On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...

Started 5 months ago | Discussions
blue_skies
Senior MemberPosts: 6,782Gear list
Like?
Re: On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to nzmacro, 5 months ago

nzmacro wrote:

Very good Henry. I would love to try the Fuji EVF, it sounds darn clever.

So being a MF user only, I can mount and use virtually any mirrorless camera out there and yet, here I am.

What some have as great specs on a camera, other things are missing. I keep looking at everything out there and nothing inspires me or would benefit me more than what I already use. Sure there is plenty of nice gear out there, but why change. One day maybe, but I can't honestly see between those cameras up there what would suit me better.

All the best Henry, nice read with a strong coffee

Danny.

-- hide signature --

Thanks Danny, you always cheer us up here.

Your best hope will be the Nex-7 successor, the A7000. It looks more real now than ever, and speculation is about whether it will be 24Mp or higher.

For your application, higher is better, as long as the sensor can handle the light (ISO).

In the end, you don't care about the sensor size as much as you care about the pixel density. The Nex-7 still combines the highest density with the largest sensor and the best ISO response. Everything else still comes second.

Now we see more and more cameras playing catchup (D7100, D5200, D3200, A77, A6000), but none is surpassing the Nex-7 yet. And no m43 can give you the same image area, they are just a 16Mp crop of the Nex-7 image, lol.

I hope that the A7000 will be 32Mp, while maintaining good ISO 1600 performance. That'll be the day

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sony a6000 +30 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ttan98
Contributing MemberPosts: 986
Like?
Re: see analysis here
In reply to blue_skies, 5 months ago

I am interested in 2 lenses,

Nex.                                                    M4/3

24mm  $1000 .                                  20mm.       $350

16-70m.  $1000.(*)                           14-45mm. $350

Both lenses  from m4/3 are excellent and compact, I own both, even though I can afford to buy both  Nex lenses they are really too expensive, I refuse to buy them. Reasonable price to me should be around $500-600 and more than that.

* it is at best mediocre to good, not excellent. The 18-105mm G lens is too bulky and not proven to be excellent.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jabez02
Regular MemberPosts: 390
Like?
Re: On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to blue_skies, 5 months ago

I'm not sure how much better a 32MP sensor will be in practice on a APS - C sized sensor. Not many lenses now in existence would cope well. There is a comment about the Nikon D5300 with its 24MP sensor and no AA filter to the effect that this is beyond the requirements of those buying such a camera, let alone their lenses.

I think it more important to fine tune the whole senor, AF, exposure package and the data pipeline. Of possible improvements for a more enthusiast / pro style camera, dual processors and pipe lines would be one way to push the hardware to its limits. You could also through the menu system enable the photographer to fine tune the EVF to whatever level of clarity or incomprehensibility they desire.

If you add in an A7 body, you may be pushing the price up substantially towards that of the A7 itself. However it would be marketed to a rather different type of photographer. And all the required components exist.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
blue_skies
Senior MemberPosts: 6,782Gear list
Like?
Re: see analysis here
In reply to ttan98, 5 months ago

ttan98 wrote:

what about availability of high quality lenses at reasonable prices. That's the main reason why I stop buying Sony bodies. BTW I know the prices of most important lenses from E-mount and m4/3 format.

Having said this I anticipate a rebuttal of my above statement but I am sticking to it. BTW I still own both NEX and m4/3 bodies and lenses, they are used appropriately under different lighting and environment situations.

ttan98 wrote:

I am interested in 2 lenses,

Nex. M4/3

24mm $1000 . 20mm. $350

16-70m. $1000.(*) 14-45mm. $350

Both lenses from m4/3 are excellent and compact, I own both, even though I can afford to buy both Nex lenses they are really too expensive, I refuse to buy them. Reasonable price to me should be around $500-600 and more than that.

* it is at best mediocre to good, not excellent. The 18-105mm G lens is too bulky and not proven to be excellent.

Then why didn't you say this in the first place?

So you want the Zeiss IQ, but pay the non-Zeiss price.

Heck, even at Oly, the math does not compute.

The E1670/4 is comparable to the 12-40/2.8 Pro - they are both priced at $1k.

If you throw up the lower-graded 14-45/3.5-5.6, why not just compare against the 18-55/3.3-5.6 kit lens. It is effective almost a stop faster already. And cheaper.

