# Sony a6k ft. "world's fastest autofocus" @11fps/24mp & 172 af pts



## Marsu42 (Jun 7, 2015)

My hometown is plastered with Sony ads, announcing the a6000 having the "world's fastest af system". That's "world" not in the sense of "the whole US", but the actual globe, btw. 

Trusty Wikipedia states this is not entirely true though:


> _As other cameras the Sony A6000 is advertised featuring the "world's fastest autofocus" with lag of 0.06 second and 11 fps continuous shooting with tracking AF, but now lags for example behind the latest Nikon 1 series J4 with 0.01 second delay and 20 fps continuous shooting with tracking AF, albeit with a much smaller and lower-quality sensor._



Nevertheless, the (lack of delay) of mirrorless is impressive to simple /me. Here's the Sony annoncement: https://blog.sony.com/press/sony-electronics-introduces-the-versatile-%CE%B16000-interchangeable-lens-camera-with-worlds-fastest-autofocus-system1/

Now, we Canon enthusiasts know there's got to be some big problem with all this shiny new tech, so I decided to create this thread to shed some light on the problems and probably a comparison to Canon's M3.

*What's your take? Does Sony's a6k rival any Canon gear? Is it a threat to the upcoming M3?*


----------



## wyldeguy (Jun 7, 2015)

If Nikons J4 has less lag then how can Sony claim they have the fastest? Do they maybe mean the time it takes for the system to recognize the button has been pressed. I'm really starting to get sick of all the marketing bullshit that companies, and I don't just mean Sony, are using these days to try and make their product sound better than the competition. Use the facts. If the facts aren't good enough then make a better product

Apple does it all the time and gets away with it and I think other companies are realizing it and trying to follow their example. I think we should all try to boycott companies and products that do this until they get the message and stop making a new product every year with incremental improvements. Sony is bad for that itself. I bought the original play station portable and within a year they had already made a new version of the hardware. Within 3 years from launch they had atleast 3 generations of hardware and had removed the optical drive and stopped making games in that format making mine useless. I stopped using it after that.

Sorry rant over.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 7, 2015)

wyldeguy said:


> Sorry rant over.



Yeah, that's the spirit and true to the mood of a Canon forum :->

Admittedly, with that kind of marketing hype Sony leave themselves open to a lot of criticism. Probably unnecessarily so, as the a6k might turn out to be a stellar product even though it lacks Canon's dual pixel af system. Maybe Canon wrote that Wikipedia article part  ? 

At least having owned the fixed-mirror EOS RT back in the days, I can vouch for the fact that less shutter lack is a blessing for shooting anything that moves or blinks - you only realize after you actually tried as it's easy to get used to the dslr lag. But having the picture taken the moment you think about pressing the shutter is really something.


----------



## deleteme (Jun 7, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> But having the picture taken the moment you think about pressing the shutter is really something.


True. I had been using the silent shutter mode for a long time on my 5Dmk3 and switched back to regular shooting mode. The reduction in lag was startling.
I think that ML cameras have made great strides in reducing lag but the basic requirements of the exposure process will always leave us with some lag.
When we get global shutters then we can see near instantaneous response. 
Of course the first global shutters will be imperfect but they will get better.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 7, 2015)

Fewer computations are required to focus a smaller sensor, since the focus standard used by all manufacturers is to 1/3 of the depth of focus. With everything else equal, a smaller sensor camera should focus faster.

Since the A6000 has a much larger sensor, getting it to focus that rapidly is a much greater design feat than with a 1 inch sensor.

Getting a FF sensor body to focus that fast using contrast detect requires some new technology or innovative design.


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 7, 2015)

In short:
I don't believe in any marketing gibble gabble of any company (incl. Canon).
This is just a threat to the more or less present "intelligence" of homo sapiens sapiens.

In long:
Most of that marketing gibble gabble is coming from people that mostly have no knowlege at all about the product they're wanting to sell. They care more about the people they want to sell it to. And they think, they can read their minds and emotions. I don't know if I would call that incredible arrogance or incredible stupidity.

I am only willing to believe in objective tests from third parties. 
Of course you then can start arguing about in "objectivity" and "good testing methods", but that's worth at least one other thread.

Does anybody have more or less good tests comparing these AF systems? 
As long as I don't have any numbers I am only willing to dispute any conclusions based on marketing gibble gabble.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Jun 7, 2015)

wyldeguy said:


> If Nikons J4 has less lag then how can Sony claim they have the fastest?



Read the footnote on Sony's page.

1 Amongst interchangeable-lens digital cameras equipped *with an APS-C image sensor* as of February 12, 2014. Determined with internal measurement method with E PZ 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OSS lens mounted, Pre-AF off and viewfinder in use.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 7, 2015)

Maximilian said:


> I don't believe in any marketing gibble gabble of any company (incl. Canon). This is just a threat to the more or less present "intelligence" of homo sapiens sapiens.



... or his ability to read fine print  ...



3kramd5 said:


> Read the footnote on Sony's page.



True: I came across another of those Sony posters in the subway, and finally managed to see the tiny * next to "world's fastest autofocus" withs the even tinier fine print stating what's noted on Sony's website.

Still, that doesn't change my opinion that the current dslr designs are *******, they have moving parts that wear down, the hi-tech sensor is blind unless you take the shot, any you need to duplicate expensive functionality (metering, autofocus). Looking forward to real world tests of the a6d and m3.


----------



## expatinasia (Jun 7, 2015)

I like to monitor what Sony is doing in the camera world. They are the only other manufacturer I watch.

I very nearly bought the Sony RX 100 Mark III and am watching what they do with a Mark IV.

I shoot sports (among other things) and so the 1D X with a 400 f/2.8 ii is perfect, but I do often wish that I had a Canon version of the RX 100 Mark III in my pocket. 

Canon's M3 does not even compare. I hope Canon can create something as good as the Mark III and hopefully match the Mark IV. Will Canon beat the latter, I doubt it.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 7, 2015)

When shooting moving subject/tracking, it more like a6000 Vs 7D II in my opinion, not A6000 Vs M3.


----------



## sdsr (Jun 8, 2015)

Dylan777 said:


> When shooting moving subject/tracking, it more like a6000 Vs 7D II in my opinion, not A6000 Vs M3.



Maybe, but if so it's worth remembering that every few months there's a sale when you can buy an a6000 for c. $450! (Despite owning an a6000 I'm afraid I can't comment on shooting moving things as I only use manual lenses on it.)


----------



## raptor3x (Jun 8, 2015)

expatinasia said:


> I like to monitor what Sony is doing in the camera world. They are the only other manufacturer I watch.
> 
> I very nearly bought the Sony RX 100 Mark III and am watching what they do with a Mark IV.
> 
> ...



What's wrong with the G7X? It's the exact same sensor as the RX100 Mark III.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 8, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Still, that doesn't change my opinion that the current dslr designs are *******, they have moving parts that wear down, the hi-tech sensor is blind unless you take the shot, any you need to duplicate expensive functionality (metering, autofocus). Looking forward to real world tests of the a6d and m3.



I agree that its coming, but then I also thought so in the 1960's when the Pellix came out.

I think that the technology is available, it just takes some willingness to spend the money and effort on development. Canon seems to study it to death.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jun 8, 2015)

raptor3x said:


> expatinasia said:
> 
> 
> > I like to monitor what Sony is doing in the camera world. They are the only other manufacturer I watch.
> ...


There's nothing wrong with a G7X except that it's big and chunky compare to the RX100 Mark III.
That truely is a pocket camera.
I would like to see an equivalent with an EVF from Canon.
The RX100 Mark III is a clever piece of design. 
Pity the zoom range isn't slight longer like the previous versions.
It's also very expensive. I guess when the better Mark IV comes out the price will drop of the III.

I'd like to have a good pocketable camera.
I'm often lugging around long lenses and it would be nice to have something quick and easy to shoot something closer in.
I used to use a G12 like that but managed to scratch the lens badly by putting it into my pocket (it wasn't really pocketable :-\)


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 9, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Maximilian said:
> 
> 
> > I don't believe in any marketing gibble gabble of any company (incl. Canon). This is just a threat to the more or less present "intelligence" of homo sapiens sapiens.
> ...


You know the German saying: "Wer lesen kann, ist klar im Vorteil!" (Who can read has really an advantage)
I prefer: "Nur wer wirklich liest, ist im Vorteil!" (Who really uses the ability of reading has an advantage)


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 9, 2015)

Hector1970 said:


> What's wrong with the G7X? It's the exact same sensor as the RX100 Mark III.


There's nothing wrong with a G7X except that it's big and chunky compare to the RX100 Mark III.
That truely is a pocket camera.

I'd like to have a good pocketable camera.
[/quote]

You need to look at a G7X I think you might be thinking of a G1X


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 9, 2015)

Maximilian said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > Maximilian said:
> ...



My favorite fine print ads are behind the subway rails, mostly from mobile phone companies. They have several lines in very, very small print on the bottom to detail the * why the offer isn't as free as the very, very big might make you think.

The catch: Unless you're using binoculars you have to climb down and _stand on the rails_ to be able to read any of the details. I never understood how they get away with this and no watchdog office intervened yet.


----------



## Maximilian (Jun 10, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> My favorite fine print ads are behind the subway rails, mostly from mobile phone companies. They have several lines in very, very small print on the bottom to detail the * why the offer isn't as free as the very, very big might make you think.
> 
> The catch: Unless you're using binoculars you have to climb down and _stand on the rails_ to be able to read any of the details. I never understood how they get away with this and no watchdog office intervened yet.


These ad posters must have been specially designed for subway stations in Berlin


----------

