A6000

Phil Wood wrote: The 55-210 seems the only option in terms of size and price with the added advantage of OSS - what else could replace it for less than £150? . One problem is that it is too easy to start thinking of this purchase as the basis for my entire photography - with lots of lens decisions to make - but it isn't, it's a small, easy to carry holiday snapper. I don't see it featuring in many Dyxum challenges.

When I bought the original NEX5, my sole reason was to use my many MF Rokkors, Zuikos and Leica M glass.That persisted for 2-3 years. That was 10 years ago.

When I moved to the NEX6, I started buying AF E mount lenses, mostly primes and the LA-EA1 &2 to use with A-mount.

Now that I've had the a6600 for close to 2 years, it is my APS-C platform. FF is still 70% a99 (stage photography if the theaters ever open again), 30% a7RII. If I still did Eventing work, the a99 would be used a lot more.

Guess what I'm getting at is that as the E/FE platform matures, I'm using it a lot more than I would have ever thought. Still won't replace A mount completely, but the percentages continue in flux.

E-mount can surely be the aps-c platform (even for some pro work).
a6000 is still great and today cheap option, if in-body image stabilisation is not important.
a6000 can be the second body for OSS lenses.

I was waiting years a small a6000 alike full frame body with IBIS. It was likely so, that when it comes out, will have 24MP sensor. My idea was to use mostly e-mount aps-c lenses (cropped up to 10 MP, enough for lot of my needs) and replace my lovely e-mount aps-c 24/1,8ZA (about 50% and more mounted on NEX7), with full frame 35mm prime for using full capacity of full frame sensor. So - smallest full frame body with IBIS and smallest and lightest lens collection.

It was interesting. At this time (2013-2015) the idea about alike A7c camera was foolish for lot of full frame users and reviewers, and Sony was not working on that. Today we can have Sony's A7c, bud I was thinking I am foolish and replaced NEX7 with A6500 in 2017.

The idea of my reply is - I was not enough patient. As A6500 sells today much cheaper and second hand lot cheaper, I do not see I can replace A6500 with A7c (body) so often. I am little bit unhappy, because full frame can be used with higher ISO.

Edit: it was logical, that alike A7c is coming.

Agree, this is why I stay with A6500 at today. Some day I probably make replacement with small FF and IBIS body, but not now, not so quiclky.
35/1,8 OSS is not so tasty for me - I love 35mm FF angle. So my best prime is still 24/1,8ZA from 2012 and it serves me perfectly. This is the only lens I will not replace till I stay with aps-c. I had in my hans 35/1,8 OSS some day and I sold it, because my older 24/1,8ZA was so much better for me, and sharper.

If all lenses have OSS, then on need to buy body with IBIS.
All my primes have no OSS, so for me is better to compare with aps-c IBIS body.
But this about lenses. I think all Sony's FF bodies will have IBIS. But who knows!

My idea was to replace aps-c 24/1,8ZA with FF35mm prime.
The lens for low light shooting.

waldo_posth wrote: Wouldn't the corresponding APS-C model not be the A6600? - because the A7C has, of course, IBIS. The A6600 with 35/1.8 OSS weighs 504+154gr and the combo is €1730,- at Amazon.de.

No, as the 35/1.8 OSS has OSS while the 50/2.5G does not. The combination A7c with 50/2.5 is comparable to the A6400 (maybe A6100) with the 35/1.8 OSS - to keep it equivalent I chose one form of stabilisation. There is no full frame 50mm lens with OSS.

The 35/1.8 OSS could do with an update, yes, but that is not the point I am making.