Previous news story    Next news story

Just posted: Sony Alpha NEX-6 Review

By dpreview staff on Mar 26, 2013 at 18:58 GMT
Buy on GearShop$687.746 deals

We've just posted our review of Sony's NEX-6 mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The NEX-6 brings a much-requested mode dial and ISO standard hot shoe to Sony's mirrorless lineup, and also adds a Hybrid AF system, Wi-Fi, and downloadable 'apps'.  The NEX-6 also features a 16MP CMOS sensor, articulating LCD, XGA OLED electronic viewfinder, and fun point-and-shoot features like Sweep Panorama and various automatic modes. Is the NEX-6 the most rounded NEX yet? Read our full review to find out. 

601
I own it
86
I want it
76
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Sony Alpha NEX-6

Comments

Total comments: 330
12
Ponderer
By Ponderer (8 months ago)

Keep mine pocket size
When NEX6 came out I liked the APS-C sensor, small size, viewfinder, & features of NEX6. Then I looked at lenses. When you hang a long lens on the front of a pocket camera, it is no longer a pocket camera. I no longer use wide angle lenses. As a walk around camera, the only lens I see me buying for NEX6 body would be a sharp, fast, pancake 50mm, to keep it below 2 inches thick. My current pocket camera is a Sony DSC-HX9V that I carry in a belt pouch made for a cell phone.
The Sony HX50V is 30X and only 1.6” thick. Could Sony use a NEX 6 body, attach a lens like on HX50 and keep it under 2” thick? This would be my ideal on my belt camera, without a long lens I’d have to carry in hand or backpack while I hike a swamp, sports event, or concert.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Apr 1, 2013)

"Image Size
L: 16M (3:2), 14M (16:9)
M: 8.4M (3:2), 7.1M (16:9)
S: 4.0M (3:2) 3.4M (16:9)"

Wait, there is no 4:3, 5:4 or 1:1 crop? So the only choice for portraits is 3:2, which is already too narrow? Pretty big omission, and of the feature which does not cost anything to make in camera, and requires a lot of cropping work in post...
Subject, what is included and excluded, is the most important thing in any photo, and this camera is more limited in this regard than 10 y/o point-and-shoots.

0 upvotes
mjj lzr
By mjj lzr (Apr 5, 2013)

Take a deep breath. Maybe Sony will create for you a special application for another $10.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Mar 31, 2013)

DPR wrote: "As far as optical performance is concerned, the 16-50mm is consistent with what you'd expect of a complex, retractable yet affordable kit lens. Sharpness is relatively good but the corner performance at wide angle (where a lot of distortion correction is being conducted) isn't great. It performs fairly respectably for a kit zoom, and offers considerable convenience."

So, did you or did you not perform optical tests of the lens, and if you did, where are they?

0 upvotes
rabbitzilla
By rabbitzilla (Mar 29, 2013)

You guys talked a lot about the decorative features , not the core competencies of this camera.

NEX-6 came to my possession 2 days ago but it did not take long time to impress.
The IQ is comparable to all mid size APS-C DSLRs. But the lens family is too small esp the pro grade. High quality mirrorless system is quite expensive. Look at the SEL Zeiss 24 mm, it is just a little cheaper than EF 35 f/1.4 L in my country.

I hate EVF, it is quite annoying to look into. but I accept the NEX-6 viewfinder. It is not as good as praised by many, but better than my expectation.

At the moment, I own 5D Mark III and 7 L lenses including the formidable 24,50 and 135. This is my first step into mirrorless. It will be a slow journey.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Mar 30, 2013)

> Look at the SEL Zeiss 24 mm, it is just a little cheaper than EF 35 f/1.4 L in my country.

E24/1.8 is a very cheap lens to design and make. it's a 37/2.8 equivalent on 35mm format cameras and is easier to make because it does not have the back-focus issue as on SLRs. it should worth about half as 35/2 lenses. the most expensive one is EF35/2IS for 850 US (the average should be 400 US something).

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
mjj lzr
By mjj lzr (Mar 28, 2013)

Built-in flash not fire on rear curtain? If I want to shoot dynamic situation where people dancing or moving (the underexposed ghost should be behind the scene illuminated by the flash) The flash on front curtain give me an idiotic effects. Should be possible to change shooting front-rear curtain flash fire on the menu near the flash compensation I think.

Comment edited 53 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
neo act
By neo act (Mar 28, 2013)

Sensor performance compared: I would be very gateful if You could provide some deeper explanation to a great difference in scoring bars of Low light/Hi ISO performance between NEX-5N and 6. Is there really such a great difference that DPR scoring bars suggests? It is particularly strange when this review suggests that NEX-6 should be rather better than worst than NEX-5N in this aspect. Also the lower RAW quality compared to the NEX-5N (in the scoring bars) would be worth of some comment.

It would be really helpful If you could compare the chip performance also to the DSLR competitors Pentax K5 II, Nikon 7100? Thanks a lot.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Mar 31, 2013)

Given that NEX-6, NEX-5N, K5, D7000 all use the same basic sensor (with just a few phase-detecting sensels added to NEX-5R/6, so few they should not affect IQ significantly), the proper test should give the same result too.

0 upvotes
whtchocla7e
By whtchocla7e (Mar 28, 2013)

Question to "legacy shooters" - do you still wear your 50 year-old socks?

0 upvotes
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (Mar 28, 2013)

No, I don't. But then they are not made of metal/glass. Socks are inherently designed for a short life and getting sweaty and needing to be washed after every use. Can't say my nice legacy lenses need washing to keep going for decades of use. :-)

2 upvotes
don_van_vliet
By don_van_vliet (Mar 28, 2013)

Ridiculous comparison.

1 upvote
Dan Tong
By Dan Tong (Mar 28, 2013)

By Dan Tong (2 min ago)

While the NEX series offers close to full control in video mode, for my uses, the lack of touch screen control (for video use) is a strong negative. If there was an app that allowed full remote control using a smartphone, or tablet, including touch screen functions, that would be a mitigating factor. Also I'm not crazy about Sony's interfaces and much prefer Canon's.

Any information about the overheating problem with this new NEX-6 as reported with some older NEX models when doing long video shoots?

For the reasons above the Nex-5R comes closer to meeting my needs, even though it lacks a built in EVF (optional add on is available), so I'm anxiously waiting for a full review of the 5R, as well as the Panasonic GH3, which at this point sounds like a far better camera for video applications.

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Mar 28, 2013)

"Any information about the overheating problem with this new NEX-6 as reported with some older NEX models when doing long video shoots?"

The NEX6 folks here at the DPR NEX forum state there's no overheating with the NEX6.

However, the video quality, moire-wise, isn't exactly up to the Panasonic GH1/2/3 level. That is, I wouldn't shoot video with this camera where artifacting-free image is a must. Get a separate high-quality prosumer video camera like the Canon VIXIA HF G20 for quality video shoots.

0 upvotes
Rob P
By Rob P (Mar 27, 2013)

Why do the links to the actual review on these news pages unnecessarily pop-up in a new tab/window?

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

Question:
How effective is Face Recognition feature?

0 upvotes
ZeevK
By ZeevK (Apr 3, 2013)

It is very effective on NEX-5n. I think this is one of the most neglected features of the NEX family - and doing so is a mistake. IMHO the ability to register a face and mark it as favorite is really a cool and useful feature. I use it alot!

0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 27, 2013)

So, I can make a conclusion now.
I shoot with NEX-5n from the November 2011 exclusively and I cannot say anything bad about IQ (with the little exception the DR could be better for about 1-1.5 stops, after Pentax K-5), I have many shots I like, but the shooting experience is UGLY, this thing is anti-ergonomic and not because of its size but rather poor design, because with RX100 I have much quicker access to the essentials — that's why very many photographers love this little guy . It looks like Sony intentionally makes NEX very hard to control. It managed to spoil very basic controls, make it inconvenient to use. This thing is the typical example of what how not to make camera.
I expected they will significantly improve experience with 5R and 6, but they didn't, it still sucks hard.

2 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

I see NEX-6 as a big step in the right direction with ergonomics.
Control Dial: Check (addressing my biggest gripe with 3 and 5 series)
Relocated Video Button: Check
Dedicated ISO button close to the thumb: Check
Quick-Navi: Check
Programmable Fn button: Check
Additional Programmable buttons: Check

What exactly is the problem?

5 upvotes
Dan Tong
By Dan Tong (Mar 28, 2013)

I'm glad you like the RX100 interface. Wish I did, but it frustrates the hell out of me at times (eg macro settings, sweep panorama limitations to f1.8 only etc).

So, I assume I would be even unhappier with the NEX-5,6,7 interfaces in general.

I guess I'm spoiled by Canon's interfaces which are far from perfect, but relatively, a lot better based on my experiences with other brands.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 28, 2013)

I don't understand where this complaint for interface is coming from. At least in the case of NEX-6...
- there are dedicated mode buttons and dials for several regularly used options.
- there is a programmable Fn button that the user can customize and select six options
- there are 2-3 additional soft keys that can be programmed for convenience
- there is Quick-Navi which can be extremely useful and prevent having to deal with menu options

And in fact, I like the Manual Mode implementation with separate and well-defined controls for aperture and shutter speed.

The only thing I wish for is expanded role of the lower dial. At least based on this review, it isn't being used for much.

2 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 28, 2013)

n/t

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Abaregi
By Abaregi (Mar 27, 2013)

EOS M has touch, 6D does not. What is the price difference there?

As a manual shooter I have never used it on my 5R but i guess it would be nice for AF. I have never used that though (Legacy shooter)

If i start with AF lenses then i might appreciate the touch on my 5R but so far i have never used or missed it.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

IMO, touch screen has its appeal to me, limited ONLY to focus magnify. But that is it, and can (and have) lived without it forever. And I see absolutely no use for it when using EVF (a big reason to consider NEX-6 over NEX-5R which has touch screen). And if I were to use touch screen and then compose via EVF, I would hate to see something else magnify because my face or finger touched on another part of the screen in the process.

I prefer: keep it simple. Another improvement in NEX-6 over the older models... mode dial, Quick-Navi, Fn button and less need to dig into LCD based menu system.

3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 27, 2013)

I find touch screens only useful for quickly moving the AF point. Firing the shutter with a touch makes zero sense and is just a gimmick.

DPR seems particularly enamored with touch panels for some reason, but I think it's wrong to penalize a camera for not having a touch panel since enthusiasts are so split on whether or not they are useful.

I'd rather not have to dig in any menu to make changes and whether you are accessing menus with touch or a button it's still more time consuming that dedicated buttons. Most of the major shooting functions can be accessed with the 4-way controller on NEX cameras.

Plus, I absolutely cannot stand finger prints all over the LCD, with I'd rather a camera with nice fast, well laid out menus like the Nikon 1 and a Quick Menu system like Pentax cameras.

3 upvotes
wb2trf
By wb2trf (Mar 28, 2013)

I find the touch shutter to be an excellent feature. I use it all the time for shooting fast moving children in groups. The reason is that with a single action you get to place the focus and release the shutter. It is the fastest way to accomplish that in one step. I think most opposition to it is because most photographers here are old and don't like to change.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 28, 2013)

"I think most opposition to it is because most photographers here are old and don't like to change."

Funny that you would say that. Last weekend, my father-in-law was struggling to use his phone camera. He was touching all over the screen but to no avail. I looked into it and it turned out that the shutter release was assigned to the physical button in the traditional location of a camera, not touch screen.

Also worth noting, that iPhone initially came up with touch screen shutter. But, it was also criticized for lack of stability. During an iOS upgrade, Apple added the corner button for shutter release for a more traditional way of taking pictures.

Touch screen shutter requires hand to be moved off the grip, which is not a bright idea if you care for stability.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
wb2trf
By wb2trf (Mar 28, 2013)

No it certainly does not require hand off grip. I use the touch shutter with my thumb. Right thumb for landscape and left for portrait. The 5R is so small, it isn't even a stretch. One common alternative when you lack touch shutter does involve moving the camera, to choose a focus point in the scene, half press to lock, and reframe. That is less stable and much slower.

0 upvotes
sjredo
By sjredo (Mar 27, 2013)

People complaining about the lens lineup are stuck with that was said about NEX before... all thats missing is a long Marco lens and then the lineup is looking pretty good.

They may not be the BEST quality out there (except for the Zeiss), but not all of us can afford USD 600 dollar lenses.

Just go out, and enjoy shooting your camera of choice.

2 upvotes
don_van_vliet
By don_van_vliet (Mar 28, 2013)

NEX lineup is looking a lot better than even a year ago, Sony have done well. There are still no fast zooms, or fast telephotos though, at least not in E-mount.

0 upvotes
starwolfy
By starwolfy (Mar 27, 2013)

Is it sharper than a Leica M11 at Iso 12800 ?

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

Is that the price of the body, or al camera with samples to go with it? :D

1 upvote
Abaregi
By Abaregi (Mar 27, 2013)

Who knows, at those prices Leica should win out.
But often enough they don't..

1 upvote
wb2trf
By wb2trf (Mar 28, 2013)

Leica has nothing to do with photography or photographic image quality. Leica is only about the image of the person carrying it.

1 upvote
ssh33
By ssh33 (Mar 27, 2013)

I love everything about NEX, but I'd never buy into the system with the current lens lineup.

3 upvotes
Rob Sims
By Rob Sims (Mar 28, 2013)

Just a list of some current e-mount lenses (before even considering the A-mount via adapter, legacy lenses, or announced but not yet released e-mount glass):

Ultra-Wide Angle:
15-27mm (equiv) = SEL1018 F4
18-24mm (equiv) = SEL1628 F2.8 w/ UWA if you're on a budget

Fast Primes:
36mm (equiv) = Zeiss 24mm F1.8
52mm (equiv) = SEL35 F1.8 (with OSS as well)
75mm (equiv) = SEL50 F1.8

Cheap but Sharp Primes
28mm (equiv) = Sigma 19mm F2.8
45mm (equiv) = Sigma 30mm F2.8

Telescopic
82-315mm (equiv) = SEL55210 (with OSS)

Basic kit zooms:
24-75 (equiv) = SEL1650 (with OSS) and super compact.
27-82 (equiv) = SEL1855

Super zooms:
27-300mm (equiv) = SEL18200 / SEL18200LE (with OSS)

Key missing ones I guess would be fast telescopic (eg. 70-200 F2.8) although size may be an issue here... and some better macro lenses. Otherwise I'm not sure what you're complaining about. For a system that's less than 3 years old they've done a pretty good job of fleshing it out no?

6 upvotes
Rob Sims
By Rob Sims (Mar 28, 2013)

Ah another one to add to the wish list:
A fast zoom - something like 16-50 F2.8. Not sure if anyone has heard of one in the pipeline.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 28, 2013)

There is a premium ("G") normal zoom scheduled for release sometime this year. I suspect it will be f/2.8-4 kind to keep size and weight down. Or, it could also be the first full frame lens, in which case, it might be a 24-70 or something like it (otherwise, it will be a first "G" to be designed for APS-C).

0 upvotes
ssh33
By ssh33 (Mar 28, 2013)

I'm mostly interested in primes. f/1.8 does not qualify as fast in my book - more in the realm of "cheap" if you compare it with N-word and C-word offers. What about Sony SEL lens pricing? Why does Sony APS-C 50mm f/1.8 lens costs $300 when Nikon costs $200 and covers full frame? What are you paying for?

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 28, 2013)

ssh33,

Sony SEL lens is obviously not cheap, something you obviously want. Sony SAL lens is, however. One of the approach manufacturers like Sony, Nikon, Canon... take to cut costs is by cutting corners (not necessarily optically but elsewhere). If you want to see this for self, pick up a Sony E-mount lens, and a comparable A-mount lens. For example, go:
35mm f/1.8 SAM (A-mount) versus 35mm f/1.8 OSS E
50mm f/1.8 SAM (A-mount) versus 50mm f/1.8 OSS E

I would expect you to be able to tell which of the two is cheaper, blindfolded.

BTW, f/1.8 qualifies as being fast. f/1.4 or f/1.2 qualifies as "marketing" to those in denial of the former.

1 upvote
ssh33
By ssh33 (Mar 28, 2013)

We are still talking about NEX, right? I have no interest in Minolta lenses. Kinda lol'ed over your "cutting corners (not necessarily optically)" after I asked: Why does Sony APS-C 50mm f/1.8 lens costs $300 when Nikon costs $200 and covers FULL FRAME? Someone IS cutting corners OPTICALLY and charges premium for shiny plastic.

I agree that /1.8 still qualifies as being fast, but to state that the superior in every way, top of the line primes from the biggest industry players are the products of "marketing" to unsuspecting idiots... well... I have nothing to say to that.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 28, 2013)

Instead of LOLing, try to understand what you've already been presented with. Unless you're into parroting, which you just demonstrated, regurgitating the same argument you'd made, despite of a response.

Or perhaps, I should be LOLed at for expecting you to be able to tell the difference, which I assumed you could do blind-folded. Apologize for being wrong. Now...

> I have no interest in Minolta lenses.
That is fine. And those weren't Minolta lenses, those are (also) Sony APS-C lenses, cheaper. You asked why couldn't Sony, and I made an attempt to make you aware that it does. You're also unaware pricing of a lens goes beyond specs.

> "I agree that /1.8 still qualifies as being fast, but to state that the superior in every way"

Stop dreaming, or at least making things up.

>" top of the line primes from the biggest industry players are the products of "marketing" to unsuspecting idiots... well... I have nothing to say to that."

You're proving my point.

0 upvotes
ssh33
By ssh33 (Mar 28, 2013)

Please forgive me for being wrong.

Sony E lenses are not really overpriced and there is nothing left to be desired as far as the selection goes.

You are right, Canon and Nikon f/1.2 and f/1.4 are just a scam, I better stick with Sony.

Comment edited 30 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 28, 2013)

No, I think you should be spending on f/1.2 and f/1.4 lenses only. How else are you going to avoid conditions where f/1.8 will be too slow for your photography skills?

But, to address your other frustration, if you feel E-mount lenses are too expensive for you, you should stick with system that you can afford.

0 upvotes
ssh33
By ssh33 (Mar 28, 2013)

Thank you.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 28, 2013)

Any time. :)

0 upvotes
pc168
By pc168 (Mar 27, 2013)

So many NEX bodies, so confused. Can they make things simpler, straight forward ... may be just two NEX product lines, pro and amateur. And one model per line.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

Allow me to simplify. Sony NEX is available in four trim levels:
3-series: Entry (Small body)
5-series: Advanced (Small body, w/optional EVF)
6-series: Mid (Larger body, w/EVF)
7-series: Semi-Pro (Larger body, w/EVF)

Sony SLT/APS-C is available in four trim levels:
3x-series: Entry (Small body)
5x-series: Advanced (Small body)
6x-series: Mid (Larger body)
7x-series: Semi-Pro (Larger body)

Olympus Micro-Four Thirds has four trim levels:
E-PL-series
E-P-series
E-PM-series
E-M-series

Panasonic Micro-Four Thirds has four trim levels:
G-series
GF-series
GH-series
GX-series

Canon APS-C has had its own set of “few” launches (since 2010):
EOS-60D (and EOS-60Da)
EOS-100D (SL)
EOS-550D (T2)
EOS-600D (T3)
EOS-650D (T4)
EOS-700D (T5)
EOS-1100D
EOS-M

Need I go on?

14 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (Mar 27, 2013)

Japanese love it!

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

Anybody else make cameras that actually sell? :D

1 upvote
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Mar 27, 2013)

Thanks for the simplification. Especially if you ignore 5N, 3C, F3, and whatever ... One too many steins ...

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

If you want to talk model updates within each series, let us pick a few since 2010:
NEX-5 series: 5, 5N, 5R (three updates in three years)
Canon T-series: T2i, T3, T3i, T4i, T5i (five updates in three year)
Panasonic GF-series: GF2, GF3, GF5
Olympus E-PL series: PL1, PL1s, PL2, PL3, PL4, PL5

In other words, Sony NEX isn't the only line seeing annual (or more frequent) updates. If you want to consider ALL models (2010-2012):
Sony NEX: 7 cameras (3, 5, 5N, 7, C3, 5R, 6)
Panasonic MFT: 10 cameras (GF2, GH2, G2, G10, GX1, GF3, G3, GH3, G5, GF5)
Olympus MFT: 10 cameras (E5, PL1, PLs, P3, PL3, PM1, PL2, PL4, PL5, PM2)
:

You're welcome.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
12 upvotes
-Teo-
By -Teo- (Mar 27, 2013)

I’d like to see on this kind of cameras (or at least on all SLT-AXX series) a GPS sensor.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

Yep. That will be one thing I would miss with NEX-6, that I have on my Sony SLT-A55. Sadly, Sony stripped that feature in subsequent models.

0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Mar 27, 2013)

Sony, Please: fewer NEX bodies, more NEX lenses. As for the menus and interfaces, pick the design that time-tests prove can be mastered and utilized fastest by teams that mix phone users, photographers, geeks, and klutzes. Deep, labyrinthine menus are a killer. The only thing missing in the somewhat redundant offering of bodies is a version less prone to overheating in video mode.

1 upvote
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Mar 27, 2013)

"Sony, Please: fewer NEX bodies, more NEX lenses."

As long as they're catering for both the budget and prosumer market, IMHO having four (soon five) distinct NEX lines (3x, 5x, 6x, 7x, soon 9x) is great. Not everyone needs an EVF - for them, the 6x/ 7x would be an overkill. By offering the 3x series with the same IQ, the same (for a kit lens) great 16-50 kit lens and at a much friendlier price is definitely a plus.

2 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

One of the reasons I find NEX-6 an upgrade is that it is more traditional, with control dial and useful buttons/dials (Fn, Navi) , while retaining programmable buttons too. Why exactly does one need to worry about settings one won't need on a regular basis?

As for lenses, well, that is another reason I've a NEX. I have over a dozen lenses to use on it, whereas I haven't really invested in Sony's newer E-mount choices which are plenty for pretty much any circumstance that a camera like NEX is designed for.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Mar 27, 2013)

lenses are much more difficult to design,
for Sony, Pana, Oly, and Fuji.

several years ago I saw an Oly post in Tokyo recruiting lens design engineers and had a good laugh. I think they should have capable designers but in other more profitable departments.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
S.A.
By S.A. (Mar 27, 2013)

heh so many negative comments as usual.... I've owned all Nikon and Sony. Nikon DSLRs and Sony whatevers... And this NEX 6 is the closest I've come to a do it all camera. As with all mirrorless, the autofocus leaves something to be diesired, but otherwise it's a swiss army knife of cameras. First thing I did was sell the lens. Would rather use primes and already had the 18-55.
Crying about the menus is pointless. The quick navi and the fn button take care of that. Hardly any need to go into menus. Love that I an use my triggers with the hot shoe. Love the wireless. I shoot in my little studio and just hit send to computer. Love it. WONDERFUL CAMERA!
Touchscreen lol. Use your cell phone then. No real advantage imho. Actually it seems a handicap if you ask me. Turned it off on the 5n after a few weeks. However, I can see no reason why they couldn't have included it for the gadget crowd. So ok, minus half a percentage point.

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
8 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 27, 2013)

Leave the auto mode and then make your judgement. Currently NEX' interface is nowhere near to be convenient for A and S modes (I'm using the most). M-mode too, but I only use it when shooting tripod and don't care much about speed there.

1 upvote
enenzo
By enenzo (Mar 27, 2013)

You are so right! Good post.

2 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

It is funny when people demand touchscreen options. Personally, the only use I'd have for it is in lesser NEX models: for Focus Magnification. Everything else is better served with logically placed buttons and dials.

