Sony a5000

[Marvin McAbee]

The Sony a5000 is now $298 at B&H this is a $200 discount.  Does anybody use this one and it comes with the 16-50 lens.  Looks like an inexpensive entry into the NEX system.

[Ed Rooney]

Wow! I'm reminded of Bob Dylan's line, "Something is happening here, but you don't know what it is, do you Mr. Jones?" 

 

If Sony and other mirrorless cams are replacing Canon and Nikon and the DSLR . . . why is it that Sony prices are falling and the Nikon D810 is $3,000? 

[John Mitchell]

The Sony a5000 is now $298 at B&H this is a $200 discount.  Does anybody use this one and it comes with the 16-50 lens.  Looks like an inexpensive entry into the NEX system.

 

The NEX line is gone, having been replaced by the a3000, a5000, a6000, etc.

 

Unfortunately, the a5000 doesn't have a viewfinder. Otherwise it looks like a good camera. The price is certainly right.

 

For $3000, I would want something that I could drive home.

[Ed Rooney]

There's always the D4S for $6,500, John. Maybe there's something going on with the Yen? 

 

I'd have liked to have been at that meeting when they decided to change NEX to the small "a" -- too much sake in the boardroom?  

[Linda]

Who knows,maybe the 'Nex' line was really 'NEXT!' without the T!

 

Apparently the Sony A7000 will be announced in January. Clear off the shelf time.

 

L

[Inchiquin]

Who knows,maybe the 'Nex' line was really 'NEXT!' without the T!

 

 

I always assumed that's exactly what it was.

 

Alan

[Guest]

..

[Brian Yarvin]

Good grief! I own the a5000 and the a6000! The price is low because there isn't much too them. They are tiny and have few parts. I'm sure it costs more to install and align the instant return mirror in a Nikon dslr than it does to assemble an a5000. As for the a5000 itself, it's perfect for lightweight backpacking (which I've been known to do) and seems to be fine for that task.

[Marvin McAbee]

 

The Sony a5000 is now $298 at B&H this is a $200 discount.  Does anybody use this one and it comes with the 16-50 lens.  Looks like an inexpensive entry into the NEX system.

 

The NEX line is gone, having been replaced by the a3000, a5000, a6000, etc.

 

Unfortunately, the a5000 doesn't have a viewfinder. Otherwise it looks like a good camera. The price is certainly right.

 

For $3000, I would want something that I could drive home.

 

I use the D90 and D3200 most of the time but thought I would like a small camera to use when not carrying a DSLR.  There are times when it is nice not to look like a photographer and these small cameras would fill that bill.  If I were going to spend allot of money then I would probably go for a newer Nikon.  Also like that the Sony with adapter I could use my old Minolta lenses.

[John Mitchell]

 

 

The Sony a5000 is now $298 at B&H this is a $200 discount.  Does anybody use this one and it comes with the 16-50 lens.  Looks like an inexpensive entry into the NEX system.

 

The NEX line is gone, having been replaced by the a3000, a5000, a6000, etc.

 

Unfortunately, the a5000 doesn't have a viewfinder. Otherwise it looks like a good camera. The price is certainly right.

 

For $3000, I would want something that I could drive home.

 

I use the D90 and D3200 most of the time but thought I would like a small camera to use when not carrying a DSLR.  There are times when it is nice not to look like a photographer and these small cameras would fill that bill.  If I were going to spend allot of money then I would probably go for a newer Nikon.  Also like that the Sony with adapter I could use my old Minolta lenses.

 

 

If you don't mind not having a viewfinder, then the a5000 should fill the bill. I now use the NEX-6, which does have an EVF, but before that I was using the original 14MP NEX-3 (it's now my backup camera) that has no viewfinder. I was surprised at how quickly I adapted to composing with the screen, and I now prefer it in some situations. I've also sold lots of pictures taken with the NEX-3, so it has paid for itself many times over. I bought the NEX-3 body and the 18-55 kit lens used for under $300. My old Minolta MF lenses work fine on the NEX cameras with an inexpensive adapter. I still have a couple of AF Minolta lenses but haven't tried them with the NEX cameras yet. 

[Marvin McAbee]

 

 

 

The Sony a5000 is now $298 at B&H this is a $200 discount.  Does anybody use this one and it comes with the 16-50 lens.  Looks like an inexpensive entry into the NEX system.

 

The NEX line is gone, having been replaced by the a3000, a5000, a6000, etc.

 

Unfortunately, the a5000 doesn't have a viewfinder. Otherwise it looks like a good camera. The price is certainly right.

 

For $3000, I would want something that I could drive home.

 

I use the D90 and D3200 most of the time but thought I would like a small camera to use when not carrying a DSLR.  There are times when it is nice not to look like a photographer and these small cameras would fill that bill.  If I were going to spend allot of money then I would probably go for a newer Nikon.  Also like that the Sony with adapter I could use my old Minolta lenses.

 

 

If you don't mind not having a viewfinder, then the a5000 should fill the bill. I now use the NEX-6, which does have an EVF, but before that I was using the original 14MP NEX-3 (it's now my backup camera) that has no viewfinder. I was surprised at how quickly I adapted to composing with the screen, and I now prefer it in some situations. I've also sold lots of pictures taken with the NEX-3, so it has paid for itself many times over. I bought the NEX-3 body and the 18-55 kit lens used for under $300. My old Minolta MF lenses work fine on the NEX cameras with an inexpensive adapter. I still have a couple of AF Minolta lenses but haven't tried them with the NEX cameras yet. 

 

Thanks John, looks like for the money this would be a good carry around camera when you were not carrying a bag full of equipment.  I still have MD and a mount lenses so might be worth playing with.  From what you say pics from these get through QC Ok.  When I look at cameras I always think of Alamy QC requirements.  Do you do RAW or shoot JPEG with these cameras.  

[John Mitchell]

 

 

 

 

The Sony a5000 is now $298 at B&H this is a $200 discount.  Does anybody use this one and it comes with the 16-50 lens.  Looks like an inexpensive entry into the NEX system.

 

The NEX line is gone, having been replaced by the a3000, a5000, a6000, etc.

 

Unfortunately, the a5000 doesn't have a viewfinder. Otherwise it looks like a good camera. The price is certainly right.

 

For $3000, I would want something that I could drive home.

 

I use the D90 and D3200 most of the time but thought I would like a small camera to use when not carrying a DSLR.  There are times when it is nice not to look like a photographer and these small cameras would fill that bill.  If I were going to spend allot of money then I would probably go for a newer Nikon.  Also like that the Sony with adapter I could use my old Minolta lenses.

 

 

If you don't mind not having a viewfinder, then the a5000 should fill the bill. I now use the NEX-6, which does have an EVF, but before that I was using the original 14MP NEX-3 (it's now my backup camera) that has no viewfinder. I was surprised at how quickly I adapted to composing with the screen, and I now prefer it in some situations. I've also sold lots of pictures taken with the NEX-3, so it has paid for itself many times over. I bought the NEX-3 body and the 18-55 kit lens used for under $300. My old Minolta MF lenses work fine on the NEX cameras with an inexpensive adapter. I still have a couple of AF Minolta lenses but haven't tried them with the NEX cameras yet. 

 

Thanks John, looks like for the money this would be a good carry around camera when you were not carrying a bag full of equipment.  I still have MD and a mount lenses so might be worth playing with.  From what you say pics from these get through QC Ok.  When I look at cameras I always think of Alamy QC requirements.  Do you do RAW or shoot JPEG with these cameras.  

 

 

These cameras are basically DSLRs in a smaller package. Image quality is the same or better, so it's your choice. I used to shoot RAW all the time with the NEX-3, but I find the JPEGs so good from the NEX-6 that I now shoot mainly in JPEG mode (sometimes RAW + JPEG in difficult lighting). I sold my DSLR and probably will never buy another one.

 

P.S. Shooting in JPEG also allows you to use the camera's built-in CA and distortion correction features (with Sony lenses), which work extremely well. Have had no problems with CA -- even with ultra wide angle and fisheye converters -- since I started using them.

[Bryan]

I have been using old manual focus lenses with NEX6 since I bought it. They produce larger, more detailed, and more punchy files than the kit lens. For stock shooting they are mostly OK, but for posed people pics auto focus is highly desirable. I shoot almost entirely RAW and it is sometimes necessary to control CA in LR, while all of my lenses produce slightly different colour temps, often benefiting from a tweak in LR.

 

I like being in control of the focus, doing it manually you know exactly where the point of focus lies, but I have the advantage of the higher resolution EVF on the 6, and would not want to be doing this using the rear screen, and would want to try the reduced resolution EVF of the a6000 before purchase.

 

I get a nostalgic pleasure from using the lenses that I have had for many years, they are better made than the cheaper modern lenses, and, being designed for manual focus, feel just right in the hand.

 

However, my eyesight is not improving with age, and I would like to be carrying even less weight, so if Sony/Zeiss can get their act together and produce a half decent general purpose zoom I would buy and use it. Reading the reviews, it appears that the latest mirror less Sony's now have autofocus to match that of equivalent quality DSLRs. Add a dedicated focus lock button, and the job would be done.

 

Enough of this rambling!

[John Mitchell]

Please ramble on, Bryan. At this age we're allowed to.

 

A focus-lock button would indeed be helpful. Perhaps 2015 will be the year of the all-purpose zoom, either from Sony or from Sigma. Guess we'll have to wait and see what materializes.

[mickfly]

Please ramble on, Bryan. At this age we're allowed to.

 

A focus-lock button would indeed be helpful. Perhaps 2015 will be the year of the all-purpose zoom, either from Sony or from Sigma. Guess we'll have to wait and see what materializes.

To me, 2014 was the year of the all purpose zoom (with some reservations), the RX10.

[Marvin McAbee]

Ok the a5000 is on the way so what lenses and accessories are good to use with it.  It comes with the 16-50 kit lens but thinking of reviving some of the old Minoltas.  I have a 28 2.8 MD Minolta that I guess would make a good normal for the 1.5 crop.  The 50mm 1.7 might a good short telephoto.  I guess you have to operate manual aperture with the old lenses.  John you showed me an adapter at one time that you use can you pull that up again.  Also interested in what new e mount lenses are best.  This will be my starting venture into the Sony e mount and see where it leads.

Marvin

[Ed Rooney]

Our own David Kilpatrick made a video about adapters to use with Sony NEX cameras a few years ago: 

 

I bought a cheap adapter to mount my Nikon ai and ai-s lenses to the Sony Es. Most of this lenses I'm gonna try to sell, but I'll keep the smaller 105 f/2.5 and the 55 f/2.8 macro . . . and maybe a few others if I'm only offered give-away prices. 

 

What makes are your older manual lenses, Bryan?

[John Mitchell]

Ok the a5000 is on the way so what lenses and accessories are good to use with it.  It comes with the 16-50 kit lens but thinking of reviving some of the old Minoltas.  I have a 28 2.8 MD Minolta that I guess would make a good normal for the 1.5 crop.  The 50mm 1.7 might a good short telephoto.  I guess you have to operate manual aperture with the old lenses.  John you showed me an adapter at one time that you use can you pull that up again.  Also interested in what new e mount lenses are best.  This will be my starting venture into the Sony e mount and see where it leads.

Marvin

 

Marvin, I can't really remember where I ordered my MD-NEX adapter from. It looks suspiciously like this one, though. They probably all come out of the same factory in China.

 

I recently bought a 28mm 2.8 MD lens to use with my NEX cameras. It works fine and is a useful focal length. I also have a 45mm "pancake" MD lens from the late 70's. It's OK as well. However, I remain hooked on AF zooms for the most part.

 

Regarding the "best" e-mount lenses, Bryan posted this link in another thread.

 

UPDATE: Thinking back, I believe that I ordered my MD-NEX adapter from Rainbowimaging in NYC. They are a reliable outfit IME. The e-bay one looks the same, though.

[Marvin McAbee]

Thanks Bryan and John, I don't know how good the kit lens is but guess I might want to add a telephoto.  With one of those adapters I could use my old 135mm 2.8 MD as a telephoto.  Do they make a new fixed focal length pancake lens.  John I had one of those 45mm pancake lenses on an old XG1 Minolta, but it is long gone.

[John Mitchell]

Thanks Bryan and John, I don't know how good the kit lens is but guess I might want to add a telephoto.  With one of those adapters I could use my old 135mm 2.8 MD as a telephoto.  Do they make a new fixed focal length pancake lens.  John I had one of those 45mm pancake lenses on an old XG1 Minolta, but it is long gone.

 

I have the Sony 55-210mm. It's a good lens (but not perfect) for the money IMO. I also have the 16mm "pancake" lens that I bought used a couple of years ago with my NEX-3. This lens got mixed reviews, but I quite like it because of its compactness. It also accepts Sony's ultra wide angle and fisheye conversion lenses, which I have as well. There is a newer 20mm "pancake" lens that seems very pricey to me, but it is supposed to be much improved optically over the original 16mm. It also takes the conversion lenses.

 

Kurt Munger's website has non-technical reviews of these lenses. It's worth checking them out.

 

Here's a shot taken with the Sony 16mm. You have to close down to f/5.6+ in order to sharpen the corners/edges.

[Bryan]

Our own David Kilpatrick made a video about adapters to use with Sony NEX cameras a few years ago:

 

 

What makes are your older manual lenses, Bryan?

I've tried Pentax, Olympus, Canon and Zeiss (Flektogon), as I had some of those lenses from film days. The Pentax and Olympus lenses fit well with the format of the NEX as they were designed around the relatively compact ME/MX and OMx series cameras. The Canon FT bayonet is more tricky to use with an adapter.

 

In general it's easy to find good glass from 35mm upwards, but wide is more problematic. All of the OEM brands had good 50s, the "standard" focal length of the era. 28s are plentiful, but it's difficult to find a really good one. My current favourite is the Pentax K f3.5, which is better than the later M series in my view.

 

The Zeiss Flektogon 35mm f2.4 has a useful macro capability that I use for table top work. That lens has a legendary status in the manual focus community, as it was once very cheap and it is optically one of the better choices. Other, more recent, 35s give it a run for the money though, e.g. the later Pentax f2.

[Marvin McAbee]

Thanks Ed, David's video had much information.  Guess I will have to look at what is available for this system.  Not sure if the 20mp versus the newer 24mp sensors would make any difference.  I still use my 12mp D90, and QC seems to be happy.  I guess the new 24mp sensors handle high ISO noise much better than the older ones. 

[John Mitchell]

Thanks Ed, David's video had much information.  Guess I will have to look at what is available for this system.  Not sure if the 20mp versus the newer 24mp sensors would make any difference.  I still use my 12mp D90, and QC seems to be happy.  I guess the new 24mp sensors handle high ISO noise much better than the older ones. 

 

I think that I would prefer a 20MP sensor. It is probably less demanding on lenses. I believe that the budget a3000 had the same 20MP sensor, and it scored high marks for image quality.

[MircoV]

 

Thanks Ed, David's video had much information.  Guess I will have to look at what is available for this system.  Not sure if the 20mp versus the newer 24mp sensors would make any difference.  I still use my 12mp D90, and QC seems to be happy.  I guess the new 24mp sensors handle high ISO noise much better than the older ones. 

 

I think that I would prefer a 20MP sensor. It is probably less demanding on lenses. I believe that the budget a3000 had the same 20MP sensor, and it scored high marks for image quality.

 

I must agree with John here. Another problem with Sony is also unless you buy an expensive lens you will even not be able to use a 16 megapixel to the limit. The old repeating advice.... better good lens with 16 MP then bad lens and 24 MP. Or like it is said maybe an G-Lens or Carl Zeiss will solve everything.

 

Mirco

[John Mitchell]

 

 

Thanks Ed, David's video had much information.  Guess I will have to look at what is available for this system.  Not sure if the 20mp versus the newer 24mp sensors would make any difference.  I still use my 12mp D90, and QC seems to be happy.  I guess the new 24mp sensors handle high ISO noise much better than the older ones. 

 

I think that I would prefer a 20MP sensor. It is probably less demanding on lenses. I believe that the budget a3000 had the same 20MP sensor, and it scored high marks for image quality.

 

I must agree with John here. Another problem with Sony is also unless you buy an expensive lens you will even not be able to use a 16 megapixel to the limit. The old repeating advice.... better good lens with 16 MP then bad lens and 24 MP. Or like it is said maybe an G-Lens or Carl Zeiss will solve everything.

 

Mirco

 

 

Yup, that's the way I see it. I don't have piles of cash to spend on lenses (wish I did), so I feel that I'm better off with lower resolution sensors. If I win the lottery, I might change my mind about this.