A6000 vs. A77ii Continuous AF - Very confused

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
123Mike
Senior MemberPosts: 4,250Gear list
Like?
Re: A6000 vs. A77ii Continuous AF - Very confused
In reply to VirtualMirage, 4 months ago

VirtualMirage wrote:

123Mike wrote:

I have as of yet see anyone complaining that the EVF is not good enough - the ones that have used it.

What is it that you don't understand the differences between fact and opinion?

Well then, it is the generally shared opinion on average, the consensus is that the EVF on the A6000 is very good and good enough.

Fact: The a77ii has a higher resolution EVF than the A6000. There is no denying that. A higher resolution display typically costs more.

People that actually looked through the A6000 found it to be more than enough.

It tracks a moving object in real time at 11fps and keeps it in focus. I've observed it doing that.

No, what you experienced was a very good predictive AF algorithm.

That's your opinion.

There is no way the camera can focus in real time while an exposure is taking place.

It can see between shots.

That was my point. The A77 and A77ii, on the other hand, can continue to focus while an exposure is taking place. But this all stemmed from my stating there was a dedicated PDAF sensor, which is an extra part which will add to the cost of the camera.

You think that you find the ultimate holy grail crushing blow providing the ultimate confirmation bias for yourself. But what if the A6000 *does* track well at 11 fps? Then what?

I think the only people that can't agree that 12 vs 11 is in all practical terms, just as good, are just arguing to the sake of arguing, and purposely giving a hard time. It's simply not reasonable.

Yes, the difference is small and I never refuted that, but it is true that shooting at 12fps puts a greater demand on the hardware than 11fps. For the hardware to remain reliable, it needs to have a higher level of durability which can increase the cost. That was my point.\

So you "won" by 9%. While you think that is a big victory, I think the vast majority don't care for that. Unless for people desperate clutching for confirmation bias.

There are many customizable buttons and features. It also has MR mode where you can program 3 sets of settings for quick access.

There are some things that a dedicated button or dial is helpful where an MR mode or a menu access cannot do or is too inconvenient. It still doesn't escape the fact that more buttons and dials add to the cost, which was the whole point of the post.

A few buttons can't cost all *that* much. You're clutching at straws here.

I'm not justifying a weaker flash. I was simply explaining that I prefer to avoid using the flash. I prefer to capture the natural lighting. So the need for a more powerful flash isn't there for me. Yes, that's an opinion, and I'm expressing it. I thought it might be interesting to explain how I maximize this. You're being only negative here, and not constructive at all.

Again, personal opinion. You are reflecting only what is acceptable to you and assuming that fits everyone's needs and that it supersedes the fact the flash is weaker.

I guess both our opinions are different.

What you call an excuse (again, you're so negative), I see as something that is exciting, a way to improve on things. As for sharpness, the focal reducer makes the image sharper. I found that the Sony 35mm/1.8 lens almost covers full frame, with little vignetting, and only in the very corners. The sides are degraded a little, but it works for a cheap solution. The results can be quite good. Normally, you'd have to stop it down to f/2.2 or so to make it tack sharp. It seems that with the focal reducer it's sharp right wide open. The results are far better than what I expected. A lot of (negative) people were making all kinds of assumptions and have been making claims and dismissing it beforehand. They were wrong.

Not being negative, I am being truthful. Your comment was an excuse to justify not needing a more powerful flash, or a flash at all for that matter. You compensated my comparison by stating you don't use a flash and would much prefer a faster lens. While it strays away from the fact comparison, I pointed out the double edge sword when shooting at a large aperture and that it isn't always ideal. Nothing more. There is a time and place for it but that doesn't mean it is a replacement for flash.

Trust me, you're being negative. My comment was that in my opinion for half the cost  you can have nearly the same quality photographic experience. Plus there are a few advantages of the A6000 over the A77ii. Video for one. Lighter. Smaller.

I used my previous A57 a fair amount. I think it was around 65k clicks after two years. I suspect I'll use the A6000 for two years as well. It might use 80k clicks, I don't know. At that point I'll sell it, and move to the next camera. It is unlikely I will see the shutter break.

Maybe for you, but again, this isn't about you. It is about the capabilities of the camera. Facts versus opinion.

The fact is that the A6000 is a very competent camera. Another fact is that the A77ii is better than the A6000 for some things. Also a fact is that the A6000 is better than the A77ii at some other things. Fact is that the A77ii costs twice as much.

Yes, but it has to work with a limited set of focal points. When the subject is not behind a focal point, the camera has no choice but to wait until it sees it behind one of those points again. With on-sensor pdaf (plus cdaf) you get so many points that it covers the entire frame and dense enough where you don't run into that problem. The A77 had more points than the A57 which was my previous camera. They upped it on the A77ii, but the A6000 still has more of them, which makes the A6000 better than the A77ii in that regard. I'm purposely writing it this way, because that's what you have been doing. You're arguing over things like "but 12 is better than 11, so there, I win, you lose". Well then, this one *I* win. Ha!

Wow, such a childish statement.

That's what I think about you. Trying to downplay every point I make. Being negative. Overlooking any constructive points I might make. I find all that very childish. I simply let you have a taste of your own medicine, is all.

What did you win, by the way?

A fact that you can not deny.

I didn't realize this was a competition and that prizes were being given away.

