>>Looks like the D3 and EOS-1Ds Mark III might have some new competition.

I doubt its going up against either of those cameras directly, it looks to be prosumer body and lacks an integrated grip. Like I said in the other post, it seems more directly marked against the Canon 5D replacement; full-frame sensor with prosumer body. Also, the Nikon D3 is more a 1D MkIII competitor then a a studio-oriented 1Ds MkIII; especially in terms of price $4.5k-$5k versus closer to $8k for the 1Ds MKIII. The real question is the price-point that this Sony flagship (A900?) is going to be released as. Regardless, it looks very interesting.

I've said i tonce I'll say it again. No Pro Photographer is going to jump ship from Canon or Nikon to these smaller brands. They have too much invested in lenses already. Not to mention the selection of the big two when it comes to lenses can't be matched.

...of course geeks will fixate on the specs of the sensor but the optics placed in front of that sensor are just as, if not more, important than the sensor itself (which is why cell phone cameras suck). If they want to compete with Nikon and Canon they're going to have to get some good lenses out there or make this compatible with existing lenses.

@JEEPINGEEK

Clearly, Sony's system is still premature compared to Canikon, but they have to start somewhere. They've only been in the DSLR for a coupe of years, they are starting to get some very nice Zeiss lenses at good prices. Perhaps in 5 years they will be the big three, but they first need to have the bodies that can actually take advantage of good glass and build their system up. Competition benefits everyone.

Like I said previously, it doesn't look like Sony is aiming this camera directly full-on at the professional market, as evidence of the prosumer body. But it may offer a lot more value and features at a lower price compared to the competition. Regardless, being that Sony has a long history of supplying Nikon with sensors, we'll likely see this 24.8-megapixel sensor in a Nikon in the future, likely to be more a studio-oriented alternative to complement the D3 which is more suited for sports photography.

More of a Canon 5D competitor and I bet it gets priced similarly ($2800-$3500).

Nikon has yet to release something to compete with the 5D so kudos to Sony for showing even more commitment to having a full Canon-esque line of products.

@Scaramanga: I doubt that Sony is going to climb up to the status of Canon/Nikon even in 5 years. Building a system is a bit different from just coming out with a camera. It took both Canon and Nikon more than 10 years to build their respective status. Remember the 1st EOS 1? That was like 20 years ago.

Having said that, I am really excited to see the new sony camera. Not that I would buy it per-se, but seeing it means that there would be some pressure on the big 2 to push progress.

That much resolution will expose far too many flaws in Sony's current line of lenses.

They will need $2k+ lenses to barely get started on the resolving power of that chip.

Who are they going to convert then?

Interesting, yes, practical from any standpoint? No...

@coolal: "they will need 2k+ lenses..."

-

Not if you're shooting nature shots with the f stop cranked down, and longer exposures.

or am I totally wrong? I could be. ;P

@Scaramanga:
Don't get me wrong I'm all for competition, Pentax Olympus, Sony and even Fuji make the big two work a little harder especially in the prosumer market. My gripe is more in the idea that Sony is somehow going to topple Canon or Nikon by having alot of pixels. It's just not that simple.

@dcartist: Most current lenses have trouble exceeding a 10mp sensor. So yes, you'd need exceedingly expensive lenses to really take advantage of that high of a resolution. Kind makes 10+ mp point and shoots look silly when you know how bad the lenses in them are.

@coolal: They have some good lenses already.

And as we've seen from their incremental product rollout they started challenging the Rebel-line, then 40D-line, and now they are starting a 5D-line. In the future I expect to see them to release 1D and 1Ds challengers too. Their lens lineup is also following this trend: they have great offerings on the lower level but they are also starting to get into higher end stuff, including a $5500 300mm f2.8. Also keep in mind that Konica Minolta, Tamron, and Sigma make lenses for the Sony Alpha line since they are interchangeable with the Minolta Maxxum Series (both use the T-Mount).

