Jump to content

Sony a6500


Recommended Posts

Working on the basis that there are no pockets in shrouds and that I needed to fend off the taxman, I bought a new camera before the tax year end, a Sony a6500

 

This replaces my now venerable NEX 6, a camera that has served me very well and taken many thousands of images - must get a shutter count.

 

I've not had the new camera long enough to come to any definite conclusions but, for Sony users, I've put together a few first thoughts here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your thoughts, Bryan -- just read through them. 

 

I'm not sure we can do a click count on these smaller Sonys. Anyone know? There was a post in here about it. 

 

I have both an NEX-6 and NEX-7, a RX10, and the little RX100/3. I use the NEXs mostly with the 10-18 zoom, so not as much as the other two systems. I'm hoping the 6 has a long life, because the 7 is the most user-unfriendly picture-taking machine I've ever encountered. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On my A55 I used to get 2 numbers, one nearly twice the other (which was the number of exposures, more or less) because of the permanent live view, which meant the shutter had to close, open and close again for a single exposure. The A58 has a single number because it has electronic front curtain.

Not sure how the NEX6 handles that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The a6500 sounds like an excellent choice for you, Bryan. I love image-stabilization. No doubt you'll find it very useful with your legacy lenses.

 

Your NEX-6 certainly served you well. I hope you give it a decent pension.

 

My NEX-6 still looks brand new. At the rate I'm going, it could last me forever. B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just spotted this in your blog post:

 

"My old lenses appear to be coping well with the increased pixel density, although the edge definition provided by my Pentax 28mm f2.8 is not great on distant views. It's fine close up, so I wonder if this is a field curvature problem?"

 

I notice the same thing with an old Minolta 28mm f/2.8 lens that I sometimes use on my NEX-6 -- fine close-up, but soft edges with distant views.

 

Interestingly, I do not notice this pattern with two other Minolta manual focus lenses that I own, a 50mm f/1.7 and a 45mm f/2. They are both fine for distant views.

 

I don't know enough about lenses to speculate why this happens. Perhaps old 50mm (Minolta ones, anyway) lenses are just better performers in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the 28 is the problem child (and I've tried Pentax [3 varieties], Zuiko and Canon FT), my 35mm, 50mm and even my old 75-150 zoom are all very good indeed.

 

I've tried a whole batch of 50s, including Pentax f1.4, f1.7, Canon FT f1.8, Zuiko f1.4 and f1.8 and they all give excellent results.

 

My favourites are the Pentax f1.7 and the Zuiko f1.8 because they are so small and light. In general the Zuikos provide super detail, but lack a bit of contrast. The Zuiko 75-150 in particular is sharp but dull, and I prefer the Pentax over that range.

 

I am currently using 

 

12 mm Rokinon F2

19mm Sigma f2.8  ( the only auto focus lens in my camera bag - poor edge definition)

28mm Pentax f2.8

35mm Samsung badged Pentax 35mm f2

50 mm f1.8 Zuiko

75-150 f4 Pentax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would know better than I, Bryan, but I've read that in general legacy lenses under 35mm focal length can be iffy with APS-C and other crop sensors. Too bad because 28mm (42mm equiv.) is such a useful focal length.

 

Field curvature does sound like a likely suspect.

 

How well does the 6500's in-camera image stabilization work with your legacy lenses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would know better than I, Bryan, but I've read that in general legacy lenses under 35mm focal length can be iffy with APS-C and other crop sensors. Too bad because 28mm (42mm equiv.) is such a useful focal length.

 

Field curvature does sound like a likely suspect.

 

How well does the 6500's in-camera image stabilization work with your legacy lenses?

Yes John, the 28 is my most used lens. Sigma make a 30mm, but my experience with the Sigma 19 has not been brilliant. Must take a look at the current Rokinon catalogue/reviews.

 

It's too early to say how well the image stabilisation works. I've had mixed results - generally fine but a few failures - but then I don't always remember to change the focal length setting. I did take a series of test shots with the 75-150 at 150 and all were sharp however, which is unusual for me, so I guess the IS must be doing some good!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You would know better than I, Bryan, but I've read that in general legacy lenses under 35mm focal length can be iffy with APS-C and other crop sensors. Too bad because 28mm (42mm equiv.) is such a useful focal length.

 

Field curvature does sound like a likely suspect.

 

How well does the 6500's in-camera image stabilization work with your legacy lenses?

Yes John, the 28 is my most used lens. Sigma make a 30mm, but my experience with the Sigma 19 has not been brilliant. Must take a look at the current Rokinon catalogue/reviews.

 

It's too early to say how well the image stabilisation works. I've had mixed results - generally fine but a few failures - but then I don't always remember to change the focal length setting. I did take a series of test shots with the 75-150 at 150 and all were sharp however, which is unusual for me, so I guess the IS must be doing some good!

 

 

Better than having no stabilization. I tend to get about 2-4 extra f/stops with OSS, with the occasional flub.

 

I've found a good deal on a used Sony 35mm f/1.8, which has become ridiculously expensive here in Canada, and I might go for it. Sony has priced me out of the new equipment market.

 

I like the Sony 35mm lens better than the Sigma 30mm f/2.8 (also a good lens) because the former has OSS and it is fully compatible with Sony's hybrid AF system. The OSS and larger maximum aperture also make the Sony a better low-light lens, which is probably what I'd use a lens like this for a lot of the time. .

 

The Sony 35mm seems to get nothing but positive reviews.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did own and use, for about a year, the 24mm Sony Zeiss Sonnar 24mm f1.8 prime. It was the best lens I've ever own, and I've own some classics lenses. 

 

A new one of those now goes for about $1400 CAN plus taxes in these here parts. Way tooooo... pricey for my budget.

 

It would certainly be a good lens for the a6500 because I believe the 24mm does not have OSS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I did own and use, for about a year, the 24mm Sony Zeiss Sonnar 24mm f1.8 prime. It was the best lens I've ever own, and I've own some classics lenses. 

 

A new one of those now goes for about $1400 CAN plus taxes in these here parts. Way tooooo... pricey for my budget.

 

 

 

Ouch!  Way too much for skinflints such as myself. (Although I can imagine the pleasure to be had from such a fine piece of kit.)

 

I used to inhabit the Manual Focus Forum, which is still going, but not as lively as it once was, and seem to recall that the Zeiss planar 50 was the one to get (Not the Tessar which I have and is not much cop). However, for all practical purposes, a £25 Pentax f1.7 50mm does all you need (on a crop factor camera).

 

Bargain of the century used to be the 35 mm f2.4 Zeiss Flektogon.  I think that they were sold as accessories for Praktica cameras and, at one time, could be had for coppers. I have one, but it's a tad soft on one side. It has a useful macro-ish capability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I did own and use, for about a year, the 24mm Sony Zeiss Sonnar 24mm f1.8 prime. It was the best lens I've ever own, and I've own some classics lenses. 

 

A new one of those now goes for about $1400 CAN plus taxes in these here parts. Way tooooo... pricey for my budget.

 

 

 

Ouch!  Way too much for skinflints such as myself. (Although I can imagine the pleasure to be had from such a fine piece of kit.)

 

I used to inhabit the Manual Focus Forum, which is still going, but not as lively as it once was, and seem to recall that the Zeiss planar 50 was the one to get (Not the Tessar which I have and is not much cop). However, for all practical purposes, a £25 Pentax f1.7 50mm does all you need (on a crop factor camera).

 

Bargain of the century used to be the 35 mm f2.4 Zeiss Flektogon.  I think that they were sold as accessories for Praktica cameras and, at one time, could be had for coppers. I have one, but it's a tad soft on one side. It has a useful macro-ish capability.

 

 

The pristine Minolta 50mm F/1.7 that I bought for $40 CAN is a very good lens. However, the 75mm equivalent focal length and lack of OSS doesn't make it a viable low-light lens despite the wide max aperture. Hence my interest in the Sony 35mm f/1.8. Also, my manual focusing skills ain't quite what they used to be, it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.