Sony A6000 Review

April 22, 2014 | Mark Goldstein | |

Your Comments

45 Comments | Newest Oldest First | Post a Comment

#1 Fredy Ross

Totally lost as to why you would review without the kit lens. Just doesn’t make sense to me.

2:45 pm - Tuesday, April 22, 2014

#2 Scott

Great review Mark and BRAVO to you for using the 35FE for samples instead of the 16-50 kit.

4:10 pm - Tuesday, April 22, 2014

#3 Scott

Mark: were you able to find a level gauge?

4:26 pm - Tuesday, April 22, 2014

#4 mrbenji

Dual-axis digital level, huh?  This feature is not present on the A6000, as per multiple confirmed reports.  How many other examples of lazy cutting-and-pasting are there in this article?

5:20 pm - Tuesday, April 22, 2014

#5 Jotographer

It’s normal for any interchangable lens camera to review the body seperate from the lens when the consumer can buy the body seperately.  This is to purify the review.  I mean you can skip the kit lens and buy just the body and better lens.  So the review does’t have to be too integrated with the lens.  The body could be great and the kit lens could be suck and people wouldn’t be too confused about it.  That said, I can understand mr Ross point of view.  Most people buying the camera the first time, always buy a kit lens.  Then again a6000 is kinda a premium camera for those people.  I think it’s actually a better compromised, to leave the review as is, but add another page of review for the camera that paired with the kit lens.  Just a thought.

5:22 pm - Tuesday, April 22, 2014

#6 Mel Snyder

Why review the camera without the kit lens, indeed! No bravos from me.

You say it’s a consumer camera. Then why test it with a lens limey to be purchased by only a minuscule percentage of “consumers?”

The kit lens performs WAY beyond the skills of 90% of consumers and 99% of its most severe critics.

5:48 pm - Tuesday, April 22, 2014

#7 Pau Poquet

Hello,

First off, I love this website, it is a quick reference for cameras. One that I always check.

I am having a bit of a doubt… I have been waiting for this camera for a while now. I don’t know if it is worth the extra 300€ compared to a NEX-6 with the same kit lens. Nowadays you can find the NEX-6 almost everywhere for a great price.

Second, I would also like to know about the on screen level gauge, it is a great feature when using small tripods.

Thank you

6:05 pm - Tuesday, April 22, 2014

#8 Snope

Well, the review is fine. But I don´t see any improvements over the NEX6 beside higher resolution.
What is really a shame that Sony neglects the video section of their mirrorless line-up.
Don´t tell me to get a videocamera with small crappy sensor as competing cameras in this price range offer more options for recording video, like the Panasonic G6 and Canon with their DSLRs.
What the A6000 is missing:
- mic input -> NEX7 and even cheaper NEX models had it, dropping that was a bad decision(and their mic for the MI is crap - I tested it)
- also no audio level control - the AGC is terrible and leads to sound clipping

The lack of better audio features is not understandable. Especially considering that the video quality has improved as it doesn´t show that much moiré and aliasing as the NEX6.
Sony is missing a growing market here.

Also it makes no sense to drop the NEX name. For me it was synonymous with Sonys mirrorless cams.
Alpha sounds more like their old DSLRs.
It could also confuse people as there are still two different mounts.

6:17 pm - Tuesday, April 22, 2014

#9 Gary

When you say, “the A6000 is currently the best compact system camera for capturing fast moving subjects.” Is this overall with image quality weighing in? As former Nikon 1 owner and current Nex owner, I can say that the N1 system can easily track moving objects. In addition, it’s burst speed shred the A6000 every day of the week. Please elaborate on your statement.

6:32 pm - Tuesday, April 22, 2014

#10 Low Budget Dave

I have to agree that you should make a disclaimer about the lens in each section. 

The prime lens, if typical, has a faster and more accurate autofocus than the kit lens.  So your statements about AF have been skewed by the manufacturer. 

I also find the color on the kit lens to be flat and over-processed.  Even the RAW files contain substantial distortion correction, making comparisons to other cameras problematic. 

If I were Nikon, I would send you the little S1 with the blazing fast F1.2 lens attached.

6:53 am - Wednesday, April 23, 2014

#11 Dsmeltz

Only problem I have is not that you used a different lens.  But that the price boxes do not show the proce for the tested product.  The price is for the camrea with the kit lens.  It should show the proce for the tested configuration.

12:01 pm - Wednesday, April 23, 2014

#12 Mike Voltin

Nobody wants to acknowledge that the king is wearing no clothes? Really? Not a single commenter realizes that this is not a real review but the recital of Sony’s marketing language and then some personal opinion of the reviewer?  Please read again the first couple paragraph of the conclusion or any other section. There absolutely no indication that the system was actually tested. You can find reviews of Sony a6000’s C-AF in different settings where it failed to track an object beyond the initial first two frames; reviewers actually post each frame and describe the process.  You can be confident that they actually did test the camera and are free to draw your own conclusions. Unfortunately, there is no indication that the camera was tested or how it was tested. It is just a discussion around an official Sony marketing language and few sample pics. It is sad that this site is turning into another fake review sites intended to draw traffic for ad revenues.

3:29 pm - Wednesday, April 23, 2014

#13 BlackBox

Sony NEX is a very WEIRD camera. Every camera maker out there (Nikon, Pentax, Panasonic, Olympus, Samsung) have realized one very important thing - what people REALLY want from mirrorless is compactness. Yes, there are “enthusiasts” who want “a second camera”, but those geeks will carry a giraffe if you tell them it improves image quality.

Regular punters want those cameras to be SMALL. And their lenses, TOO! However, Sony’s lenses for the ex-NEX-renamed-Alpha-which-is-also-an-old-Minolta-A mount are bigger than most of their full-frame counterparts! As a result you get a very miniature camera… with a huge lens sticking out of it, which completely undermines the whole idea of compactness. “Here, this is the smallest watch in the world… and that over there is the 40-ton truck with the battery for it.”

And that’s the reason I never bought a NEX.

5:35 pm - Wednesday, April 23, 2014

#14 Scott

The Zeiss Touit 32/1.8 on the a6000 is DA BOMB!

10:56 pm - Thursday, May 1, 2014

#15 engell

This is a kit lens.. just the high tier.
sold as ILCE-6000z package, and yes its expensive.

12:23 pm - Friday, May 2, 2014

#16 kawika nui

An odd “Main Rivals” section.  You pit the a6000 (APS-C, 24mp) against Micro 4/3 (16mp), against Nikon 1” (14mp), and so on.  The only thing missing is a 12mp 1/2.3” P&S or two.  These odd matchups are way beyond apples and oranges; more like apples and turnips, or apples and leeks.  It’s like something Snapsort would dream up.  What on earth were you thinking?

5:39 am - Wednesday, May 21, 2014

#17 gango

sony a6000 vs. olympus e-m10 vs samsung nx30
can anyone help me choose which camera
each one has cons and pros

6:59 am - Wednesday, May 21, 2014

#18 Larry

Will/can Sony add back their excellent electronic leveling gauge from the NEX 6 o the a6000? It is almost essential with the new and wonderful Zeiss Touit 12mm, made for NEX cameras.

11:41 am - Wednesday, July 2, 2014

#19 Kirk Bruner

Eight hundred dollars is not the price of a “consumer-focused camera”. Ordinary consumers are spending two hundred to five hundred dollars on cameras. They’re mostly buying P&S cameras.

3:37 am - Friday, July 25, 2014

#20 steve

Where is the dual axis level gauge you mentioned in the review????? you have reviewed this camera have’nt you ??????

8:37 am - Monday, July 28, 2014

#21 steveau

Where is this dual axis leveling gauge that you supossibly reviewed on this camera Mark Huh ????????????????????????????

8:59 am - Monday, July 28, 2014

#22 Tres Young

No, the A6000 does not have a built-in electronic level, yes it is hands down one of the best digital cameras made at any price. I suspect that the majority of negative comments are from folks locked into another system that don’t want to accept that they could have bought twice the camera they currently own for the same or less money. Rent the A6000 and the E-mount Sony 50 f1.8 one weekend and after shooting keeper after keeper after keeper you’ll never look back. The A6000 is a technological marvel that stands head and shoulders over any APS-C system (and many higher end systems) currently available. Don’t take my word for it though, rent one for a day or two.

7:39 am - Monday, October 13, 2014

#23 Claude B.

I agree with you Tres Young.

More then that, more professional photographer are switching to this Sony A6000.
Excellent comments here…

« Extensive Highly Detailed Review of the Sony a6000 » https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21HxRnSlPzc

“Pin Up Shoot In Abandoned Detroit St. Agnes Cathedral Sony A6000 Frames Per Second » with Jason Lanierhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPlIuzm-p6U&index=1&list=PLbTQxOS4wmCPWhEekslsnnUpuTCH94SXO

6:30 pm - Monday, October 27, 2014

#24 Rex Decker

The Sony website now offers $200 off the E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS E-mount Zoom Lens if bundled with the Body and 16-50mm lens kit.  Plus a free Sony branded camera bag and a 64gb SD card.  My order total was $802 with tax, camera body, 2 lenses, bag, and SD card. AND shipping was free! I am so excited.  I have been comparing this camera with several others for 4 months and I can’t see how it could be beat.  My only 2 wishes are that the screen flipped out, for recording videos… and that the Sony lenses were not so expensive.

6:45 pm - Sunday, November 30, 2014

#25 Dave

@Rex Decker:  I think you are right about the lenses.  The high-end Sony lenses have great color and contrast, but by the time you spend $4K on lenses, it defeats half the fun of a great $600 camera. 

The only other thing I would keep an eye on is the Sony bag.  I had one of the zippers on my Sony bag pop open and drop my lens out.

8:58 pm - Sunday, November 30, 2014

#26 Larry not the cable guy

Why are you not offering 720p video recording options in your new cameras sony? you still offer vga, plz include 720p as well.

8:03 am - Tuesday, December 2, 2014

#27 Claude B.

Rumors is keek come about a new SonyA7000 in Jan. 2015!!

http://www.dailycameranews.com/2014/12/sony-a7000-announcement-date/

7:25 am - Thursday, December 18, 2014

#28 Nataraju

Excellent camera!

7:06 pm - Saturday, December 20, 2014

#29 Max Green LRPS

Bought one recently, went out to buy a Fuji, did not like the lack of a decent sized grip.
It really is the best Digital I have bought so far.
Last Camera was a Nikon D5000 and this has made me feel the Nikon is redundant now.

4:00 pm - Thursday, March 12, 2015

#30 Glen Foprbes

I just purchased the Sony HVL-F60M top of the line flash to go with the Sony a6000 just to find out that the camera does not support wireless off camera capability. The literature from Sony either misleads you or hides the fact so you need to be careful if you think that this $1,200 combination will provide off camera flash capability. Beware it does not.

12:42 am - Friday, March 20, 2015

#31 Max Green

Hi Glen,
Try this method.
https://us.en.kb.sony.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/31424/~/how-to-set-up-and-use-a-wireless-flash.

1:49 pm - Sunday, March 22, 2015

#32 Glen Forbes

The link you provided clearly states that the internal flash in the A6000 cannot be used to trigger an off camera flash. It requires another flash. It seems that Sony wants you to purchase two flash units, one of which you may not want on in any regard, you only need it to act as a control unit.

If you have access to the camera and flash give it a try, I could not get it to work.

It is also disappointing that Sony did not respond to my message left on their sport page. All I got was an email from someone in thier TV division saying to call on non toll free number to get support. Not the type of service I expected.

3:07 pm - Sunday, March 22, 2015

#33 Mel snyder

If you are willing to invest $10 in a photocell trigger, you can use the A6000 (or any other camera with an internal flash) to trigger any external flash.

You just put the trigger on the hot shoe of the external flash, set the A6000 flash to 1/2 or 1/4 power, and adjust the aperture and external flash power to get the result you want. This is how we did it in the pre-digital era, and there are lots of Chinese marketers of these triggers on eBay.

If you need to shoot in an environment where others may be shooting flash, there are inexpensive radio triggers you can buy to put int the A6000 hot shoe to trigger a remote flash.

3:52 pm - Sunday, March 22, 2015

#34 don

Your photography skills are in need of work. I looked at some of these pics at full size and some from the Pentax K-S1.  It’s hard to tell what you are trying to focus on and the shutter speeds are a bit odd.  Why not up ISO a little and shoot a little faster.  I think you need to write less and use a camera more.

2:03 am - Monday, March 30, 2015

#35 Brian

I am somewhat at a loss here. I have read so much about this (apparently overrated) camera and every sample image I see coming off this camera is mediocre at best.

I was given the link to your sample images by someone in a YouTube thread (raving that a pro photographer switched from Nikon DSLRs to the A6000). After looking at your sample images I am still left looking at mediocre images that really are not of professional standard at all. The cheapest entry level DSLRs cream this camera for image quality.

