Reading mode: Light Dark

Sony a6000 vs Nikon D3300?

Go to last post
paulcraig said:
One thing missing from the D3300, if it matters to you, is exposure bracketing. This is apparently an advanced function, and the D3300 is targeted towards less experienced photographers. I'm sure there are other omissions as well, but I very nearly purchased a D3300 recently but like to shoot HDR, and for that I need certain features.

Image quality aside, which are all excellent, the a6000 competes more with the D5300.If you're just starting out, the real question you should be asking is what system do I want to buy into? Which has more lenses I will use and can I afford them? I've been somewhat happy with Sony-I've been an e-mount fan since the NEX-5 and back then Sony did not have many lenses for this system. There are great lenses now-not cheap though. I stick with e-mount because I travel extensively and appreciate the small size, as well as the features Sony packs into these tiny cameras. I have several e-mount lenses now, and it suits my purpose.
Click to expand...
Shai lenses do you recommend for a6000? And affordable ones if possible like $200 ish? I'll buy used if i can find them. Thanks!
 
Giggles said:
Giggles said:
.....
Click to expand...
Which would you say had better AF? I'm torn between a6000 and d5300. Read lots that says d5300 better for moving subjects and cheaper lenses like 35 or 50mm primes. But the portability of a6000 is awesome as long as it's still good with tracking moving subjects and image quality. Advice?
Click to expand...
I only have experience with Sony a6000 and Nikon D750. The Sony is a completely different beast in good light and in lower light. In good light the focus is very fast usually and also as a bonus, the face recognition is quite good. In lower light the focus bogs down, due to the switch from PDAF to CDAF. The Nikon D750 is fast in good light and lower light, both, and very reliable, but less effective face recognition. However it is much easier to manually choose a focal point on the Nikon than on the Sony.

How would this translate to the smaller Nikon? I don't have first hand experience with any generation of that camera, but the technological situation is similar, just fewer focal points.

So at a minimum, when you compare the autofocus of the two cameras, bear in mind that the Sony shines in good light and bogs down in lower light.

By lower light I mean simply indoors at a party. Really any situation where you might use flash.

Great thing about the Sony's is that the electronic viewfinder lets you see in the dark, literally. It is like wearing night goggles. And there is also excellent "focus peaking" which helps tremendously for manual focusing. The Nikon's use traditional optical viewfinder, which is nice in that you don't get the slight lag of EVF but also when it's dark, it's dark! And no manual focus assist other than a little light on the edge of the screen, which, it's hard to tell what the light thinks you want to focus on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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