-
Cameraderie, a friendly photography forum, join now for free!
- Location
- Milwaukee, WI USA
- Name
- Luke
Sony is going for the higher end like other manufacturers. I am waiting for the Sigma 56mm 1.4 lens as a small lens for portraits. Sigma is filling the apsc trinity nicely after 16mm and 30mm lenses.
The big news/rumors roundup: New Sony E-mount camera registered and first 8K FF sensors specs - sonyalpharumors
Sony A7000:
Sony officially registered a new E-mount mirrorless camera in Asia. Usually it will take up to 2 months until this camera will be officially announce. I believe this is the new A7000 or A6xxx. A New High End camera:
– it’s not an A6500 successor
– it has a new design with EVF in the center
– it’s a new High End APS-C camera
– mini-A9
– probably 20 fps and 5.6 milion dot EVF
The big news/rumors roundup: New Sony E-mount camera registered and first 8K FF sensors specs - sonyalpharumors
Sony A7000:
Sony officially registered a new E-mount mirrorless camera in Asia. Usually it will take up to 2 months until this camera will be officially announce. I believe this is the new A7000 or A6xxx. A New High End camera:
– it’s not an A6500 successor
– it has a new design with EVF in the center
– it’s a new High End APS-C camera
– mini-A9
– probably 20 fps and 5.6 milion dot EVF
- Location
- Boston Burbs
- Name
- David
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.
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.
West
Veteran
- Location
- British Columbia
You can get an A7II with a 28-70 for under a $1K. Not sure why you would want to stick with aps-c unless your an avid birder.
SonyAlpha a7 II Mirrorless Digital Camera with FE 28-70mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS Lens
SonyAlpha a7 II Mirrorless Digital Camera with FE 28-70mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS Lens
- Location
- Switzerland
- Name
- Matt
I agree that the A7 II is hard to beat at that price, especially including the lens, but the A6500 *smokes* the A7 II performance-wise except for high ISO IQ. Big time. It's a much better video camera, too (even if I'm not into video myself), while being smaller and lighter. And while not all Sony APS-C lenses are convincing, the 16-70mm f/4 and 18-105mm f/4 are both quite solid lenses. So, for a mobile hybrid shooter, the A6500 might be a much better choice than everything below the A7 III - and that camera will cost just as much body-only as a A6500/16-70 kit.
So, YMMV - anyhow, I think Sony has done just as much for APS-C as they have for FF mirrorless. I just got out of APS-C (Nikon DSLRs, btw.) because Nikon's Z6 ticks more or less all of my personal boxes, but should I ever return to it, the A6500 would be the camera I'd choose.
btw. I'll keep the A7 II around for the foreseeable future because I adore the 55mm f/1.8 and I'd very much like to keep shooting with that lens. But some of Nikon's planned - or even current - Z primes (and the performance of existing F mount primes via the FTZ adapter) might make me change my mind sooner or later. Good as it is, it's showing its age - already ... The D750 - is still going strong (with some caveats).
M.
So, YMMV - anyhow, I think Sony has done just as much for APS-C as they have for FF mirrorless. I just got out of APS-C (Nikon DSLRs, btw.) because Nikon's Z6 ticks more or less all of my personal boxes, but should I ever return to it, the A6500 would be the camera I'd choose.
btw. I'll keep the A7 II around for the foreseeable future because I adore the 55mm f/1.8 and I'd very much like to keep shooting with that lens. But some of Nikon's planned - or even current - Z primes (and the performance of existing F mount primes via the FTZ adapter) might make me change my mind sooner or later. Good as it is, it's showing its age - already ... The D750 - is still going strong (with some caveats).
M.
There are always a select few reasons to opt for A6xxx series.
- smaller, rangefinder style bodies can be preferred
- less shallow DOF helps some times in street shooting and whatnot
- the lenses for crop sensor can be smaller + lighter in size
Last edited:
- Location
- Switzerland
- Name
- Matt
Thanks. Fixed!Should read "less shallow" - but you're right about the principle
M.
davect01
Hall of Famer
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.
davect01
Hall of Famer
From what I understand the profit margins are just so much higher on FF that that is where Sony is focusing its time and effort. Plus those already willing to spend $2-3000 on a FF body are more willing to spend $2-3000 on a lens whereas many of us APS-C owners bought into the system for the low price point.
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.
So that really isn't an advantage of smaller sensors. The smaller camera (and lens) size, ofcourse, is.
- Location
- Boston Burbs
- Name
- David
Yes I know you can and its exactly what Canon and Nikon said, "just buy our bigger, heavier, and more expressive FF glass".
davect01
Hall of Famer
Ya 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
- Location
- Boston Burbs
- Name
- David
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. JMHO
Attachments
- Location
- Switzerland
- Name
- Matt
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).
To be clear (because I *tried* it and looked at the results side by side): The A7 II's sensor *isn't* one stop better in any respect than the A6500's - or even the A6000's. I know that because I've actually used the latter's cousin in the D5500 extensively - and that camera is more or less the equal of the A7 II up to ISO 3200, above which I wouldn't use either. The A7 II even shows worse chroma noise above ISO 800 - you can just about correct for that in post because it preserves a tad more detail. This is why I had such a hard time letting go of the D5500: That camera delivered IQ second to none, especially when paired with the stunning Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. However, that lens negates the size advantage of APS-C - big time (pun intended). I did keep the A7 II for the time being - because while I only own three native lenses (only one of which is made by Sony), I also own six adapters - and I'll say here that I think the A7 II (not the A7 III!) is still the best body for adapting lenses to because you can get all the most useful features for a very fair price.
However, I'll also maintain that APS-C is probably a better choice for some, if not many people - and the A6500 is stiff competition for the A7 II. More to the point, to my mind, it's not even a fair contest because the APS-C model wins most direct comparisons when shot with suitable native lenses - thankfully, the FF model is now a lot cheaper. If I were a hybrid shooter, I might pick the A6500 over even the A7 III - because I'd get a large portion of the performance in a clearly more mobile package (for less money, too). Two lenses, the 16-70mm f/4 zoom and the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 prime, and I'd be good to go. But as always, YMMV.
M.
Last edited:
wt21
Hall of Famer
Yes, it has a long, drawn out neglected future. New bodies, maybe another new lens or two. Uprevved older lenses. Same way Canikon managed APS-C once their FF business took off. It won't go away, but it will never be as complete with lenses for the imaging circle size as e.g. Fuji or m43.
Sony is rumored to release a new APS-C flagship soon. Some are saying it will be similar to the 6600 with the new AI AF, screen, and some other amenities from the A7RV, and others think it will be in a FF body. They’ve already hinted it will have the same 26MP sensor as the new vlogging camera they just released.
