Reading mode: Light Dark

V2/70-300cx vs A6k/ea2/70-300G

Go to last post
jack scholl

jack scholl

Veteran Member
Messages
4,571
Reaction score
1
This is a cross post with the Nikon 1 Forum. Thread is linked:

V2/70-300cx vs A6k/ea2/70-300G

We just got a the 70-300 cx lens and rented a V2 for comparisons with our Sony A6000 system. The intent was to gain access to a longer telephoto and perhaps a faster AF system for BIF shooting. The first thing we did was to put both BIF kits into P mode (no birds in sight) and take some...
www.dpreview.com www.dpreview.com

Comments are welcomed . . .

Thanks,

Jack
 
How about you do a comparison of ISO 3,200 pictures? Or sunsets at ISO 100? Why particularly tele shooting and nothing else? Why use P? Why no tripod? You're not even controlling for the parameters you seem to want to compare properly.

I would agree that getting a crop camera for super tele makes complete sense for an amateur. I would even go further down the line and recommend a superzoom like the FZ1000 which is cheaper than the new CX 70-300, if you can live on a shorter reach.
 
Last edited:
It totally goes beyond me why you would want to call names to the topic starter and anyone who choses a small sensor for tele and macro work. Which is nonsense btw as there are photographers out there making a living from nature photography who do just that: use a small 1 inch sensor for portable telework. Not exclusively of course but the system has a place as a walk around nature camera. This topic is about testing a set up suitable for photographing birds in flight. You will need something around 800mm then. To me it is not surprising that the Nikon V2 totally blows away the A6000 here despite the fact that one should be able to crop the bigger sensor to 1 format as both lenses are 300mm. Apparently it doesn't work that way probably due to the better optics and VR of the (expensive) Nikon lens.
 
gerardeux said:
It totally goes beyond me why you would want to call names to the topic starter and anyone who choses a small sensor for tele and macro work. Which is nonsense btw as there are photographers out there making a living from nature photography who do just that: use a small 1 inch sensor for portable telework. Not exclusively of course but the system has a place as a walk around nature camera. This topic is about testing a set up suitable for photographing birds in flight. You will need something around 800mm then. To me it is not surprising that the Nikon V2 totally blows away the A6000 here despite the fact that one should be able to crop the bigger sensor to 1 format as both lenses are 300mm. Apparently it doesn't work that way probably due to the better optics and VR of the (expensive) Nikon lens.
Click to expand...
I had to look at the post again to see what you are talking about. Rest assured by "amateur" I mean "not professional, not earning money from photography" which is a category I include myself in.
 
Last edited:
jack scholl said:
This is a cross post with the Nikon 1 Forum. Thread is linked:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54044194

Comments are welcomed . . .

Thanks,

Jack

--
http://www.pbase.com/jrs40
https://jackschollphotography.shutterfly.com
Click to expand...
It can make a lot of sense in a way.

Well you probably already know I've taken a serious long look at that system Jack. All I would want is the body and it would have to be the V3. So for me the lenses I already have would be the key. I realise what you are looking at BTW, but adding lenses to a V3 with what I already use, won't happen, I don't need more.

So for a BIF the last thing I want is a bird in full frame. We need the room to crop and often a little heavy. I had a guy with a Kingfisher shot send me a RAW and it was at close range with the V2. Stunning details and sharpness, but as he said, forget cropping it.

All the best you two and the cost of the V3 body vs the A6000 is in a different world. If you need reach and lenses without cropping, it could be interesting.

Danny.

--
Birds, macro, motor sports.... http://www.birdsinaction.com
Just Kingfisher ..... http://www.flickr.com/photos/96361462@N06/
 
Last edited:
gerardeux said:
It totally goes beyond me why you would want to call names to the topic starter and anyone who choses a small sensor for tele and macro work. Which is nonsense btw as there are photographers out there making a living from nature photography who do just that: use a small 1 inch sensor for portable telework. Not exclusively of course but the system has a place as a walk around nature camera. This topic is about testing a set up suitable for photographing birds in flight. You will need something around 800mm then. To me it is not surprising that the Nikon V2 totally blows away the A6000 here despite the fact that one should be able to crop the bigger sensor to 1 format as both lenses are 300mm. Apparently it doesn't work that way probably due to the better optics and VR of the (expensive) Nikon lens.
Click to expand...
Says someone who made this argument:
gerardeux said:
Interesting comparison. It must be noted though that now the subject is no longer in direct sunlight so the iso on the Sony has to be higher then necessary and is now eating up the fine detail. Still these are the trade-offs that happen in non-lab settings. Overall even if you got a comparable shot I think that for your purpose - birding on the go - the Nikon set up has a clear advantage.
Click to expand...
First of all, 1/4000s is pretty much a desperation shot. If anything, the OP stretched quite a bit about taking a representative of 20-25 or whatever shots. One can surely do better.

And, with a lens with max 5.6, I would be more worried about less than ideal condition on the Nikon. For that matter, the Nikon also metered a third stop lower (1/400s compared to 1/500s at ISO 200, f/5.6). What would it look like for a BIF at 1/1000-1250s?
 
I am a Nikon 1 fan. And I have been shooting it for a year and a half. I don't own the 32mm lens (which was the best lens in N!), but everything I have seen out of this 70-300 CX is great. It could be the best lens in the system. I can tell you the one thing N1 needs is good light, at least with everything prior to V3 (don't have it either). In good light it is a very fun system to shoot with and carry.

The images don't hold up well to pixel peeping, but for most situations (much like RX100) they are very nice.

That said the V3 price is way out of line for what it is, and it takes micro SD cards (seriously) which is why I now have an A6000. I'm not going to give up on the 1 system, and I really would like a 70-300mm CX lens, but it doesn't fit into my shooting needs. If I was a birder I'd own the V3 and 70-300mm. There is a value proposition in that combo. Native 810mm focal length, small, light, stabilized, and cheap, relatively, for what you are getting.

Good luck Jack.
 
sony needs an E mount 70-300 lens.How big would that be?
 
There is of course nothing wrong with being a photography amateur but there do is something wrong with "thinking like an amateur" the way I interpreted "making sense for an amateur". Otherwise the post isn't very warm heartedly to the 1 system nor it users. Thanks to Nikon it is indeed a flawed system but it has a niche in which it can do things that other system can't.
 
The Nikon photo was taken in P-mode and it metered not optimal and got too much light on the sensor as the photo shows in comparison to the A6000. Half a stop compensation would have given a better result and would probably be the standard on this combination in good light.
 
Last edited:
gerardeux said:
There is of course nothing wrong with being a photography amateur but there do is something wrong with "thinking like an amateur" the way I interpreted "making sense for an amateur". Otherwise the post isn't very warm heartedly to the 1 system nor it users. Thanks to Nikon it is indeed a flawed system but it has a niche in which it can do things that other system can't.
Click to expand...
There's nothing wrong with thinking like an amateur either - I do. I don't think "With this lens I'll be able to take these shots which I'll sell for $x and make back the price of this lens over y photoshoots after which I'll be in profit." No, I think "This money is never coming back so let me choose wisely." And therefore I'm not going to buy $5,000 lenses but go for crop lenses.
 
  • the 70-300G is not exactly a paragon of excellence, esp. wide open and at the long FLs, co the comparison is a bit unfair (alas this is about all there is in the long[ish] FL in S-land, esp. as the 400mm zoom is a rather slow-focusing beast);
  • I'd be worried about the croppability of the 2.7x 1" sensor images;
  • esp. in not so ideal light, higher ISO situations (already m4/3 sensor is quite at disadvantage there, and 2.7x simply can't be better than either m4/3 or APS-C - the laws of physics);
  • subject isolation - very recently I was asked to appraise a set of highly dynamic images from wake boarding at fast speed from the RX-100 mk-III 1" sensor;
  • the AF'ing of that cam was able to cope OK, but then virtually EVERYTHING in the each image was within the DOF - from quite close to the farthest BG;
  • no subject isolation whatsoever at all :( , and it was done at the zoom's long end !!
Quercy
 

V2/70-300cx vs A6k/ea2/70-300G

We just got a the 70-300 cx lens and rented a V2 for comparisons with our Sony A6000 system. The intent was to gain access to a longer telephoto and perhaps a faster AF system for BIF shooting. The first thing we did was to put both BIF kits into P mode (no birds in sight) and take some...
www.dpreview.com www.dpreview.com

The lack of native SEL tele's for the A6k makes this an unfair comparison (only 200-210mm at this point). Hence, the EA2 adapter is needed and does not look as capable as the Nikon 1 AF system IMO.

Has anyone found a rigorous comparison of the AF systems of the A6k and Nikon 1? Hard to tell with the differences in available lenses.

Thanks,

Jack
 
nzmacro said:
It can make a lot of sense in a way.

Well you probably already know I've taken a serious long look at that system Jack. All I would want is the body and it would have to be the V3. So for me the lenses I already have would be the key. I realise what you are looking at BTW, but adding lenses to a V3 with what I already use, won't happen, I don't need more.

So for a BIF the last thing I want is a bird in full frame. We need the room to crop and often a little heavy. I had a guy with a Kingfisher shot send me a RAW and it was at close range with the V2. Stunning details and sharpness, but as he said, forget cropping it.

All the best you two and the cost of the V3 body vs the A6000 is in a different world. If you need reach and lenses without cropping, it could be interesting.

Danny.
Click to expand...
Danny,

I am not sure we have talked about your look at the Nikon 1 . . . any links to posts?

Sure agree with the value of cropping. Shot at 810mm yesterday and it requires a different mindset for techniques. So we are starting to work through the differences. The trick is to enjoy the ride and have fun with it.

For sure the $$ of this are crazy . . . one has to have a "special need" to pay the difference. But it is our hobby after all!

You two take care and we will keep in touch
 
scottyinfrisco said:
I am a Nikon 1 fan. And I have been shooting it for a year and a half. I don't own the 32mm lens (which was the best lens in N!), but everything I have seen out of this 70-300 CX is great. It could be the best lens in the system. I can tell you the one thing N1 needs is good light, at least with everything prior to V3 (don't have it either). In good light it is a very fun system to shoot with and carry.

The images don't hold up well to pixel peeping, but for most situations (much like RX100) they are very nice.

That said the V3 price is way out of line for what it is, and it takes micro SD cards (seriously) which is why I now have an A6000. I'm not going to give up on the 1 system, and I really would like a 70-300mm CX lens, but it doesn't fit into my shooting needs. If I was a birder I'd own the V3 and 70-300mm. There is a value proposition in that combo. Native 810mm focal length, small, light, stabilized, and cheap, relatively, for what you are getting.

Good luck Jack.
Click to expand...
scottyinfrisco,

Thanks for the comments.

We just got started evaluating, but your comments ring true so far. We need to see what prints from this setup look like . . . computer displays are not why we take pictures.

Jack

--

www.pbase.com

Galleries by Jack Scholl

www.pbase.com

Shutterfly: Photo Books, Cards, Prints, Wall Art, Gifts, Wedding

Create photo books, personalize photo cards & stationery, and share photos with family and friends at Shutterfly.com.
jackschollphotography.shutterfly.com
 
jpr2 said:
  • the 70-300G is not exactly a paragon of excellence, esp. wide open and at the long FLs, co the comparison is a bit unfair (alas this is about all there is in the long[ish] FL in S-land, esp. as the 400mm zoom is a rather slow-focusing beast);
  • I'd be worried about the croppability of the 2.7x 1" sensor images;
  • esp. in not so ideal light, higher ISO situations (already m4/3 sensor is quite at disadvantage there, and 2.7x simply can't be better than either m4/3 or APS-C - the laws of physics);
  • subject isolation - very recently I was asked to appraise a set of highly dynamic images from wake boarding at fast speed from the RX-100 mk-III 1" sensor;
  • the AF'ing of that cam was able to cope OK, but then virtually EVERYTHING in the each image was within the DOF - from quite close to the farthest BG;
  • no subject isolation whatsoever at all :( , and it was done at the zoom's long end !!
Click to expand...
Quercy,

I hear you and don't disagree . . .

But it is all about tradeoffs. Tele range, weight, size and print IQ.

Our G has been a good lens.

No question, even with the 18MP V3, it won't crop like the A6k and higher ISO's will be a concern. And the cx sensor size limits the isolation capabilities.

But there are advantages to adding this package to the kit. We just need to have more time and decide where our priorities are . . .

Thanks for your thoughts as always . . . keep them coming!

Jack
 
jack scholl said:
nzmacro said:
It can make a lot of sense in a way.

Well you probably already know I've taken a serious long look at that system Jack. All I would want is the body and it would have to be the V3. So for me the lenses I already have would be the key. I realise what you are looking at BTW, but adding lenses to a V3 with what I already use, won't happen, I don't need more.

So for a BIF the last thing I want is a bird in full frame. We need the room to crop and often a little heavy. I had a guy with a Kingfisher shot send me a RAW and it was at close range with the V2. Stunning details and sharpness, but as he said, forget cropping it.

All the best you two and the cost of the V3 body vs the A6000 is in a different world. If you need reach and lenses without cropping, it could be interesting.

Danny.
Click to expand...
Danny,

I am not sure we have talked about your look at the Nikon 1 . . . any links to posts?

Sure agree with the value of cropping. Shot at 810mm yesterday and it requires a different mindset for techniques. So we are starting to work through the differences. The trick is to enjoy the ride and have fun with it.

For sure the $$ of this are crazy . . . one has to have a "special need" to pay the difference. But it is our hobby after all!

You two take care and we will keep in touch
Click to expand...
 
nzmacro said:
nzmacro said:
nzmacro said:
Yeah this post here really stood out Jack and he did send me the RAW, amazing, but remember its just not any lens attached to the V2 ;-) :-) Its one heck of a Nikkor prime.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52845501

In fact, start off at the top of that thread Jack, good shots in there.

For details this was another interesting post ......

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51462025

So as a system with that sized sensor, its amazing in my book. For a BIF it comes down to the cropping ability Jack. BIF's with cropping is a little different. The more we need to crop in, the more noise shows up as you know and larger sensors handle that better. Then again though, with a smaller sensor with the same focal length, less cropping is needed. A bit of a catch 22. Mainly the noise would concern me when we need to crop in more.

All the best Jack and its an interesting one.

Danny.
Click to expand...
Danny,

Thanks for the links . . . I didn't know you were discussing the Nikon 1 in the past.

This new 70-300 cx lens has changed the game for those of us who use AF. But it means nothing to you . . . I still haven't seen a reference to the adapter that works with your Canon's. Do you have a link for one?

The V3 goes to 18MP, but it remains to be seen if it has the crop ability of the Sony 24MP sensor. However, I was surprised on the first post, that a A6k 24MP file, cropped to the image area of the cx 810mm, was reduced to about 7MP and couldn't match IQ (provided good light of course). But the numbers say the same . . . the Figure of Merit at full tele on the V2/70-300 cx is 11,973 and the A6k/70-300 G is 4,860!

Interesting subject for sure.

Have a good one . . .

Jack
 
jack scholl said:
nzmacro said:
Member said:
Member said:
Yeah this post here really stood out Jack and he did send me the RAW, amazing, but remember its just not any lens attached to the V2 ;-) :-) Its one heck of a Nikkor prime.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52845501

In fact, start off at the top of that thread Jack, good shots in there.

For details this was another interesting post ......

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51462025

So as a system with that sized sensor, its amazing in my book. For a BIF it comes down to the cropping ability Jack. BIF's with cropping is a little different. The more we need to crop in, the more noise shows up as you know and larger sensors handle that better. Then again though, with a smaller sensor with the same focal length, less cropping is needed. A bit of a catch 22. Mainly the noise would concern me when we need to crop in more.

All the best Jack and its an interesting one.

Danny.
Click to expand...
Danny,

Thanks for the links . . . I didn't know you were discussing the Nikon 1 in the past.

This new 70-300 cx lens has changed the game for those of us who use AF. But it means nothing to you . . . I still haven't seen a reference to the adapter that works with your Canon's. Do you have a link for one?

The V3 goes to 18MP, but it remains to be seen if it has the crop ability of the Sony 24MP sensor. However, I was surprised on the first post, that a A6k 24MP file, cropped to the image area of the cx 810mm, was reduced to about 7MP and couldn't match IQ (provided good light of course). But the numbers say the same . . . the Figure of Merit at full tele on the V2/70-300 cx is 11,973 and the A6k/70-300 G is 4,860!

Interesting subject for sure.

Have a good one . . .

Jack
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

fuego6
V2+70-300cx vs OM-1+300pro
2
Replies
24
Views
2K
Richard Dutton
R
holgerlinke
This month with your Nikon 1 - November 2025
Replies
2
Views
121K
Miss tilly
Miss tilly
holgerlinke
This month with your Nikon 1 - October 2025
2
Replies
28
Views
23K
Tord S Eriksson
Tord S Eriksson
Mathew Anderson
  • Locked
  • Sticky
Announcement For-sale Forum Rules
Replies
0
Views
19K
Mathew Anderson
Mathew Anderson
holgerlinke
This month with your Nikon 1 - September 2025
2
Replies
23
Views
11K
Kazmarov
K

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top