Just picked up a Sony A6000

Tom Caldwell wrote:

The A6000 has a few advantages over the NEX6 and some disadvantages unless anyone can see any real advantage in a lower resolution evf.

Maybe I'm alone here, but I actually prefer the lower res EVF on my A6000 compared to my (now sold) NEX-6. It seems to be much less fussy with regard to putting my eye in the right place (if that makes sense). You can notice the lower resolution, if you move from the NEX-6 to the A6000 and back, however, but in other regards (colour, contrast and refresh rate) it really does appear better. I'll leave the spec monkeys to obsess over resolution (in the way they go ga-ga over output MPX) and just evaluate based on actual usage. It's still a definitely step down from the likes of the A7 (which I also own) / EM-1 / XT-1... but it's at least on par with the EM-5/EM-10 which I've used extensively.

If you spend time using both cameras you might see the improvements are quite numerous:

• The biggest improvement to me of the A6000 over the NEX-6 are the new customisable buttons and alpha menu system. A huge improvement.
• Ability to switch off the annoying pre-focusing
• Finally the ability to use Auto-ISO in manual mode
• Ability to set the back dial to always be exposure compensate (requires one less click)
• Larger grip
• Cheaper, yet equal build quality.

I also heard the AF-C is amazing, but I'm mainly using manual lenses so haven't had much chance to test that out. Even when I do use AF, it's mainly centered spot AF-S so I wouldn't like see much benefit anyway.

The most cited disadvantage appears to be the loss of the electronic level, something I've never used, but could be quite annoying for some photographers.

quezra wrote:

there's about zero chance a system will be designed around a curved sensor

Go tell the Sony forum.

Lab D wrote:

quezra wrote:

there's about zero chance a system will be designed around a curved sensor

Go tell the Sony forum.

You'll notice nobody there cares.  Curved sensor means optimized for a specific focal length.  Once you understand that simple concept, it is a given that you won't find zooms and certainly not tele lenses playing nice.  It makes sense for fixed lens compacts and that's about it.

Tom Caldwell wrote:

BolleDuc wrote:

Hi Guys,

I may have finally lost my mind & demonstrated the utter insanity of the GAS attack!

Ever since unloading my A65 in favour of an all MFT kit, there was always some nagging thing in the back of my mind about the bigger sensor size of the APS-C format being somehow better. When Sony came up with a 24 megapixel variant, along with a promise of good low light performance, I almost couldn't help myself & I started reading the reviews on the A6000. The whopping additional $25 discount for Canada Day at a local big box store had me throw caution to the wind & I splurged $725 (about $820 with taxes) on the Sony, replete with the 16-50mm PZ kit lens.

At least you saved $25

I've been shooting my feet plonked on the corner of my desk, my flowers outside the front door & I've been trying the occasional shot out the window of a moving car (I do a lot of this with my GX7!) & I'm really not seeing the dramatic differences I expected. Actually I'm really not seeing that much difference at all, to the point where I'm now thinking of returning it.

I'm not a sophisticated pixel peeper but I do like to compare out of camera jpegs at 100%. I'm also aware that there are many reports on the poor optical quality of the 16-50mm PZ but I felt there should have been some decent improvement over my GX7 or my E-PM2 with a kit lens, other than the jpegs just being bigger.

The aps-c sensor is not that much bigger than the 4/3 sensor - it might take a sophisticated pixel peeper to notice.

I'm sharing this for fun & for those hapless few who, like me, are soon parted from their hard earned coin! I welcome your mirthful scorn & ridicule, along with your thoughts on what you might do were you to have this beautiful little piece of technology in your hands. And it does feel good in the hand! Should I take it back or maybe what I really need is to test drive is one of those full frame mirrorless babies from Sony!

I tried an A7R - they make great images, you would notice the sensor difference, maybe not from those taken through your window though. The A7R was marked "fail" by me because despite the images I did not like the handling. I like using a camera for what it can do, but not enough to put up with badly thought out user conveniences.

Lucky that you can buy and try and take back. Most countries only allow returns if they are broken out of the box or unsuitable for purpose (don't take photographs). So perhaps you have not yet completely parted from hard earned coin?

I have a NEX6 which I bought to use with Canon EF lenes via electronic adapters. I could see no point in the A6000.

Paul

Go test drive Paul, the camera world needs someone who can laugh at himself

Thanks Tom, your insights on the A6000 & the A7 series have me aiming a little higher now! Once I talk myself into picking up an A7, I'll have to laugh really hard to get over the cost! Though I did like the feel of the A6000 in the hand & the alpha menu makes it a much nicer tool than the older generation NEX gear so I wouldn't mind picking one up at a bargain price somewhere down the road!

Paul

Hi Folks,

Just wanted to close the loop on this one by thanking everyone for all your feedback & insights on my new purchase & to let you know that I just returned the A6000 today.

To anyone thinking of this camera, my return is not a negative reflection on this camera, it's a little beauty. If I were starting from scratch, I would probably be torn between this & my current favourite: the GX7.

Thanks again to all & please ..... feel free to suggest what I might look at next to satisfy my ongoing need to experience gear lust!!! 

Paul

Wilu wrote:

BolleDuc wrote:

Thanks again to all & please ..... feel free to suggest what I might look at next to satisfy my ongoing need to experience gear lust!!!

perhaps this one?

Ha ha! Thanks Wilu, one divorce coming up! I think I'm going for the Sigma 60mm as an interim purchase.

Paul

BolleDuc wrote:

Hi Folks,

+1

The bigger sensor is no reason to buy NEX considering the relatively lame lenses.

BTW I have an a6000 too.

I have a Sony A7r, and a Sony A6000 as my backup camera.

lenses, I have the 35mm 2.8 FE and 55mm 1.8 FE (awesome lens), and a Canon 70-200mm F4 IS with Metabones adapter.

I also have a Sony 10-18mm OSS for wide angle on the A6000, which also works at 14-16mm on the A7r without any Vignetting.

I also shoot 360/180 degree Panaramic tours  using a Sigma 8mm with Metabones Nikon to E-type adapter.

I will probably buy the Sony/Zeiss 16-35mm & 85mm 1.4 (due shortly) and the 24mm 1.4 due later this year.

The above combo is perfect for me. All lenses and batteries are interchangeable between both bodies. The A7r for outstanding image quality and 36 megapixel Full Frame resolution, the A6000 for high speed 12 fps with 179 point phase & contrast detection at 24 megapixel Crop framed resolution. Both are incredibly small compared to my old Nikon D800, and I am very satisfied with the performance.

The focus peaking & magnification is so good, I actually prefer to shoot in manual focus now.

I did buy the RX100M3 for portability, but was disappointed with the lack of subject isolation with the 1 inch sensor (a larger sensor makes a big difference in this respect). I sold the camera a couple of days ago. I will look at the LX8 when it's out, for portability and 4K video (I have a 4K TV).

The A6000 is a fantastic fully featured camera at a bargain price (I paid $600 Au delivered).

J

jaybr wrote:

I have a Sony A7r, and a Sony A6000 as my backup camera.

lenses, I have the 35mm 2.8 FE and 55mm 1.8 FE (awesome lens), and a Canon 70-200mm F4 IS with Metabones adapter.

I also have a Sony 10-18mm OSS for wide angle on the A6000, which also works at 14-16mm on the A7r without any Vignetting.

I also shoot 360/180 degree Panaramic tours using a Sigma 8mm with Metabones Nikon to E-type adapter.

I will probably buy the Sony/Zeiss 16-35mm & 85mm 1.4 (due shortly) and the 24mm 1.4 due later this year.

The A6000 is a fantastic fully featured camera at a bargain price (I paid $600 Au delivered).

J

Isn't it amazing how mirror less has developed so quickly? Superlative resolution, fully featured bodies and portability.

The Sony A7 series are astounding cameras and if they can combine the AF of the A6000 then they will be unbeatable  (that's what I am waiting for!).

neil holmes wrote:

No I don't have an A6000.

I have a full frame A7 and a GX7.

I want an A7S

Didn't you have an A6000 briefly?  How many cameras have you owned in the past 2 years (I've gone through many myself)?

Lab D wrote:

Interestingness wrote:

For what it's worth, I do see a difference comparing my GX1 and EM-10 to my 'old' Canon 50D camera. The 50D picture quality has a subtle certain something to it and a richness that is really nice to see on screen and in print. Above 2500 ISO it all falls apart but up until then it's everything I could ask for.

When I looked at DxO sensor comparisons, the 50D was not as good as the E-M10, especially at ISO 200. The E_M10 images will have a larger dynamic range and greater color sensitivity. As you mention in lower light the E-M10 is better too.

My bet is you have more experience working with 50D images and have grown fond of the older camera. There is nothing wrong with that, and shows that getting to know a camera is more important.

This is a great example though of how similar APS and M43 really are. While DxO may rate the E-M10 higher, you are able to get images which you perceive as better from the lesser rated camera. From looking at many cameras, this is actually common and shows there is more to IQ than DxO ratings.

The image processing algorithms of the OM-Ds are very strange IMHO. They produces clean but flat images, with weak dimensionality, and large areas affected by posterization. I even preferred my Pana GF2's pictures at base ISO to my E-M5. I think maybe it is connected with the pixel size and the engineers choice for better high ISO.