Previous news story    Next news story

Sony a6000 First Impressions Review posted

By dpreview staff on Feb 12, 2014 at 04:01 GMT
Buy on GearShopFrom $648.006 deals

The a6000 sits in the middle of Sony's range of mirrorless cameras, just above the a5000 and aging NEX-7. The feature that makes it stand out from the crowd (and not just among Sony cameras) is its Hybrid AF system, which has phase detect points across 92% of the frame. To learn what that means to photographers, and learn more about the a6000 in general, then have a look at our a6000 First Impressions Review.

51
I own it
135
I want it
15
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 604
1234
JaimeA
By JaimeA (1 day ago)

Mr. Jeff Keller:
Please make sure to mention the omission of the electronic level in your report/review of this important camera.
The level is an essential tool. I still cannot understand why it has been removed.

0 upvotes
JaimeA
By JaimeA (1 day ago)

It is confirmed. The Sony a6000 does NOT have an electronic level on the LCD finder or the EVF. It is not mentioned in the Manual either, confirming the omission. Unbelievable. However, Sony has thought it important to keep the “Toy Camera” feature ….. Boggles the mind.
Especially in this camera, thought as an improved successor to the NEX-7, itself a real gem.

0 upvotes
JaimeA
By JaimeA (2 days ago)

The Sony A6000 is being released for sale in a few days. Today I visited the Sony Store at Madison Avenue in New York. There was a display model, spanking new, an object of desire. Mysteriously, neither I nor the salesman were able to activate the electronic level (virtual horizon). This is an essential tool, as I do architectural and travel photography.
If you know how to activate it, please advise.
The camera otherwise feels perfect.

0 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (5 days ago)

That said , with the new 14-70mm Zeiss lens, the A6000 should be fabulous, but will then cost so much you may as well get an A7...

0 upvotes
3dreal
By 3dreal (1 week ago)

Friend of mine who has also old Contax/Yashica-Zeiss-lenses is overwhelmed. I have seen 180mm images. Most fabulous. I am thinking about getting the A6000.

0 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (1 week ago)

The difference in sensor size is from the DSC-R1's 21.5 x14.4mm to the video-enabled new one here which is 23.5x15.6mm. I would bet the R1 lens could be redone slightly scaled up ( like an 18-70mm Nikkor is a downsized 28-105mm Nikkor etc).

You would lose all the dust problems, and the Sonnar T build quality is much better. Nothing wobbles!!

Looking in Photozone at the lenses available for the NEX style mount, they are all so bad without exception that I fail to understand how Sony can produce optics so inferior to the R1. The R1 lens is sharp edge-to-edge at all focal lengths and apertures- everything very good to excellent. What they are doing now makes no sense to me at all.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (1 week ago)

Sony have the perfect lens for this machine already. The one they fixed onto the DSC-R1. It is MUCH better than anything they have produced since, and is a reason I treasure mine.
14mm-71mm f2.8-4.8 . giving 24-120 on its slightly smaller sensor, and usefully a bit wider on the APS-C standard size.
Hardly any distortion and fringing only at the wide end. Lightroom even had a lens correction module for it they deleted (to get you to buy its replacement?).

I can imagine it on a NEX7 style body with really fast AF, and the R1's 0.007 secs prefocussed delay.

Since this technology is proven and exists WHY buy a poor substitute.The lens is easily good enough for a 24MP sensor, and combined with the body here without an AA filter would best an M9 Leica and almost any lens you put on it- well into Sigma territory here.

0 upvotes
Droidie69b
By Droidie69b (1 week ago)

Add a full frame sensor, image stabilisation, tilt up EVF, touch screen and weather proofing and you've almost got the perfect camera!

1 upvote
davids8560
By davids8560 (1 week ago)

Is it time for NEX-7 users to move on?

0 upvotes
Simon jackson
By Simon jackson (1 week ago)

does any body know when dpreview is going to have full review and what do you think there going to rank it?

0 upvotes
lawamainn
By lawamainn (1 week ago)

DP is painfully slow, but at the same time extremly thorough! Worth waiting for! My guess: three weeks from now, maybe?

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 week ago)

Do you know when sony a6000 will be offered in major camera stores?

0 upvotes
lawamainn
By lawamainn (2 weeks ago)

Question: I`ve noticed in this preview that this camera use the same dust-removal system as A7/r. Anyone who knows if it works well?? I currently use a Nex-6, and that sensor gets littered with dust at the first lens-change after I have cleaned the sensor. And I`m VERY careful during lens-changes.....

1 upvote
Galbertson
By Galbertson (4 weeks ago)

Is there any way to find out if multi interface shoe will work with sony ecmxyst-1m nicrophone? If sony not knowing or unwilling to let us know that would be frustrating.

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 month ago)

Browny
You made statement that all of us have no right to respond to your "ugly" lens statement, that we are not modern of thought as you, that we must stay in 2008. We are just as here as you. Some of us just don't care what a camera looks like, or the lens. Just blind, i guess...for me, literally.

3 upvotes
brownie314
By brownie314 (1 month ago)

Gal,
You have the right to do whatever you want. I don't give you that right, or take it away. But with that right, you also open yourself up to criticism if your response to my statement is stupid. Just as I have the right to make a comment on the aesthetics of a lens, you have the right to say no person should consider the aesthetics of a lens. I personally think you are wrong - we are photographers - we are visual creatures. We can judge if something is ugly or not. And given the choice between shooting images with an ugly can of tuna (like some of Sony's e-mount primes), or something like a Fuji X-100s - I would take the later. Let's say it inspires me more to have attractive equipment. Go ahead disagree if you want - it is not a right or wrong thing - it is my opinion.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
brownie314
By brownie314 (1 month ago)

such a pretty little body, but such ugly lenses! OK, here comes the hoard of people telling me that it doesn't matter what a camera looks like. Please, save your comments for 2008. Today - yes it does matter. I like the pancake prime, and the collapsible zoom - but other than that the other primes look like a can of Vienna Sausage.

