# So much for the "No Pros use Sony" argument :p



## ConradM

Sony 500mm F4.0 G SSM Action shots - Dyxum forums - Page 1


----------



## jake337

Who ever said that?


----------



## PhotoWrangler

Its funny cause its Sony.


----------



## Derrel

This one is a CLASSIC  canikon.jpg

And this 360 degree panoramic shot is pretty cool too....all I see are BIG CANON L-glass lenses and BIG NIKKOR ED glass lenses...

Beijing Olympics Stadium: about 30 min. before Men's 100m Final

But, glad you could find a single image of a man using a Sony!!!

Sony does make some nice cameras though. And they make some fantastic headphones too.


----------



## tirediron

Not sure what the point is...  with over six billion people on the planet, you can find almost anything you can imagine; I'm sure somewhere there's a pro using an old Olympus PEN half-frame.  Not many professionals use Sony because Sony doesn't have a professional body in their line-up.


----------



## runnah

Well he is Dutch and they are a zany bunch.


----------



## MLeeK

Gary Fong recently jumped onto the Sony Bandwagon. Of course, he's retired and is only shooting his kids now days, but he's shooting Sony.
Honestly? Sony is really stepping up their game. I think people like us who have been in the field too long are underestimating them these days.


----------



## Samerr9

Derrel said:


> This one is a CLASSIC  canikon.jpg
> 
> And this 360 degree panoramic shot is pretty cool too....all I see are BIG CANON L-glass lenses and BIG NIKKOR ED glass lenses...
> 
> Beijing Olympics Stadium: about 30 min. before Men's 100m Final
> 
> But, glad you could find a single image of a man using a Sony!!!
> 
> Sony does make some nice cameras though. And they make some fantastic headphones too.



Thank for sharing this photo, it is great.. and I will have to show it to my friend because:

I am a Canon fanboy but this is for fun and this doesn't mean anything. my Nikon friend always say that there are more Nikon shooters even in sports but you don't see them because they are black and I always see mroe whites than blacks where ever there are a group of photographers.. So I counted them on the pic and I am right 12 Nikon vs 30 Canon. So the whites are more because they are more not because you can see the whites easier than the blacks..

Edit: Sorry OP and Sony guys, I couldn't help not posting in here although not related to the subject


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

Always an exception or two for every rule =)


----------



## Derrel

MLeeK said:


> Gary Fong recently jumped onto the Sony Bandwagon. Of course, he's retired and is only shooting his kids now days, but he's shooting Sony.
> Honestly? Sony is really stepping up their game. I think people like us who have been in the field too long are underestimating them these days.



Check this out...2012 Nikon News and Comments by Thom Hogan

Sony's compact camera sales last year slid terribly, down from 11.3 million units sold to only 8 million units sold...

"Nikon grew Coolpix sales from 7.86m units to 8.26m units when Sony's compact camera sales slid from 11.3m units to 8m units."

As Thom wrote, "As I've written before, Nikon is now a camera company. As goes the camera group, so goes Nikon. Nikon expects to sell almost 22% of all compact cameras this year, 37% of all interchangeable lens cameras (DSLRs and mirrorless), and 24% of _all_ cameras. Nikon's current position can be summed up as this: for Nikon to continue to grow, it will have to take sales away from other camera makers. Indeed, for Nikon to continue to grow at the _rate_ it has in the last two years, Nikon will have to _aggressively_ take market share from other competitors."

Sony, as we all probably know, has not turned a profit in literally YEARS now. And is suffering through RECORD losses, almost every quarter...

Not to put too fine a point on it, but SONY is the electronics company that bought a bankrupt camera company, Minolta, err. I mean the bankrupt Minolta that was sold and became KONICA-Minolta, to get entry into the d-slr market...with visions of profit in their head....but...so far...SONY d-slr sales are dismal...

Canon and Nikon are killing SONY. But only in terms of sales, distribution, service, rental availability, professional services networks, and installed user base. And lens systems. I really do not think I am understimating SONY....in fact, I do not think that it's possible to *under-estimate* SONY (f you get my meaning...).


----------



## MLeeK

Derrel said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gary Fong recently jumped onto the Sony Bandwagon. Of course, he's retired and is only shooting his kids now days, but he's shooting Sony.
> Honestly? Sony is really stepping up their game. I think people like us who have been in the field too long are underestimating them these days.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Check this out...2012 Nikon News and Comments by Thom Hogan
> 
> Sony's compact camera sales last year slid terribly, down from 11.3 million units sold to only 8 million units sold...
> 
> "Nikon grew Coolpix sales from 7.86m units to 8.26m units when Sony's compact camera sales slid from 11.3m units to 8m units."
> 
> As Thom wrote, "As I've written before, Nikon is now a camera company. As goes the camera group, so goes Nikon. Nikon expects to sell almost 22% of all compact cameras this year, 37% of all interchangeable lens cameras (DSLRs and mirrorless), and 24% of _all_ cameras. Nikon's current position can be summed up as this: for Nikon to continue to grow, it will have to take sales away from other camera makers. Indeed, for Nikon to continue to grow at the _rate_ it has in the last two years, Nikon will have to _aggressively_ take market share from other competitors."
> 
> Sony, as we all probably know, has not turned a profit in literally YEARS now. And is suffering through RECORD losses, almost every quarter...
> 
> Not to put too fine a point on it, but SONY is the electronics company that bought a bankrupt camera company, Minolta, err. I mean the bankrupt Minolta that was sold and became KONICA-Minolta, to get entry into the d-slr market...with visions of profit in their head....but...so far...SONY d-slr sales are dismal...
> 
> Canon and Nikon are killing SONY. But only in terms of sales, distribution, service, rental availability, professional services networks, and installed user base. And lens systems. I really do not think I am understimating SONY....in fact, I do not think that it's possible to *under-estimate* SONY (f you get my meaning...).
Click to expand...


I didn't say underestimating their sales. Their actual new DSLR performance is not bad. 
I wouldn't invest in it because I'd be afraid of them going belly up and then I'd be invested in something that's got a sum total of zero resale value and you can't upgrade and still use what you've invested in. They also don't offer cameras that go where I need them to go.


----------



## Derrel

MLeeK said:
			
		

> I didn't say underestimating their sales. Their actual new DSLR performance is not bad.
> I wouldn't invest in it because I'd be afraid of them going belly up and then I'd be invested in something that's got a sum total of zero resale value and you can't upgrade and still use what you've invested in. They also don't offer cameras that go where I need them to go.




So many negatives with SONY...fear that they are not really committed to the serious market...fears of low or nonexistent resale value...cameras that are not in line with the expectations of serious users...

Your comments pretty much summarize some of the main obstacles SONY has faced as a new kid on the block....

Their products look and feel good. But frankly, Nikon's 1948 to 2006 lead on SONY is kind of a big thing for me, and millions of others...BUT, by the same token...I do think I could assemble and buy a SONY transmissive mirror SLR "system" that would work for a number of specialties....I sure could....I could buy two good bodies, two flashes, and a few lenses, and shoot fine,capable work with SONY gear. Buuut....I could not locally RENT ANYTHING I might need....and I could if it were Nikon, or Hassy, or Canon, or Mamiya.


----------



## argieramos

Derrel said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gary Fong recently jumped onto the Sony Bandwagon. Of course, he's retired and is only shooting his kids now days, but he's shooting Sony.
> Honestly? Sony is really stepping up their game. I think people like us who have been in the field too long are underestimating them these days.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Check this out...2012 Nikon News and Comments by Thom Hogan
> 
> Sony's compact camera sales last year slid terribly, down from 11.3 million units sold to only 8 million units sold...
> 
> "Nikon grew Coolpix sales from 7.86m units to 8.26m units when Sony's compact camera sales slid from 11.3m units to 8m units."
> 
> As Thom wrote, "As I've written before, Nikon is now a camera company. As goes the camera group, so goes Nikon. Nikon expects to sell almost 22% of all compact cameras this year, 37% of all interchangeable lens cameras (DSLRs and mirrorless), and 24% of _all_ cameras. Nikon's current position can be summed up as this: for Nikon to continue to grow, it will have to take sales away from other camera makers. Indeed, for Nikon to continue to grow at the _rate_ it has in the last two years, Nikon will have to _aggressively_ take market share from other competitors."
> 
> Sony, as we all probably know, has not turned a profit in literally YEARS now. And is suffering through RECORD losses, almost every quarter...
> 
> Not to put too fine a point on it, but SONY is the electronics company that bought a bankrupt camera company, Minolta, err. I mean the bankrupt Minolta that was sold and became KONICA-Minolta, to get entry into the d-slr market...with visions of profit in their head....but...so far...SONY d-slr sales are dismal...
> 
> Canon and Nikon are killing SONY. But only in terms of sales, distribution, service, rental availability, professional services networks, and installed user base. And lens systems. I really do not think I am understimating SONY....in fact, I do not think that it's possible to *under-estimate* SONY (f you get my meaning...).
Click to expand...


If it wasn't for Sony sensor, NIkon would have been killed before Sony by Canon. You know how terrible their camera before they start using Sony sensor?


----------



## unpopular

Notice he's using an a900, and not an slt.


----------



## fjrabon

I love Sony sensors.


----------



## gsgary

The camera makes no difference this is a crappy old Canon 10D


----------



## Derrel

argieramos said:
			
		

> If it wasn't for Sony sensor, NIkon would have been killed before Sony by Canon. You know how terrible their camera before they start using Sony sensor?



Well, as it turns out, a good number of the sensors we thought were "SONY" sensors have turned out to be Nikon sensors...oops...this according to Thom Hogan, and a few other people with the technical know-how to disassemble cameras and actually make sense of what's what...turns out MANY people were wrong about the "Sony" sensors that were being used in Nikon cameras....oops!!!

The funny thing is...the steppers used to make SONY sensors are built by Nikon Corporation...steppers use some of the highest-resolution lenses in the world...something Nikon knows a lot about manufacturing...SONY...not so much...

Again, it was nice to see a single shooter using a big, white SONY super-telephoto lens. In over 40 years, I have never seen a single SONY-branded super-tele in real life. This photo let's me know that they really do exist. I am hoping for a Unicorn shot, or a photo of Sasquatch AKA "Bigfoot" next!


----------



## fjrabon

gsgary said:


> The camera makes no difference this is a crappy old Canon 10D



Then why aren't you still using the same 10D for every shot you take?


----------



## unpopular

I don't know if I believe that. If this were teh case, why would Nikon keep their sensor sources so secret. If they developed their own sensors, you'd think they'd be very willing to counter the rumor that they're made by Sony.

Whoever makes the sensor is pretty insignificant, though. People make a bigger deal out of it than necessary.


----------



## fjrabon

unpopular said:


> I don't know if I believe that. If this were teh case, why would Nikon keep their sensor sources so secret. If they developed their own sensors, you'd think they'd be very willing to counter the rumor that they're made by Sony.
> 
> Whoever makes the sensor is pretty insignificant, though. People make a bigger deal out of it than necessary.



I think it's because they mix the two, some are Sony and some are Nikon, and they don't want to have to deal with customers who 'prefer' one or the other.


----------



## argieramos

unpopular said:


> Notice he's using an a900, and not an slt.



Notice that the very first FF SLT just came out this month (or last month)?


----------



## panblue

They make great world-band dX radios too (or they used to, anyway).



Derrel said:


> This one is a CLASSIC  canikon.jpg
> 
> And this 360 degree panoramic shot is pretty cool too....all I see are BIG CANON L-glass lenses and BIG NIKKOR ED glass lenses...
> 
> Beijing Olympics Stadium: about 30 min. before Men's 100m Final
> 
> But, glad you could find a single image of a man using a Sony!!!
> 
> Sony does make some nice cameras though. And they make some fantastic headphones too.


