Prev: Two Nikon lenses, 70-200mm/16-85mm used at opposite extremes
Next: How to get dust off film for scanning.
From: Rich on 6 Jun 2010 14:04
SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in
news:4c0bcf6d$0$1649$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net:

> On 06/06/10 9:32 AM, Bruce wrote:
>
>> Also, I have heard a rumour from a usually reliable source that Sony
>> has designed, and is developing, a successor to the DSC-R1.
>
> An successor to the R1 would be a wonderful ZLR with its APS-C sized
> sensor.
>
> The NEX system was a good idea, but the execution was poor, and it
> will likely fail.

The R1, like Olympus's smaller sensor C-8080 and a few others did not skimp
on the lenses and didn't they try to make them hyper portable. In
addition, lens elements in both apparently reached to almost the sensor
surface. It would be easy for them to make such cameras again, but would
they sell, and would people be willing to pay what they'd have to for them?
Design freedoms aside, making a zoom lens that matches top DSLR zooms
doesn't get cheaper just because it's permanently attached to the camera.
Both the C-8080 and the R1 were over $1000 when new.
From: Paul Furman on 6 Jun 2010 15:45
RichA wrote:
> On Jun 5, 7:33 pm, Bruce <docnews2...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 05 Jun 2010 17:41:15 -0500, Rich <n...(a)nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The metal bodied one, or the plastic? Which will triumph?
>> The cheaper one will sell more. The more expensive one will be more
>> profitable, because it will carry a greater profit margin that will
>> make up for the lower unit sales.
>>
>> If the lenses were better, I could see myself buying an NEX5 to
>> replace the Panasonic Lumix GF1. The NEX lenses are the weak point of
>> the system - for now.
>
> I still might, and outfit it with adapters and conventional lenses.
> The camera itself has possibilities.

The problem is; it's not compact with conventional lenses plus adapters.
The Samsung NX10 has all that but doesn't seem to have made much of a
splash.
From: Bruce on 6 Jun 2010 17:34
On Sun, 06 Jun 2010 12:45:06 -0700, Paul Furman <paul-@-edgehill.net>
wrote:
>RichA wrote:
>> On Jun 5, 7:33 pm, Bruce <docnews2...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 05 Jun 2010 17:41:15 -0500, Rich <n...(a)nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The metal bodied one, or the plastic? Which will triumph?
>>> The cheaper one will sell more. The more expensive one will be more
>>> profitable, because it will carry a greater profit margin that will
>>> make up for the lower unit sales.
>>>
>>> If the lenses were better, I could see myself buying an NEX5 to
>>> replace the Panasonic Lumix GF1. The NEX lenses are the weak point of
>>> the system - for now.
>>
>> I still might, and outfit it with adapters and conventional lenses.
>> The camera itself has possibilities.
>
>The problem is; it's not compact with conventional lenses plus adapters.


It isn't compact with its own zoom lenses either. With the exception
of the compact 16mm f/2.8, which in any case appears to be a poor
performer, the lenses are far from small. After all, they incorporate
focusing motors and an anti-shake system.


>The Samsung NX10 has all that but doesn't seem to have made much of a
>splash.


Samsung still doesn't have Sony's reputation for quality.

Sony may not fully deserve its reputation, but it has been gained over
decades and has weathered several storms. Samsung is still the new
kid on the block, and the company hasn't yet earned people's trust.

There is also the issue that Samsung is Korean. Generally, Korean
companies don't yet seem to have the same credibility as Japanese
manufacturers, especially in Japan. This is perhaps a little unfair
on Samsung, given that so many Japanese-branded products are
manufactured in countries other than Japan.

From: dj_nme on 6 Jun 2010 21:20
Rich wrote:
> SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in
> news:4c0bcf6d$0$1649$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net:
>
>> On 06/06/10 9:32 AM, Bruce wrote:
>>
>>> Also, I have heard a rumour from a usually reliable source that Sony
>>> has designed, and is developing, a successor to the DSC-R1.
>> An successor to the R1 would be a wonderful ZLR with its APS-C sized
>> sensor.
>>
>> The NEX system was a good idea, but the execution was poor, and it
>> will likely fail.
>
> The R1, like Olympus's smaller sensor C-8080 and a few others did not skimp
> on the lenses and didn't they try to make them hyper portable. In
> addition, lens elements in both apparently reached to almost the sensor
> surface. It would be easy for them to make such cameras again, but would
> they sell, and would people be willing to pay what they'd have to for them?

I don't know (nobody really does), but I suspect that this market
segment is now served by DSLR cameras that cost roughly what those
"bridge" cameras cost when first released.

> Design freedoms aside, making a zoom lens that matches top DSLR zooms
> doesn't get cheaper just because it's permanently attached to the camera.
> Both the C-8080 and the R1 were over $1000 when new.

That makes sense, the lens on these cameras have either a big zoom range
or large elements and both lenses seemed to be built "up to a standard"
and not so much "down to a price".
From: dj_nme on 6 Jun 2010 21:26
Rich wrote:
> The metal bodied one, or the plastic? Which will triumph?

If they can get the kinks out of the "pre-production" lenses sent out
for review with the new cameras, then there is a chance that both can
"survive" in the marketplace.

I would perhaps like to buy one (maybe the NEX-5) and embed it into an
old (kaput) Contax III (RF camera) and so use my collection of lenses on
a "Frankensteined" digital body with an actual RF built into it.
Sort of like the Cybershot in a Canon AE1 that went around the web a few
weeks ago, but able to use the real lenses due to the big sensor and
short flange/sensor distance in the Sony NEX cameras.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Two Nikon lenses, 70-200mm/16-85mm used at opposite extremes
Next: How to get dust off film for scanning.