It's you that's been trying to compete and downplay and ridicule and all the rest of it.

My comments weren't an argument of what is better in the eye of the beholder, but what is better in terms of specs and what can contribute to a camera that costs more.

When people assess what product offers what, there are going to be opinions, whether you like it or not. Clearly, you do not like opinions that you do not agree with. You're trying to "win" the argument by reaching for what you think are facts. You happy pose opinions as facts. You're fantasizing how something has to be better. But for me to have an opinion about something, oh no, that's not ok. Then it suddenly becomes about "facts" again. You're making for a rather weak argument.

You, and only you, took that as an offense and decided to justify your purchase, a camera I have no issues with and actually like. A camera that I have highly recommended to others, as a matter of fact. And while I find it tempting, it doesn't suit me. But that is not the point I was contributing to the OP. I was contributing only facts.

Again, opinions are part of the assessment.

And if you are going by higher numbers, 12 is better than 11. But that wasn't the point. There was no win or lose to that.

But you *ARE* posing it as a "win", and you're trying to make it go full-stop right then and there. It isn't reasonable.

As for your tracking over a greater area of the sensor, yes the A6000 has a larger coverage area.

OMG you're admitting a fact.

But your original comment wasn't leaning on it having a larger coverage area.

Excuses...

Your comment was implying the A6000 can do object tracking and the A77ii cannot.

I did not say that. I said that the A77 anyway, and A77ii slightly less so, has larger gaps between the autofocus points. It therefore has to make compromises that the A6000 does not. You just distorted that to claiming that I said that the A77ii can't track objects. The A77ii can track objects, but it has a disadvantage.

My response was simply stating the A77 and A77ii can do object tracking and, from my A77 experience, does a pretty decent job at it too.

I'm sure it does. But the A6000 can see the object in more places, so it has an advantage. This isn't an opinion. I'm merely stating a fact.

Always with the OP this and the OP that. Trying to shut up points you don't like.

The OP was asking what are the differences between the two that may contribute to the cost difference. All you did was lay down your opinion of what YOU find useful or not and not was is actually better or more costly that contributes to the price difference.

Some others share my opinions. It is my opinion that the A6000 is as formidable a camera as the A77ii is. I think it is incorrect information to see claims how the A77ii's AF system has to be automatically superior. While I'm seeing how people state that ultimately, the only way to know is by doing side by side tests and comparisons, at the same time stories are constructed and parroted around how an SLT can see the subject full time, uninterrupted. While that may be true, it does not imply that the A6000 is automatically inferior. Perhaps all the A6000 needs is a single frame to draw the conclusions it needs, and it can get that frame between each 1/11s shot.

I correct you of this and, clearly, you are taking offense as if I am trying to shut you up or bury something I don't like.

What points am I trying to shut you up on?

You're trying to downplay every point I make.

I post facts, you try to counter facts with opinion.

You seem to think that all my points are meaningless simply because you are supposedly stating only facts. Well, the *FACT* is that you're also stating opinions all over the place. You're including assumptions. So it's ok for you to express opinions, but when I do it, we're going back to facts again.

I correct you of such, nothing more.

Some facts are meaningless. 12 fps vs 11 fps is not a significant difference. It's all about reasoning, assessing options, weighing things off. Normal people kind of stuff. But, if you must merely stick with facts. Fact is that you can not know at this point that the AF system of the A77ii is superior to the A6000. Fact is that there will be differences, with some aspects favoring one camera and other aspects favoring the other camera. It then becomes weighing them off. And that's where opinions will lead to choices. Opinions are a reality, and simply shouting"but..but... the facts the fact... the plane... the plane".

It's pretty simple and straight forward. I was being objective and factual, you were being biased and opinionated.

As are you. Very much so.

I neither swayed the OP towards one camera or another while you are pushing the A6000 hard.

That's what happens in a conversation. You're trying to come up anything you can think of to have it your way. Oh, but but the OP this and the OP that. In a  discussions, things lead to other points. It's a normal course of conversation. And I've been trying to be constructive.

As mentioned before, I have no issues with the A6000. I think it is a great camera for the price. I've even been tempted by it but it doesn't meet my requirements. In my last post I said the following:

Different horses for different courses.

Do you know what that means?

It's not a slight against one camera or the other. It simply means one camera doesn't suit everyone's needs and that each camera caters towards a particular kind of photographer, job, need, and/or demand.

That's great and everything, but you're still pretending that you're sticking to facts, while in fact you're including opinions.

I'm simply helping raising awareness. The topic *WAS* also about the A6000 after all. So I can't talk about an A6000 in a topic that is about the A6000, just because you say so?

The topic isn't specifically about the A6000 and your opinion of said camera. The topic was about what is the difference between the A6000 and the A77ii and why does one cost nearly twice as much.

Which led to other discussions, to which you contributed offering your opinions.

If you wanted to talk about the A6000 and shower your opinionated love of it to the OP, then respond directly to the OP. Don't reply to my comment that was purely a factoid post and add counterpoints to my facts and try to turn it into an opinion piece.

It's a free world, and if I feel I can contribute something, I am not going to let someone like you control me.

When you do that, I take it as a direct response to me. Which, then don't be surprised if I respond and correct you of your misreadings.

Knock yourself out.

 123Mike's gear list:123Mike's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS A3000 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
f/8New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow