Like everyone says, mirrorless is the speed champ with S-AF in almost every comparison possible
... that involves ideal light and a high contrast subject.
Ideal light?! sorry but some mirrorless can focus in lower light then any Dslr as long as their is some contrast to lock onto. For instance all recent Panasonic's focus to -4ev
Yes the Pany rates lower ev than even the D7200. It would be interesting to see which acquires focus faster on a low-contrast stationary subject in -1EV. Then which one tracks that subject better when it moves. In the later case, my money would be on the Nikon. I'm not sure about the former.
The A6000 isn't their top of the line camera. It replaced their NEX-6 which was below the NEX-7.
Sony never released another NEX-7 nor did they seal the A6000 against moisture.
When I go to the Sony store and ask to see their APS-C mirrorless cameras, they show me the A6000, the A5100, the A5000 and the A3000. You might as well say the D7200 isn't Nikon's top of the line APS-C dSLR either, because nothing has superseded the D300s. So you can have it your way and we'll compare the A6000 to the D7200 as second tier cameras. Or we can acknowledge current reality and call them both top-tier.
The Dslr equiv. of the A6000 would be the D5xxx series.
Why? An a6000 with kit lens lists at $800. A D3300 with kit lens lists at $650. A D5500 with least capable kit lens lists at $1000. The A6000 is between the two Nikons, but closer in price to the D3300, both in absolute dollars or proportionately. So price-wise the D3300 is the best match. In terms of location in lineup, the D7200 is the best match.
And it's not really clear who wins for shooting sports. The D5200/5300/5500 all have very good AF systems but the Sony has an amazing burst speed.
I'll agree that the Sony has a faster framerate. I haven't developed a opinion on which is better for shooting sports using their kit lenses. Given the lenses I have, or the lenses available, it's really clear I'd rather shoot sports on the Nikon. What e-mount lenses are there for shooting sports on an a6000?
mirrorless STILL wins. Try to find DSLRs that can shoot and focus at 11-15 FPS for under $1300 like the A6000 and NX1.
Frame rate is not the same thing as autofocus speed. Many mirrorless cannot change focus between frames at their highest framerate. I'm unaware of any dSLR that doesn't focus between frames. A D7200 body costs less than $1300.
While this is true for some camera's it ain't true for the A6000 and NX-1. They can maintain their maximum burstspeed while using AF-C
But not their keeper rate for subjects changing both lateral position and distance from the camera - at least on the a6000 - I've tried. Perhaps the NX1 is better.
There are DSLRs that do a better job focusing with C-AF, but they also cost a lot more.
And they deliver a lot more. And that is at the smaller, less capable end of things. Are you suggesting that an A7RII has faster, more accurate AF-C on rapidly moving subjects in middling light than a D810 or a 5DIII, or that the A7II's AF-C outperforms the D750?
I don't think these Dslr's AF systems can be beat by any mirrorless. But then it's also borrowed from 7999,- dedicated sports camera's that shoot our most prestigious sport events.
I do think these mirrorless can make the D610 sweat and beat the Canon 6D
Yes but the point of the above comparisons was to continue to compare at roughly equal prices. The D750 has the same list price as the a7II. The D610 is $300 less. The 6D is $600 less.