And you 20mm/1.7 gives a 40mm view. Why not put it up against the Sigma 30mm/2.8 or the Sony 35mm/1.8?

  • The Sigma 30mm gives you a 45mm view, and has almost the same speed, and cost $200. 
  • The Sony 35mm gives you a 50mm view, and has a speed advantage, with OSS, for $450. 

Looks to me that you have more choices with the E-mount.

If you want to wider, you can get the excellent Sigma 19mm/f2.8 for $200 or the also excellent ultra compact E20/2.8 for $350.

Again, lots of choices. In fact, you have cheaper options on the E-mount that are just as high in IQ as you can get on your m43. They may be outresolved by the sensor, but I guarantee you that you are still scoring a lot higher in the IQ department than on your m43. There is something about 24Mp versus 16Mp, even if the sensor outresolves the lens ...

The E24Z Zeiss lens is more expensive, because it gives you that much higher IQ. It is up there - check the DxO marks. The Nex-7 ranks among FF cameras for IQ. That is how good this lens is. Sure, it comes at a price, but it is quite a step above.

So,

  • your m43 baseline is $700. 
  • On the E-mount this would only be $400. 
  • If you want to match the $1k E1670/4, you'd have to put up the $1k 14-40/2.8 lens - same expense. 
  • If you get the E24Z/1.8, you'd have nothing that comes even close to matching on m43. 

Looks to me that a real comparison would be:

  • m43: 14-40/2.8 + 20/1.7 = $1,350
  • E-mount: 1670/4 + 35/1.8 OSS = $1,450

And I guarantee you, that for $100 more you'll be getting higher IQ.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sony a6000 +30 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
blue_skies
Senior MemberPosts: 6,782Gear list
Like?
Re: On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to Jabez02, 5 months ago

Jabez02 wrote:

I'm not sure how much better a 32MP sensor will be in practice on a APS - C sized sensor. Not many lenses now in existence would cope well. There is a comment about the Nikon D5300 with its 24MP sensor and no AA filter to the effect that this is beyond the requirements of those buying such a camera, let alone their lenses.

I think it more important to fine tune the whole senor, AF, exposure package and the data pipeline. Of possible improvements for a more enthusiast / pro style camera, dual processors and pipe lines would be one way to push the hardware to its limits. You could also through the menu system enable the photographer to fine tune the EVF to whatever level of clarity or incomprehensibility they desire.

If you add in an A7 body, you may be pushing the price up substantially towards that of the A7 itself. However it would be marketed to a rather different type of photographer. And all the required components exist.

I fully agree -but I was arguing Danny's case.

Danny shoots with 500mm and 800mm lenses and then still crops his images heavily. His lenses can resolve very fine details (they are rather expensive). I am sure that they could handle a 32Mp sensor.

Even if the sensor outresolves the lens, it would still improve on his image.

As to other applications, yes, lenses will become a limiting factor - a reason to go to FF for higher resolutions. Or do multi-shot stitching.

But in Danny's case, he is shooting BIF, so no stitching is to be applied.

We didn't expect the 24Mp sensor, and Sony surprised us. We heard about 28Mp and 32Mp sensor being considered for the A7 as well, so we know that Sony likes to experiment. I would not be surprised if Sony would come out with a higher Mp sensor for the A7000. 28Mp will be a yawn, 36Mp will be too much D800/A7r like. So, I'd expect 32Mp as a target.

If physics disallow this, we will know soon. I have a feeling that Sony is further ahead in this game than we realize - the A7000 will be announced three (!) years after the Nex-7 was announced.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sony a6000 +30 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
captura
Forum ProPosts: 12,949Gear list
Like?
Re: You are comparing bodies only.....
In reply to exdeejjjaaaa, 5 months ago

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

captura wrote:

LTZ470 wrote:

Nice try Henry...when they get PDAF that works indoors in low light they'll be close to fast AF...but this one will be like the Nex-6 slower than Nex-7 and RX1 indoors room lighting...24mp Nex-7 is not that great in low light to be honest...

Nice camera, but no where near the handling of an EM1 and no where near the AF lens selection...and of course the AF Speed will have to be proven in reality...hopefully it's better than the A7r and LA-EA4 adapter...

A6000 = meh....mostly boring made over Nex...

A7 or A7R with same feature set as A6000 = Winner for Sony!

-- hide signature --

Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

Oh I don't know. My better Olympus is an E-PM1 and with CDAF it is very fast in daylight. But although it wants to be fast at night or indoors, it simply runs out of ISO.

My 5R is superior to the E-PM1 in low light AF speed, although still no great shakes. A 16 mp Olympus like the E-M1/ E-M10 might come close, but not close to the A6000.

Dear, E-PM1 is a very old tech, fast AF in m43 world really started with GH2 camera... did you read that Sony itself acknowledged that their AF in A6000 is nowhere near Nikon 1 and m43 ? reread from the official press release = "Amongst interchangeable-lens digital cameras equipped with an ____APS-C___ image sensor as of February 12, 2014. Determined with internal measurement method with E PZ 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OSS lens mounted, Pre-AF off and viewfinder in use." ... as for low light - m43 cameras now focus @ -4EV (or EV-4, if you prever this notation)

I disagree. Fast AF in M43 (daylight) started with the E-PM1- E-PL3. And with the GF-2 in the World of Lumix as I recall. Your point is? Of course it's old..but it's fast and that's what I've got.

Yes I've been saying that my Nikon 1 J1 is incredibly fast and faster than any Sony or anything else, on this forum but I stopped...there's no point to any of this here. No I did not read "Sony itself acknowledged that their AF in A6000 is nowhere near Nikon 1 and m43 ?" Please post the link for that.

The A6000 is still going to be faster than an E-M! or E-M10.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
captura
Forum ProPosts: 12,949Gear list
Like?
Re: see analysis here
In reply to ttan98, 5 months ago

ttan98 wrote:

I am interested in 2 lenses,

Nex. M4/3

24mm $1000 . 20mm. $350

16-70m. $1000.(*) 14-45mm. $350

Both lenses from m4/3 are excellent and compact, I own both, even though I can afford to buy both Nex lenses they are really too expensive, I refuse to buy them. Reasonable price to me should be around $500-600 and more than that.

* it is at best mediocre to good, not excellent. The 18-105mm G lens is too bulky and not proven to be excellent.

That's funny because I have the same 2 M43 lenses and yes, they are excellent, but old. My 14-45 came standard-kit with my Lumix G1, the very first M43 camera only! It is big a d heavy compared to to-day's lenses and being so old, the price is irrelevant. The 20/1.7 is in it's 2nd version now; a lovely pancake and excellent as it's companion, the tiny 14/2.5.

I don't own the NEX lenses for the same reason; price. But they are normally priced and worth it, to some people. It is exactly for this reason that I keep these 2 parallel systems.

But your argument is off course because MOST M43 lenses are much more expensive than the 2 you have here, and rival the E-mount lenses in price.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
captura
Forum ProPosts: 12,949Gear list
Like?
Re: On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to nzmacro, 5 months ago

nzmacro wrote:

Very good Henry. I would love to try the Fuji EVF, it sounds darn clever.

So being a MF user only, I can mount and use virtually any mirrorless camera out there and yet, here I am.

What some have as great specs on a camera, other things are missing. I keep looking at everything out there and nothing inspires me or would benefit me more than what I already use. Sure there is plenty of nice gear out there, but why change. One day maybe, but I can't honestly see between those cameras up there what would suit me better.

All the best Henry, nice read with a strong coffee

Danny.

-- hide signature --

Danny, I thought the split prism effect on the XT-1 might appeal to your manual lens shooting,

Steve

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ttan98
Contributing MemberPosts: 986
Like?
Re: see analysis here
In reply to blue_skies, 5 months ago

I want 24mm not necessary Zeiss, Sony don't make them, and I don't want Sony 20mm, ( I have sigma 30mm excellent lens at fair price.) I don't mind f2.8 if the price is reasonable. Even if Sigma makes 24mm f2.8 with no OSS I don't mind if quality is similar to 30mm. I am not after brand name. Looks  like Sony won't let Sigma make them when there is a Zeiss 24mm selling at $1000.

I want a high quality 18-55mm, f3.5 the only one better than kit lens is 16-70mm Zeiss, no other alternative.

You see I am not after large aperture lens just better quality lens better than kit lens.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
blue_skies
Senior MemberPosts: 6,782Gear list
Like?
Re: see analysis here
In reply to ttan98, 5 months ago

ttan98 wrote:

I want 24mm not necessary Zeiss, Sony don't make them, and I don't want Sony 20mm, ( I have sigma 30mm excellent lens at fair price.) I don't mind f2.8 if the price is reasonable. Even if Sigma makes 24mm f2.8 with no OSS I don't mind if quality is similar to 30mm. I am not after brand name. Looks like Sony won't let Sigma make them when there is a Zeiss 24mm selling at $1000.

I want a high quality 18-55mm, f3.5 the only one better than kit lens is 16-70mm Zeiss, no other alternative.

You see I am not after large aperture lens just better quality lens better than kit lens.

So you don't want the Zeiss IQ, and pay the non-Zeiss price?

You do know that a higher resolution sensor makes any lens perform better, right?

With the A6000 you can get a 24Mp sensor for $650 that works actually quite well with the kit lens.

Sure, it is not 'Zeiss' level IQ, but it is still really up there.

You see, high quality is a combination of both lens and sensor. The Sony kit zoom lenses are not low quality - they are actually above similar Canikon offerings. But they are kit zoom lens performance - they do not have the same crispness, lens speed as a dedicated prime can have, unless stopped down.

If you want high IQ on the cheap, simply get the two Sigma's, the 19mm and 30mm work very well on the Nex-7, they will on the A6000 as well.

I do not understand why the 1855 kit lens plus the two Sigma's would not give you what you want then? Heck, I'd even throw in the E1650P lens - it is a really nice lens, especially if you are a JPG shooter (it really is).

So you don't want the ultimate in quality, and speed is not important, but you want better than the kit lens? Right?

I repeat it again: the 24Mp will make the kit lens better, as it is 50% more resolution. So, use the kit lens (either 1855 or 1650) with the two Sigma's, 19 and 30mm. The kit comes with the body for $150, and you can pick up the Sigma's for $100 used, $200 new. You can get the lens set for as little as $350 for three lenses! Add the body for $650 and you have an amazing camera system for $1k TOTAL!!!

The EM-1 costs $1,400 just for the body only.

I don't know Sony's policy about the 24mm lens offerings. Sigma is not making 24mm for Fuji or m43 either, so that may not be restriction. Honestly, by now even Sony should consider a variant of the 20mm pancake for the 24mm focal length - there would be lots of interest in. Not because it would be cheaper (around $400), but because it would be pancake like. We know that it can be done (Samsung/Canon/Fuji).

But even so - a $400 24mm pancake or 3rd party lens would suffice your wishes. What did you say? Even $500-$600 would be ok? So the delta to the $1k E24Z is only about $400-$500?

I see them on Ebay for less than $800 - there is an option to shrink the gap to only $200-$300.

And I guarantee you, for this $200-$300 you will get an amazing step in IQ. Heck, you will not remove this lens the first month that you attach it - you will be amazed by every picture!

How about it this way then:

You can get the A6000 + kit lens + Sigma 19 + Sigma 30 for $1,200 new (if used you will save $200). You can add the E24Z later on for $800 (from Ebay). So for $2,000 you will have a truly amazing setup. Or, if you just want the kit + E24Z, you can take off $400. So, for $1,600 you will have the A6000 + kit + E24Z.

How does that compare against a $1,400 E-M1 body only now?

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sony a6000 +30 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nzmacro
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,865Gear list
Like?
Re: On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to captura, 5 months ago

captura wrote:

nzmacro wrote:

Very good Henry. I would love to try the Fuji EVF, it sounds darn clever.

So being a MF user only, I can mount and use virtually any mirrorless camera out there and yet, here I am.

What some have as great specs on a camera, other things are missing. I keep looking at everything out there and nothing inspires me or would benefit me more than what I already use. Sure there is plenty of nice gear out there, but why change. One day maybe, but I can't honestly see between those cameras up there what would suit me better.

All the best Henry, nice read with a strong coffee

Danny.

-- hide signature --

Danny, I thought the split prism effect on the XT-1 might appeal to your manual lens shooting,

Steve

yeah it does Steve and so does the smaller magnified over layed view in the EVF

All the best Steve and it seems an ideal EVF system.

Danny.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
spacemn
Contributing MemberPosts: 831
Like?
Re: Res : On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to Astrophotographer 10, 5 months ago

Astrophotographer 10 wrote:

...

As far as high ISO goes, in my case - which is not usual imaging, I often do 30 seconds ISO6400 at F2.8 for nightscapes. So high ISO performance for me is a critical performance measure, not downsampling - what comes out of the camera. I would not expect this 24mp camera to match XE1 or A7r in this regards. Nex 7 in the comparison tool on this site is very very noisy at ISO6400 in RAW. Fuji overstate their ISO's but even so it is very very clean at ISO6400. A7r is quite clean as well as was my Nikon D800e.

I think the reason DXOmark does not have Fuji cameras in its database is to do with the Xtrans and not because Fuji does not want it tested. They are no equipped to handle a different type of sensor.

I am looking forward to hearing more about A6000. I "need" to decide whether to upgrade my XE1 to an XT1 or is A6000 the better choice seeing also as I am accumulating FE lenses.

Greg.

The Fuji overstates their ISO with one stop compared to Sony NEX. How can you then say Fuji is much cleaner at ISO 6400, when you should be comparing Fuji ISO 6400 to Sony NEX 3200. Suddenly the advantage is gone. There's proof on this scattered around on the internet. The shutter speed on the Fuji is always a stop slower then the Sony.

Fuji marketing is powerful

Fair enough however, if the Fuji does the job better for you when it comes to astrophotography, it is a very subjective thing. however I am pretty sure there are some out there who are also happy with their NEX'es. Even the old NEX-5 takes awesome astrophotos.

When that is said I do not see the purpose of having the Fuji if you have the A7R already, that camera cannot be touched IQ wise. The Fuji crowd cry about bad Sony lenses, not sure what lenses they are missing in the Sony range.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SirPalomid
Forum MemberPosts: 92Gear list
Like?
Re: Res : On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to spacemn, 5 months ago

spacemn wrote:

The Fuji overstates their ISO with one stop compared to Sony NEX.

That's not true. I had Sony NEX 5R (and sold it soon after getting a Fuji) , and compared it with X-E1 in the same scene with same focal length, aperture and ISO values: Sony underexposes severely, so I had to dial +2/3 EV, and at the end I had only 1/4-1/3 stop difference in shutter speed with similarly exposed shot (Sony was faster). Sony overstates it's ISO by 1/3 stop too, according to DP review.

 SirPalomid's gear list:SirPalomid's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
spacemn
Contributing MemberPosts: 831
Like?
Re: Res : On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to SirPalomid, 5 months ago

SirPalomid wrote:

spacemn wrote:

The Fuji overstates their ISO with one stop compared to Sony NEX.

That's not true. I had Sony NEX 5R (and sold it soon after getting a Fuji) , and compared it with X-E1 in the same scene with same focal length, aperture and ISO values: Sony underexposes severely, so I had to dial +2/3 EV, and at the end I had only 1/4-1/3 stop difference in shutter speed with similarly exposed shot (Sony was faster). Sony overstates it's ISO by 1/3 stop too, according to DP review.

Other Fuji users know about this issue:

http://www.fujix-forum.com/index.php/topic/4004-the-iso-push/

If you want proof here it is from imaging resource:

EXIF data for the same ISO 6400 shots:

NEX-6: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-nex-6/EXIF/NEX6hSLI06400NR2D.HTM

Fuji XE1: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/fuji-x-e1/EXIF/XE1hSLI06400NR3D.HTM

For the same ISO 6400 shot at ISO 6400 the Fuji requires 1/500 at f/8. The NEX-6 requires 1/1000 at f/8. They both look pretty evenly exposed and there are precisely one stop difference.

Not sure what you have seen but you are pretty lonely in your observation, as there are numerous proofs like the one I showed on the net, so chances are maybe you did something wrong while having the cameras.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
LTZ470
Forum ProPosts: 10,395
Like?
Re: You are comparing bodies only.....
In reply to blue_skies, 5 months ago

blue_skies wrote:

LTZ470 wrote:

Nice try Henry...when they get PDAF that works indoors in low light they'll be close to fast AF...but this one will be like the Nex-6 slower than Nex-7 and RX1 indoors room lighting...24mp Nex-7 is not that great in low light to be honest...

Nice camera, but no where near the handling of an EM1 and no where near the AF lens selection...and of course the AF Speed will have to be proven in reality...hopefully it's better than the A7r and LA-EA4 adapter...

A6000 = meh....mostly boring made over Nex...

A7 or A7R with same feature set as A6000 = Winner for Sony!

