New to mirrorless - Sony a6000 or a6300?

[LizInTheSun]

Sorry if this question has been asked before...

 

I recent sold my canon rebel dslr so I can invest in a mirrorless camera. I have in the past been more of an enthusiast when it comes to photography (travel, vacations, etc) but I hope to become more educated in photography and make it more of a hobby.

 

I think a full frame camera would more camera than I need. Ive been looking at the Sony a6000 and a6300. Ive done some research and it seems there are only minor upgrades in the a6300.

 

Would it be worth buying the cheaper a6000 and investing in more expensive lenses or an a6300 and taking longer to buy or buying less expensive lenses?

 

There is a big price difference in the a6000 and the a6300.

 

Also, is the "weather" sealing worth it for humid environments? I live in the south.

 

Thanks.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[Username]

` 

   

The 6000 will be the definitively better buy. 

  

The 6300 and 6500 have a "proper" price 

difference between them but the 6000 has 

an "unnatural" price difference as it's really 

a clearance on a discontinued model even 

if Sony hasn't clearly/honestly said so.  

   

So "settling" for the 6000 pays off far more 

than the normal "per feature" pricing would 

normally allow. IOW the clearance pricing 

on the 6000 will buy you more lenses than 

the loss of a few features would normally 

pay for. 

    

---------------------------------------------------  

   

  

Why to buy the 6300 regardless of cost:  

If you truly NEED a toadally silent shutter,

for courtrooms, chamber music, etc etc.  

      

Why to buy the 6500 regardless of cost:  

 You work in situations where IBIS really 

pays off, and the silent shutter is bonus. 

    

"Regardless of Cost" is the overriding

operative phrase here. Actual NEED of 

silent shutter and/or IBIS must erase any

and ALL thoughts of price comparison if

one is to skip over the 6000 :-) 

     

`

[tinplater]

I purchased my a6000 on Ebay perhaps two years ago used for $400.  It is among the best investment I have made in my photography.  I love the camera!  Small, easy to use, and produces wonderful images.  (I also have an A7rII and RX10 Version I). 

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

A6000 plus better lenses is definitely the way to go. Unless you would make extensive use of video features.

 

Weather sealing is not a big deal for normal use. If you have temperature differences (indoors ac/outdoors sun) the camera could fog up anyway. Besides, not all wortwhile lenses are weather sealed.

 

Depending on which Rebel you had, the A6000 should be a big enough leap.

[TrolleySwag]

I'm considering upgrading to the a6300 for the focus points, continuous eye, use of canon lenses and better video.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[lamontcranston]

The A6000 is one of the best bargains around at the current price point.  It's really not worth the price differential to upgrade to the A6300 for me.  I have 2 A6000's now and live in the South and have no problems requiring a weather sealed camera.  If I worked on a fishing boat it might be worthwhile, but on dry land it has not been needed.

[Canujiony]

Hey Liz, if I was you I would *SERIOUSLY* be looking at a Canon M5 mirrorless.  I've been a Canon shooter for years and recently picked up an A6000 to try it out and experience firsthand all this glorious Sony engineering.  What a joke!  I made a mistake.  What you're gonna get with the A6000 is...

 

- Disgusting battery life.  It's not even comically so bad that you can laugh it off, it's just flat out horrible.  Prepare to buy a handful of spares and an external charger since charging in body takes 5 (yeah, FIVE!) hours per battery.  I was out in the cold the other night and got 17 clicks out of a battery before the cold killed the battery.  17 shots, that has to be a new record low.  It's a bit below freezing here, not talking about arctic circle levels of cold.

- White balance is so far off it's stupid.  Prepare to spend even more time on each and every image correcting the green cast and/or overly blue cool cast that every one of your images will have.  Do you want to spend more time in front of the computer fiddling with your images?  Sony is your friend then!  You'd rather be doing something more productive?  Get the Canon.

- Body is so small it's finicky if you have average or larger hands and as I found out after melting my main button, fragile.

- If you ever have to use Sony service prepare yourself to be embraced in that sh!tshow of third party money saving and buck passing by the suits at Sony head office.

- The viewfinder flat out stinks.  Point the camera into the sun and experience your focus not locking, having to switch to manual focus and then the EVF is suddenly a low-rez colour washed out useless bit of tech that seems like it's from the 80's.

- Don't even get me started on how this thing misses focus compared to Canon.  Don't believe the hype for a second that the focus on the A6000 is better than your old Canon, it's nothing but lies.

- Menu's are as bad as everyone says and lot's of function's take an extra button press or two to do what should be instinctive and quick.  Get used to the camera slowing you down.