----------



## argieramos

Derrel said:


> argieramos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it wasn't for Sony sensor, NIkon would have been killed before Sony by Canon. You know how terrible their camera before they start using Sony sensor?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, as it turns out, a good number of the sensors we thought were "SONY" sensors have turned out to be Nikon sensors...oops...this according to Thom Hogan, and a few other people with the technical know-how to disassemble cameras and actually make sense of what's what...turns out MANY people were wrong about the "Sony" sensors that were being used in Nikon cameras....oops!!!
> 
> The funny thing is...the steppers used to make SONY sensors are built by Nikon Corporation...steppers use some of the highest-resolution lenses in the world...something Nikon knows a lot about manufacturing...SONY...not so much...
> 
> Again, it was nice to see a single shooter using a big, white SONY super-telephoto lens. In over 40 years, I have never seen a single SONY-branded super-tele in real life. This photo let's me know that they really do exist. I am hoping for a Unicorn shot, or a photo of Sasquatch AKA "Bigfoot" next!
Click to expand...


And which camera is that? Definitely not the D7000, D800, D600, D3X
And funny thing, most sensor that Nikon claimed "Nikon sensor" is also part SOny? Or you ignore that fact? lol

And still does not change the fact that all Nikon top performer DSLR uses SONY sensor lol..


----------



## argieramos

gsgary said:


> The camera makes no difference this is a crappy old Canon 10D



You did a great job editing the picture. Use the 5DMKIII so less hassle


----------



## panblue

I think you could well be right ...
It might be Sony who contractually stipulate to Nikon, regarding disclosure of this fact.



fjrabon said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if I believe that. If this were teh case, why would Nikon keep their sensor sources so secret. If they developed their own sensors, you'd think they'd be very willing to counter the rumor that they're made by Sony.
> 
> Whoever makes the sensor is pretty insignificant, though. People make a bigger deal out of it than necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think it's because they mix the two, some are Sony and some are Nikon, and they don't want to have to deal with customers who 'prefer' one or the other.
Click to expand...


----------



## argieramos

unpopular said:


> I don't know if I believe that. If this were teh case, why would Nikon keep their sensor sources so secret. If they developed their own sensors, you'd think they'd be very willing to counter the rumor that they're made by Sony.
> 
> Whoever makes the sensor is pretty insignificant, though. People make a bigger deal out of it than necessary.



Except that said rumors were proven by tearing down Nikon cameras.


----------



## cosmonaut

Well I have the D800 and a99. Where the Nikon wins is in features and firmware. No matter what kind of pro shooter you are sports, fashion, landscape ect the D800 and it's advanced features will get the job done. Plus Nikon isn't going anywhere. A pro can invest thousands of dollars on lenses and it is a matter of when will the next upgrade be and not if. There are many Olympus 4/3rd shooters out there now without any idea what they are going to do with all of their high end lenses if Olympus drops the 4/3rd line. The E5 may be the end of the line. Nikon and Canon users need not fear.
 Personally for what I do, mostly landscapes, the a99 is a better choice. The EVF and focus peaking takes the guess work out of fine focusing in low light. SLT means no flopping mirror so I need not worry as much about camera shake. The shutter is smooth and very quiet Plus the articulating screen keeps me up out of the mud trying to peep though a low mounted camera. I have some investment into the Sony lens line. The Carl Zeiss lenses are super sharp. I never have to sharpen an image in post. I honestly don't think Sony have plans to beat out Canon or Nikon in sales. It will just never happen. But I like the fact Sony pushes the limits and step out of the box and try new things. Something you won't see from the big two they don't have that luxury as they have dedicated traditional shooters they must keep happy. 
 I love my a99 and the image quality is mind blowing. I would put the dynamic range up there with the D800. You would be hard pressed to find a better landscape combo better than the a99 and CZ 24-70mm lens.


----------



## fjrabon

argieramos said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> The camera makes no difference this is a crappy old Canon 10D
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You did a great job editing the picture. Use the 5DMKIII so less hassle
Click to expand...


Why do you think this is a result of a lot of post?  This isn't a technically demanding photo from the camera's perspective.  It's a pan shot in full daylight.  The fact that some amount of motion blur is expected means that sharpness isn't remotely an issue.  You don't really have to worry about noise because it's in full daylight.  The car is white, and there are only a few very basic color advertisements that are primary bold colors, so color depth doesn't really matter.  There isn't much subtle texture to show.  How would a 5DIII make this shot better?  And how do you think he's edited it in post to improve it?


----------



## mjhoward

Samerr9 said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> This one is a CLASSIC  canikon.jpg
> 
> And this 360 degree panoramic shot is pretty cool too....all I see are BIG CANON L-glass lenses and BIG NIKKOR ED glass lenses...
> 
> Beijing Olympics Stadium: about 30 min. before Men's 100m Final
> 
> But, glad you could find a single image of a man using a Sony!!!
> 
> Sony does make some nice cameras though. And they make some fantastic headphones too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank for sharing this photo, it is great.. and I will have to show it to my friend because:
> 
> I am a Canon fanboy but this is for fun and this doesn't mean anything. my Nikon friend always say that there are more Nikon shooters even in sports but you don't see them because they are black and I always see mroe whites than blacks where ever there are a group of photographers.. So I counted them on the pic and I am right 12 Nikon vs 30 Canon. So the whites are more because they are more not because you can see the whites easier than the blacks..
Click to expand...


Not so fast...

I counted 35 Canon and 44 Nikon.


----------



## rexbobcat

That's why I'm switching to Pentax.


----------



## fjrabon

how do we know all those white lenses aren't Sony?  huh, think of that?

Also, good work MJHoward, but should we add the 5 canons and 4 nikons outside the pit on the upper left corner?


----------



## gsgary

fjrabon said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> The camera makes no difference this is a crappy old Canon 10D
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why aren't you still using the same 10D for every shot you take?
Click to expand...


Because it won't take film and i prefer shooting with Leica


----------



## gsgary

argieramos said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> Notice he's using an a900, and not an slt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Notice that the very first FF SLT just came out this month (or last month)?
Click to expand...


The A900 is the only Sony i would have


----------



## fjrabon

gsgary said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> The camera makes no difference this is a crappy old Canon 10D
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why aren't you still using the same 10D for every shot you take?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because it won't take film and i prefer shotting with Leica
Click to expand...


Aren't Canon or Nikon or Minolta film cameras cheaper?


----------



## gsgary

argieramos said:
			
		

> You did a great job editing the picture. Use the 5DMKIII so less hassle



This shot has had slight levels and sharpening only


----------



## gsgary

fjrabon said:
			
		

> Aren't Canon or Nikon or Minolta film cameras cheaper?



