Leaderboard

Guess its time to prepare for disappointment.

They're trying to stimulate grey import, or what?

24fps raw stills for 150 shots... so that opens up the possibility for around 6.25 second bursts of raw 6k video! Maybe someone crazy will make a video with it. It'd be a lot of work, but might be kind of a fun challenge.

For Canon DSRLs, 1080P exists only on paper

Yeah, I was so stoked for the A6300 when it was announced. Went and got the conversion kit to E-mount for the Veydras. And then... Sony happened. They always deliver on paper... and then in practice... grmpf. Between the overheating, rolling shutter, color channel clipping and out of camera colors and lack of fully articulated touchscreen and headphone jack... maybe meh-ish batterylife... Why don't they indeed take the A7-body style and just throw in an APS-C sensor? The thing that's really going to make the difference is the lenses you're going to throw in front anyways, so why not up the body in terms of ergonomics, features and have solid heat disappation, room for a bigger battery, proper audio interface, maybe even dual card slot, vari-angle touchscreen... yeah, basically more like an APS-C Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II what I'm concerned! Actually, exactly that! If it wasn't for the up in sensor performance (mostly noise profile), better selection of wide angle lenses/easier to get shallow depth of field (and being close to S35 right of the bat) and the possibility to boost towards fullframe... I would've happily kept true to the M4/3 format. But I would like to dial in 3200 ISO without worrying too much, use lenses and have less of a crop factor and the ability to boost towards fullframe (that is why I don't need fullframe cameras, which are chunky and expensive cameras (some with 4K crop!) and the beauty of APS-C is that you can also use some more compact APS-C lenses, although Sony hasn't done enough with that themselves I think). Neways. Probably not a good idea to get your hopes up for this one... but maybe, just maybe, they've learned something over the course of this year? I'll stay tuned!

Maybe it's not a touch screen. It's an Almost Touch Screen. Like the video on the A6300, where you can Almost Shoot Movies. Cause with the overheating, photos seem more safe. Maybe the A6300 is perfect for Vines. Not Filmmaking.

Plus 20% VAT = 1507 euros, plus import duties = something higher + hell knows what else = 1700 Personally I miss the days of bargain GH2s and NEX cameras... the whole thing seems to be shifting higher and higher with every passing month as the consumer market dies and smartphones take over. At this rate there won't be an interesting camera under $3k. And also, the A6300 should never have existed. Majorly flawed, with a shelf life of approximately 30 seconds. There was absolutely nothing to stop Sony putting a touch screen in that and 5 axis stabilisation. The A6500 is a very interesting update but their game is clear, and I am angry at them, as I feel we have wasted our money...not once, not twice, but many times now with these quickly obsolete cameras.

And 35 stops of DR. And Redcode. And ice cream. Such a shame. ( )

Yes, Ive just watched all the episodes of veep (loved it btw) and it has a docu feeling. But the Jello is very distracting from time to time. But like always. Its just me noticing. No one else in the family would ever notice or care. A good example is the Swedish game show "På Spåret" (On Track). In the show they get to see timelapse footage of a train ride and also gets clues to the destination. Needless to say there are loads of jello and leaning poles. Every week its watched by millions (its the #1 show on the biggest channel). And its been on for 19 years. Not once have I heard anybody, anywhere, ever commenting on it. (Of course it probably just started having jello in recent years after the cmos introduction. And its not as distracting due to the fast moving train.)

Hot off the A6500 announcement, the GX80 seems like a better deal than ever. Thanks to Sony to validating my choice. Let's look at the numbers: GX80: 599 Euros A6500: 1699 Euros Granted, the A6500 will probably offer everything the A6300 offered with slightly better IQ (to be confirmed), better autofocus (to be confirmed), no overheating (to be confirmed), a touch screen, 5 axis IBIS. However, I question if it's 1100 Euros better than the GX80. That would be a lot left over for lenses and stuff.

The only thing that would make me consider a new camera over NX1 would be in camera 10bit recording at 4:2:2. And, for now, only GH5 seems to have this feature. But GH5 has small sensor, so not so good for stills. Summing up, NX1 will stay with me for years to come, I guess

No over heating, no over heating, way way way faster operation and finally: NO OVER HEATING!

Indeed. http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-confirmed-via-trusted-sources-the-panasonic-gh5-has-5-axis-stabilization/#disqus_thread Now let's see about the AF. If it as usable video AF then that's going to be a BEAST.

