A6000 vs. A77ii Continuous AF - Very confused

Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread
zackiedawg
Forum ProPosts: 22,031Gear list
Like?
Re: not nearly enough evidence
In reply to Eamon Hickey, 6 months ago

Eamon Hickey wrote:

B) What is your standard? Publication in a national magazine or fun pictures to post on Facebook at 800 pixels wide? The bird shots you mentioned were not critically sharp, for the most part. When you consider that the images were shot at apertures of f/7.1 or narrower on an APS-C camera, meaning they enjoyed a fairly wide depth of field to hide focus errors, that's really not particularly impressive. The pictures were fine for Facebook but would not have made the cut at Audubon magazine.

Also to be fair...only a few of those shots were at F7.1 or more - quite a few were actually at F5.6 to 6.3 - wide open on the lens involved.  Depth of field was not massive at 210mm and F6.3 - so the focus system still needed to be fairly accurate, and the A6000's is vastly beyond the capability of prior mirrorless cameras.  The difference so far in results I have gotten with the A6000 and with my DSLR and dedicated APO primes for BIFs has been that the lighting has not cooperated for me with the A6000.  I am confident that once I can shoot with a more reasonable aperture of F7.1 to F8 or so, with low ISO, and good directional light on a clear day, that I can get images that will match what I can get from my DSLR.  The DSLR will clearly remain the better overall tool because I have significantly more reach with the lenses I have for that system, but the continuous focus is no longer a hindrance as it was on past e-mount cameras - now the only real shortcoming is the lack of long quality lenses.

And while what I posted won't make a national magazine full-page spread publication standard (and yes, I know what those are as I've been published in national magazines), I think they're above the 800-pixel Facebook level...let's be real.  I have the originals, and I've made full displays and prints to test, and they're fine for even very good looking 8x10s or full size display on a 1920x pixel 24" monitor.  Put another way, I wouldn't have been able to get those shots...almost any of them, with a P&S or previous mirrorless cameras.  I have a long time experience shooting BIFs with both mirrorless and DSLR...and sell and publish them for years now.  While the shots I posted were intended as tests, to offer some with questions about the camera some samples of motion shots with AF-C, weather-be-damned...I can judge enough from the results I'm getting that when light is better, the results will be better and detail will be there - the focus system is fast enough to keep up now, and once the light plays nice with me and the bird is at the right distance, I'll get a few shots that can match my DSLR output...and even meet publication standards.

Now, I'm not criticizing the A6000 -- I happen to know it can do better than those images implied. What I am saying is that it's far too early to claim "it's good enough", and it may be good for birds but not so good for soccer, and "good enough" doesn't mean anything without some context.

I agree.  Unfortunately I was thrown into this argument when my photos were referenced - notice my previous post here I made it clear that despite owning an A6000 and knowing the AF-C capabilities are very much meeting expectations and claims, the A77II is a completely different class of camera and will definitely maintain advantages that make its higher price worthwhile.

-- hide signature --

Justin
galleries: www.pbase.com/zackiedawg

 zackiedawg's gear list:zackiedawg's gear list
Sony Alpha DSLR-A580 Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony a6000 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony E 16mm F2.8 Pancake +24 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