Sony A6000 or used Canon 60D? Motion & stills

[Matrox]

Hi guys,

 

Since 2012, I'm shooting with Sony SLT-A35. It's a great camera, but it doesn't have manual controls of shutter and ISO. I could live with automatic ISO, but with "jumpy" shutter I can't get that cinematic look.

 

This year, I'm thinking about buying a new camera. It will be dedicated not only for films, but also for stills. 

 

Probably, it will be Sony A6000 or Canon 60D. 

 

Why A6000?

• great for stills (solid sensor, 24mpx, brilliant autofocus, good low light performance)
• really nice video quality, although with poor AVCHD
• light and compact
• clean HDMI out - I can buy Ninja Star for 300$ and record uncompressed footage
• EVF, which I adore
• 1080p@60fps

Cons: 

• no audio input

Why 60D?

• Magic Lantern and tons of options with it
• articulated screen
• audio input

Cons:

• video and photo quality slightly worse than A6000
• less dynamic range
• no EVF
• weak AF for stills (compared to A6000)

 

So, I would totally buy Sony A6000, but lack of audio input is the one thing that makes me consider 60D. However, Canon has Magic Lantern and tons of customization available, but the overall photo and video quality is not so good as on A6000.

 

What would you recommend? My budget - only for camera - is around 850$.

[Quirky]

I have no comment on which of those should you buy for yourself, it's your money, your decision.

However, if you're shooting with a Sony SLT camera now and your emphasis is more than, or as much on video as in stills, why would you even consider a dSLR in the first place? Well, suppose the Canon lenses without an aperture ring are easier to use in video mode than most typical dSLR ones without aperture ring, including the Sony A-mount ones, but still... 

 

As for the no audio imput in the a6000, well, you can attach the Sony hotshoe mic and possibly some other audio gear too. The other option to bypass the no mic input issue is using an external recorder like the Star or the Ninja 2 and use the audio inputs of the recorder. Or, just settle for the good ol' dual audio with an external audio recorder. Doing it like the big boys.

 

As for the SLT a35 not having manual control for ISO, are you absolutely sure about that? I have been under the impression that all Sony interchangeable lens cameras have manual control for ISO. In manual mode you can also control shutter speed when shooting video. It's only the autofocus mode that insists on shutter set to auto. Set the focus to manual, and you're able to set both shutter speed and aperture manually, as well as ISO. At least that's the way it's being done in all the other SLT models.

 

In other words, set the camera to M mode, set the AF to M mode, and choose your preferred ISO, don't leave it in Auto mode, and you're all set. Then, the only practical annoyance left is the fact that changing aperture while in video mode is tedious, practically a no-go. Better to use either variable ND filters or manual lenses. Or both.

 

Which brings me to the money saving tip;

If you wish to improve the video shooting capabilities of your existing SLT camera without buying a new camera, let alone a whole new system, just start buying some Samyang Cine lenses or some other manual lenses which you can use with an adapter. The M42 ones are one very inexpensive option. You can also use Leica R lenses, for example, but that requires a change of the mount in the lens. The adapter plates aren't that expensive or hard to change, though.

 

Since you've already got a Sony system with at least one lens, and possibly some other gear, too, the a6000 would be a logical and cheaper choice from those two. Although you could use Sony A-mount lenses with a Canon, too, but not as fluently. I believe there is an adapter for that, at least a manual one. The rest is up to you and your personal preferences.

[pablogrollan]

Well, as an owner of both 7D a a6000, I believe the video functions of the a6000 would make your life much easier.

 

- 60D has a mic input but no headphone jack, which renders the mic input useless (recording without monitoring??) unless you install ML and use a miniUSB to jack adapter to monitor through the AVout of the 60D. For paid work I personally would never use a hacked camera, and the 60D is not the most recommendable ML camera for raw video, not to mention the hassle of raw file mangement and workflow.

 

- Exposure is hard to judge with the good ol' Canon DSLRs. The meter is just a reference that won't tell you if part of the frame is overexposed. Zebras on the a6000 make it easier. The AVCHD is not the best codec, but keep in mind not all implementations of the codec are the same (Sony FS700 vs. Olympus EM-10, for example). The AVCHD footage from the a6000 is at least as gradeable as the quicktime h.264 from the 60D.

 

- I use legacy Nikon and Tamron glass + Samyang Cine Lenses on the a6000 and they are much easier to adapt to the Sony e-mount via speedbooster than to the EOS mount. I can't speak about AF speed beacuase I hardly use it, but I can tell you that having focus peaking is a must for video (in the Canon you have to either measure exposure and focus distance first or eyeball everything).

 

As for the a6000 EVF, I like it for stills but for video is not so comfortable and I still prefer to use a kinotehnik loupe (120 €) on the lcd screen (which you would also need on the 60D).

 

Canon batteries last longer, but Sony's are smaller and you can easily fit 3 in your pocket

 

So unless you really go the ML way (which is not my cup of tea), the only advantage of the Canon is body sturdiness. Though the a6000 is well built, it is so tiny that it doesn't feel nearly as robust as a Canon body with its large grip and big buttons, but I guess that's a matter of taste. Fully rigged with separate audio recording or on a tripod the difference is not so noticeable.

[Matrox]

I knew that if I would ask on EOSHD, the responses will be great :) Thank you guys!

 

 

As for the no audio imput in the a6000, well, you can attach the Sony hotshoe mic and possibly some other audio gear too. The other option to bypass the no mic input issue is using an external recorder like the Star or the Ninja 2 and use the audio inputs of the recorder. Or, just settle for the good ol' dual audio with an external audio recorder. Doing it like the big boys.

 

Yes, you're right. However, Sony audio hardware is not cheap, but still, can be the solution.

 

 

As for the SLT a35 not having manual control for ISO, are you absolutely sure about that? I have been under the impression that all Sony interchangeable lens cameras have manual control for ISO. In manual mode you can also control shutter speed when shooting video. It's only the autofocus mode that insists on shutter set to auto. Set the focus to manual, and you're able to set both shutter speed and aperture manually, as well as ISO. At least that's the way it's being done in all the other SLT models.

 

Newer models have full manual controls, but mine hasn't. To have at least basic settings, I must shoot in Aperture mode, where I can set f-value. In manual, camera completely ignores ISO, shutter and aperture. It is also said in the instruction:

 

 

Since you've already got a Sony system with at least one lens, and possibly some other gear, too, the a6000 would be a logical and cheaper choice from those two. Although you could use Sony A-mount lenses with a Canon, too, but not as fluently. I believe there is an adapter for that, at least a manual one. The rest is up to you and your personal preferences.

 

 

 

I had done research and it looks like there aren't any Sony A-Mount to Canon EF adapters. 

 

 

unless you install ML and use a miniUSB to jack adapter to monitor through the AVout of the 60D. For paid work I personally would never use a hacked camera, and the 60D is not the most recommendable ML camera for raw video, not to mention the hassle of raw file mangement and workflow.

 

 

Oh, I don't know that you can use that miniUSB adapter :) That's tricky. Talking about Magic Lantern - is not stable on 60D? I wouldn't shoot in RAW on 60D, but I'll use ML if it's stable.

 

 

- Exposure is hard to judge with the good ol' Canon DSLRs. The meter is just a reference that won't tell you if part of the frame is overexposed. Zebras on the a6000 make it easier. The AVCHD is not the best codec, but keep in mind not all implementations of the codec are the same (Sony FS700 vs. Olympus EM-10, for example). The AVCHD footage from the a6000 is at least as gradeable as the quicktime h.264 from the 60D.

 

Yup, on Sony SLT (and on NEX as well) you can easily see your exposure. It works really great.

I saw some movies on A6000 and they look good. If Sony would put XAVC-S in A6000, it would be outstanding camera and no-brainer for me. Also, flat profiles are more convenient than on mine A35.

 

 

- I use legacy Nikon and Tamron glass + Samyang Cine Lenses on the a6000 and they are much easier to adapt to the Sony e-mount via speedbooster than to the EOS mount. I can't speak about AF speed beacuase I hardly use it, but I can tell you that having focus peaking is a must for video (in the Canon you have to either measure exposure and focus distance first or eyeball everything).

 

As for the a6000 EVF, I like it for stills but for video is not so comfortable and I still prefer to use a kinotehnik loupe (120 €) on the lcd screen (which you would also need on the 60D).

 

You're right - it's easy to adapt almost any lenses on E-mount. There are plenty of adapters. I have focus peaking on A35 and I don't know how people without it can shoot ;) It makes focusing really easy, even in hard situations. However, on 60D with ML I would have it, too.

