a6300 news

Always be aware, if you're shooting in S-Log (2 or 3) and are exposing "properly" according to Sony's standards, you are exposing 2 stops lower than usual (stills mode). Mid grey is at -2 in S-Log, to make room for the bigger highlight range of these gammas.
 
MichaelFischer.at said:
Always be aware, if you're shooting in S-Log (2 or 3) and are exposing "properly" according to Sony's standards, you are exposing 2 stops lower than usual (stills mode). Mid grey is at -2 in S-Log, to make room for the bigger highlight range of these gammas.
Click to expand...

So by Sonys eposure recommendation, are you supposed to account for that in post or just leave it where it is and apply a lut?
 
Samuel H said:
Reasons for going for an a7R II instead: high-mpix stills with -probably- more DR (I'm talking RAW stills here), IBIS, shallower DoF if you stick to FF mode (which you can also get on the a6300 with a speedbooster but then your corners will be slightly softer). None of those would convince me to spend the extra $1500-$2200, but there they are.
Reasons for going for an a7S II instead: IBIS, extreme low light, shallower DoF (same speedbooster-on-a6300 comment). Again, far from enough for the $$$$ if you ask me, but YMMV.
Click to expand...
That autofocus is unique and again takes it to it's own class (with this pricing of course). This is very clever thing on Sony side, every single new body has features unique to itself.
 
mcgeedigital said:
Apples and oranges. One is a video camera and the other is and mirrorless digital still camera that happens to also record video.
Click to expand...

GH4, A7RII/S/SII and now A6300 all jumped to the top of sales charts due to their video features, namely the availability of 4K (either via the internal or the external means). Besides, all the manufacturers - except Canon and Nikon, for the time being - are preaching conversion of the video and stills worlds. Apples, oranges, fruits and berries -- it's all a part of a big fruit basket.

I say this will happen at either the NAB in April or the PhotoKina in September.
 
It is tough to say about 10-bit but if drooping still camera sales are lifted by video centric buyers, no doubt it will shorten the time frame. All they would have to do is make a video designation on a still model variant, raise the price and add the extra codec horsepower. Panasonic came pretty close with the YAGH unit.
 
JoeThePro said:
So by Sonys eposure recommendation, are you supposed to account for that in post or just leave it where it is and apply a lut?
Click to expand...

You have to be aware of that and (over)expose at +2 by S-Log standards. If you need to be compatible with S-Log LUTs, build yourself a -2 LUT via LUTCalc or do it like this. Should you clip your highlights that way, expose lower of course, but usually you should be fine!
 
This is a quickie from B&H, sort of comparing all of Sony's video geared models, A7SII, A7RII and FS7.

 
JoeThePro said:
I did try LGG and contrast adjustments as well, same result, maybe a bit less chroma noise. Slog3 just wont yield super clean results even with the improved sensor tech. Looks like slog2 is probably the better way to go.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Thanks.

Also, looking at that BH test, slog3 has even more noise than slog2, so it's probably underexposing even one or two stops more. For no gain in the highlights. Yes, it seems Slog2 is the way to go here...
 
Question, I have never used a speedbooster before. Does using a speed booster on the A6300 add to the rolling shutter issue....or make it better?
 
JoeThePro said:
A speedbooster is a lens... last time I checked, lenses dont affect sensor readout speed. :)
Click to expand...

My thought is that FOV may alter the level of RS. Since you would be shooting with an expanded field of view...the RS in APS-C mode could have a different perceived difference than say a FF field of view. Or at least, that is my question...I may be over thinking it.


Kinda like this Phillip Bloom test...but I understand its slightly different.

https://vimeo.com/100163084
 
Indeed: speedbooster is a lens, and it doesn't affect sensor readout speed. It does affect how much you notice the rolling shutter, though, but only if you're doing a very weird comparison in which the FoV is not constant: if you put a 50mm on the a6300 and do exactly the same camera movements, you'll notice worse rolling shutter with a standard adapter than with the speedbooster. But that's because you're changing FoV. Now, compare a 50mm lens with speedbooster vs a 35mm lens without speedbooster, and there's absolutely no difference in terms of RS.
 
Samuel H said:
Indeed: speedbooster is a lens, and it doesn't affect sensor readout speed. It does affect how much you notice the rolling shutter, though, but only if you're doing a very weird comparison in which the FoV is not constant: if you put a 50mm on the a6300 and do exactly the same camera movements, you'll notice worse rolling shutter with a standard adapter than with the speedbooster. But that's because you're changing FoV. Now, compare a 50mm lens with speedbooster vs a 35mm lens without speedbooster, and there's absolutely no difference in terms of RS.
Click to expand...


JoeThePro....Samuel is giving us the exact answer I was looking for and is about what I expected. Sounds like that is a good thing for you to know as well ;)

Thank you Samuel, thats exactly what I was trying to find out.
 
ReelWorksMedia said:
JoeThePro....Samuel is giving us the exact answer I was looking for and is about what I expected. Sounds like that is a good thing for you to know as well ;)

Thank you Samuel, thats exactly what I was trying to find out.
Click to expand...

Mike, I already knew that rolling shutter is less noticeable on a wide lens compared to a longer lens, but I guess I didnt realize this is what you were asking. I need to not assume people just know this, I thought you were asking if something with the way the lens works could affect it. Didnt mean to come off rudely.
 
lyrov said:
https://www.cinema5d.com/sony-a6300-vs-sony-a7s-ii-how-good-is-it-really/
Click to expand...

"Another point to note is that, unlike the A7S II, the Sony a6300 has no difference in dynamic range between S-log2 and S-log3. However, the a6300 uses an 8-bit codec so we’d recommend avoiding S-log3 altogether; use S-log2."

Strange, I wonder if this is true, and why?

"In fact, with a readout speed of about 34 milliseconds from top to bottom, it is the most severe rolling shutter we have ever measured on a camera!"

I knew it was bad, but wow.

"When we look at a moving image, the noise reminds me of the results of temporal noise reduction, which can be found in software like DaVinci Resolve. This algorithm calculates the difference in noise between adjacent frames. I’m not saying this is what’s happening here, but lowlight images show a kind of unnaturally slow moving noise, which might be an issue for some. Overall the lowlight behaviour is really impressive on this camera. It gets close to the performance of the Sony a7S II"

"we observed that the internal noise reduction of the camera seems to be working a little differently, calculating the difference between frames – which results in some ghosting with fast movement. "

I'd bet they are doing temporal NR in cam, I noticed TERRIBLE ghosting at high ISO in the a6000. Looks like they havent fixed this, but from what I've seen it looks to be handled better than before, at least.

"The camera can shoot in full HD resolution, but the image is very soft and dirty in terms of aliasing. The Sony a7S II is much closer to the quality of the original a7S."

Bleh. Lame.
 
Last edited:
It looks like a lovely cam and value for money but with NAB just around the corner (1 month guys!!) I think it's worth waiting. We shall see what's coming
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top