When Zaibatsu's Attack!

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by digitalandfilm, Oct 16, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    Or.. how Sony just crushed the release of the OMD-EM1:

    [ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YUqAb7grI4&feature=share&list=UUnXgMYLGh8jyeqzUjJRueHQ"]FIRST LOOK Alpha A7/7R - YouTube[/ame]
     
  2. tanngrisnir3

    tanngrisnir3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    594
    Oct 18, 2011
    Eh. Sony is hardly a Zaibatsu in the classical sense of the word.

    That, and the cameras and their formats are two different animals altogether.

    There is no assurance that Sony won't stumble over it's lens offerings (again).
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
  4. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    I shoot both FF Nikon DSLRs and M43 bodies. I can get equally good shots from both systems. Only an insecure tech geek would think a mirrorless FF body would give them godly photography skills making them superior to all others. :rolleyes:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Mikefellh

    Mikefellh Mu-43 Top Veteran

    939
    Jun 7, 2012
    Toronto, Canada
    They are a pair of butt ugly cameras...they remind me of the early Mavica digital cameras, not elegant looking like the E-M5!
     
  6. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    You really should know what your talking about before you pound on the keyboard. Not doing so makes you come off as ignorant and foolish.

    "Mitsui (parent of Sony) was one of the largest zaibatsu, operating in numerous fields."

    "In 1909, a Mitsui controlled holding company took over the business, with Mitsui thus becoming a zaibatsu of more than 150 companies operating financial, industrial and commercial industries."
     
  7. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    Cameras aren't mean't to be runway models... :rolleyes:
     
  8. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    Only an insecure tech geek would post that a camera (clearly superior to m4/3'rds) is compatible with huge dslrs or hamstrung m4/3rds offerings. :biggrin:

    I see GX1's and OMD's selling for $240-640 range.. wonder why!
     
  9. darosk

    darosk Mu-43 Top Veteran

    705
    Apr 17, 2013
    Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia
    Daros
    While that's true, it certainly doesn't hurt to have a nice look for a camera. For some of us (yours truly included) physical aesthetics are still a major factor, maybe almost as much as IQ/features etc etc.

    I'm still yet to be enticed by any of Sony's camera designs.
     
  10. JeanLucX

    JeanLucX Mu-43 Regular

    60
    Oct 3, 2013
    NYC
    Yeah, I really want to switch to Sony too:( but really couldn't afford it. 1600 for a camera is a lot of money for me. Even I could afford the body, I couldn't afford the lens. I personally couldn't imagine myself spending 1600 on cameras, maybe if I get paid for it but I certainly won't pay anything close to that. Lets hope the Sony 7r drops to 600 soon.
     
  11. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    I have no clue what you're spouting about? Seriously, only a non-photographer would cheerlead one camera over another as if it were some sort of pissing contest. :rolleyes: Are you 12 yrs. old or something?
     
  12. bigal1000

    bigal1000 Mu-43 Veteran

    337
    Sep 10, 2010
    New Hampshire
    Sorry,but I'm not awestruck and the 7R looks as though the body was designed by 1 st graders. Only my opinion!
     
  13. goldenlight

    goldenlight Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 30, 2010
    Essex
    John
    Hi Digitalandfilm, I thought you had left us!

    "Decided its time for me to move on and say bye bye to this forum.

    I no longer see :43: in my future or camera bag, and in addition I have a lousy history here. The run-ins were all very petty and childish and put me in a bad place.

    I find I'm better suited to Google+ and a few other forums, but if you are interested in my work you can go to www.digitalandfilm.com which I just redesigned or G+.

    Thank you Amin for allowing me back after some nasty comments, etc.

    Keep shooting- F8 and be there!"


    You left with good grace, but have you returned with that same good grace, or mainly to mock us with the news of what you see as a game changer from Sony? Sorry, but I can forsee this thread ending badly and given that you've already stated you see no future with :43: for yourself and feel this forum no longer suits you I do wonder at your motives for starting this thread.
     
  14. napilopez

    napilopez Contributing Editor

    826
    Feb 21, 2012
    NYC Area
    Napier Lopez
    Haha, I don't mean to be rude, but you're sounding a little exaggerated, although I'm sure your feelings are genuine.

