Sony A6500 movie and photo samples are coming in

[Emanuel]

8 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Shall I review it?

Yes, indeed.

[Kisaha]

@Andrew Reid a6500 will be on the spotlight for quite a while, it would be good for the forum and the community to have an unbiased review. 

Also, there is a lot to discuss here, the camera offers more controversy than upgrade, and there are a lot of points to be made.

From where the marketing of the industry goes, rise of prices, Sony is worst in almost everything (Fuji/Nikon better iq from the same sensors-ibis better in m4/3 land-worst touch screen implmentation/batery life/ergonomics/menus in the industry-screen dims badly in 4K recording, violent devaluation of the 7 months old a6300, AF much inferior than Canon, NX1 still the best overal experience of a hybrid! APS-C lens selection underwhelming) etc

 

[Andrew Reid]

21 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

From where the marketing of the industry goes, rise of prices, Sony is worst in almost everything (Fuji/Nikon better iq from the same sensors-ibis better in m4/3 land-worst touch screen implmentation/batery life/ergonomics/menus in the industry-screen dims badly in 4K recording, violent devaluation of the 7 months old a6300, AF much inferior than Canon, NX1 still the best overal experience of a hybrid! APS-C lens selection underwhelming) etc

That's a very good summary and all true.

The A6500 is almost simultaneously the best and worse camera of its kind.

After the A6300 obsolescence came so rapidly I am very reluctant to spend 1700 euros on the A6500.

The pricing is over the top and the only new feature I value is the 5 axis IBIS, as the touch screen and AF still work so unreliably compared to Canon.

On the other hand, not much else can touch the overall features and specs for the price, not even the X-T2 as it lacks internal LOG recording, full 6K Super 35mm sensor readout and 5 axis IBIS.

[Kisaha]

Indeed, that is why it is a so controversial one!

In all, it seems like a slightly pro camera, which its main issues makes it more an amateurs camera, that is priced as a pro camera! 

We will see how it goes in sales, my guess is the a6300 will be crushed between the cheap-o a600 and the more featured a6500, and that is another chapter of the controversy.

why they had to sell such an underwhelming a6300 if they knew they had a better version almost ready? And now that they had the a6300, why didn't wait 5 more months to make an undeniable great APS-C camera?

12-13 months would be much better for the hordes of Sony fanboys that bought the a6300 a little bit less, a little bit back (the a6300 costed 1500€ in my country until recently, now it starts from 1300€. The a6500 doesn't have a price in my country yet, but I am expexting people that bought the a6300 a month ago, they will have lost almost 1000€ in a month).

There will be a a7000 in no time, and then, it would be a great camera to have. I am perfectly fine with my NX1/NX500 until then.

[Andrew Reid]

In a way though, it is like having an A7R II Super 35 image for half the price.

So it depends on how you look at it.

It's also smaller and has better stabilisation than the A7R II.

With Speed Booster the image can even compete with the A7S II 4K, but more rolling shutter.

It doesn't have a soul, but it produces great images.

[BasiliskFilm]

If you have stabilised lenses or shoot only stills, then the A6300 is a better value option. Remember people buying these cameras mostly for video are still a small part of the market, which is why there are a lot of compromises on the form factor and interface for folk who shoot video professionally. 
Still, if your shooting style allows you to work round the limitations, and you invest some time in your kit, there isn't much choice at this price point.

Even if the IS is not class leading, it does take a chunk out of the downside of the rolling shutter. For slow-mo 1080p footage (admittedly a bit soft), and even hand-held 4K shot with care, this is definitely a more useable camera for video without the cost and hassle of a gimbal.

[scotchtape]

1 hour ago, Kisaha said:

We will see how it goes in sales, my guess is the a6300 will be crushed between the cheap-o a600 and the more featured a6500, and that is another chapter of the controversy.

 

17 minutes ago, BasiliskFilm said:

Remember people buying these cameras mostly for video are still a small part of the market, which is why there are a lot of compromises on the form factor and interface for folk who shoot video professionally. 

 

A6300 will most likely not see a huge price "collapse".  Look at Sony RX100... Mk I, II, III... it is only wishful thinking to hope A6300 price craters.  Who posted that graph of sales % to pro videographers... it was like 10% max - no way it's going to make a difference.

I still really want to get this camera despite all the issues.  A lot of the time I look at my D750 footage and wish it was sharper.  Just playing around with the Panny G7 I got and ISO 3200 has so much mosquito noise it's ridiculous (I guess YT compression makes it all go away since I don't see any in the clips online).  Even though everyone complains about Sony colors, I've always hated Panny colors too!  

Maybe after getting A6500 I will hate it, who knows...  The RS is horribad and the 1080p is stupidly soft compared to the 4K, as well as the heat issues and color.  If they only fixed those 4 things and charged a bit more no one would complain.  But I guess then the camera would be "too good".

[BasiliskFilm]

53 minutes ago, scotchtape said:

Maybe after getting A6500 I will hate it, who knows...  The RS is horribad and the 1080p is stupidly soft compared to the 4K, as well as the heat issues and color.  If they only fixed those 4 things and charged a bit more no one would complain.  But I guess then the camera would be "too good".

Don't hold your breath. It's mostly down to the form factor. Maybe the 1080p can be improved, though my guess it is a 3K lineskipped image down sampled, and if they crisped it up the lineskipping might give artefacts. No one else fits so much functionality into such a small body. The "solution" is to get an A7Rii and use it in crop mode. The 6K sensor readout is going to be slow, until we get next-generation processing on to it.

[Kisaha]

1 hour ago, scotchtape said:

 

00 will most likely not see thea huge price "collapse".  Look at Sony RX100... Mk I, II, III... it is only wishful thinking to hope A6300 price craters.  Who posted that graph of sales % to pro videographers... it was like 10% max - no way it's going to make a difference.

I still really want to get this camera despite all the issues.  A lot of the time I look at my D750 footage and wish it was sharper.  Just playing around with the Panny G7 I got and ISO 3200 has so much mosquito noise it's ridiculous (I guess YT compression makes it all go away since I don't see any in the clips online).  Even though everyone complains about Sony colors, I've always hated Panny colors too!  

Maybe after getting A6500 I will hate it, who knows...  The RS is horribad and the 1080p is stupidly soft compared to the 4K, as well as the heat issues and color.  If they only fixed those 4 things and charged a bit more no one would complain.  But I guess then the camera would be "too good".

Collapsed in sales, not price, the Price will stay.

 

[Andrew Reid]

Here would be my simplified Sony line -

A9X - 20MP pro level DSLR form factor but mirrorless e-mount and EVF, replaces A99 II. Costs $3500.

Scrap the A99 and A-Mount lenses entirely. Existing A-mount lenses can be used on adapter with new cameras.

A9S - 12MP DSLR form factor but mirrorless e-mount and EVF. Video optimised, full frame, minimal rolling shutter, electronic ND, 10bit codec, costs $3500.

A9R - Resolution king (60MP+) and same form factor as above

A7 series goes from 3 cameras to 1 42MP camera for all, maintains small mirrorless body design for consumers.

Completely overhaul the menus and ergonomics of ALL cameras including RX100 series.

A6500 / RX100 / RX10 / RX1 continues, but with Panasonic LX100 like menus and ergonomics.

Bring the prices of the lenses DOWN.

Bring in ONE new entry level camera to replace A6000.

[wobba]

11 hours ago, Kisaha said:

@Andrew Reid a6500 will be on the spotlight for quite a while, it would be good for the forum and the community to have an unbiased review. 

Also, there is a lot to discuss here, the camera offers more controversy than upgrade, and there are a lot of points to be made.