Most of you here make your living with this tech, so for you it is only a tool. You buy a new one, when you current one does cut it for the job. AFAIK none of you even bought or kept the A6300, so why the outrage? Frequent releases are always better. The best strategy would be to simply release new models each year around the same time like smartphone flagships, so you would know when to hold off the purchase before new tech is announced.

Sony have and always will have ridiculous product cycles, this is their game.... To get angry about it is futile, as whichever Sony camera you purchased would have done the same to the previous camera. It seems only the CineAlta line is protected from this

Just to throw in my two penn'orth: I received my XC10 (its purchase partly inspired by this thread) late last week and gave it a baptism by fire on our family trip (3 kids, aged 20 months to 13 yrs) to Disneyland Paris. I can certainly bear witness to its effectiveness as a 'shot getter' - I was able to get far more footage than I would have done with my GH4. I had an initial play with the files last night and they seem to grade up very nicely so far. The 2 best elements of the camera, for me (and after pure IQ) are the amazing stabilisation and the tracking autofocus. I also found the digital teleconverter in HD mode incredibly useful.

Sony Alpha Rumors and another 'Japanese site' Nokishita it will include IBIS. It'd be nice if no more overheating and articulated touchscreen.

I've been enamored with shooting 5-axis stabilization. It's undeniably a great tool and I do rely on it for a lot of work. Utilizing it for over a year now, and now the motion pictures are tending to look uninspired to me. I'm finding myself drawn back to the sloppiness of true hand held. I don't know. Maybe because strong IBIS has been such a constant in my work, the opposite approach is now more tantalizing than the current? There's an organic energy in the connection of a (good-not-bad) hand-held shooter to the camera. A 5-axis camera can dull it. Add to the fact that I've really leaned on using slow-mo and combined it with 5-axis...for no good reason other than I can do it, if I'm being honest... Eh, is it true when they say, "the grass is always greener?" Anyone else that been dabbling in 5-axis questioning it? Perhaps it's because my work has been "rely"-ing on it...maybe that's the issue. Why should I rely on a feature that much? Is it necessary? Maybe in my older age I'm just yearning for nostalgia and basic simple shooting reminds me of that? It's interesting because I'm old enough to recall how the hand-held aesthetic upset so many traditional cinema folks as it came into wildly adopted vogue years ago. Is my 5-axis romance just a "phase?"

DPReview reports a6500 having the same crop for 30p in 4K mode. Looks like the sensor is identical to a6300, so I bet the rolling shutter is gonna be the same.

The GX85 seems like the best value on the market if you're a shooter desiring 5-axis stabilization. It's a cheap cam with good IQ and the 5-axis works quite well. Who can argue with that? Would I say it's a great camera overall? No. But it's an AWESOME camera if you're buying it to do what it's strengths allow you to do --'kuz you get more for less.

All Sony cameras should come with ice cream. It helps with the cooling!

Oops. My mistake, I meant crop. But, let's imagine it's 100% bigger, doesn't overheat (to be confirmed), slightly less noise (as if it were a problem with the previous one), and only bad rolling shutter (rather than borderline unusable). It still doesn't seem worth the 1100 Euro price increase over the GX80- that's a lot one could be using for lenses. You bring up a good point too: what's the deal with the European Sony tax?

Uh, check your math, the m43 sensor is 225 sq/mm, the aps-c sensor is 370 sq/mm, that's a sensor roughly 65% larger. In the US the a6500 is exactly twice the price. With the new LSI, expect better rolling shutter, less overheating and less noise - all worth the extra cost for me. Cheers

Global shutter FTW

There is also a 16/32 on ebay now. Price is high but there it is. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Bolex-Anamorphot-16-32-1-5x-1-5x-Lens-Rare-w-Mount-Case-System-Moller-768432-/381799258048?hash=item58e50257c0:g:NnIAAOSwOyJX892O

As above, enjoy in moderation. All camera movements are designed to evoke an emotional response - gliding should never be used to reflect grit (unless being pretentiously stylised) any more than over the shoulder shake should be used for a tender moment between a bride and groom (unless being pretentiously stylised). I saw a terrible wedding showreel the other week that was three minutes of zooming and sliders. It made me ill.

Started watching the new season of Narcos the other day. I started noticing how quite a few shots had some shakiness to 'em. There's no smooth hovering with a locked feeling. It moves. It adds something raw. It's organic. It's real. That's the thing if you don't take care of overdoing it... everything is just articially floating, like a virtual camera through 3D space. Now that has its use, surely, but like everything, it's a tool. You shoot stable footage when a situation is under control... when a character's thoughts are running around or there's an intense dialog, you shake things up a bit. Like just about everything in life... enjoy in moderation. Put it to good use, but don't overdo it. To have the possibility and choice though, I think is great!

Wow! Sounds like a GX80 with 25% bigger sensor at 250% the price.

Touchscreen and IBIS. My a7rII and a6300 are officially for sale. I'm buying two of these. Thanks Sony for FINALLY listening.

Does anyone know if the IBIS on the a6500 works with non native sony lenses like it does on the A7s II, where you can manually dial in your focal length? That will be the decisive issue for me in buying it because I have a lot of old manual lenses. Really wish Sony would put an ND 6 or 9 in that RX100 V. With Log mode starting at 1600 ISO, ND 3 still means you're shooting at F13 in daylight and still clipping highlights. I've rarely found myself in a situation with my Mark IV where the ND3 was useful.

Crazy you say this about any camera that would cost over 1k dollars. You shouldn't have to spend that much money and have to worry about any equipment over heating in that nature.

Very likely a large portion of that low score is due to dumb FS7 owners buying and it expecting something totally different from it than what it is.

Looks like better RS at least judging from the bullfighting scenes.

On the Canon side. 5DMK3 Raw is "technically" speaking better image than the C100 image spec wise but requires more effort to procure. It's raw so you need to manage it as with any other raw workflow. You can grade it and correct it as you wish without breaking the image. The DNGs just have more color and weight to them. The C100 is very very close but has a "different" image to it since it's not full frame. 5D3 Raw Below... XC10 HD wide shot C100MK2 front medium 5D3 RAW side shots Excuse the audio and the poor grading on the XC10...I didn't have the XC10 matched to the other cameras. Here is my breakdown of what I would rate over a C100 image in the under $4000 price range. 5DMK3 Raw > C100 5DMK4 4K > C100 *in descent light Some ungraded neutral profile 5DMK4 4K frames. When exposed correctly the 5D4 image is quite stunning. XC10 4K > C100 *in good light I would even rate the XC10's 4K image over the C100 image...but again only in good lighting conditions. My primary use for the C100 is ease of use when covering long form events, docs and to give me an image close enough to 5Draw in camera, save hard-drive space and for a quick workflow turnarounds when shooting in all lighting conditions. The 5DMK3,MK4 nor the XC10 can deliver on this like the C100 can.

I sometimes use it but in my opinion you can't just slap it on and be done, it needs manual adjustment and I never add the LUT above 30-50%. I see how using it straight at 100% makes people dislike it, it's in the same territory as overdoing it with Film Convert.

touchscreen and IBIS confirmed

IBIS, better 1080p, reduce 4k rolling shutter and I'm sold. I can deal with the other quirks for the nice IQ and AF.

You must definitely be a video guy, raw dogging a schoeps into your dirty camera's xlrs. I previously owned that mic, and it's beautifully clean and transparent. But it can sound thin and it's pickup pattern is both forgiving and promiscuous. No mic can read your mind. Not a problem in a studio, but like you noted, on location it's different, you really need to maximize that s/n: mic placement, proper gain staging, etc., and you need the right tools. You really need to raise the gain if you can't boom tight enough, which is often on an indie set, where challenging conditions (lack of noise control, short crew, limited takes, etc.) calls for quality mixers and recorders. And I'd highly recommend redundant audio for a one man band, for safety. Doesn't have to be complex.

Fuji X-T2 with speed booster.

I bought the following (though I am just a hobbiest at present that does the odd wedding and party): FE 28mm f2.0 FE 16-35mm f4.0 FE 55mm f1.8 FE 70-200 f4.0 The only lens I have barely used as yet in the six months I have had the a7sii is the 16-35mm, but that is because it isn't fast enough for indoor shooting at night under disco lights. The other three lenses have been used equally and I love them all. I guess if money had been a bigger stumbling block at the time of purchase I would not have paid the Sony premium and instead gone down the adapter route, though the 28 and 55 are (in my opinion) worth the money. If I'd had more money, I would have waited and gone for the following: Sony Zeiss 35mm f1.4 Zeiss Batis 85mm f1.8 Sony 90mm f2.8 macro Sony 24-70 f2.8 (g-master) Sony 70-200 f2.8 (g-master)

pick a set of old lenses : Minoltas, Russian M42 lenses, Konicas, Fuji AX, Contax, Canon FDs, ... and the convenient adapter and you'll be able to get a 35,50,85 set for less than 200€ (I use minoltas on my mirorless and russian lenses on my dslr myself) Any information about what you plan to shoot would be helpfull to help you btw

Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 with a focal reducer will cover a MFT sized area approximately. Not a good idea! With a straight adapter it would be a good idea with a Sony a7R mk2, but not an a7S mk2. What is your budget and purpose? As there are HEAPS of options for lenses! Do you want to go mainly adapted or native mount lenses? Personally if it was me I'd go for a mix, I could get together a nice little set at a very low cost: You can pick these up second in Nikon F mount for cheap cheap: Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8 Tokina 28-80 f/2.8 Tokina 80-200mm f/2.8 Then throw in one of the cheapest Sony FE mount lenses, which makes it quite a good value (unlike most Sony FE lenses): Sony FE 50mm f/1.8 All in cost is not much at all, and you've got four nice lenses which cover a lot of uses.

I don't think it works that way...

I bet it will be at least as good, and likely a bit better. Pixel count is but one factor in lowlight performance.

The 1DX II isn't a video camera? It shoots video. It's a video camera. We're past the time when a dedicated camera necessarily means a better image capturing machine. As far as dynamic range, most of the good dslr's have about 11-12 stops (s-log3 is problematic for sony's 8-bit codec). Blackmagic does give you more usable dynamic range, and they have excellent noise control/grain structure. But some people have their issues with them. Now does the c100 II have a better image? Well, no. The 1DX II gives you high quality 4K with low rolling shutter and great out-of-the-box color. Also, the best video AF w/ touchscreen. And the c100 would not give you any practical advantage in dynamic range, color, low light, noise, etc. Even the 1DC's advantage is way overblown here...c-log has limited use because of the 8-bit codec, and you need to shoot at native iso, in many/most situations you'd probably be using a different picture profile. As far as audio, yes the C100 does give you XLR inputs, but the quality of the preamps aren't even as good as the consumer Sony PCM-10 (<$250) or the newer Zoom products, which give you far more options in a compact package. Unless you absolutely need the super low bitrates of the c100. Also, the 1DX II is a world class stills camera. Why would you be investing in an old video camera and an old stills camera when their combined price is pretty much the same as the 1DX II? The 1DXII is both a quality 4K video camera + top stills camera.

IMHO it's also better suited for Guerilla shooting. Far less conspicuous than the G7 or G85, and obviously than the GH4. And most of the tech on the G85

I shoot with the RX10II and don't have any regrets, it's one of my best gear decisions ever. It covers any M43 lenses in a compact powerzoom form over f4, so that makes most of them until now; has 5axis stabilization; gives Slog to match his bigger brothers in a vast different range of prices mostly well, not like Canon; can record to SD cards 4k footage, accepts the XLR-K2M adapter, can be hacked to remove the time limit and doesn't overheat. All in all I think it's Sony's best camera right now. The only PITA is the lack of a touchscreen, and that's the reason the G80 or the OM-D E-M1 MKII are looking so interesting right now, but weddings pay my butter so I have time to hold my GAS and wait for what Sony presents at CES and see if finally they add a touchscreen to the a7 line. My only reason to go FF is that brides and grooms in Slovakia and Spain tend to dress in ugly as hell rooms and to be able to have background separation in full body and 3/4 portraits and videos is a godsend. For the rest M43 and 1 inch sensors are all love and bridges can cover 60% or even 70% of a shoot very well. My 2 cents of course.

Very nice article. I wish that if we were discussing motion picture production we'd consider crop factors in terms of the 1.85 ratio cropped out of a vertical piece of 35mm film--ie., the "S35" crop that most people consider "full frame" when shooting movies. There are exceptions, of course, with VistaVision, and newer big sensors. Still, it seems more appropriate to me to look at, for instance, what lens you need to use on a GH4 versus what lens you'd use on an FS100 for the same shot. For many years I shot 16mm and then 2/3" chip broadcast cameras. A 25mm lens for me was reasonably close to "normal." When doing still photography with the old Nikon, a 50mm was "normal." And with the Hasselblad, the 80mm was "normal." When shooting with the FS100, I've found I use the 35mm old Nikkor as my "normal" lens, and use the same lens for the same situation on the GH4 with Speedbooster. I don't recall anybody shooting video or film a few years ago ever comparing lens focal lengths to still camera lenses, until the DSLR revolution came along. It would be nice to revise our thinking and leave the "full frame" still camera out of the equation when talking about crop factors for movie production.

In this video, he comments that the up and down is not as stable. I think a lot of people don't consider the fact that a 3-axis gimbal does not stabilize the vertical (up and down) motion at all. Your arm is doing the stabilization and you can affect it a lot by how you walk.