Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Nikon, Canon and the new Sony a9
Page <<first <prev 6 of 8 next> last>>
Apr 21, 2017 23:04:28   #
lmTrying Loc: WV Northern Panhandle
 
Wow! I thought car guys were bad about arguing about which brand was best?!?!?!?!

Reply
Apr 21, 2017 23:26:46   #
Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.
 
lmTrying wrote:
Wow! I thought car guys were bad about arguing about which brand was best?!?!?!?!


Just like any other market we have the evangelists who are ahead of the curve and the foot-draggers that will still be in denial twenty years from now except for the ones that die first. That's what creates the click bait that funds this site.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 01:05:38   #
CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!
 
Expressoman1 wrote:
Remember: It is never the Camera, it is the person behind the Camera. If you do not see the shot, a $4500 Camera is not going to help you. The sky is the limit in what you can spend for new equipment, but in 90 % of the cases the camera is not going to help you, it is only a tool. I prefer to buy equipment produce by companies that have a lifetime experience with PHOTOGRAPHY equipment, rather than TV's and audio equipment. But then, that is me that made a GOOD living with my Photography skills for over 40 years. This morning I went to the Post Office to mail a package, and I saw a line of cars in the opposite direction behind a very shinny FERRARI, being push by 3 people to get into the Post Office parking. I am sure he paid a lot of money for it but that did not help him much.
Remember: It is never the Camera, it is the person... (show quote)


Sony has more experience with with PHOTOGRAPHY equipment than your realize or give them credit for.

Sony has been in the photography business since 1928... because if you didn't know before, you know NOW... that in 2006 it absorbed Minolta's photo products division in toto, including the patents, plants, workers, engineers, and inventory. Minolta's history BECAME a part of Sony's history.

Reply
 
 
Apr 22, 2017 01:52:39   #
Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.
 
CHOLLY wrote:
Sony has more experience with with PHOTOGRAPHY equipment than your realize or give them credit for.

Sony has been in the photography business since 1928... because if you didn't know before, you know NOW... that in 2006 it absorbed Minolta's photo products division in toto, including the patents, plants, workers, engineers, and inventory. Minolta's history BECAME a part of Sony's history.


That's not how acquisitions work Cholly. Minolta's history is still Minolta's history. Prior to the Minolta acquisition Sony digital still cameras were essentially video cameras in drag. To Sony's credit they managed the acquisition well, which few companies do, and Sony is now producing excellent still photography cameras.

Sony has a good legacy, including many innovations, but the road ahead will not be easy, it will be long and arduous. The good news is that Sony is in the game as a top tier player, and it will be interesting to see how the game plays out over the next decade or so.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 02:08:49   #
amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
 
wmurnahan wrote:
The only thing missing is a big telephoto. They have from wide to 400 covered pretty well.


Yeah, but Sony lenses are more expensive than and not as good as Nikon, which in turn are more expensive than and about equally as good as Canon.

Keep in mind that as a whole, Sony Corporation is one of the largest companies in the camera business.

Look at 2015 gross corporate revenue of the major Japanese camera manufacturers:
- Sony 8.2 trillion Yen
- Panasonic 7.7 trillion Yen
- Canon 3.8 trillion Yen
- Fujifilm 2.49 trillion Yen
- Ricoh/Pentax 2.15 trillion Yen
- Nikon 857 billion Yen
- Olympus 801 billion Yen

But 2015 operating income (i.e., pretax profits) tell another story:
- Panasonic 382 billion Yen
- Canon 220 billion Yen
- Fujifilm 197 billion Yen
- Ricoh/Pentax 115.8 billion Yen
- Sony 68.5 billion Yen
- Olympus 62.5 billion Yen
- Nikon 43.4 billion Yen

The share of each company's gross revenues generated by their imaging divisions varies a lot, too:
- Nikon 68%
- Canon 32%
- Fujifilm 15%
- Olympus 10.4%
- Sony 8.8%
- Ricoh/Pentax 5.4%
- Panasonic 3.5%

(Note: There's likely some difference in the way the "imaging divisions" are defined.)

Forbes "Global 2000" rankings for 2016 by gross sales and profitability (also shown is market capitalization in US$ as of May 2016):
#192 Sony ($34.1 billion)
#245 Panasonic ($22.9 billion)
#254 Canon ($40.4 billion)
$417 Fujifilm ($21.2 billion)
#748 Ricoh/Pentax ($8 billion)
#1182 Hoya ($15.9 billion)
#1271 Seiko/Epson ($6.2 billion)
#1473 Olympus ($14 billion)
Unfortunately, Nikon didn't make it onto the list (fell below the cutoff of 2000).

Actually, Sony bought Konica-Minolta's camera and photographic division in 2006.

Konica and Minolta had merged in 2003. Konica was the oldest Japanese manufacture of cameras and photographic equipment, dating back to 1873 (Pre-dating Kodak by several years... In fact, Rokusaburo Sugiura, founder of Konshi Honten as it was known at the time, exchanged visits and ideas with George Eastman, founder of Eastman Kodak.)

Konica and its predecessors (Konishi, Konishiroku, Rohuosha, and Sakura) manufactured film cameras from the 1910s, lenses from the 1930s, and 35mm SLRs from 1960 until the late 1980s, when they bowed out of the business prior to producing an autofocus model (although they sold the first successful AF point n shoot camera and had a series of successes with those). Rumor has it that Konica had, in fact, developed a new mounting system to accomodate AF, which they sold off to Sigma who still use it to produce DLSRs today. Konica continued making and selling P&S cameras and interchangeable lens rangefinder Hexar cameras until the merger with Minolta, who separately manufactured AF SLRs, as well as various other cameras. But the merged companies were one of the last major manufacturers to produce a DSLR, introduced in 2004.

Konica-Minolta continues to be a major player in business equipment, but sold their entire photographic division to Sony in 2006. That included a line of excellent meters that had originally been manufactured under the Minolta name and later under the Konica-Minolta brand, which Sony in turn quickly sold off to Kenko, who have further developed and still manufacture them. Sony kept the SLR, DSLR and compact/point n shoot cameras divisions they purchased and has developed those into the Sony line we still see today. They've been pretty innovative with their cameras... but have been less so developing lenses and keeping them affordable.

Someone else noted, and it's true, that Sony makes a lot of the image sensors used by other manufacturers, including most or all Pentax and Nikon DSLRs. Canon makes their own (and hasn't supplied them to other camera manufacturers until very recently). Canon bought CCD from Kodak, like everyone else, to use in their very earliest DSLRs. But in the late 1990s and early 2000s converted to using clearly superior CMOS sensors they manufactured themselves, long before Sony, Nikon and the others. The Canon D30 introduced in 2000 used a 3MP CMOS, as did all subsequent models. Nikon first used CMOS (from Sony) in their D2X in 2004, then in 2007 switch to CMOS, too, in their FX D3 and DX D300. I think Pentax' first CMOS camera was their K20D in 2008. They also bought that sensor from Sony, along with earlier CCD and later CMOS in other models.

I think all Four/Thirds sensors used by Olympus and introduced in 2008, have been CMOS. They developed those in partnership with Panasonic, who probably manufacture the sensors still today.

Medium format digital cameras continued to use CCD long after APS-C and full frame DSLRs had given upon on them, which often meant the MF digital were limited a top ISO of 1600 and slow 1 frame per second continuous shooting. In early 2014 Pentax announced their 645Z, one of the first medium format digital to use CMOS (50MP).

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 02:16:40   #
Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.
 
amfoto1 wrote:
Yeah, but Sony lenses are more expensive than and not as good as Nikon, which in turn are more expensive than and about equally as good as Canon.

Keep in mind that as a whole, Sony Corporation is one of the largest companies in the camera business.

Look at 2015 gross corporate revenue of the major Japanese camera manufacturers:
- Sony 8.2 trillion Yen
- Panasonic 7.7 trillion Yen
- Canon 3.8 trillion Yen
- Fujifilm 2.49 trillion Yen
- Ricoh/Pentax 2.15 trillion Yen
- Nikon 857 billion Yen
- Olympus 801 billion Yen

But 2015 operating income (i.e., pretax profits) tell another story:
- Panasonic 382 billion Yen
- Canon 220 billion Yen
- Fujifilm 197 billion Yen
- Ricoh/Pentax 115.8 billion Yen
- Sony 68.5 billion Yen
- Olympus 62.5 billion Yen
- Nikon 43.4 billion Yen

The share of each company's gross revenues generated by their imaging divisions varies a lot, too:
- Nikon 68%
- Canon 32%
- Fujifilm 15%
- Olympus 10.4%
- Sony 8.8%
- Ricoh/Pentax 5.4%
- Panasonic 3.5%

(Note: There's likely some difference in the way the "imaging divisions" are defined.)

Forbes "Global 2000" rankings for 2016 by gross sales and profitability (also shown is market capitalization in US$ as of May 2016):
#192 Sony ($34.1 billion)
#245 Panasonic ($22.9 billion)
#254 Canon ($40.4 billion)
$417 Fujifilm ($21.2 billion)
#748 Ricoh/Pentax ($8 billion)
#1182 Hoya ($15.9 billion)
#1271 Seiko/Epson ($6.2 billion)
#1473 Olympus ($14 billion)
Unfortunately, Nikon didn't make it onto the list (fell below the cutoff of 2000).
Yeah, but Sony lenses are more expensive than and ... (show quote)


A very nicely expressed reality check. That should put that cat amongst the pigeons!

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 09:12:30   #
jethro779 Loc: Tucson, AZ
 
Peterff wrote:
A very nicely expressed reality check. That should put that cat amongst the pigeons!


It should but it won't.

