jeszkar wrote:
Well it is good you wanted to convince me that Nikon and Canon camera are better then Sony... I wait you didn't. You wanted to convince me that the NX500 is better than the Sony. So your point is pointless. But please if that your argument show me professionals who argue for Samsung. I remember when you guys even got triggered when Phillip Bloom said the NX1 is not best hybrid camera (he preferred the A7 line)
Also you fail to argue for anything so I have to do nothing else with you. The NX500 is a camera without EVF, with weak AF system, worse video capability and not In-built image stabilization (not to mentioned no weather sealed) and again it is dead system. Your investment will become useless much faster than buying Nikon, Sony, Canon or Fuji.
..and your arguments are what? If NX500 is such a terrible camera why you "own" one?
weak AF system in comparison to what? worse video capability from what? have you tried NX1? it even has DUAL IS, 2 years ago.
in built image stabilization is in the a6500 for the very first time, a camera that will be available in my EU country next week, and it is for 1800euros body only, and in most things, NX500 which I bought more than a year ago with an excellent 16-50pz lens (unlike the Sony one, which have to buy extra by the way and it is one of the worst kit lenses ever) for 550euros (new of course, with one more year of warranty left) is better, and I have used it already professionally as a B or C camera dozens of times.
I do not try to convince you about anything, it is obvious that you know everything already, I just humbly mentioned that the vast majority of professional photographers use Canonikon, oh yeah, because they work reliably, unlike most Sony. When you are a professional, something that you clearly aren't, want something that works reliably, in all times and with the most productive way possible.
I didn't fail to argue, you fail completely in human communication. Whatever I tried to say in the first time (or whoever tried to make a civilized conversation with you) you were just "don't care about that", so if you don't care about "this" and about "that" then how can one argue with you? What you long is a monologue, or something epic that you have thought about yourself, the rest are not important anyway.
My "investments" are just right, and I am glad to inform you that have paid for them already. And because you are a month or something old, I have to bring up the reality that most photographers still use dSLRs, and still BUY dSLRs. Video professionals buy and use dedicated video cameras, this is the reality /
In mirrorless format, m4/3 produce amazing cameras and the new Olympus and (check tomorrow for the announcements) GH5 will be even better, and even the Fuji is a series company with the right attitude.
As of the in built IBIS, which is the talk of the town lately, the new Fuji hasn't (neither touch screen, but you don't care, sorry) and more than a century that people make movies without image stabilizers? and do all the Alexas and Reds and Canons C of this world that do not have in built image stabilizer, have to apologize to you?
So to recap,
touch screen implementation of a6500 WORST in industry
in image stabilization of a6500 WORST in industry
ergonomics of a6500 WORST in industry
battery of a6500 WORST in industry (even from the a6300, well done Sony!)
heat management of a6500 WORST in industry
AF second (or third, some Fuji users have different opinion about it, and Canon's dual pixel is KING, it is the only one I use professionally, and when I have used NX on a Ronin, never failed me, but only for Ronin) in industry
As I see it, the best second AF is good enough for most things, and ISO performance is great. 1 and a half out of 10 isn't a very good score, or else I would take a Black Magic pocket for video, and a D750 for photos and the occasional video.
You mentioned Philip Bloom, in his latest AF video, NX1 out of the blue had the best AF technology after the latest Canon 1D and a6300. I wouldn't score that as "WORST in industry", like most of the a6500's "awards".
P.S funny thing just remembered, check at the dpr review, a6500 has WORST 1080p video even from the a6000!
well, you seem like the useless type of guy, I will find it for you
"1080 video is surprisingly poor by current standards, even taking a step backward from the original a6000, and falling far behind what the company's own RX100 cameras are capable of."
You obviously do not care about 1080p, you always shoot and edit 4K, you have the equipment, the editing machine, the hard drives, multiple ultra fast SC cards, well, guess what, even for that, H265 is so much better for all these things! That's what I called back then "H265 is future proof"./
another one, Canon M5 has 82% score, a6500 85%!
wait, another one, "The a6500 can shoot 1080/120p or 100p video at either 100 mbps or 60 mbps. This uses a slightly smaller crop from the sensor than the lower frame rate options, though not quite as tight a crop as the 4K/30p mode." , oh yes, sorry for that, it also crops..
