# EOS M or Sony a6000



## Triggyman (Feb 10, 2015)

I need your opinion between 2 cameras I am considering to buy:

EOS M1 or the Sony a6000.

I'm sure there are a lot yelling "no brainer - get the a6000!" but my circumstances are different.

I used to have a white EOS-M with 18-55 and the 90EX flash during a flash sale, but my beloved cousin tried it out and loved it so I gave it to her. 

I know a vendor that is selling and EOS-M with the EFM 22mm f/2, EFM 18-55, 90EX flash, extra battery, tabletop and full size tripods, filters (albeit cheapo), SD card, a larger flash unit (I don't know what brand, though), etc. for $500. So if we factor that all in, it's a real bargain. 

The EOS M fit my needs before I gave it away because I just wanted to have a camera with an APS-C size sensor in a small package, for relatively cheap. Even if it was snatched away from me by a robber, I wouldn't fall down on the ground and cry like a baby.

Or forget the EOS-M and go for the more capable a6000? That's $250 more to pay with only a 16-50 Power zoom kit lens, and that teeny weeny uppy poppy flash. 

Any input is highly appreciated!

Thanks! 

PS I also own a SX50 - cheaper, but produces muddy pics.


----------



## Vivid Color (Feb 10, 2015)

Although it has its limitations, I really love my little M and I especially love the fact that I can put any Canon lens on it with an adapter. And I can use any canon flash with it. It weighs next to nothing and I can carry it all day without being tired. And it's small enough that I can put it in far more purses and bags than I can my full frame 6D. 

The other alternative you might consider is the SL1.


----------



## Triggyman (Feb 10, 2015)

Vivid Color said:


> Although it has its limitations, I really love my little M and I especially love the fact that I can put any Canon lens on it with an adapter. And I can use any canon flash with it. It weighs next to nothing and I can carry it all day without being tired. And it's small enough that I can put it in far more purses and bags than I can my full frame 6D.
> 
> The other alternative you might consider is the SL1.



Thank you for your suggestion. I too am still kind of being drawn back to the M, in spite of it being almost 3 years old and superseded by some later models. I think its simplicity, being like a super-Powershot with a significantly larger sensor and being relatively cheap makes it worth mulling over. And two lenses for less than 500 bucks with lots of other goodies is very attractive indeed.

About the SL1...hmmm. I'd rather go for the Compact shape than DSLR


----------



## bf (Feb 10, 2015)

If you like M I suggest looking on eBay for M2 with a kit including either ef-m 11-22 or ef-m 55-200. I saw the latter below $450 where usually the lens alone runs for this much.


----------



## martti (Feb 10, 2015)

My experience with the Sony a6000 is a positive one. The picture quality is good. The EVF is clear and informative. It has WiFi, you can load your pictures to the net directly. You can load applications for different functions like time lapse photography. Its 10 fps burst is very cool. The kit lens is compact though its quality is...well, you know...OK for FB pictures. You get a cheap adaptor (not the expensive one like I did) and put a Canon L lens on it and you get very good quality pictures.
The obsolete EOS M does not match the Sony an any aspect.


----------



## Triggyman (Feb 10, 2015)

bf said:


> If you like M I suggest looking on eBay for M2 with a kit including either ef-m 11-22 or ef-m 55-200. I saw the latter below $450 where usually the lens alone runs for this much.



Thanks for the suggestion! I'd look around more - it's not that criticial I buy now


----------



## Triggyman (Feb 10, 2015)

martti said:


> My experience with the Sony a6000 is a positive one. The picture quality is good. The EVF is clear and informative. It has WiFi, you can load your pictures to the net directly. You can load applications for different functions like time lapse photography. Its 10 fps burst is very cool. The kit lens is compact though its quality is...well, you know...OK for FB pictures. You get a cheap adaptor (not the expensive one like I did) and put a Canon L lens on it and you get very good quality pictures.
> The obsolete EOS M does not match the Sony an any aspect.



Thanks, I totally forgot about lens adaptors - I 've always thought only about the E-mount lenses. In that case, it's not like am totally switching to a different system, albeit with the Canon lens the a6000's other autofocus features like eye detect won't work I heard. 

I got more questions for for you if you don't mind answering:

1) Is the adaptor sold separately? What did you buy? Any suggestions?
2) How is the small pop-up flash when you use it? I heard the flash exposure is hit and miss on this one.


----------



## martti (Feb 10, 2015)

I bought the Metabones adapter that cost me 450 dollars. Looking back, this money could almost have bought the _excellent_ Carl Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 with native Sony autofocus. Done what's done. The more I use the Metabones the less I regret. You can get the adapter that suits your budget and other demands from B&H or Adorama. I got mine from a Hong Kong eBay shop http://www.ebay.com/usr/avt_uk. 

It is supposed to connect Canon EF lenses to the autofocus and exposure and with the *L* lenses I tested (24mm, 35mm and 85mm), it does. The autofocus works but it goes all the way back and forth before it hits the target. You will not like the Sony/Metabones autofocus. 

On the other hand, the manual focus confirmation is fascinating: With fast lenses you can really put the sharp zone where you want it. It glows white on the EVF. Since the focusing happens on the sensor, the focus really is where it is supposed to be. Unless, of course you have a lens with a lot of focus shift stopped down but that is another story. I really like the way things drop to focus with the manual focus confirm. 
It is like a range finder on speed and steroids. Did I already say I like it?

No problems with the exposure. The picture quality is, of course as good as you can get on an APS sensor today. If you shoot RAW you can take advantage of the latitude of the Sony sensor. It makes you want the same in full frame. 

With various EF lenses (20mm, 28mm, 50mm) the camera behaves erratically, shutting itself off. 
There may be firmware upgrades in the pipeline to correct these problems. Maybe. I would not count on them.

The silly little flash works great as a fill-in flash. While looking pathetic, at -1.5 stop correction it does exactly what you'd expect it to do on a backlighted contrasted subject. I think the sensor it uses to control the exposure is in the centre of the image. As the sole light source, well, you have to stay realistic. I haven't tried it as such.

I ordered the 20mm pancake which becomes a 30mm equivalent on the APS sensor for snapping around while biking etc. The 16-70mm f/4 Zeiss I got as my first lens is a bit bulky and it zooms the non-Canon way. The picture quality is very good. I should have got the kit zoom and the 20mm and the 55mm primes right away from the start. Probably with use, the Zeiss will prove irreplaceable. I find the Zeiss brand a bit expensive for what they are delivering. Despite that, the 21mm Zeiss f/2.8 is still my dream wide angle for the Canon FF but that's another story.

If you get the Sony a6000, the camera will not be limiting your photography. You will be overwhelmed byt the amount of technical finesse they have put in this little camera. I sort of feel that it deserves the effort that it takes to learn the way it has been thought out. It is that good. It is the state of the art of the mirrorless APS system cameras as for the moment, no two ways about it.


----------



## Triggyman (Feb 11, 2015)

Many thanks to your detailed response, Martti! Very useful information! I'm becoming more convinced it's better to get the a6000.


----------



## martti (Feb 11, 2015)

Triggyman said:


> Many thanks to your detailed response, Martti! Very useful information! I'm becoming more convinced it's better to get the a6000.



YO!, Triggyman, I just hope you do not end up hating me.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 11, 2015)

I don't have any experience of the A6000, but I have a not very often used M (1), the thing is I keep picking it up and playing with the settings and I can't work out why but the thing is firing out quality shots like never before.

I now have it on Auto ISO, Face Detect, etc and the thing is just amazing, focus speed is way better than I remember it and the IQ iso at 2,000-3,200 etc is very high. And for me the EOS compatibility is the icing on the cake, no other small camera, with a massive sensor, comes close to that kind of functionality.


----------



## Triggyman (Feb 11, 2015)

martti said:


> Triggyman said:
> 
> 
> > Many thanks to your detailed response, Martti! Very useful information! I'm becoming more convinced it's better to get the a6000.
> ...



I will "hate" you in a good way (LOL). If and when I'll pick up an a6000, it will be the first time (since getting my first Canon SLR exactly 30 years) ago that I'll be purchasing a non-Canon camera. (AV-1 -> EOS 300 -> S50 -> S3IS -> A750 -> 60D -> Elph 100 -> 7D -> 5D3 -> EOS M -> SX50HS) ;D


----------



## Triggyman (Feb 11, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> I don't have any experience of the A6000, but I have a not very often used M (1), the thing is I keep picking it up and playing with the settings and I can't work out why but the thing is firing out quality shots like never before.
> 
> I now have it on Auto ISO, Face Detect, etc and the thing is just amazing, focus speed is way better than I remember it and the IQ iso at 2,000-3,200 etc is very high. And for me the EOS compatibility is the icing on the cake, no other small camera, with a massive sensor, comes close to that kind of functionality.



Thank you very much for the input, privatebydesign! I did have the EOS M before and it did produce better quality pictures on par with the last generation Rebels. With a vendor's offer of 500 bucks with 2 lenses and lots of extras made me rethink of going back to the M if it was worth it.


----------



## JPAZ (Feb 11, 2015)

FWIW, I have an M with which I have an ambivalent relationship and (while not the a6000) my wife as a NEX 7. There is no doubt that the Sony is a very capable camera and that it has a lot of capabilities plus a wide array of compatible lenses. The issue I have with it is it is just a bit difficult to use in terms of changing settings on the fly. My M, which is way slow to focus (sorry but it does not compare to the 5Diii - but that's an unfair comparison) and hunts a lot with some of my EF lenses using the adapter but I can change settings quickly and the IQ is on a par with a Rebel. Maybe it is just because I am so familiar with the Canon menus and already have a lot of EF glass, but I'd go with the M for a small package, and agree that an M2 through eBay might be the best bet of all.


----------



## martti (Feb 11, 2015)

JPAZ said:


> FWIW, I have an M with which I have an ambivalent relationship and (while not the a6000) my wife as a NEX 7. There is no doubt that the Sony is a very capable camera and that it has a lot of capabilities plus a wide array of compatible lenses. The issue I have with it is it is just a bit difficult to use in terms of changing settings on the fly. My M, which is way slow to focus (sorry but it does not compare to the 5Diii - but that's an unfair comparison) and hunts a lot with some of my EF lenses using the adapter but I can change settings quickly and the IQ is on a par with a Rebel. Maybe it is just because I am so familiar with the Canon menus and already have a lot of EF glass, but I'd go with the M for a small package, and agree that an M2 through eBay might be the best bet of all.



On the a6000 you can configure the buttons to your taste very easily.
Changing the picture quality, the WB or the focusing mode is just a button's push away in my configuration.
If you are used to the Canon menus, no problem. Put the stuff you are used to on the main manu that either is or is not visible on the view finder or the screen.

I agree, it takes time and effort. It seems, though, that the Sony guys do not want to impose their way of thinking on you. You can actually make the a6000 work the way YOU want. If it is the Canon Way, no problem, It can do it.


----------



## martti (Feb 11, 2015)

Triggyman said:


> martti said:
> 
> 
> > Triggyman said:
> ...



My Canon chain starts from FTb to AE-1, then to F1...then there were Olympus, Nikon and Mamiya untile Canon introduced the EOS5 for film...I had the EOS 20D, 30D, 40D. 5DII, 5DIII, SL-1, an Ixus and a Powershot280.
Oops, forgot my first digital pre-EOS Canon...G3, I think. It changed everything.
Nikons are not bad cameras and this particular Sony is quite a performer.
Do you want love objects or good pictures...


----------



## Triggyman (Feb 11, 2015)

martti said:


> My Canon chain starts from FTb to AE-1, then to F1...then there were Olympus, Nikon and Mamiya untile Canon introduced the EOS5 for film...I had the EOS 20D, 30D, 40D. 5DII, 5DIII, SL-1, an Ixus and a Powershot280.
> Oops, forgot my first digital pre-EOS Canon...G3, I think. It changed everything.
> Nikons are not bad cameras and this particular Sony is quite a performer.



You've got a nice long history of camera ownership - and I thought I was too crazy over cameras.



> Do you want love objects or good pictures...



Both, whenever possible! haha. Of course, good pictures. I'll choose the more capable camera - you know what it is


----------

