Canon2018 wrote:piticoto wrote:Dylan10 wrote:ms18 wrote:A6100 withnewly released 11mm f/1.8 Viltrox 23 f/1.4 Sigma 56 f/1.4 A dream comes true.But I'm not sure about the future of photo centric APS-C bodies from Sony. So I"m sticking to Fuji.Seems absolutely bizarre to me that you would not go for a6600, none of those lenses are stabilized and the battery in the a6600 is absolutely incredible, is there a mirrorless camera that has a better battery life?As you say Sony lens options for aps-c are a dream come true and if you have a FF Sony, even better.I stay with ASP-C because I want smaller size and reasonable to me prices. A FF lens that can go on the APS-C sensor is not appealing to me. Now I'm curious how many of E mount lenses are designed for APS-C only sensor, including third party. For example the 16-50 was released for APS-C 10 years ago, 16-55 f2.8 was released a little over three years ago, but for FF. Look at the size difference and price difference. And 16-55 is not stabilized.Don't know anything about Fuji other than what the dealer told me. He said its ok but the build quality of the cheaper cameras was not as good as Sony, he also said the Fuji ibis cameras battery life wasn't the best, there was the Fuji 16-55 2.8 but it was very large, big as full frame and no 2.8 11-20 (16-30) yet, just an f4 Fuji option.The Sony 16-55 is a dedicated aps-c-lens, not FF and was introduced alongside the equally brilliant 70-350G. Recently, the 11mm 1.8, the 10-20G and 15mm 1.4 were released for aps-c only. Now we have a complete lineup of lenses for Sony aps-c and even if no more were to come we could not possibly miss anything.Indeed 16-55 is ASP-C designed. OK, about 3 times larger and 8 time more expensive than 16-50, f2.8 and G, but no OSS. Hm..., I did not pay attention thinking that it's for FF, so large and expensive.

Canon2018 wrote:piticoto wrote:Dylan10 wrote:ms18 wrote:A6100 withnewly released 11mm f/1.8 Viltrox 23 f/1.4 Sigma 56 f/1.4 A dream comes true.But I'm not sure about the future of photo centric APS-C bodies from Sony. So I"m sticking to Fuji.Seems absolutely bizarre to me that you would not go for a6600, none of those lenses are stabilized and the battery in the a6600 is absolutely incredible, is there a mirrorless camera that has a better battery life?As you say Sony lens options for aps-c are a dream come true and if you have a FF Sony, even better.I stay with ASP-C because I want smaller size and reasonable to me prices. A FF lens that can go on the APS-C sensor is not appealing to me. Now I'm curious how many of E mount lenses are designed for APS-C only sensor, including third party. For example the 16-50 was released for APS-C 10 years ago, 16-55 f2.8 was released a little over three years ago, but for FF. Look at the size difference and price difference. And 16-55 is not stabilized.Don't know anything about Fuji other than what the dealer told me. He said its ok but the build quality of the cheaper cameras was not as good as Sony, he also said the Fuji ibis cameras battery life wasn't the best, there was the Fuji 16-55 2.8 but it was very large, big as full frame and no 2.8 11-20 (16-30) yet, just an f4 Fuji option.The Sony 16-55 is a dedicated aps-c-lens, not FF and was introduced alongside the equally brilliant 70-350G. Recently, the 11mm 1.8, the 10-20G and 15mm 1.4 were released for aps-c only. Now we have a complete lineup of lenses for Sony aps-c and even if no more were to come we could not possibly miss anything.16/1.8

