It was £450 with £200 cashback at quite a few retailers for a few weeks, price has gone back up now and cashback has reduced to £100, so not as cheap now.

I know it is a trend to bash the Sony E1650. But is this the Nikon Kit Lens that you refer to?

http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-E16-50mm-F35-56-on-Sony-NEX-7-versus-AF-S-DX-Nikkor-18-55mm-f-3.5-5.6G-VR-on-Nikon-D7100__1082_736_159_865

Don't know for sure, it is alphabet soup naming for Nikon and hard to tell the generations apart. But, I don't think that is it, because mine has a big button on the side (because it is a collapsible design).

I like the kit lens and tend to use it on my A6000 when seeing family, then my primes. Also Ken Rockwell gave it the thumbs up for good quality ;)

http://www.kenrockwell.com/sony/lenses/16-50mm-pz.htm

The DxO score tends to compress the differences. Look at the actual measured data: The Nikon kit lens isn't great, but for vignetting especially it is miles ahead of the Sony. Also sharpness, CA, and distortion .. all substantially better across the board.

Very good point - in fact, I recommend the Sony a5100 + Sony 35/1.8 combo for any new parent that doesn't want to 'grow into' a camera. But you really do need that prime, over kit lens, for the increased AF (particularly in low light) and image quality performance. That particular combo can AF in low light, AF in video, and even blur backgrounds and give you decent low light images due to the fast aperture.

The reason we don't specifically spell out the lens you should buy alongside the body is that, well, you could argue that almost any camera will be better with a F1.8 prime. But you may have a point that for the a6000, it's particularly important, as low light AF performances increases as a function of how fast your lens is, a limitation (or feature, depending on how you look at it) DSLRs don't exhibit.

Fuji is definitely not the best one for quality out of the list. It still uses a really old sensor which is limited ISO 6400 for RAW (which is roughly equivalent ISO3200 on Nikon, Sony et. all).
Fuji might have great ergonomics and lenses, but in case of sensor IQ, its behind. Also not to mention it still lags behind in AF and video even after 4 updates!

That exactly!
Also, everyone might think differently which one is best for himself. That is why every brand has its own market/sales.

Very fine camera but very limited telephoto lens options. How do I get to 400mm? Please don't suggest I use an adapter... There you go: that's a reason you might not want to buy it and be invested in that system.

@Everlast66 Not sure if you were addressing me. I have the 18-200 and didn't think the 55-210 was enough of an upgrade to choose. I came across a brand new open box 70-200G for a bit less that $900 and jumped on it :) I still have the 18-200 which pretty much lives on the camera, but the IQ is no where near the 70-200G which I consider a special occasion rather than walk around lens. With the 18-200 no one even notices the camera, the 70-200 gets way too much attention.

@Keith
I just thought it is unfair to criticise this APSC camera (A6000) for not being balanced with a full frame lens, especially since Sony invested the time and resources to develop a 'crop' tele zoom that balances much nicely and I've seen very positive comments about its quality (although some variation between copies).

http://camerasize.com/compact/#535.90,535.392,ha,t

pacnwhobbyist - while that is true, it's also the case that the High Quality mode that you can easily access is comparable with the best most other cameras offer.

Large Superfine? You can make it availeble in the on sreen menue. Sometimes they make irrational choices. That is right. Usualy the on screen menu is an transparent overlay over the live view image. On the E-M5 they made it intransparent by default. One had to dive in the menue to change an obscure option to bring it back to default. I have used 7 diferent models with the E-620 beeing the first. I can tell. Much more strange is why they only have three quality options in the Olympus Viewer 3. This pice of software in brilliant on one hand but a pice of garbage on the other.

Not to mention the ability to adapt a wide range of a-mount lenses and still retain AF even on minolta lenses from 30 years ago. Totally lame.

Two real gaps: fast zooms and f/1.4 primes. Even then there are fast A mount zooms you can use w native AF adapters. And I've learned to live with f/1.8 until I decide to buy FE glass.

You have to look at FE lenses too for the full range. The FE 55 is about as "headline portrait prime" as it gets, it's almost in the right range for a portrait lens in APS-C.

The SEL24 is a bargain used these days, you can pick one up for a big discount. And the FE 28 f/2 is only $450 new which is pretty close (42mm equiv) to a 35.

You can! Check ebay and you will find they are very reasonable. I paid about $700 for mine including lens. Be sure the curtain is in good shape though and preferably get one that has been CLA'd. Nothing like picking up a solid metal camera that feels like a brick and will last several lifetimes! ;)

Does it come with free film? My Panasonic came with free "film".

No free film but your Panasonic will be worth pennies in a couple years while the Leica will go up in value! ;)

@ Thematic

Hence, the truth awoke.

@By Alex Permit

And the cat may feel that closing its own eyes others can’t see it.

That's right. Cats can drink their eyes with their milk open.
:)

@Alex Permit, ethern1ty, MikeStern

It is a proverb in a south Indian language

@, ethern1ty, Thematic

When somebody purposefully acts like sleeping, with the support of fans, we can’t awake them. Then, “to every action there is always opposed an equal reaction” – karma theory only can act. But it takes time. Then this sort of sense will not work. So for the time being truth may be nonsense.

I'd have suggested an open ended scale. its not perfect but I don't need a manual to understand how the rating works. It can as simple as 80 < 81 mathematical comparison which is easier for your users to understand.

Put it this way, I only know about your rating because i have hung out on dpr for a while. If I were infrequent or I recently dropped in I'd very confused and it would make no sense at all (wouldn't even know I had to RTFM).

People using these comparison tools I feel generally want a quick camera X > camera Y and not go away read a page long manual.

On the ILC front also suggest G7 as long as you are willing to make an "investment" in the system. An EVF is invaluable IMO and I definitely recommend buying a camera with it.

But for beginner on a budget who is not yet ready to invest in a system camera like Samuel suggested, you could perhaps consider something like RX100m4, RX10m2 or FZ1000 I suppose.

How about alternate like Nikon D3300, D5500 or panasonic GX7? so far, three of them is the most closed my budget. So far, I'm looking video can do all rounder. But the important is taking video in low light is need.

@samuel Actually I like olympus. Just service center in here very worse and I have bad experience with it. still thinking twice to get my attention.

@nanbytes Some people said that EVF can make your eyes pain for a longer that. Is that true?

Well, recently discontinued cameras are not on the list, quite naturally. But I would recommend the Olympus E-M10, which is still being sold at greatly discounted prices.

Is that your total budget? You have to also think about the lenses you will need.

@nanbytes sony a6000 doesn't have image stabilization, right? and to have it must buy lenses that have it, right? high ISO would be solved it?
About EVF I was reading from user in here. Said that see EVF for 3-4 hours, his eyes feel pain. I'm bit worried this same effect same like effect like see a PC monitor.
@teddoman I think I will buy camera package with standard lens.

That's correct, A6000 has no stabilization. But a lot of lenses for e-mount do have stabilization including their 35mm and 50mm primes.

But i wouldn't decide a video camera based on in-body stabilization . You can stabilize your camera in other ways. But there is only one way to get 1080/60p or 4K or good codec support i.e. your camera must support it!

As for EVF, if you hold it to your eye continuously for 3-4 hours then it'll hurt. Even peeping down an OVF for that long continuously would hurt (probably less) but you are still straining your eyes in either case. But I have shot for whole days (and so does many people who use EVF cameras). People seldom keep their eyes glued to their EVF for 3-4 hours.

Kit lens: Samsungs is amazingly good and better than Sony's. Common knowledge. AF is plenty fast.

NX 85 f/1.4, one of the very best in class. Extremely affordable for what it is. AF is not super fast which is normal for a heavy fast lens with so much glass. Now, where is Sony's native 85? It does not exist. This is an important FL also in APS-C for portraits. It works very well on my NX500 for portrait, people and animals shots & action shots of my kid and his friends at play.

NX 45 1.8: excellent IQ, very good sharpness, lovely bokeh and super fast AF. Hands down a winner. Well known for that.

NX 30 2: known for its superb IQ but let down by slow AF in tricky light. The only lens that really is too slow for fast action. I still take sharp pictures of the kids with it all the time.

12-24: a super UWA, fast AF, super IQ, also against the light. A super land- and cityscape lens, also great for goup shots.

16 2.4: very sharp albeit with pronounced field curvature.

More on the lenses I own:

60 macro: excellent lens for macro work, perfectly average AF for a macro lens (similar to my 60 mm and 105 VR Micro Nikkors). Where is Sony's native 60 macro? Not there.

50-200: very good for a very cheap consumer zoom very fast and precise AF unless shot against a very bright background. Super fast for action.

The 16-50S should work fine on the NX500 as the 85 1.4 also does. The 50-150 S is a different story, but the only one.

And then there are the 20 mm and the 10 mm fisheye which I don't own, so I can't say. The 10 seems much appreciated from what I read. And I'm sure it autofocuses just fine, lol!

Have you tried how intuitive the NX500 menu and the controls are? Much better than the Sony's even without the wheel. No comparison. The NX500 touch screen with touch focus, release, split AE/focus etc is a dream. If you don't think that tihs makes a significant difference to one's shooting style, then you haven't really tried it.

Coming from Nikon DSLRs and an assortment of Canon and Sony compacts, the NX500 with its superb UI and very good lens line-up (I don't need super tele lenses) has changed the photographic experience for me.

And then there is the 4K video in the NX500: it's apparently also not important to DPR's overall evaluation. Why should it be, alongside this cam's class-leading sensor and all the rest of it which make it such an immensely capable small camera.

Good night!
Andrea

Thanks for your thoughtful comments, Richard. But the NX500 is not a niche camera for specific uses and odd birds, but a very strong allrounder.

With all due respect, I think that Rishi's evaluation is telling, kit lens or nothing, lol!

The only drawback of this cam is ... that it doesn't have Sony or Canikon written on it, oh yes and the lack of EVF for quite a few it seems. Again, its AF in my "real ife" experience is equal and/or near-equal to the Sony and the rest of the cam is better, including the native lens-line-up, and the video, even with a cropped 4K version.

I am also amazed that the Samsung's singularly intuitive handling is shoved to the side here. It makes a big difference to the shooting experience.

Have you tested the Samsung and lenses with the current FW updates?

Now that Samsung is about to give up their camera business, I better get back to my trusty Nikon DSLRs, lol!

Anyway, thanks again for taking the time to explain to us how you evaluate cameras! ;-)

Thanks for the correction, Rishi. Classy move.

EthanP99,
Should that be your conclusion, I must then conclude that you do not have actual human hands - one's capable of touch, that is. The NX500 is no tank - even my Fujifilm X-e2 is much more solid, particularly factoring in the kit zoom. But - this is all relative - the A6000 is miles behind, running just ahead of a half-empty pack of cigarettes in terms of build.

That said, I'm okay with it as the recommendation in this segment. A wonderful camera, if you are okay with the build - which many are.

Also, your comment that the 30/2 is too slow for fast action but great for kids raises an eyebrow - the two are mutually exclusive. Furthermore, we've tested the 85/1.4, and your claim that it's great for action shots for kids again discredits your position: that lens is not just 'not so fast', it's utterly slow and unusable for continuous AF paired with the NX1/500, relative to the NX500 + S-series zoom, or a6000 and a number of primes.

Perhaps we just have a much higher baseline for 'excellent AF performance' - which is certainly understandable, as it's our job to pit these systems against each other every day. We don't just go home with a system and say 'good enough', we're constantly testing different systems to understand the state of the art, the best, and the worst. If you don't believe our perspective, despite our side-by-side testing, that's perfectly fine. Just please don't claim our perspective to be 'shocking' until you've done a side-by-side that proves us wrong.

Also, just to be clear - we actually really like the NX500. I personally really like both the NX500 and NX1 - they're both just built right, and I agree that the user interfaces are intuitive. I can just pick them up in a matter of seconds and be shooting with the camera.

It's just that the NX500 faced some stiff competition. One of its major strongpoints (AF) was very limited in actual implementation due to lenses. No EVF was a huge ding as well. The G7 and E-M10 II are, by the way, incredibly capable cameras. Have you tried them, perchance?

wow!! that's a fair bit to read.

captura, nex7 doesn't really feel any more or less well made than A6000 imo.

Rishi, I assume you don't have kids and don't do kids photography.

I have thousands of sharp pictures with the 30 and the 85 of my son and his friends. The 30 works well for kids if they are not actively running about. Very good for portraits and street photography, but not for fast action.As I sasid. Nothing to discredit about my months long experience.

The 85 I've taken to the playgorund many times, and got a lot of lovely action shots, e.g. of coached boxing sessions! It's not blazingly fast like the 45 or 50-200 and takes concentration, but definitely quite capable of locking focus in action. I wonder how Sony's non-existing fast 85 compares here - which was part of my original point.

So, my point is that you have been making some very overdrawn blanket statements here about the AF abilities and native lens line-ups of Samsung and Sony - to summarize your point, with Samsung it's kit or nothing - which plainly shows that you don't really know the lens line up for Samsung.

@Andrea Georgia,
This lengthy exchange sounds more like a pi$$ing match than presenting final conclusion.

To your credit: it seems like you perfected use of NX500 and it's lenses.
To DPR credit: they have tested the whole array of cameras and lenses in the said line-up against each other. In real life and studio performance.
In fact the recent field test (mushroom picking) of NX500 shows convincingly that DPR really like the NX500 in variety of shooting environments.

Don't forget that it is hard to recommend the camera which is already not available in some markets and the manufacturer don't present a clear path for the future. Shame on Samsung for that.

I love my 1DX and lenses but to say that it is superior all-rounder in every aspect would be a stretch for me.

Nandbytes, the NEX 7 is an all metal build, the 6000 is plastic.

While that may be the case, I still stand by my point. They both *feel* to be of the same quality.

Nex7 does feel a little heavier but seeing that it isn't weather sealed or anything it doesn't really add much.

@Richard. You have a point regarding the tone on both sides.

But if you read through this, you'll see that they can be well challenged on their judgments, and that's the point.

I know this camera and the 8 lenses I use for it for many scenarios very well, so I do know what I'm talking about. I also shoot Nikon DSLRs, so I know the strenghts and weaknesses of both systems.

What DPR's explanations show is that their judgement for overall performance and their subsequent rankings are as subjective as anyone else's who has used these cameras and lenses for a while.

But the problem is that they do not write it up as such, and instead make strong categorical and overdrawn statements, ignoring what does not suit them and emphasizing what suits, an approach that does not correlate with the complexity of the shooting experience.

I'm glad that I and several others made them state how they judge & what is important to them and what isn't, so this was a worthwhile exercise.

I think Richard Butler already admitted in one of his comments here how subjective DPR is in its overall evaluation also regarding the overall percentage points they award. You can read it in one of his replies to someone's query about how they justify that the NX500 gets one more point than the Sony (that in itself is telling), but is only awarded silver and comes out as one of the losers in this contest. He admits that different staff value this or that aspect differently in this or that camera, and so the sum can be equal but doesn't mean much for overall performance. What a great review technique!
It shows how the whole DPR system of awarding precise overall percentage points that are tied, as in this case, to categorical overblown statements - no competition comes even close to Camera X - can easily be misleading as a headlinining summary.

Btw, I took the 85 1.4 to my 7 year old's ice skating lessons today and got hundreds of sharp action shots in not easy conditions.

really? I am surprised you had the time? you've been ranting on here all day long...

Don't worry, no need for this. I do many things fast and well. That's part of being an academic and a mother. My son and I went ice skating from 16.30 til 18.00.

well i can only hope you are equally passionate about your subject in academia. At the same time I hope you are also more open to alternative approaches too :P

Andrea - you misrepresent my comments. The scores are as objective as is possible. The awards are the lead reviewer's assessment (and these need to be justified to all the other reviewers, so they usually represent the editorial team's consensus).

The overall score is arrived at using the same weightings between the 40-or-so aspects that we score cameras on: the reviewer's personal preferences aren't factored-in.

However reviews are by definition subjective, and that overall assessment comes in the choice of award.

I have no idea what statement you're referring to, when you talk about 'no competition comes close,' so I can't sanity check the logic of that.

As I said yesterday: most of the cameras in this class are very good (hence them all scoring similarly), but the a6000 just got the win for its all-round balance of features and capabilities. For the record, I didn't say or imply that there was anything niche about the NX500's appeal. It's a very good camera.

Yes, I am, and about other things, too, like music and sports, for instance. And photography, of course.

I don't mind alternative views at all, but I don't like undeclared omissions and strong biases that provide the basis for judgment as DPR has done here. As a historian, researcher, and university lecturer I take factual knowledge, an even-handed approach, methods of analysis and the open declaration of these very seriously.

Thanks, Richard. What you wrote sounds like much subjectivity comes in at various levels of the evaluation, incl the final addition and verdict. The precise % + medals suggest a non-existing objectivity.

QUOTE:
"The score is, as much as possible, based on our objective testing, with some input (but less weighting) given to the subjective assessments (handling, value, etc). And, although these cameras all seem to have come out as 80%, I suspect they've all reached that score in very different ways (video capability vs AF prowess, etc).

The award (or lack of it) is the reviewer's assessment of the totality of the camera, compared to what else is available. A silver is a very good camera that may have some shortcomings that will limit its appeal. A Gold is a great camera that is likely to appeal to a wide number of people.

Most modern cameras are really good, but the conclusion of each review should address who each model is best suited to and what its strengths and weaknesses are."

Richard, in all honesty I saw that statement in the Sony part as a final verdict yesterday, as in far ahead of the competition, but can't seem to find it now at a quick glance. I may have to look again later or it may have received similar editing like the Freudian slip which assigned the plasticky body to the NX500 instead of the a6000.

I still think that your categorical "con" statement that the NX500 needs the S lenses for best performance - which also includes IQ - is wrong and should be at the very least qualified.

Andrea - All reviews are inherently subjective. And, since it's impossible to make an objective measurement of qualities such as 'handling,' a fully objective score would be meaningless. Despite this, our scoring algorithm is heavy weighted towards the objective measurements we make. Even the subjective aspects are carefully benchmarked against one another, to maximise consistency.

We do everything we can to take an even-handed approach and I'm being pretty open about the process by which we work. At the point you start using loaded terms such as 'undeclared omissions and strong biases,' despite not having made a case for either, it's pretty clear that we've passed the point of constructive discussion.

I've looked back through the change logs and compared the current version of the text to the one that was present at the point of publication. There's not a single character's difference in the Sony section of the final page, so I don't know where you encountered that text.

People see/read/interpret what suits them most. I am not saying this as a criticism per say but she has really got into defending her point and camera very passionately. I have myself fallen into this trap on more than one occasion previously. I'd suggest taking a step back to get some perspective on the situation. At this point trying reason with her more will just lead to more rant which helps neither party.

Re. the text that I saw yesterday: you say it has not been changed at all since publication and yet Rishi stated on the "plasticky feel" issue: "I agree with you guys. Thanks for pointing that out - it was an honest oversight. I've corrected the error (essentially, swapped out the con)."

The bias and omissions I mentioned became apparent in Rishi's answer to my questions on the native lens line-up in terms of FL choices, the comparative quality of the lenses (should also incl. the kit lenses), the screen (touch AF) and the UI, and ergonomics. He said that he didn't care much about these but about AF precision and EVF. Then came the hyperbole that with the NX500 only the kit lens counts. This is a reviewer's strong bias that omits much.

I understand that reviews are somewhat subjective, but his statements do not suggest even-handedness. Assigning percentage points that are part subjectively derived and mean different things with different cams yet suggest objectivity is misleading.

Sorry, I should have been clearer, I meant the text about the a6000 on the final page is character-for-character the same.

Overall, though, I'm going to take nandbytes sage advice and step back from this.

I admire your commitment and am always pleased to encounter someone who loves their camera so much. I hope that, in turn, you appreciate how difficult it is to differentiate and select in a category with so many good cameras.

That's absolutely fine, Richard. I appreciate your replies. You have a myriad of cams to evaluate and even more queries and complaints to answer. And you actually do a good job at that. But as you could see in this thread, I was not the only one to take DPR (not you specifically) up on this comparison, just more persistently than others. I don't usually do this on the internet, so must have felt very strongly about it.

Am looking forward to the dents you'll put into the D750, lol!

Anyway, most terrible news have just arrived from Paris, and I still have a page or two to write.

Have a good one, and til next time. I'll try to be more evenhanded, too, then. ;-)

We're better at our jobs with our readers holding us to account.

Have a good evening.

"As a historian, researcher, and university lecturer I take factual knowledge, an even-handed approach, methods of analysis and the open declaration of these very seriously."

The number of assumptions and misrepresentations of us you make, then, is rather ironic.

I actually do shoot kids quite a bit. It's one of the reasons I emphasize that AF is important for kid photography.

"He said that he didn't care much about these but about AF precision and EVF."

When did I say that? Because I pointed out they're differentiators between a couple cameras, it means I don't care about anything else?

You consistently claim you have great experience shooting kids w/ the 30 and 85, but you haven't tested the a6000. We've directly tested the a6000 and similar primes as well as the NX500 with a # of primes, & can confirm AF is limited on the NX500 by the primes, which isn't the case with the a6000. But then you disqualify our results.

?

I think it's fairly clear which side has bias...

I have used a lot of photo and video(and film) cameras throught my 16 years of professional life, and at least a decade before that as a hobby. The Samsungs have the best user experience I have ever seen. Menus are clear and you can do some things with 2-3-4 different ways(even the iFN lens button works for me). I think Samsung is a clear winner here, and I can recomend the camera to all novices, also auto programs are working miracoulsy well. Handling and button layer is top of the tops (for such a small camera). Sony is good only for technical specifications, and when Samsung NX500 came out, Sony lost that as well. The IBIS of the Olympus is a great advantage, and Fuji's produce excellent pictures (not videos though). Sony is the second best overall camera after the Samsung and I always recomend their system but is not better than the rest in any of the specific categories. For me it was the Ibis of the Olympus, or the photos of Fuji(I am emotional attached ti Fuji even from the film days!), but because I am a video guy, I went with Samsung, Sony was there for the consideration for only a few minutes. Also Andrea is right in most things (like always!) and is rather silly to talk so much about the kit lens on a camera system. If someone will only use the camera with the kit lens is obviousle did a great mistake, as there are compact cameras these days with great sensors and far better fixed lenses, better than any kit lens(Panasonic is my preference here). Of course you express your opinions, critical thinking was always the most humane of all the human abilities and evolutiin characteristic, someone can read, test, reaserch, do a field study, and decide. If not, just take the Sonies of the world.

"is rather silly to talk so much about the kit lens on a camera system."

I'm confused - who is talking about the kit lens? We're specifically not talking about the kit lens, and talking about how AF performance falls behind when you step away from the kit lens.

Also, the a6000 page was updated with 'Plasticky, less robust body' as a con, while any reference to a plasticky body was removed from the NX1 page.

Finally, suggesting that those who buy Sony are those who don't read, test, research, and do field studies is rather disingenuous.

That's bit self-righteous, implying people who buy Sony haven't done their tests, research etc but I guess people who agree with you have?

Actually Rishi, I think the real choice for most people buying in this sector is between the A6000 and the E-M10 II.

I am buying a NX500 to go with my A6000 so I'll soon have experience with both systems. Just wanted to chime in and say that Andrea and Kisaha's experiences may be valid but not every Samsung user may feel as confident about the Samsung prime lenses. 9 months ago when there was only a NX1, Samsung forum members had a dim view of the AF of some of the primes. Maybe newer firmware of NX1 and now NX500 have made a difference, but I wonder if it's also possible some Samsung members just aren't quite as confident in the primes. I waded into or created several threads asking about the primes over the last year, and never heard any ringing endorsements like I am hearing now.

It depends on on who your ask. I personally feel A6000's AF is fantastic and best in its class. But i am sure our friends above will disagree. So there is no point going in circles arguing about it.

I'd love to try NX1 seriously (i.e. outside the camera store). But NX gear is "impossible" to find in used market and then sell in used market. Thus far all the gear I have tried have been by buying and selling from the used market. Really easy with Nikon and I made no loss. Not quite as easy with Sony but not impossible. If it became harder to buy and sell Sony gear I'd ditch Sony too. Fortunately its becoming easier.
(Disclaimer: I am commenting from experience here in UK only)

nand: you could always buy used in US and ship to UK. Esp Adorama or B&H can probably ship to UK and it'd actually end up cheaper. But no question, mirrorless used market is less liquid. We are the bleeding edge, the explorers with no safety net.

A lot of people won't buy a body without some sort of VF, I think that argument gets a little diluted when people start tossing around statements like "serious shooting" and other vague qualifiers tho. One can certainly get away without an EVF for a lot of occasions, seriously, OTOH at a certain time of day relying on a screen can become a real chore.

I've got cameras I only use indoors or at night or as a second body, don't mind the lack of VF... For a body I'll take out in the middle of the day or all day tho, it's certainly better to have one IMO.

just have to buy a loupe lol

Heck, your can always flip the screen up and plant it right against your waist too if stabilisation is the goal... Or, you know, buy a body with IBIS. :p I agree that makes a poor argument in favor of the EVF... If you're not often out in the middle of the day and away from any shade then you can get away without it, if you are then you'll likely benefit from one, it's that simple IMO.

I like the idea of having a pocket sized beast, I think it is appropriate not to have a viewfinder for this camera much like the a5100. I'd grab this camera as a back up casual camera if I had a big DSLR

Unless I'm indoors, I find any ambient light on the screen makes it difficult for me to judge exposure. And in low light I tend to really like the camera stabilized with my elbows in tight again defeating my use of the screen to capture. Because I wear glasses, I actually would prefer to use the screen on the a6000, but it just doesn't work for me. I'd like to say its just old school habits that I learned in HS way too many years ago, but I was the kid in class without a 35 SLR, instead hauling a twin lens reflex Mamiya 220 (IE no viewfinder) around, which in many respects is like a camera without an EVF.

Thank you and that is exactly why I bought it plus the price was $399. I now need to sell off my NEX5R and a Pentax Q.

The 5R is my most useful general-purpose camera. And oh, the X10 too.

A D5500 which was in the $500-$800 range with lens, would also be a great choice. And with the 35mm f/1.8 DX lens a super compact low light beast.

D5500 and D7100 are very different cameras.

n/t

Agreed Androole... I thin both models are kinda puzzling tbh. Sony will happily add touch on the cheaper A5100 (and NEX5 and every other 5 series iteration), yet keep it from the A6000, it makes even less sense than Samsung omitting an EVF but the EVF is ultimately a bigger draw amongst enthusiasts. No one brand gets it all right, Oly has a great EVF, touch, IBIS, etc etc yet has not added OSPDAF on any body outside the E-M1.

Richard, the original review said that the E-M10 II is a better camera than the A6000.