Why does everyone overlook Sony?

[Raswan]

Because Sony sucks, not just as a maker of products but as an entity as a whole.

 

[corkyg]

Aside from that, after reviewing all the replies in this thread, I have to conclude that OP's premise in incorrect . . . everyone does not overlook Sony.

 

[Throckmorton]

Sensor shift works fine at 300mm. This pic was at 1/60th... zero motion blur

 

[finbarqs]

you can't tell until it's 100%. but it could be 0 motion blur..

 

[Throckmorton]

you can't tell until it's 100%. but it could be 0 motion blur..

I did look at 100%!!

1/60 seems to be the limit. At 1/40 I get blur. How does that compare to a Canon or Nikon 300mm IS lens?

 

[finbarqs]

i meant we can't tell

 

[dougp]

Aside from that, after reviewing all the replies in this thread, I have to conclude that OP's premise in incorrect . . . everyone does not overlook Sony.

They do, based on ignorance alone or by product bias.

 

[twistedlogic]

by product bias.

Or from manufacturer experience.

Sony has done plenty of things over the years that prove they do not care about their customers. Why would there camera department be any different?

 

[dougp]

Or from manufacturer experience.

Sony has done plenty of things over the years that prove they do not care about their customers. Why would there camera department be any different?

Because their DSLR department is Minolta. Trust me, I was pretty worried about going with my A33 until I learned that.

 

[corkyg]

They do, based on ignorance alone or by product bias.

I don't think you understand what "everyone" means. I see several contributors (including you) who have considered Sony in this thread. If "everyone" were correct, there would be none.

 

[dougp]

I don't think you understand what "everyone" means. I see several contributors (including you) who have considered Sony in this thread. If "everyone" were correct, there would be none.

Ah yes, I forgot. We should take everything literally, with no room for interpretation. I believe I now understand everything you've said. Hopefulyl everyone else interprets this properly.

 

[Munky]

I've seen a lot of people using the Sony NEX cameras - the kind of people who set the camera to Auto and hold it 2 feet in front of their face while taking the photo. If the "serious" photogs aren't using Sony, then there's a reason for it - there are better options.

Nikon beats Sony in IQ, even when using the same Sony sensors.

Lens VR beats sensor VR in practice - you can judge its effectiveness through the viewfinder, it can be optimized for each lens, and it doesn't do wonky things to your sensor like drop the x-sync down to 1/125 or limit your video recording time due to sensor overheating.

I hate Sony's heavy-handed noise reduction. They seem to be improving lately, but I've seen enough to write Sony off my list. I also hate their proprietary hot shoe.

Their lens selection is relatively limited. Brag about using Minolta lenses - so what? I can use Nikon lenses going back all the way to the first F-mount.

 

[Throckmorton]

i meant we can't tell

OK, here you go

Edit: Oops, this was 250mm not 300mm. I'll take some slow shutter pics at 300mm today

 

[Throckmorton]

I've seen a lot of people using the Sony NEX cameras - the kind of people who set the camera to Auto and hold it 2 feet in front of their face while taking the photo. If the "serious" photogs aren't using Sony, then there's a reason for it - there are better options.

Nikon beats Sony in IQ, even when using the same Sony sensors.

Lens VR beats sensor VR in practice - you can judge its effectiveness through the viewfinder, it can be optimized for each lens, and it doesn't do wonky things to your sensor like drop the x-sync down to 1/125 or limit your video recording time due to sensor overheating.

I hate Sony's heavy-handed noise reduction. They seem to be improving lately, but I've seen enough to write Sony off my list. I also hate their proprietary hot shoe.

Their lens selection is relatively limited. Brag about using Minolta lenses - so what? I can use Nikon lenses going back all the way to the first F-mount.

From what I've read, Sony sets up the sensors for better color and Nikon for more sharpness, or maybe it's the other way around.

The sensor overheating issue has supposedly been fixed starting with the A35

Noise reduction? Not an issue with RAW!

About the lenses... How many of the old lenses have "VR" and autofocus motors?


The "Sony" hotshoe was introduced in 1988 by Minolta. It's not like Sony invented it just to be proprietary. Why aren't there adapters?

Edit: There are adapters http://www.adorama.com/ISOHSA.html?...ping Site&utm_campaign=Other&utm_source=gbase
http://www.amazon.com/Seagull-SC-5-Adapter-Standard-Connection/sim/B0016120M8/2

 

[Munky]

From what I've read, Sony sets up the sensors for better color and Nikon for more sharpness, or maybe it's the other way around.

The sensor overheating issue has supposedly been fixed starting with the A35

Noise reduction? Not an issue with RAW!

About the lenses... How many of the old lenses have "VR" and autofocus motors?


The "Sony" hotshoe was introduced in 1988 by Minolta. It's not like Sony invented it just to be proprietary. Why aren't there adapters?

Edit: There are adapters http://www.adorama.com/ISOHSA.html?u...m_source=gbase
http://www.amazon.com/Seagull-SC-5-A...m/B0016120M8/2

The point is, I don't have to use all these workarounds for Nikon. I don't have to shoot RAW and dick around in post processing to get decent quality pics, I don't need to buy any flash adapter, and there are more lenses available not only from Nikon but from third parties too.

 

[blastingcap]

The point is, I don't have to use all these workarounds for Nikon. I don't have to shoot RAW and dick around in post processing to get decent quality pics, I don't need to buy any flash adapter, and there are more lenses available not only from Nikon but from third parties too.

