FULL-FRAME Sony A850 Vs Nikon D300S?

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

FULL-FRAME Sony A850 Vs Nikon D300S?

(17 posts) (6 voices)

Tags:

NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Sony A850 manual leaked online. 24 Megapixel full frame. Looks like the A900 but a cheaper version to POSSIBLY go up against the D300S! If it comes in at the D300S price point then Nikon's in big trouble !!! Some rumors have it's price BELOW the D300S:(

But fear not kids, maybe this will mean a 24mp D700X with video is coming real soon to save us :)
Or better yet it signals a D400/D500 FULL FRAME in our near future as well!!!!
Either way this is definitely a WIN, WIN situation people.

http://photorumors.com/2009/08/01/sony-a850-will-be-full-frame/comment-page-1/#comment-1847

Spec summary:

24mp Full frame
3fps
ISO 100-6400
1/250th flash sync (but no built in flash)
3" 921,600 res LCD
9 AF points
viewfinder .98x coverage/.74x magnification
Dual CF/ memory stick duo card slots
In-body image stabilization
NO VIDEO capabilities

canon is supposedly about to announce an "affordable" (D300S price again) 15mp FF model too.

Posted 3 years ago #
heartyfisher

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,701
offline

Does look like a D700x will be in the works, if the Sony Specs are accurate. still there is no real technical reason the D700x is not already available.. since all the components are there.

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

I just hope that Nikon will find it's way to keep us (buyers, users) with this company. Some time ago I was already thinking about a900, and decided to give a try to Nikon once again, but it looks like I'll be tempted once again. As I wrote in another topic, d300 (and d300s) is way overpriced, as it should cost around $1200-$1300, d700 should be around $2000 and d700x (24Mpx FF) around $3000.

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

If the rumors are true then a full frame camera is in my future, hopefully ;)
A D400/D500 is what I'd like but wow a FF that is between $1500US and $2000US price would be killer. The D700S/D800 is gonna have some deep competition! But I can't just walkout on Nikon. We've been through a lot together. Besides there's gonna be some good deals on the D700 and that camera has really spoiled me :) Not to mention the price of the D300S will drop in about 6 months or less if their are FF competitors at it's heals.

I wouldn't get a canon FF unless I win it in a contest :-) But a 24mp Sony FF for the price of a D300S, gosh that's a tough one. The only thing that keeps me away from Sony DSLR's are the ergonomics. I don't like the placement of some of the buttons, but I do like the size and heft of the A900 in my hands. Feels very solid and reminds me a lot of a film camera. I also lust after the Sony Zeiss 135mm f1.8 lens! That is one gorgeous lens!

What I will definitely do, if this rumor is real, is put off buying anymore DX lenses. At least for a year to see what "develops" I'm hoping Nikon comes out with a DX sensor in a compact body with an F-mount! 8^) In which case DX lenses are back on my wish list!

Posted 3 years ago #
ted2001

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 726
offline

I would never look for Nikon to be competitive on camera body pricing on a feature by feature basis. They have a built-in marketing advantage because of the breadth of their product line and long history of supporting photographers and not abandoning them. I was more interested in Nikon when approaching digital photography than any other brand, since I still have a set of Nikon F3's and lenses. These had functioned with unbelievable strength and reliability for years - in fact they're still perfectly functional.

If you are looking for feature bang for your buck, I doubt Nikon will ever be your choice. Just look elsewhere.

If you are buying into a system, then Nikon represents one of your best bets. The only other brands that have longevity are Canon and Leica. I sure wouldn't look for inexpensive Leica.

Since I want functionality that Nikon only offers in their cameras that cost more than the D90 and since I have no interest in full frame at this point, I will quite happily buy the D300s. Even at its high cost it represents value for me in compatibility and capability.

Posted 3 years ago #
Gentoo

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 1,538
offline

I will never buy a Sony Camera. Talk about proprietary. They seem retarded. Just my opinion.

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

"I would never look for Nikon to be competitive on camera body pricing on a feature by feature basis" - and I think Nikon will have to change it's approach, as this what was yesterday doesn't have to be a good strategy for tomorrow. We all love photography, but IMHO camera is just a tool (of course, I would never look into Canon, but that's another story :)), and if Sony or any other company will give me a better tool for this what I love than I can't decide right now what I'm gonna do.
Ted You wrote that there are only two other brands Canon and Leica, I have to disagree with You. There's also Minolta (now called Sony) and their optics is really good - one may not like this company but as for the IQ it's excellent.
As for pricing, Nikon must realize that current times are not the film times, and that there are other companies that produce cameras on Nikon's level.

And don't get me wrong, I really love Nikon.

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

I agree with you adamz. If Nikon is depending on their feature strength to get people to buy the D300S when there is a FF camera for the same or cheaper price then it's not going to work.

Leica is not the brand they use to be. They are on the brink of collapse (they've come very close in recent years). If it wasn't for rebadged Panasonic cameras they would have fallen. Yes they still have the prestige, and I will always have a place for Leica in my heart, but their digital products haven't lived up to their film years. Leica dropped the ball big time transitioning to digital.

Nikon dropped the ball in the early 1990s when canon came out with a better focusing system. The press and sports pros all switched for the faster AF. It took Nikon sometime to respond. Again in the new millennium canon trumped Nikon with better CMOS for cleaner low light pictures. Nikon's delayed response was the D3.

I just don't want Nikon to take it's sweet time to hit back with an "affordable" full frame.
Though I know when they finally do, it's gonna be awesome!!!!

