why buy e-mount camera

J

Jay

Guest
I take pictures and videos of my kids in the house and at events.

I want the perfect camera where everything is sharp and clear while only using auto. I never really set out to want to learn anything other than point and shoot. But sometimes pictures are too noisy or white balance is bad or just blurry. There never seems to be a camera that provides this just right of everything in auto mode.

I have a65 with sigma 2470 2.8. I am somewhat satisfied but not really. I am intrigued with nex7/6/6000, but I never considered them before due to lack of ibis.

Do I stay where I am or do I try something else?

Thanks in advance!
 
Oh so you think pdaf will outperform hybrid?
Yes, in terms of speed.
Hybrid across most of the frame with the a6000 is what I was thinking would be the ticket. It's a smaller setup than my a65 setup.
Earlier in your post, you didn't really complain about size, which to me would be a major incentive for a mirrorless solution. But the problems that you report having suggest that mirrorless could make your issue worse.
But I am unclear about a6000 using f4 and iso1600/3200 indoor usage. I don't like the a65 iso 3200.
It's all tradeoffs, there are other cameras that are less noisy at 3200, but once again, I am responding to your blur issue. I think blur is less manageable than noise.
As for rx100, I do find that my a65 2.8 is much better in quality and hit rate. Even so, I wish it were better and that I could just use auto.
Give up on auto. You need to "grow a pair" (by which I mean setting aperture and shutter speed yourself). If auto selects a speed that is too slow, you will get motion blur and possibly camera shake blur where you don't want it. If it selects a DOF that is too shallow, you may not have acceptable sharpness where you need it.
I am reluctant to do raw.... [etc etc]
Let's not got started on an unrelated subject. We are just talking about getting more keepers from your photos, so let's stick to jpegs.
I guess my question is will the a6000 with 18105pz (or sel1670z) be my answer? I've already ruled out any cdaf camera (unless I shouldnt?).
Like I said before true PDAF is still king. Don't be impressed by the hybrid focusing systems. They are impressive indeed in terms of how far they have come, or how they are better than the previous generation, at least in some lighting conditions--but in absolute terms, they still don't beat a good dedicated PDAF DSLR. And don't let the fact that the hybrid solutions also incorporate "PDAF" confuse you. There is a similarity in the principle only, but there is a huge difference in the implementation. PDAF != PDAF.
Also if u look at my gear list you'll see that I have had 2 sony primes. They were just too limiting. I've realized that I prefer to use just 1 lense.
For which purpose I recommend the new lens coming out in A mount which is a brighter.

You need to establish the source of your "blur". Are you:
  • focusing on the wrong area?
  • releasing the shutter before focus is acquired?
  • using too slow a shutter speed for the subject motion?
  • too slow a shutter speed for handholding your camera?
  • suffering from extreme focus-recompose?
  • too shallow a DOF for the intended range of subject
  • have a miscallibrated lens that back or front focuses?
 
I thought I already had an expensive compact that would do the trick (rx100).
 
I think the blur is the result of getting the green square on the wrong item. So to me it seems like an issue with the lack of focus points. Is this thought valid? I used to just point and shoot but in my readings on this I believe I remember someone saying that the focus will be wherever the green box ends up on???
 
I think the blur is the result of getting the green square on the wrong item. So to me it seems like an issue with the lack of focus points. Is this thought valid? I used to just point and shoot but in my readings on this I believe I remember someone saying that the focus will be wherever the green box ends up on???
then make sure the "green square" is on what you want to focus

Or really, like everyone else is trying to tell you, learn to use your damn camera
 
Last edited:
I think the blur is the result of getting the green square on the wrong item. So to me it seems like an issue with the lack of focus points. Is this thought valid? I used to just point and shoot but in my readings on this I believe I remember someone saying that the focus will be wherever the green box ends up on???
Ok, let's see if this is the case. If so, the issue is blur, but of focusing on the wrong thing. If this is the case, your picture isn't really blurry at all. It's just focused on something else, like the wallpaper behind your subject, for example.

Now we have to pick a camera, say the A65 (not exactly the right forum for this), and see what focusing mode you are using, so we know how this green box is placed. Is it face recognition, multi-focus? Centered focus? Movable spot, where you are manually moving the spot? Is it initially set on something and then tracking the subject?

Towards this end, you should post some representative shots, tell us how you are configured for focus. Is this an iAuto mode where everything, including focus is determined for you? You might do better with a centered focus/recompose method, since this will give pretty unambiguous results, especially if you subject remains close to the center of the photo and isn't too close to the camera.
 
I take pictures and videos of my kids in the house and at events.

I want the perfect camera where everything is sharp and clear while only using auto. I never really set out to want to learn anything other than point and shoot. But sometimes pictures are too noisy or white balance is bad or just blurry. There never seems to be a camera that provides this just right of everything in auto mode.

I have a65 with sigma 2470 2.8. I am somewhat satisfied but not really. I am intrigued with nex7/6/6000, but I never considered them before due to lack of ibis.

Do I stay where I am or do I try something else?

Thanks in advance!
I don't mean to pile on ... but if you want great pictures, you have to be willing to learn how to take them. An auto mode will -never- be good enough if you're critical about the pictures, because there's no one "right" way to take a photo. Is freezing motion what matters? Getting a lot of things at different distances sharp? Getting a nice background blur? There are tradeoffs made in every photo -- choosing a lot of depth of field in the photo also means losing a lot of light (for instance), and therefore having to slow down the shutter to the point where motion may cause blur. Only you'll know what matters to you for a given situation.

Auto modes already to an impressive job of guessing what settings might be appropriate for an environment, but they can't read your mind.

Not everyone has to be a great photographer, or even a good photographer. It's not a big priority for a lot of people. But if want good photos, you have to learn how to take them. Another camera's auto mode isn't going to be leaps and bounds "better." It might be slightly different in terms of how it applies its AI, but it's still going to miss the mark for you unless you can download your brain into its memory.

(And if you can, that'll be AWESOME. I want that camera.)

It's like anything else -- you decide how much you care about it, but if you care a lot, you've got to be willing to put a lot of work in. If you don't, that's fine, but don't expect amazing results.

You don't have to go whole hog into it right away. You can learn some very basic concepts and radically improve what you're getting WHILE letting the camera do a lot of work.

Lou's Camera Stuff 101:

* Work in shutter priority some of the time, especially when stuff's moving: Generally keep the shutter to 1/focal length or faster (meaning if you've got a 50mm focal length, use 1/50s shutter or faster). You can get away with slower if the lens has stabilization, but it's still a good rule of thumb. Trying to get something moving fast? Make the shutter even faster -- somewhere between 1/500 and 1/4000. Faster's better for freezing motion. The camera will do the rest for you. Faster shutters mean less light. If the camera can't get a bright enough image with the shutter you think you need, it might be time for flash.

* Work in aperture priority mode some of the time, especially when stuff's not moving: Again, the camera can set everything else for you. Small F number = small depth of field. So if you want a cool shot where your subject is in focus but the black is blurred out, keep the F number small. Too small may make it hard to get the whole subject in focus (which can still be nice). Experiment. Most lenses will be sharper "stopped down" (bigger F number) than "wide open" (small F number), even at the focal point. But I don't think your blurriness problem is sharpness in those terms -- it's not getting a good focus or suffering motion blur, so don't worry about that for now. Still, around F5.6 is probably good for most subjects at a reasonable viewing distance to be nice and in focus with some good isolation from the background.

Bonus concept: You'll notice as the F number gets bigger, the shutter speed gets slower (or vice versa) in either mode, all other things being equal. Not happy about that? Hit the ISO control and set something high, but be prepared for some noise in the photo. Don't worry about it too much if you're not doing big prints.

If you get comfortable with those two concepts, you'll have MUCH more control over your photos, without having to dive deep into the world of photography physics, and while still letting the camera do most of the work while you tell it what matters most. A little knowledge can go a long way, and doesn't have to be overwhelming.
 
I think the blur is the result of getting the green square on the wrong item. So to me it seems like an issue with the lack of focus points. Is this thought valid? I used to just point and shoot but in my readings on this I believe I remember someone saying that the focus will be wherever the green box ends up on???
then make sure the "green square" is on what you want to focus

Or really, like everyone else is trying to tell you, learn to use your damn camera
Sorry I asked.
 
Side note: You seem to already have a toehold in this world. You know what IBIS is, you know that a wider lens is brighter. It doesn't take much to apply that knowledge and at least get control over the basics. You're 2/3 of the way there. Don't worry about changing up cameras ... the ones you have are excellent in many situations, and if you're not getting great results out of them, another camera isn't going to be the solution.
 
I take pictures and videos of my kids in the house and at events.

I want the perfect camera where everything is sharp and clear while only using auto. I never really set out to want to learn anything other than point and shoot. But sometimes pictures are too noisy or white balance is bad or just blurry. There never seems to be a camera that provides this just right of everything in auto mode.

I have a65 with sigma 2470 2.8. I am somewhat satisfied but not really. I am intrigued with nex7/6/6000, but I never considered them before due to lack of ibis.

Do I stay where I am or do I try something else?

Thanks in advance!
I don't mean to pile on ... but if you want great pictures, you have to be willing to learn how to take them. An auto mode will -never- be good enough if you're critical about the pictures, because there's no one "right" way to take a photo. Is freezing motion what matters? Getting a lot of things at different distances sharp? Getting a nice background blur? There are tradeoffs made in every photo -- choosing a lot of depth of field in the photo also means losing a lot of light (for instance), and therefore having to slow down the shutter to the point where motion may cause blur. Only you'll know what matters to you for a given situation.

Auto modes already to an impressive job of guessing what settings might be appropriate for an environment, but they can't read your mind.

Not everyone has to be a great photographer, or even a good photographer. It's not a big priority for a lot of people. But if want good photos, you have to learn how to take them. Another camera's auto mode isn't going to be leaps and bounds "better." It might be slightly different in terms of how it applies its AI, but it's still going to miss the mark for you unless you can download your brain into its memory.

(And if you can, that'll be AWESOME. I want that camera.)

It's like anything else -- you decide how much you care about it, but if you care a lot, you've got to be willing to put a lot of work in. If you don't, that's fine, but don't expect amazing results.

You don't have to go whole hog into it right away. You can learn some very basic concepts and radically improve what you're getting WHILE letting the camera do a lot of work.

Lou's Camera Stuff 101:

* Work in shutter priority some of the time, especially when stuff's moving: Generally keep the shutter to 1/focal length or faster (meaning if you've got a 50mm focal length, use 1/50s shutter or faster). You can get away with slower if the lens has stabilization, but it's still a good rule of thumb. Trying to get something moving fast? Make the shutter even faster -- somewhere between 1/500 and 1/4000. Faster's better for freezing motion. The camera will do the rest for you. Faster shutters mean less light. If the camera can't get a bright enough image with the shutter you think you need, it might be time for flash.

* Work in aperture priority mode some of the time, especially when stuff's not moving: Again, the camera can set everything else for you. Small F number = small depth of field. So if you want a cool shot where your subject is in focus but the black is blurred out, keep the F number small. Too small may make it hard to get the whole subject in focus (which can still be nice). Experiment. Most lenses will be sharper "stopped down" (bigger F number) than "wide open" (small F number), even at the focal point. But I don't think your blurriness problem is sharpness in those terms -- it's not getting a good focus or suffering motion blur, so don't worry about that for now. Still, around F5.6 is probably good for most subjects at a reasonable viewing distance to be nice and in focus with some good isolation from the background.

Bonus concept: You'll notice as the F number gets bigger, the shutter speed gets slower (or vice versa) in either mode, all other things being equal. Not happy about that? Hit the ISO control and set something high, but be prepared for some noise in the photo. Don't worry about it too much if you're not doing big prints.

If you get comfortable with those two concepts, you'll have MUCH more control over your photos, without having to dive deep into the world of photography physics, and while still letting the camera do most of the work while you tell it what matters most. A little knowledge can go a long way, and doesn't have to be overwhelming.
Thanks I appreciate your time. I'll absorb this.
 
In summary I started this out since I had read that the a6000 was a great advancement in camera technology and performance. Hence, I wondered if I should move to this. Despite still needing to learn lots about taking pictures, my questions are if the a6000 will improve things without a change in photographer ability.

So far I'm getting an answer of 'No'.

Anybody think otherwise?
 
In summary I started this out since I had read that the a6000 was a great advancement in camera technology and performance. Hence, I wondered if I should move to this. Despite still needing to learn lots about taking pictures, my questions are if the a6000 will improve things without a change in photographer ability.

So far I'm getting an answer of 'No'.

Anybody think otherwise?
I think that's about right. The big advancement in the a6000 is that its autofocus is way faster than you typically see in a mirrorless camera. So it's better for sports photos that a typical mirrorless or compact, for instance. But it doesn't sound like that's what's holding you back. It only makes sense to spend the money on it if it scratches your particular itch, if it solves a particular problem for you -- and it doesn't sound like that would be the case. Even if AF was your problem, it's not going to produce much better photos for you unless you learn how to apply it well.
 
In summary I started this out since I had read that the a6000 was a great advancement in camera technology and performance.
It is a nice advancement--for an APS-C mirrorless camera. You have a A65, which is already up there in the focus performance department. (Though there are still faster models, of course).
 
I am curious to see what the a77ii will be.

Thanks for everyone's education....except for the 1 rude guy.
 
Yep, that a77i will fix your issues no problem at all

why don't you try sport mode if your pics are blurry.
 
From what you are shooting and and your unhappiness with the RX 100 I suggest you consider a superzoom (HEEERE come the trolls!!)

for kids they offer a chance to get in really close. You do have to plan your shot a bit and anticipate teh action since these cameras do not recycle but they really excel at the long end.

The Sony e mount has a lot going for it but it "Fall short at the long end" There are issues with its mount strength assuming you can afford the monstrous glass you need to do what you can do with a superzoom.

Look for one with a hot shoe to so you can do bounce flash when photographing children indoors or in low light.

You won't be able to make billboard size prints of your kids playing with a black cat in a coal bin at night by available light but for photobooks and on-lime sharing the Fujifilm, Panasonic Nikon and Canon may give yuo a lot more satisfaction. These cameras have excellent full auto modes.

You might also consider a travel zoom. These use the same small sensor but are a bit less capable but still have wider zoom range than you have now. Their advantage is that they are small so you always can have them handy. My daughter uses her son's instead of her Nikon DLSr for our grandson. Buy the travel zoom for home and the superzoom for outings and longer trips.

I am about to leave on a two week trip. I'll be taking my superzoom and my Nex 7 with SEL 1018. My wife will have her rusty travel zoom which I may borrow for early morning jogs. I take my superzoomwhen I visit children and grand children.

I love my Nex and it has been great to use with my "retired" glass but for me its not so great for kids.
 
I take pictures and videos of my kids in the house and at events.

I want the perfect camera where everything is sharp and clear while only using auto. I never really set out to want to learn anything other than point and shoot. But sometimes pictures are too noisy or white balance is bad or just blurry. There never seems to be a camera that provides this just right of everything in auto mode.

I have a65 with sigma 2470 2.8. I am somewhat satisfied but not really. I am intrigued with nex7/6/6000, but I never considered them before due to lack of ibis.

Do I stay where I am or do I try something else?

Thanks in advance!
The A6000 in iAuto+ mode will most likely satisfy you the most: it has fastest AF, lacks the pellicle mirror, has newer sensor, and has a faster in-camera processor (better WB).

As to results: the 24Mp A65 with f/2.8 zoom lens will be somewhat similar to the 24Mp A6000 with f/4 zoom lens, and the 24Mp Nex-7 will trail because of lower ISO ability (although still above A65).

Get a fast prime lens for your A65 first, e.g. the SAL35F18. I know, f/1.8 is only one stop past f/2.8, but this may be all that you need.

The same lens on the A6000, the SEL35F18, is a lot more expensive. But if you were to switch from A65 + A35 to A6000 + E35, you'd get better low light response.

It could be worth it in your case, but I reckon that all you need for now is a faster prime lens....
 
I take pictures and videos of my kids in the house and at events.

I want the perfect camera where everything is sharp and clear while only using auto. I never really set out to want to learn anything other than point and shoot. But sometimes pictures are too noisy or white balance is bad or just blurry. There never seems to be a camera that provides this just right of everything in auto mode.

I have a65 with sigma 2470 2.8. I am somewhat satisfied but not really. I am intrigued with nex7/6/6000, but I never considered them before due to lack of ibis.

Do I stay where I am or do I try something else?

Thanks in advance!
The A6000 in iAuto+ mode will most likely satisfy you the most: it has fastest AF, lacks the pellicle mirror, has newer sensor, and has a faster in-camera processor (better WB).

As to results: the 24Mp A65 with f/2.8 zoom lens will be somewhat similar to the 24Mp A6000 with f/4 zoom lens, and the 24Mp Nex-7 will trail because of lower ISO ability (although still above A65).

Get a fast prime lens for your A65 first, e.g. the SAL35F18. I know, f/1.8 is only one stop past f/2.8, but this may be all that you need.

The same lens on the A6000, the SEL35F18, is a lot more expensive. But if you were to switch from A65 + A35 to A6000 + E35, you'd get better low light response.

It could be worth it in your case, but I reckon that all you need for now is a faster prime lens....

--
Cheers,
Henry
Thanks. I had to sal35f18, but I found that I really needed the ability to zoom. It was just too limiting.
 
I take pictures and videos of my kids in the house and at events.

I want the perfect camera where everything is sharp and clear while only using auto. I never really set out to want to learn anything other than point and shoot. But sometimes pictures are too noisy or white balance is bad or just blurry. There never seems to be a camera that provides this just right of everything in auto mode.

I have a65 with sigma 2470 2.8. I am somewhat satisfied but not really. I am intrigued with nex7/6/6000, but I never considered them before due to lack of ibis.

Do I stay where I am or do I try something else?

Thanks in advance!
The A6000 in iAuto+ mode will most likely satisfy you the most: it has fastest AF, lacks the pellicle mirror, has newer sensor, and has a faster in-camera processor (better WB).

As to results: the 24Mp A65 with f/2.8 zoom lens will be somewhat similar to the 24Mp A6000 with f/4 zoom lens, and the 24Mp Nex-7 will trail because of lower ISO ability (although still above A65).

Get a fast prime lens for your A65 first, e.g. the SAL35F18. I know, f/1.8 is only one stop past f/2.8, but this may be all that you need.

The same lens on the A6000, the SEL35F18, is a lot more expensive. But if you were to switch from A65 + A35 to A6000 + E35, you'd get better low light response.

It could be worth it in your case, but I reckon that all you need for now is a faster prime lens....
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top