Sony a6000 Build Quality

Started 8 months ago | Discussions
captura
Forum ProPosts: 15,690Gear list
Like?
Re: Hello Sony!
In reply to 1prime, 7 months ago

1prime wrote:

captura wrote:

1prime wrote:

So now we have evidence that a quality metal body can be stronger than composite plastics, but can be sold for a competitive price. The Fuji X10/X20 models came in at about $500. If Sony had chosen to make the A6000 more appealing by giving it a better NEX-7-like body they could have done so. By not doing so, is that not perhaps an example of corporate greed?

My personal vote is for metal. This Fuji statement seems to validate my vote.
--
1prime

Right, Don.

If Sony had used the metallic body construction, they would have given us the actual NEX-7 replacement camera which everybody was clamoring about, for so long. But they left out the level, a couple of ports and gave us plastic in order just to save maybe $200 retail. And at the lower price, they probably doubled their sales volume. GREED!

I really doubt the difference between some fiber and a small piece of aluminum plus manufacturing costs is $200. But let's not quibble on small items. I hope Sony is listening to this thread, and considers all the still NEX-7 owners. Please Sony, just tweak the A6000 a little with some metal, a better EVF, even if you have to hump it, and a couple of other small things, keep it fairly close to the A6K price, and have another APS-C model, maybe the A7000, to bust the doors down. Don

-- hide signature --

1prime

Then how do you account for the big price difference between the NEX-7 and the A6000?

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Samsung NX1000 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Son Of Mustang Ford
Regular MemberPosts: 318
Like?
Re: Plastic (was) rapidly being confined to cameras under $800
In reply to captura, 7 months ago

captura wrote:

pixelpushing wrote:

captura wrote:

pixelpushing wrote:

captura wrote:

Dimac wrote:

RichRMA wrote:

If you remember the very first NEX cameras, the 3 and 5, one was metal, the other plastic. The plastic one was more bulky because plastic is weaker than metal and requires thicker castings and things like threaded metal inserts to hold screws.

Actually plastic bodies are more sturdy! No problem at all with it.

Actually do you have any evidence to support your statement?

Do you have any evidence to support metal bodies are more sturdy? Because that's pretty much what started this whole thing.

No, I did not start this threadm nor did I say that metal bodies were more sturdy. And I have maintained all along that I just don't like composite caneras. A personal choice. I prefer the feel of a metal camera, such as my Fuji X10, or even my NEX-5R.

I didn't say you 'started the thread' but you have certainly carried the torch for metal vs. plastics starting at the third comment in this thread. And along with a couple of others, have since stridently and repeatedly maintained that plastic cameras are trash, garbage, junk, cheap, inferior, etc.

Would that you (and the other self-appointed materials police) kept your comments limited to 'I prefer', but you do not. You speak in objective and absolute terms, chiding others for preferring lesser quality products and apologizing for Sony's missteps in this regard. That is what fans the flames of this pointlessness.

Since you have no evidence, I would suggest that under the right conditions, where the designers have followed the best practices, the composite cameras could be far stronger, depending. But if a camera is milled from a single solid aluminum billet such as the new Leica T, then no way.

Stipulating for a moment that solid aluminum would be 'stronger' (if not ding and dent resistant), the object of a camera body is not simply to be the strongest material, but to be reasonably light and at least somewhat shockproof. Aluminum may be better than magnesium alloy, but for the umpteenth comparison: Does an aluminum case for your metal and glass smartphone provide inherently better protection against damage from being dropped than thermoplastic? I think not.

For many people, a metallic-feeling camera is a lot nicer. But here's what Fuji says about their reason for using metallic construction of one of their cameras, the X-10:

"Rigidity is a deciding factor for the feel of the hold. The X10 has a 1mm aluminum sheet on the front and back panels of the body that is thicker than those of ordinary cameras (0.8 mm).

Rigidity is measured by the cube of the thickness, which means the X10 is nearly twice as rigid as ordinary cameras [1³ / 0.8³ = approx. 2]. This is one of our efforts for making sure users can enjoy the camera for years to come."

http://fujifilm-x.com/x10/uk/story/story1/page_03.html

So now we have evidence that a quality metal body can be stronger than composite plastics, but can be sold for a competitive price. The Fuji X10/X20 models came in at about $500. If Sony had chosen to make the A6000 more appealing by giving it a better NEX-7-like body they could have done so. By not doing so, is that not perhaps an example of corporate greed?

Come on, this is just ridiculous. Even by your standards. The A6000 is competing with the X-T1 and is of considerably lower cost (The X20 is a vastly different and simpler camera - fixed lens, 12mp sensor. And you know it). So lets do a real price comparison, like for like.

Amazon UK : Fuji X-T1 body only : £1026

Sony A6000 body only £590

That 0.2mm of aluminium doesn't look so reasonably priced now, does it?   Yeah - Greedy Sony.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pixelpushing
Senior MemberPosts: 2,083Gear list
Like?
Re: Plastic (was) rapidly being confined to cameras under $800
In reply to Son Of Mustang Ford, 7 months ago

Son Of Mustang Ford wrote:

captura wrote:

pixelpushing wrote:

captura wrote:

pixelpushing wrote:

captura wrote:

Dimac wrote:

RichRMA wrote:

If you remember the very first NEX cameras, the 3 and 5, one was metal, the other plastic. The plastic one was more bulky because plastic is weaker than metal and requires thicker castings and things like threaded metal inserts to hold screws.

Actually plastic bodies are more sturdy! No problem at all with it.

Actually do you have any evidence to support your statement?

Do you have any evidence to support metal bodies are more sturdy? Because that's pretty much what started this whole thing.

No, I did not start this threadm nor did I say that metal bodies were more sturdy. And I have maintained all along that I just don't like composite caneras. A personal choice. I prefer the feel of a metal camera, such as my Fuji X10, or even my NEX-5R.

I didn't say you 'started the thread' but you have certainly carried the torch for metal vs. plastics starting at the third comment in this thread. And along with a couple of others, have since stridently and repeatedly maintained that plastic cameras are trash, garbage, junk, cheap, inferior, etc.

Would that you (and the other self-appointed materials police) kept your comments limited to 'I prefer', but you do not. You speak in objective and absolute terms, chiding others for preferring lesser quality products and apologizing for Sony's missteps in this regard. That is what fans the flames of this pointlessness.

Since you have no evidence, I would suggest that under the right conditions, where the designers have followed the best practices, the composite cameras could be far stronger, depending. But if a camera is milled from a single solid aluminum billet such as the new Leica T, then no way.

Stipulating for a moment that solid aluminum would be 'stronger' (if not ding and dent resistant), the object of a camera body is not simply to be the strongest material, but to be reasonably light and at least somewhat shockproof. Aluminum may be better than magnesium alloy, but for the umpteenth comparison: Does an aluminum case for your metal and glass smartphone provide inherently better protection against damage from being dropped than thermoplastic? I think not.

For many people, a metallic-feeling camera is a lot nicer. But here's what Fuji says about their reason for using metallic construction of one of their cameras, the X-10:

"Rigidity is a deciding factor for the feel of the hold. The X10 has a 1mm aluminum sheet on the front and back panels of the body that is thicker than those of ordinary cameras (0.8 mm).

Rigidity is measured by the cube of the thickness, which means the X10 is nearly twice as rigid as ordinary cameras [1³ / 0.8³ = approx. 2]. This is one of our efforts for making sure users can enjoy the camera for years to come."

http://fujifilm-x.com/x10/uk/story/story1/page_03.html

So now we have evidence that a quality metal body can be stronger than composite plastics, but can be sold for a competitive price. The Fuji X10/X20 models came in at about $500. If Sony had chosen to make the A6000 more appealing by giving it a better NEX-7-like body they could have done so. By not doing so, is that not perhaps an example of corporate greed?

Come on, this is just ridiculous. Even by your standards. The A6000 is competing with the X-T1 and is of considerably lower cost (The X20 is a vastly different and simpler camera - fixed lens, 12mp sensor. And you know it). So lets do a real price comparison, like for like.

Amazon UK : Fuji X-T1 body only : £1026

Sony A6000 body only £590

That 0.2mm of aluminium doesn't look so reasonably priced now, does it? Yeah - Greedy Sony.

Indeed, totally ridiculous.

I guess there's always a handful of people in any forum/brand/group that's never happy with anything, hellbent on incessant reposts clamoring how rotten and inferior the new product(s) are. Reason, relativity and context mean exactly jack to these folks.

If it wasn't a 1mm aluminum skin (so rigid and amazing!), it'd be something(s) else.

 pixelpushing's gear list:pixelpushing's gear list
Sony Alpha 7 II Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Apple iPad Air
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ryan92084
Regular MemberPosts: 481Gear list
Like?
Re: Plastic (was) rapidly being confined to cameras under $800
In reply to captura, 7 months ago

pixelpushing wrote:

captura wrote:

pixelpushing wrote:

captura wrote:

Dimac wrote:

RichRMA wrote:

If you remember the very first NEX cameras, the 3 and 5, one was metal, the other plastic. The plastic one was more bulky because plastic is weaker than metal and requires thicker castings and things like threaded metal inserts to hold screws.

Actually plastic bodies are more sturdy! No problem at all with it.

Actually do you have any evidence to support your statement?

Do you have any evidence to support metal bodies are more sturdy? Because that's pretty much what started this whole thing.

No, I did not start this threadm nor did I say that metal bodies were more sturdy. And I have maintained all along that I just don't like composite caneras. A personal choice. I prefer the feel of a metal camera, such as my Fuji X10, or even my NEX-5R.

I didn't say you 'started the thread' but you have certainly carried the torch for metal vs. plastics starting at the third comment in this thread. And along with a couple of others, have since stridently and repeatedly maintained that plastic cameras are trash, garbage, junk, cheap, inferior, etc.

Would that you (and the other self-appointed materials police) kept your comments limited to 'I prefer', but you do not. You speak in objective and absolute terms, chiding others for preferring lesser quality products and apologizing for Sony's missteps in this regard. That is what fans the flames of this pointlessness.

Since you have no evidence, I would suggest that under the right conditions, where the designers have followed the best practices, the composite cameras could be far stronger, depending. But if a camera is milled from a single solid aluminum billet such as the new Leica T, then no way.

Stipulating for a moment that solid aluminum would be 'stronger' (if not ding and dent resistant), the object of a camera body is not simply to be the strongest material, but to be reasonably light and at least somewhat shockproof. Aluminum may be better than magnesium alloy, but for the umpteenth comparison: Does an aluminum case for your metal and glass smartphone provide inherently better protection against damage from being dropped than thermoplastic? I think not.

For many people, a metallic-feeling camera is a lot nicer. But here's what Fuji says about their reason for using metallic construction of one of their cameras, the X-10:

"Rigidity is a deciding factor for the feel of the hold. The X10 has a 1mm aluminum sheet on the front and back panels of the body that is thicker than those of ordinary cameras (0.8 mm).

Rigidity is measured by the cube of the thickness, which means the X10 is *nearly twice as rigid as ordinary cameras* [1³ / 0.8³ = approx. 2]. This is one of our efforts for making sure users can enjoy the camera for years to come."

http://fujifilm-x.com/x10/uk/story/story1/page_03.html

So now we have evidence that a quality metal body can be stronger than composite plastics, but can be sold for a competitive price. The Fuji X10/X20 models came in at about $500. If Sony had chosen to make the A6000 more appealing by giving it a better NEX-7-like body they could have done so. By not doing so, is that not perhaps an example of corporate greed?

1) never take marketing as a fact
2) the only thing being compared there is .8mm versus 1mm of aluminum and saying the latter is more rigid. Thanks I guess...?
3) the whole thing is about feel in the hand and nothing about improving durability or longevity of the camera as a whole versus a plastic or any other material.

 ryan92084's gear list:ryan92084's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pixelpushing
Senior MemberPosts: 2,083Gear list
Like?
Build quality quibbles I can agree with!
In reply to 123Mike, 7 months ago

123Mike wrote:

I think the build quality is very good, except:

- the battery door is too flimsy. It will break there first. That little switch to keep it closed *WILL* break. "Planned obsolescence"? (an official business term !).

I don't think it's horribly flimsy but mine does stick sometimes, and I've seen other complain about that.

- the SD card is put at the wrong side, and it is hard to get out. This adds stress to the battery door when you're fingering around.

Yeah, this is the only thing about the camera thus far that has me scratching my head, wondering what the bloody fig they were thinking. Weird angle, awkward and you do have to put pressure on the door to work the card out.

- the right wheel moves too difficult (plus everything is backwards through it)

It's a little stiff, but I don't find it reversed to my way of thinking. Rotate to the left for <, right for >.

- the back wheel is too easy to click when rotating

Not mine, maybe yours it a bit more touchy? Mine is just right, IMO.

- when you want to put the LCD back flat after you pulled it out, and you do that with one finger, it needs multiple pushes and touches in multiple places in order to go flat.

So you mean like a track or something? My RX100 and NX300 worked pretty much the same way this does. In fact, I think the Samsung was even more fiddly to get back in place than this. I personally like the action of the hinge, and it goes directly back in place with my thumb along the right bottom edge of the LCD, pushing in.

- the flash popup, although cute, feels flimsy. I wonder what might break first on it. Loose contact from the flipping/vibrating when flipping? Closing mechanism? Given I don't use flash much, I'll be ok I think though. I resort to using brighter and MF lenses before I'd reach for using flash.

The flash took some getting used to, as it feels almost like an automated button function but it's really just a release. And the stalk is pretty long, but I like that, as it'll clear lenses with hoods more effectively, etc. - I also like the bounce pivot aspect. Not all pop-ups have that.

 pixelpushing's gear list:pixelpushing's gear list
Sony Alpha 7 II Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Apple iPad Air
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
captura
Forum ProPosts: 15,690Gear list
Like?
Re: Plastic (was) rapidly being confined to cameras under $800
In reply to Son Of Mustang Ford, 7 months ago

Son Of Mustang Ford wrote:

captura wrote:

pixelpushing wrote:

captura wrote:

pixelpushing wrote:

captura wrote:

Dimac wrote:

RichRMA wrote:

If you remember the very first NEX cameras, the 3 and 5, one was metal, the other plastic. The plastic one was more bulky because plastic is weaker than metal and requires thicker castings and things like threaded metal inserts to hold screws.

Actually plastic bodies are more sturdy! No problem at all with it.

Actually do you have any evidence to support your statement?

Do you have any evidence to support metal bodies are more sturdy? Because that's pretty much what started this whole thing.

No, I did not start this threadm nor did I say that metal bodies were more sturdy. And I have maintained all along that I just don't like composite caneras. A personal choice. I prefer the feel of a metal camera, such as my Fuji X10, or even my NEX-5R.

I didn't say you 'started the thread' but you have certainly carried the torch for metal vs. plastics starting at the third comment in this thread. And along with a couple of others, have since stridently and repeatedly maintained that plastic cameras are trash, garbage, junk, cheap, inferior, etc.

Would that you (and the other self-appointed materials police) kept your comments limited to 'I prefer', but you do not. You speak in objective and absolute terms, chiding others for preferring lesser quality products and apologizing for Sony's missteps in this regard. That is what fans the flames of this pointlessness.

Since you have no evidence, I would suggest that under the right conditions, where the designers have followed the best practices, the composite cameras could be far stronger, depending. But if a camera is milled from a single solid aluminum billet such as the new Leica T, then no way.

Stipulating for a moment that solid aluminum would be 'stronger' (if not ding and dent resistant), the object of a camera body is not simply to be the strongest material, but to be reasonably light and at least somewhat shockproof. Aluminum may be better than magnesium alloy, but for the umpteenth comparison: Does an aluminum case for your metal and glass smartphone provide inherently better protection against damage from being dropped than thermoplastic? I think not.

For many people, a metallic-feeling camera is a lot nicer. But here's what Fuji says about their reason for using metallic construction of one of their cameras, the X-10:

"Rigidity is a deciding factor for the feel of the hold. The X10 has a 1mm aluminum sheet on the front and back panels of the body that is thicker than those of ordinary cameras (0.8 mm).

Rigidity is measured by the cube of the thickness, which means the X10 is nearly twice as rigid as ordinary cameras [1³ / 0.8³ = approx. 2]. This is one of our efforts for making sure users can enjoy the camera for years to come."

http://fujifilm-x.com/x10/uk/story/story1/page_03.html

So now we have evidence that a quality metal body can be stronger than composite plastics, but can be sold for a competitive price. The Fuji X10/X20 models came in at about $500. If Sony had chosen to make the A6000 more appealing by giving it a better NEX-7-like body they could have done so. By not doing so, is that not perhaps an example of corporate greed?

Come on, this is just ridiculous. Even by your standards. The A6000 is competing with the X-T1 and is of considerably lower cost (The X20 is a vastly different and simpler camera - fixed lens, 12mp sensor. And you know it). So lets do a real price comparison, like for like.

