Why mirrorless sales are disapointing

Alastair said:
And that's the one appeal of the A7/r - a very niche market of old lens users. There's very little in the system to appeal to the average buyer also looking at a Canon or Nikon full-frame DSLR. There's nothing mid-range or affordable in the native mount.

I dread all the on-line posts calling for Fujifilm to produce a full-frame X-series - can they not see what a disaster it would be to "do a Sony" and try and support too many systems?
Click to expand...

I saw a guy with a Sony A7 mounted with an old manual lens on the tube one morning last week. Have to say it looked very cool but not sure I'd personally pay that much money to use manual focus all the time :(
 
twist said:
Its not difficult is it, job coming up, charge batteries, surely the same again applies to DSLR batteries. Bags have more than one 'pocket'. And 9 batteries is what he would use as an extreme, most will get away with far less.
Click to expand...

A D3s you can get what 4,200 shots on one charge the specs rate it at? If I'm using something that takes 9 batteries I'd reckon I'd be using the wrong tool for the job.
 
Laudrup said:
A D3s you can get what 4,200 shots on one charge the specs rate it at? If I'm using something that takes 9 batteries I'd reckon I'd be using the wrong tool for the job.
Click to expand...

Perhaps but it wouldnt stop you doing it. Seriously who takes 4000 shots in one session. Does that fall under spray and pray?
 
woof woof said:
They seem to have gone for quality, Look at the two primes available and see what similar quality lenses would cost from Nikon and Canon.
Click to expand...

It's the lenses that aren't available that's the problem. By the time Sony put the "system" into CSC the original bodies will be due replacement in the line-up if Sony go by their usual hardware-in-preference-to-firmware upgrade cycles.

It all comes down to whether the market can wait two years from the bodies being released to the system maturing. Fuji have done it with the X-series, but even though they mucked up the model release schedule they managed to create and maintain a strong brand for the X-series spanning compacts to ILCs and provide the ongoing firmware support that maintained consumer confidence. Sony are usually masters of brand identity (Playstation, Walkman, etc.) but have lost the plot with the Alpha/NEX charlie fox they're going through with the camera division - and Sony's track record with firmware support is poor at best.
 
Alastair said:
It's the lenses that aren't available that's the problem. By the time Sony put the "system" into CSC the original bodies will be due replacement in the line-up if Sony go by their usual hardware-in-preference-to-firmware upgrade cycles.

It all comes down to whether the market can wait two years from the bodies being released to the system maturing. Fuji have done it with the X-series, but even though they mucked up the model release schedule they managed to create and maintain a strong brand for the X-series spanning compacts to ILCs and provide the ongoing firmware support that maintained consumer confidence. Sony are usually masters of brand identity (Playstation, Walkman, etc.) but have lost the plot with the Alpha/NEX charlie fox they're going through with the camera division - and Sony's track record with firmware support is poor at best.
Click to expand...

What lenses is it missing?
 
Alastair said:
It's the lenses that aren't available that's the problem. By the time Sony put the "system" into CSC the original bodies will be due replacement in the line-up if Sony go by their usual hardware-in-preference-to-firmware upgrade cycles.
Click to expand...

I'm sure I read somewhere that no company has the capacity to design/introduce more that two or three lenses a year. If that's anywhere near true, even if we double the numbers to four to six... we can at least begin to accept that we aren't going to get a new system to compare with Canon and Nikon overnight, and if we look at Canon (it's a long time since I owned a Nikon) we can see more than one lens that's long in the tooth and not at the cutting edge these days so even the big two can't keep their line ups up to date.
 
Laudrup said:
A D3s you can get what 4,200 shots on one charge the specs rate it at? If I'm using something that takes 9 batteries I'd reckon I'd be using the wrong tool for the job.
Click to expand...


That doesn't negate the need to carry a spare or two though.

9 batteries is way overkill anyway, unless we're talking AAs
 
To be honest, I'm still bemused how CSC got so popular anyway...

What does it have over a DSLR aside from size???

Maybe it's that same thinking from a lot of camera owners that have a major influence in the growth of the CSC market.

When you think about an interchangeable system, for most people, it's an either/or question. Having 2 interchangeable systems just isn't cost effective for most so then the question will always be, which is better for you. For dexterity, lens choice, viewfinder, AF etc...it will always be a DSLR.

Having said all that...

Panasonic *almost* got my attention with their latested and greatest :)
 
Last edited:
JYC said:
I saw a guy with a Sony A7 mounted with an old manual lens on the tube one morning last week. Have to say it looked very cool but not sure I'd personally pay that much money to use manual focus all the time :(
Click to expand...

For most of my photography I don't miss AF and with AF there's always the question of what the camera will focus on. With MF assuming that you have the time you can focus on what you want and do it very accurately. Even if calling up the magnified view I find that focusing and shooting isn't painfully slow and although it does take longer than AF it doesn't take a great deal longer if you take the time to ensure that when AF-ing you're focusing on what you want to.

It's not for everyone but I find manually focusing with either my A7 or G1 to be quite easy and I find shooting with these cameras and manual lenses to be a very film like experience, much more so than when shooting with my 5D and AF lenses, all now sold.
 
So what does FE have thats native, I think thats the important question, not what you could use on it with adapters. You could use pretty much any lens on any mirrorless via adapter.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
Perhaps but it wouldnt stop you doing it. Seriously who takes 4000 shots in one session. Does that fall under spray and pray?
Click to expand...

Does seem like that to me,spray and pray.

I took my Xpro-1 plus my XE-2 to London the other week,out all day only change my battery once,took 4 Spare,they hardly weight anything :)
 
woof woof said:
For most of my photography I don't miss AF and with AF there's always the question of what the camera will focus on. With MF assuming that you have the time you can focus on what you want and do it very accurately. Even if calling up the magnified view I find that focusing and shooting isn't painfully slow and although it does take longer than AF it doesn't take a great deal longer if you take the time to ensure that when AF-ing you're focusing on what you want to.

It's not for everyone but I find manually focusing with either my A7 or G1 to be quite easy and I find shooting with these cameras and manual lenses to be a very film like experience, much more so than when shooting with my 5D and AF lenses, all now sold.
Click to expand...

I find the 'user satisfaction' point for MF fair enough - personal preference obviously. But equally I would miss many 'spur of the moment' photos to use it personally.

Bit like people who go on caravan holidays. I'd just stay in a hotel but each to their own :p
 
Laudrup said:
What lenses is it missing?
Click to expand...

Anything that's not the Zeiss 35mm, Zeiss 55mm or the 28-70mm kit zoom.. the Zeiss 24-70mm might now be available, but I haven't been following Sony that closely lately. If the 70-200mm makes it into the shops this year that would qualify the range as being a functional system to my definition. But a very expensive one compared to Canon/Nikon options.

More important than keeping a lens system up-to-date is having a lens system available. Sony's response has been "use an adapter and you can use A-mount lenses", but that throws away the size advantage - making the FE range a CSC that can either be compact or a system, but not both.
 
Alastair said:
Anything that's not the Zeiss 35mm, Zeiss 55mm or the 28-70mm kit zoom.. the Zeiss 24-70mm might now be available, but I haven't been following Sony that closely lately. If the 70-200mm makes it into the shops this year that would qualify the range as being a functional system to my definition. But a very expensive one compared to Canon/Nikon options.
Click to expand...

Well, a Sony A7 is £1,500 and a 5D is £2,300 so going for the Sony leaves some cash for lenses :D

Lens wise I don't know if there's anything in the Canon or Nikon cupboard to compare with the Sony 55mm f1.8 and 35mm f2.8 primes but a Sony 24-70mm f4 is £1,049 and the Canon 24-70mm f4 is £1,029. Considering the quality of these lenses personally I can understand the pricing.
 
JYC said:
You can't be serious right? We are talking about the FE series... What does it have is a more appropriate question.
Click to expand...

