Sony announced it halted the production of the A6600 and A7C. And it will no more produce the A7II and A6100 cameras

[Brownie]

I can understand the A7II and the 6100, they both needed to be culled anyway. The 7C and 6600 though...wow. Even though those are temporary, that's still a big deal. Makes you wonder which chips are available and which aren't, or if its a chip common to all the bodies and they're dedicating the stock to the 1, 9, RIV, etc.

https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/son...l-no-more-produce-the-a7ii-and-a6100-cameras/

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Oh god, I just came from there. I don't even know how I managed to get away from the black-hole comment cycle of "APS-C is dead/No, APS-C actually sells more than FF"

I don't know. But I should be very sad if I couldn't replace my a6500 with something at least as full-featured if I needed/wanted to. I'm not down with GAS just now, but there is always gear failure or accidental damage.

 

[Brownie]

Oh god, I just came from there. I don't even know how I managed to get away from the black-hole comment cycle of "APS-C is dead/No, APS-C actually sells more than FF"

I don't know. But I should be very sad if I couldn't replace my a6500 with something at least as full-featured if I needed/wanted to. I'm not down with GAS just now, but there is always gear failure or accidental damage.

I didn't actually look at the comments, it seemed so useless an endeavor.

 

[Brownie]

CURSE YOU @Thad E Ginathom! Your post made me curious and I had to go and look. AUUGHH!! MY EYES!!!

It seems that most of the people over there don't understand basic reading fundamentals. It appears they are unable to parse out the difference between halting production (A6600 and A7C) and no more producing (A7II and A6100), instead lumping them altogether. Then, they don't understand why none of it makes any sense to them.

 

[WoodWorks]

Whenever I start reading comments there, I am reminded that half of all people are below average.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

It appears they are unable to parse out the difference between halting production (A6600 and A7C) and no more producing (A7II and A6100)

It is confusing, using those words. Halting means stopping. Now I come to think of it, I read, I think, "end of life" for a7II and A6100, but maybe I assumed suspending production of A6600 and A7C.

"Halting" actually sounds more final than that.

It's just another of those times in life when I stop, look around me, and ask, "What does it all mean?"

 

[Biro]

The thing to remember on that rumor site is that English is not the blogger/administrator's first language. It is also not the first language of at least half - if not more - of the people posting comments.

 

[AlwaysOnAuto]

I've read, somewhere, that English as a second language can be daunting at best.

 

[WoodWorks]

I've read, somewhere, that English as a second language can be daunting at best.

It's true! The German, French, and Spanish languages were all constrained by academies back in the 1600s. But English was allowed to wander around aimlessly, snapping up words from all sorts of places, to the point where it contains more than a million words (though only about 170,000 are in common usage today). So for a non-native to learn how to speak it must be maddening.

And pronouncing it? Ha! An example: How do spell "fish" in English? Answer: GHOTI. GH from "laugh," O from the plural "women," and TI from "definition."

 

[Brownie]

Ok, fine. Still doesn't seem that difficult to sort out. Two separate groups of items described differently. Maybe the English has them confused, but Thad figured it out!

 

[SpecFoto]

Sony Addict usually brings some common sense to the crap headlines over at SAR. Here is their take on it today:

http://sonyaddict.com/2021/12/23/so...10-a7ii-a6400-and-stops-producing-a7ii-a6100/

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Sony Addict usually brings some common sense

Is that the actual Sony announcement in English? It's more than daunting, it's gobbledegook! My brain is injured.

 

[Tipton]

It makes sense to discontinue the a6100 and a7ii, as they're both two generations out of date. The A7C, well it is a generation behind, and I don't think it sold as well as it's big brother, the A7iii. But halting the 6600...maybe conserving chips for a new aps-c body?

 

[WoodWorks]

What I don’t understand is why Sony can’t “co-develop” a rangefinder-style and a hump-style camera simultaneously. If they manufactured (or sourced) many of the major components like sensor, rear screen, EVF, control modules, etc. for both styles, the savings would be automatic.

 

[Brownie]

What I don’t understand is why Sony can’t “co-develop” a rangefinder-style and a hump-style camera simultaneously. If they manufactured (or sourced) many of the major components like sensor, rear screen, EVF, control modules, etc. for both styles, the savings would be automatic.

They clearly can, witness the A7C and other FF models. They could turn any of their SLR style bodies into an APSC if they wanted to. I think Sony sells APS-C cameras because they have to appeal to that price point. If they can do an A7'C'ompact, they could do an A6600'F'ull size.

When I picked up my RIV the dealer and I were talking about this announcement. He said it isn't surprising they paused the A7C, it's the worst selling FF body they have.

I think if Sony came out with a full sized SLR style APS-C body they could get into Fuji, Nikon, and probably Canon to some degree.

 

[WoodWorks]

They clearly can, witness the A7C and other FF models.

