The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!

twist said:
It would, but A6000 has more lenses at the moment so it wouldnt be a bad stop gap till Sony sort out AF and some more lenses you're likely to buy. The A6000 handling is also nicer than the A7s ime.
Click to expand...

and only £465 :)
 
I am thinking of ditching my Fuji X100 collection and replacing it with either a Sony A6000 or RX100 II/III.
A bit of GAS kicking in I think....

Just not sure if the A6000 will fit in a pocket mmm :) whereas the RX100 II/III would.
I do have a iPhone6 so is there a need for a pocket compact like the RX100?
Visiting Edinburgh Zoo next month with my wife and don't want to spend much time faffing about with a camera thus detracting from having a nice time. :)
 
Last edited:
Rizvan said:
I am thinking of ditching my Fuji X100 collection and replacing it with either a Sony A6000 or RX100 II/III.
A bit of GAS kicking in I think....

Just not sure if the A6000 will fit in a pocket mmm :) whereas the RX100 II/III would.
I do have a iPhone6 so is there a need for a pocket compact like the RX100?
Visiting Edinburgh Zoo next month with my wife and don't want to spend much time faffing about with a camera thus detracting from having a nice time. :)
Click to expand...

A6000 is quite big, definitely not pocket size. LX100?
 
twist said:
A6000 is quite big, definitely not pocket size. LX100?
Click to expand...
The Panasonic LX100 does look good too, I will have to read up on it more to see if it or the Sony RX100 II/III is worth getting.
I really love the size of the RX100, it really is a very compact pocket camera, something which I could carry with me all the time unlike my Fuji X100.
 
Rizvan said:
The Panasonic LX100 does look good too, I will have to read up on it more to see if it or the Sony RX100 II/III is worth getting.
I really love the size of the RX100, it really is a very compact pocket camera, something which I could carry with me all the time unlike my Fuji X100.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the RXs are tiny! G7x?
 
twist said:
It would, but A6000 has more lenses at the moment so it wouldnt be a bad stop gap till Sony sort out AF and some more lenses you're likely to buy. The A6000 handling is also nicer than the A7s ime.
Click to expand...

A6000 has more lenses but they're arguably mostly rather ho-hum and besides the lens availability and quality issue... isn't the point of the A7 series that it's a 35mm equivalent system? I therefore don't see the Nex as an alternative choice as you either want a 35mm equivalent system or you go away and choose one of the many excellent smaller format systems.

I suppose another reason to choose an A7 body is that the AF lenses whilst at the moment somewhat limited are good and the range is getting better. The oft criticised AF/tracking performance is either an issue or it isn't. For me it's a non issue as the only AF lens I use is the FE 55mm and I find it to be fast enough.

I liked the look of the LX100 when it was announced but after reading the manual and asking questions here I'm not sure that I could live with one as it seems to be much more like a compact than a camera you can take control of, my main gripes being the lack of being able to take instant control and focus manually as the lens control ring can't be assigned to focus in the usual auto exposure modes of aperture, shutter and manual, and the power zoom with a lever.

But again, surely this isn't an A7 series rival.
 
Last edited:
My friend has the RX100 II and he raves about it. Seen some of his Flickr photos and I am very impressed.
The question is, do I go for the RX100 II or III..... its not a cheap camera, as it might end up costing as much as a A6000 :eek:
RX100 II £429
RX100 III £639

Do I save myself £100-120 and buy a import from DigitalRev etc

Choices choices..... :)
 
Rizvan said:
The question is, do I go for the RX100 II or III..... its not a cheap camera, as it might end up costing as much as a A6000 :eek:
RX100 II £429
RX100 III £639

Do I save myself £100-120 and buy a import from DigitalRev etc

Choices choices..... :)
Click to expand...

I'm not a fan of mobile phone images. My GF shoots thousands of them but I can't seem to do anything much with them post capture without them falling apart and does any phone shoot raw? I dunno. I think that a camera is worth the extra hassle...