Quick Navi, Fn and mode dial in NEX-6 are great improvements over lesser NEXes IMO, and it still retains the programmable buttons (three of them with dials, which works fine for quick setups).

1 upvote
AlanG
By AlanG (Mar 27, 2013)

I am a long time pro photographer and have owned the Nex 6 with 16-50 since December and think it is a terrific camera. The image quality I have gotten from this camera including low light is remarkable for something so small, versatile & inexpensive. I use DXO for conversions and that corrects a lot of the flaws of the lens and smooths high ISO noise nicely. This brings it up to a pretty high standard.

It is very feature rich and that takes some getting used to. As mentioned, there are shortcuts that once learned let you avoid diving into the menus most of the time.

My only complaint about the controls is the way the magnification feature changes to using different controls when you switch from shooting mode to review mode. In shooting mode with MF lenses, the image is magnified via the lower button. In review mode, pressing this button does not magnify the image but asks if you want to delete it.

Also, I'd like to be able to program the thumb button for focus lock plus AE lock.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
micdair
By micdair (Mar 27, 2013)

I wouldn't call touch screen useless. Especially with wi-fi/app enabled camera. Also it is very handy for focus magnification in MF mode (which is very popular on NEXes) or picking the AF point...

It's kind of strange to have the 5 series with and 6 (and 7!) without it.

2 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

NEX-6 and NEX-7 have EVF. I would find it strange to use EVF and touch screen at the same time. Dial works much better. And even if you choose to use touch screen to set the point for focus magnify and then compose through EVF, you might find it a nuisance if any part of the face or hand touches the screen accidentally in the process. And if EVF is unnecessary, NEX-5R has touch screen option for its LCD based composition.

1 upvote
wb2trf
By wb2trf (Mar 28, 2013)

It is not possible to rationally justify the lack of touch screen unless it is based on manufacturer's cost savings.

The camera switches dynamically from lcd to viewfinder and turns off the touchscreen instantly as it does so. There is no possibility of accidental touching when using the viewfinder.

The emotional issue here about touch screen is that it is new. Things that are new are thought by old photographers to be "not serious" but what this really reflects is a desire for group approval among the stodgy, by disparaging that which was not present on old cameras.
The fact is that under some circumstances touch is very good for manual focus enlargement centering, for subject selection and shutter in one action, and, sometimes, for menu handling. It is never bad to have it available. In photography anything that is good sometimes is good period, because conditions always vary.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 28, 2013)

Any argument on such issue, for or against, is purely emotional. The logical side would evaluate why you would buy NEX-6 over NEX-5R. One has EVF (where touch screen carries no meaning for touch magnification) and the other has touch screen without EVF. Now, you could argue that EVF won't be used 100% of the time. I would argue that my preference for EVF is to use it for critical focusing, and for easier tracking (that is how I use both manual focus and tracking on my A55... don't have the option on NEX-3 so it remains LCD based).

Now THAT ain't based on emotional grounds, rather practical ones.

0 upvotes
micdair
By micdair (Mar 28, 2013)

There definitely are situations - like taking shots close to the ground or overhead... - when using the viewfinder is not an option. Plus I would repeat the argument that the camera is equipped with the wifi, which means typing logins, passwords... Using the "onscreen keyboard" without touch screen is not the most comfortable solution...

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 28, 2013)

Keyboard use on a camera, touchscreen or otherwise, is likely to be a rare occasion, not a regular one. And a 2.5-3 inch LCD screen is smaller than the screen on my iPhone with which I regularly struggle getting things right (at least on iPhone, I expect that keyboard usage more).

The ONLY advantage to touchscreen anything on a camera to me is Focus Magnify (which would be useless when I use EVF). For most practical purposes, the physical buttons to locate the point works just fine.

0 upvotes
ZeevK
By ZeevK (Apr 3, 2013)

IMHO Sony made a huge mistake ommiting the touch screen from NEX-6. I personally will not upgrade to 6 or 7 till it will provide touch option. I shoot a concert holding the NEX-5n in one hand over people heads. With my thumb I was able to percisely select the focus point for each shot. I shoot macro at low level with back LCD horizontal in both Auto and Manual Focus - being able to touch the screen for Focus selection is awsome.

When I take the NEX-5 (still with me as backup) - I feel handicapped without the touch interface.

0 upvotes
Greynerd
By Greynerd (Mar 27, 2013)

This does look a very neat camera/lens setup. Obviously Sony Nex lens division have found some way of communicating with the side that produces the camera bodies which is nice to see. I do wonder if the lens side had confused Nex with NX so thought they were producing lenses for the quasi DSLR Samsung NX10 series and only had the mount specs but had never seen a Nex camera body before.
I do like the EVF being placed on rather than above the camera body. It would be nice if Olympus and Panasonic could manage to do the same thing. It does seem pointless putting a great lump on the top of a camera for just an EVF.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Mar 27, 2013)

I think Sony people should go to a school and learn how to use cameras. judging from the design of the lens, they don't even have a clue how to hold one.

0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 27, 2013)

No direct exposure compensation method drives both NEX-6 and NEX-5R usability to the level of NEX-5n for the higher price with slightly lower IQ (according to DxOmark).
Plus, I see no reason for the EVF to be fixed and greatly prefer swivel over it.
No touch screen is a huge minus as well.
So I'm surprised this crap got a 72%, IMO it only worth something about %60 or even less at best.
I hope amazon camera ranking reflects common sales figures, where no NEX camera at the TOP100 — because this crap is overpriced for its functionality and usability. Sony did a poor job with it: the worst performance for their 16Mp sensor between other camera makers (Pentax, Nikon, Fuji), inferior ergonomics — it's not size, because tiny RX100 and RX1 which is about the same size as NEX are both joy to use.

2 upvotes
wansai
By wansai (Mar 27, 2013)

you can't be serious. You're saying the RX100 is better ergonomically? That's hard to believe. I think you'd be the only person to hold that view. On the planet.

Also, the picture quality *is* good. For what you get, it's priced quite alright.

3 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 27, 2013)

I hold the RX100 and it's much easier to use. I'm using A mode and auto ISO most time. With RX100 I can change aperture value just as easy as on NEX, but it's much easier to do exposure compensation with RX. Plus I can choose focusing point much easier with RX and its continuous mode (hold middle button and camera will track chosen point, with NEX-6 I need to play gameboy).

1 upvote
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Mar 27, 2013)

Not sure what you're looking at but DXO does not rate the 6 (or 5R for that matter) lower than the 5N, especially if you take their margin of (measuring) error into account.

0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 27, 2013)

@Troj
My mistake, I just rather care the most about high ISO performance (which is slightly higher with 5N).
But still the NEX performance is obviously lower than one of Pentax and Nikon (and Fuji, probably).

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Mar 27, 2013)

It's only really (beyond margin of error) lower than the new Nikon (well, Toshiba really) APS-C sensor in terms of shadow noise. For which IMHO it more than makes up for with a lack of banding (which the Toshiba sensor does have both for stills and video).
The only meaningful difference that Pentax throws into the mix is RAW smoothing. I have no trouble beating their RAW NR and prefer choice, one of the main reasons I shoot RAW to begin with.

0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 27, 2013)

Pentax too, their cameras with the same 16Mp sensor permanently scores higher than NEXes.

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Mar 27, 2013)

That's what I said, in the SNR curve mostly thanks to RAW NR.
Add some Topaz NR to the 5N or 6 RAW files and you can end up with less noise *and* less smudging at the same time.

0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 27, 2013)

Pentax applies NR after ISO3200, it's far above acceptable IQ for DxO.

0 upvotes
Abaregi
By Abaregi (Mar 27, 2013)

1 of 10 Sad Troll :/

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Mar 27, 2013)

"Pentax applies NR after ISO3200, it's far above acceptable IQ for DxO."

I never found single data points that interesting, but if you're talking about the number on the first page, that's still well within measuring error. I was talking about the higher ISO ranges where smudging kicks in (which actually includes ISO 3200) and the SNR graphs start diverging more:
http://i46.tinypic.com/m8iqz7.jpg

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
eddie_cam
By eddie_cam (Mar 27, 2013)

I'd like to see a pancake like the one in Samsung's NX line, the 30/2,0, for Sony's NEXes. That as a kit lens, and I'd be all over a 3N ...

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

Another pancake may be nice addition, but personally, 20-24mm pancake works better for the conditions I expect to use such lens for. I actually like the size of Sony 35mm/1.8 OSS (also because I like to use manual focus more). You may also want to note that the difference between NEX-6's kit zoom (16-50) and Samsung 30mm pancake is negligible for most practical purposes (about 8mm).

1 upvote
nosnoop
By nosnoop (Mar 27, 2013)

Conclusion "Some apps (such as Multi-Frame NR and Time-Lapse) are free on previous Sony cameras or competitors"

Really? Other cameras have "intervalometer" functions.
But how many other cameras (especially NEX-6's competitors) have the ability to produce a finished time-lapse video straight out of the cameras without the need to post-process the hundreds/thousands of images from intervalometer output?

As for the Wi-Fi Apps, you did not mention the fact that once you bought the App, you can use in up to 10 cameras/devices. So you can buy a new NEX camera in the future, and continue to use all the Apps you have bought! To me, that's a bargain.

4 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 27, 2013)

I would not be so sure. We may run into compatibility problems in the future and we all know Sony won't leave the possibility to fleece dupes who once used their goods and services.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
nosnoop
By nosnoop (Mar 27, 2013)

The Apps are being updated, just like your iPhone Apps.
You are not downloading the same old ones. So any compatibility can easily be fixed by an updated Apps.

0 upvotes
Mihai Muntean
By Mihai Muntean (Mar 27, 2013)

All I know that in the comparison section of the review I selected the A900 as one of the four in RAW mode ISO 100, and I could barely notice any differences. That is impressive. Obviously the ergonomics, build quality are not comparable but that definitively shows what a good sensor this piece of equipment has. It can take on some hefty competitors from the big league. Yes the E-mount can be a hassle, yes adapters are required for A mount lenses but hey if you're buying this it's for the portability, I'm guessing most people buying this have maybe 2 lenses maximum (talking 80% of people). People who want top IQ combined with portability this is your product.

0 upvotes
djrocks66
By djrocks66 (Mar 27, 2013)

All I know is that I picked one up the other day to give it a try and it just felt right. I love the viewfinder and the I.Q. Is great for me. I shoot a K5 and now I have the perfect little camera to hang around my neck. While the menus system isn't the greatest it doesn't really bother me. Happy Nex owner. :)

4 upvotes
kecajkerugo
By kecajkerugo (Mar 26, 2013)

yet another great camera for a serious folks. Yet another reason to complain about for so may here on this (and others forums).
Is it better than OM-D? Is it better than X-E1? In some areas it is , in th others not . Differences are marginal these days. Try one which suites you and go out for shooting !

11 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Mar 27, 2013)

maybe all others should include in-camera raw-cooking (raw: well-done) as an option and Pentax and Olympus should include option out.

0 upvotes
micdair
By micdair (Mar 27, 2013)

One of important aspects for me:
Nex-6 body £549.99
OM-D body: £949.98
here in Europe... that's a big difference, unfortunately.

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
8 upvotes
fastfreddy
By fastfreddy (Mar 27, 2013)

Good for you! Reading reviews is like dancing around on the head of a pin. 30 years ago we photographers had none of the technical advances that cameras have now. Yet we still produced images that are classic and meaningful today. I have Canon, Nikon, and now an NEX-6 which produces images every bit as good as any camera I hav e ever owned. I have Parkinson's and it's configuration is perfect for me. As photographers we need to make the technology seamless so we can let our creativity shine. Go shooting with whatever you like and love!

0 upvotes
_Photographer_
By _Photographer_ (Mar 26, 2013)

Great review.. I'll will wait for a new NEX (nex-6n)... hope that the camera will have touch screen, and better Low light / high ISO performance.

