Jump to content

A mount vs. E mount


Recommended Posts

Hello All

  I was wondering if I can get some info on E mount vs A Mount. I see that Sony has Full Frame using both of these mounts. Is there a major difference between the two. I would hate to try to maintain two separate mounting systems if I don't have to. I now have the A6000 but was thinking about getting a larger camera. If the E mount will work fine I will probably stick with the E Mounts. I hope you understand what I think I am trying to ask.

 

Thanks

Rick

Link to post
Share on other sites

i do not have a a-mount FF camera but the APS-C a-mount camera i use does focus much faster than my A7 series cameras

 

and has longer batterie life, feels much more solid in the hands with bigger lenses

 

only disadvantage is that you can not mount every legacy lens 

M42 is ok but Minolta MC/MD and Leica Glas can not be mounted

 

i think the A99II is a great camera if you not need to mount Leica or Minolta Lenses

Link to post
Share on other sites

I first purchased two Sony A7s shortly after they came out.  (One for my daughter.).  I also added a Sony A6000 later for travel  because of the smaller size.  I have added multiple Sony/Zeiss lenses to the bag.  I have used all the lenses on both cameras with good results (although I am an amateur).  Going to A Mount involves a bit of thinking about what type of photography you plan to do.  A mount lens can be mounted on your E-Mount camera via adapters but they will not operate 100% as native lenses.  I have not read anything about using a e-mount lens converted for A mount.  I plan to stick to e-mount and will probably buy a newer A7 model next year..  If I were doing this analysis I would factor lens cost, variety of lens to suit my need and size/weight of the camera for my intended photography.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rick,

 

Like Gilgenberg, my A mount cameras are APS-C. I have a Minolta 7D and a Sony A700. I also have an E mount A7II that is my primary camera presently. I’m considering an A6500 but will wait for a few hands on reviews before I take the plunge.

 

Regarding you’re A vs. E mount question, off the top of my head, here are my quick thoughts.

 

A Mount

 

-A very decent amount of Sony and legacy A mount Minolta lenses available at a relatively cheaper cost compared to E mount.

-As Gilgenberg commented, the A mount bodies “have longer battery life, feels much more solid in the hands with bigger lenses”. I love the technology packed into my mirrorless and lighter weight but my A mount cameras just feel better in my hands (even with the vertical grip on my A7II)

-If you currently have E mount lenses you can’t adapt them to an A mount body. Actually, you really can’t adapt other mount lenses to an A body.

-One last “strictly personal” thought, I’m not “personally” comfortable investing in another A mount body. I have no crystal ball but Sony has not given A mount a lot of love lately. Unlike E mount, A mount releases have been few and far between the past few years. I not sure the A mount system has a lot of legs left in it. Just a nagging feeling.

 

E Mount

 

-A somewhat limited, but growing, variety of native lenses.

-Native lenses tend to be pricier than A mount and non mirrorless lenses from other manufactures. (Just a side note: if your budget allows, although crazy expensive the new G master 85 and 24-70 are worth every penny. They out resolve current E mount body sensor technology. I had a chance to shoot with both on a Sony sponsored street walk and have been saving my pennies to buy one since.)

-E mount body ergonomics for someone with larger hands is not great.

-E mount battery life pales compared to A mount.

-Sony E mount bodies allow, via adapters, the use of just about any lens mount. I have used A mount lenses, old Yashica lenses, Zeiss Contax lenses and am consider an adapter to allow me to borrow a relative’s Canon lenses. If you like a particular Leica or Nikon lens, get an adapter and go for it.

-Depending on how you feel, release rates for E mount break industry standards regarding upgraded bodies. Sony is releasing new and improved models relatively fast (actually, a blistering pace compared to the likes of Canon and Nikon). Depending on your point of view this can be great or infuriating (buyers remorse).

 

Like I said, quick thoughts. I’m sure I missed a lot of key points others may provide.

 

FWIW,

 

KMG

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have

 

- Minolta 7D and 5D, Sony A700 and A77 in APS-C A-Mount

- NEX 5n and NEX-7 in E-Mount APS-C

- Sony A900 and A99 in A-Mount FF

- Sony a7r and A7II in E-Mount FF

 

For serious shooting on a regular basis, even the old A900 and A700 feel a lot more zippy in AF reaction, more comfortable to hold with larger lenses and the choice of lenses from yesteryear is still pretty good at reasonable prices. At a recent birthday, even using my 1985 Maxxum Zoom 28-85 that is probably worth around 50-60$ these days, gave me great results with the A99 with nothing missed like what i will describe lower.

 

I am missing more pictures with my E-Mount cameras when counting on AF to do the job ( Zeiss 24-70 F4, Zeiss 55 1.8, Sony 24-240, Sony 28-70 Sony 28 F2, and FE 90 Macro G). At my daughter's birthday, half my shots were focused on something i did not care about and did not realize the body had chosen as a subject with the Zeiss 24-70. No wonder some E-Mount users are looking for faster AF but then what if it is not accurate ? Too many AF sensors ? Too many AF modes ? 

 

Since i purchased the A7r and A7II to use with my older Minolta MC Rokkor lenses and macro/ bellows equipment, some of my E-mount lenses will go soon. The only one i may keep will be the 90 Macro because i will probably use it in Manual Focus for 80% of my pictures with it.

 

I just can't see myself as an advanced amateur spending the $$$ and trekking with a 2kg monster like the new 2.8 GM monsters with these light bodies. 

 

If your 6000 is your first camera, you have no idea of the handling characteristics of a more traditional SLR so maybe E is for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Salut michelb,

 

"even the old A900 and A700 feel a lot more zippy in AF reaction", I agree. They were released at a time when Minolta genes were still very strong in Sony models. I still lament Minolta's withdrawal from the camera industry. They really produced some amazing stuff.

 

That being said, I've found my 55, and 28-70 kit lens (the few times I've use it) to be pretty responsive focusing wise.

 

I mostly shoot people/portrait. The 2kg monster 85mm GM monster really balances well on an A7 variety with the vertical grip. The images the lens delivers are well worth the weight hassle in my opinion. Just my opinion.

 

Regarding your daughter's birthday, I'm assuming you daughter was your primary focus point. I'm not questing your skills or selected camera settings, but were you using a native lens that enabled face detection/Eye AF? Just curious because I very rarely miss focus using these features.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

KMg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no expert, but allow me to add my two cents worth.  My first digital camera was a Canon 40D (APS-C).  My first lens was the Canon 17-55 f2.8.  This lens served me well for several years.  I decided that as I added lenses, I would get the best glass I could afford and get only full frame glass.  Full frame glass works on both APS-C as well as full frame.  So if you ever decide to up grade your body to full frame your lenses are all useable.  I think it pays to get good glass.  Camera bodies come and go as technology improves.  But the lenses carry forward for many years (even decades).  I wish I had saved all my Canon L lenses.  And lenses, especially good ones, hold their value very well on the used market.  The upgrades in the firmware have almost erased the differences between non-Sony lenses and all other lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Salut michelb,

 

"even the old A900 and A700 feel a lot more zippy in AF reaction", I agree. They were released at a time when Minolta genes were still very strong in Sony models. I still lament Minolta's withdrawal from the camera industry. They really produced some amazing stuff.

 

That being said, I've found my 55, and 28-70 kit lens (the few times I've use it) to be pretty responsive focusing wise.

 

I mostly shoot people/portrait. The 2kg monster 85mm GM monster really balances well on an A7 variety with the vertical grip. The images the lens delivers are well worth the weight hassle in my opinion. Just my opinion.

 

Regarding your daughter's birthday, I'm assuming you daughter was your primary focus point. I'm not questing your skills or selected camera settings, but were you using a native lens that enabled face detection/Eye AF? Just curious because I very rarely miss focus using these features.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

KMg

 

I have not yet tried Eye Focus or smile shutter and i intend to do before i finalize what i keep versus what i let go of the lenses i was mentioning.

 

I think a big part of my issues with the E-Mount has to do more with the increased number of AF points confusing both me and the camera and since viewing at shooting aperture instead of fully open creates a false sense of sharpness in the finder that is contributing to my missed shots

Link to post
Share on other sites

 A mount lens can be mounted on your E-Mount camera via adapters but they will not operate 100% as native lenses.  

 

I disagree.  I recently had a chance to test my 16-50 F2.8 on an A6300, using the LAEA3 adapter, and I must say it was phenomenal.  It was fast and accurate.  Better than any native e-mount lens currently available in the same focal range.

 

 

Edit: One detail I almost forgot about.  I also tried the same lens/adapter on an A7S, and it was horrendous.  In a brightly lit room it took around 5+ seconds to focus on something 4-5 feet away.  So the important takeaway is to be aware of which cameras work well with the LAEA3 and which need the LAEA4.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i do not have a a-mount FF camera but the APS-C a-mount camera i use does focus much faster than my A7 series cameras

 

and has longer batterie life, feels much more solid in the hands with bigger lenses

 

only disadvantage is that you can not mount every legacy lens 

 

M42 is ok but Minolta MC/MD and Leica Glas can not be mounted

 

i think the A99II is a great camera if you not need to mount Leica or Minolta Lenses

 

FYI, Minolta MC/MD glass CAN be mounted on the A-mount. Search for Minolta MC/MD to A-mount adapters. e.g.

https://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Adapter-Minolta--Mount-Cameras/dp/B0048A8CDU/ref=sr_1_14?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1476903757&sr=1-14&keywords=minolta+mc%2Fmd+to+a-mount+adapter

http://www.ebay.com/itm/AF-Confirm-Adapter-for-Minolta-MC-MD-to-SONY-ALPHA-MA-mount-A77-II-A99-A580-/181971075794?hash=item2a5e5242d2:m:mQCt_K4OS4Zdvw4iKL7UZRg

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the important takeaway is to be aware of which cameras work well with the LAEA3 and which need the LAEA4.

 

Actually, it's what lenses work well with which adapter. Old screw drive lenses will not work (auto focus) with the LA-EA3, they need the drive and focusing mechanisms in the LA-EA4. Screw drive lenses will use 15 focus points while lenses with built in drive motors can be used with LA-EA3. As a bonus the LA-EA3 utilizes the 425 phase detection points on bodies like the A6300.

 

FWIW

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rick,

 

You mention that you already have an A6000 with E mount. So to some extent your decision is already made. I agree with you that maintaining 2 lens systems is not economically viable.

 

To look at this question in perspective, I would consider the following:

1.       A mount is mature and the camera body development has slowed markedly. (The A99ii recently announced after a 4 year gap to the A99)

2.       E mount is clearly where Sony is placing its future; with new E mount bodies being released on a regular basis.

3.       E mount lenses are being produced by a larger range of 3rd party manufacturers including Cinema lens manufacturers.

4.       3rd party A mount manufacturers are basically limited to Tamron, Sigma and Rokinon.

5.       Sony will produce more E mount lenses in the future but is not likely to add to the A mount range.

 

Sony has stated that they will continue to support A mount, but I believe there is a difference between “supporting” and “developing”.

 

Sony is actually only supporting their existing A mount users.

 

Sony does not realistically expect a significant expansion of A mount users when the A99ii is released.

 

As an A mount user for many years with a large investment in good A mount glass, I will not be jumping ship but I recognise that if I was to start my journey in photography today, I would choose Sony E mount.

 

My 2 cents.

 

All the best with your long term choice.

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all for all your inputs. Delewin, yup, yup and yup. Now looking at the A6500 next year after I get some lenses for the 6000. I would love to get a Full frame eventually. Selling my Fuji cameras to help offset the cost of anything Sony :-). I know a camera captures memories I just want something I can enjoy while capturing the memories. Not a pro or will ever go that way, just want to enjoy. I am sure you all know what I mean. My first Sony was the NEX3 then eventually the 6000. Held onto the 6000. Actually, I forgot I still had it. Now to build up and stick with it and not regret.

 

Tnx Agn

 

Rick

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rick,

 

Congratulations of your decision.

 

Just a few words based on my experience:

 

If you go with APS-C bodies (A6000 / A6500 / etc) buy APS-C lenses. Your photographic experience will be better. Later if you wish to move to full frame, then sell all or keep for special occasions.

 

If you buy Full Frame lenses now, as you want to move to a full frame body later down the track, you will be "penalized" as your sensor will only "see" the middle part of the lens and therefore your low light performance will be adversely affected.

 

I did this with my A77 and have suffered for over 4 years. I have been "not so patiently" waiting for the A99ii to be released and I will be purchasing it next year. (Like you, I need to save up. :) )

 

I have noticed the drop in low light performance when I use my FF 16-35 F2.8 compared to my APS-C 16-50 F2.8.

 

Best wishes,

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats on your decision Rick, from what you've said it sounds like the right choice for you.

 

Really, when it gets down to basics, any name brand camera system these days can create great images. Focus on mastering the tool you have and create images, the preserved moments in time that only you can create.

 

KMG

 

p.s. if you're seriously considering going full frame at some future time I wouldn't discount considering full frame lenses for your APS-C body. There's some really nice FE and, via adapters, A mount lenses out there ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...