Sony a6300 4k

[Phil A]

Hearing about those "GH5 will be 6k" rumors makes me really annoyed. There's basically no really good, usable large sensor 1080p camera (I know, 5DIII ML, but a lot of people don't want to deal with the tinkering) and we jumped to 4k with weak codecs, now we'll directly jump on to 6k with probably the same weak codec but even more post issues?

Forums are full of people arguing that you can't get the good stuff because SD cards are too slow for higher quality, but why can't we at least get 10bit out of the cameras via HDMI? The High Frame Rate also doesn't go out so you shoot 120fps FullHD on some super compressed codec.

Are clips with the BMPCC out there that look like detailed, polished, modern footage e.g. like out of a commercial? All I find on VIMEO is low resolution / badly focussed, dark muddy grades stuff that looks like FilmConvert overdone times 10. I think the image out of the BMCC 2.5k is amazing but that camera ergonomics are meh, the extra resolution really helps over the BMPCC sensor in post for the finished product though.

BMCC 2.5K sensor in a C100 body with Sony IBIS and active MFT mount... TAKE MY MONEY!

[The Chris]

8 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

 to people bashing it for stills...you're full of shit. I'm sorry, but even measurebaters can look at DXO and see that raw performance is less than a stop away from APS-C. There is so much amazing work being shot on M4/3 that no one can claim the camera is their limitation to getting good results. Panasonic's DFD autofocus has also been shown to be faster and more accurate than any other current mirrorless. Time will tell on the A6300, but "it doesn't have PDAF points" is an asinine argument. The last thing to look at are lenses. Last time I checked, the Sony APS-C stable was pretty pitiful. There's like...2 or 3 Zeiss lenses that are pretty cool I guess? Micro Four Thirds, on the other hand, has a gigantic selection of both AF and MF glass, almost all of which are stellar pieces of glass. 

As someone who's shot and edited a couple dozen commercial and portrait shoots with a GH3 and A6000 side by side, there's basically nothing in it. The Sony is higher res, but the M4/3 glass has the edge. The Panny has lower DR/higher noise, but the Sony's 11+7 bit compression makes it a wash. The Sony is smaller and lighter, the Panasonic much better built and better-handling. Neither have great color on Adobe defaults, and benefit greatly from profiling in ACR. The GH3 battery life is enormously better, the A6000 has almost double the burst rate. 

Not full of shit, but maybe I was a little harsh. 50% more pixels gives you quite a bit more detail and cropping abilities, that 16mp sensor is a couple generations behind the a6300's new sensor. The DR advantage is real, more latitude to move shadows and highlights, its easy to see in any of the image comparison tools - its not a wash. When you downscale a 24mp to 16mp the gap widens. The PADF in the a6300 is a significant upgrade over the a6000 (I have the a5100 and the A7rII), its tracking abilities are much better than anything DFD is capable of producing, and it works while shooting video. 

The LAEA3 opens up the A-mount and its great glass. You get native quality AF out of many Canon lenses with any of the AF adapters, and the new Sigma adapter looks even better than what currently available as AF-c is fully functional. When talking lenses with the a6300 and A7rII - the EF lens lineup is part of the mix and gives you more options than m43. There are lots of gems in the m43 lineup, but like every mount there's lots of mediocre lenses as well. There are certainly more than 3 great E-mount lenses.

Batteries weigh 45g, its not an issue. I bought a GH4 to replace my a5100 and while the video was awesome, the stills were lacking for me - I shoot mostly natural light and the noise was just awful when boosting shadows. I kept the a5100.

I'm still impressed by what I'm seeing out of the G7, I'm going to get one to shoot video as current prices make it a bargain. But I'm still getting the a6300 as its going to be a better stills platform for me. There are pros and cons of any system and we could argue about this forever, use what you like.

Cheers

[The Chris]

More 4k footage:

 

[Cinegain]

Not yet in love with the footage, but I take it these people don't know the camera and its limitations and strong bits yet.

But if it stays like that, then indeed I might rather consider the G7.

[DayRaven]

A few clips and a few photographs too - more of interest to people like me for whom this is a photographic tool first.

[IronFilm]

11 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

Could definitely be a picture profile/settings thing. I'm sure, with tweaking, we could coax a little more resolution and shadow detail out of the G7. However, while the Panasonic has more blocked up shadows, it also has a clear advantage in the highlights. Not only is there more latitude, but it doesn't show any of the hue shifts, bright color ringing, or hard clipping I see in the A6300. Check out the underwater lights in the second example scene. Horrendous performance by the Sony. The Panasonic has much nicer color overall too, struggling less to render the mixed sources naturally. 

With used G7 prices dropping to around $400, I'm struggling to think of reasons not to buy it. No LOG profile I guess, but those things cause more problems than they solve in 8-bit cameras. Image looks acceptable at 6400 and rather good at 3200. 

As to people bashing it for stills...you're full of shit. I'm sorry, but even measurebaters can look at DXO and see that raw performance is less than a stop away from APS-C. There is so much amazing work being shot on M4/3 that no one can claim the camera is their limitation to getting good results. Panasonic's DFD autofocus has also been shown to be faster and more accurate than any other current mirrorless. Time will tell on the A6300, but "it doesn't have PDAF points" is an asinine argument. The last thing to look at are lenses. Last time I checked, the Sony APS-C stable was pretty pitiful. There's like...2 or 3 Zeiss lenses that are pretty cool I guess? Micro Four Thirds, on the other hand, has a gigantic selection of both AF and MF glass, almost all of which are stellar pieces of glass. 

As someone who's shot and edited a couple dozen commercial and portrait shoots with a GH3 and A6000 side by side, there's basically nothing in it. The Sony is higher res, but the M4/3 glass has the edge. The Panny has lower DR/higher noise, but the Sony's 11+7 bit compression makes it a wash. The Sony is smaller and lighter, the Panasonic much better built and better-handling. Neither have great color on Adobe defaults, and benefit greatly from profiling in ACR. The GH3 battery life is enormously better, the A6000 has almost double the burst rate. 

I would never argue that Micro Four Thirds is the best stills platform available, but I do believe it represents the best mix of compromises for most photographers. The system's image quality today is where APS-C was a couple years ago, and I don't recall many people complaining then. In a few more years, it'll be where class-leading APS-C is now. And so on and so on. So as technology marches on and sensors get better and better, I'd rather have the smaller size, better glass, and stronger features of a M4/3 body than a bump in performance less than 1% of shooters would even notice, let alone need.

Some samples to ponder: 

https://www.mu-43.com/threads/featured-mu43-wedding-experience-by-sssyurrr.61628/
https://www.mu-43.com/threads/m43-portraiture-by-livingloud.61610/
https://www.mu-43.com/threads/featured-photographs-from-morocco-by-ggibson.62877/

https://www.mu-43.com/resources/voigtlander-nokton-42-5mm-f-0-95-real-world-review.36/
https://www.mu-43.com/threads/featured-my-portrait-work-with-m43-can-it-hang-with-the-big-boys-by-spatulaboy.58189/

Cheers.

Well said! I am very tempted to move over to Sony A6300 if I can save up for it to match with my F3 for a B cam.

But.... even for me the odds are very high I might just as well get a G7 instead (or as well?), as my multi camera and low budget camera set up is all based around Panasonic.
2x GH1 + G6 + G3 + GF3
 

Used 2x GH1 today on a no budget music video shoot so we could do it fast on dual matching cameras.

Used my G6 today on a club party promo video (and F3 would've been far too bulky, and RISKY, to use in that *crazy* environment), and gave my GH1 body to my second shooter to grab a few extra shots during the night.

And I'll be using my whole set of Panasonic cameras tomorrow on a wedding.

So yup, they're still getting a good workout from me! Thus a G7 is very tempting.

But I'm in no rush I can wait for them to drop down to US$300ish ;-) Hopefully NAB has a few juicy announcements to help push their prices down faster....

 

7 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

I returned my G7 but it is a very good image/dollar. And it is so freeking light its scary. It weighs nothing. Pretty comfortable to.

Its retail price is down to $420. And everything points to it following the same path as thr G6 did here. Meaning it will cost around $270 before winter. 

Which of course gives it a used value of $200, and thats being extremly generous. Used price today is $300 for mint condition with +1 year warranty.

All this is imo because of a totally over saturated market. There is imo no way all these brands can keep competing like this. Maybe Samsung did the smartest move and just got out. 

Wish I could find those $200 used prices that you can

3 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

Im not a big fan of Scandinavian Photo, don't know what gave you that idea. Just use prisjakt.se, who has the energy to look around.
The price is on three of the biggest retailers, http://www.prisjakt.nu/produkt.php?p=3144178

"600-700 USD"... what a rip off.

ohhhh.... they're using EXACTLY the same looking website as our PriceSpy in New Zealand:
http://pricespy.co.nz/product.php?p=3144178

 

As you can see it is waaaaaaaaay more expensive here in NZ :-( :-(

[jagnje]

I`m seeing quite a bit of aliasing and moire in just about every a6300 video. I thought that was over with since the a7s and onward.

[Swiss]

Can't really judge a camera by youtube footage or it would have to be made by a talented videographer and with a good grade on slog-2 or slog-3. Waiting to see a video like that.

The reasons why i want this camera is that it will give me more solutions for easier creativity like good autofocus for gimbal use, 120fps for slow motion,4k for reframing stabilization and overall better resolution. Now that vimeo also do 4k it won't hurt either. 4k can also be a positive point to sell your videos to client because they don't know better. I know that i will deliver in 4k soon because why not. 

My only concerns now are if the motion is not right and the s-log3 issue that you guys have mentioned and maybe the overheating. So it would be better to use S-log2 till they fix that with a firmware update ?

 

[Gianluca]

I can confirm 1,1x crop factor at 120p over s35 or 1,65x over full frame mode....  Someone tried today the camera

[alexO]

Gianluca, what is the crop for 4K at 30fps? Same as 120fps or worse?

[TheRenaissanceMan]

8 minutes ago, alexO said:

Gianluca, what is the crop for 4K at 30fps? Same as 120fps or worse?

Iirc it should be the same.

[The Chris]

3 hours ago, jagnje said:

I`m seeing quite a bit of aliasing and moire in just about every a6300 video. I thought that was over with since the a7s and onward.

I've only watched a few videos, the lack of aliasing stood out to me when watching on a 4k monitor. Power lines and all those intersecting lines are clean from these three videos. This is just part of the screen cap, not a full 2160p image, hopefully it can be viewed at full size.

[jagnje]

so it`s my monitor?

at 47sec on the garage door...there is no moire on a 4k monitor?

 

[The Chris]

1 hour ago, jagnje said:

so it`s my monitor?

at 47sec on the garage door...there is no moire on a 4k monitor?

 

If you're watching 4k on a HD monitor, then you will see crazy amounts of aliasing and moire. At 0:47 it looks clean to me. Make sure to click the image to get the full size.

 

[Mattias Burling]

Either way, if the a6300 doesnt have moire I will be shocked. The a7sii has it, as well as every other Sony mirrorless. Maybe they got it right, but statistically it doesnt look good.

[The Chris]

Just now, Mattias Burling said:

Either way, if the a6300 doesnt have moire I will be shocked. The a7sii has it, as well as every other Sony mirrorless. Maybe they got it right, but statistically it doesnt look good.

I'm sure it will since most rolling shutter cameras have it - as we've clearly seen in your wall of moire - but so far 4k looks pretty good. Hopefully you can get your hands on one to put it to the torture test.

[Mattias Burling]

5 minutes ago, The Chris said:

I'm sure it will since most rolling shutter cameras have it - as we've clearly seen in your wall of moire - but so far 4k looks pretty good. Hopefully you can get your hands on one to put it to the torture test.

Rolling shutter doesnt have much to do with it actually. Resolution. downsampling, etc is the key.

The D16 was worse than the BMPC4K. And it has a global shutter.

Panasonic is on the right track. The lx100 is very very clean. 

[KrisAK]

Native HD footage (over at Camera Labs) shows a severe drop-off in detail, compared with the same scene shot UHD and downsampled.

Does it not do full-frame readout for HD? I'm a little concerned about the quality of the 60p.

(I just saw AlexO's earlier comment about this issue, and yes, that's the material I'd watched.)

But the question remains: how's the native 60p, compared with something like the Panasonic G7? 

 

[KrisAK]

Here's an extremely rough comparison between the two shots posted at Camera Labs. Does the loss of detail in the upper-half (native HD) seem excessive?

[Andrew Reid]

Yes it does

Best to shoot 4K with it even for 1080p delivery

Bottom shot S-LOG 3? Off-colour bands in the sky

S-LOG 2 all the way with this camera!