Comments on: Sony A850 will be full frame

By: Survivor

Survivor — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 02:33:20 +0000

It was on the Sony website. They are not known for spoofing manuals on their support site…

By: ogata

ogata — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 01:47:11 +0000

no one doubts that the pdf is just a fake made from the a900 manual?

By: Survivor

Survivor — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 22:39:26 +0000

I think you are missing the fact that being full frame means even though the MP count is going up vs. APS-C, the pixel density is going down – which is of course why there are 60 MP Medium format cameras (i.e. you need to increase the MP count to fill the frame and maintain the density.)

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 21:29:24 +0000

@survivor
I think this this not the right comparison you’re making
In my opinion 98%of all commercially used images don’t use more than 3mp. Though the NEED for 24 is really little.
Here we just have limits, and those limits are our eyes. You can print a 12mp pictures at a size where it is more than most poeüle actually want it. Though, we a a physical limit to what we need, because ours eyes “can’t see more”.

By: bibbles

bibbles — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:24:31 +0000

we’re not going to see a $1999 24MP camera. sorry.

By: Sky

Sky — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 14:53:51 +0000

yep, you don’t understand sony.
A230/230/380 are cams for people upgrading from point and shoot.
A850 is cheaper A900 – different speed, differend viewfinder, and so on…

By: Sky

Sky — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 14:52:05 +0000

it’ll be cheaper A900, not successor of A700 – successor of A700 will be (already rumored) A750.

By: Survivor

Survivor — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 12:47:26 +0000

Kind of like, no one will ever need more than 640K of ram?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 06:59:41 +0000

In my opinion it comes down to it’s noise habits. While 24mp are sure something nice to have, there is only a very small circle of people that really NEED 24mp. Though if the noise levels aren’t any better, which I’ll doubt, I think most of the people will still choose a APS-C camera with killer fps, superb handling and an autofocus system that is the best in town. This is why I don’t think that it will make a D300/s/400 loose much of it’s share.
But the good thing about it, is that it will certainly have an impact on prices, Nikon and Canon will be forced to drop their prices as well, as they are, especially at Nikon, ridiculously high for FX/FF.

By: Rebel

Rebel — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 18:56:08 +0000

I can buy an Alpha 900 for about 2000€, I hope the new FF A850 will cost 1500€… like a Nikon D300s!
But if this will be true I think there cannot be that many photographers who will opt for an A900: so the A900 will ”die”…

By: T3

T3 — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 18:25:05 +0000

Rebel you can buy a a900 for $2500 and I am almost sure that you will can a a850 for $1800 with a little bit difference….

By: Rebel

Rebel — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 16:57:10 +0000

I don’t understand Sony …this A850 is identical to the Alpha 900!! As 230/330/380 are identical to the old models !!

By: Survivor

Survivor — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 16:08:18 +0000

FF is only a niche product because of the price, just like HDTV was a niche product 5 years ago.

The reason this is huge is that it will allow the advanced amateur to purchase a FF camera for APS-C dollars.

If indeed Sony is planning on launching this at the much discussed price point, that minority market share that you speak of will rapidly advance (which is of course why it is rumored that Canon is also preparing to launch an affordable FF camera.)

As for IQ, head over to Dxomark and take a look at the A900.

By: gurbally

gurbally — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 14:32:11 +0000

Sony’s 135mm 1.8 is unsurpassed.

By: gurbally

gurbally — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 14:31:06 +0000

I will now definitely conside Sony because it now has superb Carl Zeiss lenses like 16-35mm 2.8, 85mm 1.4 and 135mm 1.8. Sony are a much much bigger company than Canon and Nikon and they are very serious about capturing the DSLR market.

By: Sproutey

Sproutey — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 13:26:07 +0000

Why is it huge?
FF remains a tiny niche product with a total single-figure percentage market share. To say this will kill the D300s and 60D when both those cameras will absolutely destroy this one on specification and still offer killer IQ is patently ridiculous.
A complete non-event when Sony have no true prosumer spec APS-C camera to fight the big two.
FF is simply not a huge deal outside of the minority of vocal internet fans at this end of the market.

By: Survivor

Survivor — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 10:57:49 +0000

This is HUGE!

If they can offer this at a price point comfortably below $2000, it would be a groundbreaking announcement. Looking at the predicted specs (basically A900 with slower FPS and smaller viewfinder) it becomes a D300S + Cannon 60D killer.)

While “perks” like live view and video are nice, they are not needed – especially at that price point with THAT sensor.

By: T3

T3 — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 10:27:10 +0000

I would hope $1800 only body…

How much will be the D700x??

By: tk

tk — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 06:02:19 +0000

i would consider this if the price point is below 2k( lets say 1.8k ).

By: NikoDoby

NikoDoby — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 05:26:46 +0000

I don’t get it rawr? A $1999US FULL FRAME camera is a bad thing?