Sony a 9

[Lance B]

mirrorless has flatlined whilst their share of the market is increasing steadily. I'd say they have every reason to be concerned. They saying it will surpass 30% by the end of this year. I don't think the switchers market is that big, id say it's more entrants to the market and that's not just cameras then, it's glass as well. Even Thom Hogan who is a massive Nikon fanboy has expressed concern in this space. The challenge as you know is when people pick a system, it's incredibly difficult to get them off unless there is something missing and not that many people need or can afford a 400 f2.8. The more likely scenario is a 100-400 which most mirrorless systems have.

Flatline shows that they are not really making any inroads yet and the A9 will not change that, especially at that price point. The real problem with a DSLR is that it has come of age, matured and *most* people do not need to upgrade and hence why their sales are falling, not really so much because people are opting out of a DSLR and switching to mirrorless. Each iteration of a DSLR is usually a small leap in technology and features rather than a large leap because it is a system that has matured. The problem that the mirrorless advocates keeping missing is that mirrorless has not matured to a point of the next gen mirrorless is "just another small technology and feature upgrade" like most new iterations of DSLR's are. Mirrorless has a much larger jump in maturity to mean that most people will consider it as an alternative to a DSLR and that time has not come yet. Not only that, but the big two, Canon and Nikon still hold the huge majority of pro shooters, regardless of a few hand selected sales figures that Sony have snowed people into thinking they have garnered. Having this huge pro user base will be huge nut to crack for Sony, or anyone else for that matter, and it won't be happening any time soon. Not only that, there are some rumours of some very big technology advancements from Nikon. Regardless of what the mirrorless armchair experts like to think, you can bet your bottom dollar that Canon and Nikon have been working on mirrorless and have not entered the market because I am sure they believe, as I and many others believe, that mirrorless has not matured enough to a point of it being worthy of their respective badges. The biggest issue is that camera phones have all but killed off the P&S market and this is what has hurt *all* of the camera makers.

[MissionMan]

Flatline shows that they are not really making any inroads yet and the A9 will not change that, especially at that price point. The real problem with a DSLR is that it has come of age, matured and *most* people do not need to upgrade and hence why their sales are falling, not really so much because people are opting out of a DSLR and switching to mirrorless. Each iteration of a DSLR is usually a small leap in technology and features rather than a large leap because it is a system that has matured. The problem that the mirrorless advocates keeping missing is that mirrorless has not matured to a point of the next gen mirrorless is "just another small technology and feature upgrade" like most new iterations of DSLR's are. Mirrorless has a much larger jump in maturity to mean that most people will consider it as an alternative to a DSLR and that time has not come yet. Not only that, but the big two, Canon and Nikon still hold the huge majority of pro shooters, regardless of a few hand selected sales figures that Sony have snowed people into thinking they have garnered. Having this huge pro user base will be huge nut to crack for Sony, or anyone else for that matter, and it won't be happening any time soon. Not only that, there are some rumours of some very big technology advancements from Nikon. Regardless of what the mirrorless armchair experts like to think, you can bet your bottom dollar that Canon and Nikon have been working on mirrorless and have not entered the market because I am sure they believe, as I and many others believe, that mirrorless has not matured enough to a point of it being worthy of their respective badges. The biggest issue is that camera phones have all but killed off the P&S market and this is what has hurt *all* of the camera makers.

I'd say you are kidding yourselves if you don't think they've made any inroads. Maybe with people you know but on my side (if for people shooting 400 f/2.8's, I don't think they will for a while), but at the entry and mid tier levels, I would say they are already doing a substantial amount of damage, at least big enough for Canikon to take notice. Most of the Fuji users I know came from Canikon full frame.

[Steve Axford]

Lance, I think you state the problem with DSLRs quite well. They have matured and there are only small advances now possible, unless of course your rumour proves to be correct. Mirrorless technology (which just means non-DSLR, so everything else), hasn't got the constraints of using a mirror to split some of the functions to a difficult place. Ie focussing as a separate function to the sensor, where it logically belongs. Add to this the problem that the competition control the sensor manufacture, and Nikon do seem to have a problem. Hard to know what the future will bring, but I doubt it will be smooth sailing for Nikon.

[Lance B]

I'd say you are kidding yourselves if you don't think they've made any inroads. Maybe with people you know but on my side (if for people shooting 400 f/2.8's, I don't think they will for a while), but at the entry and mid tier levels, I would say they are already doing a substantial amount of damage, at least big enough for Canikon to take notice. Most of the Fuji users I know came from Canikon full frame.

LOL. I'm not the one kidding myself. The only one kidding themselves is anyone who thinks Canon and Nikon haven't or aren't looking seriously at mirrorless and haven't been developing it. As I said, when it is mature enough or good enough that Canon and Nikon think it worthy to put their name on one, they will introduce bodies that will put them in a strong position once again. Fuji, Sony Olympus et all are just minor players. Look, I completely understand your desire for mirrorless to be taken seriously by the "big boys" and by the pros, but it hasn't happened yet. Keep dreaming, one day they will get there and Canon and Nikon will have cameras that will lead the way once again.

