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

Started 5 months ago | Discussions
jpr2
Forum ProPosts: 13,671
Like?
re: on of the most trite (and too often repeated) syllogisms - but...
In reply to GaryW, 5 months ago

GaryW wrote:

Who wants to pay for "pro grade" f2.8 zooms? Who wants to lug them around on their compact camera? If you want a big heavy lens, you might as well have a big, heavy camera to go with it. Sony sells A-mount cameras and lenses that can handle that.

...the frequent use doesn't make it a single bit less false !!

  • if using N7 instead of Eos 7d (both used with exactly the same 1.2 kilos 400mm lens) allows me to shave just a mere 0.5 kilo;
  • then I most gladly do so, and the only things I miss are [a] excellence of 7d's OVF, and [b] its blazing speed and accuracy of focus when AF'ing moving targets at high speed;
  • but... perhaps (fingers crossed) at least the [b] is gonna to be changed IFF what early YT videos of a6k in action AF demonstrated will... turn out to be as impressive when used with longer FLs??
  • alas, simultaneously we got robbed of substantial part of 2.4 Mpx resolution of the OLED EVFin N7-classic;
  • so the longing in [a] will get even stronger !!

jpr2

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
120 to 35
Contributing MemberPosts: 790
Like?
Re: On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to blue_skies, 5 months ago

Your comparison is detailed on quantitative differences. Such differences sometimes count a lot, for example when you compare weight, and sometimes not much, for example a few stops in the high ISO range.

You do mention qualitative aspects but only in passing. For example when you mention the fact the A6000 is similar to the NEX-6, which you prefer to the NEX-7.

Camera can be very different in the ergonomics (how you use the the camera to take various types of shots). Provided the cameras produce good pictures (which all these cameras do), user experience trumps numerical comparisons.

The A6000 seems to improve usability on the NEX-6 in some areas as far as I can tell. One is the menu system but there are possibly other areas. It is these "details" that count more than rather anodyne figures that are always printed on camera boxes.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
EinsteinsGhost
Forum ProPosts: 10,363Gear list
Like?
Re: On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to 120 to 35, 5 months ago

Your comparison is detailed on quantitative differences. Such differences sometimes count a lot, for example when you compare weight, and sometimes not much, for example a few stops in the high ISO range.

You do mention qualitative aspects but only in passing. For example when you mention the fact the A6000 is similar to the NEX-6, which you prefer to the NEX-7.

Camera can be very different in the ergonomics (how you use the the camera to take various types of shots). Provided the cameras produce good pictures (which all these cameras do), user experience trumps numerical comparisons.

The A6000 seems to improve usability on the NEX-6 in some areas as far as I can tell. One is the menu system but there are possibly other areas. It is these "details" that count more than rather anodyne figures that are always printed on camera boxes.

Good point. I am also glad to see a simple change: "Review" button replaced by "Menu" which may free up some customization for that button too. The review button moved to the bottom.

A minor change but with possibly greater implications (will have to see how it works in reality though).

 EinsteinsGhost's gear list:EinsteinsGhost's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-F828 Sony SLT-A55 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM Sony 135mm F2.8 (T4.5) STF +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
blue_skies
Senior MemberPosts: 6,744Gear list
Like?
Re: On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to 120 to 35, 5 months ago

120 to 35 wrote:

Your comparison is detailed on quantitative differences. Such differences sometimes count a lot, for example when you compare weight, and sometimes not much, for example a few stops in the high ISO range.

You do mention qualitative aspects but only in passing. For example when you mention the fact the A6000 is similar to the NEX-6, which you prefer to the NEX-7.

Camera can be very different in the ergonomics (how you use the the camera to take various types of shots). Provided the cameras produce good pictures (which all these cameras do), user experience trumps numerical comparisons.

The A6000 seems to improve usability on the NEX-6 in some areas as far as I can tell. One is the menu system but there are possibly other areas. It is these "details" that count more than rather anodyne figures that are always printed on camera boxes.

All very true.

We have seen debates here comparing e.g. E-M1 versus A7, which directly poses questions as to IQ, DOF and ISO. The E-M1, XT-1 and A6000 are closer in this regard, with my nod going to the A6000, per the original analysis. But it is also showing my preferences - other people may weigh different factors.

The A7 is 'better' than the Nex-6 (and Nex-7) in a number of ways, menus being one and camera body & handling being another one.

But if I had to recommend a travel camera to a friend, I would recommend the A6000 by far (in fact, I just did), with just the E1650P kit lens and the E35/1.8 OSS lens. Mind you, this will cost you roughly the same as the E-M1 body-only or the XT-1 body-only. Something to contemplate.

