I got specs from an anonymous sources. But unlike other anonymous sources this one could be true as a known source confirmed at least two of the mentioned specs are correct (name and sensor). The trusted source will soon give me more info. But in the meantime this is the yet unconfirmed(!) A6100 spec list:
- Name: A6100
- 36mp BSI sensor,
- silent electronic shutter mode,
- IBIS
- 4K recording
- Touchscreen
If those would be really the final A6100 specs….
[poll id=”5″]
513 Responses
omg, a touchscreen! this rumor can’t be true 😉
yep, because professionals in sony’s point of view don’t use touchscreen…
Nope. They said they would add touchscreens as soon as they think they could produce some on a “professional” level.
So there are professional and non-pro touchscreens?? I see almost no difference between all available touchscreens currently on the market, they are all good (at least the capacitive ones).
It’s not about the digitiser itself, but how it is implemented
Haha, don’t ask me. That’s what a Sony manager said in an interview not so long ago 😉
It’d be interesting to see if Sony’s going to use a plastic body like a6000 or a metal one like NEX-7.
Super-high Mp stupidity confirmed.
Which means slower FPS, slower writing to card speed, slower post-processing speed, more storage space – all for the sake of some hypothetical benefits while making large prints at ISO100.
It would be OK if Sony also released low-res models with top specs, but they seem to just push Mp as a marketing tool.
yeah, 24 would be more than enough
In theory, if they managed to get the technology that far so fast, it could be a stacked sensor like the RX100 IV. Then the frame rate could still be very high!
Wrong, wrong and wrong again. Please stop.
A7s and A7s ii are low MP…there si not other vendor going as low as 12MP on full frame these days or am I missing something?
You are only trolling here really.
Sony paired their top AF with 42Mp ultra-high Mp sensor and they put their fastest 12Mp sensor in what is essentially a videocamera with CDAF only.
That’s NOT a pairing. These focussing attributes are PART of the sensor. A7 III will have better focussing than A7R II. When will people get this?
At this rate, A7 III will get 42Mp, A7RIII will get 100Mp, and the 12Mp A7S III will still get CDAF.
Great, I can’t wait! Ok I can, pretty happy with the A7RII at the moment as long as I don’t shoot too much action with AF.
And?
And, even if “A7 III will have better focussing than A7R II”, it will change nothing.
Clean 24, 20, 16 or even 12 mp with a BSI sensor, hi FPS and IBIS, would have made this camera a show stopper. 36mp BSI sounds very ambitious for an apsc sized sensor. Look at Samsung’s NX500…
Sony should also announce a nice aps-c zoom, something like 17-50mm F2.8. And also a wide angle prime por aps-c.
I wonder how people can tell they want this camera based on only this information. They don’t know the price (it could be over $1500) The don’t know its size (it could be as large as the A7rII) They do not know anything!
The rumor is very nice and it would be nice if Sony came with that camera, when it is not (much) larger then the A6000 and when it is not much more expensive then the A6000 at launch!
as a successor of the A6000, it won’t be much larger.
the specs sound not bad and cover some of the features on my wish list, that’s why I believe this might be the camera for me.
as for price, I don’t really care whether it is 600$ or 1600$. more expensive means better build quality, so that’s a good thing.
A6000 was very aggressively priced but the small low res EVF was a bit of obstacle to people to move from NEX-6 and NEX-7.
So may be Sony need to push up the ante a bit or split into two models. One with high res EVF, IBIS and digital level and a cheaper one….A6100 and A6100 compact (or Lite or something like that)
I can’t vouch for the others, but for myself:
– I absolutely need electronic shutter for time-lapse. One of my friends had a TL assignment that ate through a Canon’s shutter in less than a week (86000 actuations).
– I also want IBIS for handheld blue hour / nighttime cityscapes and landscapes.
The rest is either just icing on the cake or factors I’m ambivalent about (e.g. the high resolution – I see that’s the new trend, but I’d have been content with 24 MPx as well; same for 4k, I’d be fine with good quality 1080p as well).
Well for reference see the GX8, it has basically all those specs, minus 36mp, sells for under $1500 and it is reasonable sized.
My biggest concern with these specs is weight. If A6100 is 200 grams or more heavier than A6000 it is non-starter for me. A7ii is very heavy relative to A7 I guess due to IBIS. We now see IBIS on these specs and this is frustrating.
If weight is kept in check and size – this may be ver soon my new camera.
Kiril. I had to remove your A6100-A7000 rumor link as the source was just a guy who wanted to have some fun 🙂
Add weather sealing, clean(ish) ISO 12800 and 8 or more fps burst for 3-4 seconds and it would be almost perfect body for me assuming the weight is still around 400 g.
Too many pixels. I’d love a 4k shooting apsc a7s 🙂
if this is A6100…. what will be A7000? 8K may be…
No.
The A7000 will have IBIS, NUBUS, 82MP 4K in Aps-C, 1 Inch, 1/3 inch 900FPS FullHD, 120FPS 4K, 2000FPS 720P clean ISO at 250.000 superoled viewfinder, 422 500mbit 4K, 200mbit fullHD 444, 16bit colour and weighs 200gram and comes with a 16-200 F1.8 lens
36mp is 8k.
Pixels do not necessarily translate to better image quality.
They eat up computer memory, slow down file transfers, slow down post processing. They hamper workflow.
maybe it’s time for you to upgrade your computer
My computer isn’t a dinosaur… It’s about 2-3 years old. I don’t feel I should need a brand new top of the line computer just to process images from an aps-c consumer camera.
no need to buy a top of the line computer, just make sure it has an Intel Core i5/i7, 8GB of RAM and an SSD.
Honestly, I don’t know what SSD means, but I have the other stuff. 24mp files already slow me down compared to my older 16mp files. I’d rather not slow down any further.
SSD is a Solid State Disk (not a traditional Hard Disc). If you don’t have one this might be a very nice (and cheap) way to make your computer significantly faster.
Yes, have SSD and an SSD external drive.
At is stands, to view a 24mp raw file in Lightroom, there is a 1-2 second lag when viewing at 100%. I’d rather not increase it to 2-3 seconds.
When processing hundreds of images, it really makes a difference.
To each their own. There are photographers who benefit from 36mp. But I’m not alone among people who find almost no benefit, while finding significant negatives. (I’d also rather have larger pixels improving ISO performance).
ok then.
I agree, I would also prefer improved high ISO to more MP.
Get an internal SSD and put your work files on it, that makes the big difference, including more memory. A new computer is not going to make a massive difference, but a faster harddrive and more memory will. SSD Cache drive for Photoshop also works pretty well. I have 3SSD’s in my system this way: boot, work and cache together with a bunch of 6TB normal drives
You made me dizzy… maybe I should hire you to upgrade my computer.
If you don’t know what SSD means, your computer is probably not specced well either.
Modern computer for photo processing should have a processor with 4 channels of memory (because memory speed is the bottleneck for data not fitting into CPU caches, like high res still pictures), like Haswell-E (for example, Core i7-5820K, i7-5930K or the best i7-5960X). It should have all 4 memory channels saturated (meaning 4 or 8 DIMMS) by fast memory, DDR4-2133 or faster, at least 16GB total. Fast graphics card for programs which support it like Lightroom, at least Nvidia GTX 960 (better yet 970, but you’ll need a powerful power supply for this one). And of course internal SSD for everything (do not process pics from an external drive, even USB3, transfer them to your internal SSD first).
SSD’s don’t retain data long term with the power off. You still need a good traditional hdd for long term storage. Just to add some info…
Maybe, but traditionals HDDs are pretty unreliable when compared with other components. I backup regularly to two HDDs (one internal, one external) and to my OneDrive account.
seriously? current SSDs retain data for about a decade.
btw: there is no secure way to store your data. redundancy is the only way to go.
[edit] ok, just found out that the retention time indeed depends on the difference between operating and storage temperature… anyway, there is no risk for normal users who use their computer at least once a month and don’t expose it to high temperatures.
Great article on it here– http://www.anandtech.com/show/9248/the-truth-about-ssd-data-retention
I know I won’t do long term storage on an ssd.
From my experience, spinners usually give some warning before they go south. SSD’s just simply crash and burn with no warning whatsoever. Theoretically the SSD should be much more reliable but the technology is still maturing and improving and IMO not quite there yet.
“SSD’s don’t retain data long term with the power off.”
That is false. And main SSD in your computer… you will turn it on from time to time. 😉
Did you read the link?
No, and I don’t need to. SSDs are not refreshed, it is not DRAM. Their long-term information holding characteristics are about the same as magnetic discs (which very slowly lose their magnetization) or DVD/Blue-ray (which have their plastics “flow”). Nothing is forever.
How long term are you talking here? 15 years? 10 years? I have 4 year old SSD’s that retain data without any problem.
Again, read the link folks 🙂
Don’t be a RTFW xxx, your statement is nonsense, I would suggest YOU read the link, because your vague claim has nothing to do with what is being said in the link.
You: “SSD’s don’t retain data long term with the power off.”
Link: “so for new drives the data retention is considerably higher, typically over ten years for MLC NAND based SSDs. If you buy a drive today and stash it away, the drive itself will become totally obsolete quicker than it will lose its data.”
So in other words: you are talking nonsense and prove it with a link.
It was a valid concern with data loss after as little as a year with older generation ssd’s such as the one I have sitting around.
Again, read the link folks 🙂
Well now your bordering on rude. It is a concern under certain scenarios no matter how unlikely it may be.
Again highly unlikely to be the worst case scenario but I know my storage unit would fit the bill.
“In a worst case scenario where the active temperature is only 25-30°C and power off is 55°C, the data retention can be as short as one week”
Define “long term”.
Just means I am out of date in computer lingo. But yes, I checked, my computer has all that. And yes, I only process from the internal drive. My external drive is for archiving. I have about 1.5 tb of photos stored between the internal drive and external drive.
the core i7 5820, 5930 & 5960 were release by the end of 2014. Same for the Nvidia GTX 960 & 970, so if your computer is 2 or 3 years old it can’t have all that.
Anyway the bottle neck may not be your computer but Lightroom and is not so good engine. Photoshop seem to be much more optimized to use the full potential of a computer as a lot of other software.
I have an i7 5820K+GTX970+16gb and i use capture one pro 8 for Sony.
Everything work smoothly with my alpha 7r files.
Capture one pro (actually 9) is cheap when you buy the Sony version if you can live with the limitation being locked to only Sony files.
Also checked frequently the Phase one site since they seem to have regurlarly rebates regarding their sofware. I bought C1 pro 8 for Sony with a special offer for 70$.
doubt you need quad channel, in over 90% of things it shows only a tiny performance gain over dual, which is surprising but ho hum
loading off the ssd/hd is likely the bottleneck in the feeding the cpu info anyways.
going off puguet systems blog its a wash between quad or 6 core in adobe apps, and for capture one i dont know, but amd cards give better performance there, per price point anyways.
Depends on the things. Internal memory representation in RAW processing programs is 16 bits per channel, basically 16 bits per pixel. 36mpix file takes 72MB. Even L3 cache is 8MB max on 2-channel Intel CPUs, up to 20MB even on top of the line i7 “-E”. Meaning the picture does not fit, every adjustment will have to push the data in and out all the time. 8 core (16 thread) i7 is a data-hungry beast, you have to feed it quickly.
Yes, for most things which do not operate on such amounts of data it does not matter. For processes which operate from disk (like video processing) it matters little either – the whole movie is not taken into memory (would not fit on many machines), and a single frame fits into cache. But for pics, when processed on CPUs especially (as opposed to GPUs), it should matter. Cores fighting for the memory bus is not a pretty picture, total waste of CPU power (I know the issue VERY intimately).
Because 36MP is SO new?
Whatever it’s age it’s a POS.
Nikon has a solution of aggregating data for 1/4th of resolution for those who don’t need it. And you can shoot JPEG for faster transfers etc, and then downscale during or after processing.
… But I want 14 bit lossless raw. Not JPEG. I’m sorry, high resolution isn’t for everyone.
It’s telling that Canon and Nikon performance flagship cameras — d4s and 1dx, are relatively low resolution. Because performance based pros don’t value super high resolution.
No, it’s because in order to be fast enough for a flagship sports camera they can’t readout fast enough.
Exactly….. For a performance based pro, they appreciate speed and ISO performance are far more important than extra megapixels.
MPs have become like zoom factor on bridge cameras… “Oh, your camera is only 40x?? Mine is 50x!!!” It’s become just a marketing stat that has little real value to most real photographers. Not saying it has no value to anybody, but few really benefit from the extra MP. Especially in a consumer APS-C camera like the A6000.
If one really wants sharper images from their Sony APS-C camera, a couple improved zoom lenses would increase image quality and perceived sharpness a lot more than increasing MP from 24 to 36.
If you don’t need resolution, higher-res JPEG will store as much color resolution (having 12 bit per pixel of information) as low res 14bit RAW, if not more.
