-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
GX8 and Pen F just got some real competition Sony A6300!
- Thread starter situman1
- Start date
L
Labe
Guest
But sony are adding lens. A f1.4 85mm even plus f2.8 zooms . That reason for not going Sony is getting less. I've owned both Sony and olympus. Love Sony for video , but i prefare the look of the images and the size of kit from olympus.The A6300 seems like a fantastic camera, but without good lenses whats the point?
Sony also released new lenses but they are huge and heavy and designed for FF.
I think i will stick to my E-M10 and G7
What they needed then in 2011 when I made the decision was lenses. Admittedly the A6000 has improved out of site over the NEX cameras, but the lens selection is spotty at best, often expensive, and often marred with problems.
If I went with an A6300 I'd probably swap my three primes 12, 20, 45 for the Sony 18-105 OIS lens, but that lens is not digitally corrected so you get the worst of both worlds on each end with pincushion and barrel distortion. The direct swap for my 12mm and 45mm are both branded Zony lenses which aren't worth the price of the stamp on the barrel. They both perform at about the same pace as my non-brand Olympus M. Zuiko lenses.
If I swapped my primes directly for the Sony equivalents it would cost me about $1000 more, two of them attract the Zeiss tag for a lens that is made in Japan, not West Germany. There is no value what so ever in the Sony E mount APS-C lens library. I don't really care how many FE lenses you throw at the system they're not native lenses.
Last edited:
captura
Veteran Member
captura
Veteran Member
captura
Veteran Member
I totally agree, except that the latest lens, 2 years ago, was the E 16-70. Which was plagued with quality issues. I wonder why it doesn't show up in DPR's list, ie: Was it discontinued?
Loading…
www.dpreview.com
PS: I just noticed that there are 2 new teleconverters showing there. A 1.4X and a 2.0X.
captura
Veteran Member
Actually (sorry for repeating myself here) I have a fairly rare made-in-Japan 18-55 kit lens, from the first few NEX-7's, and it is optically superior.
captura
Veteran Member
And I'm sure that the new GE lenses are unstabilized...nobody mentioned this before. So with the A6300 NOT having IBIS, it is a bad situation.
"It may look like its predecessor on the outside, but the a6300 uses a sturdier magnesium-alloy construction, with weather-sealing."
The PEN-F does not have weather resistance, but is priced similarly if not more expensively.
No. Nor do most APSC SLRs have this feature. Sony might not be taking aim at Olympus here.
Sony has always lagged behind in touchscreen tech, which seems counter intuitive.
Sony seems to not have abandoned it, as evidenced by the new camera, although their effort on APSC-specific lenses is similar to what C and N are doing.
Since C and N APSC has existed for years and seemingly will exist for years more, why not Sony's E line? They could probably be excused to concentrate on the FE lenses for a while esp. on longer lenses.
In any case, if one is satisfied with the coverage of the two-zoom kits or a 10x zoom plus one or two primes, the E line is perfectly OK. And I have a feeling that this covers the majority of buyers of ILCs.
I'd be happy with one zoom of modest length such as the 18-105 and a couple of primes, but the price of the primes of any decent quality are outlandish for Sony E mount. My biggest gripe with Micro Four Thirds is that there isn't an equivalent to that lens. Micro Four Thirds really does need a 12-60 type lens.
Last edited:
G
Greynerd
Guest
And the EM5 and the EM10 and the EM1 and the EPL-7 and the GH4 and the G7 and the GF7.
If you get the A6300 and do not like it there are not a lot of alternates to stick your lenses on to. We are talking with m43 about a system rather than minimal servicing of the rump of the affordable NEX sector while they are busy chasing the rich boys for big margins in 'full' frame.
If you get the A6300 and do not like it there are not a lot of alternates to stick your lenses on to. We are talking with m43 about a system rather than minimal servicing of the rump of the affordable NEX sector while they are busy chasing the rich boys for big margins in 'full' frame.
