Mirrorless Cameras (Page 6): What is interesting is that Sony has mirror less cameras in 1", APS-C, and Full Frame sensors, but has stayed away from competing in M4/3. This is...

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

What is interesting is that Sony has mirror less cameras in 1", APS-C, and Full Frame sensors, but has stayed away from competing in M4/3. This is absolutely a marketing strategy. I think the choice for the consumer has to be the feel of the camera, the lens choices, and weather proofing. Otherwise, all of these cameras seem to do quite well, and the postings show that!

mechengvic Loc: SoCalo

azted wrote:

What is interesting is that Sony has mirror less cameras in 1", APS-C, and Full Frame sensors, but has stayed away from competing in M4/3. This is absolutely a marketing strategy. I think the choice for the consumer has to be the feel of the camera, the lens choices, and weather proofing. Otherwise, all of these cameras seem to do quite well, and the postings show that!

Well I wouldn't say Sony has completely stayed out of M4/3...

http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/28/3422068/sony-olympus-investment

amehta Loc: Boston

azted wrote:

What is interesting is that Sony has mirror less cameras in 1", APS-C, and Full Frame sensors, but has stayed away from competing in M4/3. This is absolutely a marketing strategy. I think the choice for the consumer has to be the feel of the camera, the lens choices, and weather proofing. Otherwise, all of these cameras seem to do quite well, and the postings show that!

Simple market strategy: bigger is better. Their 1" sensors are used in their advanced compact and bridge cameras, to say, "ours has a bigger sensor". They are not competing with m4/3, they are competing with Canon and Nikon.

amehta Loc: Boston

mechengvic wrote:

Well I wouldn't say Sony has completely stayed out of M4/3...

http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/28/3422068/sony-olympus-investment

I don't see that this deal has Sony entering m4/3.

mechengvic Loc: SoCalo

amehta wrote:

Simple market strategy: bigger is better. Their 1" sensors are used in their advanced compact and bridge cameras, to say, "ours has a bigger sensor". They are not competing with m4/3, they are competing with Canon and Nikon.

Yes, and in order to compete with Nikon and Canon they bought into the most advanced technology they could their hands on, in order to learn and compete in the future of photography, they bought a 655million$ stake in OLYMPUS.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

ebercovici wrote:

Another excellent choice is Sony. Sensor size is ... (show quote)

Yes - the Sony A7 shows the way forward, but there is still room for MFT systems. Horses for courses. IQ at this level is only a factor in producing good pics.

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

That article sort of proves my point. Why should Sony Camera market a M4/3 product when it may compete with a company that they have an investment in? Thus, if you like Sony products, but want the reach of a m4/3 sensor, you should feel comfortable with Olympus! Myself, I have a 1" sensor (RX-10), but I can see the benefits of each sensor upgrade.

mechengvic Loc: SoCalo

azted wrote:

That article sort of proves my point. Why should Sony Camera market a M4/3 product when it may compete with a company that they have an investment in? Thus, if you like Sony products, but want the reach of a m4/3 sensor, you should feel comfortable with Olympus! Myself, I have a 1" sensor (RX-10), but I can see the benefits of each sensor upgrade.

:thumbup:

amehta Loc: Boston

azted wrote:

That article sort of proves my point. Why should Sony Camera market a M4/3 product when it may compete with a company that they have an investment in? Thus, if you like Sony products, but want the reach of a m4/3 sensor, you should feel comfortable with Olympus! Myself, I have a 1" sensor (RX-10), but I can see the benefits of each sensor upgrade.

There is no "reach", there is only crop. And the mixed blessing of pixel density. :-)

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

I may look at it differently. When I "crop" my RX-10 down to 10 or 5 mgpxls, the "reach" of my lens goes from 200mm equiv., to 1600 mm equiv. Perhaps I need a new term that is more appropriate. I'll get there if I keep treading this blog!!!!

Ghspalding Loc: Georgia

Hands down my fave is the Fuji X100s.
Image quality is the best. If you want light and compact and interchangeable lens then consider xe-2 or ft-1. Fuji lens are fantastic!

GC Loc: Bottom left edge of Canada.

See my list of currently owned cameras.

The more convenient the camera the more you will be willing to bring it along. i most often have the Sony a6000 with me.
The Oly EM1 is my second most likely.

Hemi Loc: Aotearoa

A small mirror less you don't have to lug around: I have an NEX6 twin lens kit that I take yacht racing, skiing, motorsport etc where I can fit camera, lenses and various other gear (therm os, sunglasses lunch) in my small backpack. Too hard to do with a DSLR with a 300 zoom!!
My son has a GH3 mainly for video which is alas bigger and you can see the difference in sensor size when you start cropping.

Hemi Loc: Aotearoa

A small mirror less you don't have to lug around: I have an NEX6 twin lens kit that I take yacht racing, skiing, motorsport etc where I can fit camera, lenses and various other gear (therm os, sunglasses lunch) in my small backpack. Too hard to do with a DSLR with a 300 zoom!!
My son has a GH3 mainly for video which is alas bigger and you can see the difference in sensor size when you start cropping.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Right now, mirrorless is viable for non-heavy telephoto work. For non interchangeble lensed compacts right now, the Sony RX 100 III and the Canon G1 II are very impressive. For interchangeable lensed cameras I like the Sony A3000, and the NEX with EVF's. For serious tele work, stick with the big guns .....