Sony with APS-C sensors-will they ever be obsolete

[Smorton]

Greetings:

 

As I spend more on Sony A600 lenses, etc. it occurs to me that many people talk nothing but about full sensor Sonys, Canons, etc.

 

Is it foolish to invest in Sony with APS-C sensors?  I assume there will always be a market for these cameras. 

 

Just thought I would ask.

 

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

 

Thank you.

 

Smorton

[1950n]

As you can see with Samsung, who stopped completely with camera's, you're never sure. Positive in this case is that the a6000 is the best selling mirrorless camera.

 

 

Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

[Michael_j]

I'm sure your investment is as sound as mine was with Betamax

[Smorton]

Ha, I remember that VHS Betamax thing.

 

Smorton

[Gilgenberg]

i think aps-c will come back with a better sensor

the formfactor is simply to good

[happypuppy]

I don't see that happening for quite a long time. The camera manufacturers need to milk a premium for FF as sales continue to drop with the onslaught of smartphones for casual shooters killing the P&S market.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wedge]

APS-C isn't going away, ever.  

 

It's the entry-level format for real cameras.  That fact alone makes it too important for manufacturers to ever get rid of.

Not only that, but it is still used by pro's when they need more reach.  For sports and wildlife APS-C has notable advantages over FF.  Not to mention whenever a smaller or more discrete camera is desired.  So no worries, this format is a safe investment for a long time.

 

The only alternative is M4/3, but those cameras sell in the same price range as the APS-C body's.  And considering that APS-C has as much of an advantage over M4/3 as FF has over APS-C, there's no worry that M4/3 will ever take over the entry level either.

[Golem]

Who knows. Don't ignore the BetaMax comments,

and don't "invest" [LOL] more than you can rather

painlessly walk away from. "Sports and Wildlife"

is no assurance. If they suddenly disappeared

tomorrow, the Sony-Nikon-Canon-et-al marketing

units would prolly not even notice that. Keep in

mind that ALL image recording systems are just

desktop computing peripheral devices. Each "new"

photo device is actually obsolete before the first

examples are shipped. And if you really meant

that word "invest" in regard to this stuff, you need

to check in with your investment counselor :-)

[Smorton]

Thanks for the input.

 

Smorton

[Austerror]

+1 APS-C is here to stay.

 

I 'invested' literally dozens of dollars on old MC and MD lenses.  There are LOADS of old manual lenses that you can adapt to the E-mount cameras.

 

Its a great and cheap way to experience many different lens types without spending loads of cash.  Those old lenses are full frame too

 

I did this so that when I bought a new E mount lens from Sony I knew exactly which lens I wanted.

[Smorton]

Now that I have bought a few APS-C things, I kind of hope it is, but everything changes.

 

In 20 years, perhaps these current products will look silly.

 

Thanks

 

Smorton

[ethierbach]

I'm not so concerned about the APS-C format itself; it seems pretty well entrenched. At least as much as anyone can predict tech futures.

 

What I'm more concerned about is Sony's commitment to E-mount APS-C. I know the stuff I have (A6000 + a half dozen lenses) will last a long time with proper care, but my aging hands are looking for better ergonomics and IBIS, and my bank account rules out any serious Sony FF gear acquisition.  So for me, either Sony comes out with a sort of APS-C A7II, or I look elsewhere. 

 

I guess my advice would be to hang tight, use what you have, and make use of adapted lenses as others have suggested...and see where Sony goes with APS-C in the near term. Or if money allows, get full-frame E-mount lenses, which will give you some options.

 

-Ed-

[Smorton]

That is sensible.

 

Thanks

 

Smorton

[PierreP]

I have an A6000 and a Nex 6, plus some APS-C and FF primes.

 

I've been following SAR since the launch of the A6000, and the latest (hope not last) lens that's been released for APS-C e-mount, the 16-70 Zeiss (or maybe the latest was the 18-105, I don't remember well), and honestly, my feeling right now is that Sony has abandoned the APS-C market. Here in France, the A6300 is basically the same price as the A7II naked (€1300 vs €1500). Who would buy the A6300 when the FF version with IBIS is so close ? Those who need such a fast AF might as well go the DSLR way.

