Alternative to Sony A6000 with kit lens because of sharpness concerns

Daymouse

Daymouse

Suspended / Banned
Messages
876
Name
Simon
Edit My Images
No
I’m looking at the Sony A6000 with the Kit lens and to add the 55-210mm later on and my all round and travel lens as the big thing for me is the weight. Camera and the 55-210 lens weight less than my 60D without a lens on.


My main concern is the kit lens that comes with the A6000 as I read a lot of reports that it isn’t very sharp on the edges.


Has anyone got any experience of this?


Or


Do you have any alternative cameras with a kit lens that are just as light weight as the a6000 and have a view finder at around the same price?
 
I have the A6000 + the kit lens ( and 3 primes ) imo the kit lens is no worse, no better than most kit lens. It wil do a decent job and of course is very small and portable. Why fixate on a lack of sharpness on the edges ? This is true of most 'consumer' zooms.' If you spend £600.00 plus on the zeiss Sony E 16-70mm f4 for the A6000 and start 'pixel peeping' you will find the edges lack critical sharpness. Unless you need steller sharpness across the frame for landscapes etc why does it matter ?
If you go with the A6000 & kit lens combo I recommend Dxo Optics 10 software to process the raw files. Auto correction of distortion etc.
 
Yep, I've also got the kit lens and find it terrible lol. Nah, it's a nice compact lens. Ok, a bit slow but most kit lenses are.
I did get a Sony 18-105 very quickly after getting my a6000, and it it noticeable sharper if you go looking close up. It's not as heavy as it looks, but of course not in the same size catamaran either.
Its a better all round lens as long as the size doesn't put you off, and it does feel right on the a6000.

I must admit after building up the Sony a6000 system I've now gone back to my Canon gear, but I don't really mind the weight and size.
 
Dave, I owned the Sony 18-105 and foolishly sold it (why did I do that) for the money one of the best lens I have owned. Why did I sell it ?
 
Yeah, it's a great all round lens. Probably my most used Sony lens. I always wanted to try the 16-70 f/4 but never felt it would offer anything over the 18-105 other than mechanical focusing.
Actually the way the 18-105 always started at 18mm when the camera is turned on is quite annoying, but a minor issue.
 
How often do you print your pictures at 40" x 60"? That, roughly, is the equivalent of printing at 100%, ie pixel peep a 100% crop and print at that magnification.

It's a good lens that does what it is meant to do.
 
It's an OK lens and the only zoom which keeps the A6000 just about pocketable. It won't bring out the best in the camera but it won't shame it either. If you use remote app it can be remotely zoomed which can be great in some situations.

Buy it and try it.
 
Thanks for the feed back guys!

After some research I came across the Olympus m10 Mk2 and thought that was a good contender!

I then realised after cash back and discounts I could get it with the 14-40mm and the 42-150 lenses from Jessops for £465

The similar setup for the a6000 would be about £600

Also just spotted the 8mm fisheye that Olympus do which is really cheap. That looks great fun!!
 
^^What they all say :0). The kit lens is excellent so long as you accept its limitations but stopped down slightly it performs well above its size/weight.

Couple of handheld examples from the 16-50 I've just brought down from my Flickr stream.

ImageUploadedByTalk Photography Forums1464807128.839435.jpg

ImageUploadedByTalk Photography Forums1464807137.031041.jpg

Also, with regards to corner sharpness, it's not always what makes an image. One of my favourite lenses for shooting unique portraits is a crappy 35/1.7 cctv lens :0)

ImageUploadedByTalk Photography Forums1464807181.396392.jpg
 
Daymouse said:
Thanks for the feed back guys!

After some research I came across the Olympus m10 Mk2 and thought that was a good contender!
Click to expand...

The Olympus cameras are very nice and much better looking than the Sony. They have many good and sensibly priced lenses.

I switched from micro four thirds to Sony A7 partly because they were too fiddly and I hated the menu system.The other factor was the x2 crop factor which was a real nuisance with my Leica M lenses. Never had any IQ problems though. The A6000 came along later as a bargain second hand buy and is now my 'go-to' camera for general purposes.
 
I'd do a bit more research if you think the Olympus EM 10mk2 is a good contender against the Sony's
 
Daymouse said:
Why do you say that?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say that the EM10ii image stabilising is a great improvement over the Sony IS lenses if any. Having owned the Sony 16-50 I can say that it is a very good lens, it can stand up against the Sony 10-18,18-105 quite easily and the same can be said in regards to the 16-70 from what I've seen on the internet. However if lens choice and primes are your thing I understand why youre considering m4/3 but I'd be wary about thinking edge performance is going to be sharper should you purchase zoom lenses. In my opinion the Em10ii ergonomics are very poor unless you purchase the extra grip which is a big improvement but I'd rather have the Sony's while hand holding any day.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top