Sony A6000

[shootr]

Since I still had money from the original Canon garage sale, I put in a couple low-ball bids on new 50mm/1.8 Sony's on eBay last night just to see - $208.00 for a USA NIB lens with free shipping. I love auctions that end at 3AM!

[CruiseReg]

Since I still had money from the original Canon garage sale, I put in a couple low-ball bids on new 50mm/1.8 Sony's on eBay last night just to see - $208.00 for a USA NIB lens with free shipping. I love auctions that end at 3AM!

 

Very nice score! I just bought this lens and I'm pretty happy with it so far.

 

I need to sell my Canon stuff too. I gave my father an old 300D body and a couple of lenses, but still have another body 3 or 4 lenses collecting dust.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[CruiseReg]

Another is to have the alternate lens uncapped and oriented in your other hand so the swap takes place as quickly as possible.

 

This is exactly how I change lenses and I've been lucky enough to avoid crud getting on the sensor 99% of the time.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[shootr]

A few from our hike in Tahoe last week - so nice to NOT lug a full on DSLR plus lenses - especially on a trail that is straight up!

 

 

Another try at panorama - someday I'll get one that really pops

 

Eagle Lake - note dog swimmin'!

[pierces]

Nice Tahoe scenics! I need to get back there sometime soon!

 

 

Some notes on my weekend...

 

My daughter's brother-in-law got married and as a favor to her, I fired up my favorite hobby and shot the wedding to allow their event budget to include food and drink for the guests. I used my A77 with the 16-50 f/2.8 as the primary shooter and the A6000 with the 55-210 and later the 12mm Rokinon as the backup. The A77 was primary because I seldom use flash for regular shooting and I simply haven't gotten around to buying a dedicated flash for the new shoe on the A6000 (may have to pick up an ADPMAA adapter for the time being).

 

Notes:

 

DSLR with vertical grip and flash if a brick. Even with the BlackRapid cross-body strap, it was really getting uncomfortable at around hour four.

 

A6000 on the opposite shoulder (at a fraction of the mass) was unnoticeable.

 

The A77's SLT system has excellent autofocus but the A6000 was not noticeably slower or less effective at face-tracking

 

Files from the A6000 exhibited less noise and retained more detail at ISO 3200 than the A77 at ISO1600. In better light, the results were indistinguishable....at a fraction of the mass.

 

The 16-50 f/2.8 Sony lens is really nice. Rumors of a fast FE/E zoom in this range have me hopeful that a more compact alternative to adapting this to the e-mount is on the horizon.

 

The A77 is still an amazingly capable camera.

 

So is the A6000 at a fraction of the mass.

 

When the A7000 (or whatever) comes along, I will be selling the A77. I really like that camera but the times, they are a-changin'.

 

 

Here are some of the A6000 shots:

 

 

 

 

 

 

The rest are HERE if you are interested.

 

Bottom line: Yay A6000!

 

Dave

[havoc315]

Nice Tahoe scenics! I need to get back there sometime soon!

 

 

Some notes on my weekend...

 

My daughter's brother-in-law got married and as a favor to her, I fired up my favorite hobby and shot the wedding to allow their event budget to include food and drink for the guests. I used my A77 with the 16-50 f/2.8 as the primary shooter and the A6000 with the 55-210 and later the 12mm Rokinon as the backup. The A77 was primary because I seldom use flash for regular shooting and I simply haven't gotten around to buying a dedicated flash for the new shoe on the A6000 (may have to pick up an ADPMAA adapter for the time being).

 

Notes:

 

DSLR with vertical grip and flash if a brick. Even with the BlackRapid cross-body strap, it was really getting uncomfortable at around hour four.

 

A6000 on the opposite shoulder (at a fraction of the mass) was unnoticeable.

 

The A77's SLT system has excellent autofocus but the A6000 was not noticeably slower or less effective at face-tracking

 

Files from the A6000 exhibited less noise and retained more detail at ISO 3200 than the A77 at ISO1600. In better light, the results were indistinguishable....at a fraction of the mass.

 

The 16-50 f/2.8 Sony lens is really nice. Rumors of a fast FE/E zoom in this range have me hopeful that a more compact alternative to adapting this to the e-mount is on the horizon.

 

The A77 is still an amazingly capable camera.

 

So is the A6000 at a fraction of the mass.

 

When the A7000 (or whatever) comes along, I will be selling the A77. I really like that camera but the times, they are a-changin'.

 

 

Here are some of the A6000 shots:

 

 

 

 

 

 

The rest are HERE if you are interested.

 

Bottom line: Yay A6000!

 

Dave

 

Beautiful shots! Some side-by-side questions and comments:

 

Some dSLR stalwarts claim that the A6000 AF is great, but only in good light. Side by side, in shooting in lower light, was the A6000 AF any slower than the A77?

 

Would you say the ISO performance difference was a full stop, or a fraction of the stop? Supposedly, the A77ii ups the performance a little bit.

 

The 16-50/2.8 is a FANTASTIC lens. Truthfully, I've become a bit of an image quality snob, and the lack of comparable lenses has thus far prevented me from really embracing Sony mirrorless. I suspect mirrorless is in my future (A future A7 series camera, or some yet-released Canon/Nikon version), but I find it hard to go from an amazing lenses to the "good" zooms generally available for E-mount.

[pierces]

Some dSLR stalwarts claim that the A6000 AF is great, but only in good light. Side by side, in shooting in lower light, was the A6000 AF any slower than the A77?

 

I honestly can't see any big difference. All cameras struggle with low contrast subjects in low light. The A6000 will hunt a bit by candlelight but in a normal indoor shot, it seems to keep up with the A77 and beats the pants off my friend's Canon T5.

 

Would you say the ISO performance difference was a full stop, or a fraction of the stop? Supposedly, the A77ii ups the performance a little bit.

 

At least a full stop. The A6000 can shoot usable (to me) up to 6400, though I normally keep my auto ISO is limited to ISO3200. I find the A77 is a bit messy over ISO 1600. THe A77II is much closer to the A6000 in ISO performance since it is of the same generation.

 

Both of the night shots above were ISO3200 hand-held with no stabilization.

 

The 16-50/2.8 is a FANTASTIC lens. Truthfully, I've become a bit of an image quality snob, and the lack of comparable lenses has thus far prevented me from really embracing Sony mirrorless. I suspect mirrorless is in my future (A future A7 series camera, or some yet-released Canon/Nikon version), but I find it hard to go from an amazing lenses to the "good" zooms generally available for E-mount.

 

Yes, it IS a fantastic lens!

 

Sony 16-50 f/2.8 on the A77

 

The good news is that even with the old LAEA1 adapter, the 16-50 focuses on my A6000. Not fast but very accurately. I am hoping the A7000 (or whatever) will have the same autofocus integration that allows the A7RII to work at native speed with Sony SSM or even other brands' lenses.

 

For now, I am extremely happy with the output from the lenses I have. The 16-50 produces very acceptable (actually quite good) results for a compact variable aperture zoom as does the 55-210. The 50mm f/1.8 is really remarkable and performs way above it's price point. I have the ultra-inexpensive Sigma 19mm and 30mm "Art" lenses and they turn in incredibly sharp results. The Rokinon 12mm f/2.0 may be the best wide angle I have ever owned. My good old 20mm f/2.8 Maxxum lens doesn't compare to the Rokinon, even when it's wide open at f/2.0. Focus peaking and magnified assist make scenic and walkabout photography with manual lenses easy and some of the manual primes available for the e-mount or adapted to it are pretty spectacular.

 

 

I have to say it again; no regrets!

 

Dave

[havoc315]

 

For now, I am extremely happy with the output from the lenses I have. The 16-50 produces very acceptable (actually quite good) results for a compact variable aperture zoom as does the 55-210. The 50mm f/1.8 is really remarkable and performs way above it's price point. I have the ultra-inexpensive Sigma 19mm and 30mm "Art" lenses and they turn in incredibly sharp results. The Rokinon 12mm f/2.0 may be the best wide angle I have ever owned. My good old 20mm f/2.8 Maxxum lens doesn't compare to the Rokinon, even when it's wide open at f/2.0. Focus peaking and magnified assist make scenic and walkabout photography with manual lenses easy and some of the manual primes available for the e-mount or adapted to it are pretty spectacular.

 

 

For normal length primes, not much to complain about in E-mount. Particularly for full frame, they seem to have some real winners, the new 35/1.4, the 55/1.8, the macro 90, the Batis 85, etc.

 

It's in zooms where as you said, the results are good....... for a compact variable aperture lens. Not surprisingly, upon close examination, they can't stand up to good fixed aperture zoom lenses. And long telephoto remains seriously lacking.

 

Now, like you... I have my eye on whether the A7000 incorporated the A7rii AF technology. If you can get good quality reasonably fast AF with an LAEA1/3 adapter.... with A-mount, Canon and Nikon lenses....... Then I might just have to get the A7000 as my backup.

[pierces]

To be perfectly honest, I am a bit of an image quality snob too. I have, however, developed a realistic view of how much $nob I can afford! Gear Acquisition Syndrome kills relationships!

 

I also have come to a realization that after seeing about a million posts in forums regaling the sharpness of such-and-such lens, I would rather have my 40" print of an airliner swooping over Maho beach that I took with an "OK" lens than a painfully sharp 100% crop of a bookcase or cat posted on DPReview. I am perfectly happy to use a good $300 lens on a trip to exotic locales when the alternative is using a spectacular $2000 lens while sitting at home. Besides, other than a couple of people I know who are avid photographers, nobody asks what hardware that Maho photo was taken with....and they all think it's "pretty"! :)

 

Do I wish for a great, fast mid-range zoom for my A6000? You bet! However, the lack of perfect lenses in the e-mount hasn't kept me from thoroughly enjoying the freedom and convenience switching to Sony mirrorless has brought to my hobby.

 

Happy shooting!

 

Dave

Edited July 29, 2015 by pierces

[shootr]

Mmmmm, peanut butter blossoms - haven't had those in forever!

 

Using that focus peaking has gotten pretty natural to use when the camera starts hunting in low light - I'm very pleased with it's overall focusing prowess - and I concur with the Canon comparison - or complete lack of I should say.

 

Only thing I'm a little snobby about at this point is the corners of the wide open 16-50 being too soft, but I'm trying to remember to not frame so tight and just crop it down later.

 

When doing the family reunion week before last, I used the 55-210 to shoot across the room to be less noticeable - man did I get some great natural shots - ones I never could discretely get with the giant 70-210/f2.8 on the Canon.

 

The twilight shots - this thing compensates so well and is so sharp even though handheld. Only frustrating thing at this point not finding enough worthy/interesting subjects to use it more often!

[pierces]

Only frustrating thing at this point not finding enough worthy/interesting subjects to use it more often!

 

Hence my previous comment about reasonable lenses and travel vs. exquisite lenses and the back yard! :)

 

Only a couple of months until the fall colors cruise!

 

Dave

[havoc315]

To be perfectly honest, I am a bit of an image quality snob too. I have, however, developed a realistic view of how much $nob I can afford! Gear Acquisition Syndrome kills relationships!

 

I also have come to a realization that after seeing about a million posts in forums regaling the sharpness of such-and-such lens, I would rather have my 40" print of an airliner swooping over Maho beach that I took with an "OK" lens than a painfully sharp 100% crop of a bookcase or cat posted on DPReview. I am perfectly happy to use a good $300 lens on a trip to exotic locales when the alternative is using a spectacular $2000 lens while sitting at home. Besides, other than a couple of people I know who are avid photographers, nobody asks what hardware that Maho photo was taken with....and they all think it's "pretty"! :)

 

Do I wish for a great, fast mid-range zoom for my A6000? You bet! However, the lack of perfect lenses in the e-mount hasn't kept me from thoroughly enjoying the freedom and convenience switching to Sony mirrorless has brought to my hobby.

 

Happy shooting!

 

Dave

 

We each compromise with IQ, price and size, at a different point. Honestly, I suspect I'd love the A6000 had I never gone to full frame. Shooting full frame, the A6000, combined with lens compromises, would be a hard step back in IQ. And the A7 series don't match my needs well enough.

 

As I said, we all draw the line in a different spot. As to gear acquisition syndrome.. with what I've spent on an advanced full frame kit.. hmm... my kids don't need a full 4 years of college, right?

 

For me, I've never had any interest in a 70-200/2.8.... too big and too expensive. I'm happy with a 70-200/4. (Though I just got a new 24-70/2.8). I'm happy with 1.8 primes (50 and 85mm) instead of 1.4 primes. The Otus lens is not something I even aspire too.

 

And there is definite diminishing returns with price and lenses. A $500 lens may be massively better than a $100 lens... But a $1500 lens may only be slightly better than that $500 lens... and the difference between the $1500 lens and the $3000 lens may be imperceptible to most people...

It's just hard to take steps backwards.

 

I strongly suspect mirrorless is in my future --- and in the future of almost all serious shooters. Just waiting for the point where it's truly a lateral move..... Most of the A7 cameras would be a step back in 1 way or another. THe A7rii might not be a step back, but it's not a good match for what I want, and it's a step up in price even further than I've already gone.

[pierces]

And there is definite diminishing returns with price and lenses. A $500 lens may be massively better than a $100 lens... But a $1500 lens may only be slightly better than that $500 lens... and the difference between the $1500 lens and the $3000 lens may be imperceptible to most people...

 

 

Words to live by!

 

Four years of college? It never took me four years to learn something! Besides with F1 keys and Google....;)

 

Dave

[havoc315]

Words to live by!

 

Four years of college? It never took me four years to learn something! Besides with F1 keys and Google....;)

 

Dave

 

Exactly.... Hmm, if I spent their entire college savings on camera gear.... Hello Otus....

[shootr]

Ooooooooooh, that's sexy! 😊

[pierces]

Ooooooooooh, that's sexy!

 

Yes. Yes it is...

 

 

Is this a bad time to mention how awesome the Rokinon 12mm f/2.0 and the 8mm f/2.8 fisheye are?

 

 

 

 

:)

 

 

Dave

Edited July 31, 2015 by pierces

[shootr]

Nope! Still got my fingers crossed the UPS screw up buys the 12mm for me 👍

[shootr]

Took the 50mm hiking today and learn it's strengths and weaknesses. It doesn't like wide open into subjects backlit by the sun, a bit of edge fringing. But normal f-stops - I don't think I've ever had a lens that didn't have a trace of it, but not a whisper with this thing!

 

Fun short climb up "A" mountain by ASU (lived in it's shadow for 50 years and never went up it until today.

 

 

Shoulda picked 'em and made jam

 

Hayden Flour Mill

 

[pierces]

Finally took a few minutes to drag out the tripod and play with the old Minolta macro. Having manual focus only on the LAEA1 adapter was inconsequential but I think I may pick up a macro focusing rail. With a two-second shutter delay on the self-timer and some squatting (not as easy as when the lens was new) resulted in a good percentage of keepers.

 

In the low $200s if you can find one on eBay, this lens is a real bang for the buck bargain.

 

The Back Yard Rover

 

Three image stack

 

Eight image stack

 

Society garlic close

 

Society garlic

 

Cactus bud

 

My Picture of the Week turned out to be a macro as well - HERE

 

 

Fun morning with the A6000!

 

Dave

[pierces]

Rokinon 12mm f/2.0 on Amazon Lightning Deal at 5:00 AM PST tomorrow, Monday August 3.

 

 

Just sayin'

 

 

Dave

[Turtles06]

Rokinon 12mm f/2.0 on Amazon Lightning Deal at 5:00 AM PST tomorrow, Monday August 3.

 

 

Just sayin'

 

 

Dave

 

Dave, thanks so much for the heads up; it's fortuitous timing, as I'd pretty much decided to pull the trigger on this lens this week.

 

Quick question: how do you know about the lightning deal in advance, and also, if I click on the lens as the appointed time, will the deal show up, or is there someplace else on Amazon's web site that I need to look? I ask because I've been an Amazon customer for years (not Prime, though), and I can't say I recall seeing "lightning deals."

 

Thanks!

[pierces]

Dave, thanks so much for the heads up; it's fortuitous timing, as I'd pretty much decided to pull the trigger on this lens this week.

 

Quick question: how do you know about the lightning deal in advance, and also, if I click on the lens as the appointed time, will the deal show up, or is there someplace else on Amazon's web site that I need to look? I ask because I've been an Amazon customer for years (not Prime, though), and I can't say I recall seeing "lightning deals."

 

Thanks!

 

As a Prime member, I get about an extra half day heads up on future deals. As for the price, when the deal triggers, the price will drop automatically. It's usually best to go from the deal list since an item may be listed from more than one supplier.

 

Good luck!

 

Dave

[Turtles06]

As a Prime member, I get about an extra half day heads up on future deals. As for the price, when the deal triggers, the price will drop automatically. It's usually best to go from the deal list since an item may be listed from more than one supplier.

 

Good luck!

 

Dave

 

Thanks Dave. I actually just started a 30-day trial of Prime. (And I see the deal now for tomorrow.) :)

[Turtles06]

I'm scratching my head re the following when using Auto HDR. I know that the camera will take 3 images and sandwich them together (the first will be underexposed by whatever value you set, the second at the set exposure, and the third overexposed by the value you selected).

 

Here's the question: yesterday evening using Auto HDR, and just now when I tried this again, the camera is showing me two photos: the first at the original exposure, and the second, which is the Auto HDR image (that is, the photo produced from the three exposures). My recollection (and maybe I'm mis-remembering) is that when I first got the a6000 and tried Auto HDR, the only photo that showed up was the Auto HDR image (that is, the one that's the product of the three exposures), and not a photo taken at the original exposure as well (which shows "DR OFF" when you are in playback and look at the image data).

 

Am I just recalling that incorrectly? (And perhaps I'm confusing this with "Handheld Night Shot," which only gives you the "sandwiched" image.) If not, any idea why Auto HDR is producing two photos?

 

Thanks!

Edited August 2, 2015 by Turtles06

[havoc315]

I'm scratching my head re the following when using Auto HDR. I know that the camera will take 3 images and sandwich them together (the first will be underexposed by whatever value you set, the second at the set exposure, and the third overexposed by the value you selected).

 

Here's the question: yesterday evening using Auto HDR, and just now when I tried this again, the camera is showing me two photos: the first at the original exposure, and the second, which is the Auto HDR image (that is, the photo produced from the three exposures). My recollection (and maybe I'm mis-remembering) is that when I first got the a6000 and tried Auto HDR, the only photo that showed up was the Auto HDR image (that is, the one that's the product of the three exposures), and not a photo taken at the original exposure as well (which shows "DR OFF" when you are in playback and look at the image data).

 

Am I just recalling that incorrectly? (And perhaps I'm confusing this with "Handheld Night Shot," which only gives you the "sandwiched" image.) If not, any idea why Auto HDR is producing two photos?

 

Thanks!

 

Totally normal for a Sony camera to produce and save 2 images.