[Ecce]

Zitat von guenter_w

.. Ich beziehe mich mit der Kritik auf Punkte, die von Testern im Vergleich mit dem Wettbewerb benannt werden, bei denen Sony aus dem Vorsprung teilweise in Rückstand geraten ist.

Bitte wer sagt, dass Sony irgendwo im Rückstand ist?

[guenter_w]

Zitat von Ecce

Bitte wer sagt, dass Sony irgendwo im Rückstand ist?

Beispielsweise dpreview:
"The Fujifilm X-T3 is the company's range-topping APS-C mirrorless camera. We're big fans of its retro design (though not everyone will be), and you can operate it using its retro controls or twin customizable control dials. Its more modern sensor allows for faster burst speeds than the Sony and 4K/60p video with low rolling shutter. Twin UHS-II card slots, an AF joystick and robust customization round out the package. The X-T3's autofocus isn't up to the Sony's standard, it lacks IBIS and it has much shorter battery life, but it is absolutely worth a look if you're considering a camera of this price and capability.

We've also chosen to compare the a6600 against Panasonic's G9, which is that company's flagship stills-focused Micro Four Thirds camera. The Panasonic is quite a bit bigger, but that also helps make room for an abundance of direct controls as well as a top-plate LCD. The touchscreen interface is more responsive and polished than the Sony's, and the image stabilization system can be used to create pixel-shift high resolution images. Low light and dynamic range performance from the G9's smaller sensor are less impressive and its autofocus is less reliable than the Sony's, but the G9 has an edge with dual UHS-II card slots, 4K/60p video, and very fast burst shooting.

Let's also take a look at Canon's EOS M6 Mark II. Although the Canon is a good bit cheaper than the Sony, it remains Canon's most advanced APS-C mirrorless camera yet. And despite its lower price of entry, the Canon has a similar viewfinder (if you get the kit), faster burst shooting, more resolution and comparable dynamic range. Video quality is softer (though with less rolling shutter), there's no in-body stabilizer and the battery life is so-so. But it's a friendlier and, we daresay, more enjoyable camera to use than the Sony.

Lastly, let's not forget the predecessor to this camera, the Sony a6500. You may be tempted to save some money and get the older model, and there's not so much wrong with that - you still get in-body stabilization, identical image and video quality, and the same sort of burst-shooting capability. The differences really come down to the greatly improved autofocus tracking as well as the larger battery - if those are of value to you, then the a6600 is an easy pick."

[Ditmar]

Zitat von guenter_w

Beispielsweise dpreview:

Na wenn das so ist, ist es ja richtig was Du sagst.
Und dpreview hat ja die Weisheit das alles stimmen muss was die schreiben.

Es sind eben nur Meinungen die da zum besten gegeben werden, die aber sicher nicht jeder so sieht.

[Ellersiek]

Und an welcher Stelle kommt in diesem Text Nikon vor?
Und btw:
Wenn es um Foto Qualitäten geht, scheinen die Vergleichkameras zu schwächeln:

Zitat von guenter_w

...
"The Fujifilm X-T3...The X-T3's autofocus isn't up to the Sony's standard, it lacks IBIS and it has much shorter battery life,...

We've also chosen to compare the a6600 against Panasonic's G9...Low light and dynamic range performance from the G9's smaller sensor are less impressive and its autofocus is less reliable than the Sony's…

Let's also take a look at Canon's EOS M6 Mark II...there's no in-body stabilizer and the battery life is so-so..."

Und irgendetwas findest Du bei jedem Vergleich wo mal der eine und mal der andere besser ist. Ist doch wie Quartett spielen, oder?

Gruß Ralf