a6300 news

Who actually thought the a6300 would go head to head with a C300 of F5? It's interesting but doesn't change how I feel about the camera really. I work in local broadcast and I don't need this test to say if I should use whatever camera I need for the shot. I wonder how a GoPro would fair in this testing :-D

This quote pretty much sums it up for me.

"This camera is not suitable for use in general broadcasting, apart from Special Purposes where its physical size or shape makes it uniquely suited to a particular type of shot."
I hate to say this but broadcast news viewers don't care about image quality. I see more sloppy camera work in local news gathering than crappy image quality from cameras.

Also this is only half the story. As a a6000 owner the a6300 is a much improved stills camera and the AF alone makes it great value and worthy upgrade in both stills and video. Yes HD isn't very good but the UHD is. Just stay away from slog3. The codec can't handle it in post. YMMV but it's just not worth it to me.

Yesterday I was out shooting scenics with a a7rii and the Metabones attached to the Canon 24-105. I was thrilled how good the AF was for stills. That alone is huge for me. Again I look at the a6300 as an upgrade to my a6000 not a a7rii, a7sii replacement. Those cameras are so much better and they should be for three times the price.
 
Last edited:
I just got my a6300 and love it It will live on a gimbal will run UHD in Cine gamma4 a minute or two at a time throughout the day in concert with the fs7. If it overheats ill get a second body it costs a little more than two shitty go pros. What- the BBC said something? I'm sorry I wasn't paying attention....
 
BrianMurphy said:
As someone who spent the better part of the last 40 years in Broadcast, I find this review neither here nor there. Broadcast in my humble opinion is a joke these days, Skype is good enough for most news networks, as a matter of fact they will take pretty well anything any codec. Broadcast drama and sports are perhaps another cup of tea but for most, a good HD image will work and there are some brokers who are still demanding ten year old Sony and Panasonic cameras when they call over lighter and faster EFP/ENG cameras. But some old dogs never learn new tricks. Not this old dog. The big network stuff is shot on fine equipment of all sorts from Sony to ALexa to Red and Panasonic and that will never change, despite the fact that everything is compressed to the max to minimize the bandwidth and keep the cable and sat and web distribution as low cost as possible. As a camera person, 75% of what I shoot is for on-line/web use. The rest is Sports and news and the odd commercial here and there. I don't think I am unlike many others who are looking at buying an A6300. Yep I am pissed off about the overheating, but don't care about the rolling shutter and will use this camera to replace my NEX 7 which also had the overheating problems, but still did good work the way I use it. I think there was a time when many people lived and died on the BBC and CBC standards (in my country Canada) but it becomes less and less important as times change. I am buying one, will ***** about its failings and exploit its good points to the max. It is a $1K camera....kinda says it all in my books.
Click to expand...


Amen, I for one love this little thing. I have had it for two weeks and its almost paid for itself.
 
Broadcast tests have always been complete jokes. You could buy a really shitty broadcast approved 1/3" camera that made horrible images but passed all the tests, or you could get something more cinematic that didn't pass any tests and thus was not "approved".
 
Boon said:
Content is KING!
Click to expand...
After a violent overthrow in his native land, the King was sent packing in favor of a brutish thug called Marketing. The deposed king tried setting up a government in absentia, murmuring something about characters and the three act structure but it was all for nought as Marketing made a pact to hold onto his throne by enlisting support from similar fiefdom rulers Big Budget and Special Effect.
 
We have a reporter who is a digital corespondent here at my station. He shoots everything with a 5D MKII. Does great work and wins multiple Emmy's every year. Knowing how to shoot and tell stories is far more important than passing a "broadcast camera requirement test"
 
The news feeds are full of badly framed, overexposed, underexposed badly lit, slightly out of focus, blueish, yellowish footage shot by "professionals" that meets all the tech specs of all the networks.

Any one who ever had to edit a piece from news feeds knows how atrocious it can be, but- totally within the technical broadcast standards
 
Sorry guys haven't been able to do much testing (was suppose to be comparing the GH4, A6300, A7R II, FS5 and possibly the FS7 at work as we decide on our B Cam for our crews but I have caught a terrible Upper respiratory Infection that has kept me in bed the past few days). Also I don't get why people are saying the 1080 footage is terrible. From what I shot with it with sharpness turned to +3 at this past weeks wedding the footage looks fine to me. Maybe if I had the FS5 with me or a GH4 to compare I could see a difference but the 1080 results I am getting have been more than acceptable.

Handheld is just not looking well sadly with the rolling shutter though, but Has anyone been able to test either the 18-105mm Zoom or a Canon 24-105mm with speedbooster on the A6300? Wonder how well the image stabalization helps (and how it compares to the In camera stabalization on the A7R II as that is tempting as well for me.)
 
Quick 4K UHD test of the Sony a6300 with Sony FE 70-200mm f/4.0 G OSS Lens @200mm F4 . I just got it delivered late this afternoon and there was a thunderstorm coming so it was on a tripod with the wind getting stronger.

The stock settings shows more natural colors than the stock vibrant setting on the NX1. The a6300 looks like 1EV overexposure compared to the NX1 that I shot last summer of the same bike with a 50mm F1.4 Pentax @ F4 up closer.
 
Thanks for posting. I just can't get past the rolling shutter on the a6300. Even with the controlled movement in your video I can see the tree going angled. It is on the verge of wobble the entire time and you are on tripod. Handheld seems like a stretch. If the NX-1 image had less mid/shadow contrast I would prefer it over the Sony. But both are capable of great looks.
 
yes terrible rs even on tripod - wide angle, don't move the camera, and hope the sun doesnt come out - this camera is so frustratingly restrictive, had my eye on it but too many issues for me
 
i have a problem with A6300,IN 4K is not possible to change LCD display ilumination..in HD is ok..
 
Last edited:
joe1946 said:
I just did a quick AF test with my FE 70-200mm and it beats my NX1 and GH4 by a bunch.
Click to expand...

Very impressive.

Also: those compression artifacts when it goes from the trees to the trunk are the worst I've seen in a long, long time. They are not on the original footage (I downloaded and checked), it's a vimeo thing. Really awful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top