Softitech - Download Latest Games Softwares Movies Tips and Educational Stuff: DSLR

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="hub-caption">
 <h3 class="satory-h3">
<br /></h3><script async src="//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>

<ins class="adsbygoogle"
style="display:inline-block;width:300px;height:250px"
data-ad-client="ca-pub-1586787011300843"
data-ad-slot="2065645016"></ins>
<script>
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
</script>

</div>
<img class="storyimg_mar10" height="270" src="http://media2.intoday.in/indiatoday/images/stories/a6000_650_031315034809.jpg" width="400" />
     
  <div class="hub-caption">
 
<div class="story-details">

</div>
<div class="divclear">
 </div>
The whole photography landscape is in the middle of a major upheaval.
 The way people click photos and why they click photos is changing. The 
tools they use to click photos are also changing. Almost two decades 
after the world of photography saw a major shift with the arrival of 
digital cameras, this world is changing again due to smartphones. <br />
But
 these are still early days. We don't know how the photography scene is 
going to look like in the next five years. Will everyone move to 
smartphones to click images? Or will the mirrorless cameras edge out the
 DSLR cameras just the way digital ones replaced the film cameras? Or 
will it be an end to all of these as something new -- like lightfield 
photography offered by Lytro -- takes over the world? We don't know. <br />
But
 today it is about the mirrorless cameras vs the DSLR cameras, as they 
stand currently. We are hearing a lot from the companies making 
mirrorless cameras that they are as good as DSLR cameras and yet carry 
along them the convenience that comes from their smaller sizes. But is 
it true? Should you buy a mirrorless camera nowadays and not a DSLR 
camera?<br />
Before you read any further, let me tell you this is 
not a review of the Sony A6000, a mirrorless camera. Instead, it is just
 a user report from an amateur photographer. But this will be of some 
help if you are trying to decide between a mirrorless camera and a DSLR.<br />
I
 use a DSLR camera -- Nikon D3100 -- with several lenses. I had tried a 
few mirrorless cameras in the past, but there were always some issues. 
Though the FujiFilm X100S two years ago turned out to be almost 
flawless. But it had a fixed lens and you can't call it a DSLR 
replacement.<br />
So, recently when Sony sent a review unit of 
A6000, a mirrorless camera that can be used with different lenses, I 
decided to give it a thorough try. I carried it with me to Barcelona 
where I attended the Mobile World Congress, hoping that it would save me
 from lugging around bulky DSLR camera and big lenses. <br />
While I
 had the DSLR camera with me -- still don't trust a mirrorless camera 
fully -- on most occasions the A6000 did a decent job. It was paired 
with a 16-50mm lens -- on APS-C crop sensor this translates to 24-75mm 
-- and that made it a perfect tool, at least on paper, for street 
photography. <br />
So how did it fare? <br />
The overall 
shooting experience with the A6000 was good but it still wasn't in the 
league of what I could get with the D3100, let alone something like the 
D5300, which was more natural competitor due to the price of the Sony 
camera. But that doesn't mean the A6000 is a bad camera. Far from it, it
 is a superb camera. But it has limitations. <br />
But first the good bits. <br />
If
 you hate carrying a DSLR camera but can't help it because with smaller 
shooters you don't get the same image quality, you can ditch your DSLR. 
The A6000 clicks almost as good images as what you will get from a 
similarly-priced DSLR camera. And the reason for that is pretty clear: 
Sony makes the images sensor for almost all Nikon cameras nowadays. The 
same image sensor that goes into Sony's cameras, probably goes into the 
Nikon cameras. And these image sensors are also better than the ones 
going into the Canon DSLR cameras. <br />
The difference between 
various cameras when it comes to image quality lies in the way the 
cameras process images, the lenses and the way images are clicked 
(something that depends on photographer and camera controls).<br />
When
 used in the auto mode, I found that A6000 performance is not so 
impressive when compared to what you get with a DSLR camera from Nikon 
or Canon. Both Nikon and Canon are dealing with demanding photographers 
for years and they have managed to fine-tune their image processing to a
 level where it is consistently good. While using the A6000, I got a 
feeling that Sony still needs work to get most out of its image sensors,
 especially when I was trying to capture scenes with lots of shadows and
 highlights. <br />
But use it in manual mode, shoot RAW and the 
difference vanishes. This is a big thing because this means you don't 
need a huge bulky camera to capture good images. Talking of the manual 
mode, the A6000 makes it easier to use this mode. The way aperture, 
shutter speed and ISO is controlled in manual mode is not perfect (I 
would have liked one more click wheel) but it is pretty good and as good
 as what you get on an entry-level DSLR camera. <br />
The other 
impressive bit about the A6000 is its electronic view finder (EVF). In 
the past I never found a good EVF. Even the one in the X100S wasn't nice
 enough. In comparison, the DSLR cameras have an optical view finders, 
which shows scenes clear and sharp, especially while shooting action. 
But the EVF in A6000 is very good. It is so good that I often used it, 
instead of relying on the LCD screen, something that I had not done with
 any mirrorless camera in the past. It also has a trick of its own, that
 gives it an edge over DSLR cameras. Just like other EVF, the one in 
A6000 shows you exactly the same image you are going to click because it
 shows you the image that camera sensor is seeing. In comparison, with 
the optical view finder you see the image that is in front of you. It 
doesn't show the exposure though you do get a few numbers and metering 
bar that gives you an idea of the exposure. <br />
In summary, the 
good bits about the A6000 are its small and compact size, good EVF, good
 image quality and (for a mirrorless camera) good handling and controls.
 <br />
But there is one area where the A6000 fell short. At least 
in my experience. Surprisingly so because according to Sony this one 
area is strong point of A6000. The Sony shooter, just like most other 
mirrorless cameras, still struggles with focus in challenging 
conditions. <br />
In good light, the focus is no issue for A6000. 
Even in bad light, it is mostly decent. But bad light, chaotic scenes 
with lots of items and it gets difficult for the A6000. In a trade event
 where I was shooting a lot of small objects -- read smartphones -- in 
bad light, the A6000 often struggled to nail the focus on the main 
subject. Focus was also an issue when shooting extremely fast subjects 
like birds using continuous shooting mode. For example, these are the 
images I got while trying to shoot these seagulls diving on a piece of 
bread held in hand- <span class="storycentimg" style="border: 0px solid #d7d7d7; float: left; margin: 2px 15px 2px 0px; width: 650px;"><span style="width: 650px;"><img align="left" alt="" border="0" hspace="0" src="http://media2.intoday.in/indiatoday/images/stories//2015March/gulls-and-a6000_031315035627.jpg" style="border: 1px solid #d7d7d7; margin: 2px 0px;" title="" valign="top" vspace="0" /></span></span><br />
In
 comparison, the D3100 was more assured and confident in its focus 
abilities. The D3100 is an entry-level DSLR camera and yet it managed to
 give me a better perspective and handling while shooting action. <br />
However,
 just like the impression I got with sensor, the focus performance in 
A6000 is not an issue with the hardware. Companies like Nikon and Canon 
are making these high-performance cameras, such as the D4S and the 1DX, 
for so long that finally they have fine-tuned the focus systems in their
 cameras to an extent where the performance is mostly good. Sony, 
however, still needs more work with its systems, especially for 
mirrorless cameras. Or may be it was something related to the lens 
because the kit lens are often not the fastest ones around. <br />
For street shooting, the focus system in A6000 was adequate. But when the going got tough, it also faltered. <br />
In
 fact, the focus mechanism is one area where the DSLR cameras are still 
unmatched. And no, I am not talking about focus in low light or shooting
 flowers. I am talking about shooting a seagull while it is diving into 
the ocean or a footballer as he bends his knee to give the ball a final 
push towards the goal. When you are shooting action scenes with multiple
 objects in it, you still need the precision of a DSLR camera. <br />
To sum it up, here is the A6000 story:<br />
--
 You no longer need to carry a bulky DSLR camera if you want great 
images or portraits during street shooting. You can do it with a 
mirrorless camera. <br />
-- Mirrorless cameras are more fun to use due to smaller size. <br />
--
 The electronic viewfinders in mirrorless cameras are getting really 
really good. In fact, even if the DSLR's survive in the coming years, 
they will probably come with EFV. <br />
-- The A6000 is a wonderful
 general purpose camera. Though it is little pricey, considering the 
image quality that similarly-priced Nikon D5300 offers. <br />
-- If
 you are buying the A6000, stay clear of the kit lens (16-50mm). Get 
something else, probably a 35mm prime. You are anyways going to use this
 camera for general purpose photography so you won't miss the zoom. With
 prime you will get better image quality. You can add a zoom later when 
you have got a hang of the camera. <br />
-- The only place where a
 mirrorless camera like A6000 suffers from is the focus performance. You
 still can't shoot a cheetah running at full speed with these cameras 
and get images that a mid-range DSLR camera would manage. May be some 
expert photographers can but most people can't.<br />
Personally, 
for me the D3100 is still a better camera than the A6000, though it is 
not as fun to use as the Sony camera. The smaller size means A6000 is 
more fun. But the autofocus performance of the D3100 is a key point here
 because there are occasions when I shoot wildlife. But if I were doing 
only the street photography, I wouldn't mind the A6000. </div>
<div id="new_selection_block0.7302469207701018" style="background-color: transparent; border: medium none; color: black; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
<br /></div><script async src="//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>

<ins class="adsbygoogle"
style="display:inline-block;width:300px;height:250px"
data-ad-client="ca-pub-1586787011300843"
data-ad-slot="2065645016"></ins>
<script>
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
</script>

</div>

Using Sony A6000: Can a mirrorless camera make you dump bulky DSLR?

The whole photography landscape is in the middle of a major upheaval. The way people click phot...