 

What would say about video quality between 7D and A6000? Which one do you prefer?

[pablogrollan]

 

What would say about video quality between 7D and A6000? Which one do you prefer?

 

a6000, no doubt. I shot with the 7D for many years until it became an extension of my own self. Menus, dials, wheels and buttons are top notch (it still is the flagship Canon APS-C and buid quality is better than 5D MkII). The a6000 was released in April and is not as "intuitive" for me yet.

 

But image quality wise, it is much shaper without the digitally over-sharpened look of Panasonic's M43 sensors (IMHO) and light sensitivity blows the 7D out of the water. I use it with a Nikon to e-mount speedbooster that gives me Full Frame FOV & DOF plus an addtional stop of light and sensitivity is great with much less noise.

 

Back in the day, the 7D was better than the 5D when it came to highlight protection and rolloff, but the trade off was that it was not nearly as sensitive and the blacks got really noisy. Even in properly lit situations, if you had a tad too much shadow even in 320 ISO the noise was very noticeable, and with the a6000 the noise is calm, less obvious and very "cleanable" with neatvideo.

 

Moire and aliasing were also a problem of the Canons (7D, 60D or even 550D were the same) that forced you to avoid brickwalls and wires. Not a problem at all with the a6000.

 

Rolling shutter was decent on the 7D but it is also much better on the a6000.

 

Like I said, what I really miss in the a6000 is the build construction and weather sealing of the 7D (a tank). With the 7D I shot a whole morning in a Spa-Sauna and though I had to clean condensation from the lens every 2 minutes the camera worked flawlessly and no moisture got into the electronics. Wouldn't try that with an a6000. Still the 600€ consumer Sony kicks the 2000€ Pro Canon's ass in terms of image quality...  

[Matrox]

Moire and aliasing were also a problem of the Canons (7D, 60D or even 550D were the same) that forced you to avoid brickwalls and wires. Not a problem at all with the a6000.

 

Rolling shutter was decent on the 7D but it is also much better on the a6000.

 

Thank you for sharing your opinion, it is really helpful. So it does look that I should give A6000 a try ;) Among APS-C Sony cameras, A6000 seems to have the best video quality. 

 

Speaking about audio, I've checked audio recorders and for 100$ I could buy Zoom H1 and for ~50-100$ an extra microphone and this setup should work great. Audio was my biggest concern, but if I can get decent audio for around 150$, A6000 seems like the better choice.

 

I was also thinking about used 5D Mark II. Unfortunately, it's way more expensive (typically around 1300$ for camera that shot ~100k images). Would it be better to wait more and buy 5DM2?

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

The newer generation A6000, Nikon D5300, have much better image quality than the old generation 5D Mk II, 60D, 7D, They are more detailed, no moire and aliasing, better low-light sensitivity and less rolling shutter... The best budget cameras for both video and stills are the Nikon D3300/D5300, and Sony A6000 right now. The Panasonics like the G6 are great too if your main focus is on video 

[pablogrollan]

5D Mark II is quite an old camera that has exactly the same advantages/disadvantages than a 60D (well built, good ergonomics, lack of headphone jack, soft video, no peaking or zebras...) The only difference is that it is full frame. It all comes down to your video/still needs and what you want to buy.

 

If it were me, going to the artic, the desert or a combat zone would be the only reasons to choose it over, say an A7 (1300$ new with kit lens). Specs-wise, both the 7D and the 5D MkII have long been surpassed. They are still around just because they are really well built cameras and the stills world has evolved very little in those years. A raw still from the 5D has only a little less dynamic range than from some other modern cameras because the improvements in stills have been incremental: a few more cross focus points, one or two more frames per second in burst, a few more megapixels, but -for many photogs invested in Canon glass- nothing to justify switching to a new mirrorless system after many years of faithful professional service.

 

For that price (1300$) you can get a new 70D body with improved autofocus and tilting screen...

 

I do 95% of video and 5% of stills, so for me switching to mirrorless was a no-brainer, but many of my colleagues in the stills world, working for newspapers and magazines still have their old 1D or 5DMkII and have not seen reason to even buy the 5DMkIII.

 

As for audio, I'd look for the Tascam recorders of the same price range. Depending on your needs you can plug a Rode mic shotgun or a lav like this:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/618739-REG/Sennheiser_EW_112P_G3_A_EW112_p_G3_Camera_Mount.html

 

Yeah, I know that lav is expensive, but totally worth it if you are going to shoot an interview for example. Cheap Lavs sound plasticky and terrible. And mics are not something subject to crazy innovation, so this lav will still be a workhorse ten years from now.

[Matrox]

The newer generation A6000, Nikon D5300, have much better image quality than the old generation 5D Mk II, 60D, 7D, They are more detailed, no moire and aliasing, better low-light sensitivity and less rolling shutter... The best budget cameras for both video and stills are the Nikon D3300/D5300, and Sony A6000 right now. The Panasonics like the G6 are great too if your main focus is on video 

 

I was playing with G6 in the store and I loved it. Really handy and video quality is great. Unfortunately, for stills it's not so good. If I would be looking for a camera only for videos, then I'll definitely bought G6.

 

 

5D Mark II is quite an old camera that has exactly the same advantages/disadvantages than a 60D (well built, good ergonomics, lack of headphone jack, soft video, no peaking or zebras...) The only difference is that it is full frame. It all comes down to your video/still needs and what you want to buy.

 

If it were me, going to the artic, the desert or a combat zone would be the only reasons to choose it over, say an A7 (1300$ new with kit lens). Specs-wise, both the 7D and the 5D MkII have long been surpassed. They are still around just because they are really well built cameras and the stills world has evolved very little in those years. A raw still from the 5D has only a little less dynamic range than from some other modern cameras because the improvements in stills have been incremental: a few more cross focus points, one or two more frames per second in burst, a few more megapixels, but -for many photogs invested in Canon glass- nothing to justify switching to a new mirrorless system after many years of faithful professional service.

 

You're absolutely right. I know that we can't fully trust DxOMark with their tests, but this speaks a little: 

 

 

A7 is a lovely camera, but I can't afford it. Actually, there is a gap on the market. If you want to go beyond A6000/D5300 quality, you're only option are high-end DSLRs (5D Mark III) or high-end mirrorless cameras (GH3/GH4/A7S/A7). 

 

I mean, in the end, camera is just the camera. I still don't believe that I shot this movie 

[Quirky]

Speaking about audio, I've checked audio recorders and for 100$ I could buy Zoom H1 and for ~50-100$ an extra microphone and this setup should work great. Audio was my biggest concern, but if I can get decent audio for around 150$, A6000 seems like the better choice.

 

You can get the Sony Sony ECM-XYST1M hotshoe mic for around 150€ or thereabouts, depending on the place you buy it from. You also get 15% or more off the Sony peripherals in the Sony online store upon registering your camera. I don't own that mic but looks like it's decent for the price, and you also get a mic signal out and a cable with it, so it's not limited to the hotshoe connection only. You could plug it in the H1 audio recorder, for example.

 

My suggestion would be to get both the hotshoe mic and the (circa 95€) Zoom H1n, either right away or eventually. Both equipped with a fluffy wind protector, of course. That way you can record both with the onboard mic and a second audio track with the Zoom, and then assemble a great sounding audio track in post. That's worth the extra hundred or so.

 

Another dual audio route would be to buy the H1n and a Røde Videomic or Videomic Pro, for example, to accompany the Zoom, and just use the internal mic of the a6000 for reference audio. Either a stand for the recorder/mic or a flash bracket, or both, would be very useful, too. I've used such a combo, and still do, and for price of the H1 + Røde Videomic combo the performance is good. 

 

As for the a35 manual  controls in video mode, ouch, didn't know that. That's a bit of a bummer. Looks like the non-articulating lcd screen was not the only thing they've cut costs in the case of that model.

[Matrox]

So last Saturday I shot wedding on Canon 7D and Sony SLT-A35 (stills only).

 

As pablogrollan said, 7D is a tank. Heavy, but solid. However, it's not as intuitive and easy to use as Sony. Optical viewfinder is tricky and you really need to carefully watch the scene to get that right exposure. Also, black focus confirmation marks are terrible and you can barely see them in low light. In A35, focus marks are green when "nailed", so you can easily check what's in focus and what's not.  

 

What I liked about 7D, apart from build quality? Fast autofocus in low light and, let's call it, "60fps in ovf" ;) Shutter lag with flash on A35 is 0,4 seconds, while on 7D it's only 0,2 sec. Difference is huge.