Are you giving up your DSLR?

USACanuck

Senior Member
Messages
1,270
Reaction score
7
Location
San Diego, US
The a6000 is the closest thing to a DSLR that isn't a DSLR that I've ever used.. However, I'm still holding onto my a700 because of two lenses that don't have e-mount equivalents: 28-75 f/2.8 and 70-300G SSM. Maybe I can find a la-ea2 to get me by. I have the la-ea1 but losing PDAF with the 70-300 is a nightmare.
 
I just ordered theA6000 but until I get some time in wth it a print a few 13x19 prints and look at image quality I think I will keep my 5D2 and ally L lens.
 
I just started photography, and am glad I got into it when I did. It looks like an exciting time for mirrorless, and I personally see no need to get into dslr if you don't already have a setup.
 
Yup I am indeed, I've just put my 5D Mkiii up for sale on another forum. For what I need, the a6000 will (hopefully) do exactly what I need. I did have someone ask why I don't just get a smaller DSLR but for me a smaller mirrorless system makes much more sense for my requirements.
 
I just couldn't get rid of my canon just now... I rely on on camera speedlight for some work , plus I did some sport shots recently and the Canon kicked the Nex ass, but that may be down to being more familiar with my eos. Plus the no auto iso in manual is a big negative.

I think the focus peaking and the small size of camera is great though, it certainly bests my other camera X10 in use and image quality.

Wish I could use it as a backup for event photography as its so light, but the speedlight situation
means I wont use for any paid work.
 
Sorry just realised yoy are talking about A6000 and not just nex cameras in general. Im intereted to know if its a dslr killer too.
 
Not yet. At the moment, DSLR is still faster, more robust and A mount lenses are also faster and has more selection. However, I believe that in the future, Sony will be able to get rid of the mirror in their SLT bodies but still provide same level of speed and form factor. In fact, in film days, the only reason to use a flipping mirror is to reflect some light to the AF sensors and light to the optical view finder. If the AF sensors could be placed directly on the image sensor, it is just natural that the mirror is eliminated and performance is even improved.

When that time comes, the question is: Do we still call these DSLR?
 
Last edited:
My DSLR has had a month-long break as I've been enjoying playing with the new A6000 - and it'll get a little more rest as it usually does during the summer, as I tend to bring the lighter birding rigs out in the summer heat...but the DSLR still has some advantages for when I'm willing to lug the weight around - the buffer & battery life, controls, balance and weight with long lenses, sensor-based stabilization, and just the lenses I have for it which I can't get even close to with e-mount. I'm so happy the A6000 closed the gap for focus speed and continuous focus, as it makes it that much more of a viable second body and alternate choice in the summer when birding...come winter migration, the DSLR comes out to play a lot more, with the big long primes and 600mm lenses.
 
I just started photography, and am glad I got into it when I did. It looks like an exciting time for mirrorless, and I personally see no need to get into dslr if you don't already have a setup.
 
I did already, but it wasn't too hard for me, as my DSLR was a somewhat aging Canon XTi, my wide-angle Sigma 10-20 was stolen, and other than the kit lens, my only serious investment was a Canon EF 50 f/1.4.

My employer provided me with the a6000, and I sold ALL of my Canon gear for just enough to cover the cost of the Sony 35 f/1.8. So, from my selfish perspective (i.e., disregarding my employer's investment), it was an even trade for me.
 
I did
 
The a6000 is the closest thing to a DSLR that isn't a DSLR that I've ever used.. However, I'm still holding onto my a700 because of two lenses that don't have e-mount equivalents: 28-75 f/2.8 and 70-300G SSM. Maybe I can find a la-ea2 to get me by. I have the la-ea1 but losing PDAF with the 70-300 is a nightmare.
 
The a6000 is the closest thing to a DSLR that isn't a DSLR that I've ever used.. However, I'm still holding onto my a700 because of two lenses that don't have e-mount equivalents: 28-75 f/2.8 and 70-300G SSM. Maybe I can find a la-ea2 to get me by. I have the la-ea1 but losing PDAF with the 70-300 is a nightmare.
 
I am keeping them all. Each has a special place and strong points. They don't take up much room.
 
No, there's no point to giving up my DSLR. It's a beloved old, lo-mileage Olympus E-1 for which I have four excellent lenses. There is hardly any money in selling it and it still takes fantastic photographs. The lenses also work very nicely on my Olympus E-M1. Might as well keep the whole kit. :-)

The Sony A7 is surrogate for a compact modern digital SLR body. I use it exclusively with a little kit of older Leica R and Nikkor SLR lenses. It does a very nice job.
 
I gave up my Nikon D200 & D80 a long time ago - for me my NEX-5 and NEX-7 made them obsoleate very quickly - having it with you has great value
 
I'm continuing to use an SLR for specialized shots for a very similar reason. There simply aren't enough native E-mount lenses yet. Only one fisheye converter, and no midrange zooms with a f/2.8 constant aperture. Image quality and autofocus speed don't seem to take a hit with the LA-EA2/LA-EA4, but of course photographers will eventually want to ditch the bulky adapter.

But Sony has definitely worked hard to bring very high-quality glass to their E-mount cameras, especially the new FE lenses.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top