So nice to see a place without several feet of snow.
QuarryCat: just marketing.I had tested the Alpha 6000 with tele-lenses -the AF isn't as fast as Olympus E-M1, nor Panasonic GH4 and by far not as fast and prices then Canon Eos 7d2 or even Nikon D7100.
Sony does only a good marketing job - but for their cameras and lenses and service, they have to learn a lot.
And a pro photographer who uses mirrorless body with adapter and long dslr-zoom and who puts it with camera strap around his neck - will soon ruin the glorious Body Alpha 6000!
Good point. In this case most of the pictures we could see were at F/5.6 (kit lens F-stops) and the DoF was most likely at least 17 feet and possibly much greater. It is too bad an F/2.8 zoom or longer lens was not used to actually test the AF. Still the guy is a very skilled photographer. In many cases he would have had the same results with the Sony RX100 series camera.
whakapu: Nicely made advertisement, but seriously - "testing" tracking AF by following a surfer in a black westsuit on white water moving mainly across the image plane and progressing slightly forward within the depth of field. The surfer is indeed "fast moving" relative to the water he's in but very slow moving relative to the focus range of camera. A more meaningful test was done by Tony Northrop trying to snap his daughter on a swing. The A6000 couldn't handle that. It's a great value camera, but an action camera it ain't. More importantly it's the total process of selecting a focus point, composing, autofocusing, shooting that is critical to getting the shot. The A6000 does have fast AF but pocket to shot I'd bet on even my EOS-M, yes featuring Canon's comedy-focus Af system, to beat it - because of the touchscreen.
With those lens focal lengths and the f5.6 aperture used and the distance they were from the subect, the DoF was well over 17 feet.
grasscatcher: I would buy one in a heartbeat if they had better lens choices. I'd specifically like something in the neighborhood of 100-300 with a small size (I can deal with f/6.3 on the long end if it is sharp - the higher f number would give me a smaller size and lower price for those daytime telephoto shots...). Something like the 55-210, but in a 100-300 focal zoom...
This is why the video was not a serious test of focusing. He used F/5.6 for most pictures.F/5.6, less than 200mm focal length and 30 yards distance means a very, very larger DoF. The only other E-mount lens is the 210mm F/6.3 zoom and would increase the DoF even more. Sony seriously needs a 300mm lens.
Lab D: In most pics he was using F/5.6. The DoF then ranged from 17 to 20+ FEET. Most CDAF only cameras can do that with ease. Why didn't he use a native F/2.8 lens or native 300mm lens?Good thing he had the waterproof box on the camera. A little saltwater splash would have killed it.
You are thinking Sony CDAF which is notorious for focusing on the background. Any Olympus or Panasonic CDAF only camera would have no problems with this. 20 feet DoF is NOT a serious test. Of course the GH4 which is CDAF only (plus DFD) is better than the A6000 at this stuff anyway.
In most pics he was using F/5.6. The DoF then ranged from 17 to 20+ FEET. Most CDAF only cameras can do that with ease. Why didn't he use a native F/2.8 lens or native 300mm lens?Good thing he had the waterproof box on the camera. A little saltwater splash would have killed it.
Smokymtnhiker: It will sell like hot cakes for a couple of months but the excitement will soon fade after the 50MP A7Rii is released with it's superior sensor and smaller price tag.
Looks like a nice new ultra-wide lens though. I will make good use of it on my A7R if the reviews look good.
Search Google for A7 and weather sealing. You find people complaining about how moisture broke their cameras and Sony telling them the cameras only protect again a little humidity.Then look at the lensrentals tear-down. Sony skipped any kind of protection on many parts. No Pro is going to take those cameras seriously in poor weather.
Anastigmat: Being a landscape camera, it should come with a built-in GPS, and that data can then be used to go back to the exact spot years later, even if one forgot where the photo was originally taken. A GPS unit would be less useful if one is shooting sports because the uniforms would inform you which team was playing and therefore where the photos were taken. It is a glaring omission that hopefully Canon can correct before launching the camera.
It does remind me of people who pay extra for GPS navigation in their car when they have a more up to date and more useful navigation system in their smartphone.btw, most smartphone act as wifi hot spots now too. Car makers still are trying to sell this feature in their cars..which means an extra monthly charge for what you phone already does! :D
brownie314: Nice looking camera. Any word on if it focusses any better than previous models? Especially in low light.
Most of the reviews say focusing is improved and even faster. Olympus already was one of the fastest and best low light focusing mirrorless cameras (IMHO Panasonic is as good as any DSLR). We are getting to the point where S-AF is so fast and accurate, it can be used for sports and action.
I talked to a couple pros I know and they are very excited about this camera for macro and near macro work. Very high detail, great color, low noise, and a wide r DoF. Both said they already use a tripod so this is a no brainer. Olympus may have found a very nice niche for this camera.
Jurka: Expensive for such small and noisy sensor. Every, even cheapest Canon, has better iso and dr range and details.
Canon at lower ISOs has LESS DR. The high res mode outperforms any Canon FF for DR, noise and color.
Lab D: Like most ILCs today, this one serves a niche. There is no other cameras that I can slip in to my jeans pocket, take places with the 20mm F/1.7 and 45mm F/1.8, both of which are tiny, and shoot with a silent shutter. It is a very good "stealth camera that performs acceptably in lower light. If you children are in a school show or in a performance at church, and you don't want to be that obnoxious parent, this camera is for you. I am sure some Nikon J1 and Pentax Q owners have had the same experience, but I have often forgotten I had the little camera with a couple wide aperture lenses in my pocket.
There are many F/.95 primes that will fit on the GM5 for low light events too. A silent shutter on a tiny camera with larger sensor and F/.95 lens make for a nice option in those situations.
Like most ILCs today, this one serves a niche. There is no other cameras that I can slip in to my jeans pocket, take places with the 20mm F/1.7 and 45mm F/1.8, both of which are tiny, and shoot with a silent shutter. It is a very good "stealth camera that performs acceptably in lower light. If you children are in a school show or in a performance at church, and you don't want to be that obnoxious parent, this camera is for you. I am sure some Nikon J1 and Pentax Q owners have had the same experience, but I have often forgotten I had the little camera with a couple wide aperture lenses in my pocket.
SF Photo Gal: I think it's a much needed re-direction for the GF line.
Owning a GX7 and GH3, the GM's and LX100 didn't really appeal to me, but I might be tempted to retire my very battered LX3 for one of these.
And judging by the youtube promo, looks like it will be great for personal porn!
The new GF is all about sharing. :)
Lee Jay: It's okay to be wrong Richard, and you are.
My first purchase was a 10D. That led me to a 20D for its many in-body improvements. My basic two lenses were a 17-40L and a 28-135IS but I also had two others, the 50/1.8 and 75-300IS. However, I loved wide-angle, and none of these count, and the 75-300IS wasn't long enough or fast enough. So I bought a Sigma 15mm fisheye for the crop cameras and traded up to the 50/1.4. The fish on crop is like a 19mm rectilinear on full-frame which is sort-of wide. Note than none of these are crop-lenses, but all are usable on a crop-only system.
I then sold my 10D and bought a 5D, and I sold my 28-135IS and bought a 24-105L. Then I had really, really wide (full-frame fisheye on full-frame), wide (17-40L on full-frame), and walkaround (17-40L on crop, 24-105 on full-frame). I got rid of the 50/1.4 for an 85/1.8, and sold the 75-300IS for a 70-200/2.8 + TCs, all through a nice, continuous path, each step leading to the next.
So, it's no myth.
My FF Canon lenses work very well on my current camera. Did I "upgrade" to a smaller sensor? If you want to say that go ahead. People go different directions every day and adapt what they have. Next we will see those commenting about their upgrade path from Canon to Nikon or Canon to an A7ii. Maybe anything can be considered an upgrade path.
Richard is correct. You think he said it never happens which is obviously wrong. People switch formats and brands all the time. There are many here who use their old FF lenses on ther new smaller sensored mirrorless cameras. There are many use use Canon lenses on Sony, Olympus, Panasonic and Fiji cameras. So what.The truth is most DSLR owners do not buy APS cameras knowing they will one day switch to FF. In fact, most DSLR owners don't buy more than 2 or 3 lenses. Many stick with a kit lens and use the camera like a fixed lens camera for as long as they own it. Many keep their old DSLR at home and use their smartphone now. Big deal. So nice anecdote, but it means nothing in relation to the story.
km25: A Canon 24-70 wt is 805g, 1.77 lbs. The Fuji only is 655g, 1.44 lbs. All fast and wide lens are goinr to large, but this is a one lens for just about everything. Remember, the X-PRO is APS-C and some cameras like the Nikon 7000 series is nearly as big as nomal FF Nikon. The lens factor is 50% less, the wt factor will about the same. Did you exspect an 16-55mm F.95 should only wiegh as much as an 35mm F/1.4. They make other lens that cover this range that lighter, buy one of those. This a Pro level and they work for a living.
Oops, nerd2 your math is off. Think again. Also, since the large majority of Canon DSLRs have a 1.6x crop factor, the Fuji (1.5x crop factor) in your way of thinking is a faster lens! :)
Fuji has taken the lead in APS mirrorless. Samsung looks poised to do well too. Both now have multiple F/2.8 or faster zooms. It will be interesting to see of the new Canon and Nikon mirrorless offerings this year are APS or only FF.It's been almost 2 years since Sony announced a new APS mirrorless lens and zero are on the horizon. There may be too much competition looking in that format size.
blink667: Curious about the coming competition between the D750 and Sony A7II which has in-body stabilization and is $1000 cheaper with a 28-70mm.
The New 24-120/4 which is part of the $2999 kit that is $1000 more than the A7ii kit.
The A7II has a less useful mediocre lens that goes to F/5.6 while the D750 has a wider range focal length, highly rated F/4 lens.
You could get a less useful F/4 zoom for the A7ii too, but it adds that $1000 to even things out it still can't complete with the Nikon's more useful range.
btw, the D750 shoots better video. The A7ii video is similar to the old Nikon D600 with lots of moire, aliasing and softness.