Jump to content


Photo

The A99mk2 will not be released before June 2016

A99 FF A99 mk2 Professional DSLR

  • Please log in to reply
105 replies to this topic

#41 delewin

delewin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 84 posts
  • LocationSydney Australia

Posted 30 March 2016 - 10:58 AM

Advertisement (Gone after free registration)

When I read the press releases regarding the new SEL70300G, I can only feel more rejected by Sony.

 

I own a Sony A77V Mk1 and have spent many thousands of dollars in genuine Zeiss and Sony A mount full frame lenses with the longer term intent on "upgrading" from APS-C to Full Frame sensor body of the A99 mk2.

 

But All I see is more and more FE mount lenses being produced and no information on any new A mount full frame body.

 

To say I am really frustrated is a serious understatement. I am so frustrated that I could burst forth with language so "colorful" that I would be banned from this excellent forum.

 

Sony's silence is more telling than anything else.

 

I purchased my A77 when it first came out and it is nearing its "end of life" as I enjoy time lapse photography among other forms of photography.

 

I do not believe the existing A mount Sony user base should be treated with so much contempt and disregard.

 

 

I put a serious question to you Sony.

 

If you wanted a new product to satisfy your needs, how long would you wait before you looked elsewhere?

 

I believe the Sony A mount user base has waited long enough. In fact more than long enough.

 

Isn't it true?

 

You are telling us nothing because you have nothing to tell.

 

Actually you could tell us the truth.

 

No, you are not developing a new version of the A99, you are putting all your eggs into the E mount and specifically the FE full frame body and lenses.

 

You are leaving the PRO market to Canon and Nikon.

 

Obviously Sony only wants to be number 3 in the photography market

 

I would appreciate a formal reply from Sony and not continuing silence.

 

Apologies to those who are offended by my frustration. Actually it is Sony who should be apologizing.


  • psdigital, Sator and molan like this

#42 Sator

Sator

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 30 March 2016 - 02:48 PM

Sony have said that the main reason why their FF mirrorless series is selling is because of their compactness. I quote from Kimio Maki:

 


AP: Can you summarise the benefit of choosing an Alpha 7-series camera over a DSLR in a single sentence?  
 
KM: Size. It’s all about size – it’s smaller and lighter. That’s the main reason of choosing our products. 
 
 

The problem is that the only time you get a meaningful size advantage from FF mirrorless is when working with just a single pancake and quasi-pancake slow lens for casual walkabout shooting:

 

a7RIIvsa99_20mmf2.8_zpsxje6umbm.jpg

 

The a7RII and a99 are shown with a 20mm f/2.8 lens. This was probably the original design vision behind full frame mirrorless but its popularity got out of hand. 

 

The moment you move up to faster professional grade lenses, you lose that size advantage:

 

a7RIIvs5DsRvsa99_24-70mmf2.8_zpstxugmcbb

 

Here the a7RII, 5DsR, and a99 are shown with a native 24-70mm f/2.8 lens. Add an adapter and it gets much worse. It is just physics that if you make the body smaller, the lens gets bigger. Either you choose one small body and lots of big lenses vs. one big body and lots of small lenses. The more lenses you carry in your bag, the worse the overall size disadvantage. Want a more compact professional camera system?—choose a DSLR/DSLT!

 

In some cases, mirrorless works out to be less compact than a DSLR:

 

Canon5DIIIvsSonya7RII_85mm_fast_sizecomp

 

Here the a7RII is shown with the 85mm f/1.4 GM lens and the Canon 5DsR with the 85mm f/1.2 lens. The Canon is more compact despite the lens being half a stop faster. 

 

Now that this realisation has begun to sink in, there is talk from increasingly desperate people now hoping for a 24-70mm f/2.0 FE mount lens that is more compact than the f/4.0 version. But the public have deluded themselves into thinking that Sony and Zeiss can collaborate to rewrite the laws of physics.

