A6000 first picture

Started Feb 11, 2014 | Discussions thread
123Mike Veteran Member • Posts: 4,643
Re: A6000 first picture

"A grand a pop"? The 35/1.8 for APS-C is $450.

Indeed. But the SAL3518 is under $200. I highly doubt the E version is better. Although, the E one has OSS I think. That's great and all, but it just isn't fun having to face double the price in lenses in E land. What gives?

The SEL50F18 is an outstanding lens.

At what cost? A minolta 50/1.7 goes for $50.

The 20/2.8 pancake is pretty good.

*just* 2.8? A Tamron 17-50 f2.8 does 2.8 at 20, and it was measured to be one of the sharpest lens, period, at 24 and 35mm (ok, stopped down) - but it's good at 2.8 and top notch at 3.2. Point is, the Tamron can compete very well against a 20 prime. Where is the equivalent for E? I'm not seeing any bright zooms. What the heck? I don't get it! Do they want E to succeed, or are they just hoping to lure people using fancy new cameras. It isn't interesting without lenses that at least compete with A-mount lenses ! ! !

I think you've been reading too many rants here by some typical ranters without doing your own research.

The numbers simply aren't adding up, in any shape or form! Now... I *want* it to work - I'm tempted my self by the A6000 ! I have the feeling that it will do sharper video and better low light, and also, maybe, hopefully, and noone has talked about this yet, the RX10 is the first camera on the market that extracts video frames using pixels from the entire sensor instead of skipping pixels. I'm hoping that the A6000 does that too. But it's frustrating to not being able to equals what I get from my A57 with the 17-50/2.8 in 2014. The state of affairs is just plain weird to me at this point. I mean...... going back to a 3.5-5.6 kit lens? As if ! ! !

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow