liseli porno izle liseli porno rus porno

Porno Sites:

sex porno porno videolar porno film full pornolar hd pornolar cep porno izle seks pornolar
 



Tesisat Siteleri Oneri:

kanal acma su kacagi bulma petek temizlik tesisatci

Testing

April 20, 2014

Sony Full Frame vs APS-C Using E-Mount Zeiss f/4 OSS Zoom Lenses!!

Sony A7r vs Sony Nex-6 vie Zeiss

So yesterday I took a few snapshots using both the Sony Nex-6 with the 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens (sel1670z) and the Sony Alpha A7r with the 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens (sel2470Z). I thought this would be a great opportunity to show you how the cameras perform with basically the same glass but obviously different sized format sensors. I know many of you are on the fence about the quality of full frame vs the smaller APS-C and is it worth upgrading etc..

I’ve said in the past that the full frame has a more 3D look to it and also the larger format captures much more of the scene with the same focal length. This is where the zoom crop factor comes in on the APS-C sized camera’s and you need to multiply the focal length by it to get the actual effective focal length. Full tutorial article explaining Crop Factor (Click Here) So in other words, the 16-70mm lens on my Nex-6 is effectively multiplied by 1.5x due to the smaller aps-c sensor size. Therefore the effective focal length equivalent is actually 16-70mm X 1.5x which = 24-105mm! Now that is a perfect effective focal length in my opinion and you may also recall its my favorite full frame EF Canon lens that I like to use with the Metabones II lens Adapter (Click Here)

So moving on to some real world photography, lets take a look at what 16mm on the Nex-6 vs 24mm on the Alpha A7r looks like shall we? I also have Lab photos to show you guys, but those will be used in the full review of each lens as the evaluating, naming, and cropping of all the pics takes time. Real world photography is more important and what really matters in the end anyway in my opinion.

 

Full Frame VS APS-C Via Zeiss F/4 OSS Zooms

First, take a look at the gear below and be sure to click the photos for the larger ~1200 px version if you want to see more details and full sharpness.

Sony A7r vs Sony Nex-6 vie Zeiss

Sony A7r vs Sony Nex-6 vie Zeiss f/4 OSS Zooms

 

Red Barn

I had to bring my best buddy Chubs to the vet for his shots yesterday, and from the parking lot this brilliant red barn was being lit by the sun perfectly in the morning light. I grabbed a few snaps with each camera and lens combo, so lets see if there is a noticeable difference in “look” and/or quality of the photos shall we?I was shooting raw quality just so you are aware, and I used a new preset I’ve been working on for Lightroom 5 to enhance the files equally. Basically the preset applies the lens profile corrections, a medium tone curve adjustment, some clarity, some vibrancy, and a little sharpening. I then fine tuned the exposure and WB ever so slightly if needed, but both cameras had good exposure’s for the most part. The A7r in particular exposes the highlights a little brighter than the Nex-6 I notice mostly.

 

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ ~16mm (effectively 24mm)

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 16mm, f/8, 1/250sec, ISO 100, Hand-Held

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 16mm, f/8, 1/250sec, ISO 100, Hand-Held

I actually took this next frame at 26mm on the A7r by mistake as I meant to use 24mm, so I cropped the nex-6 image in a little bit to match the frames up.. It was only a slight crop in lightroom 5 on each image. What is important to note is the overall look of the image. Note the distortion of the barn difference by how vertical the lines look in each image.

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ ~26mm

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 26mm, f/8, 1/250sec, ISO 100, Hand-Held

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 26mm, f/8, 1/250sec, ISO 100, Hand-Held

 

La Manette Hotel – No Vacancy

This next scene offered some serious dynamic range to contend with and lots of corner details and space between the foreground and background. I also took a few different focal lengths with each lens this time πŸ˜‰ I was hand holding the cameras so the scenes are not identical unfortunately. I apologize for that added variable, but I was pressed for time. Lab tests will be the same though πŸ˜‰

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 16mm (effectively 24mm)

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 16mm, f/8, 1/500sec, ISO 100, Hand held, Raw quality

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 16mm, f/8, 1/500sec, ISO 100, Hand held, Raw quality

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 24mm

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens @ 24mm, f/8, 1/320sec, ISO 100, hand held, raw quality

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens @ 24mm, f/8, 1/320sec, ISO 100, hand held, raw quality

 

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 22mm (effectively ~33mm)

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 22mm, f/8, 1/400sec, ISO 100, Hand held, Raw quality

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 22mm, f/8, 1/400sec, ISO 100, Hand held, Raw quality

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 34mm

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens @ 34mm, f/8, 1/500sec, ISO 100, hand held, raw quality

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens @ 34mm, f/8, 1/500sec, ISO 100, hand held, raw quality

 

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm (effectively ~105mm)

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 70mm, f/8, 1/640sec, ISO 100, Hand held, Raw quality

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 70mm, f/8, 1/640sec, ISO 100, Hand held, Raw quality

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 34mm

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens @ 70mm, f/8, 1/500sec, ISO 100, hand held, raw quality

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens @ 70mm, f/8, 1/500sec, ISO 100, hand held, raw quality

 

Layla

Layla and I went out back and took a few snapshots πŸ˜‰

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm (effectively ~105mm)

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 70mm, f/4, 1/200sec, ISO 100, Hand held, Raw quality

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 70mm, f/4, 1/200sec, ISO 100, Hand held, Raw quality

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens @ 70mm, f/4, 1/200sec, ISO 100, hand held, raw quality

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens @ 70mm, f/4, 1/200sec, ISO 100, hand held, raw quality

 

She also got a lovely charm necklace she wanted to show off.

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm (effectively ~105mm)

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 70mm, f/4, 1/1250sec, ISO 100, Hand held, Raw quality

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 70mm, f/4, 1/1250sec, ISO 100, Hand held, Raw quality

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens @ 70mm, f/4, 1/1250sec, ISO 100, hand held, raw quality

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens @ 70mm, f/4, 1/1250sec, ISO 100, hand held, raw quality

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm

 

Random

This is the lid to out little fire-pit and the blue is the trampoline posts and netting in the background.

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm (effectively ~105mm)

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 70mm, f/4, 1/200sec, ISO 100, Hand held, Raw quality

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 70mm, f/4, 1/200sec, ISO 100, Hand held, Raw quality

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens @ 70mm, f/4, 1/200sec, ISO 100, hand held, raw quality

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss lens @ 70mm, f/4, 1/200sec, ISO 100, hand held, raw quality

 

And lastly a snapshot from the other morning Bashakill visit in the morning glow. A similar frame anyway but I was using the A5000 as opposed to the Nex-6 this time for reference.

Sony A5000 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm (effectively ~105mm)

Sony a5000 w/ 16-70mm f/4 oss Zeiss lens @ f/5, 70mm, 1/200sec, ISO 100, Jpeg

Sony a5000 w/ 16-70mm f/4 oss Zeiss lens @ f/5, 70mm, 1/200sec, ISO 100, Jpeg

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm

 

Lab Photos

For a much more effective visualization I took some lab photos which helps illustrate what the full frame format can do compared to the smaller APS-C sized format. The cameras were the same exact distance from the Lab, but the Nex-6 I raised up a little bit to try and match the A7r a little better. What is important to note here is the crop factor Nex-6 @ 16mm is effectivelyΒ  the same as 24mm. And 47mm on the Nex-6 is effectively the same as 70mm on the A7r. So the lab scene will look the same with both camera and lens combos despite the crop factor, because the lens focal length difference is making up for it. I hope that makes sense?

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 16mm (effectively ~24mm)

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 16mm, f/4, ISO 100, Lab

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 16mm, f/4, ISO 100, Lab

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 24mm

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ f/4, 24mm, Lab

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ f/4, 24mm, Lab

 

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 47mm (effectively ~70mm)

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 47mm, f/4, ISO 100, Lab

Sony Nex-6 w/ 16-70mm f/4 OSS Zeiss Lens @ 47mm, f/4, ISO 100, Lab

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ 70mm

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ f/4, 70mm, Lab

Sony A7r w/ 24-70mm f/4 OSS Lens @ f/4, 70mm, Lab

 

Sony A6000 Shipping Update?

Sony A6000 @ AmazonThe Sony A6000 is said to be shipping at Amazon (Click Here), but check out the little note below it saying usually ships in 3-5 weeks? That is when it will be officially re-leased in the US and everybody will be shipping it, so it’s just a marketing trick, but I very good one I must admit! You can also pre-order the Sony Alpha A6000 @ BHphoto (Click Here), and you will most likely get it sooner from my experience.

Also, be sure to check out what the latest more affordable 180 degree flip screen Alpha A5000 can do in my highly detailed review This Way >>(Click Here)

 


Closing Remarks:

I would love to hear your thoughts on the look of each camera and lens combo and if you can see the difference or not. Full frame vs APS-C pretty much head to head in the real world, with the slight zoom advantage going to the 16-70mm lens of course. Otherwise very similar lenses each designed for the respective format e-mount cameras. I can see the difference, but on some of the photos the larger view is required. It’s also worth noting that the addition zoom on the 16-49mm gave the Nex-6 a slight advantage for the Layla and random pics in my opinion based on the separation and composition etc.. It’s hard to compare apples to apples like this in the real world often times. I should had only zoomed to about 50mm to keep the max zoom the same. Sorry about that, but I think the images still do a decent job showing just how good both cameras and lenses perform in the real world under the same conditions πŸ˜‰

That is about it for now, but please stay tuned for the both E-Mount Zeiss f4 OSS Zoom lens reviews which I will get published momentary πŸ˜‰ In the meantime, support links for the gear used are below and thanks again for checking in! Comments and questions always welcomed and greatly appreciated.

Jay

SonyAlphaLab Support Links:

 


Subscribe to sonyalphalab.com

Your support is greatly appreciated as we run this site in our spare time and are not paid. We can however, make a small commission if you click a product link that your interested in. That click will then give us credit if you choose to purchase any given item. This has no effect on the cost of the product, and is a simple way to give back to SonyAlphaLab.com for the effort and info we provide.

Support SonyAlphaLab by becoming a | Patreon

Also, be sure to keep following us on Google+, Twitter, RSS-feed, or Sign up for Email Updates!!

Direct Shopping Links – Thanks for your Support!!

BHPhotoVideo | Amazon – US, CA, UK

Thanks,
Jay

 


About the Author

Jay
Hello, I'm the owner and operator of SonyAlphaLab.com. Please check out the About page for a full background on myself and the Lab ;) Google+ | Twitter | RSS-feed | Email Updates!!




41 Comments


  1. Nathan

    In daylight, both look fantastic. But how about in lowlight? Will the full frame make its differentiation in IQ and dynamic range there?


    • Jay

      Thanks Nathan for the comments and I agree they both work great in the daylight πŸ˜‰

      Yes, the full frame A7r destroys the Nex-6 in low light performance according to the DXOMark Test Results as seen below. Real world it’s also much better, but not really that noticeable over the huge resolution advantage the A7r has. That extra detail makes up for a lot of the noise on the smaller lower resolution Nex-6 sensor.
      A7r vs Nex-6

      Jay


      • Robert

        I’m wondering about getting a full frame canon 6d with a very high iso, or the a7 or a7r or even the a99. Could you post a comparison photo later sometime of how one turns out in a church for weddings (where you can’t use a flash cause they don’t allow you to) with iso performance & what you think of it compared to the a57 that you did a good review of earlier on your site? Also for astrophotography, which full frame would you go with? Thanks.


      • Jay

        Hi Robert and thanks for the great questions πŸ˜‰

        The Canon 6D is one of the best value for the dollar full frame cameras on the market today. It does not have the really awesome AF system like the 5d Mark II or III, but the sensor and camera build quality are fantastic for sure.

        When it comes to low light inside Church’s that allow no flash, you will need a fast lens. the 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-20mm f/2.8 lenses are nice, but a faster prime would be ideal in that particular situation to keep the ISO down and make the best of a bad situation.

        When it comes down to straight-up up High ISO photos, all the cameras perform awesome these days up to ISO 3200 and even 6400 in a lot of cases. If you need more than that, then the Sony A7s is the best option on the marked for low light sensitivity. The Canon 6d should also perform great low, but I never used one myself. My Canon 5d mark II is not so good beyond ISO 1600 compared to the A7r or Nex-6 for comparison. The A57 is pretty good, but the A99 is much better for focusing and full frame will give you better IQ. The translucent mirror hurts it a little in low light though compared to the Canon and the mirrorless A7 series.

        Astrophotography is really hard from what I understand, but never tried it myself honestly. For that type of photography the optical viewfinder is much better than the electronic EVF found in the newer Sony cameras. The optical viewfinder allows you to see with your own eye as apposed to looking at a tv screen essentially. The electronic viewfinder has a lot of advantages over the optical, but this is one area the optical is far Superior I would think. I have a lot of experience with both kinds in all sorts of lighting, and extreme low light, the EVF has a lot of noise and artifacts. Not good for trying to focus on stars. That being said, may photogs are doing it with no issues as I have seen many photos on Google+ of stars and what not.

        I hope that helps,
        Jay


  2. Ignoring that these are not 100% apple to apple comparison, I just picked which photos I liked better. And it’s pretty much a toss up. About half the times I picked the NEX photo, the other half I picked the A7 photo. I did not view the full size versions, just what’s displayed inline.

    I should hope that being larger and more costly the A7 would show clear advantage over the NEX even at reduced sized images. The fact that it’s not the case suggests–for me as a casual photographer–the NEX is the way to go.


    • Jay

      Hi Derek and thanks for the comments and feedback πŸ˜‰ I’m going to have to take apples to apples shots I think for sure. You really need to compare the images as apposed to just picking a favorite. The large version is also a must, so you can see the texture’s better in my opinion. The fact that both cameras are awesome means the images will both be awesome, so you need to see how the format is effecting things. Note the perspective, differences in verticals and distortion control, dynamic range, color, and sharpness.

      I will get more photos to compare apples to apples Derek. Some that show off the separation advantage of the full frame format would make sense as well πŸ˜‰

      It’s great to see just how good both formats are when packing quality optics!

      Jay


      • I have to agree with Derek as far as price point goes. I didn’t notice much difference between the two and often if there was a difference I chose the NEX6…

        Thanks for your great blog. It has been so very helpful.


  3. garyabq

    Good comparison. I did not look at the enlargements but visually, on my MacBook Air, the NEX6 images look a little darker but also a bit more saturated. I own both cameras but have used them only with Leica glass and a Voigtlander adapter. With my setup, the images from the A7R are much more crisp and detailed. You just can’t beat the A7Rs sensor. However, for an everyday camera with a good quality zoom (i.e. a walk around camera), the NEX6 is one of the great bargains in camera land today. My guess is the A6000 will be just as good but with the better menus it might even be better than the NEX6.


    • Jay

      Thanks for the comments Gary and you are correct about the Nex-6 images appearing darker. The A7r metering system is not as conservative with the highlights and allows for a brighter default exposure when white is in the scene specifically. I notice this immediately, because I usually raise the exposure comp on my Nex-6 and did not need to on the A7r surprisingly. I did not adjust either exposure comp on theses shots above though, just so you know πŸ˜‰

      The A7r images are much crisper at full resolution for sure, but the files are gigantic, so it makes sense. Once you size it down it looks almost the same as the Nex-6. The depth of field difference is what I like best out the full frame format though personally.

      I totally agree with you the Nex-6 is one of the best cameras ever made for the money. The A6000 should fill that roll very nicely based on everything I’ve heard so far and really look forward to reviewing it!

      Thanks again,
      Jay


  4. Gerard Kuzawa

    I have been nitpicking as much as I can and know how. I have seen other full resolution images from the A7r and find this review lacking along that line… but, reduced and compressed does not do either system justice, most certainly the A7r. That being said, a great part of this review is all about the system. Both cameras will excel with excellent lenses and the lighting to a degree dependent on the system (sensor, lens, environment, photographer). That is why I am still open to the Fuji X-T1 and other camera systems, even the Sigmas. The body is only part of the end result, and as photographers it needs to be an understood that it is the system that ends up capturing a snapshot or a great shot. This is, as always, imho only.


    • Jay

      Thanks Gerard for the comments and your thoughts on the current situation all the crazy gear πŸ˜‰

      I did not include the full res images, because 36mp vs 16mp is such a huge difference and what is the point really? For the Lab pics I could see the benefit, but the charts and lights do the job well enough for illustration purposes. I can still add some if you like to show off the amazing resolution advantage if you think it’s necessary. Full reviews of each lens is also coming soon with 100% crops, lab test photos, and so on…

      Your sediments about the whole system is exactly the overall point of this article. I wanted to show how in the real world, snapshots will look very similar with the same type of lens despite the sensor size. I could have added the RX10 in this article and the shots would have also looked about the same except for the portrait shots and lab shots in the depth of field. I would need to zoom in more for the portrait to blur the background the same amount.

      Thanks again,
      Jay


  5. Francisco Aragao

    The photos of nex-6 seem much better at least in this sample.
    In the last couple the vertical letters of the yellow transistor look smudgy (A7 pic)


    • Jay

      Thanks for the comments Fransisco and the smudgy on the transistor that you are seeing is the much narrower depth of field advantage of the A7r. Note how much bigger the light balls are and the out of focus color chart. This makes the Nex-6 images appear sharper in some cases, but it’s just the narrower depth of field due to the full frame sensor size.

      Jay


  6. Hi Jay:

    Thanks for this comparison / analysis of Sony A7r versus NEX6. Well, first some updates…. I sold my NEX 6 as ‘NEX’ branding is out (but not just for that reason). I acquired the Sony A7 full frame (FF) to replace it. Since then, the A6000 also released and am very tempted to buy that model. I like it’s layout controls, a bit more compact, has built-in bounceable flash, but most importantly, the fantastic fast AF the A6000 has over the A7.

    Having reviewed your photos here inline, and with video aside, it seems to me that the final output from both cameras is a toss. I can see both as having sufficiently satisfactory output. One of my photography mentors here in Japan though suggests to me NOT to invest any more money in APS-C lenses and only go full frame (FF) lenses. What are your thoughts on that?

    I am thinking I would like to have the Sony A6000 because with it’s pancake 16-50mm lens is more convenient to carry around when I don’t want / need the Sony A7 and the larger lens. In fact, I did purchase a 16-50mm pancake lens on the side as a separate purchase. The reason I did that is because I can use that on the Sony A7 when I don’t want to carry around the considerably larger 28-70mm FF lens.

