taran wrote:
A6000 currently represents the top of the line APS-c performance. Image quality can only be improved by going to Full Frame. Just my 2ç.
If you aren't happy with OOC jpgs from the A6000. It is unlikely you will be satisfied with any other APS-c.
Everything is relative, but at $350, its very to close best image you can get and best SOOC jpgs you can get.
Maybe for mirrorless, but it's far from the best overall APS-C IQ. All of Nikon's current and last iteration APS-C cameras that compete with the A6000 (D5300/D5500, D7100/D7200), will easily match or beat it, with the D7200 being a significant jump in IQ. Some of that is from Sony's annoying RAW compression, though, but that disadvantage ends at around ISO 800. Samsung's 28MP APS-C sensor is also up there, probably between the D5500 and D7200 (Nikon's top 2 APS-C sensors) in IQ.
I've owned a D7100 and A6000, and looked hard at a D7200 to pair with my D750 because of how close their IQ is. I still have the A6000 for daily use and video, and I agree that its JPGs are the most pleasing I've seen out of any camera. Same with video, I just love the colors and tone. But once you get into RAW, Sony loses out.
@atlas/Nex, very nice to see the NEX 7 still at the top of the APS-c game, I love those shots... color, smooth, bokeh. Indeed, with Sony deprecating APS-c research in favor of full frame, I often wonder if another APS-c cam will ever surpass it. A6000 was a big disappointment in this regard.
@taran: Absolutely right! But even the Nex 5R performs very well with the new Ultron 35/1.7
A great combination if you like to travel light and leave the A7xx at home ;-)
Just sold my a6000. No complaints technically I just didn't like the way the body handled compared to my E-P5. It's a technological marvel but felt soulless in my hands. One of the past pictures I took with it. Kicking myself that I didn't notice I had set the camera at JPEG only. Would have loved a RAW file of this to work with.
deoredx wrote:
Just sold my a6000. No complaints technically I just didn't like the way the body handled compared to my E-P5. It's a technological marvel but felt soulless in my hands. One of the past pictures I took with it. Kicking myself that I didn't notice I had set the camera at JPEG only. Would have loved a RAW file of this to work with.
Well, if you sold the camera, that is your decision of course. Subjective things play a significant role whether one likes a camera or not. Myself, I feel repelled by the body look of the E-P5, reminding me of plastic toy cameras. Again, entirely subjective. However, when I edited some files of this camera I noticed that the pictures couldn't match my 5N in terms of resolution and grass rendering OOC. So I sticked with Sony and upgraded to the A6000.
Regarding your picture, even with JPG there is still a lot of potential in it with minor editing in Capture One. If you give the ok, I will post it here.
Kruschtel wrote:
Regarding your picture, even with JPG there is still a lot of potential in it with minor editing in Capture One. If you give the ok, I will post it here.
Hope you don't mind - I took a crack at it also
Sony JPEGs for whatever reason always seem to take editing a bit better than others'. I noticed this back when I had the A77.
I forgot to mask out the tops of the hills when I did a sharpening routine, so they show some small halos, but nothing game-breaking
