FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

A6000

Page  123 9>
Author
Howard_S View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 20 March 2008
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Oxford
Status: Offline
Posts: 2982
Post Options Post Options   Quote Howard_S Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: A6000
    Posted: 57 minutes ago at 00:27
Howard Stanbury Instagram | Flickr | Web
 



Back to Top
Phil Wood View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 24 March 2013
Country: United Kingdom
Location: England
Status: Offline
Posts: 1530
Post Options Post Options   Quote Phil Wood Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 4 hours 11 minutes ago at 21:13
Originally posted by 2manycamera 2manycamera wrote:

Originally posted by Phil Wood 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.


The A6600 is way more tan I was planning to spend (about 3 times) - though not as expensive as I'd anticipated. In every other way it seems better. I guess it would replace my A77 for APS-C use as well fit with my holiday camera plan.
Back to Top
2manycamera View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 14 November 2005
Location: Cal Motherlode
Status: Offline
Posts: 1616
Post Options Post Options   Quote 2manycamera Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 6 hours 17 minutes ago at 19:07
Originally posted by Phil Wood 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.
7D a68 a99 a6600 a7Rii 16/2.8 24/2.8 28/2 35/2 50/1.4 100/2 200/2.8 24-70CZ 1.8/135 80-200/2.8 24-105 28-135 300/4 16-50DT 70-300G Tam 90/2.8, E55-210 E2/12 Sig E1.4/16,30 & 56, FE15/4.5V
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 3252
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 6 hours 39 minutes ago at 18:45
The A6300 works pretty well with the LA-EA1/3/5. What screw-drive lenses do you want to use?

I'd want the 18-135 OSS with an A6x00.
Sony A7RIV NEX-5T HVL-F45RM LA-EA3 LA-EA4r MB-IV MC-11 EF-E II TLT ROKR MD-NEX KR-NEX DA-NEX
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9 11.5/9 AF-P/Q
Back to Top
Phil Wood View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 24 March 2013
Country: United Kingdom
Location: England
Status: Offline
Posts: 1530
Post Options Post Options   Quote Phil Wood Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 7 hours 7 minutes ago at 18:17
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.
Back to Top
overeema View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 07 September 2008
Country: Netherlands
Location: Gelderland
Status: Offline
Posts: 348
Post Options Post Options   Quote overeema Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 May 2021 at 16:22
Originally posted by pegelli 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.
minolta owner since 1969;A350-CZ1680-G70300-Tamron60F2-Minolta100F2-35105-28135-50F1.7; NEX6-E1650-E18105G (& 5 x minolta MC/MD)
 



Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 11634
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 April 2021 at 12:44
Originally posted by waldo_posth 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.
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 3252
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 April 2021 at 11:56
Originally posted by Aavo Aavo wrote:

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

That will work. There are many larger 35's available. The GM is the easy choice.
Sony A7RIV NEX-5T HVL-F45RM LA-EA3 LA-EA4r MB-IV MC-11 EF-E II TLT ROKR MD-NEX KR-NEX DA-NEX
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9 11.5/9 AF-P/Q
Back to Top
Aavo View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 03 April 2013
Country: Estonia
Location: Tallinn
Status: Offline
Posts: 5389
Post Options Post Options   Quote Aavo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 April 2021 at 11:53
My idea was to replace aps-c 24/1,8ZA with FF35mm prime.
The lens for low light shooting.
a6500 & some nice e-mount af lenses 20/24/56/17-70/18-135 mm
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 3252
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 April 2021 at 11:44
Originally posted by Aavo Aavo wrote:


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.


A larger sensor doesn't help in low light. Except when lenses allow shallower depth-of-field than those available for APS-C. It is the larger lens that matters not sensor size. Larger sensors require higher ISO to capture a similar image. That difference is not an advantage (or disadvantage).

The Sony E 35 F1.8 OSS seems to be the softest 35 mm lens ever. I find the lowly Sony FE 50 F1.8 better on full-frame than the normal APS-C primes. The recent full-frame 35's like the GM offer better optical performance for APS-C, but they are large, expensive, and lack stabilization.

The lowly Rokinon 35 F2.8 convinced me to invest in a full-frame body instead of trying the E 24 F1.8 ZA. I am sure it is a nice enough lens.

Edited by QuietOC - 27 April 2021 at 11:54
Sony A7RIV NEX-5T HVL-F45RM LA-EA3 LA-EA4r MB-IV MC-11 EF-E II TLT ROKR MD-NEX KR-NEX DA-NEX
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9 11.5/9 AF-P/Q
Back to Top
Aavo View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 03 April 2013
Country: Estonia
Location: Tallinn
Status: Offline
Posts: 5389
Post Options Post Options   Quote Aavo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 April 2021 at 11:35
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!
a6500 & some nice e-mount af lenses 20/24/56/17-70/18-135 mm
Back to Top
waldo_posth View Drop Down
Alpha Eyes group
Alpha Eyes group

Joined: 01 August 2012
Country: Germany
Location: Potsdam
Status: Offline
Posts: 5585
Post Options Post Options   Quote waldo_posth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 April 2021 at 11:27
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.
"Stare, pry, listen, eavesdrop. Die knowing something. You are not here long." (Walker Evans)   http://www.flickr.com/photos/waldo_posth/
Back to Top
Aavo View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 03 April 2013
Country: Estonia
Location: Tallinn
Status: Offline
Posts: 5389
Post Options Post Options   Quote Aavo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 April 2021 at 11:00
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.
a6500 & some nice e-mount af lenses 20/24/56/17-70/18-135 mm
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 11634
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 April 2021 at 10:12
Full frame is about a stop better yes, but....

The A7c with 50/2.5 weighs (509+174) 683gr at 2500,-
The A6400 with 35/1.8 OSS weighs (403+154) 547gr at 1338,-

These two combinations are equivalent, one is APS-C, the other full frame - but the APS-C set is cheaper and noticeably lighter. And the full frame low light advantage is negated by the f/1.8 aperture of the APS-C set.

With the 50/2.5 we at last have a true equivalence set and it proofs the place of APS-C: cheaper and lighter.
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk > E-mount APS-C Page  123 9>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.065 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.