Was the shift to E-mount worth it?

I kinda wish I had skipped A-mount completely. E-mount may not be the best choice now, but it is better. There are a couple of A-mount lenses I'd still like to try, but they are getting harder to find.

I just finished repairing a Minolta AF 28-135mm today. A screw from an internal lens group was jammed somewhere in the mechanics. Also the brushes in the focal length encoder had somehow gotten mangled. It is all working fine now with the LA-EA5/A7RIV.

I should list the A77II and a few more lenses for sale.

I migrated from a900 to e-mount. I started with a7r which I had as a parallel system for a while. I never really liked that camera. I found a very nice deal on a used like-new a9 and after that there is no looking back. The freedom offered by the AF system is mind blowing and while something similar could probably be achieved by the SLT concept, that mirror is in the way of designing compact high performing lenses. A necessary evil which is very nice to get rid of.
Never ever will I have to focus and recompose again
Absolutely worth it

QuietOC wrote: E-mount may not be the best choice now, but it is better.

What system would you consider "better" and why?

Canon - the biggest competition, but flaky APS-C and limited lenses
Nikon - proper APS-C but behind Sony and Canon in AF technology and also limited lenses
Fuji - Strong APS-C contender, but no full-frame cameras and the GFX series is not compatible.
Panasonic/Leica: DFD AF works fine but it is not as good as Sony/Canon, fine number of lenses
I do not feel any of these are "better" then Sony, maybe they have some characteristic that is better for you - but as a system at the moment I think Sony has the best system.

Anyway, like others, I grew into e-mount. I picked up a cheap used NEX 5 to use along my A-mount camera as an easier to carry system. I did not want to spend to much into the system, I picked up the Sigma 30/2.8 and 19/2.8 and later the Sony 50/1.8. When I replaced the NEX 5 with the NEX F3 I started to use it more and more. Picked up a A7r2 with the Sigma MC-11 to use with my Canon lenses. The rest is history.

When I pick up my A99m2 I love to hold it. Really love it. With the 70-400G it is a lovely combination. But it also is huge. My A6400 with the 70-350G is so much smaller. Was the shift worth it? Yes.

Thus far I'm happy to have skipped E-Mount and should have taken a pass on most of A-Mount. I'm not someone who is into post processing. A tweak here and there I can manage but other than that, Meh. I started with Olympus were the image processer takes the raw file and pulls and stretches the most that can be gained and neatly packages it into a little jpeg file in camera. Now that includes focus stacking, HDR, High Resolution Stiches, etcetera.
Sony's image processor has always been heavy handed, clipping highlights, desaturating colour, taking a decent raw file and turning it into crap. I thought it was the camera so i tried a different model. no joy. I've had a Minolta 7D, Sony A100, A200, A300, A500, A550, A580, A700, A850, A37, A57, A58, A68, A77, A77II, A99. All to a similar experience. The Raw files are nice. The in camera processed, Meh.
Has this changed with the latest E-mount cameras? I don't know. I went back to Olympus for mirrorless and a lighter load.
I still like and use the Sony cameras I have. I just hate all the computer work.

With the current e-mount glass available definitely no regrets.

Jonas A-R wrote: QuietOC wrote: Sony does cook their raw files. It would be nice if they would stop doing that. I'm sure you would like to keep some cooking: correlated double sampling, hot pixel mapping, compensation for phase detection pixels etc. I suppose some specialist applications could benefit from less filtering, but in everyday shooting I have never found it to be problematic. Do you have any cases where you had problems?

I do get that. I am generally happy with Sony's compressed raw especially with Capture One. In the under processed category people are finding artifacts in yellow areas with the A1 in Capture One. That seems to be related to the phase-detection. The circular bands from the Shading Compensation is one I see posted fairly often. Of course the star eater. It seems like some complaints may be more accurately attributed to Adobe processing, which I generally don't use.

I started with a Minolta 5D, thus choosing for the mount then.
I switched to A350, A77 and then a used A7R came on my path. I used with my A-mount-glass and the LAE4. Step by step I changed my glass to only E-mount.

Regrets? Mwoa, just price-wise, but further for this amateur, no complaints so far...