What is your top price for the Sony A1 Mark ii

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Member's gallery
I assume Sony will keep the same external grip design, so any price they charge needs to be upped by $500 to compare to the R1 and Z9…
Making the A1ii with an integrated vertical grip for $6500 would be a way to get closer to competition without really ‘dropping price‘ but I am not holding my breath on that one. I think it would have a lot of benefits on weight, cooling and overall ergonomics if they went that way for the A1ii - I love the flexibility of the removable grip for street photography but for wildlife, I hardly ever shoot without.
 
Member's gallery
i think atm typically mfgs tend to only charge for things they in turn have to pay licensing fees for. i doubt anyone is going to break that approach without some serious benefit they can provide that way
 
Member's gallery
John Navitsky said:
i’m not in the market, but i’m guessing pricing won’t be more than the 6.5k of the original. i don’t think it’ll be a global shutter, otherwise it would likely be more.

that said, i’m curious what to expect other than the next gen af as seen in the a9iii (and, incremental and iterative improvements in ergos, etc). not that it would be bad if that’s all there was, but you’d think they’d want another “killer feature”.

i think this is a problem for everyone, how to compel folks to but a new body other than improving af since for most folks it’s plenty good enough.

canon has it’s sports ai stuff. i suspect nikon is going to bring in some red features like increased dynamic range. everyone is going to do c2pa.

so where is sony going to differentiate? i guess the most obvious guess is gs. so maybe let’s call it 50-50 on gs?
Click to expand...

I'm having a really hard time seeing what they can bring to market that will make any meaningful difference to the final output vs the A1.

More FPS? is it even needed? Slightly better AF? Isn't it already extremely effective?

It's about to get really tough for these brands. I think the R1/R5ii launch you started to see that. A lot of "is it even worth updating" type discussions.

Of course there's always the people who will buy it because it's' the most recent, even for a minor change. But I see less and less numbers actually making those purchases unless it's a truly game changing tech that appears.

I just don't see that tech for the A1ii yet. Just a bit more FPS and a bit better AF. No real change in overall photo outcomes that you can't get with an A1 already.

Maybe I'm being pessimistic but we seem to be hitting a tech plateau. The A1 when it launched was truly a special camera for performance, then everyone basically caught up for less money.

Can they recreate that original tech leap? That warrants a price of the original if they can pull it off, but memory card speeds seem to be the brakes on pushing to far.
 
Member's gallery
Things I want in the A1II that I'm willing to pay for a new camera for. All of these things should happen as they are almost all things that have already been done in more recent cameras. I don't even know if the A1II will have anything special...that will have to be a surprise I guess.

1) Pre-capture
2) More FPS (I'm guessing it will have 60 which would match the data throughput of the A9III at 120FPS). Maybe 120FPS in Compressed...I'm good with that.
3) Customizable Zone AF modes
4) DMF for lenses without the dedicated switch (I really want this for my 100-400GM)
5) The newer multi-tilt/flip rear LCD
6) A9III customization for the Subject AF modes where you can tell it to go body/head/eye or just head/eye etc
7) Improved AF
8) EVF that can hold higher resolution while focusing and shooting
9) EVF that can do 240Hz at full size view (this one hasn't been seen yet on any other camera)
10) A9III body which does have nicer curves, grip, button feel etc. (the only thing I don't want is the loss of the dedicated/numbered EC dial...I have very specific reasons for this that I won't get into right now)
11) Support for V4 CFe-A cards (this also hasn't been done yet). This could help deal with the buffer issues shooting 50MP at 60 or even 120FPS.
12) Larger in camera buffer to also help with throughput

Out of that list I think #1-7 and #10 are a given. The rest, maybe.
 
Member's gallery
John Navitsky said:
i think they will, although i suspect the ero changes from the a9iii will probably come to the a1
Click to expand...
Yeah the A7RV is a tad larger and I’m assuming identical to the A9 which is nice. I really do like the articulating screen, especially for macro work.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
If they can come in at a lower price point than the original A1price at launch I would be happy. Regardless the A1 has been a fabulous camera for me and I suspect that won't change with the A1 II.
 
Member's gallery
arbitrage said:
g to pay for a new camera for. All of these things should happen as they are almost all things that have already been done in more recent cameras. I don't even know if the A1II will h
Click to expand...
I think this is the right list and I think these upgrades are pretty much a lock and would keep the price in the $6k to $6.5k range. I really think this is what we'll see. However, with Sony there is always the possibility they'll do something very unexpected (e.g. a9, a1, a9iii), and if they do this, they may up the price (though I don't think they will).
 
Member's gallery
I haven't paid close attention to Sony's pricing until recently, as I'm contemplating a switch from Nikon to Sony.

I don't think they have any reason to price it lower than the A1. The A1 is almost 4 years old and still competes with the best bodies from Nikon/Canon. And the A1 resale value has held much stronger.

I bought a Canon R3 at release for whatever MSRP was and sold it like a month later for $6.8K. That was probably early 2022. now in late 2024 I've seen them sell for $2.5K.

The A1 released in January 2021 and MSRP'd for $6.5K, and 4 years later it sell sells for $4K.

So Sony must be doing something right there.

I'm waiting for the A1II release with a lot of anticipation. The only things my Z9 doesn't provide are:

More FPS (30 would be ideal for me, 60 would be manageable if there was a switch to 30. 120 FPS is near useless to me)
Higher resolution (would love to see 60MP+ although that probably competes with FPS above)
Better AF (Sony should have this in the bag)
Pre-capture raw

If Sony introduces an A1II with 30+ FPS, 50MP+, precapture raw and then a 600GM II with built in TC - I'd almost assuredly be on board.

as it currently stands, the benefit of the built in TC on Nikon outweighs any of the Sony benefits for my use case.
 
Member's gallery
nmerc_photos said:
I haven't paid close attention to Sony's pricing until recently, as I'm contemplating a switch from Nikon to Sony.

I don't think they have any reason to price it lower than the A1. The A1 is almost 4 years old and still competes with the best bodies from Nikon/Canon. And the A1 resale value has held much stronger.

I bought a Canon R3 at release for whatever MSRP was and sold it like a month later for $6.8K. That was probably early 2022. now in late 2024 I've seen them sell for $2.5K.

The A1 released in January 2021 and MSRP'd for $6.5K, and 4 years later it sell sells for $4K.

So Sony must be doing something right there.

I'm waiting for the A1II release with a lot of anticipation. The only things my Z9 doesn't provide are:

More FPS (30 would be ideal for me, 60 would be manageable if there was a switch to 30. 120 FPS is near useless to me)
Higher resolution (would love to see 60MP+ although that probably competes with FPS above)
Better AF (Sony should have this in the bag)
Pre-capture raw

If Sony introduces an A1II with 30+ FPS, 50MP+, precapture raw and then a 600GM II with built in TC - I'd almost assuredly be on board.

as it currently stands, the benefit of the built in TC on Nikon outweighs any of the Sony benefits for my use case.
Click to expand...
You make a very good point about it still being a great camera and to me it would have to be something extraordinary to desire a second generation model. I think in today’s economy, price is paramount. Sony can certainly charge whatever they like but if they follow the pricing strategy of the A9, I don’t foresee it selling well. $8000 will by no means render me homeless lol but I will not ever in my life pay that for a camera. I’m going to go out on a limb and predict it will be at least $7499 but I hope I’m wrong. I currently have three Sony bodies that cover anything I could imagine shooting so it would have to be something special to make me pay a price that high.
 
Member's gallery
sh1209 said:
You make a very good point about it still being a great camera and to me it would have to be something extraordinary to desire a second generation model. I think in today’s economy, price is paramount. Sony can certainly charge whatever they like but if they follow the pricing strategy of the A9, I don’t foresee it selling well. $8000 will by no means render me homeless lol but I will not ever in my life pay that for a camera. I’m going to go out on a limb and predict it will be at least $7499 but I hope I’m wrong. I currently have three Sony bodies that cover anything I could imagine shooting so it would have to be something special to make me pay a price that high.
Click to expand...

While the economy may be doing poorly for the average person, the top 1% just keep getting richer and richer. These are the type of people that a high end, new camera is aimed at. Consumers who care about price often will never even look at new products. They're the ones buying DSLR's in 2024, or picking up old Canon EF super telephotos.

I'm in the camp of people who are buying 400 f2.8s and 600 f4s, and sometimes both - so it's not unusual to have $50k+ wrapped up in hobby camera gear. $8K for most of these people is only one paycheck, a month or two of not eating out, a little less nice hotels on one vacation in the year, etc.

In the last few years all of the big manufactures (Canon, Sony, and Nikon) have had trouble satiating demand at release. If I was Sony, I would price the A1II a bit above what I expect fair market value is, and try to get to a point where I'm not out of stock for the first 12 months of a release.

If lots of people are thinking $7500, I'd start at $8500. Undoubtedly they will sell. The quantity is unknown. If they aren't selling well enough, you can always lower the price without much kickback, but raising the price after release almost always results in a lot of bad press.

There will always be people who will pay any price for something, just to say they have the latest and greatest. There will also always be companies who need the latest and greatest in order to stay competitive, and they will buy it.

I don't think Sony cares what the economy for the average person is like, since the average person doesn't even know what an A1II is. Photography is a very small and niche hobby, and of that small pool - the amount of people buying a flagship body over $5K is even smaller.
 
Member's gallery
nmerc_photos said:
While the economy may be doing poorly for the average person, the top 1% just keep getting richer and richer. These are the type of people that a high end, new camera is aimed at. Consumers who care about price often will never even look at new products. They're the ones buying DSLR's in 2024, or picking up old Canon EF super telephotos.

I'm in the camp of people who are buying 400 f2.8s and 600 f4s, and sometimes both - so it's not unusual to have $50k+ wrapped up in hobby camera gear. $8K for most of these people is only one paycheck, a month or two of not eating out, a little less nice hotels on one vacation in the year, etc.

In the last few years all of the big manufactures (Canon, Sony, and Nikon) have had trouble satiating demand at release. If I was Sony, I would price the A1II a bit above what I expect fair market value is, and try to get to a point where I'm not out of stock for the first 12 months of a release.

If lots of people are thinking $7500, I'd start at $8500. Undoubtedly they will sell. The quantity is unknown. If they aren't selling well enough, you can always lower the price without much kickback, but raising the price after release almost always results in a lot of bad press.

There will always be people who will pay any price for something, just to say they have the latest and greatest. There will also always be companies who need the latest and greatest in order to stay competitive, and they will buy it.

I don't think Sony cares what the economy for the average person is like, since the average person doesn't even know what an A1II is. Photography is a very small and niche hobby, and of that small pool - the amount of people buying a flagship body over $5K is even smaller.
Click to expand...
My thoughts are, the more people that attain the equipment, the better. I certainly do agree with a lot you say, and my experience most of the photographers I run into in the field with high end gear certainly are not ultra wealthy people. Like you state, between my camera equipment, and my drones, I probably have well over 60 grand tied up, but it’s the only hobby I have. My wife and I are certainly not super wealthy, but we have did very good for ourselves. Even being financially comfortable, I think about how we spend our money and what we’re getting for it. It still makes more sense to me that if Sony were to surprise everyone and bring that camera out for $5999, the volume alone would make up for any markup, but that’s just my opinion.
 
Member's gallery
And I guess I sort of left at one hobby in the previous post lol. I do collect firearms, but I haven’t bought any in a while because I haven’t really ran into any that have enticed me to do so in a while.
 
Member's gallery
sh1209 said:
And I guess I sort of left at one hobby in the previous post lol. I do collect firearms, but I haven’t bought any in a while because I haven’t really ran into any that have enticed me to do so in a while.
Click to expand...
I’ve been in the same boat. I did add a couple to the family a month or so ago but it’s been several years. Takes a bit to excite me to add something to that collection and I’m getting to be the same with photography. Likely selling a handful of lenses etc I just don’t use. Seems I go in cycles.
 
Member's gallery
DavidT said:
I’ve been in the same boat. I did add a couple to the family a month or so ago but it’s been several years. Takes a bit to excite me to add something to that collection and I’m getting to be the same with photography. Likely selling a handful of lenses etc I just don’t use. Seems I go in cycles.
Click to expand...
Firearms really haven’t increased as much in price as other items surprisingly but still costly lol
 
Member's gallery
sh1209 said:
My thoughts are, the more people that attain the equipment, the better. I certainly do agree with a lot you say, and my experience most of the photographers I run into in the field with high end gear certainly are not ultra wealthy people. Like you state, between my camera equipment, and my drones, I probably have well over 60 grand tied up, but it’s the only hobby I have. My wife and I are certainly not super wealthy, but we have did very good for ourselves. Even being financially comfortable, I think about how we spend our money and what we’re getting for it. It still makes more sense to me that if Sony were to surprise everyone and bring that camera out for $5999, the volume alone would make up for any markup, but that’s just my opinion.
Click to expand...

I would certainly love a $6K A1II lol. I hope you're more right about this than me.

I have the opposite experience of you regarding photographers. Granted I am 99% wildlife and astro shooting, so that may skew more to people with $15K+ lenses or $50K+ hobby astro setups. The majority of shooters I run into out in the field are either currently working doctors, or retired doctors. They have so much money it's not even funny. Spending $50k+ a year on travel trips just to photograph certain animals like muskox, polar bears, birds, whatever.

I think it makes more sense for Sony lenses to be priced cheaper than bodies as most people are more inclined to save up longer for a lens than a body. "Date the body, marry the lens". Since lenses can often be used for a decade or more, while bodies might be upgraded 3x in the same time frame.

I'd also love to see how Sony makes their pricing decisions (or any of these companies really). You mention that lower prices would lead to increased volume, but as I said - they already can't keep up with the demand. Your statement is only true if they can satisfy the demand that is generated as a result ;)
 
Member's gallery
nmerc_photos said:
I would certainly love a $6K A1II lol. I hope you're more right about this than me.

I have the opposite experience of you regarding photographers. Granted I am 99% wildlife and astro shooting, so that may skew more to people with $15K+ lenses or $50K+ hobby astro setups. The majority of shooters I run into out in the field are either currently working doctors, or retired doctors. They have so much money it's not even funny. Spending $50k+ a year on travel trips just to photograph certain animals like muskox, polar bears, birds, whatever.

I think it makes more sense for Sony lenses to be priced cheaper than bodies as most people are more inclined to save up longer for a lens than a body. "Date the body, marry the lens". Since lenses can often be used for a decade or more, while bodies might be upgraded 3x in the same time frame.

I'd also love to see how Sony makes their pricing decisions (or any of these companies really). You mention that lower prices would lead to increased volume, but as I said - they already can't keep up with the demand. Your statement is only true if they can satisfy the demand that is generated as a result ;)
Click to expand...
I wish I could say I had that problem lol. Lenses are certainly a wiser investment like you state and definitely hold their value more than bodies. The A1 was really only a problem to get for a short while from what I remember. At one point I had two of them and had no issue finding either. Same with the A7RV, I bought it right away. I did have to wait a bit for the 70-200 GMii but that's the only Sony item I can remember waiting for TBH.
 
Member's gallery
This -> "Date the body, marry the lens" :).
Bodies come and go... A lens is for the long haul.


nmerc_photos said:
I would certainly love a $6K A1II lol. I hope you're more right about this than me.

I have the opposite experience of you regarding photographers. Granted I am 99% wildlife and astro shooting, so that may skew more to people with $15K+ lenses or $50K+ hobby astro setups. The majority of shooters I run into out in the field are either currently working doctors, or retired doctors. They have so much money it's not even funny. Spending $50k+ a year on travel trips just to photograph certain animals like muskox, polar bears, birds, whatever.

I think it makes more sense for Sony lenses to be priced cheaper than bodies as most people are more inclined to save up longer for a lens than a body. "Date the body, marry the lens". Since lenses can often be used for a decade or more, while bodies might be upgraded 3x in the same time frame.

I'd also love to see how Sony makes their pricing decisions (or any of these companies really). You mention that lower prices would lead to increased volume, but as I said - they already can't keep up with the demand. Your statement is only true if they can satisfy the demand that is generated as a result ;)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top