@JUMPINGEEK: Since when is Sony a "smaller brand"? Sure they are new to dSLR, but I'd rather own a Sony than a Sigma or Olympus because they seem to have the R&D/production infrastructure to "do it right" and I expect them to be innovating. Of course I'd rather own a Canon than anything else at this point, too. :) Ultimately if one brand lags far enough behind another any pro will jump ship - Nikon to Canon, Canon to Sony, whatever... time will tell. But Sony has yet to produce a "pro" camera anyway so it's a moot point.

No self-respecting professional will ever take Sony seriously and ever since it bacame known that any of the big names in Optical manufacturing will whore out their names like George Foreman, Zeiss has little credibility.

It is widely known amongst the pro scene how Sony completely screwed anybody unfortunate enough to have a Konica or Minolta camera in for warranty work a couple of years ago while the transition took place.

I'll keep my Canon systems, thanks. Sony, you can choke on your megapixels.

In case anyone is confused, we swapped out our original quick post on this subject, linking to this excellent DigitalCameraInfo.com article, when our man in Vegas, Matty B, reported back with his own impressions and photos.

@jeepingeek: There is nothing here to suggest that this is only a high-megapixel camera. The previously announced specs for the sensor allowed for up to 6.4fps at full resolution, so it seems to stack up well on speed as well to the 1Ds which is at 5fps. Beyond that that features like built-in IS and higher low-light sensitivity via per column A/D converters seem to make it a solid full-frame competitor. In addition, looking at how Sony has thus far been packing feature rich DSLRs in the price-range, this camera seems to be more then just pixel-pusher. Beyond that, its incredibly unlikely that Sony will price this against the 1Ds MkIII (being its at ~$8k) especially with a body without an integrated grip. The real test is what they price this camera at, there is nothing in Sony's system that can justify a pricing it close to the Canikon competitors, but at the right price it might be a good alternative.

Canikon got served!

What everyone fails to remember is that Sony's DSLRs are really Konika/Minoltas in Sony clothing, so much of the "system" is already in place. This camera will mount any of Minolta's extremely fine 35mm lenses and other accessories.

It's true that Sony has a long row to hoe to compete at the highest levels with Nikon and Canon, but there's lots to build on, and they've got time, and a whole lot of cash, on their side.

Is 25 megapixels really necessary? The vast majority of people only need about 4 megapixels for everyday photography. 8 Megapixels is more than enough for newspaper and magazine photography. I don't think studio photographers would use it either, for digital most use medium format Hasselblads with a digital back. I guess 25mp is good if you need to make a house sized poster of an image, but how practical is that? I would much rather see more R&D into chips that produce less noise, have better color rendition, and more frames per second rather than more megapixels. And finally, the number of megapixels is meaningless if you use one of those shitty variable aperture zoom lenses that most amateurs use.

Alien Vaporware Falcon 1

Using pioneering gene splicing techniques, DNA from aliens in cryostorage at area 54 has been combined with that of the Peregrine falcon to create the revolutionary 10 gigapixel biosensor wet lens hybrid image capture system.
Features:
Adaptive integrated wet lens system eliminates the need for interchangeable lenses
- Integrated eyelid/lens cover
- 20x equivalent optical power

Biological hybrid requires no batteries, runs on refillable liquid nutrient/Visine mixture
- Available in unscented and NEW! Imported Beer scented versions

Advanced Alien DNA powered image stabilization enables razor sharp images under extreme conditions.
- The Falcon 1 was put in the hands of a confirmed crack addict and he was thrown into a police union rally disguised as a reporter and captured stunningly sharp imagery
…and thus is an undeveloped prototype displayed to create buzz.
Yawn, wake me when you've got an actual camera to sell, OK Sony?

You aren't a Pro Photographer until you have a Hasselblad

>>is 25 megapixels really necessary?

Depends. An A3 sized print (16.5 x 11.7 inches) at 300dpi is around 17.5 megapixels ((300 * 11.75) = 3525 pixels x (16.5 * 300) = 4950 pixels); so this camera will give you enough latitude to spare for cropping. The camera will be more relevant as you go to larger prints. Beyond that, with a good glass you can get more detail with a higher-megapixel sensor. However, if you are not intending to print above A4 size prints and speed is more a priority, then a camera with a lower pixel-density such as the Nikon D3 is better suited. So depending on the application a high-megapixel camera can be crucial, this Sony seems to be closer in function to the 1Ds MkIII then the D3 or 1D MkIII, it could be a killer camera if they could offer it around the price of the 5D replacement.

@vertibraker: Cameras don't have anything to do with being a professional photographers. There are a bunch of rich idiots walking around using $5000 Leica rangefinders to take crappy photos. Hasselblads are great camera bodies, but all the money and tech can't can't make up for a lack of skill and vision.

@icemanik: Amen brother!

@icemanik: Cameras has a lot to do with being a professional photographer. It doesn't have everything tho. You can take great pictures with a disposable but it is not reliable enough, hence the need for a real professional camera. FYI, people who buy Leica and Hasselblad are not rich idiots. Those are the people who are serious about photography. The idiots are the ones buying the XTi and the D40 to try and make themselves legitimate

You cannot take great pictures with a disposable. I've taken pictures with a disposable. They come out fuzzy and noisy and with muted colors even when taking photos outdoors in the middle of summer.

And just what the hell is wrong with the XTi? It's got interchangeable lenses. It's not too expensive. I have a freind who's stuck a $1000 pro lens on there, and every photo he and I took with it in a dimly lit bar came out looking like it was out of a movie, and he had that stuck on an older Canon that was the precursor to the XTi.

The camera's not everything, but the lens sure as hell is. And XTi is just fine if you stick a good peice of glass on it. If you're on a budget, put the money into the lens.

As for the 40D, I don't know that you need to spend the money on that if you're not a pro, but if you have the money, I don't see why you shouldn't get a better camera. You'll regret it later if you take all your vacation photos with a stupid little cheap Kodak which blows out all the highlights and can't perform in dim light.

@vertibraker: OK, I get you point, no one is going to show up with a XTi and 24-70mm lens and try to shoot pro football. But I was trying to say that if you give an expensive camera to someone who doesn't know what they're doing, the photos won't be any better than if they used an inexpensive camera. For example, there were photos circulating a while ago of Elvis Costello and Victorian Beckham trying to take photos with a Leica M8 with the lens cap still on. A Nikon D3 in the hands of an amateur is just as good as a D40. Similarly, a Hasselblad in the hands of an amateur won't be any better than a Holga. Hence, a Hasselblad alone doesn't make someone a professional.

@vertibraker: Many pro photographers go their whole careers without ever owning a Leica or Hasselblad. And several people who own those high-end name-brand cameras could never use their photography to pay for them.

Haven't we all played the resolution game long enough? When a 12MP pro-level camera is giving a 21MP pro-level camera a run for its money in noise control and image quality, can't we just say "enough already!"? I know I can!

@el-emeno: Sho' nuff!

I have an M8. I like it, but like all digital cameras, it lacks soul. My M5s and SL2s are thirty plus years old and still giving me grand images. So here is to Film, the Leica, the Nikon F and the Canon F.

Nice to see that Sony is putting out a FF sensor camera. People did buy Minolta cameras, Konikas, Contax, Kodak, Yashica et al - point being that there may be something that just feels right about the Alpha to somebody. If Sony sends me one (hint, hint) I'll give it a shot.

I'm a pro and I've never owned a Leica or a 'Blad, shot a few of them but they just never felt "right" for me

Anyone know what resolution 25mp is?

@gamecrazychris:
Image size Diagonal width 43.3mm (Type 2.7)
Total number of pixels 6236(H) x 4124(V) approx. 25.72M pixels
Number of effective pixels 6104(H) x 4064(V) approx.24.81M pixels
Number of active pixels 6096(H) x 4056(V) approx.24.73M pixels

@Elliuotatar: That shows how much you know about photography. Have you ever seen any photos from Andrew Yates. He can do wonders with a disposable. You are right that the lense makes all the difference. Nothing comes close to a Zeiss lense.

@el-emeno: Of course there are pros that never use a Leica or Hasselblad. That is like a chef who works at Chili's and a master chef. And those several people who own those high-end name-brand cameras who could never use their photography to pay for them are called FAILURES. A camera does not make a photographer but it sure helps.

I want one!