They can, but they don’t. Look at that crappy EVF on the A7C. Had they used the EVF from, say, the A7IV, or any other of their current full-frame line, that might have made it a more attractive option for many people (including me) instead of a deal breaker. Yes, it would require some (minor) cosmetic changes to the rangefinder-style design. But it probably would have saved Sony some cost and development time, and possibly lowered the price to the consumer. A two-fer!

 

[Biro]

They can, but they don’t. Look at that crappy EVF on the A7C. Had they used the EVF from, say, the A7IV, or any other of their current full-frame line, that might have made it a more attractive option for many people (including me) instead of a deal breaker. Yes, it would require some (minor) cosmetic changes to the rangefinder-style design. But it probably would have saved Sony some cost and development time, and possibly lowered the price to the consumer. A two-fer!

I agree. And I truly believe the fact that the A7c would have been made that much more attractive with the better EVF is precisely why Sony didn't include it.

The longer Sony has been in the camera business, the more it behaves like the old-line cameramakers - always looking to protect its more-expensive options and pushing the consumer in that direction. That kind of thinking got Nikon into big trouble.

Frankly, Sony's cynical behavior has begun to turn me off on the brand.

 

[Brownie]

When I was much, much younger, CDs were a brand-new idea. There was an in-depth article about Sony electronics and planned obsolescence. Sony and Phillips had introduced the CD even while cassette tapes and Sony Walkman units were very popular, which many people didn't understand. Why bring out something that would make your own product obsolete?

Sony knew exactly how long to milk the market. Expensive first for the technophiles, then cheaper for everyone, then drug-store shelf for low income. They pointed out that while many people believe economy of scale is the main driver of cost and price, it has much more to do with marketing. They could sell the cheap ones earlier in the process, they just don't want to. And they already knew what the next latest and greatest would be and when they would introduce it, even decades in advance. I'd be willing to bet that there's no difference in their Camera division, or for that matter any other company.

I'm sure that with technology advancing at such a fast pace, decades have become years and the need to be flexible is even greater than before, but they already know. They know what and they know when.

The only huge mistake I can ever recall them making was failing to license the Beta Max to other manufacturers. They tried to keep in in house while JVC allowed everyone and their brother to build. By the time Sony got around to it VHS had taken over the market.

I'm sure the fact that Sony doesn't build this camera or have that feature is very well-researched.

 

[WoodWorks]

Well, I’m old enough to have long ago given up on the idea that the people in charge of things have risen to that level through merit, or that they’re the smartest people in the room. There are just far too many examples of these brainiacs running their enterprises full-speed into a ditch. @Biro’s BetaMax example is the perfect case in point. Sony survived that self-inflicted wound, and given the fact that they opened their lens design standards to the competition gives me some hope that it’s not just the bean counters running the show.

But the A7C is the poster child for a missed opportunity. I may even have sprung for one if not for the EVF, but instead I bought a used A7RIV, and Sony got exactly none of my money. In fact, of the four full-frame Sony bodies I’ve owned, the original A7, purchased nine years ago, is the only one I bought new.

And the fact that the A7C is on the suspended production list is a telling bit of evidence. Were it one of their top sellers, that model would be getting some of those precious chips. Instead…

 

[WNG]

When I was much, much younger, CDs were a brand-new idea. There was an in-depth article about Sony electronics and planned obsolescence. Sony and Phillips had introduced the CD even while cassette tapes and Sony Walkman units were very popular, which many people didn't understand. Why bring out something that would make your own product obsolete?

Sony knew exactly how long to milk the market. Expensive first for the technophiles, then cheaper for everyone, then drug-store shelf for low income. They pointed out that while many people believe economy of scale is the main driver of cost and price, it has much more to do with marketing. They could sell the cheap ones earlier in the process, they just don't want to. And they already knew what the next latest and greatest would be and when they would introduce it, even decades in advance. I'd be willing to bet that there's no difference in their Camera division, or for that matter any other company.

I'm sure that with technology advancing at such a fast pace, decades have become years and the need to be flexible is even greater than before, but they already know. They know what and they know when.

The only huge mistake I can ever recall them making was failing to license the Beta Max to other manufacturers. They tried to keep in in house while JVC allowed everyone and their brother to build. By the time Sony got around to it VHS had taken over the market.

I'm sure the fact that Sony doesn't build this camera or have that feature is very well-researched.

It's called good business strategy. Every business (successful) does this. Your initial roll out is targeted to the discriminatory buyer...with disposable income.
BTW, Betamax was more successfully adopted outside North America. Sony did license it to other manufacturers. And all professional video equipment used the TV industry was Sony (Super)Betamax. VHS was dominant in the USA when JVC spec-ed super long play. And you can squeeze more recording time per tape but at crappy quality. Then video rentals adopted VHS and moved away from Betamax. That sealed the consumer market.