0 upvotes
pgb
By pgb (1 month ago)

... or a can of tuna but the body is very businesslike. Time for a change from the Canon melted butter look but that was revolutionary in its day. Strange how things go around in circles.

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
1 upvote
trainerKEN
By trainerKEN (1 month ago)

When all else fails, blame your poor photography skills on the design of the camera

1 upvote
brownie314
By brownie314 (1 month ago)

trainerKEN - wow you must be psychic or something. Never seen one image I have ever produced - yet you already know I have poor photography skills. You are some kind of genius.
I was simply saying that Sony has some ugly lenses. I never said I could not produce high quality images with it - or any other camera. Can I blame your poor thinking skills on the design of your brain?

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 month ago)

Dude, you deserve this negative resonse. Why in the world title a lens as ugly. It is wasted comment. If you want a camera or lens as pretty necklace, fine, but what a camera or lens looks like doesn't matter to those that they are meant for...image makers. If we ever get to point where what a camera looks like as primary reasons for purchase...photography will be dead. Get my drift?

2 upvotes
brownie314
By brownie314 (1 month ago)

dude - At what point did I say that "what a camera looks like as primary reasons for purchase"? I said it matters what a camera looks like. I didn't say that it mattered above all other things.
All these new crop of mirrorless perform at about the same level. There are some philosophy differences in the interface - but IQ wise they are close. So if you could have a camera that, all other things being equal - looked ugly as fu****, or one that performed just as well, but also looked nice - which would you chose? Clearly we make choices like this every day. Any car will get you from A to B. They all do exactly the same thing. But then why do we chose to drive cars that look different? How could it be if you are right that it doesn't matter what it looks like? Try to think outside of your box a little. Get my drift?

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 month ago)

If there no differences mechanically with mirrorless, why do we continue to search for one that best suits our needs. Difference between us is i don't care about how a camera looks...period.. I primarily shoot 4x5, some could say it ugly. What is on my mind is the quality and marketability of the image.

By the way, i need to apologize, have devoted reason for not seeing importance of camera/lens attractiveness...i am mostly blind, just enough sight to compose and operate camera.

1 upvote
brownie314
By brownie314 (1 month ago)

Well, back in the age of the model T ford, no one cared what cars looked like either. They were just replacements for horses. But today, the product has matured and now looks are important too, some would say the most important. We are coming out of the film age, where cameras did not have much choice in size and shape. We are entering a new era of possibilities. Looks have mattered in the past for cameras, but not so much. As we progress, I am sure looks will start to dominate how the products look. Look at Apple - they have made an empire based on slick looking design - there products do not function any better than others - they just look better.

0 upvotes
tbcass
By tbcass (1 month ago)

Really? What a camera looks like is that important to you? You apparently are not a real photographer but instead are someone for whom a camera is a fashion statement. I might add that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. All in all I have no respect at all for you or your opinion.

2 upvotes
brownie314
By brownie314 (1 month ago)

tbcass - you, sir, are retarded. You probably read lots of photography forums - in fact that is probably why you consider yourself a photographer. Because the statement you made is one I see often repeated on all of these forums - always regurgitated by a dumb old troll. But SURPRISE! When I go read a professional review of something like a Fuji X-whatever camera - the reviewer is a professional photographer - but it is always one of the first things they mention - it is a beautiful camera. "the tactile feel is wonderful" - "it's a camera that just makes you want to put it on the shelf and display it as artwork". How could it be? Professional photographers care what a camera looks like? OMG. I have no respect for them! How dare they even look at a camera and think it might be more or less beautiful than any other camera! Go back in your hole - stop reading so many forums and go get another hobby.

0 upvotes
JustSomeOldDude
By JustSomeOldDude (1 week ago)

You could always buy a giant Sam-Yang 85mm or a sigma 50mm f1.4 and put it on it, If big glass lenses suit your need. ;)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
dp62
By dp62 (1 week ago)

I do agree with brownie314. Some cameras I would never buy, simply because I feel they look ugly, although they may be (very) good from a technical point of view. Within the same category, many cameras are technically very much the same - same as cars. You will buy the one you are most attracted to, right?

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 month ago)

Hope I'm not taking advantage of forum...is there lcd magnifier loupes that fit the 16:9 ratio of a6000 lcd?

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 month ago)

What might be the limits of print size with a6000? I would prefer prints for exhibit/gallery showing, viewed as close as observer desires, whether art appreciator or pixel peeper. My work solely landscape, tripoded, fine glass, mostly b&w?
Thanks for your input...by the way, new to digital cameras, old to 4x5 film/drum scanning.

0 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (2 weeks ago)

With a good lens on the camera you should be able to make very good prints up to 16x20 - more if you use matt paper and the prints are not going to be viewed very close.

But if you are coming from 4x5 get a Sony A7R or a Nikon D800E. With the larger sensor you'll get finer tonal gradation and dynamic range and a bit more detail.

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 month ago)

If anyone has a6000 in hand, could you pull out lcd to horizontal. Is there room to rest hoodman loupee on lcd . Does evf rubber eyecup get in way? Will it still if taking off eyecup?

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 month ago)

Has anyone found an adapter for hot shoe to use higher quality microphone other than sonynys one microphone for nex 6? I am floored sony did not include mic jack., as in nex 7. Seems a given, wouldn't you think?

0 upvotes
pgb
By pgb (1 month ago)

There is a balanced XLR one for $800 !! There's a radio one too for less but I think it was limited to 8khz, ok for voice. One guy hacked an existing hot shoe mic and put a jack on it.

Yeah, no mic in makes this limited for video work without the hassle of a separate recorder and post syncing. It seems to be difficult to record reasonable audio in 2014!