My G1 and GX7 are ok-ish but I'm spoilt by the A7 now :D and none of these are really pocketable. Even my LX5 isn't really pocketable and although it can take a nice picture it blows the highlights easily and I'd want to have a really close look at the abilities and image quality of any compact/large compact before spending three figures on one. Maybe it's best to get a small MFT or APS-C like a GX7 or A6000 and carry it in a small case? After all, in the old days a 35mm compact would probably only fit in a largish coat pocket and a MFT or APS-C and small prime will do the same, but will be heavier.
 
woof woof said:
A6000 has more lenses but they're arguably mostly rather ho-hum and besides the lens availability and quality issue... isn't the point of the A7 series that it's a 35mm equivalent system? I therefore don't see the Nex as an alternative choice as you either want a 35mm equivalent system or you go away and choose one of the many excellent smaller format systems.

I suppose another reason to choose an A7 body is that the AF lenses whilst at the moment somewhat limited are good and the range is getting better. The oft criticised AF/tracking performance is either an issue or it isn't. For me it's a non issue as the only AF lens I use is the FE 55mm and I find it to be fast enough.

I liked the look of the LX100 when it was announced but after reading the manual and asking questions here I'm not sure that I could live with one as it seems to be much more like a compact than a camera you can take control of, my main gripes being the lack of being able to take instant control and focus manually as the lens control ring can't be assigned to focus in the usual auto exposure modes of aperture, shutter and manual, and the power zoom with a lever.

But again, surely this isn't an A7 series rival.
Click to expand...

No, because my reply was to Dan, who is looking for something with better AF, the A6000 certainly has that and enough decent lenses and would compliment his A7s as a stop gap until Sony brings out something else more suited. I think you need to go back and read what I said to whom, when did I say the LX100 is a competitor to the A7?!
 
Last edited:
dancook said:
Do all e-mount lenses work ok with the A6000? I could probably find a cheap second hand one.
Click to expand...

Lens wise you have the Sigmas, they are good and dirt cheap. Also the SEL35 and SEL50 and 24 1.8 zeiss. There also a Pancake 20mm 2.8. Thats only from memory, so theres a fair bit to choose from.
 
twist said:
Do you mean CAF or tracking? The video looks to be done in CAF.
Click to expand...

CAF can't tell how different it is to the A7S - CAF pulses back and forth over the focus point, and you can take a photo of a stationary item and actually miss focus if you take the photo whilst it's pulsing....

utter crap.. :D
 
dancook said:
CAF can't tell how different it is to the A7S - CAF pulses back and forth over the focus point, and you can take a photo of a stationary item and actually miss focus if you take the photo whilst it's pulsing....

utter crap.. :D
Click to expand...

Agreed. The XT1 does the same thing, weirdly though through the XT1 EVF it seems like stuff is out of focus but its generally pretty spot on, with the Sony A7 its as you say... utter. I have the A5100 and when I use video and touch on a subject for focus tracking its very good and follows pretty much what I want it to. This guys moving pretty rapidly and the cameras choosing the points! Seriously the A5100/6000 AF destroys the A7. Best CSC AF Ive used, XT1 (CAF) and EM10 (SAF) werent bad either tbf.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-8I502JTMU
 
Last edited:
twist said:
Err A mount has always had IBIS so why would you need OSS lenses? It also has electronic aperture, I think you mean FBW, those lenses don't feel great to focus so thats a negative. The only positive you've listed is flange distance and thats more a positive for people that use manual lenses than the size saving imo.

In any case, why would we want another CSC from Sony, there are plenty to choose from already in both APSC and FF.
Click to expand...

OS has often been slightly better, and the aperture is physically moved by the camera, theres a little lever at back of lens that operates aperture, while more modern lens mounts go with electrical signals, which may give faster open and closing, and is sigma's preference, as its easier to design for.

fbw focusing and zoom on most e mount lenses does feel junky, while ssm hsm or sam screw is better
 
pingu666 said:
OS has often been slightly better, and the aperture is physically moved by the camera, theres a little lever at back of lens that operates aperture, while more modern lens mounts go with electrical signals, which may give faster open and closing, and is sigma's preference, as its easier to design for.

fbw focusing and zoom on most e mount lenses does feel junky, while ssm hsm or sam screw is better
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about lens os being better, look at Olympus, I'm sure Sony could catch up, 5 stops! I really doubt that I need my aperture to open and close any faster than what it already does. I Dont live to make things easier for manufacturers, I pay for them to do whatever needs doing.
 