 

So no new lens for over two years, an expensive new body almost none will definitely not be a hot seller like the A6000 due to the high price tag, while Sony keeps releasing new lenses for the FF line (and some cheap, like the 28 and 50), which of course no longer need to include OSS since the new bodies have IBIS, makes me think Sony is slowly letting the APS-C segment die.

 

I think they want to focus on the FF market now, for prosumers and pros, and they'll slowly let the APS-C line-up die, even if they won't do it in one day. It makes sense in a certain way : the APS-C, as a "crop" (I hate that expression, it immediately makes you feel you're robbed with something with those sensors, even if it's wrong), segment competes with m43 and Fuji, while the FF has almost no competition, and looks like the future for many consumers : look at how many people think of FF as an upgrade. Sony might not want to invest in a market that needs a lot of investments due to competition, while those investments can be made in a market where they have no rival, and which might become the future, especially if they happen to release some FF body around $1000.

 

In my opinion, this is quite a mistake, but well, as with other consumption goods, a lot of people will only shop for the best of the best, even though they don't need it, even though it's not that better. They just want to feel they have the best, and think they're not limited by their gear, and for that, as long as APS-C will be considered as a crop format, FF will be considered as the best of the best.

[molan]

Who knows. Don't ignore the BetaMax comments,

and don't "invest" [LOL] more than you can rather

painlessly walk away from. "Sports and Wildlife"

is no assurance. If they suddenly disappeared

tomorrow, the Sony-Nikon-Canon-et-al marketing

units would prolly not even notice that. Keep in

mind that ALL image recording systems are just

desktop computing peripheral devices. Each "new"

photo device is actually obsolete before the first

examples are shipped. And if you really meant

that word "invest" in regard to this stuff, you need

to check in with your investment counselor :-)

 

Now you are being silly, obviously investment in lenses is about spending money on something lasting longer than a signe camera and not an alternative for stock or a way to place your pension founds.

 

E-mount both APS-C and FF will last for many years to come, A-mount however will not.

[1950n]

As long as they can sell enough aps c they will keep it in their program, but when their clients all start buying full frame it will become uncertain IMHO. So it depends on the photographers.

 

 

Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

[TaffyTheGog]

Ha, I remember that VHS Betamax thing.

 

Smorton

If you remembered it you'd know VHS and Beta were two very different things.

[TaffyTheGog]

Does anyone remember APS/Advantix film? It was the lead-in for APS-C digital cameras. It was like dropping watercolour paint on a Kleenex. And, compared to full frame, even today's sensors are just slightly better versions.

The whole issue with full frame was sensor flaws. I'm not sure in today's world this still applies. At this point, unless you own Sigma 1.8 zooms, you're really only holding onto APS-C for an investment in inferior glass. Sure, great results can be achieved with APS-C, 4/3 and 1 inch sensors, but there's a quality with full frame that comes through, much as it does for medium format.

Larger photosites. Better sensitivity, colour depth - just, generally more space for the light to breathe.

If in today's market it is just as feasible to make FF sensors as it is to make the smaller ones, well, no-brainer: larger sensors; smaller cameras. Like computers. How many Apple IIc computers would it take to equal the processing power and storage and RAM or your bloody phone?

DI I think is primed to finally become full-frame again. For everyone. And if Sony can do that, well, they're bigger heroes than when Starman invented Polaroid film.

All that said, despite loving FF and all its benefits, I'll still just be happy with whichever camera I have on hand, because I like taking pictures.

[Touko]

Its not much of an investment anyway for Sony APS-C lenses...  between all the currently available models, they all average out to about $225 a pop.

 

Nothing you couldn't get rid of on eBay any day of the week to those who just want a decent camera and don't care if its a currently selling model or not.