 

Adapters are the least attractive feature of mirrorless in the long run. Asked about adapting Canon lenses Kimio Maki of Sony said this:

 


Do you anticipate that someone who has a collection of long telephoto Canon lenses could potentially use them to shoot sports with the a7R II?
 
KM: I hope that our native lenses are better! But it will happen. I see people using Sony a7-series bodies and third-party lenses all the time, for video and for stills, because they already own the lenses. It works, but our native lenses are much better... 
 

 

I find that adapters aren't that practical to use. I have a lot of adapters for my a7II, and have accidentally taken the wrong one with me or have forgotten to pack one altogether. It's also an extra pair of lens caps to lose. Saying you chose FF mirrorless because of the size advantage so you can shoot with an adapted Canon lens is like saying that you're going on a holiday to Hawaii so you can enjoy skiing on powder snow. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Adapters are also fiddly, bulky, and they decisively kill whatever marginal advantage in compactness the body might allegedly once have had. Unfortunately, the body-adapter-lens combination ends up looking like some ungainly Dr. Seuss contraption:

 

SeussButterBattle_zpsckkf7q8u.jpg

 

Worse still, my A to E mount adapter reduces light transmission by about a 1/2 stop, and you lose far too much of the native autofocus functionality, which gets even worse with Canon lenses. It is always immeasurably better to use native lenses—hence why Sony actually make native E mount lenses! As Maki rightly says "native lenses are much better", and selling Canon lenses is hardly a viable long term corporate strategy for Sony. Also nobody goes on and on about the fact that you can adapt some vintage MF lenses to Canon and Nikon bodies then add focus peaking to the body with Magic Latern. Micro-misalignment between lens-adapter-body causes degradation of IQ in the corners particularly at shorter focal lengths (where due to the short flange distances and narrow mount diameter the E mount is "technically challenged" already because it was originally an APS-C mount). Being able to adapt vintage MF lenses might be cute and will have its niche, but for the vast majority of photographers, the last reason to choose mirrorless is as a vintage retro lens revivalist contraption. At the end of the day, when I pick my set of lenses for a shoot, I just find myself systematically avoiding the use of adapted lenses. I would gladly give up all of my adapters just to shoot with native lenses. So please, Sony, give me a decent A mount DSLT to use with my superb A mount lenses.

 

So what's the point of professional full frame mirrorless other than as a casual walkabout camera with a pancake lens? It isn't for the compactness. It is hardly for the ability to shoot with adapters (except for a minority of legacy lens aficionados). As for IBIS, the Pentax K-1 shows you can add that to DSLRs too, and so IBIS is hardly any more a feature unique to MILCs than wifi, meaning that IBIS is no longer a reason to choose a MILC over a DSLR. A new Canon patent for a hybrid viewfinder means that DSLRs will soon have live exposure preview, meaning that being able to see the exposure before taking a shot won't be a reason to choose mirrorless over DSLRs. In any case, you get live exposure preview with an A mount DSLT already. It certainly isn't for the faster frame rate or low light autofocus abilities. You have to wonder if there is any meaningful point left at all to full frame mirrorless cameras. 

 

Mirrorless FF cameras are going through the usual cycle that goes with all novel technology. First some enthusiasts delirious with euphoria proclaim it to be the road to Elysian Fields and declare the DSLR dead. Next people find the Revolution to End All Revolutions brings its own set of problems, and it isn't the magical path to El Dorado it promised. Finally, people arrive at the more sober realisation that like rangefinders, it has its niche, along with its own peculiar set of pros and cons. 


  • delewin, Colorado and molan like this

#43 Colorado

Colorado

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 80 posts

Posted 30 March 2016 - 04:08 PM

Well said Sator! I would of put this much time into a response but I no longer need to. I 2nd & 3rd every word. Also nice visual aides. A photography forum with pictures... who would of thought.

Now if there was a way to make sure Sony see's these types of posts.
  • Sator likes this

#44 Sator

Sator

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 30 March 2016 - 04:31 PM

When I read the press releases regarding the new SEL70300G, I can only feel more rejected by Sony.

 

I own a Sony A77V Mk1 and have spent many thousands of dollars in genuine Zeiss and Sony A mount full frame lenses with the longer term intent on "upgrading" from APS-C to Full Frame sensor body of the A99 mk2.

 

But All I see is more and more FE mount lenses being produced and no information on any new A mount full frame body.

 

Sony's silence is more telling than anything else.

 

I do not believe the existing A mount Sony user base should be treated with so much contempt and disregard.

 

I put a serious question to you Sony.

 

If you wanted a new product to satisfy your needs, how long would you wait before you looked elsewhere?

 

I believe the Sony A mount user base has waited long enough. In fact more than long enough.

 

Isn't it true?

 

You are telling us nothing because you have nothing to tell.

 

Actually you could tell us the truth.

 

No, you are not developing a new version of the A99, you are putting all your eggs into the E mount and specifically the FE full frame body and lenses.

 

You are leaving the PRO market to Canon and Nikon.

 

Obviously Sony only wants to be number 3 in the photography market

 

I would appreciate a formal reply from Sony and not continuing silence.

 

100+

 

I sincerely hope Sony is reading this thread!

 

Sony: you know that E mount is an APS-C mount that got forced to double as a full frame mount. The mount diameter is too narrow and the flange distance way too shallow to allow engineers to design high-end lens in all focal lengths to serve the needs of professionals. As the Sigma CEO said:

 

...the diameter is very small and makes it difficult to design high quality FF lenses...it almost looks like E-mount was designed for APS-C more than FF.   

 

And as Zeiss have admitted:

 

“The short flange distance between the sensor and the rear element is an engineering challenge for ultra wide-angle lenses.”

 

As Sony has now candidly confessed: 

 

the A-mount has certain advantages over the E mount.

 

 

Certain advantages??? To put it another way, Sony know perfectly well that if they had predicted in advance that FF mirrorless was going to be this popular they would have fully redesigned the mount so that it was a proper full frame mount, wide enough to incorporate IBIS without causing degradation of corner IQ as the sensor moves. That makes the entire mount and the lenses that go with it much larger, but that is the proper way to have designed a dedicated professional full frame mirrorless IBIS mount. The FF E mount is something of an accident and mishap they cannot go back and change now. I quote from a Fuji manager on their reasons for not adding IBIS to the X-system:

 


TAKASHI UENO: First of all, our XF mount is not compatible with IBIS. You may be thinking that our mount size is similar to competitors’ and why Fujifilm cannot do it. The answer is simple: for the sake of image quality. IBIS has both advantages and disadvantages. IBIS moves the sensor in the mount to stabilize the image. To secure the amount of light at any position, the diameter of mount must cover the wider image circle considering the margin of sensor movement. The diameter of our mount was designed for the image circle without IBIS. It means the amount of light at the corners is reduced when the sensor is shifted. We could correct it digitally, but we don’t want to do it: we don’t want to compromise our image quality.
 
TOMASH: Why didn’t you design a mount in a size, which would allow implementing the IBIS?
 
TAKASHI UENO: To cover the larger image circle, not only mount size (and body size), but also lens size must be bigger. ​
 
 
Now look at these figures on comparative mount diameters:
 
Minolta/Sony A mount: 49.7mm
Sony FE mount: 46.1mm
Fuji X mount: 44mm
Canon EOS EF mount: 54mm
Pentax K mount: 44mm
 
The X-mount isn't much different in size to the FE mount!
 
The Sigma CEO is right. The NEX mount was originally an APS-C mount, and it is too narrow to comfortably take IBIS with a full frame sensor without causing degradation in IQ, or to readily design high quality lenses for. The FE mount is a technically retarded mount that will always create second rate lenses because of the inherent optical disadvantages of the design. It would be best to throw the whole FE mount into the rubbish bin and start again with a new mount, but it is way too late for that. But you have the A mount! The A mount is a superior dedicated professional full frame mount, and was a better candidate to carry IBIS. 
 
The A mount was the one that once made Minolta number one ahead of Canon and Nikon. It is the real deal: an optically sound mount that can be the foundation of a real high-end professional system. With it Sony can be Minolta's second coming like Apple's second coming under Steve Jobs, after Apple nearly went bankrupt. Sony A mount too can rise from the ashes and be number one again.

  • delewin and molan like this

#45 D700

D700

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts

Posted 31 March 2016 - 08:50 AM

...Sony A mount too can rise from the ashes and be number one again.

 

 

With A-Mount? Never!

Sony knows very well, that the future is mirrorless = E-Mount and even YOU can see this (if you are willing)

Yes they can become Number one - if Canon and Nikon don't switch to mirrorless soon.

DSLR/SLT is decreasing and for most people A-Mount is dead; people who are realsitic an not dreaming ...

 

Furhter invest in A-Mount is burning money!


  • molan likes this

#46 D700

D700

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts

Posted 31 March 2016 - 09:02 AM

 

 The A mount is a superior dedicated professional full frame mount....

 

 

Maybe, but nobody bought it; the market deciedes!

And since long time he decided for Canon and Nikon.

 

So Sony had to switch to a new futer driving technology to be successfull.

And as a result, they ARE!

Without E-Mount they would still have retired from producing system cameras.

And if Sony splits off the image business into a seperate company the End of A-Mount is surely coming faster.



#47 Sator

Sator

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 31 March 2016 - 11:34 AM

"The Market" is hardly some Divine Oracle. On the contrary, it is capricious, fickle and grossly irrational. What is the latest fad today can be just as quickly forgotten tomorrow. "The Market" demands that Sony rewrite the laws of physics by conjuring the Mirrorless Miracle of a 24-70mm f/2.0 FE mount zoom lens just as compact as the f/4 version. When none is forthcoming there will be trouble, as all of the starry-eyed people who brought into the mirrorless novelty thinking it would compete with M4/3 or APS-C formats for compactness will be sorely disappointed. Vacuous hype can only get you so far before the bubble bursts. That is why Sony need to use the extra economic shot in the art from a7 series sales to create a more credible long term A mount based strategy.

 

In any case, DSLT gives you EVF/live exposure preview, frame rates potentially much faster than DSLR, more compact lenses from a more mature A mount line up, no loss of overall compactness over mirrorless once lens size is considered, body better balanced against longer lenses, better battery life, and elimination of shake from mirror slap. Plus potential for an even better implementation of IBIS on a proper full frame mount in future instead of an APS-C mount passed off as a FF mount.

 

Who needs mirrorless?



#48 Colorado

Colorado

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 80 posts

Posted 31 March 2016 - 02:26 PM

With A-Mount? Never!
Sony knows very well, that the future is mirrorless = E-Mount and even YOU can see this (if you are willing)
Yes they can become Number one - if Canon and Nikon don't switch to mirrorless soon.
DSLR/SLT is decreasing and for most people A-Mount is dead; people who are realsitic an not dreaming ...
 
Furhter invest in A-Mount is burning money!


A-Mount Never? You must have a couple of E-mounts at hand.

What would be wrong with A-Mount mirrorless?? I have used both E and A-Mount FF and without exception the A-Mount is a much better fit in my work flow. Controls, handling, and features all better with the A. Things as simple as access to the battery with my quick release mounted to the bottom of the body. If the only future option for Sony is the current E-mount they will loose at least one customer.
  • psdigital likes this

#49 D700

D700

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts

Posted 31 March 2016 - 05:14 PM

A-Mount Never? You must have a couple of E-mounts at hand.

What would be wrong with A-Mount mirrorless??...

 

I'm using an A7II comming from Nikon DSLR and my last dinosaur was a A57, 3 years ago.

For me (and for Sony as you can see) A-Mount is a dead product.

 

As I wrote before, the (shrinking) DSLR market is dominated by C&N.

Sony is looking for a new Market and they did it right!

 

Mirrorless A-Mount doesn't make sense, as you can't take the advantages of a system with a short flange distance.

With E-Mount you can be small, if you like, and big if you need fast or big lenses.