Then, when I start looking at the A6000 features, in context of other products, I realized that it is quite an amazing set of features that you get in a very small package, with the same 24Mp IQ as the original Nex-7 for quite a bit less.

Do I see the A6000 as the A7's little brother? Not at all. It is a complete camera that let's you do everything. But, using the A7 now under low-light indoors, and getting used to its different handling, the A7 is a more rewarding experience, with higher IQ. The drawback is a heavier bag to carry.

Below are some Nex-6 travel shots that came out well, even under low light, check the link below. But I know that the A7 would have surpassed this easily on the shots at ISO 2000 and above. I still want to see the A6000 perform under similar low-light. I expect that will be alike the Nex-7 in this regard: low light ISO noise gets reduced by downsampling, so the 24Mp is not 24Mp any longer under low light. But we will see.

I do think that high ISO comes into play, even when traveling, and fast lenses are a must.

But I also like camera compactness, and the small Nex-6/A6000 (heck, even the Nex-5N) are still unbeatable, imho.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/111458433@N02/sets/72157639192107366/

-- 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
Astrophotographer 10
Senior MemberPosts: 4,600Gear list
Like?
Re: On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to blue_skies, 5 months ago

A6000 should be capable of amazing rez. I don't think the 16-50 is a good match for that. Its good for video which is less demanding and the power zoom makes it nice and smooth. But for stills this camera is going to need FE lenses or the best Sony lenses. Its got a higher pixel density than a Nikon D800e or A7r. So lenses will need to be hot performers otherwise you are wasting the 24mp.

I also want to find out when its in the hand s of users whether the magenta cast, side smearing problems have been resolved that Nex 7 had. A major unkown.

Greg.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Astrophotographer 10
Senior MemberPosts: 4,600Gear list
Like?
Re: Res : On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...
In reply to spacemn, 5 months ago

Don't get me wrong, the Nex 6 is good too. But I found for a similar exposure time and high ISO level the Nex 6 image would not take much processing whereas the Fuji would. Perhaps this is more of an issue with the lossy RAW than anything else.

The Fuji is more ISO6400 = Sony ISO4000.

Just as an interesting note, I find the A7r ISO6400 to appear to be a tad brighter than D800e same ISO. Perhaps not, it just seemed it is.

A7r and a Fuji - yes you are right. I pick up the A7r. But the XT1 or A6000 could be a nice complement to the A7r as it could be the action camera.

Then there is Fuji's 56mm F1.2 lens - drool.

I doubt we'll see something like that in the FE line up.

Greg.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jorginho
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,022Gear list
Like?
My take
In reply to blue_skies, 5 months ago

Sensor:
1) Sony
2) FUji
3) EM1

Body controls:

1) EM1 (touchscreen)
2) Fuji (no touchscreen)
3) Sony (no touchscreen, few controls on the body -> bad move)

Stabilsation
1) EM1
2) SOny and Fuji

Build quality
1) EM1
2) Fuji
3) Sony

EVF
1) Fuji
2) EM1
3) Sony

AF-focus
1) Where we know how EM1 does, we do not know that yet of the other two.

Price
1) Sony
2) Fuji
3) EM1

Bodysize:
1) Sony
2) EM1 and Fuji

Video
1) SOny
2) EM1
3) Fuji

Since you hop from this to buying the cam, more things come into consideration:

Systemsize (we are not buying bodies here):
1) EM1
2) Sony
3) FUji

Lens line up (still buying systems)
1) EM1
2) Fuji and Sony (Sony more choice, Fuji better IQ)

Best cam out there? There is none! It simply depends on how important each of these differences are to you...But EM1 was elected best cam of the year by dpreview and luminous landscape...

 Jorginho's gear list:Jorginho's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
stoppingdown
Regular MemberPosts: 300Gear list
Like?
Re: My take
In reply to Jorginho, 5 months ago

Jorginho wrote:

Systemsize (we are not buying bodies here):
1) EM1
2) Sony
3) FUji

I don't disagree on many other points (leaving blank answers for many EM1 points, since I don't know), but this largely depends on lens selection. For mine (10-18, 18-70, 35) Sony lenses definitely win over MFT, so EM1 would be below Sony, and I'd say also below Fuji.

-- hide signature --

Fabrizio Giudici
http://stoppingdown.net

 stoppingdown's gear list:stoppingdown's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon D5100 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF +14 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jorginho
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,022Gear list
Like?
Re: My take
In reply to stoppingdown, 5 months ago

My last sentences indicated that..It is personal.

However: when you compare lens for lens, it is pretty obvious the m43 system is considerably smaller. When you pick lenses, the differences may not be so big or become relatively huge.

 Jorginho's gear list:Jorginho's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
stoppingdown
Regular MemberPosts: 300Gear list
Like?
Re: My take
In reply to Jorginho, 5 months ago

Jorginho wrote:

My last sentences indicated that..It is personal.

Sure. But my point was: the subjective thing is not only the relative importance you give to all the points, but in some cases even the single point.

However: when you compare lens for lens, it is pretty obvious the m43 system is considerably smaller. When you pick lenses, the differences may not be so big or become relatively huge.

Lens by lens... not necessarily. For instance: my reference set of lenses was 1645g with the Nikon system (D5100); it is 1016g with the Sony (NEX-6). It would be 1572g with the MFT (E-M1): just slightly lighter than Nikon and much heavier than Sony.

This can be explained by different features: for instance, Sony offers a 16-70 f/4, while the comparable Zuiko is f/2.8-4; my normal is a f/2.8, while the MFT one would be f/1.4; so that extra weight is for some reason (extra aperture). But, for instance, the Sony 10-18 f/4 is 225g, while a very comparable (just a bit wider in the range) Lumix 7-14 f/4 is 300g, and if I'm not wrong the Zuiko 7-14mm f/4 is a whopping 780g. It's 60% heavier than my Nikon equivalent (which has even more range). Honestly, this was a surprise. The MFT was the first system I've evaluated, and discarded precisely for weight.

-- hide signature --

Fabrizio Giudici
http://stoppingdown.net

 stoppingdown's gear list:stoppingdown's gear list
Nikon D7000 Nikon D5100 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF +14 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jorginho
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,022Gear list
Like?
Re: My take
In reply to stoppingdown, 5 months ago

stoppingdown wrote:

Jorginho wrote:

My last sentences indicated that..It is personal.

Sure. But my point was: the subjective thing is not only the relative importance you give to all the points, but in some cases even the single point.

However: when you compare lens for lens, it is pretty obvious the m43 system is considerably smaller. When you pick lenses, the differences may not be so big or become relatively huge.

Lens by lens... not necessarily. For instance: my reference set of lenses was 1645g with the Nikon system (D5100); it is 1016g with the Sony (NEX-6). It would be 1572g with the MFT (E-M1): just slightly lighter than Nikon and much heavier than Sony.

This can be explained by different features: for instance, Sony offers a 16-70 f/4, while the comparable Zuiko is f/2.8-4;

my normal is a f/2.8, while the MFT one would be f/1.4; so that extra weight is for some reason (extra aperture). But, for instance, the Sony 10-18 f/4 is 225g, while a very comparable (just a bit wider in the range) Lumix 7-14 f/4 is 300g, and if I'm not wrong the Zuiko 7-14mm f/4 is a whopping 780g. It's 60% heavier than my Nikon equivalent (which has even more range). Honestly, this was a surprise. The MFT was the first system I've evaluated, and discarded precisely for weight.

-- hide signature --

Fabrizio Giudici
http://stoppingdown.net

Yes...I find this hilarious. You are mixing up your personal needs with a general view and to come to that conclusion you include a Four Third, weathersealed lens that is not designed for mFT systems. You can also add the 50-200 mm FT lenses and comapre with 45-200 mm mFT and find enormous size and weight differences....In general, there is no doubt which lenses are smaller. lighter.

1) The Zuiko is not a mFT lens. It is FT lens. 
2) The Zuiko covers 24-120 mm not 24-105 mm
3) Most importantly -> The Zuiko is weathersealed!

This is apples and oranges.

Another line up:

1) Oly 12-50 mm F3.5-f5.6 (24-100mm...weathersealed!): 211 grams
2) Panasonic 7-14 mm f4: 300 grams
3) Olympus 25 mm f1.8 136 gram

Total: 639 grams

Sony:
1) 35 mm weighs 155 mm
2) 10-18 mm weighs 225 gram
3) 16-70 mm Zeiss: 308 gram

Totals: 688 grams

Yes...EM1 is a weathersealed cam. The Nikon and the Sony are not. And it is not just abit weahtersealing: you can put it under shower, you can put it in a small pool of water. It will fire right away again and again.

Not that this is important to everyone, that is not the point. But it adds to the weight and makes you compare apples and oranges. Again.

 Jorginho's gear list:Jorginho's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads