Camera recommendation.. Hobby portrait photographer..

[paisleybell]

So we've got a trip to Universal and Disney planned soon.
I currently have a Nikon d7000 with a 50mm lens.
I dread having to carry the thing through Universal and Disney...

I'm looking for something compact, without sacrificing quality. The option to change the lens would be awesome. And I really shouldn't be considering buying a camera at all, so low costing as well..

I was looking at the Sony A6000 and to have both the typical kit lens and the 50 mm prime, it would cost a bit over $900, which is too much, but after reading and seeing some photos, it seems like a great fit for my purpose.

But I also wasn't sure, is the A6000 compact enough?
What other camera's should I be considering?

 

[bob100]

So we've got a trip to Universal and Disney planned soon.
I currently have a Nikon d7000 with a 50mm lens.
I dread having to carry the thing through Universal and Disney...

I'm looking for something compact, without sacrificing quality. The option to change the lens would be awesome. And I really shouldn't be considering buying a camera at all, so low costing as well..

I was looking at the Sony A6000 and to have both the typical kit lens and the 50 mm prime, it would cost a bit over $900, which is too much, but after reading and seeing some photos, it seems like a great fit for my purpose.

But I also wasn't sure, is the A6000 compact enough?
What other camera's should I be considering?

The Sony should work for Disney and other trips. I too didn't like carrying a DSLR and lens on trips and eventually bought a mirrorless. A smaller mirrorless camera and pancake lens is much lighter and makes a trip more pleasant when you just want to travel light with no hassles. It's nice to use pocket size camera with 22mm lens and 50mm in another pocket and not carry a bag of camera gear - very liberating !

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[hrslvr142]

Thank you for this post. I am stepping up from a point & shoot, looking at both the entry level Nikon & Canon when the A6000 caught my eye. Love the compactness, the quick fire of photos and a great deal at BestBuy right now. The camera (alas only in black, I would rather have white) telephoto lens & bag. The sales person said that their holiday return policy is on now so if you buy it and don't like it, it is returnable with no stocking fee.

 

[boBQuincy]

Some of the Olympus Pens are on sale for $300 - $400. These take Olympus and Panasonic lenses, offering a very wide choice of lenses.

 

[havoc315]

So we've got a trip to Universal and Disney planned soon.
I currently have a Nikon d7000 with a 50mm lens.
I dread having to carry the thing through Universal and Disney...

I'm looking for something compact, without sacrificing quality. The option to change the lens would be awesome. And I really shouldn't be considering buying a camera at all, so low costing as well..

I was looking at the Sony A6000 and to have both the typical kit lens and the 50 mm prime, it would cost a bit over $900, which is too much, but after reading and seeing some photos, it seems like a great fit for my purpose.

But I also wasn't sure, is the A6000 compact enough?
What other camera's should I be considering?

Depends whether you want to supplement your d7000 or replace it. The a6000 would replace your d7000. The main advantage of the d7000 is the availability of a bigger lens selection. But in terms of a 50mm prime, you'll do just as well or even better with the a6000. The d7000 has some build quality advantages -- longer battery life, weather sealing, dual card slots.
But in terms of performance and image quality, the a6000 will beat it across the board. (And I'm a Nikon shooter... It's partially because you are talking about a last generation Nikon vs current generation Sony. The d7200 would be more evenly matched).


So the a6000 is a great way to replace the d7000 with something smaller and better (in terms of image quality and performance).

If you want to supplement your d7000, then you may want to go even smaller than the a6000. Especially if you add telephoto lenses to the a6000, it's not that tiny. You can look at the Sony RX series as well as the 1" sensor cameras from Canon and Panasonic. These are fixed lens cameras, but they have high quality lenses combined with plus sized sensors (smaller than a dslr but larger than a typical p&s), giving a compromise between size, quality and performance.

In other words, the a6000 is about as small as you can go, while exceeding the image quality of the d7000.

The Canon g7x, Sony Rx100, etc, will be even smaller than the a6000, but will fall below the d7000 in image quality.

Similarly, there is the Nikon 1 series, like the current J4. 1" sensor, with interchangeable lenses. Potentially slightly smaller than the a6000, but so-so image quality.

Then you have the Olympus/Panasonic 4:3 models. About the same size as the a6000.... But their lenses can be a bit smaller than the a6000, but lenses, plus they have a superior lens selection. They have a slightly smaller sensor, so their image quality stays a step below comparable dslrs and the a6000. (The a6000 uses the same size sensor found in dslrs).

 

[havoc315]

Thank you for this post. I am stepping up from a point & shoot, looking at both the entry level Nikon & Canon when the A6000 caught my eye. Love the compactness, the quick fire of photos and a great deal at BestBuy right now. The camera (alas only in black, I would rather have white) telephoto lens & bag. The sales person said that their holiday return policy is on now so if you buy it and don't like it, it is returnable with no stocking fee.

I say this as a full frame Nikon shooter.

For an entry level aps-c shooter, there is no reason to buy a Nikon/Canon dslr. The a6000 will give you the same or better image quality, superior performance (which I'm defining as the autofocus quality, the burst shooting, etc in a smaller package.

The reason to buy a Canon or Nikon is primarily to use some of their more advanced $1500+ lenses. Issues that will never ever impact most general camera consumers.

 

[paisleybell]

So, it sounds like the a6000 would be a good choice. I'm not 100% that I'd replace my d7000, I have a couple nice old lenses, a 24mm and a 60mm macro. Now.. I rarely use them.. But I might at some point..

That being said, portrait-wise, I always use my 50mm, so if the a6000 + 50mm is just as good, if not better, then it sounds like it could work, and maybe I'll consider selling the d7000 afterall..

Soo, price-wise, does anyone know, does $629 sound like a decent price for the a6000 with the 16-50mm kit lens? I found the 50mm for about $249.
There are also some open box ones floating around a few different sellers, but I'm always a little hesitant on open box items..

 

[havoc315]

So, it sounds like the a6000 would be a good choice. I'm not 100% that I'd replace my d7000, I have a couple nice old lenses, a 24mm and a 60mm macro. Now.. I rarely use them.. But I might at some point..

That being said, portrait-wise, I always use my 50mm, so if the a6000 + 50mm is just as good, if not better, then it sounds like it could work, and maybe I'll consider selling the d7000 afterall..

Soo, price-wise, does anyone know, does $629 sound like a decent price for the a6000 with the 16-50mm kit lens? I found the 50mm for about $249.
There are also some open box ones floating around a few different sellers, but I'm always a little hesitant on open box items..

$629 is the current regular price, same just about everywhere.

If you want to save money, from personal experience I can highly recommend greentoe.com
You should be able to get the A6000 for about $580-590, with no additional tax or shipping. Essentially, you "offer" $580 for the kit, and they match you to a USA vendor who will sell it to you (new with full USA warranty) for that price, including shipping and tax. I have bought the Nikon D750 and some high end lenses through them. They only use reputable established camera stores. So you can save 30-50$ or so, plus save more by not having to pay more for shipping or tax. Their return policy is 14-30 days depending on some factors.

If you choose to replace your whole kit, Sony has an affordable tiny pancake 20/2.8 lens. The quality isn't considered great, but it's cheap, tiny and ok.
They have the Zeiss 25/2 which is fantastic, but very expensive.
For price/quality balance, they have a very very very good 28/2 for $450.

Macro options are more limited. They have an affordable 30mm/3.5 macro which is nice and small. It is known to have excellent center quality but horrible edge quality. Then they have the newer 90mm macro which is an exceptional lens, one of the best macros you can get in any brand. But it is a large lens, and it isn't cheap.

If you don't mind manual focus, you can keep using your Nikon lenses on the A6000 with a cheap adapter. But you won't get autofocus, and you might need to manually adjust the aperture.

 

[havoc315]

By the way, you have a couple choices for your 50mm prime...

The regular E-mount 50/1.8 is a pretty good lens, a nice balance of size, price and quality. For more money and a bit more size, there is the 55/1.8, which is an exceptional lens, among the best out there.

 

[paisleybell]

By the way, you have a couple choices for your 50mm prime...

The regular E-mount 50/1.8 is a pretty good lens, a nice balance of size, price and quality. For more money and a bit more size, there is the 55/1.8, which is an exceptional lens, among the best out there.

How much is a little more cost and sizewise?
If I go with the a6000, my main reasoning is to have a compact camera I feel better about carrying through Univ and Dis.. haha (That is how I will justify it anyway..)
And, sometimes I feel like the 50mm is already too tight in small spaces, so I'd be a bit weary of going longer.
If Sony's e-mount 50mm 1.8 is just as good as Nikon's 50mm 1.8, I'll be okay. (Though I wish I could shoot with Nikon's 50mm 1.4.. that baby was sharp... *drool*)

 

[hrslvr142]

Thank you for your reply Havoc315.

 

[paisleybell]

Is there any real downside to buying the a5100 instead?
I saw that the raw write speed was a lot less, which I wonder if it would be a problem since I shoot raw..

 

[havoc315]

How much is a little more cost and sizewise?
If I go with the a6000, my main reasoning is to have a compact camera I feel better about carrying through Univ and Dis.. haha (That is how I will justify it anyway..)
And, sometimes I feel like the 50mm is already too tight in small spaces, so I'd be a bit weary of going longer.
If Sony's e-mount 50mm 1.8 is just as good as Nikon's 50mm 1.8, I'll be okay. (Though I wish I could shoot with Nikon's 50mm 1.4.. that baby was sharp... *drool*)

The Nikon 50/1.8g or d? Yes, it should just about as good. I'm not a fan of the Nikon 50 to be honest, I just switched to the new Tamron 45 instead. And from testng I've seen, the Nikon 50/1.4 isn't really any better than the 50/1.8, but I'm definitely enjoying the Tamron 45.

If 50 is too tight for you, get the 35 instead.. There are several 35mm lenses to choose from, and they are all very very good. The 35/1.8 is an APS-C lens, small and compact, not toooo expensive, and very high quality.
Then there is the 35/2.8, which is also compatible with full frame. It's "only" 2.8, which keeps the size nice and compact. The image quality is excellent. There is the absolutely exceptional 35/1.4, but it is big, heavy and expensive.

