VERY Tempted but a little scared....

edmidlifecrisis wrote in post #17728106
I have an A6000 and a consumer Canon T3i with a few lenses. Things I like about the A6000- fast autofocus, good shooting in dark situations (concerts etc), the EVF and the screen are a good combo for this. Better than the DSLR. So is the low light performance at higher isos. The focus peaking is great, I use my old manual film lenses with the A6000- not so with the Canon as MF is difficult and the FD's won't focus to infinity anyway. This is great fun.

I still have no high end native lenses for the A6000. AF with my Canon EF lenses and adapters is iffy and not for situations where speed is of the essence. Manual focus with EF lenses is good and sometimes I think the IQ from the Canon lenses on the Sony and MF is better than the IQ with the T3i and AF. Of course both can miss focus and I manage to do this regularly with both systems. No high end Canon body to compare it too of course.

It is fun to shoot, especially when traveling, and small with the right lenses. The old film lenses are heavy and bulky for the most part with the adapters on.

Negatives, regardless of which Canon you are comparing it too.

Battery life is awful and drains even when you are not using it. Canon wins here. And my canon G15 wins too!

No super long teles native for Sony. I shoot wildlife and that is a big negative. You can adapt lenses for the Sony DSLR but still I wish there were some nice long zooms for e mount.

I'm keeping both for now and will likely upgrade my T3i for a 7D Mark ii this year.

This hasn't been released so not proven in real world shooting yet, but you might want to keep an eye on the Saker Falcon lite adapter. Adds PDAF with Canon lenses. If it works as promised, EF lenses should focus as well on the a6000 as a native lens.

http://www.sonyalpharu​mors.com …peration-mode-af-adapter/

That would be awesome. Best of both worlds. We will see. Thanks for the info.

dexter75 wrote in post #17728036
Hes a staunch Sony fanboy. Just ignore him.

Lol, riiiiggghhht... he's the fanboy

dexter75 wrote in post #17728036
Hes a staunch Sony fanboy. Just ignore him.

You still at it. Seems like you leave one thread arguement and enter another. Like I said, this is entertainment for you...boring life I guess.

Best to just ignore the guy and he'll soon get bored and move onto another arguement.

Hogloff wrote in post #17728883
You still at it. Seems like you leave one thread arguement and enter another. Like I said, this is entertainment for you...boring life I guess.

Best to just ignore the guy and he'll soon get bored and move onto another arguement.

...and you follow me from one thread to another commenting on it....boring life I guess.

I'm pretty sure the 5Ds iso is capped not because the sensor can't do it, but because the files would be ginormous to the ginormous power .... A Very practical cap, on that size of sensor.

now, if they would implement dual iso on that size sensor.. trade pixels for iso....hmmmm if that is even possible, it may not be given it is a different pixel size and all.. still may be to large of a file to crunch thru with any speed. Be a cool menu item though... switch on dual iso and have fabulous high iso ability at 24mp on the 5Ds..

edmidlifecrisis wrote in post #17728106
I'm keeping both for now and will likely upgrade my T3i for a 7D Mark ii this year.

I think you will find this upgrade very satisfying...

ksbal wrote in post #17728923
I'm pretty sure the 5Ds iso is capped not because the sensor can't do it, but because the files would be ginormous to the ginormous power .... A Very practical cap, on that size of sensor.

now, if they would implement dual iso on that size sensor.. trade pixels for iso....hmmmm if that is even possible, it may not be given it is a different pixel size and all.. still may be to large of a file to crunch thru with any speed. Be a cool menu item though... switch on dual iso and have fabulous high iso ability at 24mp on the 5Ds..

Interesting idea but I doubt too many people are spending the money on a 5Ds to shoot it at half the megapixels. Kinda like paying extra for f/1.2 and shooting at f/5.6 all the time. If you are going to shoot at 24mp, might as well just buy the 5Diii and save yourself $1,000

Sure, unless the boost in high iso is worth the trade off (clearer pics/less noise at same iso vs 5D3)

ksbal wrote in post #17728923
I'm pretty sure the 5Ds iso is capped not because the sensor can't do it, but because the files would be ginormous to the ginormous power .... A Very practical cap, on that size of sensor.

now, if they would implement dual iso on that size sensor.. trade pixels for iso....hmmmm if that is even possible, it may not be given it is a different pixel size and all.. still may be to large of a file to crunch thru with any speed. Be a cool menu item though... switch on dual iso and have fabulous high iso ability at 24mp on the 5Ds..

It's capped because of the amount of noise and the steep drop off in dynamic range you'd typically get at ISO6400+ at 50mp. There's an inherent correlation between noise and ISO gain, and the sensitivity of that correlation increases as the sensor resolution goes higher.The pixel level noise is an improvement over the 5DIII though, so there would definitely be some value in a downsampled 24mp mode that pushed past ISO6400 to get better low light capability out of the 5Ds.

By leveraging a back-side illuminated design and implementing the high ISO signal processing from the a7s, Sony was actually able to reduce high ISO noise and increase high ISO dynamic range despite increasing the megapixels of the sensor. Kudos to them there.

dexter75 wrote in post #17721466
There is no need for personal attacks because someone has a differing opinion than you when comparing camera brands. If you think the Sony A7x cameras are the most amazing pieces of photographic equipment ever invented, thats great. Maybe you should stick to the Sony threads since many others don't feel the same way and may make you angry. Im glad you personally know a pro photographer who "might" switch to Sony, I know zero. Most every pro sporting event, most every pro wildlife shoot, most every pro studio fashion shoot all have one thing in common. Mostly Canons with maybe a Nikon or two sprinkled in. Something that has not been touched on in this thread that someone brought up to me recently was the look of the images from the cameras. The Sony A7x cameras have slightly better sensors but produce a far more "digital" 3D type look. That doesn't sit well with most pros for what they do, especially ones who came from film. Most prefer the truer "film" look from Canon's 35mm cameras over the digital look of the Sonys. Most companies release new camera updates for bodies every 2-4 years. When you keep releasing updates within a year, yes, you anger many who just spent thousands on the older version that not even a year old.

Not disagreeing, but trying to understand what you mean by digital 3d? Example please? I own an NEX-3C and prefer the sensor on it to that of my Canon T5i. Both great cameras and Canon has the Sony outclassed in ergonomics and usability.

Do you notice the same look from Nikon cameras sporting Sony sensors?

You might take a look at the new Sony A6300 coming out i have it on order but also have a Nikon D500 on order as well.

I have been shooting a lot with the a6000 and love the image quality and skin tones.

But its only really good in good to ok light. If you shoot weddings i would never sell off the other equipment as all Sonys even the A7RII are very poor in low light for focus you will miss tons of shots do to the poor slow focus in low light. Also all the Sonys except the A7S AND II have very poor high iso images they are full of noise VS other DSLR cameras.

Now if you only shoot in good light for portraits or outdoor daytime events then the Sony's rock.

This is why i am buying both the a6300 and the D500 i love shooting with my Sony and for any natural light shooting the live viewfinder is super cool but it offers no help when using flash but after the shot being able to see the shot image in the viewfinder i find it to be a big plus when shooting out doors.
I also like how lite the Sony is But for the low light stuff the D500 is what i will be using to replace my FF Nikons i hope.

DigitalEd wrote in post #17896218
You might take a look at the new Sony A6300 coming out i have it on order but also have a Nikon D500 on order as well.

I have been shooting a lot with the a6000 and love the image quality and skin tones.

But its only really good in good to ok light. If you shoot weddings i would never sell off the other equipment as all Sonys even the A7RII are very poor in low light for focus you will miss tons of shots do to the poor slow focus in low light. Also all the Sonys except the A7S AND II have very poor high iso images they are full of noise VS other DSLR cameras.

Now if you only shoot in good light for portraits or outdoor daytime events then the Sony's rock.

This is why i am buying both the a6300 and the D500 i love shooting with my Sony and for any natural light shooting the live viewfinder is super cool but it offers no help when using flash but after the shot being able to see the shot image in the viewfinder i find it to be a big plus when shooting out doors.
I also like how lite the Sony is But for the low light stuff the D500 is what i will be using to replace my FF Nikons i hope.

Axtually the a7rII is very good in low light when using native lenses. AF sensitivity is EV -2. That puts it up there with the 5DIII

The Sony line-up is very tempting for a lot of DSLR owners with the promise of small size and top end full frame image quality however in my experience the reality isn't as rosy.

The IQ I can't deny is very good, the A7ii was easily the equal of my D750 for all but high ISO (but then I don't use much beyond 3200 anyway), for me the issue remains ergonomics and lenses, the handing is awful its just not big enough for me, especially with larger lenses and when you add a battery grip it kind of defeats the purpose of the small size.

The lens lineup is getting better but theres no denying that they're very expensive v either Canon, Nikon or even the Fuji competition (admittedly APS-C not full frame) and even the Sony glass that does exist seems to suffer from QC issues (35 f1.4) and in some cases just poor IQ (24-70 f4).

It is a bit of a leap, personally I'm without a camera having sold off my Nikon FF gear to make the move to mirrorless I tried Sony and sent it back, now pondering my next move and actually thinking about a cheap used Canon 6D with a few primes instead.

njstacker22 wrote in post #17717520
I think many of us are in the same boat. I have been looking at the A7RII and I have a strong feeling I'm not going to be very comfortable with the ergonomics of it but the features that is packs may force me to take the leap. I want to rent one but it's just so darn expensive.

Anytime we try a new camera, there will always be a little discomfort and getting used to with ergonomics. It was the same when I shifted to the a7 from the 5D2, but now I don't even think twice about it anymore. There are things about the 5D2 that I love, and also things I love about the a7.

But of course, what suits me may not often be the case for other photographers.