Having a high market share has its advantages. In any industry.

 

[dougp]

The point is, I don't have to use all these workarounds for Nikon. I don't have to shoot RAW and dick around in post processing to get decent quality pics, I don't need to buy any flash adapter, and there are more lenses available not only from Nikon but from third parties too.

Because you've been using Nikon. If you'd have gone with Minolta/Sony to begin with, then you wouldn't need adapters.

Regardless, all the complaining about Sony is funny - especially things like lack of lenses and the hot shoe. Those are all Minolta design decisions, not Sony. Sony's aftermarket support has been increasing.

As for JPG processing, I've never had a huge issue - a lot of my images are usable directly off the camera. I still edit them though - regardless of the brand I'm using.

 

[Munky]

Because you've been using Nikon. If you'd have gone with Minolta/Sony to begin with, then you wouldn't need adapters.

Regardless, all the complaining about Sony is funny - especially things like lack of lenses and the hot shoe. Those are all Minolta design decisions, not Sony. Sony's aftermarket support has been increasing.

As for JPG processing, I've never had a huge issue - a lot of my images are usable directly off the camera. I still edit them though - regardless of the brand I'm using.

Minolta issues are now Sony issues. It's not like a Sony user can say "Oh, that was a Minolta decision, so it doesn't apply to me"

 

[dougp]

Minolta issues are now Sony issues. It's not like a Sony user can say "Oh, that was a Minolta decision, so it doesn't apply to me"

Sony isn't going to buy a company and completely change the way their factories been working. I'm not saying it doesn't apply, but you're condemning the wrong company who made the INITIAL decision to change something.

 

[Throckmorton]

Here's a 100% crop from a picture I just took at 300mm (for some reason the EXIF data says 280mm), 1/15th, f/36 (hence the blurriness), ISO 100. Zero motion blur! So how does that compare to in-lens stabilization?

 

[Munky]

Sony isn't going to buy a company and completely change the way their factories been working. I'm not saying it doesn't apply, but you're condemning the wrong company who made the INITIAL decision to change something.

I'm judging the company based on the products they produce. Even if the initial decision was made by a previous company, I'm not going to excuse them simply because it was Minolta then and it's Sony now. The product still bears the consequences of those decisions, and the product is now sold by Sony.

 

[fralexandr]

wow, on my k100d shake reduction, i can't really go below 1/50 on 300mm.
that's about where i get 30-60% successful shots

that image is really blurry and low contrast though, i guess that's a result of the glass used.

i tried a sony a330 out a while back, and it didn't seem particularly impressive to me. i think it had to do with the j-peg processing. my cousin shoots pentax and was selling his k100d so i bought that. he has a lot of nicer glass than i do heh.
otherwise i might've picked up a sony if he wasn't selling, since the sony dslrs were selling for pretty cheap

personally sony seems like they're great for people on a budget, but professionals want the best glass and to a lesser extent the best camera.
it's a lot easier to recommend canon/nikon (for people who don't have friends shooting other brand cameras with high quality glass they can borrow ) due to the higher availability of aftermarket accessories as a result of high market share.
it's rather hard to find any lenses or accessories for pentax and sony and olympus beyond the basic kit lenses in most retail stores

you basically have to go online for most of them, ebay for used newer lenses, craigslist for old used lenses, or one of the big camera etailers for new stuff (outside of being lucky and living near a b&h supermega brick and mortar store or something)

 

[Throckmorton]

I don't think 1/15 is typical for 300mm. I have another picture of some mangos with motion blur at 1/30 and another one with blur at 1/40. I think reliably I can go down to 1/60th.

So the Pentax and Sony can do about the same 1/50 to 1/60 at 300mm with sensor shift, what about Nikon/Canon?

 

[Throckmorton]

BTW here is the same scene at 1/500th ISO200 f/10

Nope, the lens isn't very sharp but heat distortion is an even bigger issue at that distance, 0.43 miles

 

[Cattykit]

Regarding the EVF - for casual shooters who don't have to be looking at the EVF for certain amount of time, I guess it's okay. In my case, I was covering an event where I had to keep looking at the viewfinder for more than a few hours constantly, it just wasn't okay. It actually hurt my eyes and my friend who owns the camera made the same complaint. BTW, I never have a problem reading tiny text on my phone (Galaxy Nexus) for hours and hours.
(Having said that, I should again mention that I'm a fan of EVF regardless of such problems. Simply because I can actually use it while shooting video.)

Lots of people complain about EVF performance in low light but in my case, it was the opposite. Yes, low light situation wasn't good but I found it to be worse in light situation. Better than previous EVF cams but still terrible.

Anyways, I don't think there's much Sony can do regarding their EVF situation and I know they tried their best. The problem is, once again, damn UI lag. I mean, what the hell is wrong with Sony that they can't even make lag free UI in the first place? When I'm dialing up and down aperture/shutter speed values, I expect what I see is what I'd get if I stop dialing. Sony just couldn't deliver that simple thing. A major fail along with other epic fails.

In order to compete with other brands in semi-professional market, I just don't think Sony is ready at all. However, for regular people we like to call soccer-moms or average joes, those things shouldn't matter much. Yet, Sony hasn't won their heart even in that market segment. I think Sony would've been better off by dropping DSLT lines and focusing on EVIL market. It seems like by the time they match others' quality, the market will be transcended to EVIL systems. Why pour so much money into DSLR(T) development when they just can't even compete with...umm...Pentax?