It's got a 28-70 kit lens, 35mm, 55mm and 24-70 f/4 with a 70-200 f/4 on the way and the ability to use almost any 35mm lens manually. The 55 is the second place on the DxO chart of lenses tested. What more do people want?
 
woof woof said:
Well, a Sony A7 is £1,500 and a 5D is £2,300 so going for the Sony leaves some cash for lenses :D

Lens wise I don't know if there's anything in the Canon or Nikon cupboard to compare with the Sony 55mm f1.8 and 35mm f2.8 primes but a Sony 24-70mm f4 is £1,049 and the Canon 24-70mm f4 is £1,029. Considering the quality of these lenses personally I can understand the pricing.
Click to expand...

But when you compare..

A7 + 24-70 + 70-200 to 6D + 24-70 + 70-200
or,
A7r + 24-70 + 70-200 to 5Diii + 24-70 + 70-200

The price comparison is a little different.. ;)
 
Phil Young said:
To be honest, I'm still bemused how CSC got so popular anyway...

What does it have over a DSLR aside from size???

Maybe it's that same thinking from a lot of camera owners that have a major influence in the growth of the CSC market.

When you think about an interchangeable system, for most people, it's an either/or question. Having 2 interchangeable systems just isn't cost effective for most so then the question will always be, which is better for you. For dexterity, lens choice, viewfinder, AF etc...it will always be a DSLR.

Having said all that...

Panasonic *almost* got my attention with their latested and greatest :)
Click to expand...


An alternate viewpoint would be I can't work out why DSLR's are so popular still. CSC is a far better choice for most users and a moving mirror is so 1990s ;)
 
Alastair said:
But when you compare..

A7 + 24-70 + 70-200 to 6D + 24-70 + 70-200
or,
A7r + 24-70 + 70-200 to 5Diii + 24-70 + 70-200

The price comparison is a little different.. ;)
Click to expand...

Going for actual prices rather than rounding up...

6D is £1,379
A7 is £1,235

5DIII is £2,329
7R is £1,679
(prices from Wex.)

There is no Sony Fe 70-200mm yet AFAIK but as above the 24-70mm f4's seem to be the same price as the Canon or withing a few £ anyway.
 
Last edited:
boyfalldown said:
An alternate viewpoint would be I can't work out why DSLR's are so popular still. CSC is a far better choice for most users and a moving mirror is so 1990s ;)
Click to expand...
But why would an inferior (by a number of necessary features for most users) be more popular???

The best course of action IMO would be to combin the DSLR features with a mirror-less shutter and that could open up many doors but as it is, it's either a beefed up compact or a small DSLR but either way it's another investment in an additional or alternative system.
 
Personally really happy with the lens selection now available from Panasonic/Olympus for micro 4/3rds bodies, it's really progressed since the early days of m43, and the newer 12-35 and 35-100 2.8 lenses are a nice nod to the classic 24-70 and 70-200 zooms :) There's some awesome wide primes available for not a lot of money too.

EVF and battery life aren't amazing, however the rear screen on the latest Lumix is ridiculously clear and touch screen AF is fantastic, I haven't needed to use the VF yet, and I came from a 5D without LiveView! No I probably wouldn't go on Safari with a CSC, but for almost everything else it's more convenient for me to use a GX7. And it looks cool :p

They alluded to the slump being partly due to the collapse of Jessops, and I think that's right; if you can get a recent CSC in someone's hands, explain the pro's con's and let them press a few buttons, they might easily decide this is the way to go, instead of the entry level DSLR they perceived to be the next 'step-up' from their phone/P&S camera. But since the high street in general is in decline, I guess the challenge for Oly/Panasonic et al, is reaching that potential market with the right info and some glossy promotional material!
 
woof woof said:
Well, a Sony A7 is £1,500 and a 5D is £2,300 so going for the Sony leaves some cash for lenses :D

Lens wise I don't know if there's anything in the Canon or Nikon cupboard to compare with the Sony 55mm f1.8 and 35mm f2.8 primes but a Sony 24-70mm f4 is £1,049 and the Canon 24-70mm f4 is £1,029. Considering the quality of these lenses personally I can understand the pricing.
Click to expand...
A Nikon D610 is just over £1000 at some places, FF DSLR for £1000 seems good value for money, and unless you print really big, 24mp is more than enough

I can stick any F mount Nikkor lens on, seems good to me. Its not that heavy anyway
 
Phil Young said:
But why would an inferior (by a number of necessary features for most users) be more popular???