With ancient A-Mount technology you're always BIG! And that's the difference!

 

And: For the installed base there are a lot of great adapters available to use A-Mount lenses.

This is a win/win situation for all of us and Sony.

There might be some "old shool" users who are not willing to change; but if they move to C or N, I think this won't be any problem for Sony as they earn more modern thinking users from the competition every day ;)

 

I'm pretty shure, that in a year from now, nobody ist mentioning A-Mount any more ...



#50 delewin

delewin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 84 posts
  • LocationSydney Australia

Posted 31 March 2016 - 08:23 PM

There is nothing stopping Sony from using an A mount body and inserting the mirror-less sensor.

 

Would not that be the "best of both worlds"?

 

Actually mirror-less A mount does make sense. The flange distance would be kept . Sony would simply re-mount the sensor to suit the lenses being used.

 

The FE (E) mount has only one real advantage. That is the ability to use an adapter to mount other manufacture's lenses so the photographer does not have to sell all the "old" lenses to use the new Sony body.

 

The mirror-less sensor would be mounted in exactly the same place as the current A99 sensor.

 

A mount has better balance and is more suited to long term active use. It is stronger especially in terms of torsional strength. One of the problems noted with adding big heavy lenses to the A7 line is the need to always support the lens with your hand or tripod mount, as the FE mount can distort (bend) over time with constant use.

 

This puts your image plane out of parallel to your lens plain and the only solution is to buy another body. (Simple but very expensive fix.)


  • Sator likes this

#51 timde

timde

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 977 posts

Posted 31 March 2016 - 08:27 PM

There is nothing stopping Sony from wrapping an E mount in an "A mount" body.

 

Since you can't adapt E mount lenses to A mount, and Sony is clearly only really trying to make E mount lenses, one can to assume that and E mount in "A mount" body is a more likely outcome.



#52 delewin

delewin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 84 posts
  • LocationSydney Australia

Posted 31 March 2016 - 08:42 PM

D700 Dinosaurs are just old technology (in this case).

 

For example. There is nothing to stop Sony inserting the latest technology directly from the A7R mk2 into the A99 body.There is heaps of space.


  • Sator and molan like this

#53 Sator

Sator

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 31 March 2016 - 09:06 PM

Once again the trouble is that E mount is only compact for use as an amateur enthusiast's walkabout kit with a pancake lens. The moment you move on to anything remotely professional, it rapidly loses all size advantage, an advantage largely gained from having batteries that are too small to last for professional all-day shoots anyway. If you do a shoot on location and pack several fast lenses for it, then each of those lenses you pack ends up bigger and bulkier than their A mount equivalents. It all adds up. 

 

Worse still, the only reason there hasn't been a real blow out in the size of FE mount lenses is because the FE mount is a crippled APS-C non-IBIS mount forced to do overtime as a FF IBIS mount. That means lenses are very hard to design for it. As the Sigma CEO stated: "the diameter is very small and makes it difficult to design high quality FF lenses ... it almost looks like E-mount was designed for APS-C more than FF".

 

This can only mean that to bring FE lens performance on par with rivals you have to spend more time in R&D as well as put in extra quality elements. That's why the new 70-200mm f/2.8 GM has several aspherical elements in it, and why third parties don't think it is worth the effort. Who pays for the extra R&D costs? You do. Who pays for those extra elements? Again, you do. The danger is that the extra costs may not result in the lens being much better than its rivals, because all it does is overcome the handicap inherent to a crippled lens mount. Plus it has no size advantage overall, and when carrying several lenses results in a significant size disadvantage.

 

That means that E mount really only retains its place as something for casual walkabout photography. But I guess I am expected to shut up and put up—then always hire assistants during shoots to carry all of the bulky equipment. And all for what? So that I can enjoy the novelty of FF mirrorless as an end to itself, even though that novelty only brings an overall size disadvantage, its frame rate is slower than a DSLT, its low light focussing is inferior, and its tracking ability is inferior. 



#54 D700

D700

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts

Posted 01 April 2016 - 10:24 AM

...

Actually mirror-less A mount does make sense. The flange distance would be kept ...

 

But the flange distance IS the problem!

You cannot build small Cameras around it; no problem with modern, flexible E-Mount Kameras.

Sony (and the others) can build big bodies with E-Mount too, if there should a market.

Not to talk about adapting lenses you like (i.e. Leica M)

 

Long flange distances can't be the future.



#55 D700

D700

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 64 posts

Posted 01 April 2016 - 10:32 AM

 ... But I guess I am expected to shut up ...

 

Great idea!

The first prudent sentence from you...



#56 Sator

Sator

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 01 April 2016 - 11:29 PM

I am afraid I'm going to disappoint those who want me to stop revealing inconvenient truths.

 

Here is the latest inconvenience:

 

LeicaSL_50mmf1.4Summicron_zpsrg5xxytw.jp

 

From: http://camerasize.co...12,596.354,ha,t

 

It shows the full frame mirrorless Leica SL with the 50mm f/1.4 Summicron, the Sony a7RII with the 90mm f/2.8 macro G, and the Canon 5DsR with the 50mm f/1.2 lens. I had to double check a couple of times to convince myself that the Leica 50mm Summicron really was that big and that no mistake had been made with lens choice.

 

The Leica SL full frame mirrorless mount diameter is wider than that of the FE mount (51mm vs. 46.1mm). This shows why Sony used an APS-C mount on their FF mirrorless model, because if you use a dedicated FF mount with dimensions more typical of a full frame mount like those of the Leica SL mount, it causes an even more massive blowout in the lens size! Now we understand the basis for the Sigma CEOs puzzlement when he said that "...the diameter [of the FE mount ] is very small and makes it difficult to design high quality FF lenses ... it almost looks like E-mount was designed for APS-C more than FF". Sony simply had to put an APS-C lens onto a full frame body, because otherwise a 50mm f/1.4 lens would have ended up the same size as a 90mm f/2.8 macro lens:

 

LeicaSL_50mmf1.4_vsSony_Canon_zpsuv0guxp

 

From: http://camerasize.co...95,596.538,ha,t

 

Here the Leica SL is shown with the 50mm f/1.4 Summicron, the Sony a7RII with the Zeiss 55mm f/1.8, and the Canon 5DSR with the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 lens.

 

LeicaSL_50mmf1.4_vsSony_Canon_zpsuv0guxp

 

Yet even after putting an APS-C mount onto a full frame body, Sony still haven't reigned in the blow out in lens size on professional fast lenses as this comparison of 85mm f/1.4 lenses on the a7RII and the a99 shows:

 

a7RIIvsa99_85mmf1.4_sizecomparison_zpso1

 

The added difficulty in designing full frame lenses for an APS-C mount on a FF body explains why the roll out of lenses has been so slow and the resulting lenses more expensive. It explains the reluctance of Tamron and Sigma to make FE mount lenses, because they are concerned about the ability to recoup R&D cost.



#57 timde

timde

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 977 posts

Posted 02 April 2016 - 12:07 AM

You do realize that the Leica SL mount is actually the same as Leica T mount which is APS-C .... and, for quite a while, the Leica fans/experts were declaring that it, the T mount, was too small for FF, even though it was larger than most FF mounts (as you point out) ... they even had a FAQ declaring it as a fact and then Leica showed them a trick or two ... Sigma and Fuji managers are just "talking their book" because they can't actually compete against Sony directly. Take a look at how large the Otus lenses are, they also work fine on FE mount .... or Canon, or Nikon ...

 

In practice the FE mount works just fine ... yes, that is also inconvenient, I don't know how we FE mount owners manage :o  



#58 Golem

Golem

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,249 posts

Posted 02 April 2016 - 09:21 PM

The Leica SL full frame mirrorless mount diameter is wider than that of the FE mount

(51mm vs. 46.1mm). This shows why Sony used an APS-C mount on

their FF mirrorless model, because if you use a dedicated FF mount

with dimensions more typical of a full frame mount like those of the

Leica SL mount, it causes an even more massive blowout in the lens size!

 

   

It is obvious to anyone, just from the graphics in your posts that you have no

clue what you're talking about. Graphics aside, your actual content is way too

convoluted to quote at length. So, just a sample from you : 

 

 

 

The Leica SL full frame mirrorless mount diameter is wider than that of

the FE mount (51mm vs. 46.1mm). This shows why Sony used an APS-C

mount on their FF mirrorless model, because if you use a dedicated FF

mount with dimensions more typical of a full frame mount like those of the

Leica SL mount, it causes an even more massive blowout in the lens size!

 

  

 

It's obvious that you seldom know what you're talking about. You just said

that a bigger mount would cause the lenses to get even bigger. Well, YOU

WERE CORRECT where you said that the small size of the APSC-based

E-mount results in larger lenses. And that is the OPPOSITE of what I just

quoted from you, that "full frame mount like those of the Leica SL mount,

it causes an even more massive blowout in the lens size! "

 

Posting in huge fonts, crazy colors, contradicting yourself .... you're so very

typical of loud clueless zealots. You can't even see the obvious. Frinstintz,

this: If you made a change in the A7 series to noticeably increase the size

of the lens mount, such that optical design were not so constrained, all the

lenses would still require more room in your gear bag than a set of optically

IDENTICAL lenses for an SLR. Cuz compared to the SLR lenses, the A7

lenses have almost an inch of EMPTY TUBE on each lens, cuz they fit onto

a body with a shorter flange distance. Heck, I can argue your case better

than you can ... cuz I actually know what I'm talking about. And bcuz I know,

I won't argue it any further cuz I know it actually is toadally unimportant.



#59 psdigital

psdigital

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • LocationLoudon

Posted 02 April 2016 - 10:17 PM

To all of you that say Sony has not forgotten the A Mount users with the adapter to E mount; that's not necessarily true. I just bought the A7R II and the LEA3 adapter and only one of my A Mount lenses will work with it and it's the 16-50 f/2.8 APS-C lens. I read on Brian Smith's website where my Tamron 150-600mm would work but the focusing is SLOW! Then AF points are combined somehow instead of individual points. It's like 4 of the make one large square. I have 13 lenses and most of the should work with the adapter but they all converted to manual focus.
Sony needs to continue the A mount for all of us that have A mount glass. The glass doesn't work on an E Mount camera the way it does on an A Mount camera despite all the things you read on these forums. If they don't make a better adapter that will allow ALL the features to work with A mount glass, there is no upgrade for A Mount users. I'm so tired of hearing that in these forums. SOny needs to get their butt in gear and produce some A Mount bodies and Soon!! They're a big company and they should be able to keep up 2 mounts. They have released plenty for E Mount (except for glass) and it's time for them to hit the A Mount for their base users that haven't given up already.
I have both mounts and I can tell you A Mount glass works best on A mount cameras and E Mount glass works best on E Mount bodies. Adapters are Crapters!

#60 psdigital

psdigital

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • LocationLoudon

Posted 02 April 2016 - 10:53 PM

A-Mount Never? You must have a couple of E-mounts at hand.What would be wrong with A-Mount mirrorless?? I have used both E and A-Mount FF and without exception the A-Mount is a much better fit in my work flow. Controls, handling, and features all better with the A. Things as simple as access to the battery with my quick release mounted to the bottom of the body. If the only future option for Sony is the current E-mount they will loose at least one customer.


Nothing would be wrong with A Mount Mirrorless. I think it would outsell E mount because of the current millions of lenses out there. That's really what Sony should do is make A Mount FF mirrorless and E Mount APS-C mirrorless.
  • delewin likes this



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: A99, FF, A99 mk2, Professional DSLR

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

 
x

New Members Welcome!

Not yet registered? Really?

Registration is free and takes only a few minutes.

After the free registration you can discuss with members from all over the world, put questions and present your images.

We are looking forward to you!

Admin Andreas und Sony Alpha Forum Team

Register now! X