If I were you, I'd get the 35/1.8 or 35/2.8 instead of a 50, if it's going to be your main lens. Then use the kit 16-50 when you want some versatility.

Off topic, but a sample from the Tamron 45/1.8 for Nikon:

untitled-6.jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr

 

[havoc315]

Is there any real downside to buying the a5100 instead?
I saw that the raw write speed was a lot less, which I wonder if it would be a problem since I shoot raw..

EVF. That's the big difference. Personally, I strongly prefer to have a viewfinder.

 

[paisleybell]

EVF. That's the big difference. Personally, I strongly prefer to have a viewfinder.

Yep... I wasn't even thinking about the viewfinder.. great point. That would drive me insane to not have one.

And 50 vs 35.. I've tried a 35mm and I wasn't a fan of the bokeh. I usually shoot fairly wide open. 2.8 seems to be the sweet spot for my lens.
This is with the nikon 50mm 1.8

 

[havoc315]

Yep... I wasn't even thinking about the viewfinder.. great point. That would drive me insane to not have one.

And 50 vs 35.. I've tried a 35mm and I wasn't a fan of the bokeh. I usually shoot fairly wide open. 2.8 seems to be the sweet spot for my lens.
This is with the nikon 50mm 1.8

View attachment 134802

Background blur is a formula of aperture, distance and focal length. So yes, from the same distance and same aperture, a 50mm lens produces more background blur than a 35mm.

I've found with the Nikon 50.... It is pretty soft at 1.8. It is very good at 2.8, and exceptional at F4. But I'm disappointed in those findings for a prime. The Tamron is very very good at 1.8 (the shot I posted was 2.2), and exception at 2.8. So I basically find it about 1 stop better.

With the Sony lenses, the 50/1.8 will perform similar to your Nikon. The center may actually be a bit better than the Nikon, but the edges will be soft wide open. Becoming much better by F4. With the 55/1.8, you get a lens that is just exceptional wide open.

And that's a very nice portrait.... No flash? I really like the light.

 

[DizBee Brian]

Hi,
When I want to vacation on the lighter side [I typically use a Sony A7 or NEX 6 - older version of the A6000 - or close to it, so I am already light, per say?] I go with my RX100 iii. This is an awesome little camera!! You can probably get the Mk 1 or 2 and save $100-$300 vs. the Mk 3 or 4 [which I believe is around $700-$800, or there about? I can not say enough about the pic quality of this camera, full manual, plus its size, makes it easily pocket-able. I took mine on a Bermuda cruise this year and I didn't break my back carrying heavy equipment around the island [used the A7 on my cruise ship, so i didn't go 100% DSLR-Less].

Hope this helps?

Good luck and Kungaloosh!!

B-

 

[paisleybell]

Background blur is a formula of aperture, distance and focal length. So yes, from the same distance and same aperture, a 50mm lens produces more background blur than a 35mm.

I've found with the Nikon 50.... It is pretty soft at 1.8. It is very good at 2.8, and exceptional at F4. But I'm disappointed in those findings for a prime. The Tamron is very very good at 1.8 (the shot I posted was 2.2), and exception at 2.8. So I basically find it about 1 stop better.

With the Sony lenses, the 50/1.8 will perform similar to your Nikon. The center may actually be a bit better than the Nikon, but the edges will be soft wide open. Becoming much better by F4. With the 55/1.8, you get a lens that is just exceptional wide open.

And that's a very nice portrait.... No flash? I really like the light.

It's garage light.
My favorite light to shoot in. I set up my background and stand in the garage and leave the garage door open. As long as there's no direct light coming in, works awesomely.

 

[havoc315]

Dpreview just named the a6000 the best interchangeable lens camera $500-$800, beating out the Canon t6i and Nikon d3300. They basically said it really has no competition, though it does have weaknesses.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6851428109/2015-roundups-interchangeable-lens-cameras-500-800/14

 

[paisleybell]

Dpreview just named the a6000 the best interchangeable lens camera $500-$800, beating out the Canon t6i and Nikon d3300. They basically said it really has no competition, though it does have weaknesses.

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6851428109/2015-roundups-interchangeable-lens-cameras-500-800/14

Nice! I just stopped by a best buy to see it in person! I definitely liked it! I do wonder if it's small enough.. but I also think the photographer in me would never be happy with the limitations of a smaller camera, so it's probably more perfect than I realize.
I checked out greentoe and was sad to see that they didn't have the white body only a6000 nor did they have the 35mm e mount.

I think I've decided on the white body, 50mm 1.8 and old 18-55mm. I might hold out for a little bit to see if I can find a better deal on it though.. Ultimately, I'm sure I'd be okay with the black a6000 too . Not a huge fan of the silver.

Focus Camera had some nice bundle deals through newegg, but focus camera as a seller had terrible reviews and the page wasn't clear on grey market, so I'm guessing I'll steer clear of them.