Reply
 
 
Apr 22, 2017 11:53:49   #
CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!
 
Peterff wrote:
That's not how acquisitions work Cholly. Minolta's history is still Minolta's history. Prior to the Minolta acquisition Sony digital still cameras were essentially video cameras in drag. To Sony's credit they managed the acquisition well, which few companies do, and Sony is now producing excellent still photography cameras.

Sony has a good legacy, including many innovations, but the road ahead will not be easy, it will be long and arduous. The good news is that Sony is in the game as a top tier player, and it will be interesting to see how the game plays out over the next decade or so.
That's not how acquisitions work Cholly. Minolta's... (show quote)


You're a stubborn man Peter.

ALL Sony A mount cameras are direct descendants of Minolta technology, and up to the A55, were on the Minolta drawing boards or in various stages of development prior to the merger. Minolta history is now part of Sony history.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 12:46:28   #
CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!
 
amfoto1 wrote:
I think all Four/Thirds sensors used by Olympus and introduced in 2008, have been CMOS. They developed those in partnership with Panasonic, who probably manufacture the sensors still today.


Alan, you DO know that Olympus does and has used Sony sensors in some of it's cameras don't you? The Om-D E-M5 comes immediately to mind.

And When you compare Sony G Master lenses to the top of the line Nikkors in the same focal length, the image quality is EQUAL as is the price.

Oh.. and let's not even talk about Zeiss E mount lenses, which are also excellent.

Here is a subjective BOKEH image quality comparison between the 85 G Master, the 105 Nikkor, the 85 Tamron and the 135 Canon L:

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-85mm-g-master-vs-new-105mm-nikon-vs-canon-135mm-l-bokeh-comparison-johnny-perkka/

Enjoy!

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 13:13:44   #
Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.
 
CHOLLY wrote:
You're a stubborn man Peter.

ALL Sony A mount cameras are direct descendants of Minolta technology, and up to the A55, were on the Minolta drawing boards or in various stages of development prior to the merger. Minolta history is now part of Sony history.


Only from the date of the partial acquisition in 2006. Sure Sony can leverage the assets, technologies, IP and patents acquired which was only the camera related part of the business - and to be fair Sony has done so very well with those assets - but neither Sony nor you get to rewrite history itself. Konica Minolta still exists as an independent company.

If you want to be an unabashed shill for Sony - which you are - then at least get your facts straight and don't try to bend the truth or cite 'alternative facts'. It only hurts your credibility.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 13:38:51   #
jethro779 Loc: Tucson, AZ
 
Peterff wrote:


If you want to be an unabashed shill for Sony - which you are - then at least get your facts straight and don't try to bend the truth or cite 'alternative facts'. It only hurts your credibility.


Is he being a shill or is it he just can't stand to be wrong?

Reply
 
 
Apr 22, 2017 13:53:55   #
Desert Gecko Loc: desert southwest, USA
 
jethro779 wrote:
Is he being a shill or is it he just can't stand to be wrong?


Cholly isn't wrong. This is business 101: Sony acquired Konica Minolta's photographic division and with it acquired all rights, patents, trade secrets, etc., including its history. At the time of the acquisition, did KM retain any rights to its current Maxxum cameras? Of course not. Km's photographic arm lives on under its new parent, Sony. One can think of it as KM, with all its history, continues on with a different name and owner.

Or, with similar failed logic, I suppose my Chevy truck isn't a G.M. product, but just a Chevy.

Not my G.M. Not my Sony. Not my President.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 13:58:00   #
jethro779 Loc: Tucson, AZ
 
Desert Gecko wrote:
Cholly isn't wrong. This is business 101: Sony acquired Konica Minolta's photographic division and with it acquired all rights, patents, trade secrets, etc., including its history. At the time of the acquisition, did KM retain any rights to its current Maxxum cameras? Of course not. Km's photographic arm lives on under its new parent, Sony. One can think of it as KM, with all its history, continues on with a different name and owner.

Or, with similar failed logic, I suppose my Chevy truck isn't a G.M. product, but just a Chevy.

Not my G.M. Not my Sony. Not my President.
Cholly isn't wrong. This is business 101: Sony acq... (show quote)


In other words your wife loses all her family & background once she married you? Not hardly. Her history is her history not yours. The blended history starts when you got married.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 14:18:58   #
Peterff Loc: O'er The Hills and Far Away, in Themyscira.
 
jethro779 wrote:
Is he being a shill or is it he just can't stand to be wrong?


If it is the former, then he is clearly happy with that status and we can always ignore an obvious shill, if it is the latter he's in a whole world of trouble because he is indeed wrong!

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 14:33:03   #
Desert Gecko Loc: desert southwest, USA
 
jethro779 wrote:
In other words your wife loses all her family & background once she married you? Not hardly. Her history is her history not yours. The blended history starts when you got married.


Apples and oranges. I didn't purchase my wife. Sony purchased KM, and not just KM but also its history.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 6 of 8 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.