phil7782 Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA

Gary Fong is a fairly regarded photographer. In this video clip, taken during WPPI 2013 in Las Vegas, he discusses the advantages of the camera he uses, the Sony A77, but most of what he talks about applies to the complete Sony DSC line. So, if you're not "locked-in" to the better known brands, please watch and consider what he has to say. Personally, I have the A37, the "entry level" Sony DSC, but its capabilities are quite extensive. The main question to ask is whether your gear makes your task of making good photos easier. 21 minutes long, so get a drink and enjoy. There are also some Q&A in the comments that might answer your questions.

Phil

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbxipoTK29w

Gary Fong at WPPI, Las Vegas, 2013

ccastle Loc: Yucaipa, CA

Hmmm -- is Sony sponsoring him (at least some?)

phil7782 Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA

Evidently, this video is not for you, since you've already made up your mind about Sony and you didn't watch it and hear him say he "is not paid to be here" in the FIRST 30 Seconds...

Phil

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I am a Canon person for telephoto work and now use Sony NEX for my wide angle stuff - but if cost were no object and I had the $$, I would be SONY/Zeiss/Minolta all the way !

marcomarks Loc: Ft. Myers, FL

Since he's already a multi-millionaire, I doubt it.

rebride

Well worth watching.
Sony has been really been pushing technology the last few years.
Amazing object tracking and advanced face recognition.
Good stuff on EVF.

marcomarks Loc: Ft. Myers, FL

Personally, I have the Alpha 55, and while it's not as feature-rich as the A77, I have been completely satisfied with it. I've been accustomed to electronic viewfinder forever because I started in digital with a Sony Mavica and had a Minolta DiMage 7 and a Lumix FZ-30 later. The new Sony viewfinders, of course, blow those away.

I also use a Sigma ultrawide 8-16mm lens for my work and it's proven itself to be excellent as well. When I upgrade I'll likely stick with Sony and Sigma again. I have nothing against Canon or Nikon but Sony is right up there and does everything I need and more.

Frapha Loc: Tulsa, Oklahoma

Without doubt, Sony makes some fine equipment. I found it interesting that they recently pumped some major $$$ into ailing Olympus and now some industry analysts are saying that Olympus is likely to begin making some of the Sony lenses. Interesting arrangement for sure.
http://www.popphoto.com/news/2013/05/will-olympus-be-making-lenses-sony

phil7782 Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA

When you consider the parent companies, there is really no comparison. Sony is a hi-tech company that happens to make cameras, along with computers, televisions, who along with Philips developed the CD and is highly regarded as at the pinnacle of consumer grade electronics. Remember the Walkman, Disc-man and first Digital Cameras? For them to advance the technology of SLR cameras is only the natural course.

Gary mentioned that Canon now has a camera with an electronic viewfinder, so the technology is gaining favor, and he believes someday all camera makers will build electronic viewfinder cameras.

Most people have no qualms about praising a computer company for building a faster, lighter and more efficient computer, but when it comes to cameras, there seems to be a natural aversion to giving "the other guy" the kudos they deserve for making technical advances.

My first "real" camera was a TOPCON RE Super.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topcon_RE_Super

This is the VERY FIRST SLR camera to have TTL metering, and at full-open aperture. It was well built, had a removable prism and changeable focusing screens, an excellent 58 mm f 1.4 lens, removable back for the use of a bulk film magazine, had capability to add a motor drive and had the light meter viewable in the viewfinder. It was well ahead of its time. But, for the people I knew that owned the Nikon F, mine was just an also-ran. In fact, the US Navy standardized on the Topcon for many years because of its rugged metal case design, ease of use and excellent results. I used it for many years and developed and printed my own B&W photos, even aboard ship. It's safely stored away in a foam cutout briefcase. It even has a metal screw lid film can still taped to the leather neck strap. But, it was not long before other cameras had those same capabilities and then some. Technology advances. Life would be pretty boring if it didn't.

So, in the end, as Gary said, he "switched" to Sony because it was worth it for him because of the quick creativity it gave him. He said his wife also switched. They recognized, bought into and took advantage of the newer technology.

In this case, as in many others, sometimes it's OK to seriously consider the "other guy" because he just might have a better solution.

A lot of people still have that "Not Invented Here" attitude and sadly, may be missing out.

So, whatever you shoot, at least acknowledge that this might just be a preview of the future technology of your next camera.

And kudos to Sony for advancing that technology.

Phil

marcomarks Loc: Ft. Myers, FL

I suspect this may have been the method they used to get their grips into Minolta/Konica then bought it out completely. If so, we may eventually see Olympus become an integral part of Sony and no longer exist on its own.

phil7782 Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA

Sony's interest in Olympus is not necessarily a bad thing.

Sony has developed and you can now see the 4K HDTV systems in Best Buy Magnolia Show Rooms.

Since Olympus has about 70% of the Medical Endoscope market, Sony has "offered" to provide Olympus with that 4K technology to use in their endoscopes to provide super HD medical imaging with even 3D capabilities possible. For a substantial interest in Olympus, of course...

Olympus has a long history with their cameras, but they have been struggling after an "accounting fiasco" recently.

So, it's a win-win... Sony gets more access and exposure in the medical field and Olympus gets to survive and thrive with newer technology.

Zeiss also makes some lenses for Sony, now, some exclusively. So there seems to be Sony business relationships in many places.

Just the way of the world.

Phil

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

I am not a big fan of SLT cameras (and I do own the A77), I like their pervious models A700, A850 and A900 which I also own plus several Zeiss and "G" lenses. My beef with SLT cameras is the soft membrane mirrors are hard to keep clean when changing lenses and if you get something that will not come off with a standard rocket blower, you can't wet clean the mirror. A new SLT mirror cost around $90 and you can replace it yourself or send the camera to Sony for the same price to get the new mirror put in. I would buy a true A900 DSLR upgrade in a heart beat but not the SLT A99.

flashgordonbrown Loc: Silverdale, WA

When I damaged the mirror on my (grey market) A-77, Sony fixed it for free! I'm a truly convinced Sony user!

flashgordonbrown
www.froghollowphotography.com

phil7782 Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA

As an option, FYI.. for those of you that have a lot invested in Nikon or Canon lenses, Fotodiox makes adapters for those lenses to fit the Sony Alpha and NEX lines of Cameras.

And they are less than $40 each... and can be found on Amazon and other sites.

As one reviewer said, "they are inexpensive and they work"..

Phil

homeranger Loc: Sutherlin, Oregon

Well said my friend. I've never really bought into the whole us vs them attitude when it comes to cameras (or anything else for that matter). I went with Sony because they were not afraid to think outside the box. And the feature set they put into their cameras really sold me. I own the a77 and love it. I just purchased a used a850 and love it too, although for different reasons. Back in the film days I loved my Canon AE1 and A1 cameras too. They were fantastic cameras. The most important thing is no matter what you photograph with, just keep shooting.