I Speak My Brains III

So, why are there no a-mount announcements? It’s been a while. The fact is that Sony is making a roaring success of its other cameras. The NEX range is one of the best-selling in the mirror-less space and the recent CyberShot RX models – the RX1 and the RX100 - have been very well received (I don’t get the need for the new RX10, but I’m sure it will sell well).

However, all of these are consumer cameras - the pro market has remained largely indifferent to Sony, sticking with Canikon and leaving a-mount looking increasingly like an encumbrance. Sony has quietly shrunk the a-mount line-up down to four models – the A58, A65, A77 and A99 – removing the entry level models as that market has been cannibalised by NEX. This does rather call into question Sony’s decision to purchase Konica-Minolta as a route into the market as the business they now have owes little to this now-defunct brand.

There is one fly in the e-mount ointment, though. I don’t see the third party lens support for it. All of the major players make a-mount versions of most, if not all, of their lenses, but the choice for e-mount looks somewhat less extensive.

Okay, I know that Zeiss make e-mount lenses, which is fine if you have deep pockets, but my Sigma macro lens is good enough for me and a fraction of the price of its Sony or Zeiss counterparts.

Assuming I have the choice, I’d want to see much more third party support for e-mount before I adopt it.

The image above comes from our return visit to the National Botanic Gardens of Wales. I'm not sure what type of flower it is. Again, my Tamron super-zoom was pressed into service in the absence of my Sigma macro lens.

I Speak My Brains II

In the past I've been deliberately obtuse about the reasons why Sony have had to develop a new lens mount for their mirror-less cameras – but I do understand, really. It’s because the flange distance on the a-mount lenses is prohibitively large and would have driven up the size of the camera bodies, thus negating one of the main benefits of a mirror-less design.

[Canikon have this problem as well, which is why their mirror-less offerings eschew their long established standard lens mounts.]

The A7s are currently the world’s smallest full frame cameras, smaller even than the Olympus OM-D, as Sony are keen to point out. However, the current drive for smaller and lighter bodies can only take them and their competitors so far – what then?

I guess that I'm looking to Sony to start innovating in terms of form factor. Despite all the advances of the past few years, cameras are still basically a box with a lens on the front, a screen on the back and some buttons on the top; surely, with the mirror and the OVF gone, we can do something different?

This image comes from a return visit that we made to the National Botanic Garden of Wales in September to see the IGPOTY exhibition that was running at the time. I found this mushroom on one of the nature walks. Without my tripod or remote release, I had to put the camera on the ground and use the self timer to make the image. I should also say that I was using my Tamron super-zoom as my macro lens was being repaired. Despite all these factors, I think that the resulting image is passable. 

I Speak My Brains

Over the next few posts, I'll record some of my thoughts about the direction that Sony Imaging is taking, then we can determine the level of my prognosticative powers. To start with, some reflections on the designation of the new full frame cameras announced last week.

First, a quick recap of my understanding of Sony’s naming conventions. 

A + 3 digits = DSLR; 

A + 2 digits = DSLT; 

A + 1 digit = full frame(?) mirror-less(?); 

The higher the number, the higher the spec of the camera, with A9** being the top of any particular range.

Confusingly, the same number doesn't designate cameras at the same price point in different ranges. And I don't get why two very different cameras - the A7 and A7r - are given similar designations. And how are upgrades to be designated? With the three and two digit nomenclature, this was easy, but with a single digit you have to go to mark numbers, which would be a new departure for Sony.

Whatever, designating the new cameras as A7s leaves room in the range for a higher spec A9 - and an A9r? -  model. What would that be like? A full frame, 48 mega-pixel mirror-less model, perhaps?

Anyway, the image above is the final one from the last batch that I made prior to my Sigma lens breaking. Its another of a rose from our garden - I was experimenting with black backgrounds at this point, which I've get to return to.

Sony Day

Yesterday was a big day for Sony's Imaging division. They announced three new cameras, amongst them not one, but two full frame e-mount models - the third being the RX10, which amounts to a £1,000 bridge camera with a big sensor.

Anyway, back to the e-mount cameras, the A7 and the A7r. The two share the same body, although the internals are quite different. The first has a 24 mega-pixel sensor with a hybrid autofocus system, but the second is a 36 mega-pixel monster, optimised  - if you believe Sony - for image quality, without a low-pass optical filter to improve resolution further.

Along with the cameras, five full frame - designated FE - Zeiss (aka expensive) lenses were announced, with more to come next year.

Its interesting to note that, despite the fact that the A7s are effectively NEX cameras, they attract an Alpha designation. Apparently, Sony are bringing the two brands together. Now, I find the Sony camera range confusing enough as it is and I'm a fairly assiduous Sony watcher. In my view the whole range is likely become a hotchpotch of a-mount and e-mount cameras that will be incomprehensible to a disinterested observer.

Despite all this and my previous ranting on the subject, I find myself really wanting an A7r. Body only, one of these babies comes in around £1,700. And I'd need a new lens kit, so the whole lot would set me back the better part of four grand. So, that's not going to happen then.

Above is another image of a rose that I made with my now rather sorry looking Alpha 77. Enjoy, if you can bear to be without the additional twelve mega-pixels.

Cold Roses

Another rose from our garden. I've posted images of roses from this bush before - the flowers are dark red, probably my favourite blooms in the whole garden. 

The bush is quite leggy, so some of the flowers are above head height and difficult to photograph. I'd have been happier if the camera had been level with this one rather than below, resulting in the slight upward angle that I've had to use, but needs must and all that.

My previous post, "Acuf Rose" was named after an Uncle Tupelo track, off their final album "Anodyne". The track took its name from the music publishing partnership of the same name and features the lyric "Name me a song that everybody knows / I'll bet you it belongs to Acuf Rose." 

This post takes its title from a double album released by another alt-country luminary.

The Real Deal

If you want to see how flower photography should be done (stifled sob) - and to see a properly designed website, although a little more commentary would be nice - you should check out the work of Annemarie Farley here.

Acuf Rose

After the ranting of my previous post, back to some actual imagery.

This is, obviously, of a rose from our garden. We have several bushes, this particular one is pink. I struggled to make decent images of these flowers all summer and ended with only a couple that are passable, of which this is one.

"I Remember California" took its title from a track by REM, from their major label début album "Green". This post title has a very general musical connection, but it has been used as a track title as well.