- I got the A6000 to use with vintage manual glass so am not bothered by the lack of APS-C lenses available but Sony is completely ignoring the APS-C lineup to concentrate on FF.  What that means to you is expect to pay MORE for Sony glass than you did with your Canon and if you go to sites like Photozone.de you'll see that the Sony APS-C lenses have a long and glaring con list.

 

My quick about 2 months in review/preview is this has to be one of the most overhyped camera's I've ever come across.  I totally completely 100% regret not getting the Canon M5.  Bought the A6000 to use with vantage manual glass and that's the ONLY thing I like about it.  Having said that I find out after purchase that the flange distance is the same with the M5 and A6000, so the A6000 offers nothing but a lower price in comparison to the M5.  You can get adapters for all the vintage mounts for use on the Canon so if you want to use older glass you have just as many options with the Canon.  After a bit of use, that lower price just isn't worth it and I regret my purchase decision. 

 

Having said all that, I'll be putting my A6000 up for sale soon and going back to Canon.  Don't believe the hype Liz.

 

Cheers!

 

 

Sorry if this question has been asked before...

I recent sold my canon rebel dslr so I can invest in a mirrorless camera. I have in the past been more of an enthusiast when it comes to photography (travel, vacations, etc) but I hope to become more educated in photography and make it more of a hobby.

I think a full frame camera would more camera than I need. Ive been looking at the Sony a6000 and a6300. Ive done some research and it seems there are only minor upgrades in the a6300.

Would it be worth buying the cheaper a6000 and investing in more expensive lenses or an a6300 and taking longer to buy or buying less expensive lenses?

There is a big price difference in the a6000 and the a6300.

Also, is the "weather" sealing worth it for humid environments? I live in the south.

Thanks.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Funny, that. The Sony A6000 is one of the best selling ILCs ever. Everyone else seems to be able to make A6000 work for them. I have an A6000 and while it is a budget camera with a few quirks, it has never stopped me from shooting anything. And the photos come out great.

 

I think you must be doing it wrong.

[Canujiony]

Hey Jaf - Nope, I get photo's out of my A6000 too, not doing anything wrong.  I said and stand behind everything I said above - Liz will spend much more time fiddling with her Sony files compared to her Canon files, will spend more on lenses most likely, will be unhappy with battery life, and on and on.

 

Agree with you the A6000 is the best selling mirrorless camera's ever.  True that.  But guess what, McDonald's is the best selling restaurant and the best selling beer is called Snow from China.  Guess what all these best selling things have in common?  Low price.  You think a spouse will like to go to McDonald's over a nice steakhouse because they sell more burgers and fries?  Samsung sells more phones that Apple because guess why?  Lots of cheap lower end phones compard to Apple's premium line.

Using your bet selling mirrorless theory - Sony has notably BETTER cameras than the A6000 in the A6300/A6500 and they don't sell anywhere near as well.  Why?  More expensive.  So being better isn't what drives A6000 sales, it's cheapness.  And even you have to believe the bulk of A6000 buyers never take the craptacular 16-50 off so again, saying it's popular because of engineering excellence doesn't fly.

 

And not everybody else does make it work for them - you commented in the other thread about the other user not happy with his A6300 images and recommended heavier post processing to get the shots to look better.  Again, more time fiddling with every image in post is the fix???

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

I don't know, you seem to be on a rage trip here. There is no perfect camera, they are all about compromises. In you case, perhaps you should have considered an A7 instead, as you only intended to use vintage lenses?

 

Also, I didn't recommend the dude to do "heavier" post processing. I recommended him to turn off all in-camera "enchancements" and do it in post. Tuning noise reduction and sharpness often means bringing the sliders down not up. Anyway, processing is part of photography. When I started shooting, I spent ten times more time in the darkroom than I spent taking photos. You're lucky you don't have to do that.

 

Anyway if the A6000 bugs you so much, just sell it and buy a camera that doesn't blow your top off. In fact the whole photography lark seems to annoy you, maybe pick a different hobby altogether?

[RathPhoto]

 

 

Hey Liz, if I was you I would *SERIOUSLY* be looking at a Canon M5 mirrorless. I've been a Canon shooter for years and recently picked up an A6000 to try it out and experience firsthand all this glorious Sony engineering. What a joke! I made a mistake. What you're gonna get with the A6000 is...

 

- Disgusting battery life. It's not even comically so bad that you can laugh it off, it's just flat out horrible. Prepare to buy a handful of spares and an external charger since charging in body takes 5 (yeah, FIVE!) hours per battery. I was out in the cold the other night and got 17 clicks out of a battery before the cold killed the battery. 17 shots, that has to be a new record low. It's a bit below freezing here, not talking about arctic circle levels of cold.

 

Okay, clearly your camera has flaws. Based on this alone. Ignoring the rest of the BS you are spewing.

 

I've shot over 600 shots in a day and my battery hasn't dropped below 50%

 

17 shots in cold temps? Gtfo. I shoot in -25 C all night long without any battery issues.

[Canujiony]

And here is more of 'the Sony lie' Liz.  RathPhoto manages to shoot all night long in -25 temps on one battery.  All night!  You can't shoot all night long in the tropics on one battery, but this guy is miraculously doing it at freeze your face off temps.  Every other thread you'll read online says an external charger and extra batteries are a must first purchase for these camera's but this guy has a battery/camera that can shoot all night long on one at temps only polar bears and huskies like.

 

This nonsense happens in EVERY negative Sony thread on every website and every forum.  Says something, anything negative about a Sony product and there is one of more of these Sony people that have nothing to do except post all day everyday about how wrong you are and how right everything with the brand is.  That's why I dubbed it 'the Sony lie'.  

Don't get suckered into it Liz.

[Canujiony]

Hey Jaf-Photo.

 

I'm very disappointed in the A6000 because I feel like I've been lied to.

 

- Sony has better layout that Canon?  Lie.

- Sony battery life isn't bad?  Lie.  It's worse.

- Sony menu's aren't bad. Lie, they are as bad as a lot of other folk say.

- Electronic viewfinder is better than optical?  Lie.  The A6000's isn't very good.

- A6000 focus's better than Canon? Lie.

 

And so on.  My experience is this camera is all hype.  

 

And why do all you pro-Sony people do this?  I'm not happy with this overhyped camera and your comment is to get out of the hobby?  Really dude?  The years I shot with Canon I never had an issue and I try this new system that has some serious marketing behind it and find it more fluff than real and the 'fix' is to just leave the hobby?

Says it all right there.

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

I'm not a blind Sony fan. But I chose to swap from Canon to Sony with open eyes. That's because Sony delivers better performance and image quality than Canon. I know this because I shot both brands side by side for about a year before I made the switch. And I am responsible for that choice, which I made with open eyes.

 

If you are disappointed that's because you did not do your research. You can't say Sony lied to you just because you did not understand what kind of camera you were buying.

 

I've been doing photography for decades and I have absolutely no problem with this camera. Maybe the difference is that I don't need the camera to do everything for me?

 

Anyway, stop whining, do your research properly and get a camera that works for you.

[RathPhoto]

Why is this fool even on this forum.... Go to a canon forum.

 

The Sony battery is not that bad. The Sony menus are fine. These cameras are fantastic cameras.

[RathPhoto]

I just got back from shooting this evening, 132 shots (not a lot, I know but I got a late start and didn't have light for long) It's -20 C, or -4 F. Well below freezing. I got far more than 17 shots before my battery died. In fact, my battery is currently at 96% after all those shots in well below freezing weather. 

So yeah, the battery doesn't suck. Is it as good as a mirrored DSLR? Not. No one is claiming that. But it's not like you'll need ten batteries a day. Like I said, in warmer summer temps ive done over 600 shots on 50% battery. I would hardly call that bad. Also, it's smart to carry extra batteries regardless, what if the battery decides to crap out mid shoot? Batteries fail sometimes. Having extras is a good thing regardless. 

Ignore Canujiony and everything he says. He's clearly a Canon fanboy who's just here to troll. 

[Username]

 

 

I'm very disappointed in the A6000 because I feel like I've been lied to.

 

- Sony has better layout that Canon?  Lie.

- Sony battery life isn't bad?  Lie.  It's worse.

- Sony menu's aren't bad. Lie, they are as bad as a lot of other folk say.

- Electronic viewfinder is better than optical?  Lie.  The A6000's isn't very good.

- A6000 focus's better than Canon? Lie.

 

And so on.  My experience is this camera is all hype.  

 

 

   

I use three format, 5 brands, and over a dozen different models 

all included ... SLRs and live-view camera. My a6000 is my go-to, 

my fave, my most handy, useful, versatile .... enuf awreddy. 

   

If you've been considering quitting photography, go for it. No law 

of the universe says you can't come back. Maybe you'll be glad 

you quit, or maybe you'll miss it and come back. You won't really 

know until you try quitting. 

[angelaz]

FWIW Liz, I just upgraded to the a6000 (husband gave me an early Christmas gift this weekend lol) from the Sony NEX 3n, and while I have only used it for one session, I love it. Now yes, granted, I'm coming from an old Nex3N, but wow, I'm truly impressed and beyond satisfied with the a6000. I checked out quite a few Nikons and Canons at the stores in SF, and there is no doubt, they perform great, feel good in the hand etc..but end of the day, I just prefer and feel confident in using my a6000. It will really come down to what you feel comfortable and confident shooting with, that's all. Go check them out, hold the different models, take pictures, and then decide. You'll know.

[Canujiony]

Hahaha, hey Angelaz, I like the way you just joined on Dec 18th and then immediately posted your 'review'.  Because, you know, that's what normal people do, join just to immediately post a comment on a forum thread to defend a camera.

 

Funny you said that about looking at cameras at various stores in your area.  I was in Best Buy earlier today buying an xmas gift and was checking out some of the camera's while there.  As soon as I picked up the Canon M6 the build quality and solidity of the camera was noticeable.  They didn't have an M5 in stock, I asked but they were sold out so I could only handle the M6 but did it really feel solid.  Then I picked up the A6000 which in comparison felt like the creaky plastic throwaway that it is.  The A6300 and A6500 felt better than the A6000 but not anywhere near as solid as the M6.

 

Anyway, my A6000 is up for sale as I am 100% going back to Canon but so far no takers.  Sony... never again. 

 

If anyone is in SW Ontario, Canada and wants an almost new A6000, send me a PM.  The sooner I'm out of this the sooner I can go back to Canon.  $550.- CDN and that includes the 16-50, 2 extra Wasabi batteries/charger and Neewer grip, camera only has about 750 clicks on it.

[Chrissie]

 $550.- CDN for such a lousy camera (your own words) - are you kidding?  The camera is basically worthless, if anything you say is true.

[Pieter]

- Sony has better layout that Canon? Lie.

- Sony battery life isn't bad? Lie. It's worse.

- Sony menu's aren't bad. Lie, they are as bad as a lot of other folk say.

- Electronic viewfinder is better than optical? Lie. The A6000's isn't very good.

- A6000 focus's better than Canon? Lie.

 

Who exactly told you these lies? It sure wasn't Sony claiming their camera is better than brand y or z. Maybe an eager sales rep? If you do some online research you should be well aware of the a6000's quirks. Why buy it then if you're so satisfied with Canon?

 

For me personally there were a couple of reasons to get the a6000 back in 2014:

- best possible image quality in smallest possible housing (except for RX1 etc)

- good enough autofocus (the hybrid AF was quite new back then, certainly way beyond any mirrorless performance Canon offered at the time)

- affordable (even come 2018 the a6000 is still great value for money: the M6 is 50% more expensive and doesn't have a (for me vital) viewfinder)

- decent lens lineup

 

If the EOS M-mount is lacking anything it's native lenses: only like 7 in total, none of which are very fast. I admit I'm a bit envious of Fuji's APS-C lineup but their XT-2 is too big for my taste, same with Canon M5: the smaller my camera, the bigger the odds I take it with me and take photo's. And for that body size, might as well get an A7x.

 

But please do point out my lies and/or unfounded fanboyism.

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

No normal consumer buys an A6000 with a Neweer grip and Wasabi batteries, then goes on a forum to rage about paid shills and then try to sell the kit on the same forum.

[Canujiony]

Haha, according to you guys the camera is amazing and I'm the one so far in the wrong that I should leave the hobby.

 

Having said that, something tells me I'm going to take a bath on this as a percentage of my original paid price in relation to it being only a couple of months old and 750 clicks.

 

@Jaf - nothing wrong with those accessories at all, not sure what your point is?

 

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

My point is that if you buy those accessories, you have some knowledge and did some research. A complete noob wouldn't know about those things.

 

I bought my A6000 as a replacement for my NEX-7. Initially, I was disappointed because of the budget feel of the A6000 (it was half the price of the NEX-7). But then I updated the firmware in the camera and the lenses, which made a huge difference for AF performance. Then I started appreciating that the camera is very light. And I got better IQ both with native and adapted lenses. So, I quickly warmed to it. Considering price versus performance, it's probably my best buy.

[Canujiony]

Who exactly told you these lies? It sure wasn't Sony claiming their camera is better than brand y or z. Maybe an eager sales rep? If you do some online research you should be well aware of the a6000's quirks. Why buy it then if you're so satisfied with Canon?

 

- affordable (even come 2018 the a6000 is still great value for money: the M6 is 50% more expensive and doesn't have a (for me vital) viewfinder

 

If the EOS M-mount is lacking anything it's native lenses: only like 7 in total, none of which are very fast. I

 

Hey Pieter - the viewfinder is exactly the reason why I am getting the M5 and not the M6.  The lack of native lenses for EOS-M mount doesn't bother me whatsover, the 22mm and 11-22 are the only ones that I would want, and then use adapted vintage lenses for the rest of my needs.

 

Cheers!