[Bindegal]

It seems like some people are taking the lack of IBIS in the A6300 as a sign Sony isn´t taking APS-C seriously?

Well consider this. If the crop sensor camera became almost as big and expensive as the fullframe one, we´d have a problem.

 

Whether we like it or not, APS-C will for the most part remain the cheaper and physically smaller option to a fullframe body.

 

So rather than an IBIS enabled A6xxx body, how about a new A5000 and A6000, with new sensor technology, at an affordable price instead?

 

I´m just hoping third party lens manufacturers will pick up the mantle and produce some nice and small APS-C lenses if Sony keeps slacking.

 

/Allan

[ethierbach]

Many of us have a cost ceiling. The E-mount FF gear is just too expensive for me.  Even on the rare occasion where I actually do have that kind of cash, I can't see spending it all for a basic FF setup, when I could get more bang for my buck with the smaller sensors.  Even with the drawbacks of APS-C and M43.

 

Olympus somehow manages smaller and cheaper with IBIS.  I know the sensor is smaller, so I don't expect an APS-C IBIS camera to be the size of an M10 or M5.  But I don't think it needs to be the size and weight of the A7 series...maybe I'm wrong about that.

 

Give me a 5-stop improvement in ISO performance and IBIS becomes less important to me; then I can compensate with a higher shutter speed.

I don't see the problem with a high-end APS-C camera being the size and cost of the A7II. Canon, at least, seems to do just fine with overlap of their FF and crop camera lines.

 

Just my opinions, of course...everyone will have a different view.

[PierreP]

IBIS was important, but then, had they included it, I'm pretty sure the A6300 would have competed too much with the A7II. BSI was also another important feature they missed.

 

I'd have preferred to have these two features, for more money, than a €1250 body that just looks like a "minor" upgrade compared with my A6000. 

 

Of course, the advantage now is that it makes the €1450 A7II, with full frame sensor and IBIS, much more attractive. Damn, I would even consider an A7 rather than upgrading my A6000 to A6300 (AF speed is ok with my A6000, and A7 would bring more IQ).

 

I don't know why, but I feel Sony is misunderstanding the APS-C market, making it a secondary market while this is where, in my opinion, most photographers are. FF is super, and a dream for many photographers thanks to marketing (full vs. crop, this naming was brilliant), but it's still expensive.

[Guest all8]

The a6300 just got the best AF performance and best EVF behaviour for high speed shooting of any recent Sony camera. That does not sound secondary to me! You can get IBIS for 200 € more, and Full Frame, which still works with APS-C lenses. Sony just released an affordable 50mm FF lens too.

 

However, one has to wonder if Sony is working on something else which prevents them from doing full refreshes of either the a6x00 or a7 lines?

[Golem]

.......... 

 

Give me a 5-stop improvement in ISO performance

and IBIS becomes less important to me; then I can

compensate with a higher shutter speed.

........... 

  

That won't work in low light available light conditions.

Unless the low light is incandescent, which will soon

be toadally gone away. Shooting above 1/50" under

pulsing light sources is very troublesome.    

  

CFLs are mildly troublesome but LEDs are a serious

PITA. Those mercury laden CFLs with shortly follow

incandescent bulbs into grave. LEDs are becoming

the universal choice, now that the price is right.  

   

I was wondering whether to get an A7S or and A7M2

for low light work. The 7S offered shutter speed via

cleaner high ISO while 7M2 offered IBIS. By chance

alone I wound up with an 7M2. Right after acquiring

the 7M2 I replaced a bunch of burnt out CFLs with

LEDs and then thought I was having shutter problems

with the new camera ... but only in the rooms that had

the LED lighting !

 

After I figgered out the situation, I realized I was much

better off using a 7M2 with IBIS, rather than use a 7S

with faster shutter speeds.

[Austerror]

Is that something to do with main power frequency?  

60hz/50hz?

 

I've not encountered that problem my self with LED lights, but I've not been shooting with slower shutter speeds.  Does this phenomena present itself once the shutter speed starts to get close to the AC frequency?