So now that I have LR i can look at some files properly from the a6000
my dad shot the first bunch jpg only and at higher iso the jpg rendering is abominable, i mean utterly useless better off using an iphone 5s.... and no thats not a joke. I would completely forget about using jpg out of this camera I would rather an iphone... unless all the jpgs are low iso and properly exposed as there is next to no shadow recovery ability on jpg files
RAW low iso shadow recovery is nothing short of amazing. ZERO pattern noise but obviously alot of noise gets pulled in so IRL you cant pull up too much unless you plan on painting in ALOT of NR. but still much better than canon if you like to under expose by 4 stops...
Colour... well... I hate it. After using canon cameras for a few years since switching from nikon I can't stand the OOC colour rendering and this is using the zeiss 16-70 f4 lens! everything seems to be very green heavy, I have tried some manipulation in LR but cant get it to get close to the colours i get from the EOS M or 5Dmk3. perhaps with alot more work colour could be fixed maybe PBD could give me some tips here because I'm not that good .
resolution at low isos looks great pretty much on par with the 5Dmk3 for details. high isos = bleh (really bad)
low iso resolution vs EOS-M the a6000 wins but with the 11-22 the EOS-M is really not far off at higher isos the EOS-M is better if you get the exposure right. underexpose too much and its lost in fixed pattern noise.
all up after using both this and the EOS-M with 11-22 I prefer the EOS-M as a complete package (I know this is heresy and i will most likely burn in internet hell for saying it ) but the EOS-M is alot smaller, I like UWA lenses and the 11-22 is one of the most amazing lens purchases i have made in recent years.
I feel while the a6000 leaves the EOS-M AF for dead in good light (no much difference in bad light) the image quality of the EOS-M is overall better, better colours better detail across a wider range of iso's.
for my dad the a6000 is a pretty good camera though, he wasn't invested in anything, got a nice zeiss 16-70 f4 zoom for it and it's significantly smaller and lighter than a dslr which he definately did not want, My mum has a 600D and 15-85 which i got her. (I feel this combo is still better than the a6000 too as an overall package FPS is not really a factor for them)
All up my summary of the a6000 is that it does not live up to the internet hype. it doesn't come close unless you are looking at a few fairly unrelated metrics ie low iso shadow noise, AF spread, FPS. Higher iso performance and IQ is lacking
It is probably better at capturing action than the 600D and definately better than the EOS-M. the wide AF spread is good but not any different to the EOS-M which also has a wide AF point spread. For me the biggest problems are the rapid mid to high iso IQ loss and the crap colour rendering out of camera vs canon.
I haven't attached any images but will dig some out and post them.
Thanks for the info, although I'm sure this will ruffle a few feathers
Can you share a few low and high ISO RAW files?