Respectfully, they can smd. If the product is capable of something, it should be included, if they want to sell you an entry level product(which they already do) then make one. No company should be handicapping or milking for profit.
I’m getting rid of all my subscriptions. Got rid of my tv subscription, tv licence (uk only I think), music bed, premiere pro etc etc. looked at my bank account then culled them. I’ve kept epidemic sound and moved to Final Cut Pro. That’s me sorted and saved a fortune. I wouldn’t pay for Sony subs, I’d move camera systems if they start that game
As a Sony A1 user: I'm expecting the "Nikon way like on the Z9 and Z8": Get the latest features even from never cameras on the flagship models for free (e.g. focus bracketing, Pre-capture, etc.). That are very easy to implement software features.
I feel the same way. At $8500.00 Canadian there should be some perks, not just a couple of updates that should have been there upon the release of it! IMHO.
Cameras are already very expensive. I don't think the companies would lower the prices significantly if they introduce subscription for certain updates. After all they need to give their customers the feeling that they have already used a lot of money to buy the camera so people would feel like they have wasted a lot of money if they did not buy all the subscriptions also. I predict that the first company that offered subscription will also be the first company out of business
It'll never be that simple ie. the "base" model will never be significantly cheaper. Cost of hardware is just significant part of the camera and they will never give it away "for free". My guess is that they will sell "base" model for just slightly less and charge a lot for additional software features...
There’s not one person on this planet who needs a new camera. You dealt with your last camera. Stop upgrading every 30 seconds just in hopes that someone will notice it. Photographers existed in the 70’s and were still published like crazy.
I'd be willing to pay a small fee to get my a7Siii's more inline with the FX3. I would like the timecode ability for example. I prefer the form factor and duality of the a7SIII over the FX3.
Really not a fan of this at all - if they are software blocking hardware features, surely this is bad for the environment too, because you're putting hardware in a camera that someone might never use. As Sony has been doing good moves in moving towards more recyclable packaging and materials in their products, if this is true, it seems like 2 steps backwards!
I have no problem with charging for additional features, but charging more than the annual fee I pay for Lightroom and Photoshop combined for a simple framing feature is a bit much. The difference in software complexity to implement a simple frame on a Sony camera vs implementing AI fill in Lightroom and Photoshop is over a million times. Remember when Sony allowed downloadable third party apps on their cameras? I believe I paid $10 to add an Intervalometer on my a6000.
That is because you are so bad photographer and need to lie. For a good photographer those things are not necessary. Or probably you are rich, conceited and arrogant, but definitely not a photographer.
I don’t mind a subscription model if it means features available on newer cameras I would get access to. Like buy a camera and the first year of firmware upgrades are included. BUT … to be clear… $150 (US) for a thin green line option? That’s it? Who was the braniac at Sony who thought that was a fair assessment of what the market would be willing to bear?
Brands should charge Adobe or any "editors"and prove that their cameras are really good. However I understand that the market has grown, thanks to the "social media", somebody called "influencers" and all kinds of liars. They are the market for mediocre cameras like SONY's. or l I-phone's.
I think I would be ok with this if the prices weren't outrageous. If the cost of getting all the upgrades that a camera currently had equated roughly to what the camera currently costs or even 10-15% more, then I think I would be fine with it because I would be getting rid of some cost for the features I don't need. I absolutely wouldn't want it to be a subscription fee. I would want it to be a one-time charge. For aspects that may receive continual updates, then the initial cost to add that should be a little lower too (AF for example, I could see getting regular updates as they get new algorithms created). I think this is easier for me to weigh in on though because I don't do and don't really have any interest in video, so being able to reduce the cost by getting rid of every video feature would be a no brainer for me.
All these upgrades... Will it make you a better photographer ? I don't know... For me, I enjoy discovering used equipment and vintage lenses. (I ditched Adobe a few years ago).
I'm kinda for this. I have no interest in video stuff, and would gladly not have it on my camera. However, i would like things like focus shift shooting and if they were able to add this, I'd pay to add this to my a7riv. If it's software that can either be added or upgraded to improve the camera and longevity of it's lifespan, then i am down. I just begrudge paying for video stuff when i have zero interest in it... but if in the future that changes and I could add video features as a software extra, then bonus! I also get why there is resistance to it. I guess it all depends on what you want. As i say, if a feature comes out that will mean i can increase my cameras lifespan, and only pay 200, rather than 4000 on a new camera for 1 feature, bring it on!
I totally disagree Stefan. Camera equipment is extremely expensive as it is. Im a bit disappointed with regard to your position on this. Almost as if you an undercover spokesperson for sony. The amount we spend buying a Sony camera body should qualify us for the updates free of charge based on the fact that we invested in their brand.
I like it, updating an already good camera with the latest updates and not have to purchase a new one every two years sounds great. The companies will still be making some money and keep customers happy and discourage them from jumping to other brands. They will start designing cameras that will be made to have future great updates while being good for the environment. Nikon had done it before Sony, but you had to send the camera back for the additional features.
I don’t like crippling cameras for no purpose other than to push more expensive models. Sony’s explosive growth is in part due to packing every possible technology into their a7III when Canon and Nikon offered a hierarchal totem pole of models that deliberately crippled less expensive cameras. Sony grew revenue building their brand and selling more product. To nickel and dime their client base is a good way to undermine their brand and lose clients. Sony and Canon are competing fiercely for the top spot and it’s not the time to piss off clients.
A bit premature...but maybe. The photography industry is on its heels...with no recovery in sight. If this happens..it won't be for that long...still photography is on its way out. Sony has already announced they will place AI right into later models...everything is changing. In 5 years...a few camera companies...will be gone.
99% of photographers have a camera so they can do their best in their photography. Every week new cameras get on the market, I wonder who buys new cameras every week or month. Boycott every camera manufacturer for 2-3 years and photographers will get the newest cameras for almost free, otherwise, they will go out of business. This "pay to play" bs is the YT gear reviewers' fault. Who needs "best of this, best of that" 120 f/s and 8K videos that they will never use.
I am not surprised at all ! Sony is the worst company for upgrading its products. Till now, you want to get an upgrade : buy the new model... Soon : you want some upgrades : Buy them ! Such a shame !
