Bryan Posted March 27, 2016 Share Posted March 27, 2016 http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2016/03/22/sony-a6300-first-shots Impressive at ISO 6400, but no movement on price as yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted March 27, 2016 Share Posted March 27, 2016 Thanks, Bryan. Here in Canada, the a6000 is currently about half the price of the a6300. Given the minimal difference in image quality at low ISO (by the looks of it), I'd go with the 6000 if I were to "upgrade" from my NEX-6, but I see no reason to get into more debt at the moment, which is a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted March 27, 2016 Author Share Posted March 27, 2016 Yes John, you're a man after my own heart, no sense in spending money unnecessarily! I had my doubts about the IQ of the a6000, and the lower res viewfinder without a level indicator was a negative. It seems that most of the effort has gone into the autofocus and video capacity of the a6300, neither of which are greatly important to me, but the extra pixels and possibly superior IQ is an attraction, should my, becoming venerable, NEX 6 snap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted March 27, 2016 Author Share Posted March 27, 2016 Apologies, double post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted March 27, 2016 Share Posted March 27, 2016 Money? What money? David K. (Remember him?) seems to feel much the same way about the a6000 vs the a6300. But then he's Scottish, I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted March 28, 2016 Author Share Posted March 28, 2016 Yup, I still have David's useful guide to stock photography somewhere, he was always very generous with his advice on this forum, and I hope that he re-appears some day. Looks like he was talking about the camera before being able to thoroughly test it in that article. There's a more thorough review in CameraLabs now. Summarising, much improved auto focus and video, and a slight improvement in IQ over the a6000. One useful upgrade, from my perspective, is the ability to set the minimum shutter speed in auto ISO. Of course the viewfinder is also a lot better - back to NEX 6 standard. Unfortunately in this review the tester uses the Zeiss 16-70 f4 lens, which does not do full justice to the sensor, with noticeably soft results at the edges of the frame, the rival Fuji looking better. He does point out the need for Sony to bring out a much improved version of this lens - are you paying attention Mr Sony? Indeed Messrs Sigma, Tamron, Rokinon and Uncle Tom whatshisname etc. we Sony mirrorless APC-S folk want a half decent 24-105 FF equivalent f4 lens that doesn't cost the earth or weigh a ton. Can't be that difficult can it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 Sony seems to be primarily 'focused' on improving the video on all their updates. Although I can see that as being important to some, it's of no interest to me. In fact none of this matters to me, because I have no intention of ever buying any more photo equipment. (Wait a minute -- didn't I say that once or twice before? ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TABan Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 Seems to make great pictures, but it also has issues. http://www.eoshd.com/2016/03/sony-a6300-review-rolling-striking-image-but-nagging-issues/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 Money? What money? David K. (Remember him?) seems to feel much the same way about the a6000 vs the a6300. But then he's Scottish, I believe. He's lived there long enough to pick up some local habits (including a predilection for independence, apparently) but he's still English, fortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan_Andison Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 Seems to make great pictures, but it also has issues. http://www.eoshd.com/2016/03/sony-a6300-review-rolling-striking-image-but-nagging-issues/ It's very good. I bought one from Clifton Camera's while they had a pre-order for £899. It's a backup for my A7rii and I've found it rather nice to use. It feels very responsive AF wise, the viewfinder is really nice, not as big as the A7rii but it has lovely contrast, very clear, and zero blackout when shooting at 8fps with tracking etc. It's weaknesses aee the A7rii strengths so I've found it to be a useful addition. I've been a little surprised at how much detail this thing can capture (using FE lenses) very good. The high ISO handling is also rather impressive for an APSC camera Downsides.... handling isn't as good as the A7rii, it would have been nice to have a couple more dials and buttons. I never thought I'd say this but, IBIS. I guess I'd taken it for granted on the A7rii and only really noticed how well it works when using the same lenses on a camera that doesn't have it. Ones that I'm not bothered about. Rolling shutter with 4k, A7rii works great and my Osmo is great for run-and-gun style of footage. No problems at all when shooting from a tripod. Overheating - Only a problem if you shoot clips of 20 mins or more ( as stated in the manual). Stock footage is a mile off that limit. Batteries.... turn on Aeroplane mode and that will make the batteries last longer but.... anyone who uses mirrorless knows to expect 300 shots per battery. They also only weigh a few grams and are the same as the ones in the A7rii. I would never use it as a main camera, I've been spoilt by the A7rii but it's an impressive camera. Very snappy AF and feels nice and solid! Edit.... Anyone using the Nex6 would like this camera...... just missing that Nex7 dial though..... that would have been nice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TABan Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 Here's an amusing rebuttal to my previous link: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan_Andison Posted April 2, 2016 Share Posted April 2, 2016 Here's an amusing rebuttal to my previous link: Haha.... yeah, I watched this the other day, very good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TABan Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 Here's an amusing rebuttal to my previous link: Haha.... yeah, I watched this the other day, very good I'm beginning to think the EosHD guy doesn't like anything. He thinks the new 80D video is so bad he won't put it up in his review. I've looked at some samples and although the 6300 shoots 4K and down-sized to 1080P it looks a bit sharper than the 80D's video, the 80D isn't that bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan_Andison Posted April 3, 2016 Share Posted April 3, 2016 There are that many good cameras now that we can become very critical when something is not perfect, which it never is. I loved my Fuji's but I'd never use them for video but I find it hard to believe that Canon has taken such a big step backwards in terms of video that the 80D video isn't worth showing. Anyway, with video you don't want it too sharp.... it's not like stills. Of course you don't want it soft either but I normally dial down the sharpness setting a lot and then apply it in post if necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.