Good to see you warming up to Sony again, Cole

As I said elsewhere, Sony claiming #1 sets up all reviewers - it is a bold claim. How it compares in practice is to be seen, but I expect that reviewers have to evaluate the claim, and agree if true.

I think that Sony is becoming a different company. The A7r, the FE lens lineup, the RX10, the earlier RX1/R and RX100-II have all become #1 in their category. If Sony has changed from #1 leading innovator company to #1 product company, we can be in for quite a few more pleasant surprises.

Sony has thrown down the gauntlet in more than one arena. All this commotion about 'can they be active on so many fronts' should stop now. Their answer obviously is 'yes, we are big enough!'

My bet is on Sony delivering a lot more to us in the future. Fun times.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

If you are talking about A7000 then yes, the controls on the Nex-7 are missing on all of the other Nex cameras, and thats important...

A6000, it's a decent camera, but nothing I would replace any of my present cameras with...it would be interesting paired with 16-70 SEL f/4...Nex-7 does well with that lens...

-- hide signature --

--Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
LTZ470
Forum ProPosts: 10,395
Like?
Re: Res : On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to spacemn, 5 months ago

spacemn wrote:

SirPalomid wrote:

spacemn wrote:

The Fuji overstates their ISO with one stop compared to Sony NEX.

That's not true. I had Sony NEX 5R (and sold it soon after getting a Fuji) , and compared it with X-E1 in the same scene with same focal length, aperture and ISO values: Sony underexposes severely, so I had to dial +2/3 EV, and at the end I had only 1/4-1/3 stop difference in shutter speed with similarly exposed shot (Sony was faster). Sony overstates it's ISO by 1/3 stop too, according to DP review.

Other Fuji users know about this issue:

http://www.fujix-forum.com/index.php/topic/4004-the-iso-push/

If you want proof here it is from imaging resource:

EXIF data for the same ISO 6400 shots:

NEX-6: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-nex-6/EXIF/NEX6hSLI06400NR2D.HTM

Fuji XE1: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/fuji-x-e1/EXIF/XE1hSLI06400NR3D.HTM

For the same ISO 6400 shot at ISO 6400 the Fuji requires 1/500 at f/8. The NEX-6 requires 1/1000 at f/8. They both look pretty evenly exposed and there are precisely one stop difference.

Not sure what you have seen but you are pretty lonely in your observation, as there are numerous proofs like the one I showed on the net, so chances are maybe you did something wrong while having the cameras.

Nope, not correct, even IR admits something wrong/erroneous EXIF shutter speeds on Sigma 70mm...which lens did they use on the Nex-6?

-- hide signature --

--Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SirPalomid
Forum MemberPosts: 92Gear list
Like?
Re: Res : On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to spacemn, 5 months ago

Not sure what you have seen but you are pretty lonely in your observation, as there are numerous proofs like the one I showed on the net, so chances are maybe you did something wrong while having the cameras.

There is a difference, I didn't say there is not - but not 1 stop diff.

Make this test with native NEX lens and not "something wrong with EXIF because lens is not native".

I not shooting with 6400 ISO, but until ISO 3200 there is 1/3 stop difference between Sony and Fuji, not 1 stop. In any case with the same lightning conditions and exposure Fuji's shots looks more pleasant because of different noise-pattern and almost complete absence of color-noise.

Up to ISO 800 the are on pair with Sony, then Fuji starts to gain slight advantage.

 SirPalomid's gear list:SirPalomid's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
exdeejjjaaaa
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,688Gear list
Like?
Re: You are comparing bodies only.....
In reply to captura, 5 months ago

captura wrote:

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

captura wrote:

LTZ470 wrote:

Nice try Henry...when they get PDAF that works indoors in low light they'll be close to fast AF...but this one will be like the Nex-6 slower than Nex-7 and RX1 indoors room lighting...24mp Nex-7 is not that great in low light to be honest...

Nice camera, but no where near the handling of an EM1 and no where near the AF lens selection...and of course the AF Speed will have to be proven in reality...hopefully it's better than the A7r and LA-EA4 adapter...

A6000 = meh....mostly boring made over Nex...

A7 or A7R with same feature set as A6000 = Winner for Sony!

-- hide signature --

Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

Oh I don't know. My better Olympus is an E-PM1 and with CDAF it is very fast in daylight. But although it wants to be fast at night or indoors, it simply runs out of ISO.