    In any case, we all knew this was coming. I'm pretty sure not a single person who frequents a Micro Four Thirds website hadn't heard the rumors about this that had been floating around for months upon months. Thus, I'm not sure what the furor around users of some of the M4/3 sites is. The comparison keeps on being made to the E-M1 when it's only somewhat of a fair comparison. The E-M1 remains the significantly more pro-specced camera for a variety of obvious reasons (depending on what sort of "pro" you are) for stills, and it remains on more affordable a system. The E-M5 is a fairer comparison, but still specced over the A-7r. Something like a weather sealed G6 would be more apt.

    The facts of the matter are this: Sony, as usual, did an incredible job of miniaturizing their cameras. But it's important to recognize that this is the absolute smallest a full frame kit is ever going to get. Sure, there might be slight miniaturizations in the future, but it's very very unlikely any future bodies will be very significantly smaller other than a removal of the viewfinder until there is some radical technological advancement with like nanobot modular cameras or something.

    More importantly, FF lenses will always be huge compared to M4/3 lenses. No getting around it. You can shoot old rangefinder sized manual focus only lenses to miniaturize your kit, of course, but that comes with obvious compromises.

    In other words, one of the smallest possible FF kits is now the A7r with the Zeiss 35mm f2.8. Meanwhile M4/3s smallest ever camera is coming out tomorrow, and that one will be legitimately pocketable. There will be obvious IQ and feature differences, but the size advantage for M4/3 remains. Or rather, the option for size savings remains. You've got the G-M1 and 20mm f1.7 for small, or you've got the E-M1 + Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95 for big.

    So, I don't think Sony killed the E-M1 and/or M4/3. I think, in fact, they did the opposite: this is going to help boost overall mirrorless sales. I believe this camera is spelling the end of the DSLR market. More manufacturers will be forced to go mirrorless. DSLR's are now not the only way to get the best possible performance from a Full Frame sensor (Leicas don't count). They are no longer exclusive. It'll take several years, but I do think this is truly watershed moment for the downfall of the DSLR.

    I also think it might be difficult for Sony to sustain the FF + APS-C model in the future, but we'll see. I think the ideal market would be more M4/3 + FF. It's not even totally unreasonable to think Sony might eventually abandon the APS-C mirrorless market due to their partnerships with Olympus ( however unlikely, since Sony is doing better in the US, but just a thought).

    I really like this Sony offering, and may end up buying one myself. But this isn't making me think of abandoning M4/3. Rather, it's making me think I'm going to buy an A7r instead of a D600. They priced it right, they sized it right, and they specced it (mostly) right. But against FF competitors. M4/3 isn't going anywhere.
     
  15. Just Jim

    Just Jim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    941
    Oct 20, 2011
    tempted. very. tempted. I have about 4k plus or minus in Canon full frame.

    Never really looked at Sony FF's before. But veeeeerrrryyy tempted. I'll have to check out their 70-200
     
  16. tanngrisnir3

    tanngrisnir3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    594
    Oct 18, 2011
    LOL! Stupid child, I worked for Mitsui for 10 years; I know what a Zaibatsu is.

    They were dismantled after World War Two, and Sony, in no rational reading of the word, is a Zaibatsu. It was once part of a Zaibatsu, but it is not one in and of itself.

    Perhaps you might consider actually reading what someone posts before exposing yourself as so transparently ignorant and historically illiterate.
     
  17. picturewow

    picturewow Mu-43 Regular

    39
    Jul 16, 2013
    Didn't you make that dramatic topic that you were leaving the forum?
     
  18. RobWatson

    RobWatson Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I prefer Betamax ...
     
  19. digitalandfilm

    digitalandfilm Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 18, 2011
    Let's talk about high iso shooting:

    I'm sure the ceiling I shoot at (3200) will look *much* better with *much less* chroma noise, etc.

    Weather-Proofing isn't a big issue for me- if it's pouring, I do post-processing and other inside things. Both have a degree of weather protection.

    In-Body Stabilization- If you keep your shutter speeds/ ISO where they are supposed to be, again- a non-issue.

    Lenses- Zeiss cost more, but not by much.. Sigma offerings are good budget performers.

    Depth of Field- FF always wins.

    Resolution- FF again wins. The A7r with no AA filter really wins! :biggrin:

    I can go on.. like how :43: has been hot-rodded as far as it will go, the big block wins (FF).
     
  20. Nathan

    Nathan New to Mu-43

    4
    Jun 29, 2013
    ^^^ LOL! Ignore and do not feed the troll!!!
     
    • Like Like x 2
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.