Opinion Poll: Sony A6300 / A6500

[Dustin]

@jonpais I’ve seen several YouTubers raving over that one. It seems it works just fine in Sony e mount? I could be wrong though, just looks pretty sharp and I dig the focal length

[mercer]

Look up Christian Mate Grabe on YT... he used the a6500 with the Sigma 30mm 1.4 for a while... I think he shot mostly 1080p with it as well. His stuff is gorgeous. 

[Dustin]

@mercer yep, he’s one of my favorites! 

[Mark Romero 2]

9 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Can't you by hand enter in the focal length into the Sony camera? Like you can with Panasonics

Yes, you can enter focal length by hand in the menus of the a6500, but like most things, it's a pain to so so, even more if you are on a gimbal.

Haven't tried doing it on a panasonic, but I would ASSUME that it is easier, just because it seems easier to do everything on a panasonic.

44 minutes ago, jonpais said:

First, let me say, I've got zero experience with either the a6300 or a6500, but my guess is if you're going to be using adapted lenses or shooting with the Sigma, you're going to lose much of the af-c advantage, particularly in video mode. 

I only have ONE adapted AF lens (a Sony A Mount 85mm f/2.8 SAM on an LA-EA1) and I can confirm your suggestion. And this IS a Sony lens on a sony made adapter mounted on to an a6500.

16 minutes ago, mercer said:

Look up Christian Mate Grabe on YT... he used the a6500 with the Sigma 30mm 1.4 for a while... I think he shot mostly 1080p with it as well. His stuff is gorgeous. 

Agreed, his stuff is nice.

Isn't he using a canon now??? Like a 6D II (aka, The Camera Canon Released So That Everyone Would Buy Sony Cameras)

?

FWIW: I asked Brandon Li about using the 1080p on the a6500 and he said as long as you are using a fast lens and a shallow DOF the IQ of the 1080p out of the a6500 is fine. I think the fact that he is on a gimbal 99% of the time and using a lot of movement helps (as long as you don't buy a one-way ticket to Rolling Shutter Town).

[webrunner5]

14 minutes ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

I only have ONE adapted AF lens (a Sony A Mount 85mm f/2.8 SAM on an LA-EA1) and I can confirm your suggestion. And this IS a Sony lens on a sony made adapter mounted on to an a6500.

You really need to use the Sony LA-EA4 as it has PDAF AF in it. A lot faster and more accurate focusing. But it is expensive, and cleaning the thing is risky as it is fragile.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FSB7432/ref=as_li_tf_tl?ie=UTF8&amp&camp=1789&amp&creative=9325&amp&creativeASIN=B00FSB7432&amp&linkCode=as2&amp&tag=phillipreeven-20

[Mark Romero 2]

1 minute ago, webrunner5 said:

You really need to use the   Sony LA-EA4 as it has PDAF AF in it. A lot faster and more accurate focusing. But it is expensive, and cleaning the thing is risky as it is fragile.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FSB7432/ref=as_li_tf_tl?ie=UTF8&amp&camp=1789&amp&creative=9325&amp&creativeASIN=B00FSB7432&amp&linkCode=as2&amp&tag=phillipreeven-20

Well, there are advantages and disadvantages to the LA-EA4 (just as there are to ALL adapters).

Mostly, for me, the LA-EA4 has only a limited number of AF points, while the LA-EA1 / LA-EA3 allows one to use ALL the AF points.

Also, the LA-EA4 MIGHT require one to compensate (micro adjust) AF since the AF module in the Adapter might be at a distance different to that of the Sensor. I got sick and tired of doing that with my Nikon lenses (I had some Nikon zooms that needed -10 micro AF adjustment at the wide end, and +8 micro AF adjustments at the tele end - I have heard rumors that canon allows for micro af adjustments at two different focal lengths per lens). That is one of the reasons I went mirrorless in the first place; to avoid micro AF adjustments.

But the LA-EA2 / LA-EA 4 sure do open up a whole new world of lens options for sony users. Some nice minolta glass out there that is cheap as chips. Just need to watch out for ghosting / CA.

[webrunner5]

And one big drawback I have about the A6300, A600 is it is damn prone to the dreaded Plastic Digital look. It is the Poster Child for that problem. Skin can look like hammered dog shit on them if you push them in post. So really thinking on this thread I am not too sure I would even consider one for Weddings. Weddings are ALL about faces, and well that would be a total disaster if the whole thing, everyone looks like a Barbie Doll. Hmm.

Probably one reason the vast amount of weddings are shot on a Canon. Skin tones, paramount on wedding shots. Although Jason Lanier seems to make them work, so maybe look up one of his online lessons?? Something to look into and to think about.

[jonpais]

25 minutes ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

Yes, you can enter focal length by hand in the menus of the a6500, but like most things, it's a pain to so so, even more if you are on a gimbal.

Haven't tried doing it on a panasonic, but I would ASSUME that it is easier, just because it seems easier to do everything on a panasonic.

I only have ONE adapted AF lens (a Sony A Mount 85mm f/2.8 SAM on an LA-EA1) and I can confirm your suggestion. And this IS a Sony lens on a sony made adapter mounted on to an a6500.

Agreed, his stuff is nice.

Isn't he using a canon now??? Like a 6D II (aka, The Camera Canon Released So That Everyone Would Buy Sony Cameras)

?

FWIW: I asked Brandon Li about using the 1080p on the a6500 and he said as long as you are using a fast lens and a shallow DOF the IQ of the 1080p out of the a6500 is fine. I think the fact that he is on a gimbal 99% of the time and using a lot of movement helps (as long as you don't buy a one-way ticket to Rolling Shutter Town).

Not suggesting @Dustin get a Panny, but when mounting a lens with electronic communication, like the Sigma 16mm or 30mm DC DN or any of the Oly m43 lenses, IBIS adjusts automatically. When mounting a mechanical lens, a screen will pop up asking you to enter the focal length. It is super simple.

[webrunner5]

1 minute ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

But the LA-EA2 / LA-EA 4 sure do open up a whole new world of lens options for sony users. Some nice minolta glass out there that is cheap as chips. Just need to watch out for ghosting / CA.

Yeah there is plus and minus to doing Anything above normal for sure. But yeah there is some real bargains even in A Mount lenses, and they just about give away excellent Minolta glass. The Beer Can is a good example.

[Mark Romero 2]

2 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Not suggesting @Dustin get a Panny, but when mounting a lens with electronic communication, like the Sigma 16mm or 30mm DC DN or any of the Oly m43 lenses, IBIS adjusts automatically. When mounting a mechanical lens, a screen will pop up asking you to enter the focal length. It is super sinple. 

Yeah... well, when you register your Sony camera online, there is some small text in the End User Agreement that says:

"Camera user accepts that the word 'simple' is no longer in their vocabulary."

You will never see the word "Sony" and the word "Simple" in the same sentence unless it includes the phrase "Why isn't... ?" in it as well.

2 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Yeah there is plus and minus to doing Anything above normal for sure. But yeah there is some real bargains even in A Mount lenses, and they just about give away excellent Minolta glass. The Beer Can is a good example.

Yeah, I will probably pick up an LA-EA4 (to go along with an LA-EA3) if I move up from the a6500 to the a7 III.

I can certainly AFFORD to buy two a7 III (got to have a backup camera) and the Sony lenses for them, but I can't really JUSTIFY it. I am too much like my father was... and I guess I am ok with that.

[jonpais]

Here’s what the pop up screens look like when attaching a Veydra 25 to the GH5.

[Dustin]

@Mark Romero 2 Regarding Christian Matte, I believe he is back on Sony, mentioned in a live stream it was too heavy for his style. Back on the a7iii as seemingly every other YouTuber is at the moment.

 

Man have you guys given me stuff to think about. The a6500 / G85 have my attention. I will need to make a chart and figure out which one makes more sense. 

[BTM_Pix]

I've recently bought the Sigma 1.4 30mm lens for my A6500.

I can't bring myself to do the whole sashay towards the camera or appearing from the bottom of the frame routines to test the AF in what appears to now be the accepted industry standard manner though.

What I will say though is that in the brief testing I've done with it on non-catwalk or weightlifting simulation situations, it has thrown a couple of those "no, I'm fine where I am thanks" moments where it just wouldn't catch again that @jonpais saw on his 50mm version.

 

[Mark Romero 2]

1 minute ago, Dustin said:

Man have you guys given me stuff to think about. The a6500 / G85 have my attention. I will need to make a chart and figure out which one makes more sense. 

a6500 pros:

More detailed 4K
Better AF
120fps with AF
Better low light performance
Better dynamic range
Allows you an "upgrade" path to full frame (or maybe you can say that allows you to have a "system" that incorporates a full frame camera)
Great stills camera
Access to inexpensive Minolta glass with the right adapters that will have some limited AF funtionality

a6500 Cons:

Horrible LCD screen
Limited touch screen functionality
More likely to overheat
1080p is chock full of aliasing / moire (mostly a nuisance in static shots with large DOF and architecture, but depends on your level of tolerance)
Colors are wonky (but the EOSHD pro color packages do seem to help this out a bit)
Battery life is short
Poor ergonomics???

You can buy a cage and add a monitor and external battery and grips, or you can mount a monitor on to a gimbal and use an ultra-thin hdmi cable, and can mitigate some of the disadvantages to a certain extent. But do you want to do that?

[Dustin]

@BTM_Pix so what is your overall assessment then- general use pretty good? I’m totally fine with the occasional missed grab as it is AF. When I tested the 18-135 on the a6300 the other day at the store, I set it on af-c with face priority and it was very accurate. Focused on anything I wanted it to. 

Thats basically why I was considering that was even though it’s not a first party lens it seemed to be getting some good reviews. As long as it can hang most of the time I’d consider it.

@Mark Romero 2 Holy crap man- doing the hard work for me, thanks! And to answer that last bit- I’d rather stay as portable as possible. Maybe a cage but that would be it only if I NEEDED to rig it up for a gig.

[BTM_Pix]

21 minutes ago, Dustin said:

@BTM_Pix so what is your overall assessment then- general use pretty good? I’m totally fine with the occasional missed grab as it is AF. When I tested the 18-135 on the a6300 the other day at the store, I set it on af-c with face priority and it was very accurate. Focused on anything I wanted it to. 

Thats basically why I was considering that was even though it’s not a first party lens it seemed to be getting some good reviews. As long as it can hang most of the time I’d consider it.

Yes, its certainly functional and is a solid buy as far as I'm concerned.

I'm sure that you can probably tweak it somewhere in those menus to eek a bit more out of it.

 

[newfoundmass]

I get why people love the a6500 but at the end of the day these are deal killers for me and why I went with the GH5 and the G85 for my b-cam:

The battery life. Unless you set up some kind of external battery the number of batteries you'll eat through on an entire wedding day is ridiculous. This alone is a huge killer for me. 

The overheating. This scares the hell out of me, as someone that has never, ever had to worry about a camera overheating. Especially if I'm shooting an outdoor wedding on a hot day. It's probably more of a mental thing for me, but still, I like knowing that I'm not going to have to worry about my camera overheating, needing a break, or even shutting off when I really need it. 

The record limit. Not an issue if you're not shooting long form, however if you are, the recording limit can become a real pain in the but, especially if you're doing any external audio (which, for a wedding, you should for speeches, the actual wedding itself, etc.) Not a total deal killer but it's just a minor thing I'd prefer not to deal with. 

The rolling shutter. I don't mind a little rolling shutter but the a6xxx cameras have way too much. On a wedding shoot it's probably not a deal breaker, but overall, for me and my work, it's just too much. 

The 1080p is truly awful. I know a lot of people might not care because they will always shoot in 4K, but I still shoot regularly in 1080p for some projects and in my opinion it's unusable. 

The color science is not pleasing at all. Probably the worst out of all the major companies in my opinion. 

The form factor. This is obviously a much more personal issue, but I HATE the form factor. BLAH. 

Lens selection. It has gotten better, obviously, but still, it's still limited compared to other cameras and they come at a premium. Again though this is getting better. 

The menu system. Blah! 

All the other little issues others have raised. 

Overall I get the appeal of the low light performance and the auto focus. But they aren't enough for me personally to deal with all the other things that drive me nuts about these cameras. The A7iii does a lot to improve upon these issues, thankfully, and I think Sony will inevitably get better with this series of cameras. But right now they aren't for me. 

[newfoundmass]

Also you might want to reach out to Scott McKenna. He has a severe case of gear lust, ha ha, but it has allowed him to shoot weddings with a lot of different cameras, including the A6500. He bought the A6500, after selling one of his GH5 cameras, for a lot of the reasons you've given, but ultimately sold it because of the quirks. He did a review of it for a wedding which was pretty flattering, but he pretty quickly got rid of it; I forget which video he explained it in, it was a pretty quick explanation, but it ultimately seemed like the negatives outweighed the positives. He re-purchased a GH5. 

Another good idea might be to rent both the A6500 and the G85, put both cameras through the ringer, and see what works best for you. 

[BTM_Pix]

To be fair, its an easy hack for the unlimited record time and the USB powering means you can run it for as long as you have space on the memory card.

Or until it goes on fire, which ever happens sooner.

 

[newfoundmass]

What's the longest someone has recorded with it before it exploded into flames? Ha ha