Will the new Sonys force Canon to rethink?

[dilbert]

The new Sony cameras will be coming out with 24.3MP on APS-C and 10fps or 12fps because there's no mirror in there. With continuous AF during video, why would you now buy a 7D?

Is a 1D MarkV that does only 9.1fps good enough of a sell to sports photographers if they can get 12fps from Sony's latest toy?

If I were Canon, I'd be wanting a bunch of calendar space between my cameras and Sony's if mine were to come out looking under spec'd in comparison.

Are Sony about to change the game in a really big way?

[DJL329]

Are Sony about to change the game in a really big way?

Since Sony does not have a single super-telephoto prime lens, the answer is easy:  no.

[gene_can_sing]

I think it's good that Sony is out for blood. It will push Canon, especially with the video stuff.

If Sony really wanted to go into the Pro Market, Canon should be very worried. Why? Because Sony has a LOT more cash than Canon does. They are a far larger company than Canon with a lot of muscle and know how. I think after the success of 5D2, Canon rode it a bit too long.

If Sony were to give Canon a rude awakening, it would be good for everyone.

I'm all for Mirrorless, especially from a video perspective. EVF are great since you can judge exposure unlike the OVF, where you have to rely entirely on the meter. Mirrorless is the future.

[Bob Howland]

Are Sony about to change the game in a really big way?

Since Sony does not have a single super-telephoto prime lens, the answer is easy:  no.

Would a 200-500 f/2.8-4 zoom lens suffice instead? (That's just a guess.) If they're feeling ambitious, they could also introduce a 120-300 f/2-2.8 and maybe a 300-800 f/4-5.6.

[npherno]

No, Sony cannot compete on lens selection as of yet. I think if they were to remedy that situation, they could make quite a splash quite quickly.

My gripes about Canon are the usual: I want less noise, and more AF points. I picked up an NEX-5 for a big P&S, and it obviously cannot do everything my 50D does, but it totally craps on the 50D image quality.

If the 5DmIII doesn't have much improved AF, and substantially better noise, I would definitely consider Nikon or Sony.

I think it's good that Sony is out for blood. It will push Canon, especially with the video stuff.

If Sony really wanted to go into the Pro Market, Canon should be very worried. Why? Because Sony has a LOT more cash than Canon does. They are a far larger company than Canon with a lot of muscle and know how. I think after the success of 5D2, Canon rode it a bit too long.

If Sony were to give Canon a rude awakening, it would be good for everyone.

I'm all for Mirrorless, especially from a video perspective. EVF are great since you can judge exposure unlike the OVF, where you have to rely entirely on the meter. Mirrorless is the future.

[bvukich]

The new Sony cameras will be coming out with 24.3MP on APS-C and 10fps or 12fps because there's no mirror in there. With continuous AF during video, why would you now buy a 7D?

You'll buy a 7D if you want fast and accurate AF.

Is a 1D MarkV that does only 9.1fps good enough of a sell to sports photographers if they can get 12fps from Sony's latest toy?

Yes.

If I were Canon, I'd be wanting a bunch of calendar space between my cameras and Sony's if mine were to come out looking under spec'd in comparison.

Only under spec'd to people that don't know any better.

Are Sony about to change the game in a really big way?

Not likely.  Sony is more of an over hype, under deliver, type of company.  They've never really been game changers(but oddly enough, they think they are).

[gferdinandsen]

I don't think anyone invested in Canon glass and accessories would really consider changing.  Maybe if you have a 60D with an EF-S lens or two, but not if you own half a dozen L-series lenses.

And then there are those of us who are old school, I could never use a mirrorless camera.  I only use LV for macro work.  When I do landscapes or shoot a High School Football game, the pentaprism rules.  The pentaprisism (and penta mirror) are more natural to see a scene; your eyes adjust quicker; you can see more of the scene.

[DJL329]

Are Sony about to change the game in a really big way?

Since Sony does not have a single super-telephoto prime lens, the answer is easy:  no.

Would a 200-500 f/2.8-4 zoom lens suffice instead? (That's just a guess.) If they're feeling ambitious, they could also introduce a 120-300 f/2-2.8 and maybe a 300-800 f/4-5.6.

Ummm, no.  Super-telephoto zoom lenses aren't going to cut it for professional sports and nature photographers, especially ones that only exist in your imagination.

[Lawliet]

Are Sony about to change the game in a really big way?

Since Sony does not have a single super-telephoto prime lens, the answer is easy:  no.

Thats not the only aspect. In my book the greatest caveats are the bread&butter lenses 24-70/70-200. They look good on paper, but when trying them + the Alpha900 I was lucky it was during test shootings, can't risk to throw out a quarter of a series because the OOF areas don't pass muster.

The A900 might be way cheaper then a D3x w. the same sensor. But the first reshoot/similar salvage operation would (more then) even the score, and there is no option for a permanent fix.

[Bob Howland]

Super-telephoto zoom lenses aren't going to cut it for professional sports and nature photographers,

On the contrary, I think that's exactly where the market is heading, especially for sports photographers. After all, Canon is developing a 200-400/280-560 and Nikon already is on their second generation of 200-400.

[JasonM]

Mirroless systems can only use Contrast AF which is slower than Phase Detection AF, much slower in lower light because there is less contrast, can cause some focus hunting, and can't track focus.  So while you may have a high fps camera the focus system can't keep up if the subject is moving much for example in sports, auto racing, kids running around, etc. etc. etc.... you know, all the things high fps is most useful for.  However, the Contrast AF algorithms might improve in time or some other AF system might be developed but it's not on the horizon.  Mirrors are not going away any time soon.

[Bokehmon]

I think it's good that Sony is out for blood. It will push Canon, especially with the video stuff.

If Sony really wanted to go into the Pro Market, Canon should be very worried. Why? Because Sony has a LOT more cash than Canon does. They are a far larger company than Canon with a lot of muscle and know how. I think after the success of 5D2, Canon rode it a bit too long.

If Sony were to give Canon a rude awakening, it would be good for everyone.

I'm all for Mirrorless, especially from a video perspective. EVF are great since you can judge exposure unlike the OVF, where you have to rely entirely on the meter. Mirrorless is the future.

Seriously, I don't understand why everyone needs a DSLR to be the perfect VIDEO camera. The ergonomics are WAAAAAAAAAAAY off. It's nice to have, and a great feature to use, but for the people who really want to take video, why not just develop one with a dedicated FF video sensor or something? Like design a whole body around that.

I think it is outrageous for people to expect a DSLR camera to be ergonomically the perfect still and video device.

[unfocused]

why would you now buy a 7D?

That's not even worth responding to.

[Lawliet]

Seriously, I don't understand why everyone needs a DSLR to be the perfect VIDEO camera. The ergonomics are WAAAAAAAAAAAY off. It's nice to have, and a great feature to use, but for the people who really want to take video, why not just develop one with a dedicated FF video sensor or something? Like design a whole body around that.

Funny - they are available. They aren't even that expensive, cost less then any of the other positions on the bill.
But waiting for the DSLR that does the same buys some time until one realizes that it wasn't the cameras fault in the first place.
And the large sensor makes them the inferior tool for quite a few jobs.

[EYEONE]

The best thing Sony has going for it is the uniqueness of the SLT design. But it's also the thing that probably turns people off.

Ok ok, full auto focus while shooting video and 12fps aside, does anyone here actually enjoy looking through a EVF??

Come on I can't be the only one that despises those things. I know they have benefits, I understand and appreciate that. But for all those, as soon as I put my eye to that thing I don't really care what the benefits are.

Sony has some good sensors and they have some tech. But I have to agree with the others, they are just not as "in the game" as they think they are.