From where the marketing of the industry goes, rise of prices, Sony is worst in almost everything (Fuji/Nikon better iq from the same sensors-ibis better in m4/3 land-worst touch screen implmentation/batery life/ergonomics/menus in the industry-screen dims badly in 4K recording, violent devaluation of the 7 months old a6300, AF much inferior than Canon, NX1 still the best overal experience of a hybrid! APS-C lens selection underwhelming) etc

 

You've just outlined a very compelling reason to buy an A6500.  Based on your cherry picked list, you essentially need to buy 4 camera systems to get all the features offered by the A6500.  While the Sony may need be perfect, it sure beats investing in and lugging around 4 camera systems.

[Emanuel]

a6500 is a must have. Well, Fuji's color science too ;-)

To me, Sony's low light response and S35 format coupled to reasonable AF and IBIS at the minimum LCD (stands for least common denominator) is a no-brainer.

Only price target is overrated IMO, perhaps. But aside lowest Panasonic range, isn't the remainder offer the same panorama after all?

[Trek of Joy]

4 hours ago, wobba said:

You've just outlined a very compelling reason to buy an A6500.  Based on your cherry picked list, you essentially need to buy 4 camera systems to get all the features offered by the A6500.  While the Sony may need be perfect, it sure beats investing in and lugging around 4 camera systems.

Lenses are a big deal IMO, as Sony has completely ignored APS-c for years. So you're stuck with 2 good primes that are f/1.8, the 35/50. The rest are nothing special. Most of the crop zooms are average to mediocre, and slow. The best FE/GM glass is excessively large on APS-c since it has to cover a FF sensor. GM/Zeiss lenses are not cheap, and if you shoot crop, you're essentially paying for a lot of lens you're not using. You can adapt, but to take full advantage of the AF, you have to use E-mount lenses. To cover a full range of FL's, you're almost forced to adapt or overpay for FF lenses. 

Fuji's OIS doesn't give up much to Sony's IBIS, because quite frankly, Sony hasn't completely figured it out yet. You don't get Olympus levels of stabilization, but you do get some serious rolling shutter and tons of heat. Sony has great 4k IQ, but its wrapped in a terrible body, has soft HD, and has some serious warts that Sony doesn't seem to care about as new generations suffer from the same problems. Colors can be finicky too, this site and many others are full of discussions about trying to get rid of color casts and funky skin tones.

But people keep buying Sony bodies, so they'll keep cranking them out with new headline grabbing features and price hikes, while ignoring basic usability issues that people have been complaining about for years. I've owned a ton of Sony cameras, but the churn is a big put-off for me when the same issues persist.

After using various combinations of Sony camera and others, I need more than a great sensor. As always YMMV.

[majoraxis]

The Sony Zeiss 24 f 1.8 is also excellent e-mount aps-c prime lens.  It can work as near macro lens as well - the one I have can focus as close as 3.5".  I took off the plastic inset via loosening the 3 tiny screws at the back of the lens and this allowed me to use it with the A7R II in full frame mode with  a 1.2 clear digital zoom to get ride of most of the vignetting.  There is more distortion at the outer edges than with a full frame lens. Anyways, I would love to have the a9r as Andrew describes with the addition of on sensor variable ND and of course 4D autofocus.

 

 

 

[Kisaha]

@wobba you can take it however you like, if disadvantages and amateurish problems is your forte, then be my guest!

An example is the same heating issues because of the sensor (and architecture) is differently issued by Sony and Fuji. The first just ignores it, and the second sets strictets limits and adds a (paid) battery grip. The second solution is by a serious company that care for their hardware and users base. 

For me, it is NX1/Fuji/m43 and Sony just after. I already have 3 cameras bought (the 2 best new, and the third slightly used) for as much the a6500 will cost in my country anyway.

[Django]

i dunno on paper A6500 seems impressive.. the specs are pretty killer.. indeed like a mini APS-C A7R2. 

But in practice still that god awful class-leading rolling shutter, overheating and average at best ergonomics.

Camera is now ridiculously expensive (1700€ in EU?!) for what feels like a patch-up work on a ill-suited consumer type body.

IMO Sony should just can the A6xxx series and rework the whole camera from the ground-up.. But of course that wouldn't allow the 8 month refresh rate..

 

[JurijTurnsek]

Can you guys imagine there is a whole other group of users that thinks the AF is excellent and is looking forward to that insane buffer? A6500 is expensive, but most of its features can still be had with the A6300. R&D costs and APS-C IBIS was developed for this body only (not like FF IBIS that is used in 3 bodies) and that same IBIS should be coming to the FS series, as well as AF and super slow-motion using that LSI buffer. I'm guessing that super slow-mo bursts could be coming to the A6900 too and it will be expensive, but there will be nothing like it on the market, again.

[Trek of Joy]

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

@wobba you can take it however you like, if disadvantages and amateurish problems is your forte, then be my guest!

An example is the same heating issues because of the sensor (and architecture) is differently issued by Sony and Fuji. The first just ignores it, and the second sets strictets limits and adds a (paid) battery grip. The second solution is by a serious company that care for their hardware and users base. 

For me, it is NX1/Fuji/m43 and Sony just after. I already have 3 cameras bought (the 2 best new, and the third slightly used) for as much the a6500 will cost in my country anyway.

There are Fuji run tests on YT with the grip hitting ~2.5 hours of recording before all three batteries are extinguished. Camera Labs recorded over an hour of consecutive 10 min clips before the single battery was out of juice. No overheating at all. Same sensor. I have the a6300 and I can't get three consecutive 10 min clips without the camera shutting down. I did a run test indoors, with A/C and a fan on the cam, got 43 min before the battery was empty. The Fuji grip gets you a headphone jack too, something Sony won't put in the a6x000's.

IMO some of the missing features are a deliberate effort to push people into FF and the a7 series. That's why they waited two full years to put IBIS in the APS-c line, and that's why they're letting the APS-c lens lineup collect dust. If you want headphones, a grip for better ergos/more batteries, two control dials (not putting a front dial on the a6500 grip was dumb) and so on you're SOL. Plus you're stuck with that goofy 16:9 screen that Sony has been using since the first Nex3, so when you're shooting 3:2 stills, you have a smaller view with black bars on the side.

AF is excellent and the buffer finally solves (sort of, not UHS-II so its still slow to write) one of the many complaints, but they didn't do enough to get me to fork over another $1400 a fe months after plunking down $900 for the a6300. Again, my opinon.

[Andrew Reid]

4 hours ago, JurijTurnsek said:

Can you guys imagine there is a whole other group of users that thinks the AF is excellent and is looking forward to that insane buffer?

For stills.

But this is a video forum.

The video AF is about as reliable as a Fiat Punto.

And with EF lenses it doesn't work at all (only for stills).

The insane buffer is nice.... for stills.

4 hours ago, JurijTurnsek said:

A6500 is expensive, but most of its features can still be had with the A6300.

As long as you don't mind it overheating 20 minutes into an important shoot

(This actually happened to me)

4 hours ago, JurijTurnsek said:

R&D costs and APS-C IBIS was developed for this body only (not like FF IBIS that is used in 3 bodies) and that same IBIS should be coming to the FS series, as well as AF and super slow-motion using that LSI buffer. I'm guessing that super slow-mo bursts could be coming to the A6900 too and it will be expensive, but there will be nothing like it on the market, again.

I am trying to find out if IBIS on the A6500 is significantly better than the A7S II, so far I feel it is a bit better but nothing dramatic.

[JurijTurnsek]

34 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

As long as you don't mind it overheating 20 minutes into an important shoot

(This actually happened to me)

I am trying to find out if IBIS on the A6500 is significantly better than the A7S II, so far I feel it is a bit better but nothing dramatic.

A6500 will record longer, but it will give you sever burns if you try to hold it. Not much of an improvement here. And IBIS does not need to be better that their FF IBIS - but it had to be developed for the smaller sensor size. It probably wasn't a trivial task, hence the costly R&D.

Know the limitations and work with them. You suffered Canon's shortcomings for years and now have to live with Sony's. No perfect camera, still.