0 upvotes
KonstRuctor
By KonstRuctor (Mar 26, 2013)

Hi, I have question about sending photo to smartphone via Wi-Fi. Where I can to set up the quality? Each time when sending to the smartphone (JPEG in 16Mpix for example) I receive only strongly reduced photo (500-800 Kb), I can't find in any way where this parameter is adjusted. In your article: "Photos can be sent full size, or reduced to 2 Megapixels or VGA for easier handling." Where?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Jeff Keller
By Jeff Keller (Mar 26, 2013)

You set this on the smartphone side, in settings.

2 upvotes
KonstRuctor
By KonstRuctor (Mar 27, 2013)

The android - is settings, the iPhone - there are no settings. Ideas?

0 upvotes
OutOfFocus student
By OutOfFocus student (Mar 26, 2013)

Using primes on all NEXs is still a big pain since you don't have AutoISO in Manual mode . In general there is no significant AutoISO control as one would expect on a modern enthusiast camera.
This is really a major drawback of using any NEX camera with NEX primes, and the reason I've not upgraded to NEX-6 from 5N.
I'm surprised this was not mentioned by in the dpreview ... do you guys only shoot the crappy kit lens?

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

In fact, I see the exact opposite. My wife is a casual photographer. She wants AF, zoom and auto ISO goes with it. In fact, the only time Auto ISO even crosses my mind is when there is a chance she will be using the camera.

Can you tell me why it is better for the camera to decide the best ISO setting for a scene? If you are willing to take some control, why surrender something else in exchange?

Modern cameras have an advantage that you seem to be missing: You can have greater control, before and even after taking photographs.

3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 26, 2013)

With Auto ISO in Manual mode, it would no longer be Manual mode.
If you want Auto ISO, use one of the Auto Exposure modes: A, S, or P.

You remind me of the users who complain when a camera doesn't allow Exposure Compensation in Manual Mode. EV Compensation is designed to affect exposure in AE modes. In M mode, you already have the ability to change exposure in three ways - shutter speed, aperture, and ISO. Why would you possibly need EV compensation in M? The answer is you don't. It's the same for Auto ISO in M mode. It is simply not needed.

4 upvotes
Dennis
By Dennis (Mar 26, 2013)

Gosh, and yet sports photographers around the world rely on Auto ISO in M mode on a daily basis ! Nice of you to tell us what's needed and what isn't. So neither is A more or S mode ? Because Auto ISO in M mode is just the third missing mode where you pick two of three variables and let the camera calculate the third. Shooting sports in an arena with changing lighting where you want to maintain 1/500s and f/3.2, Auto ISO in M mode lets you set it and forget it.

As for exposure compensation in M mode, in M mode with a fixed ISO, all it really does is alter the setting at which the camera tells you you've matched the meter (and if you're only looking to match the meter, there's no reason to shoot in M in the first place). But in M mode with Auto ISO, shooting hockey at 1/500s and f/3.2, EV compensation of +1 ensures the camera sets the ISO brighter to compensate for the meter being fooled by all that ice.

5 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

>Gosh, and yet sports photographers around the world rely on Auto ISO in M mode on a daily basis !

I can't speak for them, or others, but I don't see the need. In fact, here is one from my first attempts at shooting at a basketball game. My choice (Manual Mode): ISO 800, 1/640s, f/2.8, RAW.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8368/8590393441_1d5c83a615_c.jpg

How exactly would Auto ISO make it better? I could have just as well taken that image in Aperture Priority with Manual ISO (adjusting the ISO to get desired shutter speed). BTW, if I had Auto ISO on this one, the camera would have used ISO 1600. Who do you trust more?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Mar 26, 2013)

But what's that got to do with primes?

3 upvotes
BJN
By BJN (Mar 26, 2013)

A flexible auto ISO is great. I don't use it all the time, but it's fantastic to have the flexibility - within limits I set - to have the camera bump ISO to keep shutter speed reasonable as I concentrate on managing aperture and composing the shot.

1 upvote
wb2trf
By wb2trf (Mar 27, 2013)

This has absolutely nothing to do with primes, and he is just conflating different subjects. If op meaant old manual primes, Shutter priority does what he wants. With the typical manual prime, since the aperture can't be set by the camera, setting the camera to Shutter leaves the aperture control on the lens ring and the camera manages the ISO automatically ergo manual with auto iso.

0 upvotes
OutOfFocus student
By OutOfFocus student (Mar 27, 2013)

People have different uses for cameras. I don't mind people not caring about AutoISO. But those who can't see the immense usefulness of camera choosing the sensitivity to match the desired aperture and shutter have not tried working at faster pace in changing light environments. It is critical for sports, weddings and just children running around.
I've heard "M must be manual" rubbish too many times. AutoISO is as useful in Manual as it is in Aperture mode.
What does it have to do with primes? Lack of AutoISO in manual on NEX makes particularly hard to choose both fast aperture and fast shutter speed at the same time (and have the right exposure). With slow lenses (like the kit) you can just use S mode to choose the shutter and the camera will use the lens at max aperture (which is what one usually wants) with AutoISO.

0 upvotes
neo_nights
By neo_nights (Mar 27, 2013)

I'd never cared for Auto ISO until I had to use it. It was in a situation where lights where uneven and having moving subjects. I knew I'd have to leave the lens wide open and would have to choose a fixed and fast shutter speed. But couldn't all the time fiddle with the ISO manually, I'd waste time. So I left in Auto ISO and it worked great.

BTW, that was done with a Pentax K5.

Some people may never use it (even I thought I'd never use it). But having more options never hurt, does it?

2 upvotes
HubertChen
By HubertChen (Mar 27, 2013)

I am shooting primes on NEX-5 in manual with Auto ISO. Here is how:
* Choose Aperture on Prime with Aperture Ring
* Set Camera to desired shutter Speed
* Program one of the function buttons to ISO. Then scroll through ISO and pick Auto ISO

Works like a charm, but I found it only thanks to Michael Reichmann on his Luminous Landscape site.

P.S. This is for manual lenses with aperture ring using a lens adapter.

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

@OutofFocus Student:
> Lack of AutoISO in manual on NEX makes particularly hard to choose both fast aperture and fast shutter speed at the same time (and have the right exposure).

You might want to know that M-mode on ANY camera is good for ANY combination of shutter speed and aperture, not just fast aperture with fast shutter.

Now, if you feel the need to surrender control to camera because you can't work ISO, or understand what it is, or prefer camera JPEG over RAW, then you're going to find it handicapping. Not I.

Show me an image or a set you have taken that required Auto ISO and I will tell you what you missed.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

@neo_nights:
> It was in a situation where lights where uneven and having moving subjects. I knew I'd have to leave the lens wide open and would have to choose a fixed and fast shutter speed. But couldn't all the time fiddle with the ISO manually, I'd waste time. So I left in Auto ISO and it worked great.

So you choose to adjust three parameters, instead of one? You could have accomplished that in Shutter Priority mode. Or, if you shoot RAW, just leave ISO alone at a low value (for good DR and color depth) and just adjust exposure.

Let me give you an example. Would you ever consider shooting NBA basketball game at ISO 400 with a f/2.8 lens? Or would you prefer the camera deciding that ISO 1600 would be best for you? NEX-3, M-mode, ISO 400, 200mm, f/2.8:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8234/8591767708_5749cf585e_c.jpg

I could have shot all night long without worrying about ISO. Why do you all?

1 upvote
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Mar 27, 2013)

I also would like an Auto ISO in manual mode.

0 upvotes
kadardr
By kadardr (Mar 27, 2013)

Auto ISO in manual mode is a must. You must be able on any digi camera to choose any two parameters and let the camera select the third one. Then the next question: why anybody needs ISO compensation dial on a digital camera. That is a crazy, a dumb heritage of the chemical past. Auto ISO: no worry about ISO.

0 upvotes
kadardr
By kadardr (Mar 27, 2013)

In adition: instead of ISO compensation, I need to set the auto ISO range upper and lower limit.

0 upvotes
OutOfFocus student
By OutOfFocus student (Mar 27, 2013)

@ghost:
Again what you need and do in your own circumstances is largely irrelevant to what the cameras should have. Your example has constant illumination and is 100% irrelevant. Try running after a kid inside a house with two rooms that have 5 stops of illumination difference for example ... or wedding with indoors and outdoors.
Some people shoot sports with manual focus lenses and swear by it. That's not a reason not to include AF.
Most photographers think in terms of desired aperture, shutter speed and exposure. ISO is not a parameter relevant to the desired image and choosing it is an artifact of film limitations. Fewer irrelevant parameters means easier, faster and better photography. Tweaking ISO on NEX cameras is also quite fiddly and slow (as opposed to most DSLRs). So it's a real limitation.

0 upvotes
wansai
By wansai (Mar 27, 2013)

@OutOfFocus student
Depends which Nex. On a Nex 7, changing ISO is extremely quick. It's fast enough that I could call it "controlled auto ISO". Changing the ISo setting on a Nex 7 takes, literally, less than 1 second.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

@OutOfFocus student
Perhaps you have owned cameras with fiddly layouts that aren't as friendly, forcing you to love your automatic modes. And the circumstances you describe are among the most used by me.

>"Some people shoot sports with manual focus lenses and swear by it. That's not a reason not to include AF."
As a matter of fact, I do use both, and in fact was shooting at an NBA game with nearly half of about 100 images with manual focus and the rest with AF.

But I was using NEX, and do not expect most other cameras (and all that lack such conveniences as Focus Peaking) to be useful for the situation. And focusing is NOTHING like an exposure field that is ISO. In fact, I could shoot pretty much all night long at ISO 400 under virtually ANY light conditions inside the arena. You would have returned with ISO 1600 or even ISO 3200 images, I returned with my choices: 400 and 800 for most action shots, and lower for static.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

@kadardr:
>"Auto ISO in manual mode is a must. You must be able on any digi camera to choose any two parameters and let the camera select the third one."
It is not a must have option, especially in what is supposed to be a full manual mode. But, if you prefer camera JPEG over RAW, or use OVF based system, or camera with fiddly layout, or sensors that aren’t ISO-less, then there may be a need to rely on camera’s decision.
The semi-manual modes (A, S) allow for control of one or two exposure parameters (Auto ISO is available). A-mode is my most used, since I can dynamically decide the best compromise between A, S and ISO. My A55 makes it darn easy to change ISO, and/or A. NEX-3 has programmed button for easy access to ISO.
But, having learnt about ISO-less nature of sensors in these two and newer Sony cameras, in M-mode with RAW, I see it backwards to worry about higher ISO. I can shoot all night long at a lower ISO instead of camera’s choice of going higher.

1 upvote
Abaregi
By Abaregi (Mar 27, 2013)

Why would you want auto in manual mode?
It's called manual mode for a reason, and any "manual" mode that does have it is actually not a manual mode.

You have P A S and i/Auto modes for that.
Are those 5 not enough for you?

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

If they shoot with JPEG option, and especially if they use OVF, they probably do have to rely on Auto ISO if they want to control aperture and shutter speed. With EVF, there is virtually no need for it as if exposure out of the camera is a priority, you see through the sensor with histogram assist. It may also be a need if the camera body they use lacks logical layout for quick access to change ISO.

And if they shoot RAW but still value higher ISO as being better, then they could still use either of the semi-manual modes, if they can’t change ISO quickly. It really is about want, rather than need. Or, something to complain about.

1 upvote
Abaregi
By Abaregi (Mar 26, 2013)

How can people complain about a company releasing new products?
Every one is better and makes the competition get in gear. If you want an older one good for you it just got cheaper!

There are only positives. Narrow minded negative people complain just to do it! No matter how stupid the reason is.

6 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

Some can't help it. They will complain if a company launches new products or refreshes its lineup. They will complain if a company doesn't.