But it won’t store the dynamic range, the shadow recovery, etc. Whenever I shoot jpeg, I end up regretting it.
What is up with DR? You just have to shoot JPEG with flat profile, not contrasty.
If you don’t understand the value of DR in post-processing, then no wonder you’re not understanding.
Jpegs do not give you anywhere near the latitude in shadow and highlight recovery that you get with a raw file. A jpeg is not a substitute for a raw file unless you like your images straight out of the camera.
Who said I don’t? Read again.
“Jpegs do not give you anywhere near the latitude in shadow and highlight recovery that you get with a raw file.”
Pixel to pixel, they do not. 4 pixels combined afterwards – they do, when you use flat profile to begin with (so do not expect it to be finished OOC, i.e. treat it as RAW).
No… A flat profile JPEG is still s JPEG. It doesn’t magically have greater shadow and highlight recovery, and it’s not even available on Sony cameras unless I missed that.
But yes it does. Flat profile has fewer values devoted to middle of the range, having more left for shadows and highlights. Having 4 pixels devoted to represent one (oversampling provided by higher resolution) also increases the precision of the represented colors, even if the real color under all 4 pixels is the same (due to noise distribution).
Putting aside that I don’t think you’re right.. ok, how do I access flat profile on my Sony camera?
I don’t have a Sony camera, but have a look at your Picture Profile or Creative Style settings.
MENU → (Camera Settings) → [Picture Profile]
Newer cameras have S-Log2 right there (PP7), for older you can create them yourself.
If you are planning process JPEG to have 4:1 downscaling later:
1) use highest quality JPEG available
2) turn off noise reduction
3) turn off sharpening
4) use flattest color profile, or reduce contrast and saturation (you will need a curve in your adjustment software to compensate). If you don’t have a flat picture style in your camera, start with a flattest one you have (it might be Neutral, Night Scene or Portrait), and reduce contrast and saturation (and sharpening) further, making sure histogram still takes the whole range.
Process at full-res, then downscale.
It is like having approximately 26-bit RAW in downscaled resolution.
So you’re claiming that a flat JPEG stores just as much color and dynamic range data as a 14 bit raw file… Which I don’t buy (so what’s the advantage of shooting raw??? Why would anybody shoot raw if a flat JPEG has all the same data and flexibility??)… And you don’t even have a Sony camera, and don’t know that they don’t have a “flat” profile.
“So you’re claiming that a flat JPEG stores just as much color and dynamic range data as a 14 bit raw file… ”
Not in each pixel, in each pixel it stores approximately as much as 12bit (exactly 12bit for absolutely flat profile and no noise reduction, sharpening and tinkering like that, but absolute is not possible).
But 4 JPEG pixels store way more information than 1 14bit raw pixel. Remember from what it all started.
“And you don’t even have a Sony camera, and don’t know that they don’t have a “flat” profile.”
They do have contrast and saturation settings, you can make a flat profile yourself.
No clue what you’re talking about. I did raw+JPEG on my d750, using the flat setting. And I still had far far more latitude with the raw file. No clue why you keep talking about 4 pixels.
Did not you or somebody complained about too much resolution? If you only need quarter of resolution, you have 4 pixels of input per 1 pixel of output, and may use JPEG for processing instead of big and slow RAW. And the circle is closed. 🙂
Huh???? You’re making no sense. Yes, a JPEG file will be smaller. It will not contain the color, highlight, shadow information found in a raw file. Yes, you have found a way to reduce file size. At the expense of giving up raw latitude.
And who said anything about 1/4th the resolution?? Want the same resolution I have now… 24mp.
Again, JPEG ALREADY contains the same information per pixel as 12-bit RAW. With 4 pixels of JPEG per 1 pixel of RAW, JPEG wins hands down.
File size troll.
with no lenses that can resolve this high resolution, this camera is useless and ridiculous
Almost all lenses profit from higher sampling rate. Their 24, 35 and 50mm primes are quite sharp stopped down (24 mm is just ridiculously priced). Maybe 20mm too, I don’t know. All 3 sigmas for E-mount are also sharp, especially 60mm. FE28 is OK on APS-C stopped down and not too overpriced, and FE35/2.8 and 55/1.8 are also sharp and light and small enough for APS-C E-mount cameras, if not well priced.
Sony A7000 on horizon
– 24.3MP X-Trans CMOS III sensor
– Image processing engine X Processor Pro
– Faster than has been AF, low noise, excellent color reproduction
– Magnification automatic switching function equipped with advanced hybrid multi viewfinder
– The fastest shutter mechanical shutter 1/8000 seconds, electronic shutter 1/32000 seconds
– Synchro 1/250 sec
– Intelligent hybrid phase difference AF. AF point is 273 points
– Body of lightweight magnesium alloy. Dust and water specification
– LCD monitor three inches 1.62 million dot
– Dual SD Card slot (UHS-II compatible)
– ISO range of 200-12800
– Film Simulation mode 16 with the new ACROS
– Menu is new design. Customizable. My Menu function
– Lossless compression 14bit RAW
– Wi-Fi remote shooting
– Exposure compensation +/- 5 stage
– Interval Shooting
– Video Full HD 60fps
– 13 kinds of creative filter
– The battery is NP-126W. The number of remaining shots is 350 sheets
hmm…I guess Sony has a much more powerful sensor (maybe improved on-sensor PDAF system) otherwise they wouldn’t be so generous to FUJI…
I think an ‘A7000’ would need a 36MP BSI sensor, class-leading AF, class leading (RAW Shooting) speed, on-board flash, tilt LCD, IBIS and 4K at a minimum 😉
Only 350 sheets, sounds like a short roll of toilet paper.
yeah sony will use a fuji sensor you moron….
my A6000 is near the end of its life, please dont make this too big in size.
36mp is a negative for me. I’m indifferent to 4K video, I rarely shoot any video.
Whether I’m interested in the camera, assuming these specs are true, my remaining questions are:
Price? Body under $700 would be a selling point.
Continuous eye-AF? Maybe the biggest feature I’ve seen over traditional dslrs. IMHO, that’s bigger than EVFs or IBIS.
PDAF for adapted lenses?
If it has all of the above, I would strongly consider it. (And wait for reviews of the commlite adapter… If I could adapt my Nikon lenses for it… Big plus).
With this specs for under $700, very unlikely, think around $1200.
PDAF for adapters is a given.
I suspect it will be between those prices. $700 is wishful thinking on my part. But it’s still a consumer camera and won’t be priced into the full frame category. I suspect the body only price will be $700-$900.
How more megapixels can be a negative? At least you can crop, extending reach of your lenses, especially making primes more useful. And given that the longest FL on E-mount is paltry 210mm, it is useful.
Now, some possible compromises that Sony might have if they did not support the resolution properly could be negatives. Short buffer. Slow writing speed. Line-skipping in video. But these are separate characteristics, not resolution itself.
210 with crop factor is equivalent to 315… Long enough for me. 24mp files already have enough extra crop room for me as well.
The downside of 36mp –
1– all else being equal, using the sensor space for larger pixels would result in better ISO performance than 36mp.
2– bigger files slows down workflow. I already have a 1-2 second lag viewing 24mp files at 100%. Rather not increase that lag.
3– larger files slow down the camera. I’d rather have a buffer that can hold 30 24mp files, than a buffer that gets full after 20 36mp files.
… Plus…. Let’s face it… None of the e-mount aps-c lenses are really good enough to make much use of that resolution. You’d have to use the FE lenses, defeating the small size of the camera.
Adam, apart from the IBIS (which I suspect won’t come true), would you not find the A6000 already meets most of your needs? I agree about the eye-af, and I get the impression that is hard to do without a very dense chip. It might require more processing power than you can cram in such a small body though…
Actually, for me, this is a backup to my full frame system. A “just in case” backup when doing pro work, and an easy to carry camera for my own personal use when I don’t want to be weighed down.
And yes — The A6000 does indeed meet most of my needs! And I just picked up a used one!
The main need it doesn’t fill — PDAF for adapted lenses.
So for me, it’s a question of, what would make me re-sell my used A6000, and upgrade — PDAF for adapted lenses would be a big big selling point for me. IBIS would be second. Then a few more minor points would be: improved auto-ISO, continuous eye-AF.
But you can have the compact 16-50, or fast and still compact 50/1.8 OSS for low light, and use the crop to your advantage without even bringing big and slow 55-210.
“1– all else being equal, using the sensor space for larger pixels would result in better ISO performance than 36mp.”
This is false. Displaying to the same size, all else being equal and assuming decent enough technology (so wiring does not take a significant percentage of space on the sensor), it does not matter. Total number of capturing photons, and as a consequence, square root of signal to shot noise (=”high ISO performance”) is proportional to the area of the sensor, not having anything to do with number of pixels on that sensor.
“2– bigger files slows down workflow. I already have a 1-2 second lag
viewing 24mp files at 100%. Rather not increase that lag.”
Sony could have implemented a scheme similar to Nikon’s S RAW for the cases when all the res is not needed. Or you can use JPEG and downscale after processing (4 pixels of best quality JPEG contain 48 bits of information, 14bit RAW does not come close).
“3–larger files slow down the camera. I’d rather have a buffer that can
hold 30 24mp files, than a buffer that gets full after 20 36mp files.”
Again, it is the problem of insufficient buffer, not of the resolution itself. You can make insufficient buffer for any resolution.
“But you can have the compact 16-50, or fast and still compact 50/1.8 OSS for low light, and use the crop to your advantage without even bringing big and slow 55-210.”
You’re overrating the amount of extra crop latitude you get with 36mp over 24. You can’t suddenly turn your 50mm into a 300mm. And even with the more MP, if you aren’t getting super sharp images, you will magnify the lens softness in the image when you try to crop them. When shooting with my Nikon D750_85/1.8, I can do 100% crops and get nice images. That’s not the case with every camera/lens combo. Being able to turn a 200mm image into a 250mm image or 300mm image… That’s not really such a great concern to me.
“This is false. Displaying to the same size, all else being equal and assuming decent enough technology (so wiring does not take a significant percentage of space on the sensor), it does not matter. ”
Sorry, not true. Larger pixels ultimately do produce better ISO performance. The A7s outperforms the rivals, even when you downsize the rivals. It closes the gap, but doesn’t eliminate it. Particularly, the A7s and A7sii maintain better dynamic range at high ISO than higher MP cameras, even when downsizing.
“Sony could have implemented a scheme similar to Nikon’s S RAW for the cases when all the res is not needed. ”
So call me if and when Sony actually does that.
“Again, it is the problem of insufficient buffer, not of the resolution itself. You can make insufficient buffer for any resolution.”
And no matter what buffer size, the same sized buffer will always hold more images if they are lower resolution. I’d rather have a buffer that holds 150 24mp images, than 100 36mp images. Or 90 24mp, over 60 36mp. Or 45 24, over 30 36. No matter what, 36mp will result in filling the buffer faster, than if you had the same sized buffer and 24mp images.
36mp carries almost no benefit for me personally, especially on an APS-C camera with so-so lenses. Being able to get more images into the buffer, that actually would carry value for me in such a camera.
“You’re overrating the amount of extra crop latitude you get with 36mp over 24.”
I do not. Yet at some point you’ll get 1.5mpix vs 1mpix and it matters even on a webpage. 🙂
Maybe we will see a new sensor in which the extra pixels are for extra sensitivity or AF and not necessarily for resolution so in practice resolution could still be 24 megapixels. I have no knowledge just wishful thinking and remembering comments on patents for next gen sensors from Sony.
I`m saying maybe the source has the info on tech specs of the sensor and it is 36 megapixels or say 36 million points but resolution wise the new sensor after bayer or whatever filtering/algorithm it uses is still 24 megapixels…or it could be 36 megapixels and be similar in tech as current Sony A7rII.
Every light-capturing pixel adds to sensitivity.
“Continuous eye-AF? Maybe the biggest feature I’ve seen over traditional dslrs.”
AMEN!
It’s a “transformative” feature. Actually changing the way I can shoot. My pro work is all portraits and events. When I can, I stick to the old focus and re-compose technique. It works well. But continuous eye-AF, is a bit of a game changer.
I did a side by side test with the A6000+50/1.8, and Nikon D750+Tamron24-70/2.8. Thanks in part to eye-AF, in good light, the A6000 images were modestly sharper. (Though the Nikon D750 took the edge with the 85/1.8 lens).
All this nonsense talk about extra MP. Want the highest actual perceived resolution… Extra MP won’t do anything if you’re out of focus, if you have any camera shake, shutter shock, or a soft lens. But take a good lens, and NAIL the focus…. Then you really have something. But if you’re playing with the SEL1650, you’re just wasting time even thinking about 36mp.
You can always dial down the resolution you know…
Touch screen is not something I want to see. I’ve got enough with phones, tablets, laptops and more
Selecting flexible spot AF point would be greatly improved with a touch screen.
When viewing through the EVF not really, unless you can steer the point with your thumb like in some m43 cameras.
^ Yes I like the way m43 do. And if Sony is really serious, it is easy for them to copy-cat the same way.
You can do that on either the Sony A7 or Sony A77II. Just need to make sure what focus setting you use
Sure would!
why would you not want a touchscreen? just because your other devices have one??
I mean you don’t need to use it if you don’t want to, but some people find it much more convenient to use autofocus with a touchscreen.
Perhaps a touchscreen is a very important thing just for you. However from a technical point of view a 3 inch screen is quite small for all that. You might remember the small iPhone 4 screen and how many people complained so apple went a little bigger and then quite big.
If you are a photographer and don’t use the viewfinder, a point and shoot will be best suited for you. Photographers using the viewfinder composing, getting the shoot done in either fast action or just moving subjects don’t have the time to be looking at the back lcd screen to adjust focus. We just do it intuitively with the thumb on the back of the camera.
Touchscreens are incredibly cheap (less than $10 for the touch component). You can disable touch functionality in less than 10 seconds. For macro photographers or anyone picking a subject to AF track it is unbelievably useful. Many times with my NEX-6 I’ve longed to set a focus point towards the edge of the frame, or to pick a face out of a crowd without multiple half-presses of the shutter release.
It’s cheap, you can disable it, I just cannot fathom why people complain. It’s utterly beyond me.
That sounds more what you would do by using a smartphone (iphone, samsung) or ipad more than what we use the camera for. The Af points usually does not cover 100% of the sensor so just by touching the screen by the edge of the frame like you mention won’t necessarily mean you are locking focus on that point. Lock focus, then recompose and that’s not multiple half-presses of the shutter release like you mention.
Nowadays a lot of mirrorless cameras have AF points much further towards the edge of the frame than used to be the case. Besides I didn’t say at the very edge of the frame.
You’re right, the experience is fundamentally similar to that of a smartphone, but since that experience can be fantastic I don’t think that is a negative thing at all. I smell elitism.
Go and try to take a macro shot of a flower outside, with even the tiniest bit of wind blowing, and prepare to tear your hair out as you can neither manual focus fast enough nor get the camera to choose sharp focus on just the bit of the plant you want. Try this experience with an Olympus OM and you can nail it pretty much first time by doing touch-focus-shoot. Maybe you’d never use this features, others would and I think that is legitimate.
You are absolutely right about your macro points, I don’t do it often unless in weddings and I think the wedding rings won’t move with the wind 😉
If that’s a feature that benefits your work, then it should work for you. In my line of work I barely look at the rear lcd unless I am looking at very difficult angle or a very difficult position. Most of the time I adjust and recompose using the EVF
Sorry, but who needs a touchscreen?
It´s only good for getting dirty and nothing else!!!
And 36mp on an APS-C? That´s to much.
I hope these rumors wont come true…
I need one (for AF target selection).
Oh, a regular screen doesn’t get dirty then?
If you don’t want to use the touchscreen, then DONT touch it and it won’t have fingerprints on it, easy as that.
If you don’t want 36mp there are plenty of cameras out there that accommodate your needs already. If you don’t want a touchscreen you can turn it off with one menu button, while the rest of us enjoy the huge benefits of touch-to-focus. Touch to focus with subject tracking can be incredibly useful for a lot of users, and for macro photographers picking out fine detail in tiny subjects it is invaluable. Given that it only adds about $10 to the price of the camera and you can disable it so easily I am really really tired of hearing people moan about it.
For fast AF selection. For me one of the still bad design traits of Sony mirrorless cameras (Have a Sony Nex7 and as of Christmas a Sony A7II) is the way one selects and moves the AF target. If they added a joystick or some other way would be ok with me as long as it is fast-direct and intuitive.
I want to play Angry Birds in the PlayMemories.
Sounds pretty sweet and like it’ll easily compete against the upcoming Fuji (X-Pro2) body.
Yep, just as Fuji users are salivating over 24MP after 4 years…
24 is the new 16!!
X-Pro2- I like the sound of that. Fuji does have the glass.
shut up and take my money! (:
Sounds delicious, but would they be able to accommodate IBIS while keeping the body light and compact and affordable?
I have fully expected it to be a notch above in price for awhile. I bet they still sell the A6000 Right alongside it. If it has these specs with some form of weather sealing I’m ok with that.
Sony have been pushing the A7 line because it makes so much more profit for them than the crop cameras, despite much lower sales volume. Really there’s no reason for them not to adopt the same strategy with at least one crop body.
If I were to place a bet though I would say that Sony will probably cripple the camera in a few ways to hit a lower price point and keep the volume churning over, and more keen enthusiasts buying FE.
Honestly, Sony’s claims of weather-sealing are not backed up by real rubber seals even in their A7 series and most Sony “Zeiss” lenses (except the 35mm/1.4). I would not trust them too much.
Yeah, if I were a pro depending on it, a traditional dslr with all the real seals would probably be how I would go. Myself I just need enough to keep sweat out so the dials don’t quit for days like my A6000 did.
To be fair, even if they get to the GX8 size, would still be pretty good.
*IF* this is legit, heat management will be an issue much like the A7rII. I’d expect a significant price hike as well, this would easily be a $1000 body.
Time to update your BS talking points: https://www.cinema5d.com/sony-a7s-ii-firmware-update-3-0-stops-4k-overheating-issues/
I own the A7s, a6000 and A7rII, the a6000 overheats faster than any of them with lower bitrate video and no IBIS, which generates heat. The A7rII is better after FW 3.0, but shooting 4k s35 handheld does still overheat when the IBIS is on. You get more noise when the camera gets hotter as well, in both stills and video. It’s not just overheating. Gets your facts straight.
Overheating troll, go pedal your BS somewhere else. No one here believes a word of it.
Yes I’m a troll, yet the Internet is full of discussions about the a5100/6000 and many E-mount crop bodies before that overheat. You’ve clearly never shot with any of the cameras in question. The a5100/6000 are well known to overheat. Idiot.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Sony+a6000+overheating
Ah-ha-ha to someone below who suggested a $700 price. Sounds more like a $1200+ camera to me. Throw in a flippable screen and I’ll consider.
I said “no” in the poll, but only because I already have a Nex-6 which works. But if I were buying a general purpose camera from scratch, that would be a very interesting rumour because of the touchscreen.
I love my NEX 6, however I have missed great shots because I’ve been hanging about for auto-focus, and it’s handling of high ISO means I try to keep it below 1600 even if it means shooting as slow as 1/10th (with OSS lenses). Whenever I hear people talk about not wanting to shoot slower than 1/125 I laugh, even with my 35 1.8 I go down to 1/10 and brace against walls/railings because I hate the high ISO so much.
Since these are areas Sony has made some of their biggest improvements in I think I can justify the upgrade.
On a clear day shooting static/slow subjects (hiking in the sun maybe) I agree, the NEX-6 is still formidable.
The Nex6 is not a bad camera and almost 3 years old but technology evolve quite fast and the specs I have on my A7 AF wise, won’t match the AF of my A77II so it’s hard to compare even a camera that came up a year ago with new releases to come.
Lenses will still be either awkwardly slow, bad, maybe even both or huge and very expensive compared to other options.
So you are saying that is how it is now? Sel 50 1.8 , sel 35 1.8, Any of the Sigmas, yeah not quite….
My FE lenses will be awesome with this camera. The specs sound amazing (too good to be true?).
If the rumour is accurate, a sub-£1000(?) 36MP cropped sensor camera is a much better option than a £2500 camera (A7RII) running in 18MP APS-C mode when using lenses such as the FE 90mm Macro, FE 70-200mm and even the FE 55/1.8 for use as an 85/2.8 equivalent.
Yeah that’s the “huge and very expensive” part 🙂
A lens speed vs. size troll.
Nonsense.
4K, yeah baby !
With 24MP I would buy such a camera for sure … (Low light quite important for me – I use an A7s). But when the rest is fine just the touchscreen in an usefull cam would trigger a buy!
I hope it get’s a little larger for better handling with legacy lenses – more an A7 withut the hump.
So everybody needs different things – let’s see what’s in the mind of sony 🙂
These spec seem great – not sure about cramming all those 36mp into Crop Aps sensor without affecting things but Sony is great at producing great sensors.
Hopefully there won’t be an limit of 4k of only 5 minutes but unrestricted to the normal 29m 59s limit.
Except though on announcement and during first year this camera will be expensive – probably £999.99 or more.
Price sounds reasonable.
In GER the increase from A7R to A7RII (similar “jump” in specs) was approximately 40 percent.
The A6000 started at 649 €, so 899 to 999 € should be realistic.
Same for RX100IV and RX10II. Sony Europe’s new pricing is insane. I wonder what employer would give me 40% salary increase per year ?
Do you improve that much every year? If so, why not?
True DirkB – with the Qc and recall issues I had with my Nikon I probably wait for 6 months or more for any issues to be found, fixed and for price to fall down a bit.
Looks like 2016+ will be expensive.
It still doesn’t come anywhere close to the RX100 series, that would make a 60mp APS-C.
And since the A7rII updated already handles S35 4k with ease, I expect it to perform just the same. Who knows, even super-slowmo.
Now that I am actually planning to buy this Sony APS-C camera, can someone please post a list of lenses that are very good at a reasonable price? There are so many to choose from, and so many more via adapters, that I’m sure to miss a good one. Or is there a summary posted somewhere?
Lots and lots of places. Here’s an upbeat place — http://sonyalphalab.com/sony-alpha-and-nex-technology-camera-and-lens-tutorial-guides/nex-lense-e-mount-buying-guide/
I used on my NEX7 the Sony 1018/4, the 35/1.8 and the 50/1.8. The 35 and the 50 are fantastic lenses at their price point. The 1018/4 was at least as good at 12mm as the Zeiss Touit.
I like dyxum.com. Some e-mount lenses might be missing but you can add filters to your search and sort the lenses (and cameras) in different ways.
http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/results.asp
If its better in low light than A6000 I may buy it 😀
It will be haha.
Doubtful… 50% more pixels on the same size sensor doesn’t bode well for the number of photons a pixel will be able to capture… Even with BSI the pixel size will likely be smaller than the current a6000
Mind my word, it will be better
That’s a given.
Yes if they release an apsc emount 24-70 2.8 along with it.
16-50/2.8 would be a good release
Yes, a 16-50 2.8. That, with the 10-18 and 50mm 1.8 would be a great all around kit.
Only thing you’ll need after that is a decent long lens or two
With a new design 14-71mm f/2.8-4 like the R1.
That sounds pretty perfect to me! If this is true they had to wait to not cannibalize A7 sale.
sounds more like a $1200 camera to me
Weather sealing would seal the deal!
Sounds like an A7 move. They’ll continue to sell the a6000 like hot cakes and drop a 36MP bomb with 5 axis along side it. I’d rather Fuji have this sensor than Sony but alas- we’ll have to make do. Come on Sony, give us some premo glass like the 90mm F2 fuji has. Make me have to have the glass.
So a studio portrait lens then? How much$ ?
you have batis 85 there
Well, you have a point no doubt. It’s what..1300 verses fuji’s 950 buck 90mm F2. Hmm. This camera is just cheap crack Sony is pushing. They want you to get hooked and then move onto the A7 series.
I don’t like using FF glass on crop sensors. It’s a psychological thing. I want crop for my crop, M43 for my M43 and……etc.
it’s actually 1200 and don’t forget it’s capable to be used on an FF camera to give you mind-blowing sharpness
Both Batis 85 and Sony 90 are stabilized too.
or you have the Sony G 90 for 1050.
Have you ever considered that using ff glass has an advantage?
Think about it for a second, you are using only the center of the image circle where lenses are traditionally the sharpest. As long as the size of the ff glass is reasonable like the 55 Zeiss (makes a great portrait lens on aps-c) or the Batis 85 (size is acceptable). I will agree that much as I love the lens you will never see me put a 35/1.4 Zeiss on the aps-c form factor they are producing right now.
The Sony 90mm macro is stabilized, have focus hold button and manual focus scale, just 1cm longer and $50…
But will they jump the price like they did on the A7rII?
Yes. No way it stays the same with a new bsi sensor and ibis.
I will guess $800 body only
Since a6000 was 800 with lens
800 for body only
shut up and take my money
my NEX-7 was 1200
total steal if 36mp and ibis.
i don’t shoot video so i couldn’t care less about 4k
Add a bigger battery/handgrip. Attaching any meaningful lenses already add to the overall size, so a bigger battery/grip won’t make much difference only benefit.
Would love to see a FE 135mm f1.8 and 16mm f1.8 Batis.
They are developing a new battery that holds 40% more charge, I think it’s better to keep the NP-FW50 and hope to see that battery hitting the market soon. You won’t be able to shrink the body size afterwards.
36MP with a crop to 1inch for super16 right?
I would love a M43 and S16 crop mode, specially if it allows clear zoom like the FS5, in 4k.
A-ha-ha to someone below who suggested $700 price. Seems more like a $1200+ camera to me. Throw in a flippable screen and I’ll consider 🙂
We will see…
For 1200 bucks…if it has 5 axis and a touch screen I’d consider it a steal. I mean, fuji or M43 users- come on now- that’s an attractive proposition but that glass! If Sony wants to get those OlyPanFuji users they need the glass!…personally, I don’t think most of them would want to buy FF glass for their crop cameras.
A steal? That would make it perhaps the most expensive APS-C camera on the market. That’s quite a leap to call it a steal.
I mean, I remember paying 1300 for an A77 back in the day. 36MP and 5 axis- if it should focus at least as good as the current a6000. I really do think that’s a steal. Sensor isn’t enough though. I do expect 5 axis, touch screen and better build quality.
True, but cameras have gotten cheaper than the A77 in its day.
You can get the Canon 7dii now for around $1200-$1300. And just build quality alone, that’s a valuable camera. The A77ii body goes for around $850 now.
It’s hard to call any APS-C camera a “steal” at $1200. I think the current A6000 was a bit of a steal when priced at $400. Do any of these suggested upgrades really make a new camera a “steal” at triple the price of the A6000?
I suggested a price of $700 — To me, that’s very optimistic. But that’s the price at which I’d consider it a bit of a “steal.” $800-$900, I’d consider it fairly priced. Over $1000, I’d consider a bit high. When you go over the $1000 mark, you really should have full weather sealing, dual card slots, etc.
But this is just my personal opinion of course.
EM5 II is still going for 1k at most outlets. Fuji XT10 is going for about 8 bills new and that’s considered a steal from user reviews I’ve read. I don’t think this camera would be gunning for a6000 users though- as that camera…guessing here….would continue to be carried.
I think the specs listed are to optimistic. Maybe we get the sensor, no 5 axis and no 4k..visa versa. It’s MAYBE two out of the three- but I doubt all three.
I agree that is the likely strategy. Which is why I still say $700 to $900 for the A6100. The A6000 just spent the holidays at $400. It’s doubtful it will stay at $550 for too long. So with the “budget” model priced between $400 and $550, I see the “higher” model priced 50% higher, not double to triple.
It’s pricing will also be designed with the lens in the package for most buyers. Thus, I very very strongly suspect we may see a price along the lines of $999 with kit lens. Keeping the total price under $1000 would be a selling point.
Remember, unlike Fuji, Olympus, etc…. Sony doesn’t consider their APS-C cameras to be their pro/enthusiast line. Even back in the A-mount days, they focused primarily on full frame being their pro/enthusiast line (they have always offered very few economy full frame lenses), with APS-C primarily for regular consumers (they have always offered very few premium APS-C lenses).
Sony will likely price this camera aggressively in comparison to other high end APS-C cameras but not nearly as low as the A6000.
New users I guiess. Why would an A7sII user buy this camera?
the Alpha 7rII is double the price of the 7II so I don’t see why the couldn’t reproduce it for the alpha 6000/6100.
I think Sony will priced it just under the upcoming Fuji Xpro 2 which I suspect to be in the 1500$ bracket.
My guess: 1100/1300$.
But the A6000 was just $400 and will likely return to that price point. So doubling the price would put the A6100 at $800. Prices generally don’t go up and down. Once it drops in a “sale”… it usually sticks pretty close as a new permanent price.
well actually the alpha 6000 is 600€ in Europe, so double that price and you fall in my price bracket.
Also keep in mind it’s probably not a remplacement for the a6000 but a new model in the high end APS-C market by judging of the spec sheet.
My guess is that the a6000 will remain in the market, and nothing forbid Sony to launch an “a6050” in few month to fill the 800/1000€/$ bracket: a camera with one or two feature remove from the a6100.
this is just a strange naming and timing from Sony but we are used to that.
It would have make more sense to launch an a6100 mid range APS-C and then an a7000 High end camera but I guess Sony is responding to the soon to be released Fuji’s X-pro 2.
Granted, you can only have so many different models… but if I were Sony (and selfishly)..
I’d keep the A6000 as the new entry level, at $400.
I’d add a A6100, 24mp, but IBIS, the improved OSPDAF, maybe 4k… priced around $700… then..
For about $1000-1200, the A7000, with 36mp BSI, 4k, better weather sealing.
Ditch the A3000 and A5000. Maybe keep the A5100 around as a $300 camera.
The original NEX7 was 1200, and what to say about the X100T then?
The Canon 7D is $1500.
You can find it around $1200 now:
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Mark-DSLR-Camera-Tripod/dp/B011CWFQ1M/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1452004202&sr=8-4&keywords=canon+7d+mark+ii
Grey market, you can get it around $1100-1150.
So it would move into an approximate tie with the 7dii.
“Ships from and sold by Web Offers”
That looks suspiciously grey market to me as well. Amazon and B&H both sell it at $1500.
The NX1 which has a similar feature set sells for $1499.
Leica T is the most expensive.
But I would say that the XT1 is the most overpriced, under performs the A6000 asking more than double of the price.
X-T1 has phenomenal lenses and superb color. Only use my A7sII for low light. The A6000 has to have better lenses. Not more pixels. And now for the Olympics, at least 10fps. Or it will stay in the hotel
Fuji x-T1, body only, is $1299.00 , EOS 7DII, is 1499 body only to name 2 right now and I’d wager that the OM-D E-M2 and the Fuji X-pro2 not to mention the Nikon D500 will all come in substantially higher than $1200
Forget about Sony APS-C E-Mount glass – simply not happening. I’m currently using NEX-5N w/ Metabones and Canon 35F2 FF IS USM (new version) and Tamron 28-300 F3.5-6.3 FF VC PZD for low light work and I’m quite happy with them 😉
I’m done with adapters. A7 experience with adapters killed it for me.
I’ve been using the LAEA4 adapter on my A7S, as I don’t have any FE glass yet, and it’s really kind of a mixed bag. It works well and I’ve gotten used to the form factor, but I really wish it had a more robust AF module than the old A65 module that’s in it. You lose so much in AF flexibility when going from native lenses to LAEA4-adapted lenses. The focus locks quick and solid, but the number of points is pretty limited.
Thing is…. For me, one of the biggest pros of the A6000 is the form factor. If I want to use big full frame lenses, I’ll stick them on an A7 camera, or CanNikon dSLR.
Totally agree, this is a problem on A7 series too – the lenses must be appropriate to the form factor, and they must be a coherent series of lenses.
Fuji has the opposite problem; a great lens lineup, and using three or four year old sensor tech.
Yeah, the only other well-rounded mirrorless APS-C camera is the NX1. But should the A6100 get the same price, it will be the one to go for for.
I’ve been waiting for something like this to up my hybrid game of shooting stills & video. The M4/3 system just doesn’t quite cut it, the D5300 is too traditional (1080P/OVF) and the NX1 is a dying breed. And everything fullframe is wasted on me (paying for fullframe tech that you do not intend to use and keeping stuff as portable/compact as possible). Hell yeah the A6100 with those kind of specs would have me emptying my pockets.
I’d rather have seen a Nikon… but there are smart adapters and focal reducers… to me the E-mount is flexible and welcome. Just not sure about the tricky Sony colors.
I also wish that Sony announce new consumer level good quality lenses like canon and nikon doing..
The A6000 was recently as low as $400 for body, now back to $550. The successor will definitely be priced higher than that, but not double. If priced 50% higher than the current A6000, that would be $825. $700 is highly optimistic, but I doubt it will be more than $900.
I always say ‘if it’s too good to be true, it usually is’, so I wouldn’t throw my panties at it just quite yet. But, yeah, should those specs pan out to be true, I HAVE to get one. There are no excuses, it would be a must have. A mini A7RII works for me.
With these specs, i would think they’d offer several tiered models. Like the whole package for $1000, no IBIS or 4k for $700 or something like that.
Maybe the 5xxx model with no 4k, IBIS, or touch screen. I’d buy that.
Older rumors abought this camera included
New technology sensor
Fastest AF of any camera ever
RGBW pixel array
The release of this camera has been delayed several time…which would make sense if we were about to see a new sensor technology that had to be perfected
Recent Sony sensor patents include a RGBW bsi sensor,
And an even more exciting
4 layer 3d pd pixel aray, bsi, stacked sensor
Bayer layer
1st pd pixel layer
White pixel layer.
2nd pd pixel lsyer.
Maybe we will see a new sensor technology in this camera.
I would love to see super fast AF and 12 fps burst rate, as well as full pd compatability.
RGBW or on sensor HDR would be ground breaking.
I hope it’s a stacked sensor too.
An aps-c 36mp sensor with BSI & IBIS qualifies as “new sensor tech.”
Your point here is merely semantics.
Clearly I am reffering to a new type of sensor rather than an improved higher resolution version of an existing type of sensor.
I will not argue whether this can be be called new sensor tech or not because such an argument is pointless.
I think, Barry, we will see such sensor later, as a direct competitor to Fuji-Panny organic sensor (2018+). And more likely in the A7 series at first… But it would be great to see this one even in m4/3 cameras. Cheers
I have been a big fan of multilayer organic …foveon like…sensors.
But while that has been in development bayer type sensors have advaneced a lot, and great strives are being made in Quanta type sensors.
Quanta, when ready in maybe 10 years…will supersede any of todays sensor types.
I therefore think it is now very likely that commercial release of multilayer organic sensors will not happen
This is not because the technology does not have promise, but rather because development of other technologies is proceeding at such a pace that it will leapfrog this technology.
Yep. The photo sensor industry is bright. It is up to Sony or Samsung or somebody else to push the button and release something different from ordinary CMOS. Where do you gather your info about sensor development? You know quite a lot.
I regularly check many differrent photo related rumor sites…including imagesensorworlld and use google searches to track down more info when I hear about a subject that interests me.
Plus I have been involved in potography for a very long time.
I want touch screen on the A7. Cheers.
All its competitors from Fuji, Olympus, and Panasonic have weather-sealed bodies. It really needs that to be a must buy for me.
I hope it does as well, really a problem for me on the A6000. The ibis and bsi will be enough for me to pull the trigger though.
Even if it is a weather sealed body, are any of the APS-C sony/zeiss lenses weather sealed?
I don’t think they are, but haven’t looked it up. Just the body will be enough to solve my problem.
I would imagine if they create a weather sealed a6xxx then they will, at LEAST, re-release a few select existing lenses in a weather sealed version (a la Olympus). Hopefully they will also just release totally new weather sealed quality lenses 😀
Problem is the sensor is the same size as the old one but with 50% more pixels… that would make me worry that the low light capabilities will suffer. I have the a6000 now and to me it has too many pixels for the size prints I need to make. 12 meg of pixels is plenty and would give much better low light capabilities which is more important than being able to make billboard sized prints. I doubt most people every print larger than 8X10, yet a 12 meg would still be enough for poster size prints… Why the continual run at more and more pixels? Is this some covert attempt to force everyone to buy larger and faster computers to process the photos?
They do it because they can. With a bsi sensor I expect a slight advantage over the A6000 in low light. I don’t print a lot but have several 11 x 14 and larger prints. 8 x 10 to me seems to small to bother with when you are talking about putting it on a wall.
Yeah, BSI negates a lot of the disadvantages of high-density sensors.
I would have thought Sony was looking to support 4k monitors, and your average 55″ UHD TV. Printing, not so much, for the APS-C crowd, perhaps.
If the Zeiss 16-70mm would have lived up to its name and pricetag I would have switched to Sony a long time ago.
What good is a camera when it doesn’t have a decent lens on it?
Yeah, it’s just an awful, terrible lens, isn’t it?
http://www.andywillia.ms/People/i-BZVqhRs/A
nice work
It is decent lens compare to 18-105 G
However it has a Zeiss badge and costs too much
I was comparing one day sel 50 1.8 and sel 24 1.8 witch zeiss badge the price gap is simply unbeivible.
How about an improved Kit Lens?
Curious if LCD screen is still 16×9…3:2 would be better
why? with a 16:9 you can have all the info outside the frame.
Usually the LCD is smaller that way because Sony reduces simply the height and calls it 16:9. It would be a different story if an A7 sized 3:2 display is widened to 16:9. Then you’ll end up with s much larger display.
Loving the eye detect AF on the A7RII for pictures of my feral children. Very nice to not have to sift through gigabytes of massive 42mp shots of noses surrounded by beautiful bokeh. Mini A7RII/ apsc would be pretty sweet. I had a little buyers remorse after switching to full frame e-mount as I totally didn’t consider the deep depth of field advantage of a smaller sensor (only the opposite). Much of my work (abstractions, street, walk-around scavenging) plays with super sharp flattened-out pictorial space. something that is much harder to achieve hand-holding a7rii with 55mm than with trusty nex-7 and touit 32mm (lens has a bad reputation but has fantastic image quality for the slow moving world ).
Actually a crop sensor has no depth of field advantage at all. On a full frame you can just stop down the lens by a factor of 1.5 and increase ISO by 2.25, which will give you the same depth of field and probably a little better noise than a crop cam 🙂
“A crop sensor has no depth of field advantage”
Clearly you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, no idea what depth of field is, and no idea how to determine depth of field.
Actually try using a crop and ff senor camera of similar technology before making such a statement.
??? He is right, simple equivalence, for equal generation sensors (and I suppose he uses equivalent focal lengths). Nicely explained in the luminous-landscape article luminous-landscape_com/do-sensors-out-resolve-lenses/ , for example. Maybe you compare the number of megapixels in a cropped image?
Actually I have 😉
A 100mm at f4 on FF and 50mm at f2 on m43 will give you the same field of view and depth of field. As it is stated in this article:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640/what-is-equivalence-and-why-should-i-care
And a lot of other articles and videos on youtube
The practical dissadvantages of requiring to stop down two extra f atops make ahooting action supjects much more problematic.
In the field I often resort to baxking further away from my subject and croping as the most practical solution for getting more depth of dield.
In tripod mounted situations such as lanscapes you can often stop down to improve dof.but in real life there is a definite dof advantage .
Try actually shooting both and see for yourself.
i have been making the adjustments. I realize I need to be less haphazard with the point of focus as well to maximize depth of field. I must drink too much coffee as I pretty much always need to have auto iso minimum shutter speed set to 1/125 even with ibis for the 55mm if i want things to be super sharp.
Let me get this straight – these are, once again, rumored specs for an imaginary camera that won’t be announced today? Exactly like last year at this time?
Yep, I think you got it 🙂 SonyalphalRUMORS
Adding 2 lenses: 16 50 f2.8 G and 50-200 f2.8 G would cement Sony’s position in the crop sensor mirrorless world; maybe even in the crop sensor world, including dslrs.
Also, hopefully this camera has cross type PDAF Points like the NX1. The A6000 only recognises vertical lines. This would help low light AF.
50-200 2.8G? Wow. Huge size Huge price, likely much more than the camera. Would I buy it? Heck yeah in a year or so used off ebay.
If crop-specific, it’d probably be more like 50-140, but I agree with your request, especially for the 16-50. The A-mount version yields great results on my 6000; would be nice if we could have a native E-mount version.
I don’t think it’s reasonable to make +135mm for APS-C, the size gain would be negligible.
That would be a great second camera to use with any of the latest A7 models. 36mpx on a cropped sensor? I could attach my 500mm lens and have a field day.
I worry about 36MP being too much on a crop sensor, though, that it could get too noisy in low-light situations.
As always, I’d like to refer you to the A7RII which increased pixelcount massively and has top of the class noise performance. Sony has the tech. They will implement it here too!
It didn’t increase massively – it went from 36MP to 42MP, which would be 24MP to 28MP in APS-C (pixel density) equivalence. The FF sensor also has an inherent ISO advantage. If it works with no such problems, great, but it’s a reasonable concern.
Yes, from the A7R to the second version, yes. But I was comparing for example the A7II to the A7RII. 24MP vs 42MP is quite a difference. But the A7RII is just so much better!
If you care about it, the ISO score on Dxomark is also the second highest ever on the A7RII even though it being the second highest MP camera.
Oh, I see. Yeah, good point.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-sony-a6100-si-shipping-in-march-rumored-to-feature-a-new-36mp-bsi-sensor/#comment-2438506317
I too worry that it seems to be overkill and likely to outresolve nearly any lens out there – but if it’s BSI it has a good chance of outperforming the existing non-BSI 24MP sensor noise-wise.
This ticks off the major boxes for me, which are IBIS and silent shutter (perfect street camera then!). An external mic jack would also be nice, so hopefully they add that as well.
Rest assured, if this is an a6100, it will be an incremental upgrade – sensor and better video (maybe 50gbps HD). But the full-blown revamp to 4k, 5-axis IBIS, etc – that would rate a full notch up and be named a7000. Better for Sony to have an incremental upgrade to freshen their already fabulously successful camera, and then come out with the full-blown upgrade later. When I hope for is something like an a7s variant – lower pixels, higher sensitivity & geared towards 4k video.
Why? They added all that stuff to the mkII of the A7 series w/o upgrading the model number.
From A7 to A7II:
No 4K
No increase in MP
Added IBIS
It was pretty incremental.
These specs introduce a new generation.
Sony also added lossless raw and far better PDAF support for third party lenses. Deal breakers for some. Especially the lossless raw if one was to believe all the rattle before Sony started to put it in their cameras.
Do the same, only this time with the more recent A7r.
Why? The result will be something underwhelming compared to the current A7r2.
The point was how much changed from the a7r to the r2. As you seemed to say the a7 did not get that much of an upgrade.
Agreed. The A7r to A7r2 was a proper upgrade (at a cost). However, no IQ difference was found between A7 and A7II, and advantages are mainly the improved build and IBIS.
OK then – A7R to A7RII. Added 4k, MP, and IBIS.
PDAF too, from 0 to 399
Sony wouldn’t do an incremental upgrade of the A6000. After all the rumors and delay, that would seem like failure.
If the specs are true, the A6100 will rule the next two years like A6000 has ruled until now.
It might even be enough for me to retire my NEX-7. My only worry is the price. It sounds like a $1200 camera.
The legend of the A6000 successor
I think they can do that by cropping that 36MP to 20MP or 18MP OR even less.. By giving it 1″ inch sensor size.. Because new rx100IV and rx10II have this 4K recording internally with 20MP 1 inch sensor..
Touch screen maybe possible.. But IBIS, they could be going with sensor shift.. I am not thinking about amazing 5-axis stabilisation because no point to put that into this camera.. That could be same as the new full frame camera..if it does 4K too..
If SONY going with 36MP that could be amazing and I like, that Sony could include high resolution mode for studio stuff. With sensor shift..
That’s my expectations..
Like a fanboy.
Yes, clear Zoom from S35 to S16 would be killer.
You’ll even be capable of using the M43 manual lenses while getting more resolution than any M43 on the market.
I don’t care about IBIS but I do care about 4K and silent electronic shutter. 36 Mp is nice but not really needed although it sometimes is quite handy. A touchscreen is very nice to have if it works nicely.
if noise performance at 36mp is better or no less as a6000’s 24mp than, YES!!!!!
If it has BIS sensor will be amazing
How likely are they to worry about introducing a crop sensor with higher MP than their base A7 line?
Depends how likely an A7iii is in the near future. I hope I’m wrong, but I’d be surprised if this goes 36mp with the A7iii hanging around on 24. Of course I realize this is totally arbitrary way to stratify your camera range, but hey, marketing executives.
From what I’ve gathered from interviews with executives despite the high sales of the crop range they’ve been making the bulk of their margin off the FE range. That would suggest making a more expensive crop body would be sensible, but only if it didn’t steal A7 market share, which a truly un-crippled crop body almost certainly would.
I’m looking forward to hearing the release specs and there’s a good chance I’ll buy one, but I’d be incredibly surprised if it isn’t profoundly crippled in one way or another.
None, Almost all camera in Sony’s line up have more Megapixels than Uber expensive A7sII and Sony don’t care.
Well true, except that the A7s always had killer video features. The base A7 series never really had any killer features besides being the cheapest full frame you could buy.
The A6000 already can do stuff that the A7II isn’t capable of, if Sony is afraid of the APS-C outperforming FF, they wouldn’t have developed the A77II that is a beast.
I like 4K high bitrate video because it is perfect as a 25FPS shooting tool, you can get really nice 8mp action shots out of it. Use it on my GoPro all the time.
What do you think? Would it be possible that the a6100 has a new kind of ultimate stabilisation system when using FF glass? I mean the sensor could move a veeeery long way before exiting the FF image circle. Wonder if that way they could manage a mind blowing 6-8 stops of compensation?
No, the sensor was able to move far enough from the beginning. Also one was able to use FF lenses on aps-c dslr/slt Alpha camera’s with ibis. So no change there.
This looks like the upgrade version of the a5100. IBIS & touchscreen is very welcome, but absence of a hot shoe is a deal-breaker for me.
Where did you see that?
See what?
No hot shoe.
Just pure assumption given Sony’s naming scheme on its models. A5100 also didn’t have a hotshoe, but featured a touchscreen. If this a6100 shows up with a selfie screen (flipped upward), then the inclusion of a hot shoe would be very unlikely.
The Sony naming convention goes by the first digit. A5100 is 5 series which comes without a viewfinder. A6000 is 6 series which comes with a viewfinder. NEX7 is 7 series which comes with a metal build.
Yeah… Both A5000 and A5100 lacked hotshoe, so using the x1xx numbering to claim “no hotshoe” is rather silly, since all 5xxx bodies lacked hotshoe.
A5100 was a revised/improved A5000. A6100 would obviously be a revised/improved A6000. Since it’s a revised/improved 6000, it would retain the hotshoe.
That’s what I’m hoping in the long run. I guess we’ll find out tonite.
We will find out in couple of months time when A6x00 or A7x00 are announced.
This is pure speculation. The things are not related at all. NEX-3/5 cameras never had proper hotshoe and A5100 is simply continuation of that. A6100 is continuation of higher class A6000, NEX-6, NEX-7 that always had hotshoe and this is important selling point as it also allows Sony to pitch flashes and microphones…
where did it say no hotshoe???
See my reply below.
On more megapixels:
https://fstoppers.com/originals/most-people-cannot-tell-difference-between-nikon-sony-and-canon-high-res-files-96854
To quote the article you linked. “Image quality arguments will continue to rage on, and basic consumers will continue to fall for the gimmick mantra that says “more megapixels means better photos.””
For me it’s about cropping ability now, so yes it’s a more versatile tool.
But all those extra MPs actually give you only marginally more cropping ability. It’s not like your 200mm lens suddenly becomes 500mm.
And none of the current Sony APS-C e-mount lenses are really good enough to closely crop. Try to do an extreme crop, and you’ll just get a soft image. You’d be much better off just using a longer lens.
Look at it this way, at a 24mp image, maybe you can crop for another effective 30% mm reach. On a 36mp image, maybe get another 50%.
So take that 200mm image — On the current A6000, you can crop it to become approximately a 260mm image. With the proposed A6100, maybe you get a 300mm image. Not exactly a game changing difference — you’d be better off just getting a longer lens.
I suppose it is diminishing returns but I really noticed the 8mp jump from my 5n to the A6000. I would hope a 12mp jump would be noticeable as well.
As you said, diminishing returns. The lenses that most people will pair with the Sony aps-c cameras cannot resolve that much detail. So once you are surpassing the lens resolution, adding extra megapixels really only adds marginally more perceived resolution. You mentioned the FE70-200 in another post, that lens might actually give you resolution to make 36mp worthwhile. But when shooting with the SEL1650 or SEL55210, I doubt the lens will really give you much more detail.
I noticed a huge jump when I went from 10mp to 16mp. From really having no cropping latitude, to being able to re-compose a bit with a post-processing crop. Then I noticed a moderate jump in quality and cropping when I went from 16-24. The only time I find I use the extra MP for cropping, is for birds. Outside of shooting birds, I don’t really crop 24mp much more than I would a 16mp image.
I completely agree and that is actually what I want it for.
Birding, you will always want the longest lens you can afford, and still crop it 100%. On Nikon, I have their new 300/4 pf — A really lightweight long prime. Sony really should make a lens like this.
Barry’s animals has enlightened me to the fact that the 70-200G is the only real lens that uses the auto focus and tracking fully.
Even without additional spatial resolution those additional pixels get you closer to the output of an RGB sensor. Until the sensor outresolves the lens/optical capture chain at least by the size of a bayer-patch more res makes actually sense.
As I didn’t see the rest of your comment and can’t edit my reply, I’ll reply again.
Your right about getting a longer lens, if it’s available. I can’t throw unlimited funds at it as I am a hobbiest, but I hope to get the FE70-200G this year. It would give me just a little more if I needed it, and if it carries no other penalties as it didn’t for the A7RII why not?
….. and speaking of the funds and budget issue…
If a 36mp costs much more than a 24mp camera… Again, there is the argument that your money is better spent getting more reach through the lens.
Look at Nikon, the D750 versus the D810. Now, there are many reasons to purchase the D810 over the D750. But I would never choose the D810 over the D750 just to get more telephoto reach through cropping.
The D810 is $1,000 more than the D750. For about $400, I can get a good 1.4 teleconverter. So if the issue is just for reach, I can save a ton of money.
There is a good article on the futility of all these 24, 28, 36MP APS-C sensors on luminous landscape. The article was written by a Spanish physics professor and goes into the science behind it in much detail. I posted it in this forum some time ago. Apparently, some people need MP as some kind of willy extension, so it is pointless to argue with them.
Sony, can you hear me? We.Need.Lenses. I’d love to buy a camera with this specs, but if I then have nothing to put in front of it what’s the point?
We need lenses reasonably priced and good quality wise (see Fuji). And no, the 16 / 20 / 55-200 etc do not qualify as “good quality lenses”.
At this point Fuji has IMHO the most interesting lens lineup, and Sony the best cameras and sensors. You really can’t have it all…
I’d like to see at the very least a (full format equivalent) 20mm / 24mm / 35mm / 135mm / 200mm / 70-300mm. Btw, I’d like to see the same focal lengths in full frame as well (A7r user here)!
Agreed.
At the moment the two systems are fairly competitive because although Fuji has an ageing sensor they have fantastic lenses. Sony lacks lenses but have good bodies. If Fuji come out with a 24mp XT-1mk2 in the coming year my Sony gear may very well go on eBay.
The only Sony lens I’m particularly fond of is the 35 1.8 OSS. At the very least a 35mm (24) equiv with OSS and without a Zeiss price-hike is essential.
You got it the wrong way :p
With an APS-C sensor (A6000) a 35mm lens is roughly equivalent to the field of view a 50mm lens (FF) 😉
If you want the FOV of a 24mm lens, you need a 16mm lens on an APS-C body.
Oh no I didn’t get it the wrong way I was saying I’d like a 35mm equiv that would be a 24mm. But I can see how you’d read it like that. Thanks.
It looks like Fuji listened: the XPro2 they are about to release in a week apparently will have a 24Mp X-Trans sensor. The introductory price should be nuts as usual (1.700€), but, again as usual, in a few months the price should come “down to Earth”. I can’t wait to see the first tests to see how the X-sensor compares against a 36Mp classic Bayer sensor architecture (the images shot with the 16Mp “old” one if processed with the right raw converter are almost as good as the ones shot on a “classic” Bayer 24Mp sensor).
And Olympus is supposedly about to release an E-M1 mk II with an high-resolution mode (80Mp more or less) usable handheld with IBIS. And in terms of lenses lineup Olympus/Panasonic are almost as good as Fuji (they lack a 21mm eq., but they do have a 100-300 eq. f/2.8 quite small and a 24-70 and a 70-200 eq. that are literally pocketable!)
Interesting times…if Sony wants to keep us as clients they will definitely have to step up their game in terms of lenses and prices.
That sounds like a broken record…
Unfortunately you’re right.. 🙂
The lack of lenses is what made me sell the Nex 7. I’m hanging to the full frame A7r only because I’ve a collection of Contax Zeiss glass that works beautifully on that one, but for anything other than landscape AF would be quite nice to use…
I’m sorry but longer than 90mm you won’t have anything to gain, specially if your reference is the Fuji line up.
Did you compared the Fuji and Sony’s 90mm?
Sony one is macro, have manual scale, focus hold button, stabilization, 1cm longer and for $50 more.
If you really want light, for a little more you get the Batis 85 that’s a 1.8 and again, stabilized.
The Fuji IQ is beyond phenomenal on the 90mm. Sharp as a tack at F2. Fuji has also has a new macro lens that I think is going to be out this year. If memory serves me right its going to be around 100mm. The thing that keeps me in the Fuji camp is their lenses. Sony needs to get some DX lens development going or they may was well exit the DX market.
Probably 85% of what I shoot (and I suspect is the same for many people, unless you are into sport or birds) is shot between 20 and 90mm, with the rest at 300mm and longer.
With Sony we now have an host of 35mm and (super expensive) 50mm lenses, a 28mm lens, a fairly expensive Zeiss lineup (fairly expensive considered the f/stops). Look at the more mature lineup of any other manufacturer and you’ll see not only they covered the other focal lengths I listed above, but also that they offer different lenses at different price points.
BTW, Fuji already has three pretty solid 100-300ish eq. lenses (one cheap, one “normal” and one f/2.8) and is about to release a 150-600 eq. …Sony still doesn’t have anything (without resorting to A mount lenses) above 200mm.
EVF! Better EVF! TriNavi too!
I prefer A6000 style controls. Tri-Navi was ergonomic disaster.
You must be joking. One dial for aperture, one for shutter speed one for ISO. And you find it ergonomic disaster? Really?!
Give me front and back dials any day. Plus it would be consistent with the A7 series.
I have them on my A7RII, they suck ass.
You need two fingers to operate them (front and back).
On NEX7 you needed one single finger to operate aperture, shutter speed and ISO, all without removing your eyes from EVF or modifying grip.
Dunno about you, but I never run out of fingers when operating front and rear dials.
Try holding shutter half pressed and operating front dial at the same time.
So were you unable to operate a camera before the NEX-7? Just about every ILC camera available uses front and rear dials.
NEX7 was my first digital camera. Before that I used film Yashica.
Ah, I see. Which Yashica cam(s) did you use? Never had a chance to use one myself, but used to long for one.
This one:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/222/493752563_023237a3a3.jpg
Still have it but some inner parts need to be cleaned and-or replaced. Old foam turned into black glue.
Why would you do that?
DMF. Half press, move focus ring on the lens, go into a zoom mode, move to the part of the image you want to look at (front and rear dials move zoom-focus point).
Tough luck titty, can’t do it.
Had to reassign many buttons to be able to do that. 🙂
TriNavi was perfect, single finger (thumb of the right hand) controlled everything, absolutely everything.
Aperture, shutter speed, ISO, focus point, magnification, everything.
Ok; you can do the same with the rear scroll dial, although probably not as quickly as using 2 dials.
I can see why you prefer Tri-Navi. However, people who never used it or people who have different use cases won’t feel the same about it.
I hope when touchscreens arrive on Sony cameras, selecting focus point or magnification area becomes trivial.
Tri-navi means you always have the shutter covered, I prefer that way.
And IMO is much more clean, proper for the kind of customizable level on new cameras.
How long does it take to move your finger from a front dial to the shutter release after adjusting it? It’s an almost irrelevant amount of time.
It’s just a matter of preference.
But the dial styling is quite apealling to me too.
Try holding half pressed shutter and adjusting with front dial, at the same time. Good luck with that.
A7 has 4 dials so it is less confusion. Nex-7 dials changed assignment with every mode and it was very difficult to remember. Oh and there was no mode dial so it was nightmare. The a7 compensation dial is dedicated and has visual indication which is very useful
A7 has two dials plus iso dial. They all change assignment with each mode too.
P, A, S etc.
When you are in magnified mode, they are used to move focus point 🙂
Why would I need mode dial?
I have my camera on manual and that’s it. 🙂
Nex7 is made for manual. Fastest manual mode ever.
36mpix, silent shutter, ibis, 4k (internal?) recording, touchscreen(!) reads rather alot like a wishlist. Then again the A7rii’s specs upon release did as well.
well, the price will determine the success. a7 (where it is now) or beneath will win.
Is the A6100 going to be the replacement for the Nex7, or is that camera going to come after the A6100?
The a6000 replaced the NEX-7 and the a7 took on that numeral designation. The rumored a6100 will succeed the a6000.
Ok thanks. I thought the A6000 was basically the Nex6, as it does not have tri nav likes the
Nex7.
You may be right but I’m going to wait for the A7000.
Will be a lot chunkier with IBIS. 36mp is overkill for a consumer cam
That is what we all fear. I am ok with 36MP as it will be beneficial on occasion. I am very uneasy about IBIS as A7ii is much heavier than A7.
Maybe they’l introduce a new enthusiast class. not an A6100 but and A600. Bigger but more controls and better evf. Like the Fuji x-t1
a7II compared with a7 thickness, the grip juts out (12.5mm) more but that is for ergonomics not to house the IBIS unit:
look again https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c4d063e2b6185ac453a46fba5be4816a34426c7df47b3816d92c0dddf8a56642.jpg
In my opinion, which I did not state when I posted the original image – the difference in the body thickness (minus the grip as you helpfully clarified with the lines) is negligible compared to the benefit of the ibis unit.
Additionally, if the resolution is upped to 36mp than ibis will be all the more valuable.
Do you feel that increase in depth to be too much?
^^ 100% Aggree. 2-3mm in overall thickness, make no difference whatsoever. The grip however is much better.
haha I found this so funny. Trying to be a smartass and the picture you use even proves you are wrong! what a plonker. love the internet for recording idiots like this forever.
Proves I’m wrong? To have been wrong about some things, I would have had to have made a claim. I posted an image comparing the two with facts and no opinions. So Please elaborate on your claim of attempted smart assery.
Now my opinion is this – there is little difference in body thickness only grip difference – which is a whopping half inch longer for ergonomics not IBIS, moron.
I’m quite OK with that if the top is flat without the faux prism.
http://i.imgur.com/pVaacq5.png
Do you realize that the evf hump is packed with glass and electronics on the a7 bodies? There is nothing faux about it.
But a side EVF wouldn’t hurt too… I really don’t see a reason to mimic a SLR in any mirrorless.
For the left-eyed? Either way, until the electronics are further miniaturized it would have to have a hump or increase the height of the body to match the height of the EVF which means a larger body so it could have a flat top. Maybe it could be made to be less trapezoidal as the part (when outside the body) seems to be squared (based on the teardown I’ve seen).
I am left-eyed, and the narrow body doesn’t make you touch the forehead on your thumb? That happens when I’m shooting with my minolta X700.
But, even if they kept the EVF position but made a flat top I think it would look much better while not adding much to it’s size, since I saw this cage design I was convinced about that.
https://youtu.be/YDKVhARCWp4?t=173
I like em chunky.
I’d definitely consider it as a backup to my A7II. Which brings me to my next thought: I wonder how many megapixels the A7III will sport? 36? 42? 402?
Today I visited the Sony sales store in New Delhi and the guy there told me that they shall be getting 2 new cameras by April (in India) A6100 and A7000, both 36 mp with A7000 having more features like 4K touch screen etc.
Sounds like someone in the know about unannounced products, a sales guy at a store. SMH.
If that is the case I would expect the lower end model to have the touch screen. Keeping with precedent.
What’s the competition like at this (assumed) price point? How do these stats stack up against a Rebel?
A Rebel rhave trouble with the $500 A6000, the competition would be XT1, NX1, D7200 and 7D.
If it has flip screen, 180 or to side, finally could be perfect future proof camera for all kinds of quality content creators, if not gonna still wait, don’t wanna multiple cameras, and a5100 not looking amazing anymore, or if they released a5200 or something with 4K and maybe even BSI but don’t need that much mp.
Sony does not and will never make anything future proof, ever.
yeah I didn’t really mean “future proof future proof”, more like so I could be still happy with this purchase in two years, cuz I would probably regret in two years getting now a5100
I have an original RX100 mk I that I bought within a few months of release. Happiness comes from within, not from a vendor.
Those are incredible specs for a low end camera.
This is stupid. 36 mpix in aps-c camera is downright stupid. There are not enough sharp and fast lenses to utilize this, and not enough light to have the detail of 18mpix full frame. Not to mention that at this specs it would cost around $1500.
Not enough light? An f stop is an f stop ain’t it?
Sensor size is sensor size. Yes, f stop is f stop, if you want 35 f1.4 light gather on crop, you need 24 f1.0 lens. Cant wait to see that lens in apsc.
You just contradicted the F stop is f stop. I don’t think I have it wrong in that it is the same light volume per area regardless of format. Aspect ratio etc yes but f stop is f stop regardless right? Anyone else care to chime in?
Per area dont mean nothing when it comes to high iso iq. I guess at some point you wondered why are ff cameras better at high iso.
They are not better.
Shoot a FF camera in crop mode and in the same resolution of the ASP-C and you won’t see a difference.
Why FF cameras have better high ISO image?
The foto sensors are much bigger on FF compared to APS-C.
That is all.
Nothing to do with FF vs APS-C format. 🙂
No. It is proven that photosites size do not affect downscaled image. Sensor size is the deciding factor in overall light capabilities. A7s has four times bigger photosites than a7r2, their iso is about the same. You can make apsc camera with 5 mpix, and its still going to be worse than 50mpix full frame regardless of photosite size. Photosite size matters only at pixel level. P.S. if you shoot ff camera in apsc crop, its not a ff camera anymore, its apsc. Dont have idea why would anyone do something like that at all.
was bored…
read all this long thread…
incredible how MANY people don’t know what they are talking about, but are confident that it is true
Then you should have helped a little, i was literally dying there, man 🙂
:/ … now it’s over! 3 days too late – sorry man
Everyone has their own taste and preference, dont wanna argue about that. I just want to say that in these years using nex 7, i never ever thought that i need more resolution. Sensor res is silly great already. I wished for better tracking, better iso800 images, lower evf noise and whatnot, but the resolution is the only thing i never thought lacking.
Technically, that’s not quite correct. The need to change the fstop based on the sensor size is only related to DOF because the aperture is physically smaller for the same f-stop at a shorter focal length. It does not change the actual light that strikes at a pixel level.
f1.8 exposes to the same shutter speed and ISO on an FF sensor as it does on a cell phone assuming all else is equal (which it rarely actually is, in all fairness). Of course, having the smaller sensor and smaller lens means total *sum* of light gathered is lower, and that affects noise performance at all ISOs, and smaller photodiodes (particularly in depth) affects dynamic range. That’s not the same thing as saying that you need the same total sum of light to get an equivalent image on a smaller sensor.
That is exactly what i am telling all the time. I was not speaking about dof. I was speaking about light sensitivity. At pixel level the light is the same. But if you want clarity of whole image to be equal to full frame, you need extra stop of light, or shutter speed to maintain lower iso. Thats what focal reducers do. They bring more light to pixel than it is the case with full frame. And even with more light, images are not cleaner than ff. Because pixel level light gathering dont matter in final product.
Well, if that’s what you meant, that’s a little more agreeable. I was a little confused by the wording that made it sound as if you were including the more typical “DOF vs crop factor” thing (people seem to discuss that point a lot more often after all).
Though in the longer run, there are ways around that, most of which boil down to technological and manufacturing advancements. It’s one of the reasons why even a 1-inch sensor today can have better high ISO performance than FF sensors from several years back. Higher resolution can actually help up to a point simply because you raise per-pixel noise levels, but since we don’t view pixels (we view entire images), the noise gets averaged out at scale. There are limits to how much this can help, but it’s relatively easy to model where you get the best returns on this provided you have good reliable and detailed information about quantum efficiency.
That said, the lower-res sensors like that of the A7S/ii work mainly because it allows very fast full-sensor readout which means you can use more of the light gathering capability of the sensor at a given sampling. It’s also one of the reasons why M43 cameras can still do better in 4K than a lot of HD video from some larger sensor cameras — no binning. Just a full readout from a cropped region. Bandwidth and power are your limiting factors if that’s the game you play, and high resolution works against you here, and that’s why the A7S uses that lower res sensor.
Larger pixels help with noise not so much because larger = more light on its own, but because larger = more converted charge held _until you reach saturation_. The little 1/2.3″ sensors in cell phones can have photosites that saturate at only ~6000 photons or so (that’s after its filtered by the color filter)… that means if you want, say, 10 bits of dynamic range out of this, you have to consider gradations of only 5-6 photons… that’s at the level where quantum mechanical weirdness itself results in noise… with an FF sensor, the photodiodes could get you more than 100,000 photons before saturation. If you shoot for the same number of bits per channel in RAW, then you’ve got about 90-100 photons representing your gradation… so the noise floor is now very few bits. Like anything, though, diminishing returns, and you need to scale sensor size up a lot more to get a similar improvements.
Or, in other better words, f1.4 is f1.4 on all formats, but iso1000 is not iso1000 on all formats.
Dafuq?!? 1.4 is 1.4 regardless of sensor size. Only those that cannot compose and interesting picture are concered with achieving razor thin DOF.
Once again, you’re wrong. Crop factor only apply for DOF, not for shutter speed. You definitely don’t understand the basic of photography !
Who mentioned shutter speed, lol. Crop factor lets less light in, thats all. Less sensor surface= less light, is that so hard to comprehend? If it doesnt matter, tell me, why my nexus 5 photos dont look good at iso 400 with its great f2 aperture? It should look the same as nex at f2 right? F2 is f2, nevermind the sensor size? Lol again.
Quote : “if you want 35 f1.4 light gather on crop, you need 24 f1.0 lens.” -> no, you need 24 f1.4 !
And here’s the proof :
Take a sheet of paper and a compass. Draw the biggest circle you can on that paper. Then draw a smaller circle within. Now point a flashlight toward those circles.
According to you, the centre of the bigger circle gets more light than the smaller one. Even though IT’S THE SAME FU… CENTER !!!
Curious to read your response. I know it will be fun.
Nope. According to me, and according to physics, more overall light will fall on bigger circle. Lol again.
And if i may ask, what do you need a compass for, in your magnificent experiment?
… And the difference in the amount of light is what we call Field of View. Hence the 35 f1.4 vs 24 f1.4
Exemple : you have a full frame picture showing a car and a tree on each side. Now crop that frame, you won’t see the trees anymore, just the car. The light you lose is the light depicting the trees, but the car in the center doesn’t become darker, duh.
Ok. Go for a 1/2.8 sensor. Some 3mm f2 lens. It is going to capture same amount of light, high iso will be great etc. Apsc is too big for you. And too hard to comprehend.
As far as noise goes, modern Sony sensors are quite efficient with very low read noise. That means that high ISO performance at realistic ISOs is very much similar no matter how many pixels the sensor has. Look at A7rII and A7sII – after resolution normalization, they are not too far away from each other. So having more megapixels is not entirely stupid or bad thing…
For the lenses, it does not matter how good or bad they are. Same lens will be better on higher resolution sensor, especially without AA filter. Higher resolution will also allow for better CA and distortion correction in post.
Read my latest comment. I never said noise will be worse with more mpix. I said it is overkill in probably only segment that dont need upgrade.
One thing a lot of lens resolution tests don’t get across is that the centre of many of these lenses can be sharp enough to accommodate more detail. Higher MP might be wasted across the frame, but in the centre considerably more detail may be gained especially when stopped down. This can mean more cropping potential.
Good point, and I think Sony’s compact a-series strategy makes a lot of sense. A 3x (12MP) crop on good 100mm glass is plenty for most, especially as a travel camera…vs developing optically inferior, costlier, bulkier 300mm lenses.
A 3x crop would be 3x in both dimensions, so it would actually be 1/9th the overall resolution… 1/9th of 36 MPix is 4 MPix.
Ha, you’re right. Some bad math on my part. 🙂
Smartphones have proved you wrong for the last few years, but whatever. Stay stuck un the nineteenth century if you want, just don’t comment on subjects you don’t understand ! ;-p
Yeah, you probably do understand, hence such inteligent and educated argument. A guy who cannot distinguish smartphone sensor iq from apsc or ff probably knows much about imaging technology.
Come on dude, “it’s useless because lenses cannot resolve …” is the same old bullshit people claim each time sensors improve. This time YOU were that grumpy old guy. No need to argue, you’re wrong !
Man, i am finishing our discussion here, cause its obvious you know absolutely nothing. I own lumia with 41mpix sensor, which is definitely the best smartphone camera to date, and average nex7 with 24mpx. There is about 20 times more detail in nex photos. Speak about smartphone cameras to someone else.
One of the reasons why we can get good optics on smartphones is simply the precision in manufacturing. Pretty much all the “glass” in smartphones is actually plastic. At that small scale, very tiny errors in machining are very plainly visible in the quality of photos, while the same degree of error in a Full-Frame lens would be the difference between resolving 28 and 24 so-called “perceptual MPixels” (whatever that is) on DxOMark. And anyway, with larger actual elements, it’s easier to machine glass very precisely, and the optical advantages of real glass show up more clearly.
At something as small as a smartphone lens, machining and grinding glass precisely is damn near impossible, but manufacturing molded plastic to that level of precision is quite easy. To the point that the highest quality smartphone lenses on the planet cost about $5 to manufacture.
The rx10 and rx100 aren’t smartphones and have a 150mp equivalent sensor in them, and it is one of the most used sensor around.
Just a reminder that they are a sensor company too, they HAVE to puch the boundaries.
And 36mp is 8k, on a S35 sensor and their professional Cinema cameras are all S35… I think it’s safe to assume that they are looking for the next logical step in filming.
8k video will get in consumer products looong after 36 mpix. They push the boundaries to push the price up. As i said, nex7 makes beautiful pics with 24mpix, with great detail. Af is bad, evf could be improved, weather sealing, thousand other things. But they chose to improve the best part of the camera instead. Doesnt make sense to me. And its gonna sell at d750 price point, which will decide which camera i will buy next, despite the bulkiness.
But what if they are aiming for on sensor HDR as they patented in the past.
What is the use of 36 mp in an APS-C sized camera. Diffraction will set in at about f/5.6 or less and, thus, defeats the purpose of the extra resolution ~ won’t be sharp enough.
Even with high megapixel full frame cameras, obtaining sufficient depth of field is sometimes an issue.
ever heard of the RX series?
Diffraction is not related to the pixel density.
The camera should just be called a a6000 MK II and make a A7000 if you want something more high end. I can’t see the point of 36mp. The cost of the camera would be probably just under a A7II.
And add ibis and improved pdaf
the touch screen is a nice inclusion. so they probably will have that on the future A7 cameras then
Wow – 338 comments (and counting)!!! Really goes to show how beloved Sony’s APS-C offering is!
The announcement (if it happens) will be close to 1000 or over.
hmmm, IBIS. This might finally make me buy into E-Mount. Hopefully A7000 will come with an A77 class body and A7rII type AF. That kind of camera i’d get for sure.
A77 body, lol..
GX8 and you have a chance.
So Nikon just announced a $2000 professional 10fps APS-C shooter at $2000. That does up the potential price point.
But a couple interesting notes — The Nikon D500 is 21mp. As I keep saying, while high MP benefits some shooters. For performance seeking pros, there are things far far more important than megapixels…
Now what would the A6100/A7000 need to offer to get into the same stratosphere as the D500 or 7dii?
Partially, to no fault of the camera body, a Sony E-mount system can’t ever be thought of in the same breath, because of the lack of long lenses. The point of a pro-build APS-C camera is sports and wildlife. With the longest E-mount lenses being 200-240mm, that’s just not enough reach. The Nikon press release, for example, talks about pairing the D500 with their 200-500 for get 350mm to 750mm of reach.
So unless and until Sony gets serious about long lenses for E-mount, there simply isn’t much of a market for a pro-build APS-C camera from Sony e-mount.
If the lenses were out there, then an A7000 in a bigger body, with bigger battery life, weather sealing, dual card slots, and some incremental refinements to the AF system, could really make the A7000 a $1000-$2000 camera.
Of course, all of those long lenses from Nikon and Canon can be used on the E-mount… 🙂
Not even those resolve more than 21MP on APS-C.
People freaked out about paying 3200 on the A7rII, why you think the market will understand a $2000 APS-C camera from Sony, even if it outperform that D500?
The A6000 already does 11fps with a 24mp sensor, why the heck you think they wouldn’t be able to beat that even with a 36mp camera in a bigger body?
Amusing to see how people still get so hyped into any BS that Canikon makes.
When Sony offers 300mm/2.8, 400mm, 500mm lenses… Full weather sealing… Etc… Then you start taking about out-performing a d500. I’m a fan of Sony, but I’m not blind.
YES, because Canikon took the market from Leica in less than 5 years, and made every single lens in their catalog in one single year.
11fps for how many raw shots…6, 7, 8? The D500 is talking 200 raw buffer. That is what a working pro needs. Also Nikon’s lens selection is obviously more vast, especially if you want a 300mm f2
At least for a couple of seconds, in a $500 body if you forgot…
You’re arguing that the A6000 already tops a D500, and I’m showing you it isn’t even close. D500 is far more weather sealed, with weather sealed lenses to match, 200 shot RAW buffer, dual card slots, much better flash support, and many other features that trounce what the 6000 has to offer. Nikon is offering a camera that is appealing to a lot of working pros that do sports and work outside in harsh conditions. The 6000 is for consumers shooting their cat and flowers in their backyard. FYI, I’m a Fuji lover ATM that switched from Nikon cause I’m not a pro, but also I’m not a blind fool.
Everything you mentioned should be possibe on a 2k camera, the Sammy does all of that for almost $500 less and a APS-C dedicated professional lens. Those things are easy if any manufacturer could get away by charging that much for an APS-C camera.
24 frames for sony & 79 frames for d500 not 200
Comparing a A6000 (successor) with the D500 is more BS than Canikon (both combined) have ever done.
And yes, it is indeed amusing how many people are stup*d enough to buy that “BS” from Canikon, instead of being smart, like you, and buying a different camera from a far superior brand (whatever that is). FACEPALM
Just read some coments around, people hyping the 4k on those cameras… 3min. internal for the D5 and 2.2 crop on D500, no one would forgive Sony if they did that (remember RX100IV?).
I was just about to comment on the Nikon. More than 21MP in an APS-C camera benefits nobody as there are no lenses available that can exploit this resolution. Canon (70D) and Nikon tacitly admit to this by offering enthousiast (people who tend to invest in pro-style lenses!) grade APS-C cameras with no more than 21MP. Sony is trying to take us all for a ride, instead, if the rumours are true. Sony, you can keep your 6100 or whatever it will be called. The money is better spent on good glass.
If low MP is enough why the hell Nikon just switched from 16 to 20mp?
Sorry, that’s not true.