piticoto wrote:Canon2018 wrote:piticoto wrote:Dylan10 wrote:ms18 wrote:A6100 withnewly released 11mm f/1.8 Viltrox 23 f/1.4 Sigma 56 f/1.4 A dream comes true.But I'm not sure about the future of photo centric APS-C bodies from Sony. So I"m sticking to Fuji.Seems absolutely bizarre to me that you would not go for a6600, none of those lenses are stabilized and the battery in the a6600 is absolutely incredible, is there a mirrorless camera that has a better battery life?As you say Sony lens options for aps-c are a dream come true and if you have a FF Sony, even better.I stay with ASP-C because I want smaller size and reasonable to me prices. A FF lens that can go on the APS-C sensor is not appealing to me. Now I'm curious how many of E mount lenses are designed for APS-C only sensor, including third party. For example the 16-50 was released for APS-C 10 years ago, 16-55 f2.8 was released a little over three years ago, but for FF. Look at the size difference and price difference. And 16-55 is not stabilized.Don't know anything about Fuji other than what the dealer told me. He said its ok but the build quality of the cheaper cameras was not as good as Sony, he also said the Fuji ibis cameras battery life wasn't the best, there was the Fuji 16-55 2.8 but it was very large, big as full frame and no 2.8 11-20 (16-30) yet, just an f4 Fuji option.The Sony 16-55 is a dedicated aps-c-lens, not FF and was introduced alongside the equally brilliant 70-350G. Recently, the 11mm 1.8, the 10-20G and 15mm 1.4 were released for aps-c only. Now we have a complete lineup of lenses for Sony aps-c and even if no more were to come we could not possibly miss anything.Indeed 16-55 is ASP-C designed. OK, about 3 times larger and 8 time more expensive than 16-50, f2.8 and G, but no OSS. Hm..., I did not pay attention thinking that it's for FF, so large and expensive.It is quite bulky and front-heavy, indeed. But it is incredibly sharp. It is so good that you can often just take this lens and no second one to supplement it, which mitigates some of its weight. FF options are even larger and heavier. On the other hand, Sigma has shown that you can build a comparably tiny and fast standard zoom (18-50). But it is not as good as the 16-55.

Nielk Mike wrote:Reading the interview with Sony managers from October (I think it was), it seems that Sony considers APS-C the format of choice for video and hybrid cameras. But to be honest: The interview gave little hope of any significant development regarding cameras for still photographers. Do I interpret the interview correctly? Owning a couple of older APS-C bodies I am fine with what they offer and may add an a6400 in the future when the a6500 breaks down.There's definitely funny movement in the APS-c lineup since about the last two months, atleast over here in the Netherlands. The a6000 has been taken out of the product range, the entire a6xxx line pricings has gone down 10% to 20% while almost Sony's entire lens lineup went up 5% to 10% on average.Considering all latest rumors I'd say such a shift, all the way down from the current APS-c flagship on, means there is gonna be a new APS-c flagship on the horizon very soon.

Take five wrote:Nielk Mike wrote:Reading the interview with Sony managers from October (I think it was), it seems that Sony considers APS-C the format of choice for video and hybrid cameras. But to be honest: The interview gave little hope of any significant development regarding cameras for still photographers. Do I interpret the interview correctly? Owning a couple of older APS-C bodies I am fine with what they offer and may add an a6400 in the future when the a6500 breaks down.There's definitely funny movement in the APS-c lineup since about the last two months, atleast over here in the Netherlands. The a6000 has been taken out of the product range, the entire a6xxx line pricings has gone down 10% to 20% while almost Sony's entire lens lineup went up 5% to 10% on average.Considering all latest rumors I'd say such a shift, all the way down from the current APS-c flagship on, means there is gonna be a new APS-c flagship on the horizon very soon.I hope you are right but here in Canada the price hasn't moved.Just checked SAR and they reckon it's a ZV FF camera. I wish it's the much delayed A6600 replacement. Let's see if Sony will make an announcement at the CP+ Show in Yokohama, Japan during the next few days.

I honestly this is a non issue. Other brands have just started an apsc linuo like Canon and Nikon, as it rounds out a full offering and allows more compact designs, which so many crave.Hybrid cameras have proven profitable for so many companies. But video improvements year on year still carry over to stills and visa versa, a new 6k or 8k video feature would require higher res sensors. At tech, improved iso performance etc would carry over into stills too, so regardless, unless they physically remove the shutter button there is no problem.Plus they have invested so much and released so much for the apsc line of cameras in the last few years. Some of the most attractive lenses on the market sit in the Sony apsc lineup. 11mm / 10-20mm / 70-350mm / 18-135mm to name a few.Exciting times for the system imo. I have just bought an a6500, just a ‘fun’ small camera to compliment my z7 system

Dylan10 wrote:Bender79ita wrote:Dylan10 wrote:So, what really does do more in that size of camera, 500gr or less?You're in your honeymoon phase, we get it. We really do.But... don't forget thatnot everybody uses the camera the same way as you do.I will list some of the shortcomings of the a6600 compared to what choosing other manufacturers/bodies can improve, both at lower and higher price points;Most of these things don't bother me, but that doesn't mean other people might find 1 or more compelling reasons to choose other options.Again, are those dealbreakers for me? No. For you? No.But we're all different. There's other people on this planet that might see things different.Well, to get all of those will mean which camera?I must have missed this reply... bad days for me.The point is not which has all; the point is that "what does more" is very personal.If I sold watches on ebay an a6600 would be a nightmare for me.Or if I was shooting video in mostly backlit conditions.Or if did alot slow motion video at 1080p.Or if I changed settings frequently while doing long burst action photography.Or if I used the popup flash alot.And so on...Canon R7, big, Fuji X-T something, big, do they even have 10 bit video except latest FF cameras? So basically it could be what to get all of that?

José B wrote:That's a nice complete list Bender!No one knows when the A6600 replacement will arrive but I'm already thinking of my next cameraI'm checking out the Canon R forum due to the hot rumor of the R8. Love the specs of the R6MKII as well. I haven't discounted the A7IV (plus OEM vertical grip) as well.I think that the A7IV is a little too high res for action. It's got great handling for video, but 33mp non stacked is far from ideal.The R6MKII's 40 fps ES looks very appealing considering the rolling shutter is well controlled. Another advantage is I can use my EF lenses with it with the adapter. However, it's 24MP so not enough cropping power.Specially for tennis, I wouldn't use ES on a non stacked sensor camera, not even the R6II. Tennis really got some fast moving sticks and balls.OTOH, the A7IV seems like a great sweet spot at 33MP. Sure it's 'only' 10 FPS but I heard the sound of the mechanical shutter at high bursts and it seems more quiet than the A6600. Also, I shoot sports using jpeg so I would imagine the buffer with a fast Sandisk UHS-II 128GB card with the 135/1.8 GM @ ISO-100-800 should be pretty much endless.You could also do lower resolution raw (14.2mp or 8.2mp), with all the DR benefits but much smaller file size.But for your application where silence and fast burst are more important, I think that the A9 series would be the perfect fit.Also, I can use my e-mount lenses which are more or less more modern than if I shoot EF with the R6II. Also I don't shoot sports all the time and the A7IV is a well-rounded camera.I'm not sure I'd recommend it if it's not used for video.It doesn't feel like that big of an improvement for action, and resolution either, it's around 10-11% linear (7k pixels vs 6k pixels width, in example).You're mostly paying for the stills/movie switch, the 10 bit video, the custom shutter speed increments (i.e. 1/51s) for flickering etc.The biggest pros for my use are;I don't shoot birds, and for dogs I'd say the improvement isn't worth it. The a6400 already did similarly well.Having said all the above, I'll wait for the A6600 replacement before I make my decision.I think that if extreme DR is of no concern, aps-c is a more versatile platform for the money.

Bender79ita wrote:José B wrote:That's a nice complete list Bender!No one knows when the A6600 replacement will arrive but I'm already thinking of my next cameraI'm checking out the Canon R forum due to the hot rumor of the R8. Love the specs of the R6MKII as well. I haven't discounted the A7IV (plus OEM vertical grip) as well.I think that the A7IV is a little too high res for action. It's got great handling for video, but 33mp non stacked is far from ideal.The R6MKII's 40 fps ES looks very appealing considering the rolling shutter is well controlled. Another advantage is I can use my EF lenses with it with the adapter. However, it's 24MP so not enough cropping power.Specially for tennis, I wouldn't use ES on a non stacked sensor camera, not even the R6II. Tennis really got some fast moving sticks and balls.OTOH, the A7IV seems like a great sweet spot at 33MP. Sure it's 'only' 10 FPS but I heard the sound of the mechanical shutter at high bursts and it seems more quiet than the A6600. Also, I shoot sports using jpeg so I would imagine the buffer with a fast Sandisk UHS-II 128GB card with the 135/1.8 GM @ ISO-100-800 should be pretty much endless.You could also do lower resolution raw (14.2mp or 8.2mp), with all the DR benefits but much smaller file size.But for your application where silence and fast burst are more important, I think that the A9 series would be the perfect fit.Also, I can use my e-mount lenses which are more or less more modern than if I shoot EF with the R6II. Also I don't shoot sports all the time and the A7IV is a well-rounded camera.I'm not sure I'd recommend it if it's not used for video.It doesn't feel like that big of an improvement for action, and resolution either, it's around 10-11% linear (7k pixels vs 6k pixels width, in example).You're mostly paying for the stills/movie switch, the 10 bit video, the custom shutter speed increments (i.e. 1/51s) for flickering etc.The biggest pros for my use are;I don't shoot birds, and for dogs I'd say the improvement isn't worth it. The a6400 already did similarly well.Having said all the above, I'll wait for the A6600 replacement before I make my decision.I think that if extreme DR is of no concern, aps-c is a more versatile platform for the money.Thanks for sharing your views on the A7IV. If Sony will ever just cater to vloggers for their APS-C strategy I might pick one up. The sensor will have enough cropping power to shoot tennis with the 135/1.8.I'm priced out of the A9MKII. Even an opened box one at a camera store (out of province) is CDN$ 5000. Also here in my area and even within 100 km., there are only less than a handful of used A9/A9MKII available. Not only that, even if I buy one---I need a longer lens since it is only 24MP. A Tamron 70-180/2.8 will add to the expense and to top it all, that is a third party lens thus it will reduce the FPS to 15.I saw a lot of tennis pics from the ones Canon invited to their R6MKII launch in San Diego. They all said that the rolling shutter is well controlled. I've seen the pics too presumably with ES. Now they didn't say the % that came out with elongated racquets and or egg-shaped tennis balls. However, from my experience using ES on tennis with the A6600 which I think has a slower read out speed than the R6MKII---I say it's less than 30% are distorted. Most of them are in players hitting their serves. Thus I will take my chances with the R6MKII.My main concern with the R6MKII is I will be using old lenses i.e. EF lenses. Is their AF performance going to be as good as a native RF? Somehow I don't think so. I'd like to think it won't beat a modern lens like the 135/1.8 GM partnered with an A7IV albeit at a much lower FPS for sports.

José B wrote:Bender79ita wrote:José B wrote:That's a nice complete list Bender!No one knows when the A6600 replacement will arrive but I'm already thinking of my next cameraI'm checking out the Canon R forum due to the hot rumor of the R8. Love the specs of the R6MKII as well. I haven't discounted the A7IV (plus OEM vertical grip) as well.I think that the A7IV is a little too high res for action. It's got great handling for video, but 33mp non stacked is far from ideal.The R6MKII's 40 fps ES looks very appealing considering the rolling shutter is well controlled. Another advantage is I can use my EF lenses with it with the adapter. However, it's 24MP so not enough cropping power.Specially for tennis, I wouldn't use ES on a non stacked sensor camera, not even the R6II. Tennis really got some fast moving sticks and balls.OTOH, the A7IV seems like a great sweet spot at 33MP. Sure it's 'only' 10 FPS but I heard the sound of the mechanical shutter at high bursts and it seems more quiet than the A6600. Also, I shoot sports using jpeg so I would imagine the buffer with a fast Sandisk UHS-II 128GB card with the 135/1.8 GM @ ISO-100-800 should be pretty much endless.You could also do lower resolution raw (14.2mp or 8.2mp), with all the DR benefits but much smaller file size.But for your application where silence and fast burst are more important, I think that the A9 series would be the perfect fit.Also, I can use my e-mount lenses which are more or less more modern than if I shoot EF with the R6II. Also I don't shoot sports all the time and the A7IV is a well-rounded camera.I'm not sure I'd recommend it if it's not used for video.It doesn't feel like that big of an improvement for action, and resolution either, it's around 10-11% linear (7k pixels vs 6k pixels width, in example).You're mostly paying for the stills/movie switch, the 10 bit video, the custom shutter speed increments (i.e. 1/51s) for flickering etc.The biggest pros for my use are;I don't shoot birds, and for dogs I'd say the improvement isn't worth it. The a6400 already did similarly well.Having said all the above, I'll wait for the A6600 replacement before I make my decision.I think that if extreme DR is of no concern, aps-c is a more versatile platform for the money.Thanks for sharing your views on the A7IV. If Sony will ever just cater to vloggers for their APS-C strategy I might pick one up. The sensor will have enough cropping power to shoot tennis with the 135/1.8.10% more res is not much to crop, honestly. You crop 1/10 and you're already there at 24mp. APS-C mode is 14.2mp, just like RAW (M).I'm priced out of the A9MKII. Even an opened box one at a camera store (out of province) is CDN$ 5000. Also here in my area and even within 100 km., there are only less than a handful of used A9/A9MKII available. Not only that, even if I buy one---I need a longer lens since it is only 24MP. A Tamron 70-180/2.8 will add to the expense and to top it all, that is a third party lens thus it will reduce the FPS to 15.15 is a hell of alot more than 10 though. Remember you get 10 only if you shoot without focus confirmation. In reality the A7IV feels quite slower fps than a6400. I'd expect A9 + VXD motor to keep up and always give you full 15. But ideally you should rent first.I saw a lot of tennis pics from the ones Canon invited to their R6MKII launch in San Diego. They all said that the rolling shutter is well controlled. I've seen the pics too presumably with ES. Now they didn't say the % that came out with elongated racquets and or egg-shaped tennis balls. However, from my experience using ES on tennis with the A6600 which I think has a slower read out speed than the R6MKII---I say it's less than 30% are distorted. Most of them are in players hitting their serves. Thus I will take my chances with the R6MKII.I think a6600 is quite slower than R6II. Should be above 20ms whereas the Canon is below that, 14 or 17? Something like that IIRC.My main concern with the R6MKII is I will be using old lenses i.e. EF lenses. Is their AF performance going to be as good as a native RF? Somehow I don't think so.With front-back movement EF lenses might be too slow, but it will depend on the amount of movement the lens needs to do. From far to far, I'd expect to be minimal lens movement so they might keep up.From far to close, the elements need to move alot more. To say, focusing bewteen 15 to 20m is quite different than 5m to 10m.But again, if the camera needs to wait for focus confirmation the fps speed might not be what is expected.I'd like to think it won't beat a modern lens like the 135/1.8 GM partnered with an A7IV albeit at a much lower FPS for sports.No absolutely it won't. Mmm... if you often find yourself a little tight at 135, then it might work. But if you feel a little short, then you'll be alot shorter.Remember you will be able to crop only up to 149mm equivalent, before you start going below 24mp.

Bender79ita wrote:José B wrote:Bender79ita wrote:José B wrote:That's a nice complete list Bender!No one knows when the A6600 replacement will arrive but I'm already thinking of my next cameraI'm checking out the Canon R forum due to the hot rumor of the R8. Love the specs of the R6MKII as well. I haven't discounted the A7IV (plus OEM vertical grip) as well.I think that the A7IV is a little too high res for action. It's got great handling for video, but 33mp non stacked is far from ideal.The R6MKII's 40 fps ES looks very appealing considering the rolling shutter is well controlled. Another advantage is I can use my EF lenses with it with the adapter. However, it's 24MP so not enough cropping power.Specially for tennis, I wouldn't use ES on a non stacked sensor camera, not even the R6II. Tennis really got some fast moving sticks and balls.OTOH, the A7IV seems like a great sweet spot at 33MP. Sure it's 'only' 10 FPS but I heard the sound of the mechanical shutter at high bursts and it seems more quiet than the A6600. Also, I shoot sports using jpeg so I would imagine the buffer with a fast Sandisk UHS-II 128GB card with the 135/1.8 GM @ ISO-100-800 should be pretty much endless.You could also do lower resolution raw (14.2mp or 8.2mp), with all the DR benefits but much smaller file size.But for your application where silence and fast burst are more important, I think that the A9 series would be the perfect fit.Also, I can use my e-mount lenses which are more or less more modern than if I shoot EF with the R6II. Also I don't shoot sports all the time and the A7IV is a well-rounded camera.I'm not sure I'd recommend it if it's not used for video.It doesn't feel like that big of an improvement for action, and resolution either, it's around 10-11% linear (7k pixels vs 6k pixels width, in example).You're mostly paying for the stills/movie switch, the 10 bit video, the custom shutter speed increments (i.e. 1/51s) for flickering etc.The biggest pros for my use are;I don't shoot birds, and for dogs I'd say the improvement isn't worth it. The a6400 already did similarly well.Having said all the above, I'll wait for the A6600 replacement before I make my decision.I think that if extreme DR is of no concern, aps-c is a more versatile platform for the money.Thanks for sharing your views on the A7IV. If Sony will ever just cater to vloggers for their APS-C strategy I might pick one up. The sensor will have enough cropping power to shoot tennis with the 135/1.8.10% more res is not much to crop, honestly. You crop 1/10 and you're already there at 24mp. APS-C mode is 14.2mp, just like RAW (M).I'm priced out of the A9MKII. Even an opened box one at a camera store (out of province) is CDN$ 5000. Also here in my area and even within 100 km., there are only less than a handful of used A9/A9MKII available. Not only that, even if I buy one---I need a longer lens since it is only 24MP. A Tamron 70-180/2.8 will add to the expense and to top it all, that is a third party lens thus it will reduce the FPS to 15.15 is a hell of alot more than 10 though. Remember you get 10 only if you shoot without focus confirmation. In reality the A7IV feels quite slower fps than a6400. I'd expect A9 + VXD motor to keep up and always give you full 15. But ideally you should rent first.I saw a lot of tennis pics from the ones Canon invited to their R6MKII launch in San Diego. They all said that the rolling shutter is well controlled. I've seen the pics too presumably with ES. Now they didn't say the % that came out with elongated racquets and or egg-shaped tennis balls. However, from my experience using ES on tennis with the A6600 which I think has a slower read out speed than the R6MKII---I say it's less than 30% are distorted. Most of them are in players hitting their serves. Thus I will take my chances with the R6MKII.I think a6600 is quite slower than R6II. Should be above 20ms whereas the Canon is below that, 14 or 17? Something like that IIRC.My main concern with the R6MKII is I will be using old lenses i.e. EF lenses. Is their AF performance going to be as good as a native RF? Somehow I don't think so.With front-back movement EF lenses might be too slow, but it will depend on the amount of movement the lens needs to do. From far to far, I'd expect to be minimal lens movement so they might keep up.From far to close, the elements need to move alot more. To say, focusing bewteen 15 to 20m is quite different than 5m to 10m.But again, if the camera needs to wait for focus confirmation the fps speed might not be what is expected.I'd like to think it won't beat a modern lens like the 135/1.8 GM partnered with an A7IV albeit at a much lower FPS for sports.No absolutely it won't. Mmm... if you often find yourself a little tight at 135, then it might work. But if you feel a little short, then you'll be alot shorter.Remember you will be able to crop only up to 149mm equivalent, before you start going below 24mp.Hi Bender,I really appreciate your time with your comments. You've given me information that I haven't thought about. In a nutshell, going to either R6MKII or A7IV has advantages and question marks. My best bet for now is to stay the course and wait for Sony's announcement for the next A6600 and go from there.Thanks again.José

Take non wrote:Nielk Mike wrote:Reading the interview with Sony managers from October (I think it was), it seems that Sony considers APS-C the format of choice for video and hybrid cameras. But to be honest: The interview gave little hope of any significant development regarding cameras for still photographers. Do I interpret the interview correctly? Owning a couple of older APS-C bodies I am fine with what they offer and may add an a6400 in the future when the a6500 breaks down.There's definitely funny movement in the APS-c lineup since about the last two months, atleast over here in the Netherlands. The a6000 has been taken out of the product range, the entire a6xxx line pricings has gone down 10% to 20% while almost Sony's entire lens lineup went up 5% to 10% on average.Considering all latest rumors I'd say such a shift, all the way down from the current APS-c flagship on, means there is gonna be a new APS-c flagship on the horizon very soon.I believe the rumor to be very true this time, it is going to be interesting at the least.https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/sony-zv-full-frame-e-mount-camera-will-be-announced-on-march-29-shorty-after-we-will-get-the-new-high-end-aps-c/

Take non wrote:Take non wrote:Nielk Mike wrote:Reading the interview with Sony managers from October (I think it was), it seems that Sony considers APS-C the format of choice for video and hybrid cameras. But to be honest: The interview gave little hope of any significant development regarding cameras for still photographers. Do I interpret the interview correctly? Owning a couple of older APS-C bodies I am fine with what they offer and may add an a6400 in the future when the a6500 breaks down.There's definitely funny movement in the APS-c lineup since about the last two months, atleast over here in the Netherlands. The a6000 has been taken out of the product range, the entire a6xxx line pricings has gone down 10% to 20% while almost Sony's entire lens lineup went up 5% to 10% on average.Considering all latest rumors I'd say such a shift, all the way down from the current APS-c flagship on, means there is gonna be a new APS-c flagship on the horizon very soon.I believe the rumor to be very true this time, it is going to be interesting at the least.https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/sony-zv-full-frame-e-mount-camera-will-be-announced-on-march-29-shorty-after-we-will-get-the-new-high-end-aps-c/Same rumors that have popped up for the last two years. I for one believe Sony has already showed their ASP-C hand. If you want a Sony camera for photography choices will continue to be the old A6000 line or make do with one of the newer Vlogger/video cameras. Sony has shown they continue to allow these rumors more to boost  their lens sales nothing more. Photographers can switch to full frame to stay with Sony of move to another brand like Fuji for APS-C  cameras if you want newer technology.

Completely incorrect. Another APSC camera will come 100%, they have just released 3 top of the line APSC wide lenses, this doesnt happen unless they release new cameras.

JT26 wrote:Completely incorrect. Another APSC camera will come 100%, they have just released 3 top of the line APSC wide lenses, this doesnt happen unless they release new cameras.The new APS-C cameras are being released but are  designed for video. The last photographers leaning camera Sony APS-C camera was the A6600 which is now a few years old and was recycling an old sensor with a bigger battery. Last releases were FX30 and ZV-E10 and next planned release this month is another video camera!

JT26 wrote:Completely incorrect. Another APSC camera will come 100%, they have just released 3 top of the line APSC wide lenses, this doesnt happen unless they release new cameras.For v-loggers. All three lenses are mainly for folks who need WA ad UWA to get themselves into the frame. Same for the UAW PZ zoom. Those releases say nothing about still cameras.

Take non wrote:Take non wrote:Nielk Mike wrote:Reading the interview with Sony managers from October (I think it was), it seems that Sony considers APS-C the format of choice for video and hybrid cameras. But to be honest: The interview gave little hope of any significant development regarding cameras for still photographers. Do I interpret the interview correctly? Owning a couple of older APS-C bodies I am fine with what they offer and may add an a6400 in the future when the a6500 breaks down.There's definitely funny movement in the APS-c lineup since about the last two months, atleast over here in the Netherlands. The a6000 has been taken out of the product range, the entire a6xxx line pricings has gone down 10% to 20% while almost Sony's entire lens lineup went up 5% to 10% on average.Considering all latest rumors I'd say such a shift, all the way down from the current APS-c flagship on, means there is gonna be a new APS-c flagship on the horizon very soon.I believe the rumor to be very true this time, it is going to be interesting at the least.https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/sony-zv-full-frame-e-mount-camera-will-be-announced-on-march-29-shorty-after-we-will-get-the-new-high-end-aps-c/Any idea what the price of that would be? More than a7c? You can get an a7III for €1.800 new! Who buys APS-C when you can get FF for the same price????

It's not just about the price of the body.  I would rather pay the price you mention as that of the A7III for an updated APS-C body than for a camera that is the same age (give or take) as my current A6600.   The main issue for me, however, is that FF lenses are heavier; and I am no longer as young as I once was.CheersMike M

oldthor wrote:Take non wrote:Take non wrote:Nielk Mike wrote:Reading the interview with Sony managers from October (I think it was), it seems that Sony considers APS-C the format of choice for video and hybrid cameras. But to be honest: The interview gave little hope of any significant development regarding cameras for still photographers. Do I interpret the interview correctly? Owning a couple of older APS-C bodies I am fine with what they offer and may add an a6400 in the future when the a6500 breaks down.There's definitely funny movement in the APS-c lineup since about the last two months, atleast over here in the Netherlands. The a6000 has been taken out of the product range, the entire a6xxx line pricings has gone down 10% to 20% while almost Sony's entire lens lineup went up 5% to 10% on average.Considering all latest rumors I'd say such a shift, all the way down from the current APS-c flagship on, means there is gonna be a new APS-c flagship on the horizon very soon.I believe the rumor to be very true this time, it is going to be interesting at the least.https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/sony-zv-full-frame-e-mount-camera-will-be-announced-on-march-29-shorty-after-we-will-get-the-new-high-end-aps-c/Same rumors that have popped up for the last two years. I for one believe Sony has already showed their ASP-C hand. If you want a Sony camera for photography choices will continue to be the old A6000 line or make do with one of the newer Vlogger/video cameras. Sony has shown they continue to allow these rumors more to boost their lens sales nothing more. Photographers can switch to full frame to stay with Sony of move to another brand like Fuji for APS-C cameras if you want newer technology."the bias is strong with this one"It is all about personal speculation, based on bygones or not. You can have yours but I'll have mine, which for me only begs the question if the new flagship aps-c is going to be a more refined a6600 or if its going more towards a9/a1 capabilities in terms of processing power and AF speed/accuracy.The latter would have my undivided attention however I'm not at all willing to update to anything 'a6700'.

DutchMM wrote:It's not just about the price of the body. I would rather pay the price you mention as that of the A7III for an updated APS-C body than for a camera that is the same age (give or take) as my current A6600. The main issue for me, however, is that FF lenses are heavier; and I am no longer as young as I once was.We all are further down the roadBut there are some small and light FF options. Like I carry the Sigma 24f3.5, FE50f2.5 and Sigma 90f2.8 - or just the FE28-60 kit zoom. Not very fast options, sure. But I rather compromise on speed as I don't use f1.4 or even faster that often. Of course, size and weight of the original NEX cameras with the early Sony or Sigma lenses can't be beaten. In fact that was Sony's original claim to fame: Small, yet high quality images.CheersMike M