My full a6000 review is up on Admiring Light

Discussion in 'Sony Alpha E-Mount News and Rumors' started by Jman13, Jul 23, 2014.

  1. Jman13

    Jman13 TalkEmount Regular

    Jul 4, 2014
    • Like Like x 10
  2. GabrielPhoto

    GabrielPhoto TalkEmount Top Veteran

    Jul 3, 2013
    Couldnt read the whole thing as I am at work but two things I want to ask about

    What do you consider better for APS-C?

    Also, you mentioned the EVF is not as laggy as the NEX-6 yet from my personal test at Best Buy I found it very laggy, more than my NEX-6 so that surprised me. I am still considering getting it as I like the extra MP and the Auto ISO and memory settings over my NEX-6 though. Just wish it still had the level too. :) 
  3. Jman13

    Jman13 TalkEmount Regular

    Jul 4, 2014
    I don't really know what to tell you on the EVF. I have not found the a6000 EVF to lag much at all, and while it does have a bit of lag in low light, it was no worse than the 6 and far less noisy to my eye.

    As far as noise goes, the Fuji sensors are still better at high ISO, even accounting for their rather, um, generous ISO ratings (about 2/3 stop over-rated). Still, I find my X-T1 to have cleaner files at ISO 6400 than the a6000 is at ISO 4000. The a6000 may have a little more detail at those comparable ISOs, but the noise is pretty high. The Fuji sensors also control color noise MUCH better than the a6000, though color noise can mostly be eliminated with the default color NR in Lightroom, so it's not much of an issue.
  4. chrid

    chrid Super Noob

    May 5, 2014
    nice review, balanced and informative
  5. WestOkid

    WestOkid TalkEmount All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jan 25, 2014
    New Jersey, USA
    Excellent job Jordan. I love a "real world" review. Too much of today's reviews are theoretical vs empirical.

    I noticed that you use far more third-party lenses are used than Sony lenses. I myself have more third-party lenses than Sony. In my case, it's a price vs performance decision. Would you say the a6000 is limited by the lens lineup?
  6. stephen431

    stephen431 TalkEmount Regular

    May 2, 2014
    I wish that reviewers would add in the current FE lens lineup when they're comparing Fuji-X to Sony-E.

    When you add them together and compare it to Fuji's, Sony's lineup has gotten a lot more competitive.
  7. Jman13

    Jman13 TalkEmount Regular

    Jul 4, 2014
    For me it is also a price/performance decision. Sony is not my primary kit, and as such, so I wasn't looking to break the bank or duplicate all the function of my Fuji kit. I wanted small, a variety and high optical quality, which led me to the Sigma primes. The 18-105 I chose because of its versatility and fast AF. The Rokinon 12mm is also awesome, and while not as good as the Touit 12mm, I wasn't going to spend $1K on a UWA for E-Mount.

    I don't think Sony's lineup is quite as good as Fuji's (even including the FE lenses), but it's far better than it was even a year ago. The FE lineup adds a very good telezoom, though when comparing on APS-C, it's much larger, but only a little faster (and slower at the wide end) than the 55-200mm from Fuji, and from what I've seen, optically similar (I will review the 70-200 sometime in the next few months). It's also FAR more expensive (Over double the price).

    The FE 55/1.8 is an amazing lens for full frame, and while I haven't shot with it much, when I tried it out, it was only as sharp on the a6000 as my Fuji 56/1.2 is at f/1.2...and with the Fuji at f/1.8, I have no doubt that it would spank the 55/1.8 on APS-C. The blur index results on SLRGear bear that out as well. They're the same price, but the Fuji is a stop faster and sharper.

    The Fuji 23/1.4 and FE 35/2.8 are similar in quality at the same equivalent aperture for DOF, but the Fuji is two stops faster and a stop shallower DOF...again, for the same price. IMO, the Fuji 23 is also superior to the Zeiss 24/1.8, though that's not a big gap...but the Zeiss is still more expensive.

    In the UWA market, the 14/2.8 is better than anything available for Sony, the 10-18 isn't quite as good as the Fuji 10-24 (though it's smaller and still quite good). Macros: both have the Zeiss Touit, but the Fuji 60 is far better than the Sony 35 macro. The Fuji 18-55 f/2.8-4 is better than any Sony E-mount standard zoom, including the Zeiss 16-70/4, and it makes the 16-50 PZ look like a piece of junk. The worst lens in the Fuji lineup is the 18/2, and it would be considered a pretty good lens in the E-mount system.

    The above sounds harsh, and it's not intended to be, but I can't really think, from an APS-C standpoint, of a lens that is notably better in E-Mount than the equivalent Fuji lens. That doesn't mean the Sony options are bad: they're not at all. Many are very good...and several are excellent, but Fuji's lenses are really exceptional. Now...Sony has a lot of lenses that are less expensive and are great options for the budget minded, and the third party makers are doing a good job. The Zeiss Touits are excellent, the Sigma primes are excellent, and there are several very, very good lenses for E-Mount, but from an enthusiast perspective, the speed (aperture) isn't there, and the quality isn't quite up to what Fuji's doing with their lenses.

    All that said, ultimately, I DON'T think that the a6000 is really limited by the lens selection. There are plenty of excellent lenses for E-Mount, and they don't limit the camera to any great extent (save perhaps for the lack of anything with AF and faster than f/1.8). I think you can make amazing photos with either system. While I primarily bought my E-Mount stuff to do reviews, I originally planned only on the 18-105 and the Sigma 30, but I liked the camera enough that I fleshed out my system more so that it was a full featured option for me when I wanted to shoot Sony. While I don't think it'll make up the majority of my shooting over the coming years, I will use it quite a bit for its strengths, some of which are Fuji's weaknesses.
    • Like Like x 6
  8. stephen431

    stephen431 TalkEmount Regular

    May 2, 2014
    I totally agree with everything you've said. I have a friend with the X-T1 and that kit 18-55 is just fantastic. All of the XF lenses that I've played with have been fantastic. Even their XC lenses look like they're slightly better than Sony's comparable midrange lenses.
    Sony really needs to get on the ball and add faster lenses.
    I look at Fuji's upcoming 16-55/2.8 and... ugh.
    Even knowing the flange distance makes it basically impossible, I've still spent more time than I want to admit looking for some Chinese skunkworks X-to-E adapter.

    That said, I still see this aggravatingly widespread impression that the 2014 lens lineups are the same as the 2012 lens lineups (not your site, but elsewhere). Sony added a lot of good lenses in the past 2 years & their lineup is now pretty good. Not Fuji good, but good. The opening FE selection has definitely been better quality than the opening E selection was. It's also not just about comparing this lens to that lens. You have to compare the systems as a whole. That's where Sony really catches up.
  9. Jman13

    Jman13 TalkEmount Regular

    Jul 4, 2014
    Indeed. One thing I think we all can agree on is there is an amazing array of extremely capable cameras and lenses to choose from.

    Now this is partly (or maybe mostly) because I review Fuji, Sony and m4/3 gear, but I currently have Four Fuji bodies: the X-T1, X-E2, X-E1(which I hop to convert to IR soon) and the X-M1 (though the X-M1 will be sold soon since the a6000 is a better small camera). I have two Sony cameras (a6000 and NEX-6) and an Olympus OM-D E-M5 and a Panasonic GX1. All have strengths and weaknesses, along with some outstanding glass for all three systems.
  10. stephen431

    stephen431 TalkEmount Regular

    May 2, 2014
    Absolutely. And less than 2 months to Photokina, so it's about to get even better.
  11. NickCyprus

    NickCyprus Super Moderator

    Oct 11, 2012
    That's a nice review! Thanks for sharing :) 
  12. Jman13

    Jman13 TalkEmount Regular

    Jul 4, 2014
    Yup. I'll be at Photokina doing daily show reports too, almost all on mirrorless, but I'll check out the big boys too.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. dejavu2339

    dejavu2339 TalkEmount Regular

    Mar 25, 2013
    Thanks for your review...i want to ask a question.. i have a nex6 with 35mm f1.8 and i want to buy 18 105 f4 but also i think to change my body to a xe2...but the watercolor effect on the fuji is worst can u tell something about this
  14. lenshoarder

    lenshoarder TalkEmount Veteran

    Feb 7, 2012
    Are you comparing apples to apples? This has been discussed ever since the NEX 7 came out and people said the NEX 5 had less noise. The problem is that people pixel peeped 16MP NEX 5 images and 24MP NEX 7 images. That's not a fair comparison. To make it fair the 24MP images need to be resized to 16MP. Once people started doing that, they found that the NEX 7 wasn't any noisier than the NEX 5.

    So are you comparing 16MP X-T1 images to 24MP A6000 images or are you resizing the A6000 images down to 16MP?
  15. Jman13

    Jman13 TalkEmount Regular

    Jul 4, 2014
    Yes. Resizing the Fuji still has a high ISO advantage, though the a6000 has a detail advantage. The Fuji files can also be pushed pulled and twisted into submission without a lot of artifacts, while even base ISO a6000 files will start to show banding if you push them too hard. Still, overall image quality with both is excellent. I really like the a6000...certainly can't beat it for the price.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.