Any 16Mp micro 4/3 sensor (Olympus, Panasonic) already has more or less the same density of a 36Mp APS-c sensor.
Now with such density we are starting to push the limit of most cheap glass.
But I still have plenty of legacy glass that works a treat on my Olympus E-M10. A 50€ used Contax 50/1.7 or Konica pancake 45/2.8 are still outputting more resolution than the one the sensor is capable of capturing, and the same is true for many of my other lenses.
36 MPix APS-C amounts to 81 MPix fullframe sensor (x1.5×1.5) pixel density. I want better A6000, but I don’t want that :/ Only the best lenses used in best conditions make current 36 MPix fullframe sensor produce reasonably more detailed images than current 24 Mpix fullframe sensors – and not 50% better. With even higher density it’s just more pixels with less real information. In this case, with current bayer mask sensors, 24 MPix for APS-C is really enough..
I think they’re in a sort of partnership with Zeiss and will be trying to sell us hugely overpriced lenses that are supposed to ‘measure up’ to this unnecessarily high density sensor. I don’t want 36mp either, it just means bigger files and slower post-processing.
I’ll be quite surprised if the new APS-C camera has 36mp. Maybe 28 but 24 is really enough and should be better at low light.
Honestly, I was hoping Sony would just abandon APS-C and rework their original A7 sensor into a camera with the features of this new A6100 and retail it for under $1,000. The reason? Their APS-C lens library is the worst of all the manufacturers by a mile. Their FF lens library is starting to come along at least, and it would also allow them to mainly JUST focus on that mount.
why when there is clearly a strong market for both
I don’t think Sony can drop the FF price below $500 for new products.
And the highes performer in mirrorless is still the A6000, so until they can match its performance, they can’t get rid of the format.
Camera specs look decent, but I would like to see a few more APSC lenses from Sony. It is clear that Sony wants its users to start with the a6000 and move up into the a7 line. This makes sense from a business standpoint, but for most people a good APSC camera such as the a6000 is enough or more than enough.
I have an NEX7 with the 10-18 (very good lens), the 16-70 (also good, especially in the centre), the 35 with IS (excellent lens) and the 55-200 (terrible lens). I have the A7RII with lots of lenses but it’s not a small travel setup like the NEX7. I’d like a better telephoto that’s a lot smaller and lighter than the FE70-200.
I agree a smaller lighter telephoto would be great for Sony APSC users. I would also like to see a few more primes as well. That said I know it takes time to build a new system.
I use the NEX7 as a walk around camera, for family photos, and for travelling on business. I want convenience, light weight and small size. Hence the focus on zooms. When I want to do something serious I take the A7RII. I have the FE 35 2.8, the FE 55 1.8, a Minolta 85 1.4, a Canon 17 TS/E II, a Canon 24 TS/E II, a Minolta 20 F2.8, a Canon 135 2.0, a Canon 100 2.8 Macro, and Minolta AF 500 8.0 Mirror lens. All of these pretty much match or exceed the sensor capabilities. I also use the Canon 70-300L a lot. The FE 24-70 4.0 lives on the body until I want to use a prime. The 24-70 4.0 is as good or better than any comparable zoom from Canon, just not as good as the FE 55 or 35.
Sony is targeting a different market with the APS-C cameras than the A7 Series. I am part of both markets – casual shooter sometimes and serious photographer at other times. The lens lineups should match that.
Agreed, the 55-200 has awful autofocus…they really need a better mid-range long zoom…
The touch screen better not be mandatory like on the Leica SL! I NEED BUTTONS!! =D
True the only thing useful for touchscreen is to select focus point, although after using the a6000 for quite some time I find I don’t miss that feature very much. Now every time I go back to use my Nex-5N I’m totally lost without the extra buttons.
Just hope they maintain the form factor of A6000…
Was hoping it had an a7 type viewfinder!
IBIS -> swap I and S -> IBSI -> remove I -> BSI ….coincidence? You be the judge…..
this is bigger than the moon landing
Why do I get this sinking feeling like this would become a higher-end camera, pricing it out of reach to many of the entry to mid-level dSLR folks using Nikon/Canon that Sony should be aggressively targeting?
Just find a way to blackmail your wife and it’s yours.
Why are you even complaing? An high-end APS-C mirrorless is missing from Sony’s line-up so it’s highly welcome. For entry-level target there are still A5100-A6000
36 Megapixels? But will it have shuttershocks? 🙂
With such high MP in A6100,
it would be wonderful if Metabones made a M43-E mount autofocus
adapter. Then we would have small body with small and plenty of lens. Real
compact APSC camera!! And after cropping
to M43, we still have enough MP.
That’s what I’m hoping too, some are doing that with the FS7/FS5 usign clear zoom to use B4 lenses.
I still would much prefer an affordable A5 in a NEX5n form factor, with normal resolution and without IBIS or 4k.
Just by taking the EVF from an A7 I don’t think it would make the camera that much cheaper, maybe a $100 difference.
but it’s smaller. If you don’t need EVF at all – good to have the choice to buy a body without. Biggest downside of 5n vs A6000 is the toy-hotshoe IMO
Are there any rumors about the screen? Will it be articulating?
Will buy one if Sony announces a telephoto lens for the E-mount….I mean a 300mm f4.0 or 400mm f5.6
I want better low light performance, 36 on an APSC is crazy!
No! Just downscale to say 12 or 24 mpix. The different between A7R II and A7S II for stills is small below ISO 25600. What matters is the sensor area – not the pixel count.
When downscaling you also get the benefit of less AA artifacts.
When NEX7 was released 24mp felt as crazy as 36 today. But after I saw a ISO comparison-row of a 16mp image of NEX6 vs NEX7 downscaled to 16mp, the difference was very small. But the 24mp sensor was sharper at base ISO + it has a built in 1.22 treleconverter. Now 36mp is just the next logical step.
BTW: BSI makes the difference even smaller.
IMO this is the reason why they should be developing an 8k super 35 sensor, and why it does make sense.
http://www.broadcast-alternative.com/1926-large_default/sony-f65-super-35mm-8k-cmos-sensor-srmaster-camera.jpg
That is a crazy high MP count, but I would still buy it. The A6000 hasn’t let me down, and IBIS would be great. Still, weatherproofing would be better….
They should release an A6000 Mk2 with IBIS and better pdaf for third party lenses etc.
This specs from A6100 should be A7000 specs with better body, 4K, battery grip ready and so on
I love my A6000, and I don’t know if I would consider to buy the A6100 because my only wish is IBIS for all lenses. BTW 36 MP is way too much in my opinion, my old NEX-3 and NEX-5R were both great with 14 and 16 MP
They only need to achieve the same speed but with deeper buffer, I think everybody will forget the 36mp then.
Ok you can still resize/downscale the pictures but the data size is getting bigger and bigger. We need lossless compressed raw too
Well, they already know there’s a strong demand for that, so I guess it’s safe to assume that it will eventually happen.
And I like the images I took with the R1 from 2008, and probably is quite enough for me, but if they have a chance to improve that why not…
Because high MP affects your complete workflow: more storage space, slower editing, slower management, slower camera performance, better lenses, faster shutter speed (= higher ISO) … If you don’t need 36 MP, you shouldn’t use it. We’re talking about a successor for a fast, action-orientated mid-level camera. There’s no need to make the successor a slow landscape high-end camera, IMO.
For me, 36 MP are really a bumper. I don’t need it and it would alter my workflow, probably to much. I’d rather go with a 24MP BSI sensor with better high ISO, PDAF from the A7II series for adapted A mount lenses, maybe IBIS, maybe silent shutter, weather sealed and metal body, quick AF selection (finally!), build-in GPS (it should be a traveler’s dream), much better Auto-WB, selectable min. shutter speed for Auto-ISO … and a personal dream would be to go back to the larger A-mount batteries with a slightly increased grip size. But that wouldn’t happen.
Still is nowhere near the weight of 4k workflow, and there’s almost no professional that dismiss the possibility of getting that kind of IQ, even for converting to 1080p afterwards.
Thank you, exactly my thoughts, improved sensor with same or less MP, ibis and new pdaf for a-mount lenses and Sony can have my money (again)
Add an audio jack and we have a deal
does anyone know what the sensor size might be?
APS-C?
I also miss the level scale in the NEX 5 series.
hope the body won’t be too much bigger with IBIS
issue is still lenses for E APS-C – seems Sony is not doing much about the many calls for more lenses – endless Zeiss for FE and G very costly –
The issue will always be lenses or Canikon would have stopped developing them.
Do you think Canikon started with their line-up ready on the day 1?
🙂 of course not – but if you think how long it has been since the last Sony branded lens came out – then that tells it all – Sony have produced the A7 A7r A7s A7m2 A7rm2 A7sm2 A6000 and now A6100 and of course the A5000 etc during that time – I personally think there might not be another E APS-C body after the A6100 as Sony has stated that they are going to focus on FE and have stated there is a cheaper body coming out – meaning cheaper then A7/M2 – which sounds like a body in the price range of the A6100 – It has been quite a while since I first got my NEX5n and that was an update to the NEX5 which had already been around for at least a year – since I got the NEX7 and everyone waited and waited for the NEX7update – but then came the NEX6 and at least a year later A6000 – so it has been quite a few years – but granted there was a short period of time that some lenses came out – mostly Zeiss branded – but no 24-70mm F2.8 or a 70-200mm F2.8 which just seemed logical – Fuji a smaller company has released lot more lenses –
Yes Canon and Nikon etc have been around longer with their mounts – but if one takes a look at the M43 system and say just Panasonic lenses then I personally feel that Panasonic for example has been lot more committed to their customers in not so much longer timeframe then the E mount –
But if you are happy with Sony’s offerings and commitment with the E-APs-C mount then I am happy for you –
It is interesting that Tamron that did produce few lenses for the E mount has totally stopped producing anymore –
One thing you forgot is that the NEX didn’t get traction as fast as the A7 series, and they where still dealing to the A-mount to hold them back in R&D.
Not to mention that it was before Kaz Hirai become CEO, Sony was agonizing, one step to bankruptcy, kinda silly to expect the R&D dedication in two systems that didn’t have the return they expected. It would be basically as expecting Samsung to develop more lenses for the NX system even with its uncertain future.
Seriously exciting camera!
Res seems crazy high for APS-C I’m all for it, just hope they can keep the burst rate up and noise under control at that res. Personally I’d be happy with less than this if it was a tradeoff situation. Do Sony have the lenses to effectively match such a high res sensor? Will their existing 16-50 kit lens play nicely with this?
Next is IBIS. God yes, please please this! I presently shoot Pentax, who had this YEARS ago, but who then STOPPED using it in video mode! WTF?! Their loss, Sony’s or Olympus’s gain really. IBIS is the one must have feature that’s prevented me jumping for the A6000.
Any word on weather sealing?
Finally, price, take my money but I hope I’ve got enough. The NEX range always had an angle of being competitively priced, but I wonder how things will go as Sony moves into a more professional/major player position now?
What it needs is what isn’t mentioned, namely a vast improvement in those horrible grainy Sony EVFs which render shadows as blacks and send colours all over the place in a kaleidoscope which makes composing by colour impossible.
And 36 mp on an APS-C sensor? Well there goes its low light ability in one go! Noise, noise and more noise is what I predict, and I’ll be right. And who really needs 36 mp even in broad daylight? No one. This is simply one-upmanship specs for their own sake.
It’s almost as though Sony don’t understand photography or photographers.
I’ll give a try, even knowing that you are a mere troll…
But nobody ever talked about the EVF on newer cameras, they even place it second to the Leica one.
And the same old bullshit was said about the A7rII when they announced that it was a 42mp camera…
For a company that doesn’t understand photography getting praised and winning prizes around the world, maybe is you that doesn’t know shit.
Charming boy you are too! In fact A7 series are full frame whereas the A6100 is APS-C. That makes a huge difference when cramming in the mp and noise. Nor can you answer why anyone would need 36 mp? The reason is, even landscape enthusiasts don’t.
As for EVF, you are easily satisfied if you think the recent Sony EVFs are fine.
Now back to your swearing…
I would want 36mp, 8k resolution, it’s just logical.
And I will be able to make better film scans.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQ9up5Yp1pg
The fact that this exists prove you wrong.
And Sony let us just rumours again… tsc tsc
A stabilized A6100 would basically trash the old unstabilized A7/R for hand held static low light photography with the unstabilized prime lenses, not to mention the size and weight benefit.
With IBIS it will probably have the same size as a GX8, that is basically a A7II with flat top, a bit shorter.
http://i.imgur.com/pVaacq5.png
But I would be OK with that.
I don’t know if I’d buy a successor with some of those specs, but I know I will not buy a successor lacking a touch screen. And I mean a full menu system touch screen GUI. And focus select. This is an absolute deal breaker for me. 4k will be far more trouble than it’s worth to me. Would prefer it absent, but I know that’s not possible.