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 month ago)

Yeah, read article about hacking, also on utube. But he used a mono mic. Curious if same could be done with sony's little stereo mic for nex6. I read one article they not sure if same mic compatible with a6000, but dp review says it is. I know there are third party hotsshoe mic adapters, bot not fitting sony multi interface shoe. Bummer.

Is it legal to engineer and manufacture correct adapter? There is a ton of nex camera owners who would be pleased as punch. Maybe a kickstarter project.

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 month ago)

I looked at XLR-K1M mic w/adapter. Wouldn't be perfect if they would just offer that little hotshoe adapter with audio cable coming out. We could simply...welll, i would recruit a much better seeing friend...to wire in a 3.5 mic jack.

Or, i can just buy a7, get mic and headphone jacks,lus an FF sensor. Now, to win lottery.

0 upvotes
pgb
By pgb (1 month ago)

Of course buying an A7 or future A7000 is whats behind this omission so I doubt a cheap hotshoe interface will be available.

I assume Sony hotshoe mics would go on any Sony camera ?
So I can't see why the stereo mic couldn't be modified. You wouldn't have to toss the mics like on utube but extend them as well so they can be used. It could be done a lot cheaper that he did.
Illegal, your not hacking their code but doing a very basic modification to something that you own, so probably not, and you have to buy a mic from them as well.

I was going to buy an A7 but trying this instead is tempting.

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 month ago)

Tpgb...thanks for your logic. Certainly would keep my hopes alive for a6000 if i could eventually use rode stereo mic or my zoom h2n as external mic.if you do indeed figure out simple way of adapting, sure would like to know..
Thanks much.

0 upvotes
northernblonde1
By northernblonde1 (1 month ago)

pgb. Thanks for that link. One of the best reviews ever & wonderful photographs with the a6000. Enjoyed it hugely & learnt a lot!

1 upvote
captura
By captura (1 month ago)

I hope that DPR will one day grace us with a full review. I am still waiting for a review of the NEX-5R.

1 upvote
pgb
By pgb (1 month ago)

Yes, the excellent photography made it credible. The line `iso use-able up to 8000' was very simple to understand. It looks like a great camera. The author is very talented and generous.

Comment edited 24 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (1 month ago)

To pgb
Where is this article and samples on a6000? Is there a link?
Thanks

0 upvotes
pgb
By pgb (1 month ago)

below http://www.alinpopescu.eu/blog/full-review-focus-tests-sony-a6000-beautiful-dream/

0 upvotes
pgb
By pgb (2 months ago)

Here's an excellent review -
http://www.alinpopescu.eu/blog/full-review-focus-tests-sony-a6000-beautiful-dream/

6 upvotes
Gearóid Ó Laoi, Garry Lee
By Gearóid Ó Laoi, Garry Lee (2 months ago)

It has the same rubber grip I see as the NEX-7 which just cost me €140 to get replaced by Sony.

0 upvotes
lightnfast
By lightnfast (2 months ago)

I just can not bring myself to buy a camera without in body anti-shake. I am so nervous when trying to hold a camera....and the in lens anti-shake is not the same to me. With in body, I can marry any lens within reason with a camera that has in body anti-shake. Or to be more precise, stabilization...I am trying not to cross boundaries and cause a camera flame war.

0 upvotes
Reality Check
By Reality Check (1 month ago)

Maybe you should try not to be so lightnfast in trying to get your shot. That way you would not feel so much pressure to get the shot, and therefore more comfortable shooting... ;=)

The benefit of having image stabilization with any lens is a valid point though.

0 upvotes
eph28
By eph28 (2 months ago)

What about image stabilization? I didn't see it in the review.

0 upvotes
quezra
By quezra (2 months ago)

Because that depends on the lenses and not the camera?

0 upvotes
Patrick Sarfati
By Patrick Sarfati (2 months ago)

Hello
Is this Sony A6000 sensor compatible to M mount Leica legacy lenses ?
From all reviews, Nex 6 was awesome but nex 7 with its 24 M was presenting chromatic aberrations with leica wide angle lenses
So how this new 24 M pixel sensor behaves with leica lenses?
Thanks
Patrick

1 upvote
captura
By captura (1 month ago)

The Nex7 is older than the NEX-6 by one year.

0 upvotes
JaimeA
By JaimeA (2 months ago)

Is there in the new Sony A6000 any way to save Custom Settings? In the mode dial of the A7r/A7 we see the numbers 1 and 2; there are none on the dial in the A6000. As much as I loved the NEX-7 and its stunning results, there was no way to save settings. When I did tripod-mounted panoramas everything had to be changed to manual, including the focusing and the ISO at 100. For any other type of use it was a real hassle to change everything back to automatic. Often I forgot and kept shooting to discover later that no images were usable.
If there is no means to save at least one custom setting this camera is worthless for me, no matter how advanced. I tried to find this info but I cannot find it anywhere. Please help.

0 upvotes
Lofi
By Lofi (2 months ago)

Does it overheat?

1 upvote
pew pew
By pew pew (2 months ago)

the overheat issue was fixed long ago.

4 upvotes
ChefPisi
By ChefPisi (2 months ago)

is this camera made in China like the NEX 6? I sure hope not!

3 upvotes
quezra
By quezra (2 months ago)

Yeah just like iPhones made in China are universally crap. Seriously, what kind of racist garbage is this?

15 upvotes
DGurney
By DGurney (2 months ago)

Learn what racism is. Saying that you don't like stuff made in China isn't racist.

8 upvotes
quezra
By quezra (2 months ago)

It is when said without context, as if the point of origin is the fault of the product, which is by remarkable coincidence almost entirely ethnically comprised of "Chinese".

6 upvotes
OBI656
By OBI656 (2 months ago)

with all respect "quezra " you an idiot.