    Considering that the Sony A7 can also function as an APS-C camera (prioritized in menu to shoot APS-C) that effectively will provide a 1.5x crop giving the same amount focal length reach but by using the smaller pancake lens attached to A7. Of course the A7 can also be used as what was designed as, a full frame camera.

    Would you get the A6000 in addition to the A7? I can hardly think of, ‘in lieu of’, because that would be like taking a step backwards to APS-C. (that is not necessarily a bad thing). I really love the very fast AF on the A6000 which is lacking on the A7. On the other hand, reason tells me to hold off for awhile on a second camera body (A6000) purchase decision as we are on the threshold of 4K, and Photokina is coming in the fall. I am thinking that eventually there might be a sequel to the A7 / A7R that will offer 4K and that same super fast AF system incorporated into the A6000 design. I know the A7S has been recently announced but I really don’t like Sony’s first attempt here with 4K. One is rerquired to record to an external recorder (unlike Panasonic’s GH4 which is internal) if you want 4K output. Quite a ‘mickey mouse’ decision on the part of Sony. An external recorder will cost you once more the cost of that camera’s body and even then it’s not going to be available til closer towards the end of the year. I am hoping a higher end sequel to A6000 with 4K and similar AF system will be forthcoming. So, my confusion, doubt, is whether to buy the A6000 or not, as a sidekick second body camera to the A7. I realize camera purchase decisions etc., is a very subjective thing from user to user, but being that you experience a lot more equipment then the average person I thought I might ask you for some ‘food for thought’ on what to do.

    Thanks for reading.
    (and thanks to Layla from Tokyo, for all posing cooperation.)
    πŸ˜‰


    • Jay

      Hi Jerry and thanks for the very detailed questions and update on your gear situation! Congrats on the Full Frame A7 upgrade πŸ˜‰

      To answer your basic questions, yes the output of both cameras is excellent and you really can’t tell unless the extra resolution is required, or the format is being pushed in the depth of field area. So, yes I would absolutely recommend the A6000 over the A7 if you don’t need the full frame depth of field or resolution advantages. For the extra size and cost it really needs to be an everyday camera in my opinion. If you can afford both than absolutely go for the A6000. That 16-50mm kit lens sucks though, and although compact it’s just not going to give you the best results. Especially with 24mp resolution on the A6000. The flaws will be very noticeable and even worse in the corners at full res.

      I hope that helps Jerry and thanks for helping on the other question πŸ˜‰

      Jay


      • Dennis

        Hi Jay,

        Great website and I love all your videos and unique write-ups – this one interested me especially. Keep up the great work!

        I’m actually between cameras right now (upgrading from a Canon G9) and I’m trying to decide between the A6000 and A7. I also considered the Fuji XT-1 for a while due to Fuji’s awesome lens lineup, but decided that if I’m going to spend that much I might as well go full frame. So it’s between the A6000 and A7.

        The A7 has better controls, weather sealing, better low light, better shallow DOF potential (which I’m really excited about), and the ability to use non-native full frame lenses at their intended focal length without the need for expensive and limited speed boosters. The A6000 wins on built-in flash, AF speed, size, and larger and cheaper and more compact lens options. After agonizing for a while, I believe I’m going to choose the A7, and part of my reasoning is similar to what Jerry mentions (which I’ll get to below).

        First the flash and AF. The A6000’s built-in flash is great, but I don’t really like to use flash unless absolutely necessary anyway because I don’t like the look it produces (though admittedly, I’m leagues behind the magic I’ve seen you perform with flash on this website). But still, I’d really like to have that in the A7 – especially because you can aim it at the ceiling. Also, the A6000’s AF is really awesome, especially since I’ll definitely be taking pictures of my kids who seem to never stop moving. However, I’m expecting Sony to release an updated A7 that addresses these disadvantages at some point and I don’t think I’ll mind living with the A7 until that happens.

        Next, the size and lens selection. The A6000 with that compact 16-50mm are a dream for the crazy small size and zoom range even if the quality isn’t perfect at it’s widest (I’ve heard other reviewers say they think it’s great). There are also pancake lenses, high end Zeiss options, and in general, the lenses will be smaller and cheaper compared to their full frame counterparts (especially the giant 70-200mm FE compared to the 55-210mm). However, the fact that the A7 can use these lenses, as Jerry points out, offers some intriguing options. Yes their resolution will only be 10mp with the non full frame lenses, but they also allow the A7 to have the same cheap and compact lens options as the APS-C cameras. People say using APS-C glass on a full frame camera is a crime, but 10mp is fine for some situations and I’ll make that trade for compact size sometimes too. The two options that are most intriguing to me are the 16-50mm, and the 55-210mm (82-315mm equiv.). The pictures taken with the 55-210mm would be for my kids outdoor sports which aren’t going to be hung in a museum, so 10mp isn’t an issue – especially at 1/4 the price of the giant FE. The 16-50mm would be for extreme portability. After reading this you’re probably thinking I’m crazy but more options are always better right?

        My only concerns are compatibility (AF and OSS mainly) and image quality. Since you have so much Sony stuff, I was wondering if you could look into these things. Actually, I think using the A7 with Sony APS-C lenses would be a great topic for you to cover since there aren’t many people reporting on it. Specifically, I’m hearing that the OSS isn’t working on either the 55-210mm or the 16-55mm when used on the A7 (wouldn’t you know it, the 2 I’m most interested in). After hearing that, I’m also now wondering about PDAF (since it’s been an issue in the past). Can you check into these issues? I’d be most appreciative… and I do plan on using your links when I purchase my A7 with the kit lens πŸ˜‰

        Thanks again, and I hope this rather long-winded post will help some others who may be having trouble making this choice between the A6000 and A7 (which I suspect is a very large number of people).


      • Jay

        Hi Dennis and thank you for taking the time to write so much! I know how hard it can be to try an articulate a point, and you did a great job πŸ˜‰ I laughed when you wrote “After reading this you probably think I’m crazy, but more options are always better right?”

        So, the A6000 or the Sony A7?? I think I might have come around on this a bit Dennis, I must tell you. I’ve said full frame is the bomb a million times, and it is, but for size, ease of use, and AF advantages, the A6000 is a better option for most people I now believe. Lens choices are better and IQ in the real world is almost identical. Yes depth of field is potentially much better on the A7 and low light advantage, full frame adapter compatibility… More options is better if you plan on using them I’m starting to find out personally πŸ˜‰

        If you are a die hard depth of field and bokeh lover, plus need better low light, then yes the A7 is a better option of course. However, in almost all other real world scenarios, the A6000 is going to look the same output wise, or be better than. You pointed all these things out yourself; AF is reported 50% faster than Nex-6 after extended use by a very trusted reader!

        The user experience of the 55-210mm on the full frame camera is not the best because Sony decided to turn off OSS and PDAF as you pointed out. I don’t think that is a coincidence either. Once the FE 70-200mm is available then the 55-210mm firmware update will fallow if I had to guess. I could be totally wrong though as I’m sort of ranting and should check for firmware updates! This is your biggest concern and it lies in the hands of Sony firmware updates? I can’t really say they will ever come out for certain, but will look into it for you!

        The A6000 built in flash is also very nice, but the small F20M works great on the A7 and A7r I must say. I no longer have the A7 just so you know Dennis As I just review the gear and send it back 99% of the time.

        For my personally Landscape and HDR photography, the A7r is flat out amazing so I can’t blame you for wanting the full frame. Real world wise, it’s just not as easy to point and shoot with great results. Especially with moving subjects like kids. The A6000 is going to destroy the A7 and A7r in this regard, but not in the Landscape and HDR photography via tri-pod and time taken. So, it really depends on your style of photography and patience in setting up a tri-pod for maximum quality etc.. Sony does not want you using the 55-210mm on the A7 for sports, so my guess is forget that firmware update anytime soon…

        I’m sorry I really don’t have a better answer for you, but I hope it helps in the meantime Dennis! Thanks for the link support as well, I greatly appreciate it,
        Jay


  7. Shamael

    By what we see, we can not see much difference, except saturation. Now, one had to have full sized shots to compare. Some say not to go APSC anymore, only full frame. this is false, to do just anything in photography, full depth pf field sharpness, shallow dof, you need both formats, even a 1 inch sensor camera to complete it will give you the autonomy in all fields of action. At a normal 9x18cm sized print, the difference in IQ in anyway not so much important, and if you take same shot with an A7R is crop size, a NEX-7 or a RX10, the picture will look the same anyway, I doubt that someone will see the difference at first look. I have not see any need to change to FF yet, the NEX-7 makes such good shots, I seek not for more. Maybe if both, APSC and FF will have evolved to a higher level, I will have a look at a change of gear. A7S tempts me for the low light ability, I just wait to see photos made by it and the price for sure. I shoot manual only, so the fast a6000 AF system is not of any interest for what I do.


    • Jay

      Hi Shamael and thanks for the comments πŸ˜‰ You absolutely correct in your staements and could not agree more. i want the RX10 for that very reason and also have to have the full frame for Pro Photography work. The APS-C is the perfect everyday compromise when it comes to the camera body and lens sizes. The A6000 looks to be almost perfect for my purposes and I’m considering selling my Nex-6 or possible even the A7r to get that camera. I want that or the RX10 for my personal use these days with the kid and all plus crazy versatility in one package. I could have used it yesterday at Layla’s school, but was restricted with one slower zoom lens. A great set-up, but the RX10 would have been better for me in that particular situation I feel. The amazing video is also a huge benefit for capturing personal Layla memories and footage. I really love that RX10!

      The Nex-7 really is an amazing camera and the A6000 will not be much better in image quality until the obvious High ISO abilities. Regular shots will be almost the same though. No reason at all for you to upgrade unless High ISO or AF speed is a huge priority. The A7s is tempting for the low light I totally agree, but I really have no need for it these days realistically. Same goes for the A7r when I still have my Pro Canon gear. It’s great to have though, don’t get me wrong, but I don’t need it.

      Thanks again and great thoughts as always πŸ˜‰

      Jay


  8. Jose B.

    Thanks for the comparison and all your insight and reviews. In daylight the NEX 6 can really hold its own. I’m wondering if you can use the 24-70mm f/4 on the Nex 6? I’m interested in moving all my stuff to Sony and if I can use the same full frame lenses on the aps-c e-mount camera as I can with the A7 this would be awesome. I would have already moved to the a7 (current Nikon user) if not for the lack of really great off camera flash (overheating issues with F60M). I’ve decided to hold off on any switch to see what the second iteration of the a7 looks like. If it has the auto focus features of the a6000 and better off camera flash, I’m sold. Keep up the great work and if I move to Sony, I’ll use your links to get my stuff.


    • Hi Jose. You should have no problem using the 24-70mm f/4 E-mount based lens on the NEX6. I currently own the A7 and previous owned NEX6, which I sold. Both cameras have the exact the same E-mount. But using the 24-70mm on the NEX6 will be using the lens as APS-C crop. A full frame can be an APS-C camera, but not the other way around.

      I also wished the A7 had the A6000’s fantastic AF system. But, A7 released first and A6000 was subsequently released. We’ll see what comes forward at Fotokina and the remainder of the year. RX2, RX20, and RX200 are rumored to be on their way, but then this is another league of fixed lens cameras.


      • Jose B.

        Thanks for the info Jerry. I have to say it is hard to wait for the new version, but I’m sure once it comes out I’ll wish I would have or would probably find a way to upgrade anyways. I just hope the second version of the a7 does not disappoint. So far I’m hopeful the auto focus will be much improved, but still wary of the external flash options.


      • Jay

        Thanks Jerry πŸ˜‰


    • Jay

      Hi Jose and thanks for the comments/ questions!

      Jerry pretty much answered everything, but I will add my input anyway πŸ˜‰

      The 24-70mm E-mount will work fine, but it’s so much larger and you are losing a lot on the wide angle end. I would rather wait and get something else personally, because it defeats the size and weight advantage of the smaller aps-c system so much. Plus, if a better A7 does not come out for a while you will be stuck with it and have to sell it anyway know?

      Sorry to hear about the flash, that is awful and I never tested that unit personally. Sony really needs to address that I would say ASAP if they want any pros to consider switching over for weddings where 100’s of fires are required in a short period.

      I do believe a new full frame A7 style camera will come out with the much faster af speeds, but it’s hard to say when. If the sensor needs to be made still that will take some time. Sony may already have the sensor made though, so who knows.

      Thanks again,
      Jay


  9. Jay

    Sorry for the delayed reply everybody and thank you very much for sharing your excellent comments, questions and observations. I’m working on replying asap!

    Jay


  10. Bob

    Hard to tell the difference in most of the photos. Color seemed better with the A6000 though.


  11. Thanks for your eye opening comparison.

    Full size images aside, I see little appreciable difference between the two, which really surprised me. Owning the NEX-6 and having lusted after the A7/7r, I now realize that the camera I am waiting for has not yet arrived.

    The A7/7r and especially 7s have the low light ISO performance and resolution. The A6000 has the focus, built in flash and the better UI than the NEX-6. None have it all and none have a GPS, which I think is an omission in a modern digital camera.


    • Jay

      Hi Keith and thanks for the comments πŸ˜‰

      If you have the patience to wait for the perfect camera, I commend you. The closest I’ve seen so far is the A6000, and/or the Olympus OM-D E-M1 for an all in one solution. IQ wise the Sony A7r is insanely good with quality glass, but as you stated, in the end is the difference really that noticeable? No, not in these shots at least. The Lab scene shows pretty clearly the difference, but real world I did not take any photos that would exploit the depth of field like the Lab does. I used the max focal length for the 16-70mm in all the real world shots which gave it an advantage. The Lab scene is much more accurate of a comparison in that regard.

      Perfect would be APS-C with 5-Axis IS and OM-D E-M1 / A6000 camera body design. Full frame would be just to large to accommodate that sensor movement technology I think, and 24mp is enough for almost anything. APS-C also produces enough depth of field for most photography. Full frame is fantastic when you want the absolute maximum IQ for large prints and if you require the most depth of field and low light capabilities possible.

      Thanks again,
      Jay


  12. CARMINE

    Hello all
    I AM AN ITALIAN videographer
    I HAVE A DOMENDA FOR YOU, PLEASE HELP ME.
    THE SONY SEL 18105 G F4 WORKING PROPERLY ON THE VG900?
    DOES THE POWER ZOOM AND FOCUS?


  13. Eric Peffer

    Hi Jay,
    Very interesting comparison! Thanks so much. I enjoy the more apparent sense of depth and better tonality from the FF A7r, but the NEX-6 is surprisingly close –at least the web sized pics we are looking at.

    Any chance we could get to the see a similar comparison between the A7 and the a6000? These two cameras both have 24mp sensors and are both marketed towards enthusiasts.

    Cheers,
    Eric


  14. Hi Jay,
    Excuse me if you already answered this question before, but here goes:

    Which lens between the 18-105 f/4 G and the 16-70 f/4 from zeiss do you prefer? Which one has the best bokeh/sharpness? I know the 18-105 has a lot of distorsion but it’s either corrected via lightroom or if one shoots Jpeg it’s automatic so I don’t think it’s a problem in the end. But the prices are so different, I’m wondering if the zeiss is really worth its high price, especially as the Sony one has an extra focal lenght at the long end. And 16 vs 18mm is not much of a difference after all.

    So which one would you advise? Just performance wise, and then taking into account the price?

    Thank you very much for your answer.
    Chris


  15. MMM

    I’ve been grappling with whether to trade in my A6000 and get a A7R because of the better image quality, however, one thing that emerges from many reviews is that the A7R’s greater resolving power means that vibration due to hand-holding will degrade the image more noticeably with the A7R than, say, with the A6000.

    Hence, I notice that all the comparison pairs of shots were done hand-held. It would be interesting to see how the A6000 compares with the A7R if the comparison shots were done using a tripod.

    Thanks for your extensive reviews.

    While landscape and portrait photography are my passions, I also like street photography, and from what I’ve read – even in Jay’s A7R review, it seems that that A7R results are not so great from hand-held, point and shoot situations. It seems, to get the most out of the A7R, it has to be on a tripod — hence, further reinforcing the interest in having the above tests to include tripod mounted shots.


    • Jay

      Hi MMM and great question.

      Yes the A7r is more susceptible to vibration due to the higher resolution and larger full frame sensor. The A7r shutter also adds to the vibration a bit. Therefore it’s a bit easier to hand hold the A6000 at the same shutter speed for example with the same lens.

      All you have to do is make sure the shutter speed is a little higher, and the images will come out razor sharp. It’s not really much of an issue, but technically correct in that regard.

      I can get razor blade hand held shots with the A7r, but it’s not as easy as the A6000 for comparison. On a tri-pod the A7r will destroy the A6000 due to the no AA filter and all πŸ˜‰ I usually just aise the shutter to 1/100th or so for a 50mm prime and the results are tack sharp. hand holding a Non OSS lens below 1/60sec can be difficult for sure. With OSS you can go as slow as 1/30sec if you anchor yourself a bit. The wider you go the easier it is to hand hold as well I’m sure you know. Tri-pod is always better is the bottom line, but it’s a pain to use at times like in the street. I love the full frame A7r, but the A6000 certainly has a few advantages for street photography.

      I hope that helps?

      Jay


  16. Hi Jay did you try the sel1670z on the A7 if so what we’re your thoughts. Thanks Steve


    • Jay

      Hi Stephen and no I have not. That is crop factor lens designed for APS-C E-Mount cameras like the A6000 for example. So, if you were to use it on the A7, it would be in crop factor mode, or have really bad vignetting in full frame mode. The 24-70mm f/4 OSS lens is a much better option for the A7 considering the full frame coverage.

      Do you have a specific purpose in mind?

      Thanks,
      Jay


      • Thanks for the reply Jay
        I have the nex 6, and just brought the A7r, even in crop mode they both shoot 16 megapixels. I have a lot off nex lenses and was after a 24-105 full frame lens. The sel1670z would fit that bill. I don’t mind shooting in crop and when the full frame lenses become more affordable I can start to add them to my collection.


  17. Interesting. To my eyeβ€”compared side-by-sideβ€”I can immediately see differences and I prefer the A7R. That said, the differences are less dramatic than they used to be and I’m not sure I could always tell the difference without seeing side-by-side comparisons. Poor post processing and technique could easily sway the IQ of one side or the other.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Protected by WP Anti Spam