Yes but not as good to use Leica lenses piss all over Canon and Nikon


----------



## Overread

gsgary said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aren't Canon or Nikon or Minolta film cameras cheaper?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes but not as good to use Leica lenses piss all over Canon and Nikon
Click to expand...


I can hear your 300mm f2.8 -- its crying!!!!!


----------



## unpopular

^^ you mean this one?

Konica Minolta AF 300mm F2 8 300 mm F 2 8 APO G High Speed Lens for Sony


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

hah!


----------



## Samerr9

mjhoward said:


> Not so fast...
> 
> I counted 35 Canon and 44 Nikon.



Come on man, it is clear that it is photoshoped with more black lenses


----------



## fjrabon

gsgary said:


> fjrabon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aren't Canon or Nikon or Minolta film cameras cheaper?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes but not as good to use Leica lenses piss all over Canon and Nikon
Click to expand...


Hmm, so you're telling me cameras can matter?


----------



## gsgary

Overread said:
			
		

> I can hear your 300mm f2.8 -- its crying!!!!!



Its ok just not going to upgrade Canon bodies, only digital i will be buying in the future will be an M9 or M


----------



## unpopular

planning a family vacation with the Kardashians, gary?


----------



## gsgary

unpopular said:
			
		

> planning a family vacation with the Kardashians, gary?



Who the **** are they never heard of them


----------



## MLeeK

Samerr9 said:


> mjhoward said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not so fast...
> 
> I counted 35 Canon and 44 Nikon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Come on man, it is clear that it is photoshoped with more black lenses
Click to expand...

Ha! I shoot a canon with a black 70-200 f/2.8 lens. OBVIOUSLY so do the ones with black lenses in there! LOL!


----------



## Overread

MLeeK said:


> Samerr9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mjhoward said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not so fast...
> 
> I counted 35 Canon and 44 Nikon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Come on man, it is clear that it is photoshoped with more black lenses
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ha! I shoot a canon with a black 70-200 f/2.8 lens. OBVIOUSLY so do the ones with black lenses in there! LOL!
Click to expand...


SIGMA for the WIN!


----------



## unpopular

^^ notice heated debates never erupt about Tamron v. Sigma? I'd like to see a battle over the most mediocre, hohum lens.


----------



## MLeeK

unpopular said:


> ^^ notice heated debates never erupt about Tamron v. Sigma? I'd like to see a battle over the most mediocre, hohum lens.


Vivitar, rokinon or bower all have equally sh!tty stuff on the market these days!


----------



## unpopular

NO WAY! Tamron is the sh*tiest of sh*t! so stfu.


----------



## gsgary

Overread said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Samerr9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Come on man, it is clear that it is photoshoped with more black lenses
> 
> 
> 
> Ha! I shoot a canon with a black 70-200 f/2.8 lens. OBVIOUSLY so do the ones with black lenses in there! LOL!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> SIGMA for the WIN!
Click to expand...


You mean Stigma


----------



## rexbobcat

P.E.N.T.A.X.


----------



## Derrel

gsgary said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ha! I shoot a canon with a black 70-200 f/2.8 lens. OBVIOUSLY so do the ones with black lenses in there! LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SIGMA for the WIN!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean Stigma
Click to expand...


NOT Stigma....that is what we have from hanging out with YOU, gary....

Surely you mean SIGMA, as in *SIG*nifiCant*MA*lfunction...right...

Sigma: The King of The Jaundice Lenses! The lenses made for shooting canaries, daffodils, yellow-bellied sapsuckers, and the Green Bay Packers.


----------



## Overread

Derrel said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overread said:
> 
> 
> 
> SIGMA for the WIN!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean Stigma
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> NOT Stigma....that is what we have from hanging out with YOU, gary....
> 
> Surely you mean SIGMA, as in *SIG*nifiCant*MA*lfunction...right...
> 
> Sigma: The King of The Jaundice Lenses! The lenses made for shooting canaries, daffodils, yellow-bellied sapsuckers, and the Green Bay Packers.
Click to expand...


Pfft the only "Significant malfunction" is that you've still not bought yourself a Sigma 150mm macro


----------



## Overread

unpopular said:


> ^^ notice heated debates never erupt about Tamron v. Sigma? I'd like to see a battle over the most mediocre, hohum lens.



There are no heated debates because, unlike common (as muck) purist Canon/Nikon/Sony shooters - Sigma users are refined and respectable photographers.


----------



## MLeeK

Overread said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> ^^ notice heated debates never erupt about Tamron v. Sigma? I'd like to see a battle over the most mediocre, hohum lens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are no heated debates because, unlike common (as muck) purist Canon/Nikon/Sony shooters - Sigma users are refined and respectable photographers.
Click to expand...

Far above stooping to their level.


----------



## DiskoJoe

gsgary said:


> argieramos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> Notice he's using an a900, and not an slt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Notice that the very first FF SLT just came out this month (or last month)?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The A900 is the only Sony i would have
Click to expand...


The a900 is a nice motor. My buddies at the Houston Press all upgraded to the a99 for their concert work. So far they have said its pretty nice.


----------



## DiskoJoe

MLeeK said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> ^^ notice heated debates never erupt about Tamron v. Sigma? I'd like to see a battle over the most mediocre, hohum lens.
> 
> 
> 
> Vivitar, rokinon or bower all have equally sh!tty stuff on the market these days!
Click to expand...


These are pretty good lenses except they are manual focus only. IQ is pretty good for the price. Who else sells a 85mm f1.4 for less then $300?


----------



## rexbobcat

MLeeK said:


> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> ^^ notice heated debates never erupt about Tamron v. Sigma? I'd like to see a battle over the most mediocre, hohum lens.
> 
> 
> 
> Vivitar, rokinon or bower all have equally sh!tty stuff on the market these days!
Click to expand...


Really? I thought the 14mm f/2.8 was pretty good. It has incredibly high resolution for the price of $400. But it does have a good amount of weird distortion. Although it can be corrected for the most part.


----------



## fractionofasecond

I think a Sony is better than shooting a wedding with an iPhone. An Entire Wedding Shot On An iPhone And Processed Using Instagram | Fstoppers

Now THAT is the definition of a low budget wedding.

Not to mention it was processed with Instagram, jesus christ what is this world coming to?


----------



## fractionofasecond

And check out that high ISO performance, basically no noise!  Brilliant!  I think we should all ditch the SLR's and just use iPhones!


----------



## gsgary

DiskoJoe said:
			
		

> The a900 is a nice motor. My buddies at the Houston Press all upgraded to the a99 for their concert work. So far they have said its pretty nice.



Pretty nice does not sound that good


----------



## Kolia

gsgary said:
			
		

> Pretty nice does not sound that good



Yeah, and if they had said "Absolutely awesome" you would have whole hearthedly agreed and ran out to buy one !

Lol


----------



## unpopular

fractionofasecond said:


> I think a Sony is better than shooting a wedding with an iPhone. An Entire Wedding Shot On An iPhone And Processed Using Instagram | Fstoppers
> 
> Now THAT is the definition of a low budget wedding.
> 
> Not to mention it was processed with Instagram, jesus christ what is this world coming to?



I especially like #4. The groom's skepticism of his bride's photographer choice is so painfully obvious.

but come on, aside from the instagram, psuedo SX-70 hipsterness - they're not all that bad. Well. Unless you want prints larger than a Polaroid.


----------



## fjrabon

fractionofasecond said:


> I think a Sony is better than shooting a wedding with an iPhone. An Entire Wedding Shot On An iPhone And Processed Using Instagram | Fstoppers
> 
> Now THAT is the definition of a low budget wedding.
> 
> Not to mention it was processed with Instagram, jesus christ what is this world coming to?



Sad part of it is that's better than about 50% of the wedding photography I see simply because the photographer has a sense of composition and lighting.  Most wedding photography I see these days are a series of faux paint by numbers cliched photojournalistic poses imposed upon a scene regardless of whether or not the light or atmosphere fits.


----------



## unpopular

^^ and that is exactly why I don't care what he "pros" are using. The vast majority of them are hacks anyway.

This whole "pro worship" thing is just stupid. If it weren't for the great depression, even Ansel Adams would have been an amateur.


----------



## jfrabat

First, my disclaimer: I WORK FOR SONY!

I do have to say, I do not like to drink the coolaid; I rather make my own opinions, and if I do not think a product is any good, I do not buy it.  Also, my brother is a big Nikon fan, so I have compared my camera to my brothers Nikon (D500 IIRC).  And after trying the translucent cameras, I went ahead and dropped my coin in the A77 (and a bunch of accessories), so that points to the fact that I actually believe in the product...

OK, now that I got that out of the way, let me share some points here with you guys (AND PLEASE NOTE, THESE ARE ALL MY OWN OPINIONS, NOT SONY'S!).  



			
				Derrel;2767406}

Check this out...[URL="http://www.bythom.com/2012%20Nikon%20News.htm" said:
			
		

> 2012 Nikon News and Comments by Thom Hogan[/URL]
> 
> Sony's compact camera sales last year slid terribly, down from 11.3 million units sold to only 8 million units sold...
> 
> "Nikon grew Coolpix sales from 7.86m units to 8.26m units when Sony's compact camera sales slid from 11.3m units to 8m units."
> 
> As Thom wrote, "As I've written before, Nikon is now a camera company. As goes the camera group, so goes Nikon. Nikon expects to sell almost 22% of all compact cameras this year, 37% of all interchangeable lens cameras (DSLRs and mirrorless), and 24% of _all_ cameras. Nikon's current position can be summed up as this: for Nikon to continue to grow, it will have to take sales away from other camera makers. Indeed, for Nikon to continue to grow at the _rate_ it has in the last two years, Nikon will have to _aggressively_ take market share from other competitors."
> 
> Sony, as we all probably know, has not turned a profit in literally YEARS now. And is suffering through RECORD losses, almost every quarter...
> 
> Not to put too fine a point on it, but SONY is the electronics company that bought a bankrupt camera company, Minolta, err. I mean the bankrupt Minolta that was sold and became KONICA-Minolta, to get entry into the d-slr market...with visions of profit in their head....but...so far...SONY d-slr sales are dismal...
> 
> Canon and Nikon are killing SONY. But only in terms of sales, distribution, service, rental availability, professional services networks, and installed user base. And lens systems. I really do not think I am understimating SONY....in fact, I do not think that it's possible to *under-estimate* SONY (f you get my meaning...).



I have to comment here (and find a way of doing it without revealing inside information), but, truth be told, the poin and shoot MARKET is dropping as a direct result of phone cameras getting better and the fact that (1) you always have them with you, (2) you can post pictures directly onto whatever site you like the most, and (3) you do not need to make a separate investment, carry another gadget, or worry about ANOTHER battery to charge.  And the reason for the loss last year was because of the Japan earthquake and the Playstation Network issue, not because of bad business (there was no way to foresee those; well, not the earthquake, anyway, which caused problems in 5 different factories, including the one that makes all the lithium batteries).

According to Bloomberg, the 2011 (2012 data is still not available, as far as I know, as the year is yet to be closed; there may be some predictions out there, though) total camera sales, Sony continued to be the second largest camera maker (after Canon), with Nikon in 3rd place.  And an interesting quote is this: 

"In the market for cameras with interchangeable lens, or single lens reflex cameras, Canon controlled 44.5 percent of the market, followed by Nikon with 29.8 percent and Sony with 11.9 percent, according to the data."  

12% is not a bad job by a newcomer to the ILC segment...  



rexbobcat said:


> That's why I'm switching to Pentax.





fractionofasecond said:


> And check out that high ISO performance, basically no noise!  Brilliant!  I think we should all ditch the SLR's and just use iPhones!



Both Pentax (well, at least on the K30, K10, K100, K110, and K200) and Apple (iPhone 5) are now using Sony sensors... So maybe they are not ALL that bad, are they...  Oh, and don't forget the Nikon D800 that everyone is now talking about, of course...



DiskoJoe said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> argieramos said:
> 
> 
> 
> Notice that the very first FF SLT just came out this month (or last month)?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The A900 is the only Sony i would have
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The a900 is a nice motor. My buddies at the Houston Press all upgraded to the a99 for their concert work. So far they have said its pretty nice.
Click to expand...




cosmonaut said:


> Well I have the D800 and a99. Where the Nikon wins is in features and firmware. No matter what kind of pro shooter you are sports, fashion, landscape ect the D800 and it's advanced features will get the job done. Plus Nikon isn't going anywhere. A pro can invest thousands of dollars on lenses and it is a matter of when will the next upgrade be and not if. There are many Olympus 4/3rd shooters out there now without any idea what they are going to do with all of their high end lenses if Olympus drops the 4/3rd line. The E5 may be the end of the line. Nikon and Canon users need not fear.
> Personally for what I do, mostly landscapes, the a99 is a better choice. The EVF and focus peaking takes the guess work out of fine focusing in low light. SLT means no flopping mirror so I need not worry as much about camera shake. The shutter is smooth and very quiet Plus the articulating screen keeps me up out of the mud trying to peep though a low mounted camera. I have some investment into the Sony lens line. The Carl Zeiss lenses are super sharp. I never have to sharpen an image in post. I honestly don't think Sony have plans to beat out Canon or Nikon in sales. It will just never happen. But I like the fact Sony pushes the limits and step out of the box and try new things. Something you won't see from the big two they don't have that luxury as they have dedicated traditional shooters they must keep happy.
> I love my a99 and the image quality is mind blowing. I would put the dynamic range up there with the D800. You would be hard pressed to find a better landscape combo better than the a99 and CZ 24-70mm lens.



I had a chance to fool around with the A99 for a couple of weeks (prototype, not final product) a week or so ago, and I have to say I am impressed with the camera.  High ISO noise is VERY MUCH controlled, and the camera controls are A LOT smoother to the touch.  If not because switching would mean I have to ditch my 2 flashes and my Zeiss lens (APC-S only) on top of the additional investment, I would not think twice about switching my A77 for the A99.

Anyway, and I know most of you have mentioned this, at this time, you get the most features/bells and whistles for your buck from Sony, as the cameras tend to have a more competitive pricing than Canikon and are loaded with almost the same or more features, which is why people are starting to switch.  Living in Costa Rica, I have noticed a lot of Europeans come here for vacation (bird watching and such) with Sony cameras.



Derrel said:


> Again, it was nice to see a single shooter using a big, white SONY super-telephoto lens. In over 40 years, I have never seen a single SONY-branded super-tele in real life. This photo let's me know that they really do exist. I am hoping for a Unicorn shot, or a photo of Sasquatch AKA "Bigfoot" next!



I have personally used the 300 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8 lenses, and both are VERY CRISP lenses.  They are not CHEAP lenses, but then again, neither are Canon's or Ninkon's versions...  But optically, they are up to par.  Most critics of Sony ussually focus on the fact that Sony does not have good optics, but I think Sony was smart enough to reconize this many years ago (that they did not have the know-how in optics) and have Zeiss jump on board as a supplier for lenses; and I think none of us here can honestly say that Zeiss is not one of the best producers of high quality lenses.  Obviously, these lenses are more expensive, but so are the good lenses from Canikon!

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.  i think only time will tell if Sony will become a major player in ILC or not, so I guess we will just have to wait and see...


----------



## fjrabon

unpopular said:


> ^^ and that is exactly why I don't care what he "pros" are using. The vast majority of them are hacks anyway.
> 
> This whole "pro worship" thing is just stupid. If it weren't for the great depression, even Ansel Adams would have been an amateur.



I don't necessarily care about 'pros' in the broadest sense.  I tend to care about what a few very gifted working professionals think, because they simply have worked through most of the issues those with less experience still hash out on a daily basis.  Being paid to do photography doesn't mean a whole lot, I'm a hack and I get paid every day to take pictures.  

However, a big difference between pros and amateurs is often an understanding of what is the most efficient solution for a certain problem.  If, for instance I ask an amateur how to solve X problem, I will often get certain very technical explanations of the problem, and all these incredibly complicated ways you could go about solving it, which are useful in one sense, but usually a lot of their ideas are wildly impractical in a day to day, on the scene, under time pressure setting.  A pro will tend to say something like "oh, yeah, that, two cuts of CTO, up your kicker a full stop."

A few very certain pros are gifted in both ways, and know what level to exactly distill things, how much theory is useful, and how to explain things at just the right level needed.  Michael Freeman comes to mind.


----------



## argieramos

gsgary said:


> argieramos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> unpopular said:
> 
> 
> 
> Notice he's using an a900, and not an slt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Notice that the very first FF SLT just came out this month (or last month)?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The A900 is the only Sony i would have
Click to expand...


And why is that my friend? If the EVF is still your reason, I don't know what to say to you


----------



## argieramos

gsgary said:


> argieramos said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You did a great job editing the picture. Use the 5DMKIII so less hassle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This shot has had slight levels and sharpening only
Click to expand...


But with the 5DMKIII, you probably don't have to touch the sliding


----------



## argieramos

fractionofasecond said:


> I think a Sony is better than shooting a wedding with an iPhone. An Entire Wedding Shot On An iPhone And Processed Using Instagram | Fstoppers
> 
> Now THAT is the definition of a low budget wedding.
> 
> Not to mention it was processed with Instagram, jesus christ what is this world coming to?



Just like when snapsort did the studio photoshoot with an iPhone 4s and MF Hassselblad and people couldn't see the IQ different on print.


----------



## cosmonaut

Well I wouldn't let something like if pros use it or not be a factor in if I shoot with Sony or not. I have a D800 and it's certainly a nice camera but I am going to have to buy a how to book to learn everything it can do. If you like fooling with endless menu options and turning dials an switches the D800 is for you. If you want a more simple setup and just shoot with great image quality then the a99 might be the better choice. Not that I don't like the D800, i love it, but someone that is not more of a gear guru might struggle with the D800. I left Olympus because I thought the 4/3rd line is pretty much dead and I wanted a super wide lens but I wasn't about to invest that money in a system that was going out and at the least taking to long for upgrades without much more to offer.
i love the Sony line of cameras. It really all works out to what style shooter you are. If you like lots of features or more of just a shooter. 
The a99 is light years beyond the a850/900. It was past time for an upgrade. Plus I think you would find Sony popularity might be a lot higher in Japan and other countries. I understand all to well about investments in lenses and future upgrades as I am deep into Sony. I hated to leave Olympus but felt they abandoned me and not the other way around.


