Leaderboard

The A6300 was a dog back in 2016 when the competition was far less, no X-T3 or G85 back then, or E-M10 III. X-T3 is a similar price now to when the A6300 was released back in 2016. The X-T3 today is $1399 new (less used) and the A6400 is $900 so a difference of $500 max, the price of a low-end Sony E-mount prime. The 23mm F2 and 35mm F2 Fuji X lenses are cheaper than their equivalent Sonys and the 18-55mm F2.8-F4 zoom is superior to any Sony APS-C zoom equivalent for just $300. I don't see why people would be interested in paying more for the A6400 + primes + decent zoom than the equivalent Fuji kit. If you look at the A6400 body in isolation, sure it's cheap-ish. But it's also naff-ish, 2-3 year old tech with terrible rolling shutter and bad ergonomics. The target market is a prime area to do some innovations... flip out 5" touch screen for example. All-new user interface and menus suited to touch screen operation. Better touch-pad AF interface. Better smartphone integration and Bluetooth LE. Sony took the easy option and did nothing.

Thought this might be able to be my next vlogging camera, as with the Sony 20mm pancake it could be a pretty sweet compact setup. I can even overlook the selfie screen / hotshoe clashing, but no IBIS?? Sorry, the cheaper Panasonic G85 still reigns supreme in my desires to by my next vlogging camera.

People can LOL all they want but I think it really takes shooting & working with the EOS R footage to appreciate it.. or not. But until then, a spec sheet isn't going to give you the full picture. And again as part of an ecosystem it makes total sense. We shoot Sony at work and personally, I'm not at all a fan of matching my Canon gear with the A7III etc.. I'd rather rent an FS5/7. And even then its a bit annoying because Sony keep changing their colour science. Canon has done so too but at least gives you the option on EOS R to choose in between original C100/C300 log & the newer C200/C300II log colour matrix. Its little details like that which make life easier. I hate losing time in post with that type of stuff..

For me a7iii works fine as b cam to c200, too much compromise on EOS-R for me. But if you are happy with EOS-R then it’s good for you as we all have different preferences and stuff, there is no one camera to rule them all.

Spoken like a true Sony fanboy. This camera is a dud. Sony pulled a Canon by recycling the same 3-year-old sensor that already had issues with its abysmal RS. $100 cut ain't fixing that.

There are other things in a6400 too....biggest positive is the elimination of 29 minutes in video! another good thing is the adoption of HLG video, hdr video without the need of slog.

XT3 has AF-C in video. It even does face & eye tracking. I'd buy an XT2 (or XH1 if you need IBIS) over this mess of a camera. Rolling shutter alone (36ms!) makes it a no go, especially for the intended travel/vlog market its intended for. Of course the cluelessness of that demography probably has never heard of RS and will be swayed by the hype/pricing.

I think once you accept that DPReview an Amazon owned company, which basically makes it an Amazon message board masquerading as a legitimate user driven community, then you should just let stuff like that wash over you. By contributing any expertise or insight to those forums then you are effectively just helping build and add credibility to a stealth advertising platform for Amazon (for free!) which they will always ultimately exert control over in the way that fits in with their agenda of selling gear. Thats why in your situation they turn a blind eye to people being attacked rather than the camera. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, the fact that the 64/24 year old filmmaker/dentist/banged to rights scam artist is one of their respected contributors should be enough reason for people to ask themselves if they wan't to belong to a club that would have someone like that as a member.

As I say, specs don't always translate into something breaking into the market when it comes to working professionals, particularly one thats dominated by two systems. And 'systems' is the key word there as Nikon and Canon have not only the equipment range (including the boring stuff to do with image transmission) but also the infrastructure with service centres and on site event support to keep it all working. Incidentally, when you use the mechanical shutter on the a9 (which you would do to minimise the banding with the ES from pitchside LED ad boards) then the a9 is a rather less than stellar 5fps. With all due respect to the Northrups, I think they have some ideas about what a professional sports photographer needs and does without much if any practical experience of ever actually having done it. For one thing they look far too healthy, wealthy and happy to have done it

G85 Autofocus sucks (it sucks on GH5 as well, I have one). EOSm50 DPAF is a game changer for vloggers, my partner couldn't give a toss about 4K (or IQ much in general), she just wants reliable AF and a file she can edit on a regular laptop computer (same as most other vloggers out there). For the reccord I would never buy an EOSm50 as my sole camera, but I'm not a vlogger . Most regular people don't vlog in 4K (even Casey doesn't anymore). EOSm50 autofocus in 1080p is amazing. Vloggers want reliable autofocus unfortunately. I'd agree a G85 is a much nicer camera otherwise, but it's falls short in the one key feature in which most vloggers care about most. p.s. Also if you've ever used an m50 you'd see how intuitive and helpful it is to use for people who aren't super into cameras. The scene specific timelapse modes is also a great touch.

I agree that the A7III is the reference point for pricing, and probably will be for another 6-9 months, but it's not a perfect camera and comparisons can never be absolute. If the XT3 had IBIS I feel it could and would comfortably sell for almost $2k, even with the A7III and Z6 right there with bigger sensors. The A7SIII being $3k would be a pleasant surprise, at launch the A7S was $3200 and the A7SII was $3400, if I remember correctly. The only way I see the A7SIII being less than $3400-3500 is if they skimp on a feature or two (say, no 10-bit anything, and no new codec. Or if they stay at 12MP). The A7000 costing the same or more than the A7III makes total sense, assuming it's got the high-end specs that outclass the A7III. The 7DII cost the same or a bit more than the 6D, same with the D500 and D610. I expect the A7000 and A7SIII will be pretty similar specswise (new sensors, 4K60 8 bit, possibly 10bit out but I doubt it, probably the same old h264 100mbps codec, third-gen body/battery, nice EVF and screen, new AF from the A6400), with mostly the sensor size differentiating them. $2000-2200 and $3400-3600. I don't see the new HEVC codec making it into the Alpha cameras anytime soon, the broadcast/cinema divisions will demand to have a year or two with it to themselves. I think 10-bit HDMI is the most we can reasonably expect in the next generation.

After a 1 month battle... finally took it apart! Leslie I did actually miss 2 small, real deep screws (heart0less pointed them out earlier in the thread). That helped separate the front focusing element from the 2 rear cylinders, which were still "welded" together so my problem wasn't quite solved yet. Decided to throw that part into the freezer for 30 min. Meanwhile boiled about an inch of water in a pan (it's like I'm on a cooking show). Put the cold lens inside a Ziploc bag and sat into the water bath with the black rim facing down (this element needed to expand since the other is screwed into it). After that the rubber strap wrenches finished the job with barely any force needed. Great success??

Sony.... the next Canon? It exists. Is called "the Panasonic G85".

Ha ha the camera is a massive flop. Clearly Sony have learned nothing about ergonomics and how people actually use their cameras.

It might be a year or two, but in the meantime we can use proxies, the way we did when 4k just started. I dont think computing power will be a big deal in the long term. It seems to me that 8k is happening much smoother and cheaper than 4k did. Thats not to say that 8k is super important, but i think the tech is shaping up nicely.

They were rentals, and very reasonable ones considering our producer worked at the rental house. Besides, the Canons are actually very affordable in comparison to other cinema glass. Also, it was anything but a big shoot. 2 days in a friend's cabin with 9 crew and 4 actors. $2500 budget that largely paid for food, actors, and rentals. Our goal on the technical side was to get maximum production value for minimum money and give ourselves as much post-production flexibility as possible, because at the end of the day, no one watching the film cares what the gear costs; they just want to like what they see.

The GH5 and GH5s typically give less heat and more reliable operation than the Sonys. There's also longer battery life, less rolling shutter, and more high speed frame rates combined with better data rates and codecs.

Over the past few weeks I have spent a lot of time with the Canon EOS R. I have also spent a lot of time with Nikons new Z6. On paper the Nikon Z6 would appear to have the EOS R beat dead to rights. And in all fairness to the Nikon, the 4k output from the Z6 is more detailed, sharper and cleaner at higher ISO than what the Canon can manage. So case closed then... an easy win for the Nikon, Canon fanboys go home! Well, not so fast... the problem is that for all of these specs, when viewed side by side... the exact same scene shot on the Canon EOS R just seems more organic. More filmic... in all honesty, it feels more cinematic. Most here know that I have long praised the Nikon for its strengths... and rightly so. It's one hell of a camera. But when looking at the same scene, shot on both the Nikon and Canon, I can tell you, there is something magical about the Canon footage. I caught myself constantly trying to make the Nikon footage more like the EOS R. I thought softening a sharp image would be a simple matter of adding in a diffusion filter. But in practice nothing I did could duplicate the effortless organic vibe of the Canon. It's not the sharpest, but it is clear and in focus; softer by default, and frankly in a world filled with over-sharpened footage I find it refreshing. The color out of the EOS R look great. You need do very little if anything to the files. But if you shoot in C-Log, there is ample data to play with. Better yet if you output to the Ninja V in 10 bit. While it might not make sense... and you would be right to argue that the Nikon is superior... none of that changes the fact that the Canon produces a nicer image. Even when it gets noisy the noise looks more like film grain than noise. Between the two, both are fairly easy to use, granted, there is a learning curve if switching from one brand to the other. But nothing that bad. I find the Canon's menus to be better, but that might be just because I am use to Canon. I will say that the Canon's controls are arranged to be easier to use from in front of the camera. The flippy screen is also a big plus. The crop did bother me at first, but I don't favor wide shots so it was not a deal breaker, and for those times that call for more FOV, I can easily adapt one of my wide angle lenses. In the end you have a choice to make... Go with the spec sheet, and get a superior camera; or pick the one that delivers more cinematic footage. For me the choice was difficult until I stepped back and looked at the output from both cameras. Once I did that the choice was clear. Canon wins again. I'm not sure how they managed it. But perhaps that's part of the magic.

@BTM_Pix yeah I must admit, other than the past few days, I’ve been steering clear of this site a little because quite frankly I am tired of defending myself when using words like cinematic, mojo, etc... I’m definitely not the most talented or skilled person around these parts but if somebody needs quantifiable definitions for mojo, then they’re not using their eyes or capturing with their gut. If this stuff was one hundred percent scientific, then I’d be a lot better and we’d all be Kubrick but it isn’t no matter how much math you throw at an explanation. Art isn’t always describable and a brush stroke can only explain so much. It’s when science and art melds with craft and emotion does a beautiful image appear. I am far from that goal but it doesn’t mean I can’t recognize it without explanation. end rant That Angenieux looks beautiful. I’m always tempted to pick up the 35-70mm Nikon Mount Angenieux until I see the price tag. With my brief stint with the Micro, I had the 15mm c-mount and it was like painting with pastels and sharp as a tack at the same time. Does that 25-250mm cover S35 or is that using the magic zoom function of the LS300? With that being said, here's a shot of the same subject from the Zeiss 50mm 1.8 Rollei mount lens...

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind a bit of technical jousting and whatever myself but at some point all this shit has to mean something tangible in terms of an image. The amount of A/B/C/D camera comparisons that I see getting chewed over that use completely different lenses on each camera bewilders me to be honest, like the lens is somehow incidental. I've posted this before with regard to making a Cinecorder but I'm definitely going to get rid of a few bits and pieces and buy one of these Angenieux 25-250mm if I can find a decent one.

I find it funny how people on here think the average consumer could care less about RS but for some reason they care so much about 4k, which codec they can't even edit on their laptops. For the average person the m50 is a much better option: the price is more appealing, has a proper screen, more aesthetically pleasing, better brand name recognition, and ergonomically a treat with that nice touch screen interface. Most people watch youtube (I'd hazard a guess at around 80%) on their phone, for which 480p is good enough. I used to own a a6300 and sold it. That thing was so sharp you could see every pore and blemish on your face. I put it on 1080p and - ah - so much better for my appearance haha. I don't see vloggers spending the extra money over a m50 - it would be a stupid decision.

I think its safe to say 'mojo' in this particular area of the forum

I'm bored of those seascapes, I want to see some New York City footage. I prefer the zeiss because I don't really like nervous bokeh,but let's continue this review with NYC footage, I want to see some glorious out of focus lights on the zeiss, I love it when they are dense dot and not some fuzzy crap, and I think that's where the zeiss really will show off.