@vertibraker: I'm old, as this statement will prove, but in my experience the primary source of perfect-condition used Linhofs has always been doctors and lawyers who thought they were dedicated amateur photogs.

@nosauten: No, "Canikon" has not been served.

Sony, or anyone else who wants to be a pro standard, can only challenge Canon and Nikon by meeting the needs of the those pros. Contax, Pentax and plenty of others have previously turned out cameras as good as Nikon and Canon. Some of them even turned out whole systems. The Pentax system headed up by the LX was brilliant in every way and the camera was arguably better than anything from Canon and Nikon but Pentax never came close to being a pro standard alongside the F1 and the F3.

No, knocking off Canon or Nikon for the pro market requires beating them at the service end of the equation. When Sony sends teams of highly qualified techs to all major events, ready to fix anything and lend out piles and piles of horrifically expensive equipment to the pros working those events, then they'll have a shot at displacing Canon or Nikon. When Sony can do repairs the way pros expect to get their cameras repaired (instantly, and moving mountains if need be to get the equipment back to the shooter), then they'll have a shot.

Not before.

Relatively new to this site, but NOT to Minolta systems. I am a professional photographer, for the past 17 years or so, and yes I have used Hassleblads, own a rangefinder,Mamya 645, etc. I shoot studio portfolio, glamour, themed portrature as well as commercial advertisements and catalogs.Then there is my location work for cd music covers, concerts for the artists, weddings etc.
I use a Minolta 7D, prior was a Minolta 9,9xi,8xi etcall the way back to the 5ooo series.My work would surely benefit from the larger sensor area, as that's the main goal...to be able to use lenses I currently own without them being doubled due to the smaller aps size sensors.ie a 14mm fisheye is now reduced to a wide angle equivelant to a 28mm.It's frustrating as hell, but the camera is a good one and the guys I shoot along with, all use cannon and nikon...yet are in amazement of my imagery.So it doesn't matter what you shoot with, but rather...get some skills first.And by the way , I was in the top percentage of a contest through American Photographer magazine, whereby they gave out 100 throwaway 35mm cameras to see what us pros could do with it...so yes a pro can make magic even with a throwaway.Skills boys...learn , than bash.

@benenglish: Gotta agree on the service end.

I've used the LX system and it never felt right, the F1 and the F3 (although a bit heavy with the motor drive) felt right. I will say that one of the best ergonomic cameras I've ever shot was the x-370. Also we need to give tribute to Minolta for taking on Honeywell on auto-focus.

@benenglish:

True. I was just being a bit silly...was speaking to the pixel peepers:)

You are absolutely right. The service of Canon and Nikon to their CPS and NPS members is quite remarkable--or at least much better than the competition. That's why they are the leaders in the pro-market for DSLR's, and will be for a long time to come.

In the pro end, it's not just about the MP's and sensor size, but the whole package--and the way the camera processes the image etc...and ultimately about the person behind the lens getting the support they need when they need it. If you can't get your pro equipment to work at the right time, life won't hold still for you to come back and retake that bread winning picture...well, unless you're taking landscapes :D

Going back to the original text...

I am surprised that you guys are surprised. Sony announced to the press two years ago that they were going to have a "pro" camera.

(of course they also said they were going to be number 2 in digital SLRs by now)

There's been talk on here of someone not being able to call themselves a professional until they've owned a Leica. I know someone who bought a Leica D-Lux 3 and was rather annoyed to find a week later that it was a rebadged Panasonic Lumix but with the price increased by about 40%. Oh but he's got a Leica so at least he can call himself a professional. Everyone else calls him a badge snob with more money than sense!

Hasselblad ... now that's different - give me a H3D anyday!

Canon has to be thinking hard about the next 5D.It is probaly something like this, panic panic ,panic if this shoots in low light like the D3 which im sure it will they will get some pros jumping ship. I know of a few that went from canon to nikon on the d3 release alone you can always just sell your glass on ebay and start fresh. There is no doubt this camera has to be a threat to any competitors it has more packed in it than the top canon for 1/3 the price.slap some good glass on this thing wow... iso 25000 11x13 print oh yea