6 upvotes
quezra
By quezra (2 months ago)

Ah yes, insults the refuge of the ... ?

2 upvotes
PaulDavis
By PaulDavis (2 months ago)

So is the nex6 made poorly? I haven't heard that anywhere else. Mine has always worked great.

2 upvotes
ageha
By ageha (2 months ago)

It's made well and as everybody knows it isn't made in China, it's made in Thailand.

1 upvote
Rocky Mtn Old Boy
By Rocky Mtn Old Boy (2 months ago)

Lol... we all want the clever Japanese design made to exacting German standards at affordable Chinese pricing.

Can't have your cake and eat it too... ;-)

4 upvotes
jacksond
By jacksond (2 months ago)

My NEX 6 is labeled "Made IN Thailand".

0 upvotes
tanmancs
By tanmancs (2 months ago)

My EM-1 is made in China. It works just fine. I'm thinking of selling the EM1 for A6000.

0 upvotes
saradindubose
By saradindubose (2 months ago)

Whether one agrees or not made in China stuff are surely inferior compared to made in Japan!!!

1 upvote
SVhuMMer
By SVhuMMer (2 months ago)

Oh, really? Did you have a chance to compare the same product, made in China and in Japan, or is it just "geographically inevitable"? :-)

0 upvotes
Zenvor
By Zenvor (3 weeks ago)

If things dont make in china i dont think Westerner cannot enjoy the quality of life they are living now.

0 upvotes
lawamainn
By lawamainn (2 weeks ago)

Most of our high tech gear is made in low-cost contries. Professional cameras are still "made in japan", but most of "amateur" and "enthusiast"-cameras are made in, at least assembled in, countries with cheap labour in order to fix a pricetag You and Me are willing to pay for....

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
JustSomeOldDude
By JustSomeOldDude (1 week ago)

I'm an American,, things made here in America aren't as good as they used to be. Does that view make me a racist?
I personally Love the Chinese people. I think they are beautiful people. but i have had very bad experiences with the quality of many products that are made there, mainly hand tools and power tools. The point is, that a person can state that they don't like the products made in a certain location and not necessarily be a racist in saying it.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
tudzio
By tudzio (2 months ago)

Does rear dial wheel still do nothing in A/S modes? Can I set one of the C buttons to one-click chang from MF to AF?

1 upvote
chj
By chj (2 months ago)

still waiting for touchscreen

5 upvotes
kinglau711
By kinglau711 (2 months ago)

This is a nice camera!

Now I am missing a SMALL all around lens like a 16-80 f/3.5-5.6 OSS

and a SMALL pancake (and NON 1000$ Zeiss) 24mm f/2 OSS :)

2 upvotes
pew pew
By pew pew (2 months ago)

Imagine a camera like the a6000, with A mount a bit bigger because the mount distance, but still small with all those minolta lenses available for really cheap, that would be perfect :d

4 upvotes
ageha
By ageha (2 months ago)

It will have the same size as an A6000 with Sony's adapter slapped on. No point in selling the same camera with a non-removable adapter glued on.

1 upvote
cplunk
By cplunk (2 months ago)

put an LA-EA2 or 4 on it and you're there, right now, no imagining.

Those do have the SLT mirror in them though.

0 upvotes
forpetessake
By forpetessake (2 months ago)

Y'all with adapters are completely wrong: 1) there is no image stabilization with an adapter; 2) LA-EA1/3 doesn't use OSPDAF; and LA-EA2/4 has a design with translucent mirror, thus losing light and having poorer PDAF, and also adds a substantial weight and size. All those adapter solutions are pathetic compared to the native A-mount.

0 upvotes
Old Baldy
By Old Baldy (1 month ago)

No image stabilization with an adapter? Suggest you be more specific, because stabilization works perfectly fine with EA2.
Regarding the mirror in EA2/4 - how exactly does that provide less light than the mirror in a native A-mount?

1 upvote
feztizzle
By feztizzle (2 months ago)

Got a nex6 before christmas love it not sure if this quite worth the upgrade but sony is going the right direction here. But they need to discontinue that garbage lens.

2 upvotes
cplunk
By cplunk (2 months ago)

Which "garbage" lens? the 16-50, compromised being designed to fit in my pocket? Or the 18-55 that's mighty inexpensive and a good place to start for new, general purpose users on there A3000?

I imagine you can buy it body only, and then get the Zeiss 16-70 or the Sony 18-105 G, should you need such quality.

0 upvotes
LGJim
By LGJim (2 months ago)

I pretty much agree - I took the 1650 on a NEX 5N to Hong Kong and Bangkok as a casual travel lens, and got very nice results. Not a pro lens, as it is not a "live" lens with great "bokeh". But, it is a great vacation lens, besting compact camera lenses and equal to APS-C from Samsung and Nikon...

2 upvotes
DT200
By DT200 (2 months ago)

"From what we were able to see, the camera focuses slightly faster than the previous NEX 6 but it isn’t anything with blazing speed. "
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2014/02/11/first-impressions-sony-a6000/
Need more hands on reviews.

3 upvotes
quezra
By quezra (2 months ago)

You forgot to quote the part that said, "We played with a pre-production model..." Please stick to your A3000 kthx!

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting
9 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (2 months ago)

Finally, someone with actual information. The "Worlds Fastest AF" with a 16mm (16-50mm) f/3.5 lens has a hyperfocal distance of 11 feet, AF is zero challenge for such a lens. 90% marketing hype. Yes, focus tracking looks much improved, and I am sure it is a nice step up, but people looking for a silver bullet might still be looking. I haven't used the camera yet, so I would be happy if I am wrong, but I think people are setting their expectations awfully high. I think the X-E2 was the worlds fastest AF camera last week, and their system is still lacking in AF performance.

3 upvotes
Butoa
By Butoa (2 months ago)

"Finally, someone with actual information."

The one quote that agrees with you has the "actual information"?

What about all the other previews?
http://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/sony-unveils-alpha-a6000-mirrorless-camera/

"As mentioned ,we had a brief opportunity to play with a preproduction sample, and it’s no joke: The autofocusing is extremely fast and responsive."

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 14 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Butoa
By Butoa (2 months ago)

http://www.cinema5d.com/news/?p=23407

"A Sony representative was kind enough to visit our cinema5D headquarters and demonstrated how fast the new autofocus system is and let me tell you, there is surely something exciting to be looking forward for. (the new focus system should also work very well in video mode).

"The focussing system tracks objects very accurately and it is working so fast that it’s hard to notice it’s an autofocus system – it’s time to rethink autofocus and reconsider it for video shooting. "

4 upvotes
ageha
By ageha (2 months ago)

"As mentioned ,we had a brief opportunity to play with a preproduction sample, and it’s no joke: The autofocusing is extremely fast and responsive."

You can read comments like that in almost every preview these days.

1 upvote
viking79
By viking79 (2 months ago)

Look, I might be impressed with the AF when I see it, but be assured a 16mm lens with hyperfocal distance of 11 feet is not tricky to focus. What I am saying is I will be more impressed when I see similar results with a 70-200mm or something decent.

2 upvotes
captura
By captura (1 month ago)

There will be nothing faster except the Nikon 1.

0 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (2 months ago)

What we need to be asking is why bad total cameras [not balanced photographic benefits] are getting positive profits that are not tied together. Is that a true measure of success?

Why is the bar so low, and the prices so inflated?

This is a balancing act. Not one where we do not know which state-of-the-art benefits are already proved and can combine without exorbitant costs. Who's working on that camera, and better? Why not?

Why does a new feature necessitate the removal of very important photographic benefits combined?

This class-made, disposable camera market has got to end. New cameras are bad enough without purposely hamstringing them more, for the "lower class" po folks. The high-end models with far to much weight, and unreasonable prices are not even that good yet! A new non-photographic feature, on very unbalanced camera is not progress. It's anti-competition. Are we doing our best to foster photographic competition? How?

0 upvotes
PaulDavis
By PaulDavis (2 months ago)

What????

14 upvotes
Mirko Taylor
By Mirko Taylor (2 months ago)

Maybe you should write in your primary language here, whatever that could be. I think Google Translate will help us understand better what you were trying to say.

4 upvotes
Peter CS
By Peter CS (2 months ago)

Wish it were weather-sealed! First advanced, weather-sealed APC mirrorless that also has a weather-sealed, ultra-wide zoom get my vote in dollars!

0 upvotes
captura
By captura (1 month ago)

Not at that price point. Wait for the A6.

0 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (2 months ago)

Image Samples. So much better than any NEX.

http://www.photographyblog.com/previews/sony_a6000_photos/

1 upvote
ageha
By ageha (2 months ago)

lol

1 upvote
Greynerd
By Greynerd (2 months ago)

A more advanced Sony noise reduction system should scare even the most strong hearted person. Often it is akin to pouring water over the dots in printed output. I often wish my Sony TV would just leave the poorer picture quality alone rather than often turning it in to an even bigger mess.
They up the nominal image resolution then have to scrub it to try and clean it up.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
new boyz
By new boyz (2 months ago)

Higher resolution means better quality when downsampled, even with the "sony watercolor" effect.

1 upvote
Shamael
By Shamael (2 months ago)

There is no watercolor effedct in the new rework Bionz engine. The pictures, even at 25000 ISO are not blotchy, what surprises me.

1 upvote
tecnoworld
By tecnoworld (2 months ago)

I love the design of this camera. I think that all mirrorless systems should have a camera with this shape in their lineup. Fuji X-E2 is also very nice, actually.

2 upvotes
Timur Born
By Timur Born (2 months ago)

Yes, but there is very little room between the grip and the lens. So while the NEX-6 overall felt good at the grip my fingers didn't like getting squeezed and kind of stuck in there.

0 upvotes
SDF
By SDF (2 months ago)

From DPR's CP+ report, "highlight product of the company's year so far is the a6000. Replacing the NEX-6 (and for now at least, the NEX-7 too)".

0 upvotes
Jr
By Jr (2 months ago)

Faster tracking - but faster FOCUSING? That's what I want to see. Are there focus zones? Letting the camera GUESS what you want to focus on isn't very safe. I'd rather narrow my focus to at least give the camera a HINT as to where I want focus. Like zones. Or single point. So, in single point, does it still do that little focus dance before it locks in like the NEX-6 does? That little 'dance' of the lens going back and forth may be somewhat quick, but not quick enough. I've lost shots waiting for that ... as little as it was.

0 upvotes
luis caramujo
By luis caramujo (2 months ago)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2f9ue2FJB4

3 upvotes
dynaxx
By dynaxx (2 months ago)

" dubbed Bionz X for reasons that presumably made sense to someone" ; is there an echo in here ?

Readers with a photographic [gag intended ] memory will recall that this moronic comment has been lifted from the fourth-rate DPR Sony A7 review that was pilloried from pillar to post. Either the reviewers don't partake of this valuable and occasionally constructive feedback or they consider themselves above criticism.

Japanophobia ( just looked it up - the fear of the Japanese culture that gave rise to the Bionz-X processor name ) is a strange affliction for someone in a profession that requires constant contact with products from that nation.

8 upvotes
The Lotus Eater
By The Lotus Eater (2 months ago)

Another copy and paste. DPR are good at that. Lazy.

It's interesting that Imaging Resource found the new EVF better than the one in the NEX-6 (better colour accuracy and detail is easier to discern), but DPR see it as a noticeable step down. I'm wondering, did DPR actually compare them side-by-side or did they simply look at the spec sheet?

12 upvotes
Jonath
By Jonath (2 months ago)

That's a really good point. You have to question the editorial standards that are being applied. I wonder, for example, if there are any qualifying criteria for a 'first impressions' review. It seems, if you read the XE-2 and A6000 first impressions reviews, that DPR had a X-E2 early sample, but not for the A6000, so they're not like for like - perhaps why DPR were able to be less dismissive of the XE-2's 'fastest AF' claims - for me this is poor though, for any reader these should be based on the same qualifying criteria - after all, many will read and use these comments to form opinions. Equally we have the lack of impartiality, I just don't think there is a place for unqualified, personal opinion, like the BIONZ X comment. This then begs the question, why is the A7R review taking so long... clearly not because its going through any in depth editorial sign off, more perhaps to keep traffic up while people keep coming back to check if its published yet...

8 upvotes
dynaxx
By dynaxx (2 months ago)

.... while we are commenting on the Bionz X Processor sections that are common to the Sony A7 and A6000 reviews ... you mention that Sony "claim" to have made 3 improvements ( Detail Reproduction Technology to improve image sharpening, Diffraction Reduction and Area-specific Noise Reduction ) which implies you are doubtful of their existence. If your First Impressions / Full reviews give us no feedback on these 3 processor enhancements they will remain "claims" for the rest of time.

If you do another "cut-and-paste" of this block of text for the A7R review and have no findings on the 3 processor enhancements your credibility will be further damaged.

1 upvote
captura
By captura (1 month ago)

I suppose it's descended from Beyond(s). Kinda like Depends.

0 upvotes
Hawaii-geek
By Hawaii-geek (2 months ago)

OFF Camera Flash triggering , on a small camera ... Nice ! you would think that is a NO Brain-er for any small camera. ... RX1/r comes to mind, I am not bitter :)

4 upvotes
HelloToe
By HelloToe (2 months ago)

Yeah, the NEX-6 didn't support it, either. If you wanted to trigger a remote flash, you had to buy a larger camera-mounted flash to go with it.

0 upvotes
SVhuMMer
By SVhuMMer (2 months ago)

YEAHHH!!!! FINALLY!!! An off-camera flash triggering with built-in flash!!

Sony, now just tell me: what ON EARTH did prevent you to implement it in NEX-6?...

0 upvotes
flipmac
By flipmac (2 months ago)

About time. Even the very cheap E-PL1 can do multi-flash wireless remote control from its built-in flash.

0 upvotes
mwan
By mwan (4 weeks ago)

<<the a6000's flash isn't powerful enough for much more than close-range portraits and 'fill-in'. However, it can be used to control compatible external speedlights wirelessly. <<

This is A BIG mistake. I've bought a A6000 today, it seems that the wireless flash mode is there, but this mode is not available to the internal flash, just like NEX-7 or NEX-6. Quote from the manual of NEX-6:

Wireless: This mode is effective when you attach a remote control-compatible external flash (sold separately) to the camera, and shoot with a wireless flash (sold separately), placed away from the camera.

http://sonyalphalab.com/2013/01/sony-nex-6-and-flash-photography-on-and-off-camera/

0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (2 months ago)

Someone mentioned that cameras with in lens stabilization were not capable of more sophisticated 5 axis stabilization as implemented in Oly's in body stabilization design. WRONG. Check the specs on Canon's G1 X mII. The new Canon gives you 5 axis stabilization with body and in lens IS and without moving the camera sensor around.

2 upvotes
new boyz
By new boyz (2 months ago)

So how will ILIS corrects z-axis rotational blur?

2 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (2 months ago)

Hi boyz, it's done with software. No complicated mechanical movement required.

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (2 months ago)

@Donnie, the problem with touting Canon's new 5-axis in-lens IS is that it can't be retrofitted to older lenses. That's always going to be a limitation of in-lens IS. With in-body IS, if a newer body comes out with more advanced IS, then that newer IS capability can benefit all existing lenses. Furthermore, there's no telling if or when Canon's G1X MKII stabilization system would ever find its way into any other product aside from the G1X MKII! So what you're touting is a rather hallow victory.

2 upvotes
LiquidSilver
By LiquidSilver (2 months ago)

@Donnie, do you wonder why camera makers don't do all 5 axis in software without complicated mechanical movements?

1 upvote
captura
By captura (1 month ago)

Why on Earth would you want to have both kinds of IS in a fixed lens camera? That can't be right.

0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (2 months ago)

Well, it took a few years and a whole lot of missteps and stumbling around, but this time it looks like Sony finally got one right. Good job Sony.

9 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (2 months ago)

Isn't that every camera maker ever?

1 upvote
canonluber
By canonluber (2 months ago)

I'll tell my wife it's for her and maybe I get to use it 80% of the time. beautiful piece of kit. Way better than the Canon G1X mII and about the same size and price,cheaper if you count the overpriced oled add on.

7 upvotes
Dougbm_2
By Dougbm_2 (2 months ago)

But the Canon has a built in 24-120mm bright lens

4 upvotes
saradindubose
By saradindubose (2 months ago)

This SONY looks cool - is it made in Japan or China?

1 upvote
SDF
By SDF (2 months ago)

Probably Thailand.

4 upvotes
HelloToe
By HelloToe (2 months ago)

Right, AFAIK most Sony cameras in this range are currently being made in Thailand (not Taiwan, btw).

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (2 months ago)

there are a lot of troubles in Thailand these years thanks to royalist protesters and 2011 flood. maybe Yangon is a better place for attractive low cost (salary 1/6 of Bangkok).

0 upvotes
Mylene_777
By Mylene_777 (2 months ago)

It's design is so cool but the 'APS-C' logo on front cover looks awkward.

5 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (2 months ago)

Gaffers tape.

0 upvotes
greenarcher02
By greenarcher02 (2 months ago)

Possibly to differentiate themselves from m4/3? But m4/3 already had a logo of Micro Four Thirds on their cameras. But I guess Sony doesn't want to be lumped with them or with the others. And this is also useful to differentiate their own products, seeing as they now use 'a' for both full frame and APS-C...

3 upvotes
Robert Garcia NYC
By Robert Garcia NYC (2 months ago)

hmm, no image stabilization?

0 upvotes
Zeisschen
By Zeisschen (2 months ago)

Yes, It's in the lenses where you need it.

13 upvotes
T3
By T3 (2 months ago)

@Zeisschen - whether in the lens or the body, IS still works great wherever you put it. But the advantage of IS in the body is that it gives *every* lens stabilization. Even old manual lenses that predate IS. It's too bad that, when starting these new lens systems, some manufacturers still chose to use in-lens stabilization rather than going with sensor stabilization. But at least Panasonic was smart enough to change direction, after initially starting with in-lens stabilization. Now Panny offers in-body stabilization. Maybe someday, Sony will do the same. Sure, then can still offer lenses with in-lens stabilization. But it'd be nice if they also offered it in the body, too. Having used both in-body stabilization and in-lens stabilization, I don't see any difference in performance. If there are any differences, they are so tiny as to be inconsequential in day to day shooting.

6 upvotes
Felice62
By Felice62 (2 months ago)

you're definetely an Olympus fanboy, aren't you?
To me sensor shifting is weird. I don't like the ideaa of having my sensor moving... lens stabilization sounds more suitable to me.

5 upvotes
binauralbeats
By binauralbeats (2 months ago)

Personally, I need IS in the body so I can use my legacy lenses. IS in lens is 100% useless to me.

3 upvotes
T3
By T3 (2 months ago)

@Felice62 - one can just as easily say the same thing about in-lens optical stabilization being weird-- having a lens element inside the lens floating around...and only being able to have IS by using a lens that has one of those floaty lens thingies inside the lens!

As a Canon SLR user, I've been using in-lens stabilization since the 1990's. In-lens IS is a legacy of the film era. With film, you *had* to put stabilization inside the lens, by way of a floaty lens element. But in the digital age, where you can stabilize the sensor, it makes a lot more sense to have in-body IS. Every lens now becomes stabilized. You can also now have multi-axial (3 and 5 axis) stabilization, too, whereas in-lens "floaty-lens" stabilizers are limited to 2-axis.

BTW, since Sony has now invested in Oly, Oly's 5-axis in-body stabilization is rumored to be coming to Sony's bodies in the future:

http://petapixel.com/2013/06/05/olympus-5-axis-image-stabilization-may-soon-arrive-on-sony-a-mount-cameras/

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
T3
By T3 (2 months ago)

@Felice62 - as for not liking "the idea of having your sensor moving", sorry pal, but your sensor already moves...assuming that your sensor has a self-cleaning mode, which every ILC camera now has. These sensor self-cleaning modes work by shaking the sensor to shake any dust off of them. Most cameras go into this self-cleaning sensor-shake mode every time you turn on or off the camera. So if you really don't like the idea of your sensor moving, then I guess you only buy ILC cameras that don't have a sensor self-cleaning feature!

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
whitebird
By whitebird (2 months ago)

I would bet we'll never see IBIS in a Sony E-mount camera body. It just isn't in the corporate game plan. All the whining in the world won't bring it about. Reminds me of the long period of waiting for the return of the optical viewfinder in the A-mount line. Waste of energy and words it seemed...

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (2 months ago)

@whitebird - yeah, people said the same thing about Panasonic-- it wasn't part of their corporate game plan, since they had already chosen to go the in-lens IS route. But then, Panny came out with in-body IS!

As for it not being part of Sony's "corporate game plan"...well, Sony "corporate game plan" was to buy a stake in Olympus, and are now clearly working with Oly to share camera technology:

http://petapixel.com/2013/05/29/olympus-slated-to-supply-sony-with-lenses-in-two-way-alliance/

and now are supposedly working with Oly to bring Oly's in-body IS to Sony's A-series bodies (link in previous post). And once it's in Sony's A-mount bodies, it's not a far leap to bring that same tech to their E-mount bodies.

As for your claim that "it isn't in the corporate game plan"...so you know exactly what Sony's "corporate game plan" is? And this "corporate game plan" specifically addresses the issue of IS? Gee, I guess the rest of us missed that "corporate game plan" announcement.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
JeanLucX
By JeanLucX (2 months ago)

I like IBIS better because by moving the IS in the body. We can make the lenses smaller.

0 upvotes
The Lotus Eater
By The Lotus Eater (2 months ago)

...and the body bigger.

4 upvotes
thebustos
By thebustos (2 months ago)

Sony does use IBIS... Of course that's A-Mount....

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (2 months ago)

@The Lotus Eater - LOL, you seriously think that in-body IS makes the body bigger? Have you seen how small cameras with in-body IS are?

0 upvotes
binauralbeats
By binauralbeats (2 months ago)

VGA resolution? Sorry, I know "many reviewers said the EVF is great", but that doesn't change the fact that it is significantly lower resolution. Less is not more. More is more. Personally, I'd like camera makers to spend more on the EVF than the rear screen. In fact, leave off the rear screen and spend it all on the EVF.

2 upvotes
Zeisschen
By Zeisschen (2 months ago)

800x600 is SVGA
the old one was 1024x768 which was called XGA

It's less than the difference between between HD and Full HD. A 20% decrease in dpi resolution. The numbers sound worse than it is.

7 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (2 months ago)

I agree with you, the rear screen serve e to nothing else as to shortly revie my picture, see if the repartition of light was ok, and for that I do not need millions of dots. The EVF is important, then, why is Sony not able to include a 1/8000th mechanical and 1/4000th electronic shutter like on GX-7. For me, GX-7 is absolutely the most complete camera on the market in this range. For me this Upgrade to NEX-6 is ok, but as an "upgrade for NEX-7, it's just a disappointment. All has been concentrated to upgrade the inside of the camera and the outside has been wasted totally. I will sell my NEX-7 now and go GX7, I am tired of waiting for useless "upgrades" that are none.

Comment edited 24 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Enginel
By Enginel (2 months ago)

@Shamael: GX7 has smaller sensor in larger body, that's why it was easier for them to make faster shutter.

2 upvotes
Timur Born
By Timur Born (2 months ago)

How useful higher EVF resolution is in practice depends on how Live View is implemented. On the Olympus E-M1 the higher resolution of the EVF compared to the E-M5 is mostly only useful for playback. During Live View the image is about the same on both cameras, as in: considerably less detailed compared to the final playback image.

Guess we first need faster processors before we get to see the full resolution of EVF being used. Don't know what Sony's implementation looks like, but they deal with the same fundamental problem. During Live View you cannot process the *whole* sensor's input while trying to provide fast AF along the way. It's just too much data to crunch in real-time.

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (2 months ago)

I do not ask Sony to make a mini body, do not tell me that 3 to 5 mm on each side of the sensor, and 1 cm more body will make it that much bigger. Fact is simply that GX7 has it all, and this camera has nuts, it's still 1/4000th, it still has no Ibis, it's still no touch screen, and it has a lower resolution EVF, and for the AF, I shoot manually only. The comfort to use NEX in MF was the reason for buying it. 1/4000 only is the main reason for not buying the A6000. Sony has updated the NEX6 inside, has udated and partially downgraded outside and has completely thrown the majority of NEX-7 users into the hand of Fuji and other brands. Sonyalpharumors claims today that they know by sure source from Sont that there will be no other successor to the NEX-7 in e-mount and apsc. They will concentrate on Fe mount now. So, the next NEX-7 style camera at photokina will be a FF, that's it. I care nuts about the bit lower sensor size of the GX7, for me, that camera has it all, it's that simple.

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (2 months ago)

Compare GX7 and NEX-7 and see yourself: it's 3 mm longer, 4 mm higher, 12mm thicker, not pocketable and GX7 has 2 gr more bodyweight. Then compare NEX-7 to A7, which is 7 mm longer, 27 mm higher, the body deck is 2mm higher, and 74 gr more weight, it is FF sensor, thus double size. So, then do not tell me that an APSC in a GX7 system body with all it has had been an utopia. It's just no will not to do it. Sony will find that out when most NEX-7 users will go elsewhere, but like we know by the past, they care nuts of that. It is an error from Sony to estimate that just anyone wants FF sensors. If that was the case, all manufacturers would do only that since a bit of time. Pentax, 4/3 Gremium and Fuji have not the intention yet to go that way. I can buy A7R tomorrow, but why should I, it is not what I need and look for. At an A4 size print, is gives me nothing more, except too much DOF I can not take awaqy by any magic, but on smaller sensor some magic allows me to get that as well.

0 upvotes
km25
By km25 (2 months ago)

24MPs is a little high for APS-C, I would rather give up a few MPs for better low light use. The 24MP is fine for the mass market, but I think most serious photographer would rather a better balance, leaving 24MP for FF. I fell as if 16-20MP is best for APS-C in all the noise tests I have seen.

3 upvotes
pew pew
By pew pew (2 months ago)

ye, I also feel like 16MP would been better, but for marketing reasons more is better.

0 upvotes
SDF
By SDF (2 months ago)

In 2006, I purchased my first DSLR Nikon D40 with only 6MP and thought it was plenty enough for normal use. Boy I was wrong.

7 upvotes
wb2trf
By wb2trf (2 months ago)

The idea that fewer pixels is better, always, is just a myth, perpetuated as a calling card for dpr pseudo-cognoscenti.

12 upvotes
forpetessake
By forpetessake (2 months ago)

In 2001 I got my Canon D30, and 3MP was top notch resolution at the time, and 4x6 were looking great. Then came high resolution monitors ...

4 upvotes
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (2 months ago)

I guess you missed DXO.
low light (sports) score:
D7000 16 MP 1167
D5300 24 MP 1338
This is correct. With good noise reduction especially, any of the 24MP APSC cameras will show as clean with better detail than any of the Sony-sensored 16MP items.

8 upvotes
Frenetic Pony
By Frenetic Pony (2 months ago)

So I'd have assumed, but looking at the differences in other Sony cams, like the A7 (24mp) to the A7r (36mp) I'd say they somehow manage to make high pixel density work with low relative noise anyway, often better.

Not sure what it'll do for dynamic range though.

0 upvotes
HelloToe
By HelloToe (2 months ago)

On equal sensor technology, fewer megapixels will generally yield better noise performance. But let's not forget that this sensor is a couple years newer than what the NEX-6 and NEX-7 had.

5 upvotes
Felice62
By Felice62 (2 months ago)

IF 16MP is fine with APS-C THEN 10MP if good to m43?
How many people would purchase an M43 system based on a 10mp sensor, today?
This is also true for FF. 20MP is overkill for anything you can immagine of unless you need to print 10'x15' yet how many > 20MP ff camerras you see around?
Nex 7 was a great example of oversized APS-C. And A6000 should do better, IMO.

3 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (2 months ago)

there's little nothing we can do about that...t.here's still plenty of consumers that there is no progress without a jump in MP. As can be taken from the sensor of the Nikon Df, bigger pixels still matter.

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (2 months ago)

agree with you, a GX7 type camera with the 20 mpix chip, that's the way to go.

I hope that all those that defend high pixel density here are the same that defended with all their energy the super expensive sensor of the Nikon DF that matches almost the one of the Nikon D40.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
SDF
By SDF (2 months ago)

Not really. Maybe a bit high for a tiny m4/3 sensor but not for current APS-C and Fullframe sensors.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 604
1234