Anyone carry two Sony A6000?

[Smorton]

Greetings:

 

Does anyone carry two Sony A6000?  It appeals to me.

 

I would put the Sony E 16-70mm f/4 Zeiss on one and the Sony 50 to 210 mm kit lenses on the other. 

 

Crazy?  Too much to lug around?

 

I like to travel and as much as I would like to use primes, it does not work for me.

 

I already have the Sony E 16-70mm f/4 Zeiss on one and the Sony 50 to 210 mm kit lens.  Is there a better replacement for the Sony 50 to 210 mm kit lens?  It seems fairly sharp to me.

 

Thank you.

 

Smorton

 

[PierreP]

I have a Nex 6 and an A6000, one with a SEL50f1.8 and one with a Zeiss 24. It definitely is a great combo. I always have one camera in my bag, and the other in hand when I go out and take pictures.

 

To me, the advantage is that I don't have to change lenses outside, which I don't want to do because on mirrorless cameras, the sensors are much more exposed to dust than on traditional DSLR (which reminds me of a good advice : buy a blower if you haven't got one already).

 

I don't find it particularly heavy. Of course, the SEL50 and the Zeiss 24 are not that big nor heavy, and I must say that it is a bit different when I have to lug my FE90 around.

 

I definitely think the kit you currently have is good enough, and light enough, especially since you say the 50-210 is fairly sharp to you. The only other options would be the 18-200 (not as sharp), the 24-240 (expensive, don't know if it's that good on APS-C) and the FE70-200 (said to be very good, but too heavy). I think you should stay with the 55-210.

 

In the end, I think another A6000 would be a good idea, if you're satisfied with your current lenses. You might even find a cheap second-hand one, so hy not ?

[Smorton]

Thanks.

 

The FE70-200 is a nice lens but it is not light.  Expensive too.

 

Appreciate the feedback.

 

Smorton

[baillieswells]

I use the original SEL 18-200 mm as a sole lens. Obviously the definition is not as good as prime lenses but it is more convenient and better than the two kit lenses which came with the camera.It is heavy, but not as heavy as say the Canon 15- 85 lens which I use on my Canon 70D

[Reinhold_1]

Your question is my philosophy. With two cameras to travel the advantage to avoid frequent changing lenses offers (dust)!

I have therefore set up two nagging, which I consider myself traveling:

 

1. Unnecessary changing lenses should be avoided,
2. If necessary lenses only be changed in the house.

My travel equipment is (mostly) from:

- A6000 + E 4,0 / 10-18 mm OSS
- A6300 + E PZ 4,0 / 18-105 mm G OSS
+ Sony E 4.5-6.3 / 55-210 mm OSS
+ Sony E 1.8 / 35 mm OSS
+ four accus NP-FW50 + Charger BC-TRW

With this combination I have covered at a minimum weight everything suits my needs.

 

 

[Smorton]

Thanks for the response.  I am happy to hear it.

 

"I have therefore set up two nagging"  What are nagging?  Camera?

 

I traded the E PZ 4,0 / 18-105 mm G OSS for a Sony Zeiss 16-70 mm.  I wonder if that was a good move.  I liked the E PZ 4,0 / 18-105 mm.

 

Thanks.  Can you recommend a good camera bag for all those naggings?

 

Smorton

[Golem]

I have the lightweight lenses [18-55 & 55-200],

so adding one more small body means I never

hafta change lenses where airborn dirt is likely

to invade the sensors.

 

"Back in the day" one of the attractions of small

cameras was the ease of carrying two. Back then

it wasn't about sensor dust. It was about loading

two different emulsions, or to avoid a slow zoom

in favor of a pair of compact primes at-the-ready.

[Golem]

..........

"I have therefore set up two nagging" 

What are nagging?  Camera?

 

............

My guess is that it's cuz the "n" is next to

the "b" on the keyboard, even in Germany.

Add a pinch of "autokompleet" and it pretty

much makes sense :-) Especially if he was

typing on a phone.

[Smorton]

Thank you for your help!!

 

Smorton

[mcguyver]

Greetings:

 

Does anyone carry two Sony A6000?  It appeals to me.

 

I would put the Sony E 16-70mm f/4 Zeiss on one and the Sony 50 to 210 mm kit lenses on the other. 

 

Crazy?  Too much to lug around?

 

I like to travel and as much as I would like to use primes, it does not work for me.

 

I already have the Sony E 16-70mm f/4 Zeiss on one and the Sony 50 to 210 mm kit lens.  Is there a better replacement for the Sony 50 to 210 mm kit lens?  It seems fairly sharp to me.

 

Thank you.

 

Smorton

 

 

I use 2 a6000s for weddings at the beach all the time.  I usually use the 18-105mm f4 on the main body, and the 10-18mm f4 on the second body for the wide shots.  I find that this combination gets me about 90-95% of the coverage I need.  I also use the 50mm f1.8 if I need a shallow doc portrait lens.  The 55-210mm I have but hardly use it.  It depends on what you're shooting I guess.  The only alternative for the 55-210 is probably the 70-200 f4, but that's way heavier and more expensive.

[Austerror]

I sometimes carry around my Nex-7 and my A99... But only because I don't have an ultra wide for my A99 yet.

 

However, I also choose the lens I intend to use before I leave the house.  If I'm going out to the zoo, then I take a telephoto zoom. If I'm walking up a mountain for a landscape, then I take something wide.

 

It is true that I can use telephoto for landscape also.  But the point is I choose the lens before leaving the house.  When travelling overseas that may not always be possible.  Instead of filling a suitcase with 20kg of lenses, I compromise. For my Nex-7, the 24Z and the 55-210 is all I need.

 

Having said that. My partner uses a Nex-5n, so when we travel, we have two cameras and two lenses. No one has to carry two of anything.

 

Although the 18-200mm zoom whilst not a perfect lens, is a great do it all travel lens.

[Smorton]

I use 2 a6000s for weddings at the beach all the time.  I usually use the 18-105mm f4 on the main body, and the 10-18mm f4 on the second body for the wide shots.  I find that this combination gets me about 90-95% of the coverage I need.  I also use the 50mm f1.8 if I need a shallow doc portrait lens.  The 55-210mm I have but hardly use it.  It depends on what you're shooting I guess.  The only alternative for the 55-210 is probably the 70-200 f4, but that's way heavier and more expensive.

I used the 70 - 200 f4 in a camera store.  Certainly has nice images.  Pretty big and pretty expensive.  I wonder just how much better it is than the 50-210mm.  A lot I imagine.

 

Smorton

[Tommy]

I travel with my A7 and 1 of my (2) a6000 (sometime both).

The lenses that I carry are: E4/16-70, FE 4/16-35, Canon FD 50 f1.2, Voigllander 35 f1.4 and either Contax Carl zeiss Sonnar 135 2.8 or FE 4/70-200 (depending on where I am visiting)  Total of 5 lenses, sometime also a 85 1.4 lens for people shot.

I uses the Sony for my leisure shooting because I like to play with manual focusing since started photography 4 decades ago.
The extra body will minimize me changing lenses so less dust on sensors. The fast manual lenses are for indoor and night /evening scene and less heavy than the AF version.
All that weight about 8 to 9 kg. including the extra 4 batteries, charger, cleaning brush and cloth which weight much lesser than the DSLR that I carried to travel before mirrorless Sony came to the scene some 3 yrs ago.

[Smorton]

Makes me think that having two camera on me isn't enough.

 

Thanks

 

Smorton

[Golem]

I used the 70 - 200 f4 in a camera store.  Certainly has nice images. 

Pretty big and pretty expensive.  I wonder just how much better it is

than the 50-210mm.  A lot I imagine.

 

Smorton  

 

 

   

   

Your imagining runs afoul of reason. The 50-210 is slow, and is

designed for a smaller format. And considering its format size, it

is not an especially compact package. That's three major design

advantages, which are proven out by it's excellent reputation.

[happypuppy]

I will pickup a 6300 towards Christmas when they drop in price a bit. I don't shoot video so that's not needed so no great rush. Since I live in Washington state we get wet a lot and I wish they were weather proof. Maybe a 7000 will be ?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LiveShots]

I purchased an A6300 recently and will be keeping my A6000 in my camera bag as a backup until I can maybe get a second A6300 or perhaps an A7. The camera barely takes up any space in the camera bag and is extra insurance in case of a problem with the main camera.

[Coast]

I have both of those lens w my a6000

I consider both of them a POS.

I've started using Rokinon primes. I can crop the 12mm f.2 almost into infinity. it's that sharp.

but thats just my experience

[Austerror]

I have both of those lens w my a6000

I consider both of them a POS.

I've started using Rokinon primes. I can crop the 12mm f.2 almost into infinity. it's that sharp.

but thats just my experience

Which both lenses do you have?

[ib2010]

I usually carry one with 55 1.8, and one with 16-35 4. Covers 24-82 eq. I struggled when i had to choose just one lens, and i like to be free from constant swapping..Alternatively, I do swap one to the 70-200 f4, and shift to a bigger bag, which allows all three lens (plus a fisheye) to be available.

[Coast]

Which both lenses do you have?

 

16-70

55-210

The ones he opened the discussions with

the Zeiss has  horrible ca

the tele has horrible detail and colors

I do like the kit has power zoom, anti shake, auto focus, pancake compact, light weight, excellent walk around and at least as sharp as the Zeiss

[Austerror]

Perhaps your 55-210 is broken?

 

I get excellent results from the 55-210 that I have. Both in detail and colours. Excellent enough for me to be surprised at how cheap they are now.  

 

Having said that, it is a bright day light lens only.  Its not fast and I wouldn't be using it without appropriate light.

[Smorton]

I have the 16 to 70 Zeiss and the 55 to 210.

 

Thanks for the input.

 

Smorton

[Coast]

by Coast, on Flickr

 

This is the 55 210

this is the top of Devils Tower in Wyoming 

 Most of the smaller aging cracks are not visible  the colors are horrible and this is in broad daylight

 

 

This is the 16 70

 note the color infringement on the figure on the far left, magnification isn't even necessary

 

Comparison photo, Ocean Beach] by Coast, on Flickr

 

[Smorton]

I am on a trip to Israel. I bought a second Sony a6000 just before I left.

 

Lucky I did. Now the first a6000 has a red vertical line in the viewfinder and a blue/ black line in the images. Bought the 1st a6000 in August 2015. I bought one a month before that and I got a sign that said something is amiss (can't recall what it said exactly) but it was not useable. I returned it to National Camera and they tested it and said they had never seen this before and said it takes months to have Sony repair something. I was happy they gave me a new one and I bought an extended "diamond" warranty.

 

Anyone else have this many problems with a6000? Does it take months for a repair?

 

I worry that the diamond warranty is not a replacement warranty although they said it was when I bought it.

 

In some ways I wish I had stuck with Cannon. Traveled all over the world and never a problem. Now I merely look at the Sony and something is wrong.

 

Frustrating!

 

This only has one question in the post but it helps to rant a little.

 

Any input about the faulty Sonys appreciated. I treat them kindly.

 

Smorton