OS tends to be better for longer focal lengths, but ibis is nice too, think ive got alot of a mount glass anyways :)
 
pingu666 said:
OS tends to be better for longer focal lengths, but ibis is nice too, think ive got alot of a mount glass anyways :)
Click to expand...

I think that used to be the case, not so much anymore. I think a mount mirror less would be awesome they just need to make sure AF is very good, good enough to match the very high price or people will just carry on buying dslrs. The a99 was a flop, I'm hoping for better.
 
twist said:
I think that used to be the case, not so much anymore. I think a mount mirror less would be awesome they just need to make sure AF is very good, good enough to match the very high price or people will just carry on buying dslrs. The a99 was a flop, I'm hoping for better.
Click to expand...

Not sure on the A99 being a flop. It scored higher than its peers the 5d3 and d800/e in its DPReview review. Perhaps it's sales figures you mean?

I will agree with you on the Minolta glass it's simply amazing. The 28/2 Minolta I will wager despite being 30 years old will be optically superior to the FE version. Canon have the mp-e lens which is supposedly unique to the canon system. Better tell that to Minolta ;)
 
Brazo said:
Not sure on the A99 being a flop. It scored higher than its peers the 5d3 and d800/e in its DPReview review. Perhaps it's sales figures you mean and have the figures to hand?

I will agree with you on the Minolta glass it's simply amazing. The 28/2 Minolta I will wager despite being 30 years old will be optically superior to the FE version. Canon have the mp-e lens which is supposedly unique to the canon system. Better tell that to Minolta ;)
Click to expand...

I dont need sales figures, various forums of actual users proved enough for me. Perhaps you have sales figures to prove it sold better than canikons? At that money for a Sony slt, I highly doubt it.
 
twist said:
I dont need sales figures, various forums of actual users proved enough for me. Perhaps you have sales figures to prove it sold better than canikons? At that money for a Sony slt, I highly doubt it.
Click to expand...

Well, you could always take the view that people are sheep and would buy a polished turd with a Canon or Nikon badge on it. Sales are IMVHO a poor indicator of how good a product is. Isn't this why we now have the A7 series? Something different to the Canon and Nikon duopoly...
 
woof woof said:
Well, you could always take the view that people are sheep and would buy a polished turd with a Canon or Nikon badge on it. Sales are IMVHO a poor indicator of how good a product is. Isn't this why we now have the A7 series? Something different to the Canon and Nikon duopoly...
Click to expand...

No, I think people that buy into their first or second beginners camera would buy into branding, anybody serious spending that kind of money uses their brain. Its not anything different tbh, CSC manufacturers have done that form factor long before the a7 came along, all Sony did was cram one of their big sensors in and hopefully everyone will follow suit, to a certain extent. The fact is, not everyone wants an evf or small camera with a huge lens hanging off it. I think manufacturers have to provide a choice to the end user.
 
twist said:
I dont need sales figures, various forums of actual users proved enough for me. Perhaps you have sales figures to prove it sold better than canikons? At that money for a Sony slt, I highly doubt it.
Click to expand...
Sorry I actually edited my post about 1 nanosecond after I posted but looks like you saw my original, I removed my sarky comment. I didn't and wouldn't suggest that sony sold more than canikon I know it didn't, I was just rather surprised by your comments given they have no foundation. Just because it didn't sell as many as more established brands (it never would as woof woof alludes to) but given the reviews it was at least as good if not better than the competition!
 
Last edited:
Brazo said:
Sorry I actually edited my post about 1 nanosecond after I posted but looks like you saw my original, I removed my sarky comment. I didn't and wouldn't suggest that sony sold more than canikon I know it didn't, I was just rather surprised by your comments given they have no foundation. Just because it didn't sll as well(it never would as woof woof alludes to) but given the reviews it was at least as good if not better than the competition!
Click to expand...

So here's the sensor comparison, clearly the SLT tech has had a negative effect on the iso, the Dr is still very good

www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-SLT-Alpha-99-versus-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-versus-Nikon-D800___831_795_792

Where the canon loses out on Dr it makes up on iso and video performance, the Nikon has the best performing sensor.

The a99 has poor video and worse af than its peers from what i researched and poor battery life, also Sony has a non existent pro network.

So they were trying to sell a camera with worse performance in key areas for the same money from what I recall. You only need to look around to see how 'well' the camera sold to see what opinions people have of it.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
No, I think people that buy into their first or second beginners camera would buy into branding, anybody serious spending that kind of money uses their brain. Its not anything different tbh, CSC manufacturers have done that form factor long before the a7 came along, all Sony did was cram one of their big sensors in and hopefully everyone will follow suit, to a certain extent. The fact is, not everyone wants an evf or small camera with a huge lens hanging off it. I think manufacturers have to provide a choice to the end user.
Click to expand...

I couldn't disagree more :D

Most people walk into Curry's and buy what's on the shelf or what the sales assistant shows them and they walk out with an entry level Canon + 18-50mm f3.5-5.6. I only went for a Canon DSLR after owning a Nikon SLR because everyone said they were "best" but to be honest the Samsung my sister bought was much better built and really looked like a quality bit of kit but they don't sell too many of them now despite the apparent quality. Actually they don't make them any more and instead Samsung said "and now for completely different" :D

Was VHS the best format? I'm sure there are many examples of this but who can be bothered and I'll leave it to Ivor Tiefenbrun who I believe said when talking about HiFi... "Trash Triumphs."

Maybe CSC exists because they're different and an attempt by the makers to sell something when they couldn't sell DSLR's? I'm glad they exist though and I'd hate to go back.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
So here's the sensor comparison, clearly the SLT tech has had a negative effect on the iso, the Dr is still very good

www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-SLT-Alpha-99-versus-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-versus-Nikon-D800___831_795_792

Where the canon loses out on Dr it makes up on iso and video performance, the Nikon has the best performing sensor.

The a99 has poor video and worse af than its peers from what i researched and poor battery life, also Sony has a non existent pro network.

So they were trying to sell a camera with worse performance in key areas for the same money from what I recall. You only need to look around to see how 'well' the camera sold to see what opinions people have of it.
Click to expand...
And yet it still came out top on dpreview ;)
 
a99 isdecent enough but not super amazing, i think the jump over a900 wasnt enough for many. and the a900 850 had a great ovf
 
pingu666 said:
a99 isdecent enough but not super amazing, i think the jump over a900 wasnt enough for many. and the a900 850 had a great ovf
Click to expand...

Your right there a lot of A900 users would have loved the A99 if it didn't have the EVF, it might be the next big thing but for a lot of people EVF's just aren't there yet.
 
woof woof said:
I couldn't disagree more :D

Most people walk into Curry's and buy what's on the shelf or what the sales assistant shows them and they walk out with an entry level Canon + 18-50mm f3.5-5.6. I only went for a Canon DSLR after owning a Nikon SLR because everyone said they were "best" but to be honest the Samsung my sister bought was much better built and really looked like a quality bit of kit but they don't sell too many of them now despite the apparent quality. :D
Click to expand...

Perhaps try read my post... again! I wasnt talking about beginners.
 
chrism_scotland said:
Your right there a lot of A900 users would have loved the A99 if it didn't have the EVF, it might be the next big thing but for a lot of people EVF's just aren't there yet.
Click to expand...

Yup, the A850/900 was a very good camera, not sure what they were thinking, imho they shouldve continued DSLR alongside the newer tech and given people a choice like they did with the A55 & A580. Look at the superb job they did with the A580, then they stopped DSLR support and brought out the A77. :rolleyes:
 
I like my a77, but ive never used a Sony slr.... But its easier for a crop camera evf to surpass its ovf breathren in usefulness. The bigger ff stuff is better ovf, becaouse of the size of it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top