user47513 | sent on April 19, 2020
Pros: Performance, size, battery life
Cons: Price? Aim still too small and "artificial"
Opinion: This review does not apply to professors and super professionals, I am a chicken who writes for other chickens, if there were any... It's the most snubbed and mist mirrorless ever due to the price-performance ratio... But it is the first mirrorless that happens to me in my hands, used together with the D500, the difference in weight and size is abysmal, both as a body and as an optic. The sony menu that scared me so much (to hear all the negative opinions) doesn't really make me any problem... I came from d500 (which I still have), a machine lady, and I was hesitants of the mirrorless system... But I had to think again... The autofocus is out of its mind... Eye AF, point coverage, pursuit, flexibility... I haven't tried it at night yet, but on all other occasions I've found it "better" than the d500, including sports photos. I did two rallies (Brands and Valleys) and a bit of photo hunting and lots of tests at home on tripods in manual focus with similar objectives sony sigma and Nikon for the two systems, and the files that come out are always more beautiful, at least in my eyes. The jpeg are much more detailed and rich, with raw the difference is thinned but always in favor of sony, both for the 24mpx sensor and for the optics, especially with the typical telephoto lenses in the range of 70-300 /100-400 /200-600, which are better than the competition. The iso seal is I would say identical to the D500. Maximum limit 6400 iso,pp experts will manage to recover well, but the noise is still quite evident and a chicken like me does not do so much. The battery life is fantastic, pretty much like the d500, maybe better. Compared to the D500 pays a smaller and less natural viewfinder, which is activated only when you put the eye on it, so with a very slight delay that makes you lose shots in birds and fast sports, something that I find ridiculous in 2020 for a top of the range dedicated precisely to the sport.si can solve by putting the duct tape on the sensor of the crosshairs. In addition, taking from the viewfinder practically in the dark the d500 still hooks, while the sony does not. The speed with which you operate with a d500 is still a bit higher, even as immediacy of use. The d500 just turn it on and in less than a moment you aim and part machine gun (with a shooting noise however really "exaggerated" in comparison to sony) A6600 is a nice toy. But probably right now it's worth taking an a6400 that costs a lot less.also the stabilizer (reason I chose it) does not convince me much, we are around 3 stops. Professionals and many partisan enthusiasts will tell you that this review is rubbish. But I see them at sporting events and on other occasions covered in equipment, sweaty, clumsy, with heavy backpacks, with machine bodies that resemble prehistoric tanks, and I too was put like them, even in my treks... With sony I carry with just a pouch or at the limit a backpack, I seem to have nothing on me and runs away laughing, then at home unloading the photos, for example after the rally val d'orcia, Nikon d500 with 18-140 and a6600 with 18-135, the results speak for themselves... Then I download the photos of the photo hunt and the long-distance test with d500 and sigma 100-400 /60-600 against a6600 with 70-350 and 200-600, and to the pleasant surprise the sony telephotos clearly prevail over those her competitors... The extra-council in combination 70-350! |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