Amazon UK : Fuji X-T1 body only : £1026

Sony A6000 body only £590

That 0.2mm of aluminium doesn't look so reasonably priced now, does it? Yeah - Greedy Sony.

That's crazy. The Fuji XT1 is not competing againt the A6000...it's double the price. It's a different market altogether. Fuji X buyers would not consider the A6000 because of it's cheaper construction. A6000 buyers are getting a nice bargain considering the Sony's great performance. But if you live in a posh condominium you wouldn't want to move to a slum, would you?

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Samsung NX1000 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pixelpushing
Senior MemberPosts: 2,083Gear list
Like?
Re: Plastic (was) rapidly being confined to cameras under $800
In reply to ryan92084, 7 months ago

ryan92084 wrote:

For many people, a metallic-feeling camera is a lot nicer. But here's what Fuji says about their reason for using metallic construction of one of their cameras, the X-10:

"Rigidity is a deciding factor for the feel of the hold. The X10 has a 1mm aluminum sheet on the front and back panels of the body that is thicker than those of ordinary cameras (0.8 mm).

Rigidity is measured by the cube of the thickness, which means the X10 is nearly twice as rigid as ordinary cameras [1³ / 0.8³ = approx. 2]. This is one of our efforts for making sure users can enjoy the camera for years to come."

http://fujifilm-x.com/x10/uk/story/story1/page_03.html

So now we have evidence that a quality metal body can be stronger than composite plastics, but can be sold for a competitive price. The Fuji X10/X20 models came in at about $500. If Sony had chosen to make the A6000 more appealing by giving it a better NEX-7-like body they could have done so. By not doing so, is that not perhaps an example of corporate greed?

1) never take marketing as a fact
2) the only thing bring compared there is .8mm versus 1mm of aluminum and saying the latter is more rigid. Thanks I guess...?

Exactly - they're not doing any comparisons at all, vs. plastics.

3) the whole thing is about feel in the hand and nothing about improving durability or longevity of the camera as a whole versus a plastic or any other material.

Yep. And hey, I like metal as a feel for a camera, too. It's just not as big a deal when the camera is otherwise well made, like with the A6000. By contrast, my NX300 has a metal top plate with a leather-ette wrap and I found that camera a bit cheap feeling compared to this Sony.

Meanwhile, my former RX100-II was metal, but it was a pain in the posterior ergonomically. My X100 was probably the sexiest camera I've owned and beautifully built, but lacked too many features and the 12MP was just not adequate, anymore. It also had a retail price of well over a grand -- with a fixed lens.

 pixelpushing's gear list:pixelpushing's gear list
Sony Alpha 7 II Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Apple iPad Air
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
123Mike
Senior MemberPosts: 4,306Gear list
Like?
Re: Build quality quibbles I can agree with!
In reply to pixelpushing, 7 months ago

The flash took some getting used to, as it feels almost like an automated button function but it's really just a release. And the stalk is pretty long, but I like that, as it'll clear lenses with hoods more effectively, etc. - I also like the bounce pivot aspect. Not all pop-ups have that.

It doesn't clear the 18-55 lens with hood unless zoomed all the way to 55mm... I do like how I can bounce it off the ceiling though...

 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
zackiedawg
Forum ProPosts: 22,186Gear list
Like?
Re: Build quality quibbles I can agree with!
In reply to pixelpushing, 7 months ago

pixelpushing wrote:

- the battery door is too flimsy. It will break there first. That little switch to keep it closed *WILL* break. "Planned obsolescence"? (an official business term !).

I don't think it's horribly flimsy but mine does stick sometimes, and I've seen other complain about that.

I don't feel it's too flimsy - if I directly compare it to the 5N's door, it seems lighter than the 5N's...but seems strong enough.  Mine doesn't stick either.

- the SD card is put at the wrong side, and it is hard to get out. This adds stress to the battery door when you're fingering around.

Yeah, this is the only thing about the camera thus far that has me scratching my head, wondering what the bloody fig they were thinking. Weird angle, awkward and you do have to put pressure on the door to work the card out.

I only found the card slot to be a problem for memorysticks.  For SD cards I haven't found it to be an issue.  The SD cards seem to go in easily, and I tend to pull them out by pushing to release, then tweezing the two ends of the card with my fingernails rather than trying to grab at the card with my fingers which would stress the door.  Memorysticks seem much harder to align with the slot, and much harder to get at with your fingers.

- the right wheel moves too difficult (plus everything is backwards through it)

It's a little stiff, but I don't find it reversed to my way of thinking. Rotate to the left for <, right for >.

Agreed - not too stiff for me, and the directions seem intuitive.

- the back wheel is too easy to click when rotating

Not mine, maybe yours it a bit more touchy? Mine is just right, IMO.

Agreed here - mine's not touchy at all - just about right, doesn't move accidentally.

- when you want to put the LCD back flat after you pulled it out, and you do that with one finger, it needs multiple pushes and touches in multiple places in order to go flat.

So you mean like a track or something? My RX100 and NX300 worked pretty much the same way this does. In fact, I think the Samsung was even more fiddly to get back in place than this. I personally like the action of the hinge, and it goes directly back in place with my thumb along the right bottom edge of the LCD, pushing in.

Haven't noticed this to be an issue...admittedly, I'm mostly an EVF user though.

- the flash popup, although cute, feels flimsy. I wonder what might break first on it. Loose contact from the flipping/vibrating when flipping? Closing mechanism? Given I don't use flash much, I'll be ok I think though. I resort to using brighter and MF lenses before I'd reach for using flash.

The flash took some getting used to, as it feels almost like an automated button function but it's really just a release. And the stalk is pretty long, but I like that, as it'll clear lenses with hoods more effectively, etc. - I also like the bounce pivot aspect. Not all pop-ups have that.

Another thing I haven't noticed - though it's highly unlikely I'll ever use the built in flash.  I think I took 1 flash photo with my NEX3 in a year, none with my NEX-5N in two years, and expect the number on my A6000 to be about the same.

-- 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
captura
Forum ProPosts: 15,690Gear list
Like?
Re: Plastic (was) rapidly being confined to cameras under $800
In reply to pixelpushing, 7 months ago

pixelpushing wrote:

Meanwhile, my former RX100-II was metal, but it was a pain in the posterior ergonomically. My X100 was probably the sexiest camera I've owned and beautifully built, but lacked too many features and the 12MP was just not adequate, anymore. It also had a retail price of well over a grand -- with a fixed lens.

Maybe you should have bought the replacement X100S, instead.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Samsung NX1000 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pixelpushing
Senior MemberPosts: 2,083Gear list
Like?
Re: Plastic (was) rapidly being confined to cameras under $800
In reply to captura, 7 months ago

captura wrote:

That's crazy. The Fuji XT1 is not competing againt the A6000...it's double the price. It's a different market altogether. Fuji X buyers would not consider the A6000 because of it's cheaper construction.

What hogwash. They may not be direct competitors, but you can't say why someone would pick one over the other. Every individual has different requirements.

Here a quote from this very forum:

"I am planning to get a MIL camera that I can use my Contax G lenses on & am seriously looking at the A6000. I had been planning to get a Fuji X-T1, but I have decided not to spend that much."

Again: Plastic doesn't necessarily mean CHEAP.

A6000 buyers are getting a nice bargain considering the Sony's great performance. But if you live in a posh condominium you wouldn't want to move to a slum, would you?

So you're saying that a 24MP sensor with an 82 DXOmark is secondary to a 16MP with aesthetically pleasing materials that are not proven to enhance the durability or functionality of the product.

Since when is a camera like a condominium? How is that even remotely analogous, by any stretch of the imagination?

 pixelpushing's gear list:pixelpushing's gear list
Sony Alpha 7 II Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Apple iPad Air
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pixelpushing
Senior MemberPosts: 2,083Gear list
Like?
Re: Plastic (was) rapidly being confined to cameras under $800
In reply to captura, 7 months ago

captura wrote:

pixelpushing wrote:

Meanwhile, my former RX100-II was metal, but it was a pain in the posterior ergonomically. My X100 was probably the sexiest camera I've owned and beautifully built, but lacked too many features and the 12MP was just not adequate, anymore. It also had a retail price of well over a grand -- with a fixed lens.

Maybe you should have bought the replacement X100S, instead.

Because I prefer something that's more practical and functional, rather than a pretty looking design or a material that feels cool to the touch.

The X100S is a novelty item - fixed lens, so-so speed, fixed display with a low resolution 16MP sensor that, while good, has issues with greens as well as cooking/processing higher ISO RAW (detail loss, softening). There's a reason DxO has yet to test the X-Trans cameras. They can't do it with any efficacy as a comparative entry into their rankings.

Seriously, you do know there's more to a camera than a metal skin, yes?

 pixelpushing's gear list:pixelpushing's gear list
Sony Alpha 7 II Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Samsung Galaxy Note 4 Apple iPad Air
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Son Of Mustang Ford
Regular MemberPosts: 318
Like?
Re: Plastic (was) rapidly being confined to cameras under $800
In reply to captura, 7 months ago

Fcaptura wrote:

Son Of Mustang Ford wrote:

captura wrote:

pixelpushing wrote:

captura wrote:

pixelpushing wrote:

captura wrote:

Dimac wrote:

RichRMA wrote:

If you remember the very first NEX cameras, the 3 and 5, one was metal, the other plastic. The plastic one was more bulky because plastic is weaker than metal and requires thicker castings and things like threaded metal inserts to hold screws.

Actually plastic bodies are more sturdy! No problem at all with it.

Actually do you have any evidence to support your statement?

Do you have any evidence to support metal bodies are more sturdy? Because that's pretty much what started this whole thing.

No, I did not start this threadm nor did I say that metal bodies were more sturdy. And I have maintained all along that I just don't like composite caneras. A personal choice. I prefer the feel of a metal camera, such as my Fuji X10, or even my NEX-5R.

I didn't say you 'started the thread' but you have certainly carried the torch for metal vs. plastics starting at the third comment in this thread. And along with a couple of others, have since stridently and repeatedly maintained that plastic cameras are trash, garbage, junk, cheap, inferior, etc.

Would that you (and the other self-appointed materials police) kept your comments limited to 'I prefer', but you do not. You speak in objective and absolute terms, chiding others for preferring lesser quality products and apologizing for Sony's missteps in this regard. That is what fans the flames of this pointlessness.

Since you have no evidence, I would suggest that under the right conditions, where the designers have followed the best practices, the composite cameras could be far stronger, depending. But if a camera is milled from a single solid aluminum billet such as the new Leica T, then no way.

Stipulating for a moment that solid aluminum would be 'stronger' (if not ding and dent resistant), the object of a camera body is not simply to be the strongest material, but to be reasonably light and at least somewhat shockproof. Aluminum may be better than magnesium alloy, but for the umpteenth comparison: Does an aluminum case for your metal and glass smartphone provide inherently better protection against damage from being dropped than thermoplastic? I think not.

For many people, a metallic-feeling camera is a lot nicer. But here's what Fuji says about their reason for using metallic construction of one of their cameras, the X-10:

"Rigidity is a deciding factor for the feel of the hold. The X10 has a 1mm aluminum sheet on the front and back panels of the body that is thicker than those of ordinary cameras (0.8 mm).

Rigidity is measured by the cube of the thickness, which means the X10 is nearly twice as rigid as ordinary cameras [1³ / 0.8³ = approx. 2]. This is one of our efforts for making sure users can enjoy the camera for years to come."

http://fujifilm-x.com/x10/uk/story/story1/page_03.html

So now we have evidence that a quality metal body can be stronger than composite plastics, but can be sold for a competitive price. The Fuji X10/X20 models came in at about $500. If Sony had chosen to make the A6000 more appealing by giving it a better NEX-7-like body they could have done so. By not doing so, is that not perhaps an example of corporate greed?

Come on, this is just ridiculous. Even by your standards. The A6000 is competing with the X-T1 and is of considerably lower cost (The X20 is a vastly different and simpler camera - fixed lens, 12mp sensor. And you know it). So lets do a real price comparison, like for like.

Amazon UK : Fuji X-T1 body only : £1026

Sony A6000 body only £590

That 0.2mm of aluminium doesn't look so reasonably priced now, does it? Yeah - Greedy Sony.

That's crazy. The Fuji XT1 is not competing againt the A6000...it's double the price. It's a different market altogether. Fuji X buyers would not consider the A6000 because of it's cheaper construction. A6000 buyers are getting a nice bargain considering the Sony's great performance. But if you live in a posh condominium you wouldn't want to move to a slum, would you?

Less crazy than comparing the A6000 and the X20

Functionally the A6000 is much closer to the X-T1 than it is to the X20. Interchangeable lens, APS-C sensor (OK the Sony is much newer and has 50% more MP), EVF, Very fast auto-focus. Yes the Fuji is aimed at a much smaller niche market and so not-remotely-greedy have put a premium on the price. I get that this means they are not directly competing (after all when you are in the market for a Ferrari, a R8 Audi just won't do it - even the V10) but you were comparing the 6000 with the very different X20 and comparing prices to illustrate Sony's greed. I'm not accusing Fuji of 'corporate greed'- I understand that niche market suppliers HAVE to charge a premium in order to survive and therefore supply next years product, But the A6000 seems to me to be extremely good value for money, and so does not demonstrate greed on Sony's part.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
captura
Forum ProPosts: 15,690Gear list
Like?
Re: Plastic (was) rapidly being confined to cameras under $800
In reply to pixelpushing, 7 months ago

Thanks for thew quote,

"I am planning to get a MIL camera that I can use my Contax G lenses on & am seriously looking at the A6000. I had been planning to get a Fuji X-T1, but I have decided not to spend that much."

That's exactly my point. The A6000 is a cheaper alternative to the XT1.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Samsung NX1000 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
captura
Forum ProPosts: 15,690Gear list
Like?
Re: Plastic (was) rapidly being confined to cameras under $800
In reply to Son Of Mustang Ford, 7 months ago

Son Of Mustang Ford wrote:

Fcaptura wrote:

Son Of Mustang Ford wrote:

captura wrote:

pixelpushing wrote:

captura wrote:

pixelpushing wrote:

captura wrote:

Dimac wrote:

RichRMA wrote:

If you remember the very first NEX cameras, the 3 and 5, one was metal, the other plastic. The plastic one was more bulky because plastic is weaker than metal and requires thicker castings and things like threaded metal inserts to hold screws.

Actually plastic bodies are more sturdy! No problem at all with it.

Actually do you have any evidence to support your statement?

Do you have any evidence to support metal bodies are more sturdy? Because that's pretty much what started this whole thing.

No, I did not start this threadm nor did I say that metal bodies were more sturdy. And I have maintained all along that I just don't like composite caneras. A personal choice. I prefer the feel of a metal camera, such as my Fuji X10, or even my NEX-5R.

I didn't say you 'started the thread' but you have certainly carried the torch for metal vs. plastics starting at the third comment in this thread. And along with a couple of others, have since stridently and repeatedly maintained that plastic cameras are trash, garbage, junk, cheap, inferior, etc.

Would that you (and the other self-appointed materials police) kept your comments limited to 'I prefer', but you do not. You speak in objective and absolute terms, chiding others for preferring lesser quality products and apologizing for Sony's missteps in this regard. That is what fans the flames of this pointlessness.

Since you have no evidence, I would suggest that under the right conditions, where the designers have followed the best practices, the composite cameras could be far stronger, depending. But if a camera is milled from a single solid aluminum billet such as the new Leica T, then no way.

Stipulating for a moment that solid aluminum would be 'stronger' (if not ding and dent resistant), the object of a camera body is not simply to be the strongest material, but to be reasonably light and at least somewhat shockproof. Aluminum may be better than magnesium alloy, but for the umpteenth comparison: Does an aluminum case for your metal and glass smartphone provide inherently better protection against damage from being dropped than thermoplastic? I think not.

For many people, a metallic-feeling camera is a lot nicer. But here's what Fuji says about their reason for using metallic construction of one of their cameras, the X-10:

"Rigidity is a deciding factor for the feel of the hold. The X10 has a 1mm aluminum sheet on the front and back panels of the body that is thicker than those of ordinary cameras (0.8 mm).

Rigidity is measured by the cube of the thickness, which means the X10 is nearly twice as rigid as ordinary cameras [1³ / 0.8³ = approx. 2]. This is one of our efforts for making sure users can enjoy the camera for years to come."

http://fujifilm-x.com/x10/uk/story/story1/page_03.html

So now we have evidence that a quality metal body can be stronger than composite plastics, but can be sold for a competitive price. The Fuji X10/X20 models came in at about $500. If Sony had chosen to make the A6000 more appealing by giving it a better NEX-7-like body they could have done so. By not doing so, is that not perhaps an example of corporate greed?

Come on, this is just ridiculous. Even by your standards. The A6000 is competing with the X-T1 and is of considerably lower cost (The X20 is a vastly different and simpler camera - fixed lens, 12mp sensor. And you know it). So lets do a real price comparison, like for like.