Last edited:
It has some very attractive features and I'm sure the sensor is about as good as it gets in anything smaller than FF. But I'm not big on the overall packaging. Add a 2nd control dial and a touch screen and it would be much more compelling to me. At least for the time being Sony has seemed to abandon development of E lenses and the native lens selection is not especially compelling either. The best FE lenses are big, heavy, and pretty expensive. With good lenses it will no doubt be capable of producing excellent images. And the video capabilities (about which I care little) look very good for folks that do a lot of video. I'm more attracted to the Fuji system as an alternative to m43.
rgs_45
Veteran Member
Yes. The IQ of the M4/3, my EM-1 is more than enough for me, for my style of shooting. I'm tired of those big APSC bodies with the big lenses that's why I moved to the M4/3 bodies, small and light and very comprehensive line of lenses and still growing
That's the good thing about new cameras, they will boast the latest technologies, specially sensor and some new features. Hopefully some will migrate to the M4/3 system
Looking forward to the EM-1 II or GH-4 refresh and see what Oly and Pany can come up. Read that there are some fast lens patents that Oly got and hopefully we can more faster primes and zooms in the near future.
Olymore
Veteran Member
This is only relevant if you need the extra features.
Do you need fast tracking AF ? If I did I would be using a DSLR now.
Better low light performance ? If I did I would be using FF for a significant advantage, not messing around with APSC.
Better video ? I have no interest in video.
I'm sure for many people it will be a wonderful camera but there's no point in changing systems unless it provides something that you really need without taking away other stuff that you also need (lenses for example).
Do you need fast tracking AF ? If I did I would be using a DSLR now.
Better low light performance ? If I did I would be using FF for a significant advantage, not messing around with APSC.
Better video ? I have no interest in video.
I'm sure for many people it will be a wonderful camera but there's no point in changing systems unless it provides something that you really need without taking away other stuff that you also need (lenses for example).
An increasing number of people do, especially that 4k has the option of frame-grabbing.
Fully agreed on that, one has to prioritize and choose the right system(s) accordingly. For stills, I give my vote to Olympus: 5EV IBIS, absolutely great & fast zooms, hopefully soon a set of f1.2 primes and IQ comparable to the previous generation of APS-c DSLR-s (like my venerable D5200). For video I opted for an RX100iv: I am fine with its limited 24-70 eq FOV, it'll probably get a light gimbal soon for stabilization. In case I want to "go pro" in video and use additional lenses, I can still get a G7 to use my Olympus lenses.
On the sony side key lenses are missing, an f/2.8 normal zoom (17-50) and some fast primes.
dmanthree
Veteran Member
TheClueless
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 2,140
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 943
It'll be great for who it's aimed at - the guy who uses it with a kit for a few months~year, and buys a wide zoom and a couple of primes over the next 1-2 years.
...which is most of you I'll bet lol
G
Greynerd
Guest
With Sony e-mount aps-c there is not a lot of choice though if you do want to expand your lenses on a budget. In m43 the strategy will be by choice and in e-mount more out necessity.
Whatever the merits of the A6300 the idea that it will cause a switch to e-Mount seems rather unlikely. This just looks like the usual Sony cross forum new camera posting nonsense.
Jacques Cornell
Veteran Member
These three cameras really aren't comparable. Each has a unique strength that makes it better for certain users. The Sony continues to be the choice for (good light) action shooters, but it's never been great at AF in low light. And, it lacks IBIS, weather sealing and touch. The GX8 is more of a semi-pro (or pro) all-rounder for both stills & video, with class-leading 4K, a terrific EVF, and weather sealing. But, it lacks the higher rez available from the Sony or Oly. The PEN F is more for style-conscious casual shooters who want something really small. And, its hi-rez mode uniquely appeals to landscape and still-life specialists. The a6300 bolsters the a6000's strengths, but doesn't seem to address its weaknesses or change the game in any substantial way.
Jacques Cornell
Veteran Member
I dunno. I hear what you're saying, and a 5x f4 zoom is a nice idea. However, f4 is not fast. In a situation where I need better than f5.6, I'm usually dealing with low light and really need an f2.8 zoom or better yet some fast primes. In good light, Panasonic's 14-140II is sharp wide open at all focal lengths, is much smaller and lighter than the Sony, and has almost twice the range. The 14-140 makes a great walkabout, and the 18-105 is less suited to hiking, travel and everyday carry while also not offering much practical advantage.
On a 135-format camera, it's a different story, as the larger sensor's much lower noise makes an f4 zoom effectively equivalent to an f2 zoom on MFT and very usable in low light. I guess you could look at this lens on APS as equivalent to and f2.8 on MFT but with greater range. Still, my use cases described above leave this combo in the mushy middle. I either want a small, light, sharp 10x zoom in good light or a set of fast primes for shallow DoF or low light.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum