There are always a select few reasons to opt for A6xxx series.Not sure why you would want to stick with aps-c unless your an avid birder.
Should read "less shallow" - but you're right about the principleshallower
Thanks. Fixed!Should read "less shallow" - but you're right about the principle
M.
One can hope they will continue and also not follow the Canon/Nikon tradition of ignoring APS-C glass. But a quick look says differently, only one E mount lens in about 5 years?
At least they have 10 - 105 at f/4 covered and Sigma has the 2 f/1.8s for zooms plus a good number of fast primes.
Well, about that... Stopping the full frame lens down 1 stop (and a tiny bit, if you want to be precise) and upping the iso to maintain your shutter speed will give you the exact same result in terms of dof and in terms of light hitting the sensor (which, assuming equal sensor efficiency, will give you the same noise, dynamic range and color depth).Should read "less shallow" - but you're right about the principle
M.
Yes I know you can and its exactly what Canon and Nikon said, "just buy our bigger, heavier, and more expressive FF glass".If you did not know, you can use any FF lens on the APS-C body. I have any use quite frequently two FF lenses on my A6000.
Yes I know you can and its exactly what Canon and Nikon said, "just buy our bigger, heavier, and more expressive FF glass".
I'm sure Fuji, Olympus, and Panasonic are happy Canon and Nikon thought the same. Their mirror-less systems are smaller not because the bodies don't have mirrors but because they designed lenses to cover the image circle required. If Sony isn't going to do more than produce updated bodies they should just release a rangefinder FF, it wouldn't be that much bigger than the A6500. JMHOYa but as a company, it makes a lot more sense to build a lens that everyone can use rather then a lens only just a portion can use
This comment shouldn't even have been directed at me because I didn't claim that the initial statement told the full story, but I also don't feel it's truely valid: If you want to match Sony's latest APS-C sensors with that kind of approach, you have to get an A7 III. And add suitable lenses. Which will leave you with a bigger, heavier setup that costs more. For instance, to get a superior Sony setup to the A6500/16-70mm combo, you'd have to buy the (clearly superior!) 24-105mm FE - and would end up with a package 50% more expensive and 100% heavier than the APS-C setup (according to local prices).Well, about that... Stopping the full frame lens down 1 stop (and a tiny bit, if you want to be precise) and upping the iso to maintain your shutter speed will give you the exact same result in terms of dof and in terms of light hitting the sensor (which, assuming equal sensor efficiency, will give you the same noise, dynamic range and color depth).
So that really isn't an advantage of smaller sensors. The smaller camera (and lens) size, ofcourse, is.