----------



## argieramos

Kolia said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty nice does not sound that good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, and if they had said "Absolutely awesome" you would have whole hearthedly agreed and ran out to buy one !
> 
> 
> Lol
Click to expand...



Frank Doorhof, a 5DMKIII user Pro did ran out to buy the whole a99 set.


----------



## rexbobcat

argieramos said:
			
		

> Just like when snapsort did the studio photoshoot with an iPhone 4s and MF Hassselblad and people couldn't see the IQ different on print.



But at what size did they print? Lol.

The camera in the 4S is awesome, but the absolute resolution (not the amount of MP) is not really all that incredible when it comes to fine details.


----------



## usayit

tirediron said:


> Not sure what the point is...  with over six billion people on the planet, you can find almost anything you can imagine; I'm sure somewhere there's a pro using an old Olympus PEN half-frame.  Not many professionals use Sony because Sony doesn't have a professional body in their line-up.



What ^^^ said...

Magnum photographer, Alex Majoli, published an entire portfolios using a cheap Olympus P&S... he carried several in fact.

One of the reasons why Canon and Nikon dominate in the professional/commercial imaging is their international support for those professionals.  Their supply chain is so large that they can get replacement equipment into the hands of a professional working major media outlet within hours.  $*(# happens and occasionally hear of some Canon photographer simply walking into any Canon retailer for help.  Now that most of the professional world works in digital, this is ever so important.

Olympus, Sony, Leica, Panasonic, Pentax etc... all make products all capable of being used in some sort of professional capacity but just like in the commercial computing realm, the differentiator often is the service behind the product.


----------



## skieur

tirediron said:


> Not sure what the point is...  with over six billion people on the planet, you can find almost anything you can imagine; I'm sure somewhere there's a pro using an old Olympus PEN half-frame.  Not many professionals use Sony because Sony doesn't have a professional body in their line-up.



Sure they do.  The full frame A99.

skieur


----------



## Derrel

I went to the seashore this week, and there were a LOT of photography enthusiasts there!!!! I actually saw a woman with what she called, "Her new baby!"...and it was....a Sony!!! I saw Nikon D800, Nikon D300, Canon 5D, 5D-II, Canon 60D, Canon 1D II-n, and Mamiya AFD 645 shooting film, and--a mid-level Sony. The weather was exceptionally beautiful for late December (the 30th), and there were TONS of people shooting pics. The most popular phone was...the iPhone. Which was also the MOST-popular camera. I volunteered to take pics for multiple groups...every single person handed me his or her...iPhone 4, 4s, or 5...not one ANdroid, not one non-iPhone...one lady handed me a tiny red Nikon CoolPix, another 20-something lady handed me a Nikon CoolPix 7000. Compact cameras were almost non-existant.


----------



## DiskoJoe

gsgary said:


> DiskoJoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The a900 is a nice motor. My buddies at the Houston Press all upgraded to the a99 for their concert work. So far they have said its pretty nice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty nice does not sound that good
Click to expand...


Oh hush. You know what I mean.


----------



## o hey tyler

skieur said:
			
		

> Sure they do.  The full frame A99.
> 
> skieur



Great post skieur! 10/10. Would read again. If only for the lulz it produces.


----------



## argieramos

Derrel said:
			
		

> I went to the seashore this week, and there were a LOT of photography enthusiasts there!!!! I actually saw a woman with what she called, "Her new baby!"...and it was....a Sony!!! I saw Nikon D800, Nikon D300, Canon 5D, 5D-II, Canon 60D, Canon 1D II-n, and Mamiya AFD 645 shooting film, and--a mid-level Sony. The weather was exceptionally beautiful for late December (the 30th), and there were TONS of people shooting pics. The most popular phone was...the iPhone. Which was also the MOST-popular camera. I volunteered to take pics for multiple groups...every single person handed me his or her...iPhone 4, 4s, or 5...not one ANdroid, not one non-iPhone...one lady handed me a tiny red Nikon CoolPix, another 20-something lady handed me a Nikon CoolPix 7000. Compact cameras were almost non-existant.



Cool story bro! lol


----------



## argieramos

rexbobcat said:
			
		

> But at what size did they print? Lol.
> 
> The camera in the 4S is awesome, but the absolute resolution (not the amount of MP) is not really all that incredible when it comes to fine details.



What size? It's 8.5 x 11 print.
Do you have another question?


----------



## skieur

o hey tyler said:


> skieur said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure they do.  The full frame A99.
> 
> skieur
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great post skieur! 10/10. Would read again. If only for the lulz it produces.
Click to expand...


Well, Tyler, I'm laughing all the way to the bank.


----------



## unpopular

really Skieur? Did National Geographic buy that blurry spider picture you posted back when you were posting stuff?

Does the Dog River community center photo competition award cash prizes? I bet Lacy gave you a run for your $10 prize!


----------



## ConradM

o hey tyler said:


> skieur said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure they do.  The full frame A99.
> 
> skieur
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great post skieur! 10/10. Would read again. If only for the lulz it produces.
Click to expand...


Wait, so are you saying the A99 is not a pro body?


----------



## cosmonaut

I bought my first full frame Sony from a full time pro that is a freelance. I have been published and have pictures in Galleries although photography isn't my source of income. I have used Olympus, Leica, Sony, Canon and Nikon. I have been published with a picture I took with a Canonet QL-17. Most pros I know are not fanboys and have no set one system they use. I know customers could care less and seldom know what the pictures were shot with. I have never lost a job over what camera I used. To a pro a camera is more like a tool than a toy like for some people. So price is the biggest factor. At one time in my hometown the biggest and best studio in town used an Olympus E1. The pro that does most of the school pictures here uses a Fuji.
 I also know a pro who runs a studio and makes a good living at it, bought a 5D mark III and sent it back because they didn't understand why some of the lenses from their 7D wouldn't work on the 5D. They didn't know about crop factors and different size sensors. They were sending the 5D back and getting the 6D. I tried to explain that they would have the same problem with the 6D and it still didn't sink in.
 Being a pro doesn't mean anything. Just that you sell pictures for a living. Pros are no smarter than anyone else I know shooting. The absolute best photographers I know have never been published. Pro means nothing.


