I read that post when it came out. 
What I understood from his post was “cool toy, let’s see what they do next”. The thing is, NEX cameras are not anywhere near being substitutes for prosumer and pro cameras. So yeah, I would like one (if they were WAY cheaper) to use as my carry-around camera, but I would not ditch my full frame DSLR for it, or get rid of my lenses. NEX cams will have to get much, much better to reach that point.
Would you ditch an APS-C SLR for it?
I don’t see why you’d want to use AAs. It’s much nicer to be able to carry your camera with you and charge it up anywhere. My sister actually just bought a camera, and one of her gripes is that it uses AAs instead of a proprietary battery. She’d much rather just be able to plug the camera in at night and have it be charged up for the next day.
Nature usually doesn’t have electrical outlets.
I usually take my 35mm Nikon N90 with a fixed 50mm lens on lengthy outdoor expeditions. It takes four AAs, and they last forever. I scan the negatives with an Epson V500 flatbed scanner.
Since you need a charger either way, a AA charger isn’t much larger than a LiIon charger. She should be using NiMH rechargeable batteries anyways, not alkalines.
How many sets of batteries can you carry for the same size and weight of 10 rolls of 35mm film? I generally carry 3 sets of batteries when I’m out for a week, and a few 8 gig cards means I can return home with 2000+ photos and video.
What’s the native resolution of the scans? (and you DO know this qualifies you to anachronism status, right? )
I found my camera!!! Woot!
AA’s and a viewfinder!
I’m so happy! 
Frankly your guy reactions are pretty funny. It reminds me how people were reacting to digital cameras 10 years ago. Professionals were swearing they would never switch to digital.
All Sony is saying is that we don’t need the mirrors anymore. In five years people who still use DSLRs are going to look like dinosaurs.
I had to get myself a negative scanner. My Epson flatbed is too slow. I found a negative scanner for less than $100 that is 10 times faster than the flatbed.
The flatbed also does 120 film. It takes a long time, but I’m willing to wait.
I think his point was the opposite; that the NEX-9 already is a good replacement for an APS-C DSLR from a quality and usability standpoint. It’s certainly the target market; people who want interchangeable lenses and more control, but don’t want the size, expense and complexity of a full sized DSLR.
It’s inevitable that DSLRs will go away or morph. There will probably always be people who need the most robust and versatile cameras that can be made. They will be slower to transition away from traditional DSLRs, just like they were slow to transition away from film. But they will leave DSLRs when they can get more for less from the new camera designs.
Does the camera you’re talking about have a real viewfinder? One you actually look through with your eye, rather than a live-preview LCD? I don’t think it does. That is a huge handicap, in my opinion, and in the opinion of most serious photographers I know.
I’m sure the majority of people don’t care about it. There’s a thread in Cafe Society about favorite photographers, and it’s been there since last afternoon and it only has three replies.
They seem to have been saying that for much of the last decade, and I believed them a few times, only to be disappointed every time due to sensor size, image quality, aperture limitations, and terrible interfaces.
I’m open to the idea (and really excited by it, actually, since SLRs are so frigging big)… but I’ll believe it when I touch it.
A viewfinder allows me to turn off the stupid back LCD panel, that’s all I care about. And, I’ve never had any problem lining up my shots with my viewfinder.
Not so much on expense yet. A Nex-7 sets you back $1200. You can get a nice DSLR body for that. I expect the price to come down eventually since a mirrorless system is actually mechanically simpler. I also expect some competition in the aftermarket lens market.
I suspect this viewfinder may change some minds. It is an OLED display with 1024x768 resolution and a 10,000-1 contrast ratio.
http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/cx_news/vol66/pdf/ecx331_332a.pdf
Here is what David Pogue said:
BTW, he still isn’t happy with the controls, although he says they are much better.
That article describes the APS-C as a “pro-size sensor,” but I don’t know any pros who use anything less than a full-frame sensor. That means Nikon D3 or D700 or Canon EOS 5D. Show me a digital camera - an affordable one, not some unholy monster that costs more than a new car - with a 645-sized sensor, then I’ll maybe be impressed. Why are these digital crooks holding out on us? Is it so unbelievably expensive to create a larger digital sensor that it absolutely demands a five-figure price tag? If so, maybe they should work on making it less expensive. Oh, wait - they’re price-gouging crooks who want to screw the consumer, so of course they wouldn’t do that. All the electronic viewfinders and gizmos in the world won’t impress me one iota as long as the APS-C midget-sized sensor remains the standard for “consumer” grade cameras, with absolutely no end in sight whatsoever. Fucking greedy monsters.
No, not yet.
I think you are wrong. Pros held on to their film cameras because until relatively recently digital did not offer the quality film did. Then Nikon, Canon, Hasselblad got their feces together and most pros ditched film and happily migrated to digital. They won’t ditch their work horses for some cute camera just because. The moment a lighter, more compact camera of similar or better price and quality appear most will move ASAP.
For 1200 you can get a brand new Nikon D7000, a mighty fine camera for that price. One you can squeeze pro-quality pictures out of (my agency takes pictures from D7000, the lowest level camera they will accept pictures from, it may not be full frame, but with higher resolution than the D700 it makes up for the DX format.
You don’t know many pros.
I know enough. I’ve worked with everyone from local hipsters and art photographers to National Geographic veterans. They all seem to use D700s, D3s or EOS 5Ds - that is, the ones who don’t use film Leicas, Hassys or view cameras.
It is eminently possible to shoot professional-level work with a DX. It’s possible to shoot pro-level work with any camera! It’s the eye that matters, not the camera, ultimately. But, typically, someone who lives and breathes photography just needs that big, bright, clear viewfinder of a full-frame. Anything less feels like, I don’t know, wearing a rubber.