The other thing you have to remember is that there was no way any manufacturer was going to touch Canon and Nikon with another DSLR, especially a FF DSLR. So, what do they have to do? They have to use a completely different approach to try to chip away at their unassailable market dominance. And what was their only way of doing that? By trying a different approach and that was mirrorless. It doesn't make it better, just a different approach. In fact, I really don't see why it can't cohabitate with OVF as they both have their advantages and disadvantages. Mirrorless has a more benefit with smaller sensored cameras and their tiny OVF compared to say a FF OVF. There are benefits with the tiny VF of the smaller sensored cameras, not so much with FF.

- - - Updated - - -

Lance, I think you state the problem with DSLRs quite well. They have matured and there are only small advances now possible, unless of course your rumour proves to be correct. Mirrorless technology (which just means non-DSLR, so everything else), hasn't got the constraints of using a mirror to split some of the functions to a difficult place. Ie focussing as a separate function to the sensor, where it logically belongs. Add to this the problem that the competition control the sensor manufacture, and Nikon do seem to have a problem. Hard to know what the future will bring, but I doubt it will be smooth sailing for Nikon.

Nikon does not have an issue with sensor supply. Sony manufacture sensors for anyone that gives them a design. Nikon has designed a number of sensors that Sony has manufactured for them.

[Steve Axford]

Really. Then Nikon are sitting pretty. Sony will have to make their sensors when requested and Nikon will move into mirrorless when they are good and ready.
Fortunately, reality will inevitably take over so we will just have to wait to see what will be.

[Lance B]

Really. Then Nikon are sitting pretty. Sony will have to make their sensors when requested and Nikon will move into mirrorless when they are good and ready.
Fortunately, reality will inevitably take over so we will just have to wait to see what will be.

Exactly right, Steve. Anything we say here is pure speculation and I really wonder why there are some so hell bent on predicting the demise of Nikon or Canon or both.

[Steve Axford]

I doubt that there will be any deaths in the near future, but perhaps some movements up and down. I do think that the A9 has made it clear that DSLRs no longer have a lead in any respect except maturity, and that will vanish with time. When will Canikon move? Tough call.

[bitsnpieces]

Well, there's a lot to discuss, pros and cons, various aspects of things

Here's a nice article of someone who uses the a9 professionally, and, nothing's perfect, but I reckon the a9 lives up to its expectations

https://alphauniverse.com/stories/so...-to-the-races/

Battery, weather resistance, autofocus, speed, etc

[MissionMan]

You were saying?

https://petapixel.com/2017/05/11/ep-...leaving-nikon/

https://petapixel.com/2017/05/08/dea...dicated-users/

Even the Nikon guy is saying Nikon what the hell are you doing?

[arthurking83]

.....

Even the Nikon guy is saying Nikon what the hell are you doing?

How about, is there any chance, maybe, that we could see some f/1.2 autofocus primes? Canon users tease us all the time about it and it’s really embarrassing.

Hmmmm....

When the reasons for wanting a faster aperture lens become about how you look to Canon fanbois over the internet!!! ... I think you can safely assume the author is seeking attention for the benefits of furthering their business causes.

What's actually interesting about all this rubbish mirrorless vs DSLR chatter is that individually, Nikon (with their D3xxx series) and Canon(with the Rebel/1300D model) each respectively sell more of those singular models, than the mirrorless manufacturers sell of their entire product lines.



Also! While I have to say I used to enjoy reading Nikon Guys stuff a few years ago, nowadays not so much .. but on his comments re: the f/1.2 lenses possibility I think he doesn't really understand some of the tech aspects of lenses to claim this ...

There’s this idea out there now that the F-Mount can’t support f/1.2, which is nonsense, seeing as you have manual f/1.2s out in the market right now

There's a reason that Nikon's f/1.2 lenses are manual only .. there's no room for unimportant stuff like the contact block!
Just a stupid little meaningless side issue they have to deal with.

As has already been said, I'm pretty sure that Nikon know the numbers, they generally know what customers want, and even tho they're losing sales, just like everyone else is(maybe more so) .. they still sell enough of what they currently do to warrant continuation of that lineup.
It's an impossible concept to think they have no idea that camera sales are dropping, and the latest I've read is that this slow down has actually slowed down itself, so the bottom of the trend may have passed or coming up soon.
Given that, I'm sure they'll be planning a mirrorless version of their most popular model(which is the D3xxx range)
Again, and strangely enough .. why is it that this model range(and the Canon 1300/Rebel) are still cheaper cameras to buy than most, if not all, mirrorless cameras at that same market level?
If these mirrorless cameras are supposed to be cheaper to make due to their simpler design, why hasn't it transpired that they are also ACTUALLY cheaper to buy?

I think the main point here is that the manufacturers would seem to have a pretty good grasp on the issue(s) involving camera sales. Just because the non Canikon(and Pentax) manufacturers have all turned to mirrorless that this means the everyone else HAS too as well.

Nikon knows this. A good EVF is obviously much more expensive than an OK OVF system to build.
A classic example of this is from Canon. Their 1300D sells for more than $200 less which includes a lens for the DSLR, than their cheapest mirrorless camera(body only) sells for. And that's the mirrorless model that doesn't include a viewfinder.
People want cheap. And to get a cheap camera with a decent viewfinder you need a DSLR!

note that this the the general breadth of the market .. to most of us enthusiast we only tend to see things from our enthusiast mindset(just like Nikon Guy's comments re the f/1.2 Nikon lens idea).
Yes Nikon could make an f/1.2 AF lens with contact blocks. It's going to be ridiculously expensive even by Nikon's insane pricing standards .. it'll need a complex relay system(apparently). It'll vignette badly, and corner performance may be questionable.
The main point here is that while it's possible, it's almost certainly not viable, and Nikon were famous for making possible, but not commercially viable lenses for most of their history.
Take Nikon Guy's comments about that topic with a grain of salt .. and consumerist view to a manufacturer's complex problem.
Maybe it's time he became Canon Guy, if he doesn't want to be embarrassed that Canon shooters have f/1.2 lenses and he doesn't!
Never mind that the 1/2 to 1/3 extra aperture doesn't really give you much of an observable difference .. but as long as you don't have to feel embarrassed any longer due to the people that use another brand are taunting you about your lack of options!

I'm thinking that it's time to lay this silly topic to rest. You have your preferred option of gear, be happy with it.
Nikon sell more than enough of their products to maintain their market share. It'll probably drop a little every now and then, and at other times it'll probably increase again(as it has done in the past).
When the time is right for Nikon(what about Canon!!!???) they'll do a mirrorless camera as their main selling product, and the world will change ... we'll probably see an end to global warming, and solve the issues currently going on in Asia and the Middle East.

I mean .. seriously! .. just enjoy what you now have, and be glad you don't have to suffer Nikon's incompetence any longer.

As a dedicated Nikon user myself, and mind you not one to defend them either!! .. I have gripes with Nikon. And to my mind they're far more serious gripes:

1/. customer service. The saying is, the customer is always right. I'm convinced that they're losing more customers due to this one single issue than the internet is leading you to believe. (they nearly lost me too!)
2/. software(post processing)!. they used to have a good software environment. Having changed it all from very usable and mature to the equivalent of finger painting in pre school .. they either need to commit to it, or open it up to all and sundry so that the user has more control.
3/. products are generally fine. But their firmware updates regime, and software implementations in their hardware also sucks. As with image software above, either commit to it, or outsource it to more competent parties. As for firmware, a more open environment would be nice for the true geek to have access too.

Lets get this thread back on topic now ....

[Lance B]

You were saying?

https://petapixel.com/2017/05/11/ep-...leaving-nikon/

https://petapixel.com/2017/05/08/dea...dicated-users/

Even the Nikon guy is saying Nikon what the hell are you doing?

Your wish for the demise of Nikon is noted. But it ain't happening. Move on.

- - - Updated - - -

Hmmmm....

When the reasons for wanting a faster aperture lens become about how you look to Canon fanbois over the internet!!! ... I think you can safely assume the author is seeking attention for the benefits of furthering their business causes.

What's actually interesting about all this rubbish mirrorless vs DSLR chatter is that individually, Nikon (with their D3xxx series) and Canon(with the Rebel/1300D model) each respectively sell more of those singular models, than the mirrorless manufacturers sell of their entire product lines.



Also! While I have to say I used to enjoy reading Nikon Guys stuff a few years ago, nowadays not so much .. but on his comments re: the f/1.2 lenses possibility I think he doesn't really understand some of the tech aspects of lenses to claim this ...



There's a reason that Nikon's f/1.2 lenses are manual only .. there's no room for unimportant stuff like the contact block!
Just a stupid little meaningless side issue they have to deal with.

As has already been said, I'm pretty sure that Nikon know the numbers, they generally know what customers want, and even tho they're losing sales, just like everyone else is(maybe more so) .. they still sell enough of what they currently do to warrant continuation of that lineup.
It's an impossible concept to think they have no idea that camera sales are dropping, and the latest I've read is that this slow down has actually slowed down itself, so the bottom of the trend may have passed or coming up soon.
Given that, I'm sure they'll be planning a mirrorless version of their most popular model(which is the D3xxx range)
Again, and strangely enough .. why is it that this model range(and the Canon 1300/Rebel) are still cheaper cameras to buy than most, if not all, mirrorless cameras at that same market level?
If these mirrorless cameras are supposed to be cheaper to make due to their simpler design, why hasn't it transpired that they are also ACTUALLY cheaper to buy?

I think the main point here is that the manufacturers would seem to have a pretty good grasp on the issue(s) involving camera sales. Just because the non Canikon(and Pentax) manufacturers have all turned to mirrorless that this means the everyone else HAS too as well.

Nikon knows this. A good EVF is obviously much more expensive than an OK OVF system to build.
A classic example of this is from Canon. Their 1300D sells for more than $200 less which includes a lens for the DSLR, than their cheapest mirrorless camera(body only) sells for. And that's the mirrorless model that doesn't include a viewfinder.
People want cheap. And to get a cheap camera with a decent viewfinder you need a DSLR!

note that this the the general breadth of the market .. to most of us enthusiast we only tend to see things from our enthusiast mindset(just like Nikon Guy's comments re the f/1.2 Nikon lens idea).
Yes Nikon could make an f/1.2 AF lens with contact blocks. It's going to be ridiculously expensive even by Nikon's insane pricing standards .. it'll need a complex relay system(apparently). It'll vignette badly, and corner performance may be questionable.
The main point here is that while it's possible, it's almost certainly not viable, and Nikon were famous for making possible, but not commercially viable lenses for most of their history.
Take Nikon Guy's comments about that topic with a grain of salt .. and consumerist view to a manufacturer's complex problem.
Maybe it's time he became Canon Guy, if he doesn't want to be embarrassed that Canon shooters have f/1.2 lenses and he doesn't!
Never mind that the 1/2 to 1/3 extra aperture doesn't really give you much of an observable difference .. but as long as you don't have to feel embarrassed any longer due to the people that use another brand are taunting you about your lack of options!

I'm thinking that it's time to lay this silly topic to rest. You have your preferred option of gear, be happy with it.
Nikon sell more than enough of their products to maintain their market share. It'll probably drop a little every now and then, and at other times it'll probably increase again(as it has done in the past).
When the time is right for Nikon(what about Canon!!!???) they'll do a mirrorless camera as their main selling product, and the world will change ... we'll probably see an end to global warming, and solve the issues currently going on in Asia and the Middle East.

I mean .. seriously! .. just enjoy what you now have, and be glad you don't have to suffer Nikon's incompetence any longer.

As a dedicated Nikon user myself, and mind you not one to defend them either!! .. I have gripes with Nikon. And to my mind they're far more serious gripes:

1/. customer service. The saying is, the customer is always right. I'm convinced that they're losing more customers due to this one single issue than the internet is leading you to believe. (they nearly lost me too!)
2/. software(post processing)!. they used to have a good software environment. Having changed it all from very usable and mature to the equivalent of finger painting in pre school .. they either need to commit to it, or open it up to all and sundry so that the user has more control.
3/. products are generally fine. But their firmware updates regime, and software implementations in their hardware also sucks. As with image software above, either commit to it, or outsource it to more competent parties. As for firmware, a more open environment would be nice for the true geek to have access too.

Lets get this thread back on topic now ....

Well said. I can't disagree on any of what you have said.

I am not interested in f1.2 primes either. f1.4 is more than enough, thank you.

Matt Granger used to be good, but I think he is trying to get hits on his site like Thom Hogan etc.

As you say, Nikon do know the numbers and you can bet your bottom dollar that Nikon are working on EVF and will introduce it when they see it mature enough for Nikon to believe it good enough to slap a Nikon badge on it. But it is *not* the cure all that the mirrorless fanboys make it out to be, it is just another way of accomplishing an image. The very fact that their is so much *heated* debate and the fact that DSLR's still outsell mirrorless by a huge margin just proves that OVF users are not going away any time soon. So, the mirrorless fanboys and extremists need to just chill out and accept that there are people that like OVF's over EVF's at their present state of play. These two systems can and should happily co-exist, it is not a case of one must win out over the other - that is just a silly desire and quite childish.

[MissionMan]

Hmmmm....

When the reasons for wanting a faster aperture lens become about how you look to Canon fanbois over the internet!!! ... I think you can safely assume the author is seeking attention for the benefits of furthering their business causes.

What's actually interesting about all this rubbish mirrorless vs DSLR chatter is that individually, Nikon (with their D3xxx series) and Canon(with the Rebel/1300D model) each respectively sell more of those singular models, than the mirrorless manufacturers sell of their entire product lines.



Also! While I have to say I used to enjoy reading Nikon Guys stuff a few years ago, nowadays not so much .. but on his comments re: the f/1.2 lenses possibility I think he doesn't really understand some of the tech aspects of lenses to claim this ...



There's a reason that Nikon's f/1.2 lenses are manual only .. there's no room for unimportant stuff like the contact block!
Just a stupid little meaningless side issue they have to deal with.

As has already been said, I'm pretty sure that Nikon know the numbers, they generally know what customers want, and even tho they're losing sales, just like everyone else is(maybe more so) .. they still sell enough of what they currently do to warrant continuation of that lineup.
It's an impossible concept to think they have no idea that camera sales are dropping, and the latest I've read is that this slow down has actually slowed down itself, so the bottom of the trend may have passed or coming up soon.
Given that, I'm sure they'll be planning a mirrorless version of their most popular model(which is the D3xxx range)
Again, and strangely enough .. why is it that this model range(and the Canon 1300/Rebel) are still cheaper cameras to buy than most, if not all, mirrorless cameras at that same market level?
If these mirrorless cameras are supposed to be cheaper to make due to their simpler design, why hasn't it transpired that they are also ACTUALLY cheaper to buy?

I think the main point here is that the manufacturers would seem to have a pretty good grasp on the issue(s) involving camera sales. Just because the non Canikon(and Pentax) manufacturers have all turned to mirrorless that this means the everyone else HAS too as well.

Nikon knows this. A good EVF is obviously much more expensive than an OK OVF system to build.
A classic example of this is from Canon. Their 1300D sells for more than $200 less which includes a lens for the DSLR, than their cheapest mirrorless camera(body only) sells for. And that's the mirrorless model that doesn't include a viewfinder.
People want cheap. And to get a cheap camera with a decent viewfinder you need a DSLR!

note that this the the general breadth of the market .. to most of us enthusiast we only tend to see things from our enthusiast mindset(just like Nikon Guy's comments re the f/1.2 Nikon lens idea).
Yes Nikon could make an f/1.2 AF lens with contact blocks. It's going to be ridiculously expensive even by Nikon's insane pricing standards .. it'll need a complex relay system(apparently). It'll vignette badly, and corner performance may be questionable.
The main point here is that while it's possible, it's almost certainly not viable, and Nikon were famous for making possible, but not commercially viable lenses for most of their history.
Take Nikon Guy's comments about that topic with a grain of salt .. and consumerist view to a manufacturer's complex problem.
Maybe it's time he became Canon Guy, if he doesn't want to be embarrassed that Canon shooters have f/1.2 lenses and he doesn't!
Never mind that the 1/2 to 1/3 extra aperture doesn't really give you much of an observable difference .. but as long as you don't have to feel embarrassed any longer due to the people that use another brand are taunting you about your lack of options!

I'm thinking that it's time to lay this silly topic to rest. You have your preferred option of gear, be happy with it.
Nikon sell more than enough of their products to maintain their market share. It'll probably drop a little every now and then, and at other times it'll probably increase again(as it has done in the past).
When the time is right for Nikon(what about Canon!!!???) they'll do a mirrorless camera as their main selling product, and the world will change ... we'll probably see an end to global warming, and solve the issues currently going on in Asia and the Middle East.

I mean .. seriously! .. just enjoy what you now have, and be glad you don't have to suffer Nikon's incompetence any longer.

As a dedicated Nikon user myself, and mind you not one to defend them either!! .. I have gripes with Nikon. And to my mind they're far more serious gripes:

1/. customer service. The saying is, the customer is always right. I'm convinced that they're losing more customers due to this one single issue than the internet is leading you to believe. (they nearly lost me too!)
2/. software(post processing)!. they used to have a good software environment. Having changed it all from very usable and mature to the equivalent of finger painting in pre school .. they either need to commit to it, or open it up to all and sundry so that the user has more control.
3/. products are generally fine. But their firmware updates regime, and software implementations in their hardware also sucks. As with image software above, either commit to it, or outsource it to more competent parties. As for firmware, a more open environment would be nice for the true geek to have access too.

Lets get this thread back on topic now ....

Nikon listen? You're kidding right?

How long did we wait for a D700 replacement, something we are still waiting for? They gave us every conceivable item except the D700. How long did we wait for a D300 replacement which only finally arrived now?

All this time we got a whole heap of crap no one asked for. All the photo journalists have knocked Nikon for exactly that...NOT LISTENING!

Nikon is extremely arrogant. They have this Applelike logic that they will dictate what happens. Both the articles I mentioned are exactly about that. Nikon not listening.

If they are working on mirrorless, their marketing department should be fired. If they aren't, their market research people should be fired.

Your wish for the demise of Nikon is noted. But it ain't happening. Move on.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't wish for their demise. I love Nikon gear. What I wish is that they would get off their &$#&i@^&$ asses, starting listening to customers and fix the problems they have before their demise. Unfortunately, I think their senior management needs a serious revamp to make that happen.

[arthurking83]

The thread is about Sony's A9 .. we should take any Nikon bashing comments into a new thread .. and I'm up for a bit of Nikon bashing to be honest

[MissionMan]

The thread is about Sony's A9 .. we should take any Nikon bashing comments into a new thread .. and I'm up for a bit of Nikon bashing to be honest

Let's not forget that the Nikon bashing started because people on this thread were saying the A9 couldn't live up to Nikon and Canon along with a substantial amount of bashing of a camera that no one here has actually even put their hands on.

Don't bring a DSLR to a mirrorless fight

[arthurking83]

Let's not forget that the Nikon bashing started because people on this thread were saying the A9 couldn't live up to Nikon and Canon along with a substantial amount of bashing of a camera that no one here has actually even put their hands on.

....

I didn't read any A9 bashing, in a real sense of the term.
Suspicion, maybe, but not so much bashing.
As I've said before, many folks made a lot of noise about that 20 frames/sec spec, but haven't read the caveats on what you have to sacrifice to achieve that frame rate!
In real terms, it's frame rate at it's best settings(ie. 120Hz viewfinder refresh rate and mechanical shutter) are only 10fps or so .. only just DSLR territory.

It's amazing buffer sounds almost too good to be true .. and it is .. if you don't mind waiting two minutes for the backed up data on the secondary memory card to finally clear .. and you can't do anything at all with the camera.
That guy at the Kentucky Derby(that David linked too) needed 6 camera bodies, where the D5 and 1Dx guys probably only needed 3!

like they (really)say ... don't bring a mirrorless camera to a DSLR showdown!

[bitsnpieces]

That 6v3 argument is a little weak don't you think?

The others only had 3 because that's all they could afford, that's all
Where that guy forked out a little extra and got double what they got, thus more pictures, more angles, more quality photos. Even if the others spent equivalent money as the a9 guy did, they're still 2 down

[MissionMan]

for you mirrorless fanatics..............................
Sony A9 rant
Everytime Sony brings out a new camera there mission statement is the same. Look out Canon and Nikon your going to lose so many pro users because of this new camera. I just pi$$ myself laughing at all the BS give it a month and like all the other Sony cameras you just don't here from them. For me to change over to Sony a couple of things need to happen and they must ask what the Sony a9 don't have that makes real pros don't switch! For me it's sooo simple. Weather sealing, damage resistants and battery life! The Sony cameras are world renowned for weather damage, god if the camera even looks at water you get error code E:91:0 or something even dropping the things they smash into a million tiny pieces. I have thrown my canon over 20m and it's survived. And I have dropped a Nikon off the roof of a car and it just bounced down the road.
And for pros to switch lol..
Pros are heavily invested in their gear and workflow. It's not that easy to switch. They need to relearn the old habits crafted so painfully for so many years. Other thing is, many people just hate Sony user experience and not much choice in affordable & quality glass. They need to build a 600,400,300mm at f2.8 and just maybe I will think about the switch all the non Sony glass you can get on the body's just don't work at 100 percent.
This is ridiculous. This camera (a9) doesn't have A SINGLE CROSS-TYPE phase-detection point; nor a double cross-type; nor a very sensitive one (lower than 0EV). Also it doesn't have an infra-red IR sensitive metering, to distinguish a sports ball from a human head; or a player from a volleyball court net. So it's pretty much POINTLESS. Sony creates these ridiculous "press events" with a single girl running on a straight line, stating the "tracking AF" is great on all of its cameras. I thinks it's atrocious to compare it to a Canon 1D-X or Nikon D5, when the A9 can't even compare to an EOS T6i double cross-type, high precision AF point; nor its IF+RGB metering. Brilliant marketing from Sony, fooling every internet noob with NUMBERS. I'm just getting angry now.

People should really temper their enthusiasm for product hype over product reality before making great claims!(not referring to anyone here, but more generally in the net as a whole .. read some of the hyperbole and it hysterical).
Firstly! many claim that battery life is DSLR like. No way, nothing like it, never will be until they make the battery much bigger(and hence heavier) and body larger to suit.
Seen many claims that battery will last 600 exposures. Yeah right, that's one spec, and for a pro, 600 is only just pushing it .. so take many batteries just to be sure. Luckily they also introduced a multiple battery charger that suits this camera .. I reckon as a pro that accessory is a must have.
Read the actual specs and for a pro the expected battery life is barely consumer oriented compact comparable!! .. nothing like a DSLR. Battery life for a pro is one of the paramount specs they need to be mindful of.
With a DSLR, in general you don't need to worry about battery, you generally get between 800-1000 from most DSLRs at this level.
Hidden in the specs that I've yet not seen is that the A9 claims 600 exposures, but this is only if using the LCD screen, ie. not using the EVF!!
Apart from the odd hard to get image where the LCD is useful, what pro worth their reputation shoots with the LCD full time?
They all use the EVF, as the EVF is the drawcard for this type of camera, and Sony's spec says about 480 exposures when using the EVF!!!

480 exposures is not even comparable to a heavily used second hand Nikon D3300!!

In terms of professional tool, Sony really needed to work on that single factor.
On a shoot(any type, wedding, portrait, studio .. whatever) if you're always concerned about battery life and always keeping an eye on the battery indicator, you're not keeping you mind focused(pun intended) on the event at hand.
Having to change out 3 batteries in the time even a lowly consumer level DSLR won't need any change .. not really comparable to the 3000-ish exposures you'd get out of a single digit CaNikon.




Nah! I'm pretty sure they're all shrinking. DSLR shrinking faster than mirrorless, so the percentage factor for each company/body type changes continuously. You're reading that Sony's market share has increased .. not the same thing as their sales figures are higher than before. Just that by comparison to other manufacturers, they're not as dramatically low.

If you read Thoms blog he gives some decent reasoning as to what may have happened with the Sony/#2 posi.(marketing/promotional deals .. and currency of their latest products). Nikon's are all mainly older compared to Sony's.
If you carefully read the specific fine print, the marketing blurb about this specified that the position change was in terms of dollars .. ie. specifically not in units!
If it were measured in unit volume, they'd not have needed this fine print detail. Apparently what Sony does a lot is that they sell the A7's in kit form(as most folks buying won't/don't have a native lens) and then the kit sale is at an elevated price.
At that elevated price point, the Sony is registered as a full frame camera, but the $ value is still registered as the kit(because they don't separate the prices of the individual body and lens in the kit) ... this leads to 'greater value' products(where Nikon sell mainly D610s, D750s and D810s rather than in kit form). And Nikon's (US) promotional push was in Nov/Dec(for Christmas), whereas Sony's promotion deal season was in Jan/Feb.

As for the pros switching, Fuji has gained a fair amount of market share already in wedding photography where long lens like the 400 f/2.8 aren't required. How many pros need long lens? Wedding ohotographers? No. Portrait? No Studio? No. Landscape? no. It's only Wildlife and sports that require it.

This is true, but then again many of those types of photography could easily be done with any non 20fps camera body, and more specifically a higher res(say 42Mp) camera such as the A7Rii!
The photographer type that those specs are marketed towards seems to be more so those sports/wildlife types .. where they have no real competition in lens lineup, and would take many years of hard graft to catch up as well.
And then, as they don't have the history of those same lens types as per CaNikon do .. most of the lenses they do create at that end of the spectrum will all be super massively expensive by way of comparison too!
They should easily be able to get a 300/2.8 and 500/4 to market as they did buy into the brand that once was Minolta, and they have some background with respect to those lens types.
But they'd also need a 200/2, 200-400/4 and a trio of super capable teleconverters to suit all those lenses.

BUTT(a deliberate double butt here!) what would really be the point of that kind of exercise, other than to simply try and unseat the two established players in a small(but elite market segment) in some way?
When the lenses get that big, the advantage of that small body is diminished massively and the of the small compact lightweight body is redundant. In fact the ergonomics of cameras mounted onto on long lenses, are more favourable towards the larger camera bodies anyhow.
In terms of strength and durability, I can't imagine that the a9 will have the weatherproofing capability that a single digit CaNikon body will.

In reality this camera would appeal to D810/5DMkIV upgrade path types ... rather than the D1/1DX types.
And in this situation, the 20fps would basically be a redundant specification. The price is massively beyond both the CaNikon products (and astronomically beyond the Pentax K1) by comparison.

I think a few buyers will get into it early on, but only for the cache factor(ie. braggin rights, gear heads with more $'s than ȼ's .. etc).
As a long term product without the backup of the required accessories(ie. full lens list, GPS, etc) I can't see it as a commercial success(yet).[/QUOTE]

Hence why I can't see it as a Canikon killing product in any way.

Yeah, it has cache and bragging rights power .. but in reality little else.

Sorry missed this reply:



with respect to the D5s comment .. maybe, maybe not(not me anyhow!) .. but you're right, in that others probably would be(going GaGa over it).

BUT!
it should be noted that the 20fps on the A9 is only available when electronic shutter is used.
Switch to mechanical shutter(which all DSLRs use for their max frame rate specs!!) and the A9 slows to 10fps .. still not an inconsiderable spec in itself.
So like Thom Hogan says .. the records being set here by Sony are not the cameras specs(20fps has been a reality for a while now) .. but it's in the caveats thrown in by Sony to temper those sky high specs for the A9!

eg. when electronic shutter is used(to achieve this 20fps spec), the camera also reverts back to 60Hz EVF mode .. not the super duper 120Hz mode.
so while it may not produce the blackout that a SLR is required too, I think the delay rate will probably be off putting for fast paced action.
I'm fairly sure that the viewfinder blackout time for those super high end CaNikons are in the order of about 40ms(which is short enough to be considered insignificant!)

Also note that in electronic shutter mode, dynamic range from the sensor is almost sure to be compromised.(see DPR's comparison data on the A7rII in e-shutter mode).

** side note that one of the off putting aspects of the old D70s was it's electronic shutter. It used a hybrid electro-mechanical shutter system, which allowed a 1/500s flash sync speed, but really bright highlights were always compromised due to the electronic gaiting of the sensor. For this reason, I'm always suspicious of electronic shutters, especially where you are 'forced' to use them(D70s had no option other than what it used)

Also, as yet no info(that I can find) on whether the A9 sensor is limited to the lower 12bit capture mode when using e-shutter, or if they've designed it to allow 14 bit mode.

So, for those times when 20fps are a necessity, it's almost a dead certainty that there's going to be too many gotchas that go with it.
All I'm trying to get across here is not to just read the stated specs, and immediately assume that it's game over for the established players.

That was just the first page and a half. I didn't go further, do I need to go on and find the rest? Heaps of "it'll never work" posts, heaps of speculation about why it won't work. Complaints about battery life (when the measures for battery life are actually conservative so batteries should last over a 1000), etc. In short, finding every conceivable reason to defend your precious DSLR's.

But bring up bad things about Nikon and we're just wishing their demise.

[MissionMan]

I didn't read any A9 bashing, in a real sense of the term.
That guy at the Kentucky Derby(that David linked too) needed 6 camera bodies, where the D5 and 1Dx guys probably only needed 3!

like they (really)say ... don't bring a mirrorless camera to a DSLR showdown!

Nope. Apparently they needed 50! Yes, 50. So it's a 50vs 6 argument.

https://petapixel.com/2017/05/06/her...entucky-derby/

[arthurking83]

....
That was just the first page and a half. I didn't go further, do I need to go on and find the rest? Heaps of "it'll never work" posts, heaps of speculation about why it won't work. Complaints about battery life (when the measures for battery life are actually conservative so batteries should last over a 1000), etc. In short, finding every conceivable reason to defend your precious DSLR's.

But bring up bad things about Nikon and we're just wishing their demise.

I think there's a big difference about claiming that "Nikon is backward, or on a path of self destruction if they don't change because they don't listen to customers" and "Sony's marketing hype numbers" as bashing.
The Nikon comments are personal, due to personal motivation .. nothing to do with overly hyped up numbers that their products claim to produce. When Nikon says the D5 can do 12fps, it doesn't mean .. maybe on every third Sunday after a new full moon, after the pink elephant has flown the coop!
Sony claim 20fps, but with major caveats!
People see 20fps and immediately assume 1DX/D5 killer. Fact is Olympus did 18fps years ago, and hasn't dented D5/1DX numbers. Nikon themselves do 60fps with the Nikon1(again with many limitations) .. and 20fps with barely any.

I think there's confusion between commentary centred around company bashing, because they don't make a product specific to one persons needs .... and commentary centred around highly suspicious marketing mumbo jumbo for a particular product!

As I've said before, I have a personal gripe against Nikon for stuffing me about with my D800(poor craftsmanship) .. and Nikon's all round lack of customer care. I have no problem with well thought out Nikon bashing.
But negative comments on Nikon re their product decisions is is misguided.
A fairly well known fact is that they still sell more DSLR products(over 3.2million/yr) than the combined efforts of ALL mirrorless manufacturers .. and there are too many comments that they need to change this!
if you were selling 3million units compared to most of your competitors 1/2 million units .. why would you change(yet!!).
In the background that manufacturer would be working on a product to combat potential sale threats(as Lance said, Nikon are almost certain to be working on a mirrorless product of some type), but when you're sales are still miles ahead of the majority .. why would you risk following them to the lowest level and handing over the major share of current sales to your major competitor!

That, to me seems like Nikon bashing! Denigration of their current policy based on personal needs, rather than current company performance.
The claim that Nikon doesn't listen to customers with respect to product types is hilarious. I agree they don't listen too or care about customers with product issues(due to bad workmanship, and other defects) .. but when the market still wants nearly 3 times as many DLSRs compared to mirrorless body types, and Nikon predominantly still makes DSLR type bodies .. how is that 'not listening' to customers?
Just because one or two individuals want or need a larger format mirrorless camera and Nikon don't make them one .. is that considered not listening to their customers?
Are you willing to pay close to a million dollars for a camera body just so that Nikon would make you and a couple of other people a specific camera to suit (respective)yourselves. Camera development isn't cheap!

Nope. Apparently they needed 50! Yes, 50. So it's a 50vs 6 argument.

https://petapixel.com/2017/05/06/her...entucky-derby/

What a massive over exaggeration! Talk about over hyping themselves.
I only counted 46 bodies.
In saying that, there does appear to be two of those KeyMission 360 devices sitting on the table too .. never seen them in real life, so can't say for sure .. but 46 real cameras and 2 instamatics ...

So it begs the question: if 46-50 camera bodies are the norm for such an event, then what were the other 40-44 camera bodies used by that 6 x A9 photographer guy? My bet is that he stuck with the tried and tested D5!

[MissionMan]

I think there's a big difference about claiming that "Nikon is backward, or on a path of self destruction if they don't change because they don't listen to customers" and "Sony's marketing hype numbers" as bashing.
The Nikon comments are personal, due to personal motivation .. nothing to do with overly hyped up numbers that their products claim to produce. When Nikon says the D5 can do 12fps, it doesn't mean .. maybe on every third Sunday after a new full moon, after the pink elephant has flown the coop!
Sony claim 20fps, but with major caveats!
People see 20fps and immediately assume 1DX/D5 killer. Fact is Olympus did 18fps years ago, and hasn't dented D5/1DX numbers. Nikon themselves do 60fps with the Nikon1(again with many limitations) .. and 20fps with barely any.

I think there's confusion between commentary centred around company bashing, because they don't make a product specific to one persons needs .... and commentary centred around highly suspicious marketing mumbo jumbo for a particular product!

As I've said before, I have a personal gripe against Nikon for stuffing me about with my D800(poor craftsmanship) .. and Nikon's all round lack of customer care. I have no problem with well thought out Nikon bashing.
But negative comments on Nikon re their product decisions is is misguided.
A fairly well known fact is that they still sell more DSLR products(over 3.2million/yr) than the combined efforts of ALL mirrorless manufacturers .. and there are too many comments that they need to change this!
if you were selling 3million units compared to most of your competitors 1/2 million units .. why would you change(yet!!).
In the background that manufacturer would be working on a product to combat potential sale threats(as Lance said, Nikon are almost certain to be working on a mirrorless product of some type), but when you're sales are still miles ahead of the majority .. why would you risk following them to the lowest level and handing over the major share of current sales to your major competitor!

That, to me seems like Nikon bashing! Denigration of their current policy based on personal needs, rather than current company performance.
The claim that Nikon doesn't listen to customers with respect to product types is hilarious. I agree they don't listen too or care about customers with product issues(due to bad workmanship, and other defects) .. but when the market still wants nearly 3 times as many DLSRs compared to mirrorless body types, and Nikon predominantly still makes DSLR type bodies .. how is that 'not listening' to customers?
Just because one or two individuals want or need a larger format mirrorless camera and Nikon don't make them one .. is that considered not listening to their customers?
Are you willing to pay close to a million dollars for a camera body just so that Nikon would make you and a couple of other people a specific camera to suit (respective)yourselves. Camera development isn't cheap!




What a massive over exaggeration! Talk about over hyping themselves.
I only counted 46 bodies.
In saying that, there does appear to be two of those KeyMission 360 devices sitting on the table too .. never seen them in real life, so can't say for sure .. but 46 real cameras and 2 instamatics ...

So it begs the question: if 46-50 camera bodies are the norm for such an event, then what were the other 40-44 camera bodies used by that 6 x A9 photographer guy? My bet is that he stuck with the tried and tested D5!

So the Nikon comments are due to personal motivation...they have no backing, because I'm the only person saying except, oh yeah, except maybe Thom Hogan, a long time Nikon advocate, and the Nikon Guy, and almost every other camera journalist on the planet. So, apparently we are all doing it because of personal motivation, except that personal motivation seems strange consistent amongst a large group of people.

On the numbers front, 1 in 3 cameras sold is now mirrorless and the number is increasing. That's not personal motivation, that's reality. If I had lost 30% of my market and that number was growing, I would have woken up about it a long time ago. Nikon haven't. They won't even admit there is a problem. Their solution to the mirrorless problem? produce a better DSLR. That's NOT listening. If the market wants a SUV, and you give them a minivan because you think you know best, that's not the answer, and that's certainly not listening.