Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 10, 2006, 11:07 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

tmoreau wrote:
Quote:
I had a few moments of frustration recently regarding the availibility of some lenses, and the fact that most minolta telephoto lenses are fetching a huge premium right now compared to the other brands. I sat down and did my homework for a switch and found some interesting things.

Canon and nikon each were missing a lens or two in thier lineups that I would like to have, and each had at least one lens that I wanted which was prices WAY over what I could spend on it. Considering what I could sell my stuff for, what I'd have to spend, and how little that situation is going to change in two or five years, I realized I have no reason at all to switch. If I have reason to later, I can address it then.

Just to add to what you saying, imagine if you factor in what IS lenses would cost you to that equation.
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2006, 9:00 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
tmoreau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 477
Default

I did, it was insane. Canon would be nice if the f/4L lenses suited your every need, but I really like at least a usable f/2.8. What costed me $750 in used minolta and 3rd party lenses has the potential to cost several thousand to replace in a switch. Then there was that deal on the 7D... I have a mid to high-end camera with a modest collection of prime lenses for about the price of a 30D body only.

There is so much back and forth if your really taking a disinterested look at the brands. Minolta has a very cheap and good 70-200 f/4, canon's 70-200 f/4L is a fair price, and Nikon dosent offer an equivilent. But then, Nikons 80-200 f/2.8 is a bargain, the minolta 70-200 f/2.8 lenses are super scarce and massively expensive when you find them, and then canon is even worse when you consider the IS version. Even though your limited for the next year or so to only used lenses, the minolta lineup is still very solid in the face of its competition and the prices are mostly quite reasonable.
tmoreau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2006, 10:11 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 338
Default

Kalypso wrote:
Quote:
They just entered the DSLR market. I'm not surprised that they don't have the lens selection of Canon, Nikon (or Minolta for that matter). I have a Minolta 50mm/f1.7 & I paid less than $60.00 for it (& it will work on the Alpha just fine).

Yeah, Minolta, KM, and most other A-mount lenses will work fine on a Sony DSLR, but that doesn't really address the point I was making. Sony is only building entry level (or pro-sumer) bodies whilemostly making mid to highpriced lenses. The two markets don't coorelate, people looking for a bargain in bodies aren't likely to buy expensive lenses (in volume).Personally I think that is a result of the way KM decided to remove itself from the market more than a linear strategy because there is no product balance. While that is a bit disappointing today, it's also heartening to infer (by the fact that sony is producing some true pro lenses) that pro level bodies will follow. (Also street prices are sure to drop below current which may make some of the mid-grade Sony lenses more attractive to A100 buyers.)
Mercury694 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 11, 2006, 10:54 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

It's all speculation but it just makes no sense that Sony would enter the market at all if their intent was to offer only an entry level model and introduce other models at some point. Every DSLR manufacturer has several models except Panasonic since they are also a new kid on the block. I don't think any true contender can survive in the DSLR market with one offering unless theyhave a niche product offering that it can't be bought elsewhere. Even then, it still makes sense to offer more than model just to sell more lenses.

As far as the curent logic for good glass, it may be for several reasons.Ithink good glass may compliment the 10MP high resoultion capability of theAlpha really well. Granted not every entry level consumer will be willing to pay for good glass but there are some existing 5D owners that do. Truthfully good glass works the same in a 5D as it does a 7D. I would imagine that plenty of 7D owners still want good glass, but of course all of this repair uncertainty does put a damper on things and I certainly would have to think long and hard before plunking down a lot of money on lenses. My needs are strictly as a hobby so good glass above the mid-range is wasted on me anyway.


meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:11 PM.