Another mirrorless / 4/3 thread

[blastingcap]

All of my photos are taken in isolation, so what does it matter with side-by-side comparisons if the users are exceedingly pleased with the images their chosen camera produces? For those that appreciate these retro cameras as well as having dials and physical controls to manipulate camera settings instead of menus, the Fuji seems to me to be a good option.

As cameras have gone digital, a large community has cropped up to pixel peep and get hung up on tech specs at minute levels. But a number of users enjoy using cameras that have a kind of nostalgic style--for me that's the Olympus OM-D series, since I learned on my dad's OM-1. I'm just saying that people will pay more for style or different functionality, just like they do with cars.

That said, the Sony a6000 at around $600 body only seems like a sweet deal and also is reported to produce excellent images; if I ever give up my full frame and go mirrorless APS-C, the Sony will get a serious look.

True, if you are happy that's what matters in the end! I think everyone agrees that Fuji takes great photos. And Fuji has some unique advantages in styling and hybrid OVF/EVF. But my wife would kill me if I paid what Fuji was asking for a body and my most-used focal lengths (over $3000 including replacement of my speedlites and buying new filters for sizes I don't have), so I was forced to look for bang-for-buck options within my budget. The a6000 compared very well to Fuji samples online, and if the a6000 handles worse, I'll just have to live with it... better that than dealing with an angry wife.

 

[rsutoratosu]

Wow crazy, sony nex 7 is like 1200, nex 6 around 500 with the basic lens..

so far on the nex6, still researching

 

[blastingcap]

Wow crazy, sony nex 7 is like 1200, nex 6 around 500 with the basic lens..

so far on the nex6, still researching

Nobody buys the nex7 at that price, and its closest successor is the a6000. nex6 is ok if you don't need fast af-c, like if you mostly shoot slow or not-moving things.

 

[rsutoratosu]

it'll be for shooting 2 & 3 year old.. i think they too fast already

that price is insane... i thought mirrorless was suppose to be cheaper than slr

 

[jlee]

it'll be for shooting 2 & 3 year old.. i think they too fast already

that price is insane... i thought mirrorless was suppose to be cheaper than slr

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-D810-FX-...ll+frame+nikon



There is a huge price range in both types.

 

[rsutoratosu]

Just an update, nex 6 cost more here than US, trying to sell us on alpha 5/6s both are also 200 higher than Amazon. Next stop is taiwan.. been busy so haven't been to grey market places yet

 

[Rdmkr]

Before you get anything from the Nex line I recommend you look carefully if the lenses you want for it exist at any affordable price point at all.

In my personal opinion, absolutely essential lenses are:
- superzooms with a focal range from wide angle (+/- 28mm equivalent) to telephoto (+/- 300mm) that don't compromise on image quality too much
- fast wide angle primes with good sharpness at maximum aperture

For the Nex line, both of these lens types are exceedingly rare and expensive if you do find them, or they are heavily compromised in some way such as lacking auto-focus or getting only +/- 3 perceptual megapixels of detail at f/6.3 in the case of superzooms.

My experiences with the Sony A6000 weren't positive for this reason. You can read about them in the thread that starts with "Jacket pocketable".

Other models I'd look into:
- FZ1000
- RX100 II or III
- Nikon D3300, D5200, D5300, D7100

 

[blastingcap]

Before you get anything from the Nex line I recommend you look carefully if the lenses you want for it exist at any affordable price point at all.

In my personal opinion, absolutely essential lenses are:
- superzooms with a focal range from wide angle (+/- 28mm equivalent) to telephoto (+/- 300mm) that don't compromise on image quality too much
- fast wide angle primes with good sharpness at maximum aperture

For the Nex line, both of these lens types are exceedingly rare and expensive if you do find them, or they are heavily compromised in some way such as lacking auto-focus or getting only +/- 3 perceptual megapixels of detail at f/6.3 in the case of superzooms.

My experiences with the Sony A6000 weren't positive for this reason. You can read about them in the thread that starts with "Jacket pocketable".

Other models I'd look into:
- FZ1000
- RX100 II or III
- Nikon D3300, D5200, D5300, D7100

I think that's the first time I've ever heard superzooms described as "absolutely essential." There are the Sony 18-200 and Tamron 18-200 lenses as well as the 18-105G. No superzoom is ever that good and a FZ1000 may do ok as a replacement for one. But you shouldn't buy an ILC for a superzoom IMHO, you buy it to swap lenses.

I do agree that there is a missing fast wideangle prime, something like the Canon 22 f/2.0 would be great. There is a FE lens, something like 24 f/2.0 coming out next year but for much higher price. The stopgap solution is a Sigma 19mm f/2.8 but that isn't f/2.0 and no OSS either, but it's only $100 used so.... Zeiss's 24/ f/1.8 is good but at nearly $1k new, it's not affordable.

 

[lykaon78]

My Sony NEX-5 has tagged along with me on two Disney vacations. I love it. With the pancake lens it fits in cargo pants pockets - although its generally a little too heavy to be comfortable there for very long.

The shot quality in low light is 400% than any point-and-shoot that I ever owned. As just a casual photographer it has all the power I'll ever need. It was perfect for vacation photos.