----------



## xposurepro

I'd switch to Sony .. if they sponsored me to do so that is. Pay me and supply me with all the toys I need to complete my work and I'll shoot with a JC Penny camera. Ok that was taking it a bit far.


----------



## rexbobcat

Sigma SD1 ftw


----------



## skieur

unpopular said:


> really Skieur? Did National Geographic buy that blurry spider picture you posted back when you were posting stuff?
> 
> Does the Dog River community center photo competition award cash prizes? I bet Lacy gave you a run for your $10 prize!




Your posts demonstrate that you are really "out to lunch".  National Geographic is American, not Canadian...just so you know.:lmao:

By the way WHERE ARE THE PHOTOS IN YOUR GALLERY???


----------



## unpopular

I don't post images to this gallery. I do have a flickr with about 400 images currently uploaded. I also have about that many slides in storage, and probably twice as many negatives. I know it's not a huge catalog, but I'm not going on like Don Juan Photographer, either,


----------



## CCericola

"Sony parts, Nikon parts, All made in Taiwan!"


----------



## skieur

unpopular said:


> really Skieur? Did National Geographic buy that blurry spider picture you posted back when you were posting stuff?
> 
> Does the Dog River community center photo competition award cash prizes? I bet Lacy gave you a run for your $10 prize!



You mean way back in 2012 when I was posting stuff?......and you called me a liar!!!  You keep making things up!


----------



## skieur

unpopular said:


> I don't post images to this gallery. I do have a flickr with about 400 images currently uploaded. I also have about that many slides in storage, and probably twice as many negatives. I know it's not a huge catalog, but I'm not going on like Don Juan Photographer, either,



I notice that you did not include a link.  Reluctant to show them here, eh?  The glass house saying comes to mind.


----------



## Overread

How about you two make up and agree to just both post pictures now 

7 pages of chatter is far too many for a photography forum - we need some photo therapy now


----------



## unpopular

skieur - Nearly everything i've posted there in the last couple years has been posted here.

Flickr: ion_nine's Photostream

But if you comment on anything, I will delete it. Not because I can't take criticism, but rather because I don't respect yours.


----------



## skieur

unpopular said:


> skieur - Nearly everything i've posted there in the last couple years has been posted here.
> 
> Flickr: ion_nine's Photostream
> 
> But if you comment on anything, I will delete it. Not because I can't take criticism, but rather because I don't respect yours.



Boy, what a surprise.  You can't take criticism and you don't have the photographic background to understand it and or reply to it.   Well, at least you are admitting to it and the fact that you are afraid of criticism.

skieur


----------



## skieur

Well, there were a lot of photos with quite a range in quality and artistic expression.  I would say that the black and whites were the weakest, without visual impact, without a strong centre of interest, and without the tonal range that is part of excellent black and white images.  The colour work was much better but still based on texture, colour and pattern which has limited visual impact without a really strong centre of interest with obvious visual impact.

What I did not see, was natural scenics, architecture, transportation, well exposed portraits, pets, sunsets, street photography, macro photography, sports,...examples of all or most of which are in my gallery or elsewhere in my postings.

And yet you are criticising me!  I find that rather amusing.

skieur


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

Derrel said:


> I went to the seashore this week, and there were a LOT of photography enthusiasts there!!!! I actually saw a woman with what she called, "Her new baby!"...and it was....a Sony!!! I saw Nikon D800, Nikon D300, Canon 5D, 5D-II, Canon 60D, Canon 1D II-n, and Mamiya AFD 645 shooting film, and--a mid-level Sony. The weather was exceptionally beautiful for late December (the 30th), and there were TONS of people shooting pics. The most popular phone was...the iPhone. Which was also the MOST-popular camera. I volunteered to take pics for multiple groups...every single person handed me his or her...iPhone 4, 4s, or 5...not one ANdroid, not one non-iPhone...one lady handed me a tiny red Nikon CoolPix, another 20-something lady handed me a Nikon CoolPix 7000. Compact cameras were almost non-existant.



About the same here.  The only place to find several Sony cams is at the Mall. And, at that Sony store at the mall, its empty other than a few bored employees. But the Apple store.........can't walk through it.  I'll take a iPhone pic of the two places next time I'm at the mall


----------



## cgipson1

2WheelPhoto said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> I went to the seashore this week, and there were a LOT of photography enthusiasts there!!!! I actually saw a woman with what she called, "Her new baby!"...and it was....a Sony!!! I saw Nikon D800, Nikon D300, Canon 5D, 5D-II, Canon 60D, Canon 1D II-n, and Mamiya AFD 645 shooting film, and--a mid-level Sony. The weather was exceptionally beautiful for late December (the 30th), and there were TONS of people shooting pics. The most popular phone was...the iPhone. Which was also the MOST-popular camera. I volunteered to take pics for multiple groups...every single person handed me his or her...iPhone 4, 4s, or 5...not one ANdroid, not one non-iPhone...one lady handed me a tiny red Nikon CoolPix, another 20-something lady handed me a Nikon CoolPix 7000. Compact cameras were almost non-existant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> About the same here.*  The only place to find several Sony cams is at the Mall.* And, at that Sony store at the mall, its empty other than a few bored employees. But the Apple store.........can't walk through it.  I'll take a iPhone pic of the two places next time I'm at the mall
Click to expand...


I'd swear I saw some at Best Buy... but I could be wrong...


----------



## unpopular

skieur said:


> limited visual impact without a really strong centre of interest with obvious visual impact.



That's nice, skieur, but unfortunately I don't respect your opinion. For what it's worth though, a lack of central interest is thematically central to my intent (that's like what an artist is interested in and intends to convey, in case you didn't already know). I realize that it's a hard concept to swallow after all you've learned from Tippy the Turtle. You must be really confused right now and thinking "Why would anyone intentionally experiment with composition?". Don't worry. You're incapable of understanding and never will. So don't bother trying.


----------



## Derrel

Next time I have a party that's running on wayyyyy too long, I'm gonna call both of you guys up and insist that you both come over to help shut it down, instantly. You skieur and you unpopular, ought to be able to clear the place out within minutes.


----------



## unpopular

everyone needs a nemesis.


----------

