Those advantages are tangible and real, and while all large sensor cameras produce pretty darn good images at high ISO nowadays, full frame will still provide the cleanest results at high ISO if the sensor technologies are comparable. People who shoot a lot in dim light may want or need the better high ISO performance that comes with the larger sensor. Others prefer full frame because of the ability to provide greater subject separation with fast glass.
For some shooters, this may well be the case: they need every ounce of image quality out of their cameras that they can get, due to shooting in demanding situations, printing huge or other considerations. Many people will argue that full frame is such a huge leap in image quality that the smaller sensors aren’t even worth their time. Full frame has an image quality advantage due to the larger sensors, and given the same technology, will produce cleaner images with better tonality and larger dynamic range. APS-C or even smaller sensors like Micro 4/3. But if you’re using slower, non-stabilised lenses you could notice some blurrier results when shooting handheld.There’s a fierce running debate about the merits of full frame vs. We didn’t find it a problem in our few weeks with the camera, as most of Sony’s E-mount lenses are either equipped with stabilisation or fast enough to not need it. Unlike a lot of system cameras, there’s no optical image stabilisation inside the A6000’s body. We’d say it’s faster than any DSLR we’ve used. The A6000 has 179 phase-detection focus points and 25 contrast-detection focus points, and between them they allow the camera to focus almost as soon as you start to press the shutter button. The A7R felt a little quicker to get a lock, but at this point we’re talking milliseconds difference, so perhaps we’re just subconsciouly assuming the A7R’s hefty price tag makes it the speedier. One thing we have to highlight is the incredible speed and accuracy of the A6000’s autofocus. The physical controls are small out of necessity, but the mode and adjustment dials are pleasingly chunky, and we didn’t have any issues with changing settings on the fly using these and the other buttons. If you prefer, you can compose shots using the 3in tilting screen, which works well enough. This, of course, is arguably better than optical, because it can overlay more information on screen and show you a preview of exactly how your shot is going to turn out.
Sony’s OLED electronic viewfinders are consistently fantastic, and that’s the case here: clamp your eye to the EVF and you’re rewarded with a large, bright and pin-sharp image that damn near fools you into thinking you’re looking through an optical viewfinder. It’s not quite up to the stellar standards of the full-frame Sony A7R, but then the A6000 costs £1,000 less… We found the video quality to be excellent and the stereo sound to be clear, even without an external microphone.
Sony a6000 full frame 1080p#
On the video front, the A6000 is able to capture 1080p at 50, 25 or 24fps in either AVCHD or MP4 format. Cheaper E mount lenses may not perform quite as well (you can buy it in a kit with the Vario-Tessar for £1,300, with a 16-50mm power zoom lens for £670, or with 16-50mm and 55-210mm zooms for £880). Both, in other words, are significantly pricier than the A6000 body itself. Speaking of lenses, we should point out that the images we’ve posted here were taken with Sony’s Zeiss Vario-Tesser 16-70mm f/4 zoom and Zeiss Sonnar 35mm f/2.8 prime lenses, which are priced at £840 and £700 respectively. With a reasonably fast lens attached, you can snap away in very murky conditions and still end the evening with plenty of usably sharp photos. The camera’s new BIONZ X image processing engine helps too, doing a fine job of reducing noise where it appears as well as offering a huge ISO range of 100-25600.
Because the sensor is physically large the A6000 performs very well in low light conditions, even when you don’t pop up the tiny built-in flash.