I’m sitting here shaking my head in amazement for all the attention this poor-image-quality camera is gaining. You gave it 5 stars for image quality and yet your sample images show that its quality is hardly better than the images coming from a decent point-n-shoot compact camera.

11:22 pm - Friday, April 10, 2015

#36 Brian

@Tres Young You typed:“I suspect that the majority of negative comments are from folks locked into another system that don’t want to accept that they could have bought twice the camera they currently own for the same or less money.”

You are in dreamland and it is funny how people always assume others should think what you think or like what you like. I think this camera is the most overrated camera ever for one simple reason: Every sample image I can find that came off the A6000 is of mediocre to useless quality.

Would you care to share with me a link to some high quality images that were taken by a Sony A6000? I love all of the features the camera has to offer and the price is spectacular for the features on offer, but the price is actually a little high for the lousy image quality I keep seeing. Please convince me otherwise as I may well buy an A6000 if someone can show me it can take quality images in the right hands.

11:30 pm - Friday, April 10, 2015

#37 Mel Snyder

@Brian - I suggest you check out this photographer on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/52986833@N00/with/16479898304/.

It really isn’t fair to ask “someone can show me it can take quality images in the right hands.” Such a photographer will make great images with whatever s/he’s handed.

In fact, I think if you scan through the photographs on the A6000 Flickr group, you will see other images shot with the A6000 that are quite good.

I don’t own an A6000 - I shoot an A7 because I have a lot of legacy lenses, and like to shoot them in the perspective I remember them from my film days.

However, I accidentally packed my 50mm f2 Summicron-M instead of my intended 35mm f1.4 Summilux-M when I hurried to San Francisco to be there when my first grandchild was born - but on the NEX-6, it still worked well: https://flic.kr/p/o8sLQh

1:22 am - Saturday, April 11, 2015

#38 Dave

@Brian As far as I can tell, pretty much every camera these days takes good pictures.  If you hate the pictures coming out of the A6000, then don’t buy it.  But statistically, the only thing wrong with most of the pictures is that they were taken with the 16-50, which was designed to be small, rather than great.

If you want to compare the A6000 to a bigger camera in the same price range, then you need to compare it using the same size lens, too.  The Nikon lens you are comparing it to is the 18-55, which weighs 265 grams.  Of course it is better, it is more than twice the size.  If you were to grab the Sony 18-55, (which is still 30% lighter than the Nikon), you would find the pictures almost identical. 

Don’t listen to me, though, listen to the hundreds of people who have reviewed that lens and/or that camera. 

You are entitled to your opinion, of course.  Even if you have an axe to grind against Sony, your opinion is still just as valid as everyone else’s.  But your opinion does not outweigh professional testing organizations like DXO, or whatever. 

And when you look at the results from professional tests, virtually every camera of that generation is so similar that it doesn’t matter which one you grab.  They all take almost exactly the same pictures.

The only difference is which lens you use, but you knew that, didn’t you?
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D7100-versus-Sony-A6000___865_942

3:24 am - Saturday, April 11, 2015

#39 Claude B.

@Brian, the secret is the quality of lens, the A6000 is a superb camera but some lens are fantastic. Also the other factor is the photographe itself.
There are many groups devoted only on this Sony A6000 it could be on Flickr or Google+
Please, do your own DDs on it.

There is a long waiting list waiting to get this jewell. (In Canada only the back order is now over 1000 A6000.)

2:08 pm - Saturday, April 11, 2015

#40 Brian

@Mel Snyder Thanks for the link, there are some great images there, especially compared to what I have been looking at. The camera is looking a lot better after seeing those images.

To clarify my comment about seeing better image quality with the camera in the right hands, I was simply meaning in the hands of someone who is steady and does not take shots with movement blur (I have seen a ton of shots exhibiting movement blur from A6000 cameras). Also, someone who gets the exposure right. Obviously, the skill of the photographer will determine the artistic quality of the image, but I was struggling to find basic clear and correctly exposed shots LOL.

I am very much into photographing people. I cannot find ANY images from the A6000 exhibiting straight out good image quality (sharpness, detail and lack of noise or artefacts around eyes and teeth). The majority of images I can find online taken with the A6000 of people are either very slightly blurred, lacking detail and/or exhibiting noise and artefacts. I did a general Flickr search for “Sony A6000” and about 70% of the portrait type shots were in black and white and were over-sharpened, if anything. I just cannot find a single sharp, noise-free colour image of a human face from the A6000 and if I bought one that would be 75% of my subject matter.

12:00 am - Sunday, April 12, 2015

#41 Brian

@Mel Snyder Hi again Mel, I just looked at the link to the image with your grandchild. Beautiful image, thanks for sharing!!

12:05 am - Sunday, April 12, 2015

#42 Brian

@Dave Thanks for your response. I agree with you that many cameras are very similar in image quality these days with the amount of noise being the biggest differentiator.

I had a look at some Flickr images and I can see the A6000 certainly captures far better quality with better lenses; more than I would have expected.

The only thing I haven’t found yet is a good quality colour portrait. I was interested in buying a Sony A6000 after reading all the hype, but most of my photography is about people, so I have to be convinced it can capture quality portraits. The ones I have seen have exhibited noise (even at low ISOs) and lack of detail. Some were so bad they looked like they were taken on a cheap point’n'shoot camera. No kidding, the skin looks so blurred in some shots (overly-aggressive noise removal?) that they almost look painted. Those images were only taken at ISO 400/800, which is not that high for a modern camera.

12:14 am - Sunday, April 12, 2015

#43 Mel Snyder

@brian The first thing you need to accept is that if you are capable of shooting good portraits with a camera, Check https://www.flickr.com/photos/melsnyder/17094402096/ - I was a junior in high school in 1959, shooting with a Leica IIIa and a 90mm f4 Elmar lens, uncoated.

Now fast forward to this past January, a pro bono job https://www.flickr.com/photos/melsnyder/sets/72157648662709124/ for a top NGO, reproduced on their web site and in the Boston Globe. Shot with the full-frame Sony A7 and a 1990s Canon FDn 85mm f1.2L and the Sony-Zeiss FE 35mm f2.8. All available light - bad light - in a private mansion. I had about a minute or so to shoot each portrait, with a big party going on downstairs - and the head of the NGO wanted “different looks and backgrounds.”

You don’t need to see portraits with the A6000. The limits are not in the camera or lens or sensor - they are 99.999% in the photographer. The tool is irrelevant.

I am a totally incompetent artist. I remember the first time I tried to use the widely regarded Corel Draw, and every fractal and similar drawing program since that early Windows effort. I simply don’t “have it” and the tools that more enable the competent computer artist are useless in the hands of one with no talent for the craft.

If you think the A6000 is capable of making good images, and you believe yourself a competent portrait photographer, buy it. There are no shortage of legacy and current lenses with which you will make spectacular images.

12:40 pm - Sunday, April 12, 2015

#44 Dave

@brian

You might want to take a look at Derrick Logan:
https://500px.com/photo/97924079/tamara-by-derrick-logan-

or Ahmed L: https://500px.com/photo/73514561/friends-for-ever-by-ahmedqtr81

or Craig Martin: https://www.flickr.com/photos/loubella/

I can’t recommend my own, for various reasons, but none of the reasons have much to do with the camera:  https://practical.shutterfly.com/pictures/713

7:27 pm - Sunday, April 12, 2015

#45 Tres Young

@Brian
Personally I ditched my entire Canon set up after shooting with this camera partly because of superior performance but also because my admittedly aging 5D and assorted lenses felt more like a boat anchor than a camera.
I won’t enter into the lens debate here other than to say that IMHO the A6000 with the E-mount Sony 50 f1.8 will keep up with or outperform any other (DSLR or Mirrorless) APS-C camera / 50 mm lens combo currently on the market within shouting distance of the same price range (let’s say within $1000). And by “outperform” I am referring to both image quality and camera feature set. That is just my opinion though and since in the U.S. everyone still retains the right to be wrong I’ll concede your point that I could very well be in dream land. But again, don’t take my word for it, just go rent one. Disclaimer: I haven’t been keeping up with the latest and greatest technology so this post is based on my experience at the time that I purchased the A6000 in 2014.

10:42 pm - Sunday, April 12, 2015

Entry Tags

hd video, hd, 3 inch LCD, 1080p, compact system camera, hdmi, wi-fi, wireless, mirrorless, csc, sony, nfc, 24 megapixel, wi fi, flash, android, OLED, iphone, 11fps, playmemories, apps, a6000, Sony A6000, alpha 6000, Sony A6000 Review, a 6000

Tracker Pixel for Entry