Breaking the buying strike.

Yesterday I stated my decision to stay with Sony and in that I also listed a couple of things I was going to discuss later; they were what my 'final' lens line-up plan was and how I had chosen to mark my decision to remain in the A mount when I broke my buying strike.

So, first things first, my 'final' lens line-up. Ok, even before that, whay do I insist on qualifying the word "final". Well thats pretty simple, because final only ever is final until a new lens is announced that makes me want to change my list. Also, occasioanlly opportunities will crop up to add something extra at little cost that I might choose to take. Now with that out of the way what is my 'final' list. Well I'll start with overall design of the list, basically its long slow high quality zooms with generally fast, high quality primes. So the list is:

Zooms:

Sony 16-80 3.5-4.5 CZ

Sony 70-400 4-5.6 G

Primes:

Sigma 20 1.8 EX

Sony 24 2.0 CZ

Sony 35 1.4 G

Sony 50 1.4

Sony 85 1.4 CZ

Sony 135 1.8 CZ

The Sigma 20 1.8 might look out of place in this list but really there is nothing in the a-mount better than this lens anyway.

There are a few things interesting in this list when comparing it to other brands. The first is that its a line-up that has no apologies to make. This line-up of lenses is as good as any you can get from Nikon, Canon, Pentax, or (dare I say it) Leica. At this point I should acknowledge that I know I can get a much cheaper line-up with not a huge drop in quality so why am I aiming at all these CZ's and G's? Basically because I want to give myself no excuses, no reason to think that the equipment is holding me back. In short,if I cant make great images with this line-up I should just give up any pretensions to being a photographer. And, lets be really honest, I can afford it - not all at once, it may take years to build the full line-up, but if I'm careful I can do this without taking from my family.

Secondly, what is also really interesting is that the costs are very, very similar no matter which brand I choose to go with. This line-up with Sony, Canon or Nikon all fall within a few hundred dollars of each other. So much for the myth of Sony being an expensive brand I suppose.

Now whilst this is my final wish list (until I change it) these wont be the only lenses I buy or own. I have a couple of other pieces of the glass I'm either going to just keep or buy in addition to this list. The most obvious addition will be E mount lenses. These form a completely different range and so aren't discussed any more here. The second is the Sony Easy Choice range, that is the 30 2.8 Macro, 85 2.8 SAM, and 35 1.8 DT SAM. I love that these lenses are so small, so portable and so so cheap. Given the very small investment I will almost certainly be picking up some of these.

So, how did I break my buying strike?

Today I picked up the 70-400 G, 30 2.8 DT SAM Macro and 85 2.8 DT SAM. I am so stoked.

A little more brand validation for Sony

Sony users always run the risk of becoming, or at least being seen to become real fanboys (and girls I suppose but they seem pretty rare). At the other extreme it can be tempting for we Sony users to go the other way and become in-house trolls, doing nothing but undermining the mount we feel trapped in. I wrote about this tendency in this blog post.

Therefore, its always nice to read an article that doesnt gush or decry but simply says nice things about the camera brand I'm using. And thats pretty much exactly what Andy Biggs has done with his short "review" of the Sony A900 and lenses in Namibia. Coming on the heels of the good things said by the online photography blog this is some cool brand validation.

And yes its sad that we Sony Shooters feel the need for this pep up.

Why Sony forums get a little tense

The internet is a place for conflict, we are mostly hidden away in our bedrooms or studies tapping away safe in the knowledge that no matter how horrible we are, our 'real' selves are immune to any pay back or opprobrium for what we say on the net. Photography forums are generally pretty civil, but there is an undercurrent of tension that runs through many that occasionally bubbles to the surface.

Recently I've noticed that the Sony forums (which are my main haunts) are probably the some of the 'worst' of the photography based fora. To the extent that on DPReview recently one poster felt the need to wonder if Sony users should actively work to calm it down a notch. That's probably not a bad idea but it made me wonder what is it with Sony that seems to be making this happen. My theory is that there are 3 factors.

1. Since taking over Minolta, Sony now has trolls actually in its ranks. Usually trolls are people from outside a brand who pop in to cause a bit of trouble for the thrill of it. In Sony's case there people are from another brand - Minolta (notice how the Konica always gets dropped off) - but they don't pop in, they live on the Sony fora. The resent Sony for swallowing up the company they loved, they feel Sony is treating the Minolta heritage with disrespect and they constantly cry that every problem with every camera Sony has produced is solely a result of Sony changing something Minolta had. These people bring an overwhelming and incessant negativity to any and all Sony photography fora.

2. Sony is a hated brand at the best of times. Apple and Pentax etc are brands that everyone loves. Even people that don't use their products always have a soft spot for them and hope they do well. Microsoft, Sony, IBM etc are hated brands - even people that have never used their products just seem to hate them on principle. Sometimes its their business practices, their history, their success, god knows. But the harsh fact of life is Sony just isn't a huggable brand.

3. The underdogs fans are always hypercritical. The fans of the underdog, whether its a camera company, sports team or political party know that to win their guy has to be better than the opposition and when their guy fails, even just a little, they fear the backsliding will begin and the race lost forever. Therefore, the fans of the underdog become super sensitive, concerned over every little slip-up, careful not to let a single discretion go on by. Compounding this sensitivity is two 'sub factors':

a) Not wanting to be wrong. Like tipping against your football team, slagging off at your own brand protects you a little if they do actually fail. Yes your company has gone and your camera is no longer supported but at least you weren't fooled - you always knew there were problems. Moreover, you knew the answers and they just should have listened to you.

b) Justifying shifting. Being part of the minority is tough. Not only that, sometimes no matter how good the things your brand are offering might be, sometimes your brand just doesn't offer what you need. But shifting brand is also tough, there's a lot of inertia to overcome and sometimes a lot of money to find. So trashing your brand is part of the process for leaving. Leaving because one lens isn't quite cheap enough is a tough sell, even to yourself, but leaving because Sony sucks and everything they touch is crap is easy.

None of this should be taken to imply that Sony and its products are perfect and beyond criticism. In fact there are many, many things I'd like to see Sony changes and I've never hidden that fact. All I'm seeking to investigate in this post is the venom you see sometimes in Sony fora.

Sony and the DSLR Lens marketplace

We are (apparently) on the cusp of the launch of a new range of lenses from Sony. This, the delays in Sony's release of new cameras and their stated aim to become one of the big players in the DSLR game has made me wonder how the current range of Sony lenses stacks up against the big two, Canon and Nikon.

PS:

Red cells indicate sony price over their rival (number percentage over).

Green cells indicate Sony price under their rival (number percentage under).

Note there are a lot more reds than green.

DSLR Lens Marketplace