I dunno. Once you've taken that step of walking along in public talking into any camera it is debatable whether there is any self-consciousness left that can be challenged by a mere bracket being attached to the camera

I think if you match the white balance and exposure between them it gets a lot closer. I personally prefer the Zeiss image largely because its a more subtle settled look overall with enough (and smoother) separation to the background without being as jarring as the Nikkor is though I dare say this would be the case with the Nikkor at f2.8 as well.

Ok, thanks a lot, I will keep using CINE-V and CINE-D for 4k 8bit 60fps. I'll use V-LOG 10bit for films, which looks amazing in C4K and 6k anamorphic

I sort of like the Nikkor lens better. The Zeiss is kind of Too good to be honest. Although in reality they are two different shots. The Nikkor is using it's f2.0 to the max LoL. You could have picked a warmer day to do this you know. Although the snow really adds to the scene. I hope those were screen gabs so you have some good footage to add.

So, I took a drive yesterday in the cold to do a test of a few lenses... the Nikkor 24mm f/2 vs the Carl Zeiss 25mm f/2.8 in the Rollei QBM mount. Here are the results... Nikkor 24mm f/2 Carl Zeiss 25mm f/2.8 I found the speed of the Nikkor to be pretty helpful considering that that shot was taken about 10 minutes after the Zeiss shot, but there is just something about that cold Zeiss look that has a definite pop to it that seems more cinematic... maybe it's in my head? Full disclosure... I didn't attempt to match these images, I just did a basic Rec709 conversion and a little bit of curves and saturation. Also I am still using my MacBook Air screen for all of this preliminary color work and lens tests. I'm in the process of deciding on a monitor upgrade... so these may look like crap compared to what I am seeing in Resolve... oh the fun of hobbyist color work... lol.

Santa was Damn good to you!

Huh? The RS is considerably worst than A7S (16-24ms) & A7S2 (25ms). It's known to be the absolute worst of the worst at a whopping 36ms. Possibly some kind of record. For the money what else are you going to buy? There are tons of second-hand options.. XT2 to start with. If you want new, save up a little more & buy yourself a decent camera.

How about going all in with PDAF ?

"The Sony A6400 is an absolute turkey" who just missed Xmas ?

I think Panasonic will keep their MFT GH-line to push out awesome video specs before anyone else (like they did with GH5's 10-bit 4K, and 60fps 4K). Then they'll trickle up to their full-frame cameras a couple of years later. I wouldn't be surprised to see a late 2019 GH6 with 12-bit 4K internal raw (perhaps BM Raw, since it is open), 120 fps 4K, and maybe even a higher resolution like 6k or 8k at 30p. Also, they may just go all in on the video front and throw in the one thing I'm waiting for: an internal variable ND. Please? someone?

Don't forget how Canon mistreats EF-S Vs EF, unlike Nikon who lets you happily swap between DX and FX lenses to the max extent.

With one of those guns that everyone should own.

I bought it in 1966 from the Naples, Italy Navel station duty free store. I think it was around 355 dollars without taxes, or duty fees which I didn't have to pay. Funny My father was a Radio operator in the Navy, and I am a Ham radio operator since I was 11. Haven't done any of it for years and years. Picture even sort of looks like him! He was a radio operator for Admiral Halsey in WW II. I think there were four operators that went anyplace the Admiral did. They changed ships like every 2 to 3 weeks to not be detected. My father was on a TON of ships. He was in 4 years like me.

Speaking as one of those pros, I have to say that this particular niche market will collapse in its entirety before Sony gain any significant foothold in it due to a combination of video frame extraction, rights issues and brand image control. The burst mode is a red herring if its using electronic shutter due to the environments its being used in and even if they got it above the 12/14fps of the D5 and EOS 1DXii with the mechanical shutter its not going to be anything more than fiddling around the margins. I have absolutely no idea why Sony came to what is a dying market in the first place and then approached it in such a half arsed fashion when they did. Its not far off 2 years since the a9 release and there wasn't much latitude for a gradual roll out of the eco system around it even when it was released let alone now after all this time. I can see why those such as the Northrups who don't do this for a living can look at an a9 and come to the conclusion it has everything a professional sports photographer would need and that it will surely be adopted because it does slightly more here and there but its too simplistic a viewpoint that honestly betrays a lack of understanding of the speciality. One could even say it lacks nuance.

Sony doesn't take away IBIS? They did just that with this A6400. They don't disable 10-bit internal? They did so on FS5 vs FS7 and never implemented 10-bit internal or external in their alpha range (unlike Fuji, Panasonic, Canon & Nikon). Still the same 100mb XAVC codec in their third-gen FF cameras. Sony may be aggressive with pricing/specs but they segment products like anyone else. Please stop drinking the kool-aid.

Exactly! Did it? I don't remember , although I recall the a5100 being better than the a6000 which is why I got it. Huh?? Nikon is arguably leading the pack right now, it is everyone else who needs to catch up!! Or are you meaning that Nikon needs to "catch up" by offering an affordable DX mirrorless? Well, I could not agree more!

All my friends that are consulting me about cameras are asking for camera to vlogging, tutorials or to film their kids. None for stills - these usually buy a Canon T5/T6 or a Nikon D3xxx/Dxxxx with a kit lens, without asking. And for the first group, the most wanted feature is good AF - never even consider to use manual AF. If Sony nailed it in the A6400, they could have a very good seller (external mic could be used with a bracket without covering the screen - and a lot of vloggers use lavaliers).

I ran into an issue I haven't been able to find much talk about so I thought I'd share - I'm using the P4K with the Viltrox EF-M2 and primarily the Canon 35mm f2 IS and Sigma 24-105 F4 IS. The viltrox had the same firmware as when i received it, probably 2.2 or something. When I would turn on the P4K, the aperture wouldn't show up. I had to disconnect the adapter and reconnect it with the camera on, and then the aperture would show up and be able to be adjusted. So, I downloaded the latest firmware (3.2) from Viltrox's website and installed it. Boom! aperture shows up every time now. BUT, image stabilization didn't work anymore. Downgraded to 3.1. IS still didn't work. Did some hunting online and someone recommended downgrading to version 2.3. Did that and now aperture shows up upon boot and IS works every time. I had been considering getting an aputure lensregain if the Viltrox wasn't going to work anymore and so i can use it as a follow focus for EF lenses. Maybe I'll still get it and leave the Viltrox on my GH5. We'll see.

The A7siii and a7000 could change things

With all the new mirrorless combos, I'm really looking for a mirrorless system where I can use the same lenses for both a full frame, pro-body and a smaller APS-C, take anywhere, be more discreet body - as well as possibly use for higher end cinema stuff when needed. Unfortunately, Sony is the only manufacturer that has a good lens lineup and mount (FS7/5, A7x, A6500...) to achieve this. But wow - their ergonomics and image and color continue to be horrible in my opinion. Hoping the L-Mount lens lineup fills out soon, plus adds an L-Mount EVA-2 and Sigma APS-C camera. The Panasonic S1 is really exciting.

It's funny how people talk about the GH5, and GH5S and P4K in similar terms, to me the GH5 is in a different class of cameras because it has IBIS. It might seem to be just another spec, but for anyone who needs to get usable hand-held shots it's practically the king. That's why I bought one over the A7III, P4K, GH5S, EOS-R, Fuji XH-1, etc. If I'd not needed IBIS then I would have been ordering the P4K like a shot. The 'look' of high-quality older cameras is an interesting thing, and I know that @mercer and @webrunner5 have an eye for it. I think I do as well, having ranked the cameras in the 2012 Zacuto Camera Challenge in descending order of price as a blind test, but I'm not sure what part of the look it is that I'm attuned to. I suspect that one aspect people often get attached to is that it doesn't look as real as modern cameras. I've noticed that modern cameras and modern TVs look more real somehow, and to my eyes that hasn't been a good thing. Watching TV soaps on the odd occasion I visit someone and the TV is on I am struck by how much it looks like normal people in a room rather than TV stars in a fictional world. When previously you might have watched a show you're not familiar with for five minutes and come away with questions about the story or characters, now I'm left with impressions about how makeup needs to improve and the whole thing looks like a home video despite being shot professionally. I suspect that this comparison to how cinema used to look is simply one that younger generations just don't have, so they can't be using it as their benchmark. I once read an article saying that the music you listen to at 14 years old is the music that you will like forever because at that age your stage of development and hormones and whatever make the things in your life at that time kind of baked-in, so they stay with you. If you were 14 and mostly watching TV at home and going to the movies in a digital projection setup with THX everything, then that surreal and magical aesthetic of film just wouldn't be in your experience. In terms of 10-bit or more workflows, look to the ML thread. I shot test clips at 10, 12 and 14 bit RAW and compared them and decided that I could barely tell the difference between 10 and 12 bits. ML aficionados with an eye for colour claimed 14-bits was the way to go, but acknowledged that 12-bits was almost as good and that shooting 14 was mostly because it was there and didn't cost them anything. The difference between 8-bit from my XC10 and 10-bit from my GH5 is huge, 10-bit RAW would be better again due to the lack of compression, but I think 12-bit RAW or 14-bit RAW really aren't going to excite many people in a practical kind of way. Lastly, @thebrothersthre3 the reputation of MFT matters to Panasonic. If they don't reassure their MFT customers, the uncertainty might lead to some people switch to FF that would have stayed in MFT, which then would mean less customers for the GH6, devaluing the system and potentially causing a feedback loop that devalues the system. Technology devalues in camera bodies, sure, but lens systems devalue at a different rate. If you don't think that people care what their equipment is worth, have a read in the XC10 thread, and see how many people liked the camera and the image but sold it saying they couldn't keep an investment in a camera that was falling in value.

Nikon Mount is usually the best option for adaptable lenses, but anything with a longer flange distance than EF would work... M42, Pentax K, Olympus OM, Yashica/Contax, etc... search flange distance on Wikipedia for a full list. Ones that definitely won’t work are Canon FD, Minolta MD, Konica AR, etc... Again look for a flange distance list. What kind of work do you do that you need 4:22 and the Resolve license? Just curious, because a lot can be done with Resolve Lite. Honestly, with all of your Canon lenses, you may be better off with a Canon. If you’re looking to shoot Raw, a 5D2 can be had really cheap and there is some beautiful work out there done with it. I’m not here to knock the P4K but I think a lot of people hear about specs they think they need and don’t take the downsides into consideration that comes along with BMD cameras. Oh yeah, how do you like the Canon 85mm 1.4 IS? That’s a pricey lens, right?

I don't think the grade or how the footage is shot represent either camera well, but the technical aspects in terms of sharpness seem about right, although I think those clips are from .mp4 files, which are not as sharp as raw. I find this video more representative, though: But I don't like the +5 sharpening here, either. Anything above 0 looks "digital" to me. Regardless, both cameras are plenty sharp. Super sharp 1080p (sharper than the Alexa's 1080p) vs average 4k. But the difference between the two isn't great. The C100 oversamples in a way that achieves nearly 100 mtf. Bayer's mtf as sampled in the C200 drops to zero at around 70% linear resolution I believe. So at best the C200 has "twice" as much resolution in UHD as the the C100 has at 1080p, not four times as you'd expect by counting pixels. If the C200 had an 8k sensor, that would be another story. There are other differences, however: I prefer the C100's color and its noise pattern, and significantly. But the C200 has much less skew and much better dynamic range. There are major workflow and ergonomic differences. And if your client is demanding 4k footage acquired in 4k, well, only one of the two delivers on that.

Ah but the thing is that if Sony has a button that is 1mm out of place for most people that makes it unuseable while Canon (and Nikon) could make a camera that only takes a picture every second time you push the button and that would be neither here nor there! Just merging your two recent threads a bit.

are you sure you haven't missed any little screws around the outside ? i have heard of paint covering them over, making disassembly near impossible

Testing the A7iii in anamorphic setup in exterior condition, some quick run and gun test shoots but I m very happy with the result . A7iii ( full frame mode ) + Ninja V + Cinelux ES + Rectilux HCDNA + Russian Primes.

Did you try unscrewing these?