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Gentoo, weren't you the one who almost bought a canon at one point? NOW THAT would've been retarded!! :^)

Friends don't let friends buy into canon! But Sony? Eh....they do make Nikon's sensors so...

Posted 3 years ago #
ted2001

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 726
offline

Adam, I didn't forget about Minolta/Sony, I originally bought a Minolta SRT-101, while in the army (1970). I then purchased a succession of lenses. It wasn't until I was required to do a lot of copy work that I became disenchanted with the Minolta's technically since they had about 94% finder accuracy. Then Minolta upgraded their camera body and obsoleted the older lenses. I was lucky to find a camera merchant that allowed me to trade the SRT-101's and lenses in on an F2 and a couple of lenses. The best investment I ever made!

I migrated to F3hp bodies, but Nikon never obsoleted a lens. I can still use the 500/8 reflex from years ago.

I also feel that Nikon has to meet the competition more closely on price on their less expensive, more consumer driven products. If you buy a camera body and one lens, then Nikon does not provide a consumer advantage, and won't be able to maintain higher prices. Even third party vendors charge extremely high prices for smaller volume products. Look at the pricing of Sigma's ulta-long telephotos.

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

Ted - I agree with You that smaller volume products must cost more - that's how the economics works, I also follow the prices of Sigma's ultra long, as in the next 12 months I need to buy a longer lens, and currently Nikon 300/2.8 and Sigmas 500/4.5 are on the top of my list. But no matter what all will say, d700, canon 5d and sony a900 are competitive products - all FF, all target towards the same customers - advanced amateur/semi-professional (or as a back up body for professional - not in case of sony of course) and therefor their price should be pretty much the same, and once nikon will launch d700x, the price of d700 should drop as it's no longer going to be competitive. As for d300s, once sony will unleash a850 it's price should drop, as sony's direct competitor would be d700 rather than d300s - that's my opinion and You guys doesn't have to agree with it, just try to look at the whole situation from a longer perspective.

Niko - as for Leica, I agree with You that is not the company that it used to be, at least the digital leica.

Posted 3 years ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

I don't think that the full frame D700 replacement will fully replace the D300. If it does gets replaced then there will be no pro-body DX camera. That won't fly with a lot of people- the D90, as good as it is, doesn't have the same build quality as its' bigger brother. I think the D700x (or whatever) will be unveiled alongside the D700. Some people may not want 24mp, they just want cleaner high ISO pictures. Plus, no doubt the D700x will probably be more expensive anyway. But then again, perhaps they can do 24mp and still deliver the same clean images at high ISOs. Nikon's cool like that. :D

Besides- I don't like Sony. I love their TVs and electronics, but honestly, I hate their camera and Memory Stick bullshit. Why can't they go with SD cards? They're bigger and probably faster.

And like I said in the other thread (the EP-1 first impression thread), I picked up an Alpha 350 and I couldn't figure that out either. I quickly lost interest. :D

I would rather go Canon than go Sony if I absolutely had to change. And you guys know how die hard Nikon fans feel about Canon in general. :D

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

NSX - I've never wrote that d700 will replace d300, I was just writing about prices

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Actually adamz I do think the D700 replacement will come down in "market" and would work as a replacement for a D300. Lets call it the D500 :^)

The D500 would become Nikon's low end full frame model. Same as a D100,D200,D300 but full frame and with video. The D90 replacement (D10?) would then move up "market" as the top DX model. Nikon could then bring in a D6000 or D7000 to fill in any gaps below the D90 replacement.

A D800 would become a cheaper D3 body. Think of it as a D3H kinda model. D4 and D3X would take the top spots.
There, perfect. Admin please give me credit when this all comes true! :^)

Posted 3 years ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

Adamz, I didn't say that you said that the D300 replacement would be full frame, replacing the D700. I was responding to NikoDoby. I got the feeling from his original post that that would happen. Surely enough, in the post after yours, he said that the D90 would move upmarket, while everything under it would move up a notch too. That would be cool, although they better make sure the D90 replacement, if they do that, has the same build quality and features as the D300 if the next D300 were to be full frame.

In any case, I wouldn't mind a metal pro bodied D90 replacement.

Posted 3 years ago #
NikoDoby

The Terminator
Joined: May '09
Posts: 6,598
offline

Yes indeed the "up market" D90 replacement would have to have the same build quality as the D300. It would be more inline with what canon offers with the 50D. Nikon doesn't have anything with that kind of build and at that price point ($1200US-$1500US). So that's where an up market D90 would be placed.

D3000 (intro DSLR)
D5000 (base video model)
D7000 (takes over the D90 price point $999US)
D10 ("up market" D90 replacement with D300 build. $1200US-$1500US)
D500 (intro FF D300 replacement $1800US)
D800 (like a D3H, high speed priced at $2999US. D700 price point)
D4 (D3 replacement)
D3X (sticks around with maybe an "S" tweak)

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

As I have the d200 and d90 - one metal one plastic, I don't see any problems with the plastic d90, apart from weather sealing, but for that You don't need metal.
As for Niko's prediction, looks logical, apart from this that I doubt that Nikon will release D500 as a FF, but we will see.

Posted 3 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.

The new Nikon Rumors Forum is now live at http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussions. This forum is now in "read only" mode until I figure a proper way to import all data over to the new platform. Please register over at the new forum.

FULL-FRAME Sony A850 Vs Nikon D300S?

Reply