My 5R is superior to the E-PM1 in low light AF speed, although still no great shakes. A 16 mp Olympus like the E-M1/ E-M10 might come close, but not close to the A6000.

Dear, E-PM1 is a very old tech, fast AF in m43 world really started with GH2 camera... did you read that Sony itself acknowledged that their AF in A6000 is nowhere near Nikon 1 and m43 ? reread from the official press release = "Amongst interchangeable-lens digital cameras equipped with an ____APS-C___ image sensor as of February 12, 2014. Determined with internal measurement method with E PZ 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OSS lens mounted, Pre-AF off and viewfinder in use." ... as for low light - m43 cameras now focus @ -4EV (or EV-4, if you prever this notation)

I disagree. Fast AF in M43 (daylight) started with the E-PM1- E-PL3.

no, the first camera was GH2 where for the first time CDAF was feeded @ 120 readouts per second... at that moment Olympus had (for whatever reason) only 12mp sensors from Panasonic and they (sensor) were not capable to feed CDAF @ that speed... then Panasonic moved to 240 readouts per second supported by Sony Semi m43 sensor GH3 and now to 480 readouts per second supported by Panasonic sensor in GH4 and they focus faster w/o any PDAF on sensor... Olympus now is using at least 240 (E-M1 has the same sensor as GH4 from Panasonic and the rest are using Sony Semi sensor).

and that's what I've got.

that's exactly why you don't understand what fast AF is (am I saying as a owner, past and present, of GH2, GH3 and EM1)

No I did not read "Sony itself acknowledged that their AF in A6000 is nowhere near Nikon 1 and m43 ?" Please post the link for that.

at the bottom of Sony's own press release posted @ dpreview - and that's the point of fine print exactly
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/02/12/sony-a6000-promises-worlds-fastest-af-and-11-fps-subject-tracking

then scroll down to a text in green... are you so naive as not to read fine print ? the same goes for Fuji X-T1... same wording about fastest AF only in for cameras with APS-C or bigger in their press release... everybody knows why - because N1 and m43 are beyong reach for both Sony and Fuji...

 exdeejjjaaaa's gear list:exdeejjjaaaa's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Sony Alpha 7 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
spacemn
Contributing MemberPosts: 831
Like?
Re: Res : On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to SirPalomid, 5 months ago

SirPalomid wrote:

Not sure what you have seen but you are pretty lonely in your observation, as there are numerous proofs like the one I showed on the net, so chances are maybe you did something wrong while having the cameras.

There is a difference, I didn't say there is not - but not 1 stop diff.

Make this test with native NEX lens and not "something wrong with EXIF because lens is not native".

I not shooting with 6400 ISO, but until ISO 3200 there is 1/3 stop difference between Sony and Fuji, not 1 stop. In any case with the same lightning conditions and exposure Fuji's shots looks more pleasant because of different noise-pattern and almost complete absence of color-noise.

Up to ISO 800 the are on pair with Sony, then Fuji starts to gain slight advantage.

I just presented you with proof and there are more examples. I haven't seen any proof from your end. What you just saw was 1 full stop, not 1/3 of a stop. That is all what I can say. If you have "observed" something else that is fine.

There is no reason why you should not love your Fuji, as the X cameras are nice and well suited for enthusiasts, but functionally they are not superior to their Sony counterparts. The Fuji APS-C roughly match the Sony ditto. Then you can say whatever you like the built-in colour filters, prefer the noise grain or like the gimmicky shutter dial, but that is all subjective.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SirPalomid
Forum MemberPosts: 92Gear list
Like?
Re: Res : On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to spacemn, 5 months ago

Well, I understand what you're saying. I'm not saying that Sony is an awful camera, and somebody cannot love it or something like this. Just to point out that "1 stop difference" it's not what I've experienced myself, and "Fuji overstates ISO" is exaggerated - almost everybody do so, Sony and Olympus (in E-M5 for sure) too. If I had NEX right now, I'd happily perform this comparison test for you.

Although I have Panasonic GX7 and Canon 6D, so I may do test with them (with Panasonic as reference as "right ISO"), and if I'm wrong, and difference is really 1 stop, than I apologize. 
I didn't want to harm you in any way with my words, so excuse me.

 SirPalomid's gear list:SirPalomid's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads