A6000

I'm still looking and pondering - saw an A6300 + 16-50 go on ebay for £430, and now wonder if it is worth the extra (silent shooting really attracts me for classical concerts).

Then there is the prospect of a little windfall - should I blow it on an A6600 and be able to use the LA-EA5?

Decisions, decisions.

Phil Wood wrote: I'm still looking and pondering - saw an A6300 + 16-50 go on ebay for £430, and now wonder if it is worth the extra (silent shooting really attracts me for classical concerts). Then there is the prospect of a little windfall - should I blow it on an A6600 and be able to use the LA-EA5? Decisions, decisions.

When I bought the a6600 to replace the a6300, my reasons were; the much better AF system, IBIS and the larger battery, in that order. The LA-EA5 wasn't even being discussed.

When the LA-EA5 did become available I got it and primarily use it with the a6600. It's brilliant with the 100/2, CZ135/1.8 and 200/2.8 HS. Doesn't get as much usage with shorter focal lengths, except for the Tokina 11-16/2.8, a lens I almost sold, but new life on the a6600!

So much will depend on the lenses you'd adapt. For my stable of screw-drive A mounts it was a no brainer.

TOP likes loves the A6600, https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2021/05/the-sony-a6600-goes-back-to-roger-today.html.

addy landzaat wrote: [QUOTE=Phil Wood] Just wait for the A6700/6900 that is expected shortly.

I'd wait for the A6700/A6900 announcement too, if only to see if the "vlogger camera" (described so on SAR) will also have enough updates in the stills photography department and not necessarily because I think that the A6600 price will suddenly take a nosedive.

On a slightly related to-the-discussion tangent I relatively recently acquired my first E-mount camera that employs the Z-type battery. The larger battery wasn't what I was looking forward to primarily but it is what I've come to appreciate the most. Coming from A-mount to the A7 then A7rii I'd gotten used to mini batteries that die after 30 minutes shooting in the cold; the Z-type was a minor relevation.

That TOP article I mentioned above discusses the improved battery, and my own experience with the A7 IiI is that the battery is a huge improvement over that for the A7 and NEX-7 (in my case). You might have to factor in the cost of an extra battery for the earlier models if you think you’re likely to be a day-long user of the camera.

QuietOC wrote: There's definitely a trade-off between features and battery life. The A5000 was pretty decent with the little batteries. The A6000 less so. The A7RII can drain them in an hour. The A7III could last a week with the Z--A7RIV not so much. I need a second Z battery.

I have seen that trade-off moving from A58 to A99ii, but I carry spares and it hasn't been much of a hindrance.

If the A6600 could be found for half the price it would be a no-brainer, I may end up with a A6000 or even a Nex 6, to satisfy my holiday needs for a year or two, until the A6600 can be found at a better price.

overeema wrote: pegelli wrote: I have and like the A6000 which gets used a lot more than my NEX6, better menu (like the A7's I also use) and a better sensor. AF is also a slight improvement. Only thing I find dearly missing from the A6000 is the spirit level, the NEX6 and later A6xxx models have it, but not the A6000 I've never used a NEX7, so I can't compare it against the NEX6 or A6000 On the downside for A6000 or NEX7 compared to NEX6 are: NEX6 has a higher resolution viewfinder (2.3 vs. 1.4 Mpixel) and the the NEX6 and 7 have a metal alloy body, whereas the A6000 has a plastic body. (if 16 Mpixel sensor is good enough for hiking) I agree the menu system of the NEX6 is a disadvantage.

I can cope with the menu system. It's just a pity that the LA-EA1 & 3 don't provide usable AF with the Nex-6.