you look. Great to see that they bring competition to FF. Just a shame that it has the stupid E-mount.
You mean the stupid, yet innovative E-mount?
Seeing as we’re on the subject of stupid…
There’s nothing innovative about E-Mount.
It’s the same thing, only smaller.
Not like there’s much innovation anyway… A55 seems to be the last innovative camera, and before that the 5D Mark II.
There’s nothing innovative about E-Mount.
It’s the same thing, only smaller.
Not like there’s much innovation anyway… A 55 seems to be the last innovative camera, and before that the 5 D 2
You can use virtually any lens on the planet with these cameras. That’s not innovative?
been done before them with m43 cameras and i’ll bite and say by leica, after all leica was first to come to market with FF mirrorless camera 😉
Yeah, but precious few can afford Leica. 🙂
Not really. MF is not that complicated. A guy on local forum sells a bunch of Canon FD etc. glass reworked for A-Mount.
And for new customers who don’t have legacy glass waiting on the shelves it’s irrelevant from the start.
You can use any lens in the crippled bait and switch mode.
If you want them to be fully functional you have to switch to native E mount lenses.
You don’t see E-mount as innovative because you’re judgement is clouded by your sentimental attachment to A-mount/SLT.
SLT could have been innovative, but Sony never really took advantage of it. The EVFs were great, but they still had average AF compared to the competition and its high burst rates are flawed by technical limitations. The A77II may well have come too late.
“Innovation” and “great camera” are not the same thing. A 55 was kind of crappy, but it was highly innovative. A77-II is a great camera, but no real innovation there.
And innovation isn’t always needed, sometimes refinement is just fine.
Funny, i was really impressed by the size of the a7, and the fact that its the first interchable lens camera that can use almost EVERY lens ever made thanks to suck a low flange distance. You thought it wasn’t innovative…but hey, thats none of my business
How can a mount be innovative? It’s a gift and and a curse that it supports both APS-C and FF.
I didn’t necessarily mean the mount itself is innovative – though it does offer some modern advantages over A-mount – more that the cameras released using E-mount have been more innovative. Technically speaking, the A-mount is beginning to show its age, and that could stifle innovation.
E-mount’s biggest advantage is the flexibility it offers in terms of body and lens sizes, both now and potentially more so in the future.
Maybe you can explain the gift/curse thing…
Based on the tamron lens that has canikon versions as well, I would say that this Tamron lens is A mount lens, and this 46mp camera is A mount, keep our fingers crossed! And it makes sense to what sony said “A mount is for professional use” so it should be a pioneer here!
“A mount is for professional use”
Did Sony ever actually say that?
Nope, they never did but I understand why some feel that way. Back when I purchased my A900 it was running up against the Canon 5D II and the Nikon D700. Since a lot of news folks used these two cam’s it was easy to associate the A900 in the same category. A lot has change since then and in my view, the comparison is no longer valid.
Agreed, it no longer applies. If you look at what all their sponsored pros are using and touting publicly, it’s A7, A7, A7. Even Canikon pros that are switching to Sony (or at least using it as a second system) are doing so for the A7. I see no evidence that “A-mount is for pros, E-mount is for consumers.” The A7 series is being marketed to pros just as much as the consumers. They may not be sports cameras, so won’t compete in that space against the D4s and 1Dx, but they’re perfectly capable cameras for professional use for studio portraits, fashion, landscape, etc. Also, if you look at the AF speed and 11fps of the a6000, we see that speed can be put in the E-mount bodies. Some improvements are needed yet, sure, but I see nothing really holding E-mount back for professional use going forward. Really, the only justification for A-mount DSLTs going forward, after all things are made equal, is just to have that larger DSLR form factor to balance with the larger, faster lenses.
Don’t forget button layout is important for the pros, a7 series can be good for pros too, but mostly for video. F4 zoom lens and non OSS prime is no good for the pros. I still prefer IBIS!!!
Every non-Sony pro on the planet is using non-OSS primes. Yeah, it’s kind of a step back for us A-mounters, but it just puts us on equal footing with the Canikon folks, who have never had stabilized primes. I agree with you about the F4 zooms, but I believe that will get corrected in the near future. I think Sony has been focused on small/light as a particular advantage for now, but as they get their lens lineup rounded out, they’ll come back and release those faster zooms, especially if they eventually a launch a more DSLR-style E-mount body.
Yeah agree, ergonomics is a factor…
http://sienavine.smugmug.com/IPhone/i-dmdB9Zr/1/XL/CA_10091408474680-XL.jpg
Until they give us a 135mm 1.8 or 85mm 1.4 it’ll never work for me. I want both without an adapter- no compromises.
With the button layout and more ports on A mount bodies, yes it aims for more professional use, I couldnt use my huge f60M on any of small eiunt body.
Even the lens for A mount is bigger and can open up to larger aperture, so big yes! A mount camera aims for more profesaional use!
More than mpix, I hope that a more substantial A9 body will show up with better phase detection autofocus, no long video clip overheating and internal 4K.
If there is going to be a hybrid A/E mount then this is the time.
All 3 manufacturers are poised to participate in this revolution.
Cannon will release 2 new multi layer profesional cameras in Jan plus high res and a large sensor cybershot superzoom
Nikon will release at least 2 new cameras..not sure what but they will probably match Sony with Sony sensors.
46 mp is by itself not a huge increase over 36mp. If this is a three layer sensor we are talking 15mp x 3 layers.
It would be nice if Sony would take the revolutionary step of actually calling a 3 layer pixel a pixel…therefore a 46mp sensor would be 46mp x 3 layers but I am not expecting it.
Here are the unanswered questions…will we see mirrorless Sony A mount
Will Canon and or Nikon produce mirrorless or SLT.
There is a rumor that Canon is working on an SLT like rebel with Sony sensor.
Only one thing is certain…we will see major changes in Januarry-ish.
Canikon…in my opinion..major shortcoming is the flaping SLR mirror.
If they manage to move beyond that it will allow them continuou tracking AF that only Sony now has.
This could open up a whole new level of camera competition.
Another issue is that lensmakers such as Sigma will not support Sony to the level they support Canikon which puts Sony at a disadvantage.
Thats an interesting post as always, barry. How about a 3 layer, 3×15.333MP sensor and what kind of resolution would that correspond in terms of a bayer sensor? Interesting times ahead.
Firstly it will NOT produce a native 46mp file but rather a native 15.333 file.
This will ne completely unlke a bayer file becauuse NOTHING IS INTERPOLATED unlike bayer where EVERYTHING IS INTERPOLATED.
The quality of this 15.333mp image will be vastly superior to a similar size bayer file.
Bayer files are interpolated 4x…so of we interpolate this file 4x we get 61.333mp at a comparable level of interpolation as a 46mp bayer file…1/3 more …
Thats based on the math…bayer fans will argue with that interpretation by saying that bayer interpretation also uses info from adjacent colors in their algorythms….so this is a contrversial statement.
The comparisons are a little difficult because we are not comparing apples to apples.
Personally although we now call each indidual color a pixel…now that we are moving to 3 layers I would like to see a new term..full color pixel… that would finally be calling what the average person thinks of as a pixel..a pixel.
Thanks, that is understandable. This bayer interpolation thing never was clear to me from the point you mentioned with the adjacent color interpretation. But I see that the real pixel 15MP layer sensor would surpass a 46MP bayer sensor in terms of IQ but not in (fake/interpolated) resolution.
Thanks and keep going, you bring substance to this forum.
Thanks for the encouragement..
Your last sentence is spot-on. Sony is all about innovation and they do it very
well, but they do so at the expense of not being accepted by the pros. For me,
I would prefer a system that remains relevant and fully supported for a
reasonable amount of time after purchase.
Yes
Here is the dilemma I now find myself in.
I want the new Sigma 150-600 sport…but I have been assured by multiple sources that this lens will never be made in Sony mount.
I do not yet know if the contemporary version which will be available in Sony mount will be of sufficient quality.
I do not like flaping mirrors therefore preffer not to switch to Canokon…but If I want the lens I will have to switch…E mount is not fully compatable with anything and so is useless to me…
Since I plan to buy both a new camera and lens I will have lots of options…If Canikon get rid of the mirror my choice will be easy..if the contemporary fersion is close to the quality of the sport version my choice will be easy…if niether of those happen I have a very difficult choice.
If the revolution is in multilayer sensor tech, then it is also possible that Panasonic and Fuji’s jointly developed “organic” sensor will join the revolution.
And if indeed these technologies even come close to providing the huge leaps in both dynamic range and resolution that have been intimated, then even M43 will be far beyond what is necessary.
At that point, the system(s) that will “win” are those that have the best glass to take advantage of the new sensors, the best size to performance ratio, and the best ergonomics.
Soon, sensor size will no longer effectively matter. This may be why Sony is shifting resources to the smaller systems. Large, DSLR style cameras will go the way of medium format: still “better” for some things, but less and less mainstream.
But Sony would be wise to put their latest tech into both A and E cameras, at least for the short term, since walking away would alienate a huge segment of their customers.
As much as it might appear to suck for those of us who have invested in larger glass, i do believe that smaller sensors will eventually become more than good enough and that smaller, easier to produce, high quality glass will replace the biggest and best of what’s available today. When that all happens, I won’t miss my big lenses at all. They served me well.
The flaw to this logic is the assumption of …its good enough so lets make it smaller…but the potential, and the reason ff is becoming more populer is that many people want better..so the purpose for many will be to make the best..not the smallest and easiest.
Big will always provide “more.” But do you really think that if a small sensor (APSC, lets say) can delver 50-100 megapixels and twice the current DR, that “many” people will still want more? That’s not to say that some people won’t find a use for more, but “many?”
Yes, absolutely.
🙂 I hope they deliver what you want. But for me, small is the new big. At a certain point, all the resolution and DR I ever need will be there and I’d rather have portability. I want a sports car. You want a truck, or maybe a big sedan. Both have merit. Meet you here in 5 years to see which way the market goes.
Check out Canon new Grote Zoom (big zoom)
Sounds like just what you are looking for.
Canon’s pocket cameras don’t have the handling or build I want. But put an organic 1″ sensor (maybe even a 2/3″) in a Fuji that outperforms today’s best FF IQ and then you’re talking.
Or talking after you catch your breath from lugging all of that big, heavy gear.
5 years. Total reset. You’ll probably still have a big system if you want it. But you won’t have much company. Change doesn’t have to be hard or necessitate Grote cheap shots.
Dont get me wrong..IF..there were a compact system that too pixel/sharp 200mp pictures with long telephoto and macro capability..I would be on the front of the line for it.
But I do not anticipate anything like that in the near future.
Cutrently the best cameras out there are nowher near the resolution I want so until that changes I am still looking for the best that is available.
But…
The thread that you kicked off was about the forthcoming sensor revolution.
That doesn’t mean 200mp pocket cameras, but could mean 50-100mp Fuji sized cameras. Or A6000 sized cameras. Sure, it could go into a large body too. But if you need a tripod to hold massive telephoto lenses anyway, I’d still prefer the smaller (A7, EM1, XT1 sized) body. Or a smallish, redesigned A mount body.
Ironically, the much maligned Nikon 1 system could end up with a bit of a lead if the sensor revolution happens. That tiny 800+ field of view zoom would be pretty sweet if the sensor could deliver clean, high DR, high Rez images (and if the glass is any good).
Fuji is fsr too incomplete a system to interest me so I do not follow it..the one fuji bridge camera I pnce purchased is garbage.
I generall do handhold my long lense ..iether with a Cotton Carrier Steadishot or or a monopod with the base in a holsteron my belt
Great news! Would be really nice to try “the great Tamron”, just have to wait a couple of years until it’s gonna be available for Sony 😉
I wish Sony would put the high rez, FF sensor into a camera with the A6000 form factor (no “hump” on top, and left side EVF).
To me, the high megapixel count is interesting, but far less so than the multi-layer aspect of the sensor, which promises even better color and dynamic range (in theory).
A release like this from Sony (and selling the sensor to Nikon) will force Canon to respond. One assumes that they’re sitting on lots of tech that doesn’t come to market while they enjoy their current market share. But if that’s not the case and they can’t respond, then this will be the turning point when they may “see impossible” to recover.
When I read your comment, I vomited a little in my mouth. The a6000 form factor sucks, especially when it comes to dealing with the majority of lenses that can deal with that kind of resolution.
Please elaborate, after chewing some gum. 🙂
How are lens resolution and camera body style connected? RX1 seems not to suffer…
The A6000 is nothing more than a point and shoot with a big sensor, you can’t hang big lenses off it’s cheap little plastic body. But it fits nicely in your purse.
Form factor and build quality are not linked. Pick up a Leica.
But equating small size with female and using it as a pejorative just makes you sound sexist and childish.
48.8 MP sensor would make more sense than 46MP.
Museum Art copy I did yesterday required a7R. I hate that camera. Just hate it, but need it to keep up with my MF and Nikon competitors. Wish I could use my a99 for that. Don’t want to rent medium format for these specialized jobs. Really angry at Sony for making me adapt to their best sensor. They give it to my Nikon competitors for years now, in three different versions.
Come on Sony… Stop making your own professionals adapt to the competition you serve better than your own.
Would prefer a high MP camera with multiple RAW resolutions available. Would prefer multiple formats, classic 4×5/8×10/11×14 and contemporary 4×6/6×9/11×17, and square, and multiple wide format options too.
No reason this can’t be done.
SONY!… Please commit to A-Mount professionals before somebody else does.
And this is combined with Sony destroying my flash system, making me adapt that too.
Sony a7R DOES NOT SYNC with Phottix Odin while using adapted lenses. Non chipped lenses cause flash to give black frame, so my Mirex/Mamiya adapted lenses cannot be used with flash. Can you imagine the frustration? In front of clients? It really sucks. a900 doesn’t have this problem.
I never get the feeling that Sony is working with me. They seem to work against me, making my job harder than it need to be. Sony should work better with their partners (ME). I’m your partner Sony, with tens of thousands of dollars invested. Please listen to your partners.
Why not switch to Nikon? It is a much comfortable system for work.
I used Nikon/Canon many years. Alpha, to me, is far more comfortable, and reliable. Sony is changing that though, making it more difficult. I own too many lenses from 16 to 600. My investment is considerable.
If this sensor is for the E mount,Sony needs to wake up,cause they have 4 and 5 camera lenses,i.e. the most useless photo system in the world.
Wake up Sony,wake up!
They would be crazy to do such a thing. If that happens it’s game over for A mount. No reason to debate this issue anymore after that. If a 46MP FE comes out before an A99II- I could care less if they still keep making Alpha bodies. I won’t be buying them.
+1000
It doesn’t mean I’ll get rid of my glass, but I’m going to sell off everything but the Zeiss I have. At some point you have to draw the line. I have micro four thirds and tons of glass. It’s a great system for the little stuff. But when it comes to the serious (I want the best quality that I can reasonably afford) it’s full frame. I can see the difference and I’m paying for access to the latest technology as well as best glass. If Sony can’t offer that to me in A mount I see no point sticking with adaptors, etc. and investing in more glass. I really hope they showcase a roadmap and marketing plan for A mount early next year because I still believe in the system.
One important thing to know about the A77II.
It focises much faster than screw drive lenses were ever desighned to fucus.
If you use screw drive lenses you must set the AF to slow or it will burn out the gears.
I did not realize that and burned out my Bigma.
The Bigma is HSM, not screw driven.
The new Bigma is HSM , the original….aka my Bigma…is screw drive.
Make that my original deceased Bigma….I just got the new one and yes it is HSM.
I didn’t know that. Well, it’s time for you to upgrade then 🙂 Probably the new 150-600 is a good choice, but no idea when it’s gonna be available.
I plan to get a 150-600 also, but need more info about the latest products to make the best choice.
If this sensor is not A mount Sony is dead to me!
How is mirrorlessrumors.com’s track record? They’re claiming “almost certainty” that it is a E mount.
They predict both…I wont speculate on thier track record.
I would hope to see A mount first or both at the same time but I totally expect E mount to get it eventually.
If E mount gets it and A mount doesnt things will go very badly for Sony.
Or they might go very well. Your personal reaction/tantrum to Sony not releasing the camera you want will not necessarily be the reaction of the entire market.
Could you be any more arrogant?
Not really, at 46mp is going to be slow as molasses, and doesn’t fit with the all out speed the SLT is famous for.
46mp is a speciality camera at most, and the A99 is a generalist camera. A 46mp camera will not be sold for anything less than 4K.
A slow 46mp camera is the perfect fit for the A7 series, which is famous for being slow, and awkward to use.
I’m looking for a more mainstream 36mp, capable of 12fps so I can use it with our 300mm f/2.8, and 500mm f/4.0.
The 46mp sounds good on paper but i’m not interested in it until it’s as fast as the A77II.
If the 46Mp sensor will be a foveon-like one, then it will interesting but i think it should be 48mp for 3 x 16 mpx foveon sensor.
Glory to the E-mount.
how many have and use lenses, that support a 50PM+- sensor??
and how large do you print?
I think it’s about burying noise, cropping and higher DR. 50MP isn’t really as much as people think it is, but it is for 35mm lenses. It’s time to move onward and upward. Time for medium format for the masses!
You don’t understand…
My a7R with cheap Mino 35-70/4 zoom provides better clarity than my Canon 21mp FF with sharpest L glass. Those MP’s without AA really help.
This is the A99II’s sensor, and CSC users are going to have to live with the fact the A-Mount Sony’s SLR solution, and the A99II “Is the flagship”
CSC cameras will never be a SLR replacement for any brand. Nikon, and Canon still don’t even take them serious. Sony is only realizing this now. The A-Mount sales have increased significantly over the last 24 months, disproving the mirror-less future fantasy. They are now shifting gears.
Mirror-less adoption hasn’t been successful, outside of a handful of Asian countries. If it continues to remain unsuccessful some of its advocators have already stated they’d launch DSLRs.
The E-Mount lenses shown at Photokina maybe the last for a long while.
SLR cameras dominate 82% of the market. This will continue for a very long time. Quality entry level Full Frame DSLR is what the market wants, and the D750 is proving this.
It’s amazing how Nikon has just schooled Sony on DSLR. The D750 has managed to outsell all three of Sony’s A7 Series cameras.
The A99 sales have increased due to the price drop. The public wants quality FF DSLR cameras, more than mirror-less.
That’s where the market is headed more people are upgrading from APS-C DSLRs to FF DSLRs. Which is why Nikon seized this opportunity with the D750.
Mirror-less is nothing more than a niche market. FF DSLR are drowning out mirror-less sales. Had Sony launched the A99 at $2K there we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
However I hope it highlights the importance of this emerging segment(quality FF between $1799.99, and $1999.99).
Mirror-less doesn’t have a chance emerging from this supposed CSC, SLR war. FF DSLR cameras are what the majority of enthusiasts, and semi-pro, are upgrading to.
Cameras like the D750, and unreleased A88 are going to lead the way (entry level professional), because they allow the use of lenses the owner already posses, and come it at 1/2 the price of cameras like the D810.
This 46mp camera is a pipe dream, and should it release it’ll be at a price none of us will appreciate.
The A88 doesn’t exist.
Was your former name BRWAT?
No moron it isn’t.
They’re both up north (Canadian Arctic) on assignment, and they’ll be out of the office for the next six weeks. I’m pretty sure they’re not going to waste band width to post comments on SAR.
BRWAT actually took advantage of the SAR chaos (cause he’s epically evil), and wrote a list of addition lenses he wanted. He surfed http://www.kijiji.ca, in Toronto, Canada, and picked up four out the five he wanted for next to nothing.
He got the 16mm fish-eye for 400 CDN, and a Zeiss 135mm for 900 CDN. Cause he’s a complete b✺st✺rd. I got sick when someone suffering from SAR meltdown handed him over a Minolta 100mm F/2 for 90 bucks.
So keep spreading the BS SAR you’re saving us big money/
You’re mixing up CSC and mirrorless. They aren’t necessarily the same thing.
Sony didn’t seem very keen on showing off any kind of A99 as its flagship at Photokina.
BTW, I hope you enjoy your stay in La-la Land.
They’re the same. I guess you bought the wrong camera.
I guess the A3000 was a CSC right?
How big can a camera get before it is no longer classed as compact?
If Sony releases an A9 in DSLR form factor, that will still be a CSC, right?
Its funny, cause crazy people believe a A9 is coming.
Not likely, cause there’s no demand for such a camera. The D810/D750 just eliminated the reason for Nikon users need for a A7 series camera. Canon will probably do the same.
An A99II with 46mp is going to squash that idea for Alpha users, and Canon is reading a new full MKIV
So who’s going to buy it? No-one! The A7 Series success was only possible due to launch date. Had it been launched alongside the D810, and 5D MKIV no one would have cared.
Most Nikon users have already switched to the D810, or D750, and Alpha users are buying A99 in droves since the price dropped under 2K.
If you check out http://www.kijiji.com, you’ll find plenty of A7 for sales, and virtually no A99 for sale, as people go back to their SLRs. Wait a year and you’ll probably see the A9.
I don’t want an A9 anyway. I want an A900II, but the size of a minolta 7000 and it should have 20FPS, 4K and 50MP. I want to be able to pull out 24MP stills from the video- OVF/EVF hybrid.
Is there any reason why the A mount could not have been attached to a small body? I think Canon was on to something with the Rebel SL1, but should have steered it towards the enthusiast market to challenge mirrorless instead of targeting entry users and families. Sony should have done a tiny, pro focused A mount camera instead of starting a new line. They certainly have the miniaturization chops.
“Sony should have done a tiny, pro focused A mount camera instead of starting a new line.”
Exactly!
Buying a FF DSLR is the only solution.
Q. what do you call a semi-pro or Professional with a mirror-less camera?
A. unemployed.
That’s funny, but not at all true. Magazine clients can’t tell the difference between an A7 image and a Canikon image. Wedding clients can’t tell the difference between M43 and FF. Only photographers care about sensor size. There are use cases when sensor size might matter, and camera performance of a particular system may currently be better suited to a given task. Sports shooting with a Phase One might not be as successful as shooting a 1DX, but will have “better” IQ if you manage it. 😉
I agree as well, but the reason might be more telling. I can’t believe how many wedding clients never print, don’t want print and take their pictures right to facebook. It’s not the initial destination, it’s literally the final. There is a FF advantage, but it’s wasted due to the clients final application. I have shot weddings with a full frame on one side and an Olympus on the other- no issues whatsoever.
Professional images captured for magazines are usually shot at base ISO whenever possible. There goes your high ISO advantage. I still think your better of spending more time considering a prime verses a zoom for the shot than what sensor size is backing it up. The basic’s still apply.
Agree about primes. I’ve recently been really enjoying the size and speed advantage, and the forced restriction that they bring.
But any camera can make great images. Sometimes its just about the moment. Earlier this year I had quarter page images from an old Sony point and shoot run along side those from a FF Canon 5DM3 shot with L glass and nobody ever commented on the “difference.” The shots were printed on heavy, high gloss stock and color separated with a 300 line screen. A tiny, aging, compact sensor is pushing it. But a modern Sony sensor from 1″ and up is more than capable of doing “pro” work.
Stop rationalizing, your just full of $hit, lots of it.
What part are you disagreeing with? That primes aren’t small, fast and fun to shoot, or that for many use cases, sensor size is not as important as capturing the moment? Or are you trying to break my heart, Wilco?
Partly agree. I, for myself use fullframe because I like shallow DOF (easier and cheaper to get) and because of the greater dynamic range possible, giving me more freedom to compose shots or do changes in post. But there is a large range of situations, where cameras with smaller sensors produce similar pictures for smaller print sizes.
And you can’t tell the difference between BS and reality. Only misinformation generators care about this.
Its funny, but true. I’ve seen it happen on multiple occasions during job interviews.
It doesn’t matter how good you are when you pull out a squeakier toy in America you lose a credibility with the client.
It a shame Fuji doesn’t make a FF DSLR. I really like the XT-1, and they really need to stop playing around with toys, and step back into the professional market.
If the interviewers are more interested in your gear than the quality of the quality of your images, you’re better off not getting that gig. 🙂
Actually most of the companies I’ve worked for long term actually buy you most of your equipment Its how I ended up with a 5D MKIII, and 24-105mm f/4.0, and a 70-200mm f/4.
The extras you usually pay for.
Mirrorless cameras will eventually replace DSLRs…..
Or DSLRs will eventually become mirrorless.
Canikon will not be foolish enough to replace DSLRs but eventually they will become mirrorless.
Sony is not giving us a clear direction therefore I have no confidence in thier decision making.
Sony has made many mistakesbut the camera devision survives.
If they do not make this sensor for A mount first this will cost them the Camera devision.
It will start a MASS exodus from A mount to Canikon, and when Canikon get around to competing with E mount that will be the end of Sony camera division.
The direction is simple. SoS.
Canon doesn’t have to mess with the pentaprisim to be successful. It just has to launch a sun-1K entry level FF DSLR.
SLR cameras are an iconic symbol of North American culture, and almost impossible to erase (like the Mustang, Corvette, Macintosh, iPhone, and Coca-Cola, and Bud Wiser).
Mass Full Frame adoption is the next logical evolution of the DSLR. APS-C will become the niche DSLR camera in the future.
Mirror-less won’t succeed, and remain a inch camera segment like APS-C was during the film age.
“remain a niche segment”
“Auto Correct on this iPhone 6 is driving me bonkers”
You’re absolutely right. Mirror-less really is like APS-C was in the 90’s. A niche camera format with ardent fans that never really took off. SLR will remain the dominate technology/form factor for years to come.
When mirrorless becomes as fast focusing as mirrors there will be no use for mirrors any more.
I am talking about eliminating the mirror but leaving the camera system intact.
SLR, SLT, and mirrorless will share the same system.
E mount goes about this totally wrong…it tries to replace the existing system instead of fit into it. Thats why it will fail..because the competition will come up with a mirrorless system that is not a new system but fits in with the existing system.
Why would anyone choose 2 incompatable systems when they can simply buy the type of camera they want to fit a single system.
That is the entire purpose of interchangeable lenses …to build a system so everything works together…and thats what Sony just doesn’t get.
A and E mounters should not need to debate which system is better or which systen is dead or survives…it should be one compatable system.
When Sony finally realizes that they will find themselves stuck with 2 incompatable systems and customers battling each other for system survival..and strugling to find compatable equipment..and not being able to buy non Sony lenses because the manufacturers have no confidence in them…thats what will happen…oh wait..it already has happened.
It doesn’t matter about the technology behind it. DSLRs are also advancing so when a 2020 mirror-less camera achieves parity with a 2014 DSLR, the mirror-less crowd will be the only ones that care.
DSLR technology will have already advanced enough that the mirror-less improvements will be inconsequential.
The DSLR is all about pure performance, its kind of like a Corvette where all out performance is the single most important feature of the camera.
So a 2020 DSLR will probably be capable of burst rates we thought were impossible today, and 16fps, and 1/12,000 will probably be the norm. The SLR strength is it dedicated PDAF which will allow future generations of SLR to focus faster more accurately, and in light conditions that will continue to confuse mirror-less.
Slamming all of the electronics is a bad idea, because the more electronic you integrate on sensor the less capable a sensor becomes.
There is a flaw to your logic…mirrorless will evenually be faster than dslr because there is no physical mirror to flap out of the way.
Mirrors are a vistigial remnent of the film age and would not have existed otherwise.
That is why DSLR needs to EVOLVE into mirrorless, not be REPLACED by it.
This is the tact that Canon and Nikon SHOULD be pursuing. Removing the mirror but keeping the mount and glass.
I would love for the mirror and pentaprism and SLR mounts to stay, but the body to be made the same shape/idea as the FE/FM. It would have to be a bit thicker than a film SLR, yes, but it would suffer none of the problems of EVFs. Add an EVF layer into the prism and suddenly you have all the goods of all systems, and barring the ridiculous packing of features, none of the problems.
It has evolved it’s called SLT, and it’s probably the best technology devised for professional SLR cameras going forward. Sony’s already demonstrated it can make sensors with outstanding ISO performance.
The only argument against SLT is ISO performance, and after using the A7s, I’m impressed. ISO performance will probably be a non-issue with the next generation SLT.
I’m sure the A99II, and whatever this 46mp sensor is going to be installed in are will be great cameras.
SLT is an interim system.
I agree it is the best we currently have..but mirrorless will surpass and replace it in the near future.
You’re making a huge assumption Barry. SLT has gone already surpassed many of its SLR brethren. You must be talking ten or so year in the future.
I’m living in the here and now.
Let’s call it “American” culture, if not ‘muscle’ culture; pretty sure we in Nunavut, and those in Panama have a different take on what North American culture is.
DSLR’s will eventually become mirrorless. Look at any of the first A mounts and it’s obvious they can be made to the same size specifications as FE. The whole smaller flang distance means smaller camera is such a garbage fallacy. It’s the worse argument in favor of mirrorless. I was messing around with a guys Canon 6D a few weeks ago and couldn’t believe how stupid small that FF was- but the grip was still substantial and as small as I would go. I think Canon and Nikon will eventually release a mirrorless version of their current line-up. No new mount, all the lenses work without adaptors and they’ll make them lighter than before.
There’s a rumor that Canon will be making another BIG announcement next week. Possibly a FF mirror-less with 82 megapixel.
“CIPA data: Mirrorless cameras shipment growing. DSLR falling. Even in US and EU!”
http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/cipa-data-mirrorless-cameras-shipment-growing-dslr-falling-even-in-us-and-eu
The newest information (01 Jul 14) direct from Sony indicates while other manufacturers DSLR sales are shrinking Sony’s SLT sales are not.
Which fully reinforces Willful’s point. DSLR sales may be declining, but SLT sales are climbing. Mass acceptance of EVF in professional SLR/SLT cameras is well underway.
Since the launch of the original A77 in 2011 the A-Mount sales (bodies, flashes, lenses) have increased substantially. Sales have increased from paltry 20% of sales in 2011 to 32% in 2013.
“The Information is from the 01 Jul 14, A77II launch presentation that was held in London”
it can be located @ http://www.youtube.com
Its true. Sony’s sales retracted when the A55, and the other original SLT arrived. However we are now in a period where the SLT technology has been full embraced by Alpha users, and they’ve been on the rebound for the last two years.
This has largely been a result of the original A77, and the A99 to a lesser extent.
Had the A99 been appropriately priced two years ago, Sony could have sold significantly more bodies when the entry level Full Frame camera market segment emerged two years ago.
However the price drop of the A99 is indicating that Sony is going to correct that significant error.
>Sony is only realizing this now.
Are they? Doesn’t seem to be the case…
Some of the comments here are just ridiculous!
The sensor will be in the camera (either A or E mount) where Sony thinks it should be best placed….not you! Stop this A mount vs. E mount or DSLR vs mirrorless nonsense….
minipixels.net | Automotive Photography
It’s almost as pointless as Primes vs Zooms, or Film vs Digital. Maybe even trucks vs cars. However I enjoy reading the pursuing insanity, and its cheaper than buying a comic book.
