Just posted: Sony Alpha NEX-6 Review

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.

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.

"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.

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

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.

Japanese love it!

Anybody else make cameras that actually sell? :D

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.

You are so right! Good post.

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).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

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.

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.

>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?

But what's that got to do with primes?

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.

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?

@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.

@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?

@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.

@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.

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?

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:)

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.

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.

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.

@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?

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.

@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?

@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.

@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?

>"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

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!!

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.

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.

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.

Read carefully, I never claimed anything like that.

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?

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.

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

Amazing.

@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).

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

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.

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?

@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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

@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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

@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

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.

@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?

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.

@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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

"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.

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).

@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

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

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?

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

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.

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

There is no good reason to use Auto ISO.

@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.

>"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

>"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.