7 upvotes
Underdog 3000
By Underdog 3000 (Mar 27, 2013)

If only they would release as many GOOD QUALITY lenses as they do cameras then Sony would have my interest.
Their current selection seems wanting and if you use that crazy adaptor you might as well have a SLR.
BTW I would love it if all manufacturers cycled as fast as Sony.
God forbid they cycle like the Canon 7D type:)

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

IMO, the 10-18 is excellent, so is 35/1.8 and 50/1.8. Hoping, 85mm matches them, and 20mm/2.8 does its job.

1 upvote
Pal2012
By Pal2012 (Mar 26, 2013)

Decent review and its good to know this doesn't suffer from the poor design of the Pentax models, bloatware etc

0 upvotes
HubertChen
By HubertChen (Mar 27, 2013)

I shoot with Pentax DSLR and Sony NEX-5. The NEX-5 is stylish but of poor design for photography. It is the first camera which could make me angry. The Pentax instead works like it is part of my body. I would call that great design. It appears to me you have never shot with a Pentax DSLR. Anybody I know having one loves it. I am keeping this NEX and contemplating buying my next one, but I assure you, great design is not the reason why I am doing so!

1 upvote
Underdog 3000
By Underdog 3000 (Mar 27, 2013)

I agree Hubert, I shot with both. The Pentax becomes an extension of the arm once programed (K-5 and up). The Sony NEEDS touchscreen to "assist" due to lack of programable buttons. That and other issues.

Cheers

0 upvotes
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (Mar 27, 2013)

I am a Sony Alpha user and love the interface. Tried a Pentax K20 and was fairly impressed.

However I tried a NEX5 and felt like throwing the camera on a hard floor ! I just couldn't believe how crappy the interface was when I simply love the Alpha interface.

That said I like the metal finish of the NEX bodies. Feels quite solid in the hands. IQ was also quite good.

1 upvote
kristaps
By kristaps (Mar 27, 2013)

Have you used a Pentax camera? I have a K-30, and while the display has a fairly boring color scheme, that's about the only thing I can complain about. The interface is really well thought-out.

Pentax should have made something along NEX lines instead of tiny sensor Q and weird-looking, slow K-01.

I bought the K-30 because I wanted weather sealing, OVF and legacy lens compatibility. If not for those considerations, the NEX-6 would have been on my list too. With the new powerzoom it's really compact, but has two dials, a VF and hotshoe.

0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 27, 2013)

LOL what?
Pentax makes excellent cameras that are pleasure to use, where I can change most needed parameters instantly, even with their junior models, like K-m, K-x, K-r, etc.
I cannot say the same for NEX. Moreover, I can state NEX bodies look rather like they were designed to be usability nightmare. I was ready to replace my NEX-5N with NEX-5R (I don't need that crappy NEX-6: swivel EVF is superior IMO) since I was sure I can do exposure compensation instantly now. And it wasn't. I was very amazed, at least ;)
No wonder Sony didn't get my money after that and I also dropped an idea of buying 10-18.

@kristaps: don't buy this "two wheels" idea. It's implemented in such a bad way there's practically no difference if it only had one for real shooting (unless you are using auto most time).

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

Yawn... yet another NEX? Which one is this within last 24 months? 3rd? 5th? 10th?

14 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

You're into Pentax, right? That might explain your frustrations. :D

But since you asked a question, I think you deserve an answer. It is the fourth model for NEX-series (3, 5, 7 and 6). Which camera line are you aware of, that has fewer offerings for models?

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
18 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

Nope, I actually shoot Sony.

And since you answered - I decided to check.
It's 7th release since 24 months. Not 4th.

SEVENTH NEX

If Wikipedia is right - that's only one less than Sony released LENSES for this whole system since it's creation.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
17 upvotes
Paul_B Midlands UK
By Paul_B Midlands UK (Mar 26, 2013)

You got him dude ... pointless comment from him. I'm a Pentax guy, and I wish they'd hurry up and bring out a K5 replacement (not just the tweak to bring out the mk2). When I bought Sony NEX5N I discovered what a brilliant sensor it is, and ditched my K-7 which had a lousy sensor. No point buying the K-5 as the sensor was the same as NEX5N hence waiting for a new super-Pentax.

6 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

@Plastek:
"Nope, I actually shoot Sony.

And since you answered - I decided to check.
It's 7th release since 24 months. Not 4th."

Then your argument is even more pathetic that it sounded the first time around. It is the fourth model number (you didn't understand that either)... like the Alpha-series which has had five: A3x, A5x, A6x, A7x and A9x). And Alpha series folks are hoping for an A8x too as a lesser version of A99. I'm sure you'd hate if Sony did that?

3 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

Wow.. so now my argument is "pathetic"?
Keep the discussion civil, or if you can't - leave your comments elsewhere.

I never asked which model number it is. I asked which NEX it is being released during last 24 months. Also difference between NEXs and A-mount is that A-mount actually gets quite a bit of lenses. You see - NEXes were released in 2010. In the same period E-mount got ~8 lenses, and A-mount got ~11 lenses. Quite a bit of a difference, don't you think? And there were dozens of lenses available for A-mount already beforehand, so Sony obviously should have pushed for at least twice the amount.

And that's my point - Sony is playing with countless toy-bodies (NEX3F took roughly 1 quarter till it got a replacement!) instead of developing a system for NEX users.

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
10 upvotes
Scott Nicol
By Scott Nicol (Mar 26, 2013)

Whilst I agree that Sony is getting a bit of a rep of producing too many bodies and not enough lenses, I don't think that is a fair reason for criticising DPR for reviewing what is an excellent camera with many user requested refinements and upgrades.
Oh, and there are 5 primes and 6 zooms by Sony in E-mount - these are already out and available to buy now. Plus the 2 adaptors for the 16mm and 2 excellent sigma primes... and more to come this year from Sony and Third parties. Whilst its competitors certainly have more lens options, the argument that there are no lenses for the NEX is getting a little old. There is of course always room for more and better lenses but the system as a whole is starting to mature nicely and this camera is, in my opinion, an excellent example of that.

0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

Oh... so they matched the releases of A-mount glass, at least in number? Wow, I'm impressed.
But yea, so is more glass to come for A, F, EOS, m4/3, NX, Nikon 1, and possibly: even Pentax Q. :) Market doesn't stand in place waiting for NEXes to catch up.

"there are no lenses for the NEX is getting a little old" - I don't think so. Especially when Sony keeps on flooding market with new bodies, as if anyone would be able to remember these. Seems like they learned exactly nothing from the era of A200-300-350 successors.

" I don't think that is a fair reason for criticising DPR for reviewing" - I never criticized dPreview for reviewing ANY camera. I'm criticizing Sony for it's ridiculous polices.

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

@Plastek:
"Wow.. so now my argument is "pathetic"?"
Yep. Considering that you should have a better understanding of models,. especially Sony, and how it stacks up against others. Do you also mix an A38 with A99, for example? I hope not, because that will be pathetic.

"I asked which NEX it is being released during last 24 months."
In the last 24-months, it is the second model (the other being 7-series). And fourth overall (since NEX lineup was launched in 2010), something you have been told (and you did not like the response).

"Also difference between NEXs and A-mount is that A-mount actually gets quite a bit of lenses."
I don't think Sony has launched nearly a dozen lenses for A-mount over the period NEX has existed. But, it doesn't matter. I have over a dozen lenses, ALL used on NEX, and half of them are used on A55. In fact, there are more lenses for E-mount than you may be willing to spend on. What exactly do you find missing?

1 upvote
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

" Do you also mix an A38 with A99, for example? I hope not, because that will be pathetic."
But I do mix NEX C3, F3, 3N, 5N, 5R, or whatever- no clue which one was released after which and what are differences, just know that 5s are suppose to be better than 3s.

"something you have been told (and you did not like the response)" - cause the answer was BS.
Last 24 months: NEX C3, F3, 3N, 5N, 5R, 6, 7.
C3 is the earliest from June 2011. Roughly 21 months ago (depending how you count)

0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

"What exactly do you find missing?" - From basics?
f/2.8 or f/4 standard zoom, tele reaching 300mm (or more), cheap 50mm, cheap 35mm (A, EOS, or F-mount primes in that range are half the price or less comparing to NEX), any lens brighter than f/1.8, Holy Trinity of Zooms, Holy Trinity of Primes, Pancake prime anywhere between 30-50mm. This plus recently released pancake zoom and rebranded copy of tamron's walk-around lens would be a good start for something I'd be able to call a competitive mirrorless system. Not just bunch of mirrorless cameras sold under one brand with prayers some 3rd party companies will release new glass sooner or later or people will go down to adapters.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

@Plastek:
"But I do mix NEX C3, F3, 3N, 5N, 5R, or whatever- no clue which one was released after which and what are differences, just know that 5s are suppose to be better than 3s."

I am aware that you don't have a clue. And yet, claim to be a Sony owner. The clue you're missing was spelled out by me earlier. Sony has 3-series, 5-series, 6-series and 7-series for NEX lineup just as it has had 3-series, 5-series, 6-series and 7-series (and 9-series) for its DSLT lineup, and a similar lineup before it with DSLR. Now you know why I used the term pathetic?

For the same reason that you won't count A65 against A37, you should be reasonably aware of not counting NEX-6 against NEX-3 and that you are not.

If you chose not to learn this the first time I posted this above, hopefully, you will choose it right this time.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Mar 26, 2013)

actually Canon is doing the same with their 18MP APS-C sensor for economic reasons.

Sony or the old Minolta don't have good reputation with lenses (one reason why Minolta designed and made lenses for Zeiss and Sony licensed Zeiss brand later. the Zeiss brand simply means "the lens is not good") but they do have some that are not bad.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

@Plastek:
"f/2.8 or f/4 standard zoom, tele reaching 300mm (or more)"
Two points.
1- What will be the point? MILCs cannot take advantage of fast zooms today. If a 70-200mm f/2.8 or f/4 was available for NEX, for $1500-2000, what exactly would YOU be using it for?

2- Count number of such lenses developed exclusively for APS-C sensors. Include lens made by Canon, Nikon and Sony A-mount.

"cheap 50mm, cheap 35mm (A, EOS, or F-mount primes in that range are half the price or less comparing to NEX)"
I use my "less than half the price" 35mm/1.8 A-mount on NEX-3. I have seen the E-mount version. It isn't difficult for me to see why one is cheap. Ultimately, this is about affordability, isn't it?

"any lens brighter than f/1.8"
Unnecessary. Take a guess why I prefer to have A-mount 35mm/1.8 over 35mm/1.4.

"Holy Trinity of Zooms"
There is no such thing.

"Holy Trinity of Primes"
16mm, 20mm, 35mm, 50mm. 85mm expected soon.

"Pancake prime anywhere between 30-50mm"
Like one on A-mount?

1 upvote
plasnu
By plasnu (Mar 26, 2013)

We'll see 40 different type of NEX on Ebay in 2020.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Mar 26, 2013)

hopefully not all 16MP ones.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

>"We'll see 40 different type of NEX on Ebay in 2020"

Which popular model wouldn't have that many in 10 years?

>"hopefully not all 16MP ones."

Not sure why you feel the need to "hope" for something like it, knowing that NEX has already seen 14MP, 16MP and 24MP, with 20MP pretty much a guarantee soon. :D

Comment edited 13 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Abaregi
By Abaregi (Mar 26, 2013)

You just wished they stopped making cameras huh?

Let's let the others continue, upgrade and iterate alone...
How many EOS/Rebel are there now in total?

Sony must not improooove!!

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Revenant
By Revenant (Mar 27, 2013)

NEX has four parallell model lines, from the entry-level 3-series to the enthusiast/prosumer 7-series. Compare for example with Panasonic's GF, G, GX and GH, and Olympus' E-PM, E-PL, E-P and E-M. There are only four current models at any given time, since the older ones are discontinued upon the release of the new.
All manufacturers iterate the lower models roughly once a year, and the more advanced models every 2-3 years. From 2010 to 2013 we would expect four NEX-3. We've had NEX-3, C3, F3 and 3N. The same with NEX-5, which was followed by 5N, 5R and no doubt a new model later this year. NEX-6 was introduced last year, and will likely be replaced in 2014, while NEX-7 was introduced in 2011 and is up for replacement very soon.

1 upvote
austin design
By austin design (Mar 27, 2013)

@ EinsteinsGhost:

You wrote "Then your argument is even more pathetic that [sic] it sounded the first time around. It is the fourth model number (you didn't understand that either)... like the Alpha-series which has had five: A3x, A5x, A6x, A7x and A9x) [sic]."

You know, if you're going to badger another member about what he or she doesn't "understand", you might want to do a better job of understanding things yourself: the Sony Alphas also include A1x, A2x and A4x cameras (heck, the first Alpha was the A100!). And there already HAS been an A8x -- the A850.

Actually, these numbers don't denote "series" anyway; for instance, most of the A3x models bear little relation to one another, rather more to cameras beginning with a different number.

0 upvotes
Emacs23
By Emacs23 (Mar 27, 2013)

@Paul_B Midlands UK. I owned K-5, Pentax somehow utilized this sensor much better than Sony: I have more than 1.5 stops of shadow push than with NEX. Not to mention K-5 is much better to use camera than any NEX.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

@austin design:
>You know, if you're going to badger another member about what he or she doesn't "understand", you might want to do a better job of understanding things yourself: the Sony Alphas also include A1x, A2x and A4x cameras (heck, the first Alpha was the A100!). And there already HAS been an A8x -- the A850.

You might want to ask first why I put one "x" instead of two. Sony currently does not produce Axxx cameras (for example). If I meant A900 etc, I wouldn't have quoted A9x but A9xx.

>"Actually, these numbers don't denote "series" anyway; for instance, most of the A3x models bear little relation to one another, rather more to cameras beginning with a different number."

So you'd be another one who would whine about if an A88 is launched in the same year as A58, because you can't tell that one is a different model than other, just like you and the person you're defending can't, between NEX-3 series and NEX-6.

0 upvotes
austin design
By austin design (Mar 27, 2013)

@ EinsteinsGhost:

"You might want to ask first why I put one "x" instead of two..."

In your mind, you may have had all sorts of reasons why you used one "x" instead of two (and you're right: your ambiguous prose dose invoke a lot of questions). But you initially wrote "the Alpha series has HAD" -- past tense; my understanding of English means this sentence properly DOES include the A100, A850, etc., regardless of whether you meant it to; don't get snarky with me just because you were unclear and I can't read your mind.

0 upvotes
austin design
By austin design (Mar 27, 2013)

@ EinsteinsGhost:

"So you'd be another one who would whine about if an A88 is launched in the same year as A58, because you can't tell that one is a different model than other..."

Huh? I've offered absolutely no indication that I'm confused or otherwise bothered by Sony's model nomenclature. You, on the other hand, do seem to be confused: the Sony Alphas are NOT distinct from the NEX cameras, but actually include them. Besides the Alpha logo clearly appearing on the NEX bodies, Sony's site describes both these and its DSLRs as Alphas (quoting directly from Sony's site, "Sony Alpha NEX Cameras"). The distinction you mean is between DSLR and NEX, not Alpha and NEX.

"...just like you and the person you're defending..."

Slow down, I'm not defending anyone here (in fact I haven't even referenced anyone's post but yours). It seems you're one of those people who spends more time writing than reading and comprehending, with the inevitable result that you get a bit ahead of yourself.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

@austin design:
"I've offered absolutely no indication that I'm confused or otherwise bothered by Sony's model nomenclature..." You, on the other hand, do seem to be confused: the Sony Alphas are NOT distinct from the NEX cameras, but actually include them..."

Claims don’t matter. What you speak do. And as you just demonstrated, that alpha logo is confusing you, perhaps more than the rest of them. At least they are only talking about NEX, you’re running around with the whole family of SLT and DSLR and NEX because they all say “Alpha”.

A person who can make such distinction as: “Sony has 3-series, 5-series, 6-series and 7-series for NEX lineup just as it has had 3-series, 5-series, 6-series and 7-series (and 9-series) for its DSLT lineup, and a similar lineup before it with DSLR.”

…is not the one who is confused.

>"Slow down"

Perhaps you should get up to speed.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Mar 28, 2013)

Sony do use a rather consistent model numbering for their Alpha cameras, regardless of whether we talk about DSLR, SLT or NEX. The number is supposed to tell you something about the models' position in the line-up. It's the first figure in the model number that's important:

1-3 = Entry-level APS-C (Ex. A100, A290, A33, NEX-C3)
4-5 = Upper entry-level/Mid-level APS-C (A580, A57, NEX-5)
6 = Advanced mid-level/Enthusiast APS-C (A65, NEX-6)
7 = Enthusiast/Semi-pro APS-C (A700, A77, NEX-7)
8 = Enthusiast/Semi-pro Full frame (A850)
9 = Professional Full frame (A900, A99, the rumored NEX-9)

Admittedly, the system isn't perfect. 1-3 are basically at the same level; for example, the A200 was a direct replacement for A100, not introduced above it. And the 6-series sit somewhat uncomfortably between the stablemates below and above.

1 upvote
George Veltchev
By George Veltchev (Mar 26, 2013)

Even the little G1 X from Canon showing better image quality in comparison and even better low light performance than this mirrorless Sony ... check the test results for yourself.

5 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

Canon G1X is actually bigger than NEX-6 (w/zoom kit lens attached). It is also slightly heavier (534g versus 461g).
Top View: http://camerasize.com/compact/#257,375.360,ha,t
Front View: http://camerasize.com/compact/#257,375.360,ha,f

As for IQ, don't place your bet on G1X.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

And offers OVF, MUCH better controls, more solid body and better (than a kit pancake) lens.
Quite a fair trade for rather insignificant increase in size & weight.

2 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

OVF has been dead for me, for almost a decade now. But if you want to claim your idea of better IQ is demonstrated by G1X, well, I always welcome amusement.

8 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

Read carefully, I never claimed anything like that.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

The collective you've associated with, has. Naturally, you didn't argue against them, but against my response to them. But then, may be your lame point about lens has nothing to do with IQ? What exactly are lenses, and choices of lenses, are for? To count? To look at?

1 upvote
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

I've associated myself with a collective? And that's your argument for putting a words into my mouth? Wow.... I'm speechless.
[edit] also: I never said that lens got nothing to deal with IQ. Please, stop twisting my words.

Comment edited 54 seconds after posting
1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

So Plastek, you were talking about IQ and OVF earlier, that you disowned previously, and now you're back?

Amazing.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Mar 26, 2013)

@George Veltchev,
G1 X is about one stop less effective, lower image quality, than NEX with a standard lens but depending on the handle of the cameras it's possible that you can get better image with G1 X than a beginner with NEX (not a fare comparison).

1 upvote
Ridethelight
By Ridethelight (Mar 26, 2013)

Ha Ha call the G1x Ovf and viewfinder ! also the damm camera can't focus any closer then the nearest star system Lol

2 upvotes
JadedGamer
By JadedGamer (Mar 26, 2013)

The G1 X OVF is not through-the-lens so is even less "what the camera sees" than the typical sub-100% FOV you get on non-rangefinder cameras.

EVF is the future.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Mar 26, 2013)

The comparison tool doesn't show that the G1X actually has really poor DR, which is why it scored down with the older m43 and compacts on DxOMark sensor ratings. In contrast, the NEX-6 has huge 13 EV DR, better high ISO ability and color depth than the G1X.

2 upvotes
chillgreg
By chillgreg (Mar 26, 2013)

DPR WHAT ABOUT THE 5R!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Aside from the EVF flash and control dial they are all but identical. Even Sony uses a single manual/handbook for both models. I know there's a gazillion cameras and you have so much resources and time yada... but seriously would it have been a stretch to review them concurrently?

Disappointed.

0 upvotes
Vibrio
By Vibrio (Mar 26, 2013)

If they are the same why does there need to be a different review. Surely the output from the cameras will be the same?

1 upvote
Cane
By Cane (Mar 26, 2013)

You just did the full review in your post. It's the same except for the flash and mode dial, right? What else do you want?

1 upvote
The Lotus Eater
By The Lotus Eater (Mar 26, 2013)

"EVF flash and control dial they are all but identical"

...and QuickNavi and hotshoe. They are biggies for me. Quick-Navi, especially, transforms the NEX-6's usability.

1 upvote
flangad
By flangad (Mar 26, 2013)

This NEX 6 is a really great camera, and the 16-50Pz a good lense to go with it.

Anyway, i wish Sony could add a few features, not quoted in the review:
- fully articulated screen for self-portrait
- live-bulb mode as the Olympus OM-D EM5
- "crop zoom"available for movie shooting (without interpolate, as Pnasonic do on micro4/3 cams)
- more still picture aspect ratio : 4:3, 1:1
- more videos modes: Only one version PAL+NTSC and not 2 localized versions, 720p, more mp4 resolutions, slow motion VGA 120 or 240 fps.
- max ISO-auto parameter

And we would get a near perfect camera on a functional point of view.
maybe some of those features could be some future "apps", or firmware updates

I'm impatient to see the future "mid-tele prime E-mount lens" (many people says it will be a 85mm f/1,8). I hope it will be very compact (why not collapsible as the 16-50pz?)

Also need more accessories for the accessory socket (microphone and standard microphone plug....)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Mar 26, 2013)

there are two things I don't like instantly.

#1 is the slow AF speed (same to EOS-M)

#2 is the handle of the power zoom. the level should be on top-left of the lens near the alpha mark, as the Pana one, which is right under the thumb when you hold the camera/lens correctly.

Comment edited 48 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

yabokkie - I can't see how this NEX got AF anywhere near as bad as EOS-M.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

@yabokkie:
I don't think it comes as a surprise that you don't like something from Sony, so stop making excuses. :D

Now, as for your issue with AF speed, why is it not better to have a larger sensor camera that does reasonably well with AF but works really well for those of us who are less into point and shoot, relying on Auto Focus and more into taking more control and manually focusing?

And trust me, NEX-system is flexible enough for those of us to go shoot indoor sports. I have done it, and plan on doing it more.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Mar 26, 2013)

> I don't think it comes as a surprise that you don't like something from Sony

Sony means nothing to me. all I care is good quality and good price no matter it's from Sony or Samsung, or even Zeiss (which means lower quality than Sony if a brand does tell something).

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

yabokkie,

I tend to assume that when someone participates in a discussion on a product, there is a meaning to it. For that matter, tell me one good thing about Sony's NEX lineup that you find better than all others.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Mar 26, 2013)

> tell me one good thing about Sony's NEX

why should I care you don't know any.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

Then don't complain.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Mar 26, 2013)

> I can't see how this NEX got AF anywhere near as bad as EOS-M.

I don't think they are so different. I do think Canon should be able to do better by simply improving their software (firmware), the difference between Sony and Canon.

it's hard to believe neither Sony nor Canon care to modify their sensors for fast AF readout (high-speed imager), why I category them the same. they are fundamentally the same.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Mar 26, 2013)

Yabokkie wrote:
"I don't think they are so different".
How does a factor 3 to 5 difference in speed qualify in terms of "different"?
Not to mention tracking at 10fps possible under certain circumstances vs no tracking possible whatsoever.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

@yabokkie:
>it's hard to believe neither Sony nor Canon care to modify their sensors for fast AF readout (high-speed imager)

There is no free lunch. Besides, we might be looking at the challenge larger sensors bring. If things were that easy, pro-DSLRs costing thousands would have it, whereas they still rely on predictive algorithms and a bit of Hail Mary when the mirror is up.

0 upvotes
chlamchowder
By chlamchowder (Mar 26, 2013)

" whereas they still rely on predictive algorithms and a bit of Hail Mary when the mirror is up."
And offer better autofocus tracking even with that limitation, while providing better image quality because they're not losing light through a fixed mirror...

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

chlamchowder, where did you learn that mirrorless cameras have to deal with the nuisance of moving or fixed mirrors?

3 upvotes
Mike Sandman
By Mike Sandman (Mar 26, 2013)

Thanks for this review - we've been waiting for this for quite a while. (1) The comment that battery life is better than average has me wondering what I'm doing wrong -- I get maybe 200 shots from a fully charged battery. (2) The main menu is indeed a hodgepodge and the "settings" tab is utterly disorganized. But if you set up the Fn key to suit the way you shoot, it's possible to avoid getting into the main menu very often. (Of course the Fn key just gets you into a personalized subset of the on-screen menu).

0 upvotes
flektogon
By flektogon (Mar 26, 2013)

The “scoring bars” show far worse high ISO performance of the NEX-6 in comparison with the NEX-5N. Is this really possible, or it is just a result of the different review (expectations) time? I have been convinced that if the NEX-6 IQ is not better than the IQ of NEX-5N, definitely it is not worse.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Mar 26, 2013)

speaking only for myself, my image quality tests are not stable and the difference you mentioned could be well within error range of 0.3 stops or about the improvement between generations of sensors.

I think error source number one could be shutter speed, especially for entry level cameras (all APS-C excluding the top model A77/D300/7D). also my lighting may not be stable (I switch among several settings, all cheap ones).

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
neo act
By neo act (Mar 28, 2013)

To the reviewers: Joining the question of "flektogon" I would be very gateful if You could answer this and also provide some deeper explanation. The great difference in the Low light/Hi ISO scoring bar is quite strange when the review suggests that NEX-6 should not be rather better than worst than NEX-5N in this aspect. Also the lower RAW quality compared to the NEX-5N (in the scoring bars) would be worth of some comment. Thanks a lot.

0 upvotes
Provia_fan
By Provia_fan (Mar 26, 2013)

Standard ISO HotShoe is a welcome change/addition, well done Sony! There are so many brilliant flashguns we can use and I got loads :)

2 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Mar 26, 2013)

It's not standard. There are a lot of reports of third party accessories not working for this shoe/not fitting, unlike all other makers that have a real standard hot shoe.

2 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

@cgarrard,
It IS standard (ISO) Hot Shoe.

2 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

Nope, it's not. It's proprietary Sony hotshoe. Right now it's fully supported only by... 3 flashes if memory serves me well - plastic GN20, expensive GN60, and a Ring.

Besides, let's face it: a real "standard" hotshoe died around '80s. Since then everyone got a proprietary hotshoes.

1 upvote
The Lotus Eater
By The Lotus Eater (Mar 26, 2013)

A real standard? Carl, you know full well that the word "Standard" in Standard ISO is erroneous.

2 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

@Plastek:
"It's proprietary Sony hotshoe."

The proprietary part comes from: connectors, not the shoe design itself which follows ISO. Simple fact, often missed by many. Canon and Nikon also use ISO hot shoe, but they also have their own connector designs.

1 upvote
ET2
By ET2 (Mar 26, 2013)

Argggh! Cgarrard again. This guy is stupid!

It's a "standard" hot shoe, clown, with Sony's own propriety connection for the EVF and XLR audio included (that part is same from Canon, Nikon, Pentax .. they have some propriety connections too). That doesn't change the fact it's a standard hot shoe.

The physical dimensions of the "standard hot shoe" are defined by the International Organization for Standardization ISO 518:2006. This makes it a standard hot shoe

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Mar 27, 2013)

Exactly what plastek said. Try using a 3rd party flash on that shoe or any of the accessories that work with other brands. It's a proprietary shoe that looks like all the other brands.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

cgarrard, if you're looking for company, you've picked the right person. But that doesn't make your idea right. ISO is ISO.

1 upvote
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Mar 27, 2013)

Ok I yield on the technicality that its "standard" however, its also carrying a backslider secret that Sony isn't forward about, which others will not yield too here. That is the issue with this shoe.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

cgarrard,

Sony or Canon or Nikon... anybody using ISO hot shoe doesn't need to come forward to explain YOUR lack of understanding of the fact.

0 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Mar 28, 2013)

The fact remains that Sony's version of this "type" of shoe does not support most flashes and third party accessories (unlike its competition), and is dressed up to look as though it does. When in fact it is proprietary. And yes, I think a manufacturer should be open about that, disclosure builds confidence with clients.

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 28, 2013)

>"The fact remains that Sony's version of this "type" of shoe does not support most flashes and third party accessories (unlike its competition)"

cgarrard, you need to learn what "ISO Hot Shoe" entails. (Hint: It isn't what you think it is). So, how great does a Nikon flash work on Canon?

0 upvotes
SRHEdD
By SRHEdD (Mar 26, 2013)

BTW... a great balance of a small camera that takes great pics? Nikon P7700. Seriously. Save some money while Sony gets up to speed in AF and image processing.

0 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Mar 26, 2013)

Yep good score on DXO too.

0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

Yep. For 90% of people who buy this NEX - a Point&Shoot would be by far better option.

3 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

@plastek:
"For 90% of people who buy this NEX - a Point&Shoot would be by far better option."

I'm in the 10% then, you think like the 90%. :D

4 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

Most of the people posting around dPreview belong to these 10%. So do people who belong to any other photographic community. But that's just a tiny portion of the market.

2 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

@Plastek:
"Most of the people posting around dPreview belong to these 10%."

They sure don't sound like it. Or perhaps they try to speak more for others than self?

3 upvotes
dpLarry
By dpLarry (Mar 27, 2013)

Yeah, for sure. A lot of posers try to sound like Einstein.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

Which is a good thing, instead of sounding like the typical Tom, Dick and Larry.

Comment edited 41 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 27, 2013)

"They sure don't sound like it. " - don't they? Let's do the reality check. Loads of dPreview owners are in total, blind love with mirrorless. Here is the place where people constantly complain about viewfinders, mirrors, and differences of 1/3 EV in DR or noise levels. Here is a place where people demand manufacturers to do this or that, they shoot using adapters, and praise constantly how mirrorless is compatible with 3rd party manual glass.
Yep, looks pretty much like the 10% of folks who would end up better with NEX than P&S.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

Plastek,

I can't decide if you're the 90%, or simply can't stop speaking for others.

0 upvotes
SRHEdD
By SRHEdD (Mar 26, 2013)

I followed the mirrorless trend for about a year. Sold off a D7000 (which was fantastic) and bought an Oly E-P3 and E-PL2 (BOTH fine cameras and very satisfying to shoot), and fell in love with the Oly jpgs. In a moment of weakness, I fell for the hype of the NEX-6 when introduced as being possibly the perfect combination of APS-C sensor in an Oly-sized body. Even bought a used NEX-7 to go along with it. It occurred to me very quickly that I had gotten so far away from why I like photography, that I dumped it all and bought a D600. The ONLY camera I'd even consider to replace my D600 is the Oly OM-D. The system is equally as versatile for my needs (a little more work on Oly add-on flashes please), and the jpgs are just awesome. Sony gear just gets into the process of making images far too much, and the results don't justify the effort it takes. AF is a distant third to DSLRs and the OM-D. BUT, having shot the NEX-6 AND NEX-7 side-by-side, get the NEX-6 easily.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

@SRHEdD:
"Sony gear just gets into the process of making images far too much"

If you're someone who chooses to give control to the camera. Otherwise, no.

6 upvotes
SRHEdD
By SRHEdD (Mar 26, 2013)

Not all the time, but I would like to utilize ALL that I pay for and not just manual exposure control/focus. Sometimes my cameras are used for family events, grab and grins at events, etc., and ANY use of features included is non-intuitive. The control dial on the 6 is a big improvement, but the menu system is just not good. Changing modes, resolution, ISO, and other parameters is much more user-friendly on other cameras. If there were a Nikon FM version of this camera with match needle metering and manual focus, that only shot RAW files, (for $400.00) I'd beat a path to its door, but this is so loaded with "features" that just get in the way, and it is a shame to pay for them only to turn them off for the best results.

I don't choose to give the camera control, I choose WHEN to give the camera control based on its performance in any given situation. In many situations,where the camera is purported to excel, it doesn't. And this comes from ACTUALLY USING THE CAMERA, a rarity here.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

If you actually used the camera, and still make statements like:
"Sony gear just gets into the process of making images far too much"

Then perhaps you should do a better job at explaining your point than trying to run around in circles.

2 upvotes
Michael Barkowski
By Michael Barkowski (Mar 26, 2013)

The rear LCD appears to be at least 20% shorter in height than the rear AMOLED on my Samsung NX200. That's a pretty big loss when you shoot in square format a lot, as I do. Big sacrifice for the rangefinder mystique.

Really, I think rear LCD size should be advertised in square millimeters, but again, I'm not a 16x9 shooter most of the time.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

I suppose that's why they got an EVF - so you wouldn't shoot in Zombie position using rear LCD all the time.

2 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

@Plastek:
"I suppose that's why they got an EVF - so you wouldn't shoot in Zombie position using rear LCD all the time."

You've strange ideas, but a continuous supply of amusement. If you want to be forced to use VF, I think you've earned that right. Spare the rest of us with your non-sense.

3 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 28, 2013)

Perhaps you should spare us your elitist attitude and talk about merits of the discussion instead of stalking me? Cause as far as I see you got some serious personal issue and should probably learn a little bit of respect instead of going down to personal attacks. For a beginning of learning good behaviours online I'd suggest googling term "netiquette" - suppose you never heard about it, so it's about time you learn a bit.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 28, 2013)

Plastek,

You get the response your post deserve. I would say any response to such non-sense as you spewed with identifying people as "zombies" for using LCD, is guaranteed to appear elitist attitude to you.

And, stalking you? Learn that you're posting in a public forum, and being responded to. If you hate that, stop posting.

0 upvotes
flangad
By flangad (Mar 26, 2013)

long awaited review!!! good job.
2 points anyway:
- you talk very little about the lens that goes with the camera: the 16-50pz.... there is certainly a loooot to investigate and say! meaning concerning native optical quality and quality after correction.

- You write a few things about the efficiency of hybrid AF during movie shooting... but Sony says in the NEX 6 manual the PDAF is dissabled during movies (work only for still pictures). So WTF?

0 upvotes
byhyew
By byhyew (Mar 26, 2013)

Most of the talks about the 16-50PZ is stereotype. Yes it has terrible distortion at 16mm, not unlike a fisheye, but the cons stop right there. The camera compensates the distortion at 16mm in camera all the way down to preview, so it's likely you'd never notice it. The sharpness is actually quite fine, with well controled CA, better than the old 18-55 IMO, and the start-up extending movement is no issue in real time. The build quality is also great. In my 2 months of using this lens, it accidentally got splashed by a wave. Water got in and condensated on the front lens element, but it didn't stop working. And after a night behind a heat radiator, it's good as new. Most interestingly, it has become the most used lens on my NEX-6, leaving the E10-18, Sigma 19, E30 (and E50 during the day) sitting on the shelf.

0 upvotes
The Lotus Eater
By The Lotus Eater (Mar 26, 2013)

I use my 16-50 PZ as a last resort. It's *fine* across most of the zoom range at most apertures, but 16mm is unusable unless stopped down to F8 in order to mostly eliminate soft edges and corners. Apart from 16mm, the lens is *OK*. Notice my emphasis on the words "fine" and "OK".

The Sigma 30mm and Sony E50mm wipe the floor with it, so they get the most use on my NEX-6.

1 upvote
Jeff Keller
By Jeff Keller (Mar 26, 2013)

Yes, the lack of PDAF in movie mode was pointed out after the review was published. I've updated that section accordingly. One thing is still true, though: the camera did track subjects well in movie mode.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

In the early days with my A55 (nothing but PDAF), I relied on AF for video. Then I discovered that manual focus was a better option, and more so after I got my NEX (Sony kept focus peaking out of A55, unfortunately). Now, I almost never shoot video with AF.

0 upvotes
YuriS
By YuriS (Mar 26, 2013)

Something is bothering me… I barely see an advantage of Oly OM-D EM-5 over Sony NEX-6. Or no advantage at all. Both have their pros and cons. And score is almost the same: 78% vs. 80%. But “Silver award” for Sony means only second place behind “Gold award” for OM-D. I do not understand it… Frankly speaking, can somebody explain it???

2 upvotes
byhyew
By byhyew (Mar 26, 2013)

EM-5 has a better built, is weather and dust resistant, is noticebly faster in single AF, has an excellent touch screen shutter and there's olympus colors, which is quite better than the JPGs from Sony. EM-5 was the first m4/3 camera that had image quality that rivaled the aps-c counterparts, so there was some credit there. If you check, the NEX-5n received a 79% and Gold Award when it came out. I guess that the NEX-6's 78% is downgraded because of the challenges it now faces, and probably most importantly, DpReview is waiting to give the Gold Award to the upcomping NEX-7n.

3 upvotes
franta123
By franta123 (Mar 26, 2013)

It's quite simple: awards an scores mean very little, if they mean anything at all.
They are an attempt at giving a value based on what dpr considers to be an average user for what dpr considers to be the general category of the camera. It is not possible to summarize in one number the usefulness of an object.

2 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

"there's olympus colors" - That's a disadvantage, not an advantage.
"Minolta colors" or "Zeiss colors" might be an advantage, but Oly? Sorry, just: no.

2 upvotes
wansai
By wansai (Mar 27, 2013)

The OMD EM5 would, imo, still be the better camera if you look at it overall. Faster, more precise AF, comparable IQ.

based on that, it would justify a +1 or +2 advantage in rating.

Though it would be unfair not to mention that the EM5 RAW files aren't as robust as the NEX files.

1 upvote
RobertSigmund
By RobertSigmund (Mar 26, 2013)

Does the test say something about the shutter noise?

0 upvotes
Jorginho
By Jorginho (Mar 26, 2013)

The relatively good AF for moving subject especially makes the NEX6 more desirable than any other NEX to date in my view. I think this is very important. Panasonic and I think Oly have always told us that CDAF is the future. May be in the future it will be as good, but people need it now. Smasung NX300 is also a hybrid AF system.Currently that is the way to go.
Thanks to Nikon for introducing this BTW!

2 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Mar 27, 2013)

Fujifilm had on-sensor PDAF in the old F300EXR well before the Nikon 1 system was born.

0 upvotes
tbcass
By tbcass (Mar 26, 2013)

This model addresses only one (eye level TTL viewfinder) of the issues that has kept me from wanting a NEX (I'm and Alpha user). The interface and lack of dedicated buttons, slow AF and the requirement to use an expensive adapter for Alpha lenses make all NEX cameras a no go for me.

0 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Mar 26, 2013)

And the others may see it in a different way: that the NEX has the same sensor but without the mirror taking away 1/3 of the light, thus producing better pictures with less noise. And this everything can be put in a jacket pocket, whereas the chunky SLT stays at home. ;-)

0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

Or the NEX stays at home when you got a serious job to do instead of just shooting kids playing soccer (oh, wait, can't do that either - there's no decent tele lens for NEX, not to mention issues with AF-C) or birthday parties (assuming noone runs around the house).

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

@Plastek,

So, one can't shoot action/sports with a NEX? Taken with the most basic of NEX cameras (NEX-3) on Sunday:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8239/8591496084_3d8d6f285b_c.jpg

1 upvote
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 26, 2013)

You "can" shoot sports with anything, even 25$ compact. But there's "can" and can.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

Then why were you proposing leaving NEX home, Plastek? Did you happen to see some of these images from $25 cameras you're now talking about?

2 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Mar 27, 2013)

Yea, they are somewhere next to the images from a mirrorless with unreliable AF - in the garbage bin.

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

Aah, your were speaking of the "can", where you might be storing all these action/sports photographs of yours.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 23 seconds after posting
1 upvote
RobertSigmund
By RobertSigmund (Mar 26, 2013)

I like to read about the snappy autofocus. Give me a little money and I spend it on the NEX 6.

2 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (Mar 26, 2013)

If I were potential buyers, I'd go handle this camera before buying. IMO, the build quality is not as good as the NEX-7. It's more like the drop in quality between the Nikon D300 and D7000 bodies. The camera feels unsubstantial, especially for $1000.00.

0 upvotes
thxbb12
By thxbb12 (Mar 26, 2013)

What about auto ISO ?
I wish DPR would have described the auto ISO implementation. It is very important and manufacturers have no excuses in not featuring clever implementations. Nowadays, there is no reason for not using auto ISO most of the time. For instance, Pentax and Nikon implementations are the best by far IMHO: you can set min and max ISO limits and the camera chooses the shutter speed (or aperture in T mode) and ISO according to the focal length. Additionally, you can offset the sensitivity (if you're below or over average in terms of shake) by an arbitrary amount (-2,-1,0,+1,+2). All of this can all easily be implemented in the firmware.
This review completely lacks information on this matter. From user reports, it seems all NEX cameras don't let you set min/max ISO. Furthermore, it looks like the shutter speed is fixed to 1/60 in A mode!? Totally ridiculous. Because of this issue alone, I'll simply never purchase any NEX cameras. It makes them totally unusable.

4 upvotes
doinksdoinks
By doinksdoinks (Mar 26, 2013)

" it looks like the shutter speed is fixed to 1/60 in A mode!? Totally ridiculous."

you have totally no idea of what you are saying. ofcourse it changes shutter speed in A mode dpending on the lighting situation idiot!

3 upvotes
byhyew
By byhyew (Mar 26, 2013)

Sony lets you set the max ISO, not min ISO. And in A mode, the camera will try to maintain a shutter speed above 1/60, regardless of focal range and ISO.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 28 seconds after posting
1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

"there is no reason for not using auto ISO most of the time."

There is no good reason to use Auto ISO.

3 upvotes
thxbb12
By thxbb12 (Mar 26, 2013)

@doinksdoinks: no need to be impolite. Say I have a 15mm lens @ f/4 attached and I work in A mode. On a Pentax K5, in this situation the body knows the focal length of the attached lens and adjust the ISO accordingly. It would for example set a minimum shutter speed of say 1/30. If the light doesn't allow for this speed, then it would start increasing the ISO. How does a NEX behave in such a situation? The key here is that shutter speed threshold depends on the focal length as it should. Setting an arbitrary shutter speed makes NO SENSE whatsoever.

1 upvote
thxbb12
By thxbb12 (Mar 26, 2013)

@byhyew: In A mode, can't you set the max ISO the camera will pick? Also, the 1/60 speed is irrelevant of the focal length? (makes no sense).

0 upvotes
thxbb12
By thxbb12 (Mar 26, 2013)

@EinstensGhost: read my answer to doinksdoings. If you still think there is no good reason for auto ISO, then I'm afraid you're still stuck 10 years ago...

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

>"Say I have a 15mm lens @ f/4 attached and I work in A mode. On a Pentax K5, in this situation the body knows the focal length of the attached lens and adjust the ISO accordingly... How does a NEX behave in such a situation?"

That is how it works on my NEX-3. Here is an example (A-mount 35mm, f/1.8, ISO 500, 1/60s):
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8223/8293541528_ec4b109f44_c.jpg
I prefer manual ISO in ANY mode but this was an occasion my wife was also using the camera and she prefers to point and shoot.

The 35mm lens translates to 52mm equivalence, which translates to 1/60s minimum shutter speed. From this point on, the camera adjusts the ISO up or down, to maintain the shutter speed. Similar but a bit darker conditions, same set up and ISO increased to ISO 640:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8350/8240697898_2067d7a7be_c.jpg

1 upvote
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 26, 2013)

>"If you still think there is no good reason for auto ISO, then I'm afraid you're still stuck 10 years ago"
As much an educated response as someone claiming that using a DSLR puts you decades behind.
At an NBA game recently, I went for A, S and M on my NEX-3 using a 50mm lens at f/2 (MF) and a 200mm lens at f/2.8 (AF). I kept the shutter speed between 1/400s and 1/800s for action.

With S and M modes, it was ISO 400 or 800. Combination of low light, f/2.8 (or f/2 with the 50mm) and high shutter speed was lacking in exposure. Shooting RAW, I boosted the exposure by 1 to 2 stops. Here is an example where I could have relied on Auto ISO, and the camera would have assumed that it knows better and used ISO 1600 instead:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8368/8590393441_1d5c83a615_c.jpg

Unless shutter speed is important, I prefer A-mode with Manual ISO for ideal control over A, S and ISO with one switch (ISO). I did not use A-mode above since the camera would limit to 1/320s for 200mm lens.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
thxbb12
By thxbb12 (Mar 26, 2013)

@EinsteinsGhost: thanks for pointing out your case with a 35mm lens. However, what would have been the shutter speed with the 16-50 say at 16mm? Still 1/60? In A mode, it would be unnecessary high leading too lower IQ because the ISO would be higher than desired.
Regarding your other comment, sport situations are different and of course require a minimum shutter speed. This is where manual in Nikon land (or TAV with Pentax) is very useful: you set the aperture and the minimum shutter speed. The camera takes care of controlling the ISO. Much more flexible than setting ISO manually which is cumbersome and inefficient (especially if the light is not constant).

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

>what would have been the shutter speed with the 16-50 say at 16mm? Still 1/60?
No. It will be down to 1/30s with 16mm lens, if you choose Auto ISO. The algorithm appears to use 1/f-equivalence to determine the floor.

>In A mode, it would be unnecessary high leading too lower IQ because the ISO would be higher than desired.
Since the priority is on minimizing ISO, the shutter speed slows down to the floor calculated before ISO is bumped.

In fact, it is for these reasons that I prefer to have the control. I can evaluate the best compromise between A, S and ISO and avoiding Auto ISO is a good way of doing it.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost
By EinsteinsGhost (Mar 27, 2013)

>sport situations are different and of course require a minimum shutter speed. This is where manual in Nikon land (or TAV with Pentax) is very useful… (especially if the light is not constant).
The need may be due to ergonomics, a non-issue on my cameras (Sony A55 and NEX-3) and the benefit of using EVF/LCD with real-time info. A recent example (Sony NEX-3 w/Minolta 200mm f/2.8 G):
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8234/8591767708_5749cf585e_c.jpg
Manual Mode: ISO 400, 1/640s, f/2.8, RAW – all my choices. Exposure bumped by 2-stops in LR4.

If AutoISO were used, the camera would have decided to go for the Auto ISO ceiling: ISO 1600, an example of a situation where camera’s decision making does not entail consideration for loss of dynamic range and color depth at ISO 1600 compared to ISO 400. I could shoot all night long with ISO fixed at 400 (or 200 or 800) I could have use S-mode with manual ISO. But, if one sees ISO 1600 as a benefit, Auto ISO is available in S-mode (and A-).

0 upvotes
MGJA
By MGJA (Mar 26, 2013)

Not for the first time, I find myself wishing that AF speed and accuracy was measured more systematically. Dpreview does such a solid job of fixing other stuff in hard numbers, and then this crucial aspect is left to "we feel". It was luck I read the conclusions to find out that the much vaunted hybrid system does not, in fact, increase focus speed, only moving tracking accuracy...

3 upvotes
byhyew
By byhyew (Mar 26, 2013)

Yeah, that's the lacking part of DPReview work. Maybe for the autofocus you can try Imaging-Resource. They have it in the Performance section of their reviews.

1 upvote
ET2
By ET2 (Mar 26, 2013)

All modern cameras (with just a couple of exceptions) have very fast AF in single shot mode (1/2 sec or less). Why do you need single shot focus to be any faster?

The AF tracking in continuous AF is far more important. That's where the subject is moving and you are shooting burst.

So hybrid AF does what it supposed to do: it improves AF tracking in burst mode

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Total comments: 330
12