Its a virtual debate, and worth the read.
Sony will decide what decisions they make and we the consumer will decide if Sony Camera division survives.
Just like we decided with Sony tvs, Sony computers, and Sony cell phones.
And whatever fate we decree for Sony will be enforced by Sony’s competition.
Agreed. The market as a whole will determine whether Sony made the right decision but all these ppl keep blabbing like their individual opinion has a say or they have some secret knowledge that putting this sensor in A or E mount is best……lol
I guess the ultimate winner here is the site owner here with the traffic 😉
minipixels.net | Automotive Photography
A year ago there were rumors of a dual mount in development. Certainly, once on chip PDAF catches DSLR autofocus, the two camera systems can be combined. Perhaps this would involve a high quality adapter, but it can be done. I think that the question here is if it is to Sony’s advantage to combine the two systems where they don’t need to maintain two product lines.
If you stick two dogs in a cage and keep taking their food away at some point one will eat the other. FE and A mount are fighting for limited resources with Sony, they can’t both be supported IMO. Either A mount must gain a new marketing strategy and begin to further differentiate itself or it must go. If it becomes the high megapixel and fast glass option targeting higher end pro’s fine. Sony just has to make up it’s mind already.
Sony supports a 1/2 dozen video camera lens mounts. The A-Mount is the third largest player in the SLR market, and growing. The E-Mount is the largest player in mirror-less.
Sony will keep both. Multiple lenses, and mounts is nothing for the world’s largest electronics manufacturer.
Once the drive to give the A7 users the basic lenses needed they will shift their focus elsewhere. If I was a A7 user I wouldn’t expect much beyond 2016.
Sony will likely introduce a third mount in the near future. Possibly the medium format camera we’ve heard so much about. When that happens both A, and E mount users will whine in unison.
You’re talking too much sense for this crowd.
The 6000 still feels better in the hand than an A7- it’s 30 years old! The whole shorter flange distance means smaller camera is rubbish!
The minolta 6000 is now almost 30 years old. Still feels better in the hands than an A7 and almost as light. Flange distance doesn’t matter unless your a company more fixed on selling new recycled products than expanding your existing product line.
Still a looker after 30 years. A mount can be just as stylish and small as Sony wants it to be. For proof, look to the past.
Missed the pic I guess.
Even the a7 is bigger than a Minolta 35mm pro body from the 1970’s
If you remove the cap on the bayonet, it would be a significant difference.
Really?
Thinner by a little bit but not smaller overall. I don’t have a body cap for the MD11 unfortunately but could have taken them off the others although I don’t like to do that here in the desert in order to keep the sensors clean.
The point is that today’s so called small cameras are not smaller than pro bodies were early in my career.
This side comparison only shows the half truth. While the old camera had only a film behind the image area that was less than 1/4 mm new cameras have a sensor with electronics behind the image area and a screen. The sensor will propably take 5mm, the screen 5mm and the electronics a few mm, add that to your old Minolta and you will see what is the minimim size if you try to make A-Mount as small as possible.
Thats why this comparison between the A7 and the old Minolta is pure nonsense…
I still can’t buy that logic. I’ll have to look into this to make a good rebuttal. It can be done! Saying that current camera electronics are a certain size is also a half truth.
You are completely missing the point but I suspect you have no desire to actually understand the point.
The main difference in thickness is:
– E-Mount has about half the flange distance than a FF SLR/DSLR/SLT because of the not existing mirror, so the body can be slimmer
– this is a little bit compensated because sensor and Bayer filter are a little bit thicker than film and pressure plate
Overall for my “taste” the old ones were a little bit too small to be ergonomic – the new monsters like the 1Dx or D4s are too big. Optimal ergonomic size (for me…) is something like the A77M2 plus VG with bigger lenses. With small lenses something like the A7 w/o VG is quite ergonomic because of the grip the old ones didn’t have. Only thing that bothers me with the A7(x) is the sharp lower right edge pressing to hard on the heel of my hand… A little bit more rounded and it would be close to perfect…
There is so much more going on in the a7 versus the film camera. It’s like comparing a sheet of paper & pen to an iPad. Yeah the paper is thinner & lighter…
What exactly is so overwhelming? I don’t see the issue here. I’ve taken apart a few alpha cameras and see no reason as to why they couldn’t be downsized- including thinner LCD’s. If they can fit all of it in a A7 they can do it in an A mount camera minus the flange distance.
What exactly is so overwhelming? I don’t see the issue here. I’ve taken apart a few alpha cameras and see no reason as to why they couldn’t be downsized- including thinner LCD’s. If they can fit all of it in a A7 they can do it in an A mount camera, but much smaller:)
What about ergonomics? Everyone wants thinner stuff but it’s becoming really uncomfortable for some of us. I’d love to use a a6000 instead of a77 for several reasons, but ergonomics is not one of them.
I replied to the person who stated that the manual film camera is smaller than an a7, which is a silly comparison.
As for the size differential between the a99 and a7. The difference in thickness is 30mm. The difference in flange depth is 28mm (or 1.1 inches). As you know, this extra depth must always be honored for the lenses. So realistically if the a7 represents Sony’s maximum thinness abilities, the next a99 can only get slim down by 2mm.
As for the LCD, perhaps it an be made marginally thinner but it has to retain some degree of thickness / rigidity for flipping out and articulating. If Sony abandoned the articulation then they could shave a few millimeters because it would not need rear housing – but that’s a terrible trade off.
I think there is a problem because I didn’t miss attaching the picture but it didn’t post so here is a retry:
I had a problem posting the pic as well. This is a great pic though and I think illustrates just how big DSLR’s have gotten. It’s not a product of the mount though- that’s just a fallacy. 1 extra inch in the center makes almost zero difference to the size of the camera it’s laughable. Canikon makes their higher end DSLR’s bigger for a reason. Customers associate pro with big, but it’s not the mount on their end either. The original EOS line was rediculously small. I’l love to see an A99II with the size and form factor of some of the original A mount cameras.
Also I didn’t log out yet the repost posted as Guest. Oh well, sorry for the double post.
Now add a FF sensor module, PDAF module, various electronics and an LCD screen to the back. Not so small now, is it? We will never see an A-mount camera that small, unless Sony feels like going back to film.
Dude the Maxxum 7000 has a PDAF module, and a massive amounts of electronics on board it. It even takes cards. Pre-programmed cards.
And Sony can easily shrink the A-Mount. The big body SLR trend was brought about by Nikon, and Canon.
If you crack a A99 its has plenty of space. Sony could halve the size of the A99 with no issues what-so-ever.
The a99 is pretty svelte. I think it was the most compact / lightest full frame dSLR upon its release. Even if Sony ditches the mirror box the thickness of the camera must remain. It could get thinner of Sony gets rid of the rear articulating LCD but that’s a poor trade off for a quarter of an inch savings. Also…Sony offers compact ff bodies already for those that want compact.
What maxxum said. They can make LCD’s wafer thin as well. I see no reason why it can’t happen.
Its this crazy tech called oled. Apple has been using it for years. and its wafer thin. It wouldn’t add much yo the size.
Apple does not use OLED, though I think the Sony full frame EVFs are currently OLED.
I figured my iPhone 6 had an oled. I guess should have read the manual before I signed the contract.
iPhone 6 (like all other iPhones) uses IPS LCD not OLED
SLRs are going through the Big Body means better camera mentality that US auto makers did in the 70’s.
Hopefully it’ll dissipate soon, cause most of the designs are looking sillier with ever generation.
I’d really be happy with a Maxxum 7000 sized FF A-Mount. Even if I’d have to put up with the annoying cards they forced you to buy.
I still have a 7000 body, and a roll of Ilford in the fridge.
I don’t know why, I love that body, like a solid, angular, machined piece of confidence.
It cannot be as thin as an E-mount camera due to the flange distance (sensor/film to mount).
It seems this will be an FF camera with a stack of pixels. An a7R has enough pixels for 16×20 and that’s the biggest I print. So that will be perfect for me.
This higher resolution camera, in a FF package will be starting to have very small pixels. The reason the a7S is so loved is it’s large pixels, compared to most other FF cameras, which allows great sensitivity at very low noise.
Now the 46 odd pixels will have a characteristic look but it may not be what many people want. Just the problems generated by noise may make this camera less than ideal for many situations.
Oh yeah, good luck with hand held.
I’m hoping the 36mp, 12fps rumour is true. If so I’d be better fit than the 5D MK III I use daily.
My current A900, and Zeiss lenses that I use outside of the office is getting a little long in the teeth, and is due for an upgrade.
I would have bought the A99 sooner, but work gave me a 5D MKIII for and two lenses for free, and Sony couldn’t match free.
LOL, that’s an excellent feature, I wish I could get that on my next camera 😉
Sold my A900 thinking the A99II would be here in like another month. FAIL. Now I’m FF’less- stuck in Sony purgatory. I just want a proper A mount with no compromises.
Sorry – but someone selling its tool before he gets a new tool cannot be taken seriously…
Well, the camera wasn’t doing it for me either. It’s a great “tool” but it’s time to move on. Slow AF, pretty horrid ISO and no live view. I prefer an EVF as well. Plus, I own 6 other cameras as well.
all cameras that are build to serve very special needs (like a7s) have their downside. you just have to know what you are buying/using it for.
The Pixels would still be bigger than those in an a77 II. If you scale that sensor up to full frame you end up with 54mpix
Canon also rumored to reduce high mpx camera. Wondering whether it is the same Sony sensors.
so funny nobody talking about the Tamron lens… just more Alpha/Elpha banter.
I hope it’s a great lens, but I bought the 16-35mm last year. Hopefully it succeeds, but the Sony’s Zeiss model is a pretty hard act to follow.
I guess it will cost much less, so it is ok if it doesn’t compete with the Zeiss in terms of optical quality ;)…
It’s logical. Tamron is an FF Alpha lens, so the question immediately arises, what camera to use it on, if Sony screws Alpha in favor of E.
Pretty simple. Why Tamron should use VC for A-mount???? It’s for E…
Alpha is A-mount and E-mount. Just because “Alpha” begins with an “A” doesn’t make it the same thing. Or do you think the “M” mode on your camera is the same thing as “Money” for example 😀 ?
Aha, and what is “Alpha mount”?
Its not a focal length thst even remotely interests me
300
sounds like an average battery life in mirrorless camera – or not? 😛
(SR5) It will be a E-mount camera. A-mount is dead.
http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/50-megapixel-full-frame-sensor-generation-coming-first-quarter-of-2015#view-comments