DtEW

DtEW

Joined on Feb 17, 2012
About me:

Amateur photographer primarily shooting in adventure and urban exploration contexts.

Comments

Total: 39, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kakariki: Hi, I am split between the a6000 and the fuji x-t1. The IQ of the a6000 seems to be a bit better with a decent lens but the weather-sealed body of the x-t1 is quite tempting. I want to take my camera on longer hiking trips in any weather conditions - below freezing, in heavy rain and sweet sunshine. I would be certainly careful with using any camera in bad weather conditions but even when you are careful you can't keep your gear 100% dry when your hands are wet or heavy fog precipitates (i try to avoid falling into rivers these days).
Has anybody got some experience with the performance and durability of the a6000 in somewhat rougher conditions?
Any comments much appreciated, thanks!

(continued)

Nevertheless, the care with which I use the Canon system remains the same, as "weather-sealed" is not weather-proofing, and there are lots of testimonials of people destroying their "weather-sealed" cameras with seemingly normal "weather". Therefore I regard "weather-sealing" as not something that expands the performance envelope, but rather just a better insurance policy.

Remember, you don't hear about a lot of the cases in which people who dunk their "weather-sealed" camera in a stream to clean it, only to find that it doesn't work right anymore. The nature of testimonials is that people will more likely post about their enviable successes, and not so much their over-ambitous failures.

I think this approach might benefit your consideration: weather sealing is desireable as an added insurance policy. But it is not the be-all, end-all. Neither is the lack of it.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 9, 2014 at 21:51 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kakariki: Hi, I am split between the a6000 and the fuji x-t1. The IQ of the a6000 seems to be a bit better with a decent lens but the weather-sealed body of the x-t1 is quite tempting. I want to take my camera on longer hiking trips in any weather conditions - below freezing, in heavy rain and sweet sunshine. I would be certainly careful with using any camera in bad weather conditions but even when you are careful you can't keep your gear 100% dry when your hands are wet or heavy fog precipitates (i try to avoid falling into rivers these days).
Has anybody got some experience with the performance and durability of the a6000 in somewhat rougher conditions?
Any comments much appreciated, thanks!

Can't speak to the A6000 (too new, and my usage of this system is different these days*), but I used to use the NEX-5N (an A6000 predecessor) as my primary camera in all conditions except pouring rain (what's to shoot in pouring rain?). This included a canyoneering trip down Tenaya Canyon (dry-bagged the camera when we had to rap into water), lots of shooting in snow/snowing/windblown snow conditions in Tahoe, and lots more urbex (dust, animal fecal matter, industrial waste). The camera survived unscathed, although I was as careful as was reasonable (i.e. wiping down the camera, not rinsing it off).

* - My E-mount system usage has been shifted to casual/social/tourism photography after I invested in a full-frame Canon system. The Canon system is weather-sealed, and it is the primary camera system I use for more adventurous/challenging activities... and those are the photos I might only ever shoot once, so hence maximal IQ.

(continued)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 9, 2014 at 21:50 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

DPJoe2: I can't find the lock out option to prevent the camera from taking a shot when there is no memory card in the camera. Yes, I am brain dead and old. Yesterday I took about 5 shots of my sister-in-law. Then, last night I went to import them into LR. Surprise, no card in the camera. How dumb. Help!

I just utilize the policy that I don't close the battery/card bay hatch unless I have a card in there.

The policy has a dual effect:

1) It indicates at-a-glance that you don't have a card in the camera.

2) If leaving the hatch open bothers you (it does for me), it incentivizes you to transfer your stuff quickly, and return the card to the bay quickly so that you can close the hatch.

This policy also addresses the brain fart of running out somewhere with the camera without a bag (which is presumably where you might keep an extra card). The electronic lock-out you are seeking will do nothing for you (aside from thwarting you early) when you don't have a card somewhere on you, right?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 8, 2014 at 01:30 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: I want an A-mount version of the A6000 with a proper grip, preferably in a $999 package with that 16-50 f2.8 lens of theirs. Who's with me? SLT be damned, just rip it out and let the chip do the work.

@Miwok: it probably doesn't matter in most circumstances, but I would rather have it than not, esp. when OSPDAF has progressed to the point where SLT doesn't offer any particular performance advantage anymore.

Yes, I would think long-and-hard between a dSLR and dSLT for the light loss vs. AF/EVF performance advantages. But it is a short consideration when you can have the same advantage as dSLT without light loss with this newest version of OSPDAF.

As an aside, I don't think one needs to fear the decline of A-mount. You will always need a bigger body for IBIS with sensors of this scale (and bigger), and there are definitely handling advantages to full-sized grips/buttons/levers/etc. Plus there is a more-developed lens catalog, plus the Minolta legacy.

MILCs are the most obvious and flashiest implementation for OSPDAF. But its advantages will go everywhere.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 6, 2014 at 21:19 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: I want an A-mount version of the A6000 with a proper grip, preferably in a $999 package with that 16-50 f2.8 lens of theirs. Who's with me? SLT be damned, just rip it out and let the chip do the work.

@tkbslc: No. Not in a way that preserves the functionality of the A6000 OSPDAF.

The LA-EA3 will only enable CDAF.

The LA-EA4 adds its own PDAF, but that necessitates a pellicle mirror, which takes away 1/3-stop of light. Even that isn't quite as fast as the A6000's OSPDAF w/native lenses.

In addition, when you talk about A-mount, it is the norm to have IBIS, as the vast majority of A-mount lenses do not have OSS. Adapting the A6000 to use with A-mount lenses would leave you with a setup that features no image stabilization for just about all lenses.

This is why adding an A-mount body sans SLT, and instead using the A6000 OSPDAF, makes total sense, assuming it is technically possible. The A-mount has more lenses on the long end. The bigger, dSLR-like body enables the incorporation of IBIS and weather-sealing, and a full grip also helps handling those big lenses.

A common use of crop bodies like this is an addition to an existing FF system in lieu of a tele-extender.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 6, 2014 at 19:09 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

mosc: I want an A-mount version of the A6000 with a proper grip, preferably in a $999 package with that 16-50 f2.8 lens of theirs. Who's with me? SLT be damned, just rip it out and let the chip do the work.

I think with a few tweaks to the tracking algorithm, and an even bigger buffer, such a camera can be a serious contender against the Canon 7D and its upcoming successor.

It could conceivably become the killer app for birders.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 6, 2014 at 18:29 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

Ross the Fidller: I am looking at this because of someone buying it, but why do you have to be region specific, "when it was introduced in the Fall of 2012.", with the timing of its release? I'm sorry, but as an Australian, I 'fall' about laughing at that term for Autumn. ;) Could you please remember it isn't just North Americans reading this & refer to the time of the year by month or quarters or something else that isn't region specific.

Thanks mate.
Cheers!

Why stop there? Why does it even have to be English for just the English-speaking countries?

I'm sorry, but this site needs to consider all the people that visit from elsewhere and make sure they not only can understand what is being said, but feel *totally* at home so as to not have their fine national sensibilities be bruised like an over-ripe pawpaw.

Therefore, the only correct linguistic choice for this site is Esperanto.

Ĉi tiu estas la plej bona maniero. Manĝi ovo.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 6, 2014 at 06:22 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

dcolak: I just got A6000 after using NEX7 for several years.

A6000 EVF is nowhere close to the one in NEX7!

It's so pixelated that it's hard to read the aperture-speed info text that is above and below the image.

Just looking the menus through EVF shows how pixelated and low resolution it is.

I have no idea what the reviewer was on when he said that it's fine EVF.

It's not. NEX7 gives you an ilusion of an optical view finder, A6000 is like looking at the old CRT TV screen, one can see the "space" between pixels.

The other problem I have is the brightness. NEX7 EVF is much brighter than that in A6000.

Maybe the reviewers eyes are not 20/20?

@dcolak, you must've never taken your NEX-7 into any place dark, or cared about seeing anything in the shadows when you compose.

Yes, the old 2.4m-dot EVF has the better resolution in good light. But it falters (in both noise and refresh rate) much earlier than this 1.4m-dot EVF as the light grows dim. Also, the 2.4m-dot EVF is infamous for crushing blacks/shadows. This 1.4m-dot is much better in that regard.

In terms of manual/DMF focusing, if you use focus magnification, both EVFs work as well as each other. It is conceded that the 2.4m-dot EVF works better than the 1.4m-dot EVF if you don't use focus magnification. But neither has enough resolution to allow you to hit critical focus without focus magnification, so I think this "advantage" is extremely limited.

In other words, the 2.4m-dot EVF is better on paper and at-a-glance, but actually use both EVFs in varying conditions and the 1.4m-dot EVF will reveal itself to be more useful.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 5, 2014 at 23:35 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

beemerchef: The camera is wonderful. I take a lot of photos having been on the road for the past 8 years full time camping [with my Dog!] and as someone pointed out to me since I do not sell photos and my largest posted format could be at the most 900x... "why am I driving a couple Ferrari which can go 300mph [2 x Canon 5D Mark III "L" lenses] when I am only going 40!". It all made sense as very tired having 40lbs of camera around my neck The a6000 is perfect BUT, do not buy the 16~50mm lens which is part of the kit. I made that mistake. I should have read the reviews on it and not just the camera. It has the worse distortion, vignetting, totally black corners at 16mm! Shame on Sony for that. I am now waiting for the 10~18mm to arrive, meaning I am ending up spending more on a lens than the camera itself. I have read good reviews on that one. It will be worth it to me so we shall see what happens.

On a related note, you will need to apply a lens correction profile to the SEL1018 RAW output as well, especially on the 10mm end, for which the lens exhibits noticeable barrel distortion.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 19:51 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

beemerchef: The camera is wonderful. I take a lot of photos having been on the road for the past 8 years full time camping [with my Dog!] and as someone pointed out to me since I do not sell photos and my largest posted format could be at the most 900x... "why am I driving a couple Ferrari which can go 300mph [2 x Canon 5D Mark III "L" lenses] when I am only going 40!". It all made sense as very tired having 40lbs of camera around my neck The a6000 is perfect BUT, do not buy the 16~50mm lens which is part of the kit. I made that mistake. I should have read the reviews on it and not just the camera. It has the worse distortion, vignetting, totally black corners at 16mm! Shame on Sony for that. I am now waiting for the 10~18mm to arrive, meaning I am ending up spending more on a lens than the camera itself. I have read good reviews on that one. It will be worth it to me so we shall see what happens.

(continued)

The SEL1650 was never designed to be a traditional standard zoom, which as well all know is basically the size of half a can of soda in normal guise across all vendors. Rather, the SEL1650 is meant as an ingenious re-thinking of the genre given the common usage of that type of lens (you bring the standard zoom instead of better IQ primes/zooms because of the snapshot convenience), leveraging the relatively newfound processing power that cameras and PP software now have to correct distortion, vignetting, etc.

It is a convenience lens. Find me another standard-range zoom (much less one that goes to 16mm/24mm FF equiv.) that's nearly as compact and doesn't require software correction... then you would have some right to fault Sony.

You just had no idea what you were buying into (a lens that requires software correction to function correctly), and failed to realize/value the advantage what you bought into had provided (extraordinary compactness).

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 19:45 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

beemerchef: The camera is wonderful. I take a lot of photos having been on the road for the past 8 years full time camping [with my Dog!] and as someone pointed out to me since I do not sell photos and my largest posted format could be at the most 900x... "why am I driving a couple Ferrari which can go 300mph [2 x Canon 5D Mark III "L" lenses] when I am only going 40!". It all made sense as very tired having 40lbs of camera around my neck The a6000 is perfect BUT, do not buy the 16~50mm lens which is part of the kit. I made that mistake. I should have read the reviews on it and not just the camera. It has the worse distortion, vignetting, totally black corners at 16mm! Shame on Sony for that. I am now waiting for the 10~18mm to arrive, meaning I am ending up spending more on a lens than the camera itself. I have read good reviews on that one. It will be worth it to me so we shall see what happens.

If you're seeing black corners at "16mm" what is happening is that you are working in RAW and failing to apply the lens correction profile this lens *NEEDS* to function properly, and is normally automatically applied in JPEG. You are also looking at what is really a 14-15mm angular FoV perspective, with some part of that picture designed to be auto-cropped by the lens correction profile to rid those black corners.

(continued)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 4, 2014 at 19:44 UTC

I would think that if you had a Vertu phone, you just call up the concierge and somebody comes and takes the photo for you? ;)

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 22:27 UTC as 63rd comment | 3 replies
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fox Fisher: Canon & Nikon users, start bashing and pixel peeping! 3 2 1 GO!

I think a lot of Canikon users/fans are watching, and I think a great many them aren't trolls/fanboys (merely the silent, cordial majority), and the fact that mirrorless is now completely viable as a full-function alternative to dSLRs have got them either considering adding a new tool to their arsenal, and maybe asking "where are you, Canikon, on this new development?"

Perhaps this is about time Canikon starts to feel the pressure and begins developing this technology/format seriously.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 20:23 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

justmeMN: DPR: "The a6000's kit lens isn't great from an image quality point of view, regularly producing images with very poor corners ..."

That's a significant flaw, that should have prevented it from getting a Gold Award.

If we are to let the performance of a kit lens dictate the rating of a camera, esp. when it is available to be purchased without one...

What are we to say about cameras that don't come with kit lenses?

"This Nikon D4S gets a rating of zero, because it is obviously defective, as it cannot produce any picture at all. The included kit lens is plasticky, lacks a glass element, or even a pinhole..."

Let me clue you in: these are INTERCHANGEABLE LENS cameras that are intended to be used with a variety of lenses to achieve a variety of results to a variety of ends. The kit lens is merely a starting point that helps facilitate some people. It is not the be-all-end-all, nor even a significant part of the experience for many people.

I for one got my A6000 with a Zeiss SEL1670Z. It came as part of a Sony-sanctioned package. Why not let that dictate the score?

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 19:46 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jerry Fusselman: "While still respectable, the EVF on the a6000 is a step down from the one on the NEX-6. It's both smaller and lower resolution."

I have both of these cameras, and no one would prefer the NEX-6's EVF. Especially in low light, the a6000's EVF is far better to look at and far more useful. That, not just resolution, is the bottom line. Thus, the review's statement that the a6000's EVF is a step down is false. It is actually a big step up, when all aspects of using the EVF are considered.

@Greynerd: It's far from an assumption when 1) an authority makes that claim, and 2) observations confirm the authority's claim. Sony has stated explicitly as to what the lower resolution EVF will do.

It is only you who is making a relatively unfounded leap to the theory that 1) this brand-new EVF couldn't possibly have any hardware advantages, and 2) the improvements we see must all be firmware, therefore implying 3) soon everyone with the 2-year old EVF will enjoy the same performance through a firmware upgrade.

Yeah, good luck on that.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 19:37 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

FiveForm: I'd love to see Sony make a G series, 16-85mm f2.8 walkaround lens for the a6000. Not sure if they can manage the top end being that long, but one of my favorites for my Nikon D series cameras was their 16-85. I'm currently shooting the Sony original 18-200mm and while nice, it's just too heavy and bulky and makes a small, light ILC a bit too cumbersome. Zeiss glass is great, but they know it and charge through the nose. I can buy two decent Nikon prime or zoom lenses for the cost of one Zeiss prime.

Basic math makes your desired 16-85mm f/2.8 *huge*. Its front element would need to be even bigger ( = 30.36mm entry pupil) than that of the full-frame Canon EF24-105mm f/4 (= 26.25mm entry pupil).

(It needs to be remembered that since the angular FoVs are similar as well, the front element will be comparable.)

I *have* the EF 24-105mm. Trust me when I say you do not want anything on that scale on the A6000.

The SEL1670Z is a good compromise that works with both the ergonomics and performance intent of the A6000. If you really want a f/2.8 normal zoom, you want the full grip typical of dSLRs, and perhaps of bigger MILCs in the future.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 19:22 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jerry Fusselman: "While still respectable, the EVF on the a6000 is a step down from the one on the NEX-6. It's both smaller and lower resolution."

I have both of these cameras, and no one would prefer the NEX-6's EVF. Especially in low light, the a6000's EVF is far better to look at and far more useful. That, not just resolution, is the bottom line. Thus, the review's statement that the a6000's EVF is a step down is false. It is actually a big step up, when all aspects of using the EVF are considered.

That is absolutely correct. You can actually use the A6000's EVF to resolve what is past the point of naked-eye visibility in darkness with as pedestrian as a f/1.8 aperture. The prior 2.4 million dot EVF that was in the NEX-6/7/FDA-EV1S would crush it all down to absolute black.

The old EVF is nicer to look at (high res!) on cursory examination under ideal conditions, but any deeper usage under a variety of conditions would reveal that the new, lower-res version is simply more functional, bar none.

I'm afraid you guys rushed this one out, DPR.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 10:38 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

Fogsprig: Everybody should wait for a7000. According to some rumors, Sony will release it in two weeks.

And according to some rumors, your beloved micro-four-thirds is going to fold tomorrow. ;)

Please lay off the obvious FUD. Leave it to the pros, lest you only further the reputation of m43-forums as being chock-full of politicking fanboys/trolls.

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 10:09 UTC
On Sony a6000 Review preview (765 comments in total)
In reply to:

h2k: A camera without touchscreen? That feels almost un-Sony.

Neither of the A6000's closest predecessors, the NEX-6 and NEX-7, have touchscreens. None of its higher-end, FF siblings (A7/A7R/A7S) have touchscreens. None of its current-generation APS-C siblings (A5000/A3500) have touchscreens. None of the entry-level predecessors (NEX-3/C3/F3/3N/A3000) had touchscreens.

In fact, the only Sony CSC to ever have had touchscreens were the NEX-5/5N/5R/5T series.

So what you must necessarily mean is that it feels unlike the NEX-5-series... by which necessarily deserves a "no duh, Sherlock!"

Direct link | Posted on Jun 3, 2014 at 09:56 UTC
On Shockproof flagship: Olympus 'drops' new Tough TG-3 article (107 comments in total)

Is it just me or does this camera resemble a MILC without a lens attached?

Direct link | Posted on Apr 4, 2014 at 21:43 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply
Total: 39, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »