Sony a6000 for a beginner?

[DSNY4ever]

Hi guys, I have been reading a lot on here (and Dp Review etc) and a lot of you seem to use and like this camera, what would you think of it for a beginner?

I know nothing about photography, but want to learn and step it up from my very old point and shoot. I was intimidated by the DSLR's when we went shopping because I am not sure if I would realistically carry something so large around.

The bottom line is I want better photos of my kids, and I want to be able to walk around Disney a couple days (or other vacations) and not feel hassled trying to use it while keeping up with kids. I also looked at the Panasonic Lumix and it seems to have good reviews too, but I feel like I should step it up to something fancier like the mirrors cameras in order to get a better picture..?

Would the lens that the Sony comes with be good enough for a beginner (and then if I got really into it I could get something later?).

Any advice would be appreciated!

 

[boBQuincy]

Sony's a6000 has an "auto" mode so it would be as easy to use as any other auto camera, not a problem for a beginner. Like other cameras of this type it also has P, S, and M modes for when you want to set the exposure yourself. The APS-C sensor is equivalent to that in most consumer dSLRs so image quality will be very good.

The kit lens is fine for a beginner but one of the potential downsides of the alpha cameras is a kind of short list of native lenses. If you do not plan to buy a lot of lenses this would not matter.

The Lumix lineup covers a lot of models, some are close to the a6000 in image quality to where most people would not notice, especially at anything but high ISO. The G6 and GX7 are similar to the a6000, GX7 even looks similar. Olympus also has a great selection of good small cameras with their OM-D series. The lens lineup for these micro 4:3 cameras is second probably only to Nikon and Canon.

 

[havoc315]

For all intents and purposes, the a6000 is essentially a dslr in a slightly smaller body. The image quality is the same as you would get from an Aps-c dslr like the Nikon d5500, etc. Older mirrorless cameras were behind in terms of autofocus, but the a6000 can match or surpass entry level and mid level dslrs for autofocus. In fact, I think the a6000 may be one of the best cameras in its price range.

Like all consumer dslrs, and point and shoot cameras, it has auto and semi-auto modes, where the camera chooses everything except composition. Sticking to auto modes, you'll still see some improvement over point and shoot. But to get the most out of any camera, you need to learn compositional techniques and the technicalities of exposure. The a6000 can be a good instrument for beginners to even advanced users.

The kit lens will be fine to start with. There are fewer lens options than exist for a Canon/Nikon user. But unless you plan on becoming a pro, the lens selection is adequate to cover even most enthusiasts. An advanced user might not love the lens quality/price/selection, but it really is plentiful for 90% of likely buyers. (Lacking for people who like to spend thousands on 5-10 lenses that can be pixel peeped to perfection under a microscope... Though I am like that at times, lol).

 

[zackiedawg]

Just to put the lens comment in brief perspective - as you will occasionally hear mention of a 'lack of lenses' - we're talking about a lens system that has dozens of lenses, rather than hundreds of lenses. For the average amateur, enthusiast, and even for some pros, the lens selection will be more than they would ever buy or need...but there are some serious gear-heads out there that want to have every conceivable lens and aperture ever made available to them, even if they aren't going to buy them, just so they know it exists. There are few photographers in the world that have more than 10 lenses, so a lens collection consisting of more than that is going to likely meet the needs of 90-95% of the buyers of cameras in the world. Only if you happen to be a serious enthusiast with a very particular lens you've become accustomed to using and can't live without, and find out that particular lens is not available in a certain lens mount, should you worry.

Sony's e-mount currently has 33 autofocus lenses and 4 adapters available...and an additional 32 manual focus lenses. While there are other lens mounts that have over 100 autofocus lenses, most people would find a selection of 33 lenses to be sufficient for most any need, from ultrawide to fast prime to macro to general telephoto. And there are even some that can stand up to the pixel-peep perfectionists...if you're willing to spend the money for some of those high-end ones!

As with most mirrorless cameras, you can also utilize lenses from any other mount by purchasing various adapters - some with autofocus and some without...it's one of the fun sides of mirrorless cameras that you can open up access to tens-of-thousands of lenses from the past 70 years to today.

 

[DSNY4ever]

Thank you for the advice guys. And yeah when it comes to the lens options it sounds like the A6000 would be fine for what I plan to do with it now and beyond. I will probably never be as amazing as most of you on this forum! I am still leaning toward this camera as my choice, but I am going to go back to the store and fool around with it a bit more before I decide. Then I must learn how to use it!

 

[SplashMo]

a6000 is a great camera. I would pick black. Also add the Sigma 30mm lens and later perhaps the sigma 19mm. Maybe even the 60mm at some point. They sometimes go on sale.

Or purchase a SONY RX100 (first edition).

 

[Greg K.]

I'm mulling getting the a5100, the slightly older sibling of the a6000...any impressions? It seems to be virtually the same (with a few notable differences, including a cheaper price).

And re the RX100: is the absence of a longer zoom a drawback for Disney shooting??

 

[zackiedawg]

Greg,

Believe it or not, the A5100 is actually a slightly NEWER sibling of the A6000 - it came after. That said, you're right about it being essentially the same sensor, focus system, and much of the guts.

The key differences would be that the A5100 doesn't have a built-in viewfinder - if that's something you find valuable, you may be better sticking with the A6000, and if not, the A5100 should be fine...all the shooting is done off the LCD. And there is no Fn menu on the A5100, which on the A6000 allows you to store up to 12 different functions in a quick access menu - if you use a lot of controls when you shoot this can be more convenient than diving in the menu every time, but if you tend not to adjust much on the fly, it might not matter. And finally, there is no hot shoe on the A5100, which would only be something that matters if you wanted to use more powerful flash systems with the camera...otherwise, may not be important.

The one feature the A5100 has that the A6000 does not is a touch LCD screen. Some people prefer touch screen controls, especially for things like setting the spot focus point by just touching the subject you want in focus.

As for the RX100 - it's up to what you shoot - but I dare say most people who shoot at Disney, if they were to review their EXIF data on focal lengths, would find wide to standard focal lengths to be the most used by far at all the parks and resort properties, save Animal Kingdom. I am a huge long-lens fan, and shoot with some huge lenses up to 600mm optical, but when it comes to Disney, probably 80% of my shots are from 10mm to 100mm or so...except at Animal Kingdom. I'd say something like the RX10 might be near perfect for Disney - it has a 24-200mm F2.8 lens that would cover probably 95% of all needs focal-length-wise...I've used that camera at Disney and don't come up wanting for much...the RX100 shares the same very good 1" sensor - smaller than that on the A6000 and DSLRs, but still quite good for most general shooting.

 

[havoc315]

I'm mulling getting the a5100, the slightly older sibling of the a6000...any impressions? It seems to be virtually the same (with a few notable differences, including a cheaper price).

And re the RX100: is the absence of a longer zoom a drawback for Disney shooting??

The main difference between the 5100 and the 6000 is the EVF. Many shooters prefer using an EVF. A viewfinder has the advantage of helping to steady the camera (your body becomes a tripod to some degree). It's also much easier to view a viewfinder in bright glaring light.

The RX100 is an excellent "Disney" camera. I've shot an entire Disney World vacation with it, and I never found the focal length lacking. But 2 caveats: I have the original version, 28-100. The newer version is 24-70 I believe. So a bit wider (which is really nice), but also a bit shorter. But still a very useful range for Disney parks.
The second caveat: I skipping Animal Kingdom on that trip. Animal Kingdom does indeed call for a longer lens.

But 24-70 with a big bright lens, and enough resolution to do some cropping -- it covers your landscapes, it covers your dark ride shots, cover fireworks, covers environmental portraits (portraits where you want to see the Castle or Epcot ball in the background), good for family shots with characters, etc.
The focal length is short for wildlife. It's short for close portraits -- ie, headshots of a single person.. you can use 70mm for that, but I prefer something more like 100mm for that).
Using a limited focal length -- the extreme being a prime lens -- does make you think about composition a bit more, you'll be zooming with your feet a bit more often. But "foot zoom" results in a far better picture than relying on the long zoom of one of the 50x point and shoot cameras.

 

[DSNY4ever]

I went back and looked at the A6000 again today, I just keep coming back to this camera with all its nice features. I looked at almost every other one you guys mentioned too, but with the prices all being similar, this one seems the best ( I was hoping one might be a lot cheaper, haha). I am just having a hard time with the price since I'm a tight wad! I have tried looking at the cheaper ones, but I feel like if I want better pictures I really need to suck it up and spend the $$ on a nice camera like this.

My husband found a package deal with the kit lens and a zoom lens. Do you guys think it is worth it to spend about $150 more for the zoom lens? We won't be able to afford many other lenses probably for a long time after this initial purchase. The sales lady told me we will want the zoom lens for photographing the kids' sporting events. I guess that might be good, my kids don't play any sports yet, but maybe this is an important lens to have? Decisions...

 

[havoc315]

I went back and looked at the A6000 again today, I just keep coming back to this camera with all its nice features. I looked at almost every other one you guys mentioned too, but with the prices all being similar, this one seems the best ( I was hoping one might be a lot cheaper, haha). I am just having a hard time with the price since I'm a tight wad! I have tried looking at the cheaper ones, but I feel like if I want better pictures I really need to suck it up and spend the $$ on a nice camera like this.

My husband found a package deal with the kit lens and a zoom lens. Do you guys think it is worth it to spend about $150 more for the zoom lens? We won't be able to afford many other lenses probably for a long time after this initial purchase. The sales lady told me we will want the zoom lens for photographing the kids' sporting events. I guess that might be good, my kids don't play any sports yet, but maybe this is an important lens to have? Decisions...

The kit lens is a zoom lens. You are referring to a telephoto zoom lens.
Whether you need a telephoto zoom lens: there are people who use them extensively, and others who never use them. Totally depends on how you shoot, your own style.
They are useful for: kids sports, shooting kids at play outside, wildlife, close cropped portraits.

 

[DSNY4ever]

The kit lens is a zoom lens. You are referring to a telephoto zoom lens.
Whether you need a telephoto zoom lens: there are people who use them extensively, and others who never use them. Totally depends on how you shoot, your own style.
They are useful for: kids sports, shooting kids at play outside, wildlife, close cropped portraits.

See, I have no idea what I am talking about Sounds like it could be useful to us, thanks!

 

[DSNY4ever]

I just wanted to say thanks again for the info, we did get the Sony A6000 and so far it is AMAZING! I have no idea what I am doing with it and will hopefully have some time to fool around with it and start learning more this weekend, but just the auto mode is already giving us beautiful crisp photos and we are so happy!! I can't wait to use it in Disneyland on our next trip.

 

[ravensterling3]

When I got mine also got the 55-210 lens too. I didn't use that lens alot except at AK.

 

[ebloom]

I bought the a5100 in October in a kit with the 55-210 lens as well. I wanted something for a newbie so I could take pictures of my boys who play hockey as well as other sports. For a total novice this camera has been awesome! I just set in on the sports mode and go, takes amazing pictures in the low light hockey arena and believe me it is not my photography skills. I had only used point and shoot cameras before so the EVF was a none issue for me. Even better the camera went on sale at Costco where I had originally purchased it just after the 30 day mark and when I went back they refunded the difference ($300) even though the price match policy is 30 days. The clerk even said if he couldn't get permission to do the price match he would let me return in it (90 day policy) and they repurchase for the sale price. Love Costco! Anyway, great camera, light, great photos, and super easy to use.

 

[fractal]

All you new Sony shooters, come visit and post some pics in the Sony Alpha thread.

 

[FINFAN]

a6000 mirrorless is the bomb. The store my DS works at can't keep them in stock. Congrat's on your new toy!

 

[Nana2Callie]

I'm excited about my new purchase and learning this camera.