The best course of action IMO would be to combin the DSLR features with a mirror-less shutter and that could open up many doors but as it is, it's either a beefed up compact or a small DSLR but either way it's another investment in an additional or alternative system.
Click to expand...

which features are inferior? IQ, nope
Af- Maybe, but its more the good enough for most uses. Maybe not for pro sports or wildlife

Smaller size, better handling (I realise thats subjective), less moving parts all should make them much more accessible to the average user..........

Sadly, any change always means new investment.
 
boyfalldown said:
which features are inferior? IQ, nope
Af- Maybe, but its more the good enough for most uses. Maybe not for pro sports or wildlife

Smaller size, better handling (I realise thats subjective), less moving parts all should make them much more accessible to the average user..........

Sadly, any change always means new investment.
Click to expand...
Ergonomics (could be improved I realise), OVF, AF.

That's where it stops for me. We could go into lists of pros and cons but at the moment, with a severely unbalanced lens, awkward handling and lacl of OVF, it will never be in my list of wants.

Just looked at the sony A7. Looks nice and even accepts nikon lenses with an adapter BUT...

It still boils down to the points above (for me).
 
Phil Young said:
Ergonomics (could be improved I realise), OVF, AF.

That's where it stops for me. We could go into lists of pros and cons but at the moment, with a severely unbalanced lens, awkward handling and lacl of OVF, it will never be in my list of wants.

Just looked at the sony A7. Looks nice and even accepts nikon lenses with an adapter BUT...

It still boils down to the points above (for me).
Click to expand...


Yep, I do recognise it'll always be taste, but for me, they work well.
 
Laudrup said:
Who wants to charge up 9 batteries and keep track of the used ones? Just use a DSLR.
Click to expand...


Make up a Cotton real style slide....
take out from the bottom... old ones in from the top.
Easy to make out of leather.
You could even mount it on your strap.

Though the Idea that you might need 9 batteries is a big exaggeration.
 
Phil Young said:
And you are the type of person that will increase CSC growth.

The question for the future of CSC is...how many people out there think like me???
Click to expand...
Until the AF is as good as DSLRs, then I`m with you on this Phil. I shoot, mainly wildlife, so this is an important point for me.
 
Its definitely not unbalanced with the 24-70 its perfect.

Its on sensor which isn't as good as a separate AF sensor.
 
Phil Young said:
I just don't know how someone could even hold it with a fairly long lens...the A7 & 24-70 looks severely unbalanced.

Out of interest, why isn't CSC AF as good - the A7 boasts over 100 phase detection points...?
Click to expand...
From what I have read, although I could very well be wrong, it is nowhere near as fast as say a D700.

I need to do more research to be honest though.
 
You mean stick a mirror in there and have a separate sensor, think it would be a DSLR then. lol
Its just one of the trade-offs for having smaller system.
 
robj20 said:
Its on sensor which isn't as good as a separate AF sensor.
Click to expand...
For static subjects (which is what I shoot) CSC focusing systems are actually faster and more accurate than DSLRs.... On chip phase detect will mature and then CSCs will be as good as/better for moving targets too.
 
ST4 said:
A Nikon D610 is just over £1000 at some places, FF DSLR for £1000 seems good value for money, and unless you print really big, 24mp is more than enough

I can stick any F mount Nikkor lens on, seems good to me. Its not that heavy anyway
Click to expand...

I could mount manual lenses on my 20D and 5D but the problem is focusing. For close up stuff and stuff which is big in the frame focusing isn't a problem even with a modern DSLR but once you get away from that how are you going to get precise focus? With a CSC you get a magnified view and possibly focus peaking which makes manual focus accurate and arguably... if you have the time... more accurate than AF.
 
Last edited:
Phil Young said:
I just don't know how someone could even hold it with a fairly long lens...the A7 & 24-70 looks severely unbalanced.

Out of interest, why isn't CSC AF as good - the A7 boasts over 100 phase detection points...?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing that actually being on the sensor limits phase AF compared to a separate chip, maybe the light isn't spilt as widely(like rangefinders with a longer baselenght focusing more effectively) or maybe the sensors themselves are small?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top