Amazon UK : Fuji X-T1 body only : £1026

Sony A6000 body only £590

That 0.2mm of aluminium doesn't look so reasonably priced now, does it? Yeah - Greedy Sony.

That's crazy. The Fuji XT1 is not competing againt the A6000...it's double the price. It's a different market altogether. Fuji X buyers would not consider the A6000 because of it's cheaper construction. A6000 buyers are getting a nice bargain considering the Sony's great performance. But if you live in a posh condominium you wouldn't want to move to a slum, would you?

Less crazy than comparing the A6000 and the X20

Functionally the A6000 is much closer to the X-T1 than it is to the X20. Interchangeable lens, APS-C sensor (OK the Sony is much newer and has 50% more MP), EVF, Very fast auto-focus. Yes the Fuji is aimed at a much smaller niche market and so not-remotely-greedy have put a premium on the price. I get that this means they are not directly competing (after all when you are in the market for a Ferrari, a R8 Audi just won't do it - even the V10) but you were comparing the 6000 with the very different X20 and comparing prices to illustrate Sony's greed. I'm not accusing Fuji of 'corporate greed'- I understand that niche market suppliers HAVE to charge a premium in order to survive and therefore supply next years product, But the A6000 seems to me to be extremely good value for money, and so does not demonstrate greed on Sony's part.

It's greed because what most of us wanted was a NEX-7 replacement. Instead they gave us a much cheaper but capable plastic camera, missing a few niggly things so that no one could ever claim that it was THE NEX-7 replacement. ON PURPOSE. Why? Because by saving the customer about $200 on the purchase, Sony would sell may be 2 or three times as many. Bigger net profit resulting. What a shame....no metal NEX-7 replacement.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Samsung NX1000 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
1prime
Contributing MemberPosts: 994Gear list
Like?
Re: Hello Sony!
In reply to captura, 7 months ago

captura wrote:

1prime wrote:

captura wrote:

1prime wrote:

So now we have evidence that a quality metal body can be stronger than composite plastics, but can be sold for a competitive price. The Fuji X10/X20 models came in at about $500. If Sony had chosen to make the A6000 more appealing by giving it a better NEX-7-like body they could have done so. By not doing so, is that not perhaps an example of corporate greed?

My personal vote is for metal. This Fuji statement seems to validate my vote.
--
1prime

Right, Don.

If Sony had used the metallic body construction, they would have given us the actual NEX-7 replacement camera which everybody was clamoring about, for so long. But they left out the level, a couple of ports and gave us plastic in order just to save maybe $200 retail. And at the lower price, they probably doubled their sales volume. GREED!

I really doubt the difference between some fiber and a small piece of aluminum plus manufacturing costs is $200. But let's not quibble on small items. I hope Sony is listening to this thread, and considers all the still NEX-7 owners. Please Sony, just tweak the A6000 a little with some metal, a better EVF, even if you have to hump it, and a couple of other small things, keep it fairly close to the A6K price, and have another APS-C model, maybe the A7000, to bust the doors down. Don

-- hide signature --

1prime

Then how do you account for the big price difference between the NEX-7 and the A6000?

I think it's obvious. Sony realized how relatively easy it would be to capture a huge market slice and emphasized the sensor it had waiting for the delayed NEX-7 replacement, gave it to the A6K, and economized as much as possible to knock their new APS-C camera out of the park.  And Sony did achieve a home run on it.  Now it's time to tweak the A6K a little and maintain an attractive price. The A7K's technology need not be futuristic and expensive. In fact, many of us see the wisdom of 24.3 MP instead of 34 & 36 or even 42. And a little metal vs fiber just should not cost that much. Remember your 5R! Gads, we're remaining in the APS-C for a reason so don't price us into immobility. We like your A6K Sony, so just give us a little more, please!

-- hide signature --

1prime

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
123Mike
Senior MemberPosts: 4,306Gear list
Like?
Re: Build quality quibbles I can agree with!
In reply to zackiedawg, 7 months ago

- the back wheel is too easy to click when rotating

Not mine, maybe yours it a bit more touchy? Mine is just right, IMO.

Agreed here - mine's not touchy at all - just about right, doesn't move accidentally.

I didn't mean that it moved too easily. I meant that it is too easy to end up clicking one of the directions while rotating it.

 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
PVCdroid
Senior MemberPosts: 2,173Gear list
Like?
Re: Hello Sony!
In reply to 1prime, 7 months ago

1prime wrote:

captura wrote:

1prime wrote:

captura wrote:

1prime wrote:

So now we have evidence that a quality metal body can be stronger than composite plastics, but can be sold for a competitive price. The Fuji X10/X20 models came in at about $500. If Sony had chosen to make the A6000 more appealing by giving it a better NEX-7-like body they could have done so. By not doing so, is that not perhaps an example of corporate greed?

My personal vote is for metal. This Fuji statement seems to validate my vote.
--
1prime

Right, Don.

If Sony had used the metallic body construction, they would have given us the actual NEX-7 replacement camera which everybody was clamoring about, for so long. But they left out the level, a couple of ports and gave us plastic in order just to save maybe $200 retail. And at the lower price, they probably doubled their sales volume. GREED!

I really doubt the difference between some fiber and a small piece of aluminum plus manufacturing costs is $200. But let's not quibble on small items. I hope Sony is listening to this thread, and considers all the still NEX-7 owners. Please Sony, just tweak the A6000 a little with some metal, a better EVF, even if you have to hump it, and a couple of other small things, keep it fairly close to the A6K price, and have another APS-C model, maybe the A7000, to bust the doors down. Don

-- hide signature --

1prime

Then how do you account for the big price difference between the NEX-7 and the A6000?

I think it's obvious. Sony realized how relatively easy it would be to capture a huge market slice and emphasized the sensor it had waiting for the delayed NEX-7 replacement, gave it to the A6K, and economized as much as possible to knock their new APS-C camera out of the park. And Sony did achieve a home run on it. Now it's time to tweak the A6K a little and maintain an attractive price. The A7K's technology need not be futuristic and expensive. In fact, many of us see the wisdom of 24.3 MP instead of 34 & 36 or even 42. And a little metal vs fiber just should not cost that much. Remember your 5R! Gads, we're remaining in the APS-C for a reason so don't price us into immobility. We like your A6K Sony, so just give us a little more, please!

-- hide signature --

1prime

I think you're right on in your analysis.

 PVCdroid's gear list:PVCdroid's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
captura
Forum ProPosts: 15,690Gear list
Like?
Re: Hello Sony!
In reply to PVCdroid, 7 months ago

PVCdroid wrote:

1prime wrote:

captura wrote:

1prime wrote:

captura wrote:

1prime wrote:

So now we have evidence that a quality metal body can be stronger than composite plastics, but can be sold for a competitive price. The Fuji X10/X20 models came in at about $500. If Sony had chosen to make the A6000 more appealing by giving it a better NEX-7-like body they could have done so. By not doing so, is that not perhaps an example of corporate greed?

My personal vote is for metal. This Fuji statement seems to validate my vote.
--
1prime

Right, Don.

If Sony had used the metallic body construction, they would have given us the actual NEX-7 replacement camera which everybody was clamoring about, for so long. But they left out the level, a couple of ports and gave us plastic in order just to save maybe $200 retail. And at the lower price, they probably doubled their sales volume. GREED!

I really doubt the difference between some fiber and a small piece of aluminum plus manufacturing costs is $200. But let's not quibble on small items. I hope Sony is listening to this thread, and considers all the still NEX-7 owners. Please Sony, just tweak the A6000 a little with some metal, a better EVF, even if you have to hump it, and a couple of other small things, keep it fairly close to the A6K price, and have another APS-C model, maybe the A7000, to bust the doors down. Don

-- hide signature --

1prime

Then how do you account for the big price difference between the NEX-7 and the A6000?

I think it's obvious. Sony realized how relatively easy it would be to capture a huge market slice and emphasized the sensor it had waiting for the delayed NEX-7 replacement, gave it to the A6K, and economized as much as possible to knock their new APS-C camera out of the park. And Sony did achieve a home run on it. Now it's time to tweak the A6K a little and maintain an attractive price. The A7K's technology need not be futuristic and expensive. In fact, many of us see the wisdom of 24.3 MP instead of 34 & 36 or even 42. And a little metal vs fiber just should not cost that much. Remember your 5R! Gads, we're remaining in the APS-C for a reason so don't price us into immobility. We like your A6K Sony, so just give us a little more, please!

-- hide signature --

1prime

I think you're right on in your analysis.

Me too. Do you think that Sony is listening?

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Samsung NX1000 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PVCdroid
Senior MemberPosts: 2,173Gear list
Like?
Re: Hello Sony!
In reply to captura, 7 months ago

captura wrote:

PVCdroid wrote:

1prime wrote:

captura wrote:

1prime wrote:

captura wrote:

1prime wrote:

So now we have evidence that a quality metal body can be stronger than composite plastics, but can be sold for a competitive price. The Fuji X10/X20 models came in at about $500. If Sony had chosen to make the A6000 more appealing by giving it a better NEX-7-like body they could have done so. By not doing so, is that not perhaps an example of corporate greed?

My personal vote is for metal. This Fuji statement seems to validate my vote.
--
1prime

Right, Don.

If Sony had used the metallic body construction, they would have given us the actual NEX-7 replacement camera which everybody was clamoring about, for so long. But they left out the level, a couple of ports and gave us plastic in order just to save maybe $200 retail. And at the lower price, they probably doubled their sales volume. GREED!

I really doubt the difference between some fiber and a small piece of aluminum plus manufacturing costs is $200. But let's not quibble on small items. I hope Sony is listening to this thread, and considers all the still NEX-7 owners. Please Sony, just tweak the A6000 a little with some metal, a better EVF, even if you have to hump it, and a couple of other small things, keep it fairly close to the A6K price, and have another APS-C model, maybe the A7000, to bust the doors down. Don

-- hide signature --

1prime

Then how do you account for the big price difference between the NEX-7 and the A6000?

I think it's obvious. Sony realized how relatively easy it would be to capture a huge market slice and emphasized the sensor it had waiting for the delayed NEX-7 replacement, gave it to the A6K, and economized as much as possible to knock their new APS-C camera out of the park. And Sony did achieve a home run on it. Now it's time to tweak the A6K a little and maintain an attractive price. The A7K's technology need not be futuristic and expensive. In fact, many of us see the wisdom of 24.3 MP instead of 34 & 36 or even 42. And a little metal vs fiber just should not cost that much. Remember your 5R! Gads, we're remaining in the APS-C for a reason so don't price us into immobility. We like your A6K Sony, so just give us a little more, please!

-- hide signature --

1prime

I think you're right on in your analysis.

Me too. Do you think that Sony is listening?

Yes, I do believe they are listening. They have even said so in interviews.

SONY, GREAT JOB WITH THE A6000 AT AN AFFORDABLE PRICE. STAY ON TRACK. DELIVER A KILLER NEX-7 REPLACEMENT BY FALL THIS YEAR. IT WON'T EAT INTO YOUR FULL FRAME BUSINESS ONE BIT. IT WILL INCREASE YOUR IMPROVING CREDIBILITY AND MARKET SHARE INSTEAD.

 PVCdroid's gear list:PVCdroid's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads