Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              10      
11
       12              16       17       end
  

Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced
  
 
mawz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #1 · p.11 #1 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


curious80 wrote:
You are right the T12 takes care of the wide angle prime part, and the full frame 55mm 1.8 can double up as the APS-C portrait lens, though it is an expensive way to get an f1.8 APS-C lens..


So expensive that it's $100 cheaper than the ZA E 24/1.8 and also is the best lens in its focal length range for less than $4K (in terms of optics, nothing less than an Otus touches it).


So I could re-phrase to say that it is possible to get a good looking Sony kit as long as you are willing to spend $1K per lens and are OK to still get relatively slow f1.8 lenses. If I compare again to say Fuji - a much younger system, it still gives a lot more high quality options. Fuji has the T12 just like the Sony, but also gives you 14mm f2.8 - a great lens by all accounts and 18mm f2 - a fast compact wide-angle prime. Also at significantly less price than the ZA24, you get the Fuji
...Show more

And yes, the Fuji line remains more attractive if you don't want a full-Zeiss line. Which is one reason why I now shoot X mount rather than E mount. E mount has the lenses I want, but X mount has a major cost advantage. The A6000 doesn't personally interest me either as I prefer a high/low split across 2 bodies rather than 1 mid-range body (and the A6000 looks like a downgrade from the NEX-6 & 7 if you're a heavy manual focus shooter. No way is a 1.44M EVF going to adequately replace a 2.36M one. A6000 looks awesome for the price though, it's just not high enough up the line for me).



Feb 21, 2014 at 01:04 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #2 · p.11 #2 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


mawz wrote:
There are no high-end APS-C bodies except the now obsolete NEX-7.


mawz wrote:
The A7r isn't anywhere close to being a high-end APS-C body, any more than the D800 is one. It's a mid-range FF body which can be operated as a sortof APS-C body. Any other description is stretching the definition of APS-C body.


I am confused. The NEX-7 is high end, but the A7r is midrange? What properties of the NEX-7 puts it in a cetagory above the A7r?



Feb 21, 2014 at 01:20 PM
HopeIsEternal
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #3 · p.11 #3 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


Well the A7r has like 1.5fps c-afs compared to 11fps for moidrange A6000 and I think 10fps of Nex-7. I never understood why the FF NEX models had such pitifully slow shooting rates compared to lower end RX10/RX100 series and APS-C NEX models. And don't bring up the excuse of higher resolution as the midrange 11fps A6000 has the same resolution and batteries as the 3fps A7. Clearly Sony either rate limited the shooting speed of A7/A7r or they used lower-spec imaging ASICs/less efficient sensors in them than on their APS-C NEX and DSLRs. The same thing happened with the FF Sony A99 - despite being their flagship FF camera it has the same resolution and batteries as midrange A-77 but yet has half the frame rate.

alundeb wrote:
I am confused. The NEX-7 is high end, but the A7r is midrange? What properties of the NEX-7 puts it in a cetagory above the A7r?




Feb 21, 2014 at 02:16 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #4 · p.11 #4 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


HopeIsEternal wrote:
Well the A7r has like 1.5fps c-afs compared to 11fps for moidrange A6000 and I think 10fps of Nex-7.


Now you compare the AF mode of the A7r with the high speed mode of the NEX-7.

The A7r does 5 fps in APS-C high speed mode, and the NEX-7 does 3.5 fps in AF mode.



Feb 21, 2014 at 02:30 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #5 · p.11 #5 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


Hope, you started the thread "Wow! Sony A7/A7r most returned " high end new cameras"


Feb 21, 2014 at 02:36 PM
xbarcelo
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #6 · p.11 #6 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


Actually, the XF23 is, if anything, more expensive than the ZA 24… The 20 2,8 is equal to the Fuji 18 (except, true, a little less bright, but significantly cheaper). The XF 60 is nice, but with a very very slow AF. As for the 18-55, its price new is 2/3 of the Zeiss, but its range is significantly less, both on the wide and long ends. Furthermore, with the La-EA 1, 2, 3 and 4 you have the whole range of Sony, Minolta and 3rd party lenses, which on the long end is massively more interesting than the lonely 55-200, however nice it might be. However, it is true that the 14 2,8 is very nice and all the lenses have a very consistent rendering, which is probably the big problem with Sony. I'm saying all this after having tried, enjoyed and suffered both systems.


Feb 21, 2014 at 02:48 PM
Dave McGaughey
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.11 #7 · p.11 #7 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


xbarcelo wrote:
Actually, the XF23 is, if anything, more expensive than the ZA 24… The 20 2,8 is equal to the Fuji 18 (except, true, a little less bright, but significantly cheaper). The XF 60 is nice, but with a very very slow AF. As for the 18-55, its price new is 2/3 of the Zeiss, but its range is significantly less, both on the wide and long ends. Furthermore, with the La-EA 1, 2, 3 and 4 you have the whole range of Sony, Minolta and 3rd party lenses, which on the long end is massively more interesting than the lonely
...Show more

In the US, the Fuji 23/1.4 is selling for $750 while the Sony/Zeiss 24/1.8 is $1100.



Feb 21, 2014 at 03:12 PM
snapsy
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.11 #8 · p.11 #8 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


A full user-review from a poster at dpreview:

http://www.alinpopescu.eu/blog/full-review-focus-tests-sony-a6000-beautiful-dream/



Feb 26, 2014 at 02:43 AM
mawz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #9 · p.11 #9 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


alundeb wrote:
I am confused. The NEX-7 is high end, but the A7r is midrange? What properties of the NEX-7 puts it in a cetagory above the A7r?


The NEX-7 is high-end APS-C. The A7r is mid-range FF. Yes there is a difference.

High-end APS-C is the $1K+ club. Which the NEX-7 is still in officially. It's also by far the highest-end E mount body in terms of build & controls.

Of the ~14 FF bodies currently on the market, the A7r is in the bottom 4 in terms of price and spec (aside from the sensor). So yes, it is mid-range. Sure it's quite a capable body and arguably has the best sensor on the market, but it's not exactly in 1-series or Single-digit Nikon territory in terms of spec.

And no, the A7r in crop mode is no comparison to the NEX-7 shooting native APS-C. It's a better camera if shooting at its native resolution but 15MP crop mode does not beat 24MP. And of course there's certain aspects of the NEX-7 that are just better than the A7r (blackout/lag most notably).


Edited on Feb 26, 2014 at 05:00 AM · View previous versions



Feb 26, 2014 at 04:51 AM
mawz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #10 · p.11 #10 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


xbarcelo wrote:
Actually, the XF23 is, if anything, more expensive than the ZA 24…


umm, no. The ZA24 $1098 at B&H, the XF23 is $899 normally and $699 right now.


The 20 2,8 is equal to the Fuji 18 (except, true, a little less bright, but significantly cheaper).


Umm, again no. The 20/2.8 is a full stop slower and right now all of $50 cheaper. It's also at best comparable to the already significantly cheaper Sigma 19 and handles worse than either the Fuji 18 or the Sigma 19 (the focus ring is chintzy on the 20/2.8 and hard to use if the hood is mounted)



The XF 60 is nice, but with a very very slow AF.


That's not true anymore. The XF60 today focuses about as fast, if not faster than the 50/1.8 OSS does on the NEX-7.


As for the 18-55, its price new is 2/3 of the Zeiss, but its range is significantly less, both on the wide and long ends. Furthermore, with the La-EA 1, 2, 3 and 4 you have the whole range of Sony, Minolta and 3rd party lenses, which on the long end is massively more interesting than the lonely 55-200, however nice it might be. However, it is true that the 14 2,8 is very nice and all the lenses have a very consistent rendering, which is probably the big problem with Sony. I'm saying all this after having tried, enjoyed and
...Show more

While that is true, just try handholding any of those long lenses on an E mount body. Been there, done that. No way am I doing it again. One major knock I've had with all the APS-C E mount bodies except the bloody awful A3000 is that there is no way to configure them to handle well with larger lenses like pretty much any decent telephoto.

And yes, I've shot both systems as well (3 NEX bodies owned, 5N/R and a 7, collectively north of 10K frames, currently shooting an X-A1).



Feb 26, 2014 at 04:57 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



mawz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #11 · p.11 #11 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


Oh, I should note one thing:

For all my complaints about the current state of E mount (and especially the body selection), the A6000 looks to be an extremely solid camera for its pricepoint and arguably the best value we've seen in E mount.




Feb 26, 2014 at 05:06 AM
Jeff Kott
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.11 #12 · p.11 #12 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


mawz wrote:
That's not true anymore. The XF60 today focuses about as fast, if not faster than the 50/1.8 OSS does on the NEX-7.



Didn't you just say the Nex 7 was "obsolete"?

Just kidding, couldn't resist.



Feb 26, 2014 at 06:50 AM
kevindar
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #13 · p.11 #13 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


so it only uses the fast pdaf focusing in continous focus according to the reviewer, where it is not possible to his estimate in setting what subject to focus on what a bummer.


Feb 26, 2014 at 07:13 AM
xbarcelo
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #14 · p.11 #14 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


mawz wrote:
umm, no. The ZA24 $1098 at B&H, the XF23 is $899 normally and $699 right now.

Umm, again no. The 20/2.8 is a full stop slower and right now all of $50 cheaper. It's also at best comparable to the already significantly cheaper Sigma 19 and handles worse than either the Fuji 18 or the Sigma 19 (the focus ring is chintzy on the 20/2.8 and hard to use if the hood is mounted)


Where I stand, that is, Europe, that's the case. I didn't check US prices, but I guess that there's a difference, that affects my perspective and yours.



That's not true anymore. The XF60 today focuses about as fast, if not faster than the 50/1.8 OSS does on the NEX-7.


I'm very happy that you think that way, but I do have an X-E1 and it's bloody slow!!



While that is true, just try handholding any of those long lenses on an E mount body. Been there, done that. No way am I doing it again. One major knock I've had with all the APS-C E mount bodies except the bloody awful A3000 is that there is no way to configure them to handle well with larger lenses like pretty much any decent telephoto.

And yes, I've shot both systems as well (3 NEX bodies owned, 5N/R and a 7, collectively north of 10K frames, currently shooting an X-A1).


I'd say that handholding long lenses on the A7 (which is an E mount body) is fine. As for the rest of the bodies, it's not worse than the Fuji's. I've tried! If you start adding grips to the Fuji, then you can do the same with the Sony. I don't know, I guess that both systems are not great for big, long lenses ergonomically, but at least with the Sony's you do have AF (and proper PD AF, at that). I'm not trying to sell any Sony, but having tried the Fuji, I'm back at the Sony camp… Dealing with little niggles in both cases, I must say!



Feb 26, 2014 at 09:46 AM
mawz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #15 · p.11 #15 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


xbarcelo wrote:
I'd say that handholding long lenses on the A7 (which is an E mount body) is fine. As for the rest of the bodies, it's not worse than the Fuji's. I've tried! If you start adding grips to the Fuji, then you can do the same with the Sony. I don't know, I guess that both systems are not great for big, long lenses ergonomically, but at least with the Sony's you do have AF (and proper PD AF, at that). I'm not trying to sell any Sony, but having tried the Fuji, I'm back at the Sony camp… Dealing
...Show more

The A7 is FE mount, not E mount (which is the APS-C variant of the mount). Dunno why Sony differentiates the mounts like that but they do. And I agree that the A7 body handles reasonably well with larger lenses, it's the wee APS-C bodies that don't (aside from the previously mentioned and bloody awful A3000).



Feb 26, 2014 at 01:16 PM
mawz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #16 · p.11 #16 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


xbarcelo wrote:
I'm very happy that you think that way, but I do have an X-E1 and it's bloody slow!!


Are you on the latest firmware for both lens and body? I won't call the XF60 fast, but it does focus about as fast as the Sigma 105OS HSM on a D600, at least at non-macro distances. It's certainly acceptable on my X-A1 which should have about the same performance as an X-E1 on the latest firmware.

Note I'd tried the XF60 on the X-Pro1 when it originally came out. That was slow. Dog slow. But Fuji's improved AF for that lens a lot since then.



Feb 26, 2014 at 01:20 PM
mogul
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #17 · p.11 #17 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


mawz wrote:
The A7 is FE mount, not E mount (which is the APS-C variant of the mount). Dunno why Sony differentiates the mounts like that but they do. And I agree that the A7 body handles reasonably well with larger lenses, it's the wee APS-C bodies that don't (aside from the previously mentioned and bloody awful A3000).

E mount is E mount...no difference. Lenses are marketed FE if they give FF FOV.



Feb 26, 2014 at 03:06 PM
kewlcanon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #18 · p.11 #18 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


Looks good:

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/new-sony-a6000-autofocus-video-tests/



Mar 11, 2014 at 07:35 PM
BlueBomberTurbo
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #19 · p.11 #19 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


Finally, some sample RAWs!
http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2.php?id=slr_review&divpage=1&page=1&no=392

And they're looking good! Very close to my Nikon D7100, with even 1/3 stop more highlight recovery!



Mar 16, 2014 at 08:59 PM
kewlcanon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.11 #20 · p.11 #20 · Official: Sony Alpha A6000 Mirrorless announced


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohX8XZRMp2Y


Mar 18, 2014 at 12:57 AM
1       2       3              10      
11
       12              16       17       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              10      
11
       12              16       17       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password