A7 or A6000 for video?

Unless DP Review got it wrong:
[TABLE="class: contentTable"]
[TR]
[TH="class: super, colspan: 2"]Videography features[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="class: sub"]Resolutions[/TH]
[TD="class: propertyValue"]1920 x 1080 (60p, 60i, 24p), 1440 x 1080 (30p, 25p), 1280 x 720 (120p), 640 x 480 (30p, 25p)
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
 
My thought would be to buy the A7S and one good zoom lens. Then as you have money add lenses and the XLR adapter. For a run and gun camera, it sounds to me like the sound issues on the A6000 would be prohibitive. If you're going to buy what will eventually become a B camera (such as the A6000), make sure it's a camera you really want as a B camera. For a two camera shoot, however, the A6000 might actually be quite nice.
 
I really appreciate all the help here.

Im going ring to opt for the a5100. It makes the most sense given what it's capable of for the price. My only concern is glass. If I buy this body with the intention of grabbing an a7s (or whatever is next) down the road, what would you recommend? I could go native it legacy. The AF on these seem amazing so isn't that the mainstay of the Sony OSS glass? I could grab a cline rokinon like the 35, but no AF on that guy - would be great on the a7 cameras, though.

Or or I could splurge on Sony Zeiss, but I'm guessing the AF wouldn't work on the 5100 or 6k. If anyone has any thoughts, I'd appreciate it. Thanks
 
For $150 extra, you can get the kit lens. I would certainly do that. In my opinion you want at least one Sony lens for run and gun use (auto focus, etc.). You might only use autofocus 10% of the time, but for that 10%, it's really useful. Note that there are many long threads here (including under FS100, FS700, etc.) comparing lenses. Just look a few pages into the threads, and you should see them. Many people go to Canon lenses with the Metabones adapter (and possibly the Speed booster), while many don't. I personally have mostly Nikon and Rokinon Cine lenses.
 
+1 on the kit lens.

For $150 you get one of the fastest focusing lenses anywhere. Plus it's silent when shooting video, stabilized, really small and optically pretty good. There's a thread on DpReview comparing it to the 16-70 Zeiss and the kit lens was as good or in some cases better than the Zeiss. With any aps-c (Nex) Sony, its a no brainier as a compact knock around lens.
 
If it was me I'd look at the 18-105 f4, but it's not full frame. If you plan on stepping up to the A7s eventually it might be best just to stick with the 16-50 as it'll only cost you another $150 or maybe get the 50mm 1.8 OSS which is currently $250. I would recommend the 35mm if it was better value and you just wanted 1 lens but it's $450, which I think is kind of a ripoff, especially when compared to the much more reasonably priced 50mm. At that point, for just $150 more, you could get the 18-105.
 
Thanks a lot.

I was thinking: keeping the zoom or take that $150 and put it into the Sony 50 oss. Seems like a decent lens. I could use my wider glass without the AF. I saw some very favorable reviews of the Sony 50. BUT, if the zoom is an awesome video performer, I'd be dumb not to group that in with the original purchase!
 
My choice: get a speedbooster and build a vintage lens set that will work with all your future cameras (in my case, Leica-R, but Nikon AIS is also quite good and it's much cheaper). And maybe one or two cheap lenses with AF or IS if you're going to need that (in my case, sigma 19mmf/2.8 and 30mm f/2.8).
 
If you need Zoom lenses then buy native ones, Sony 16-50mm and the 55-210mm, or the 18-105mm f4 with this you have covered the reach, and then buy manual prime lenses, like the Nikon D series (sorry but i love the design of this lenses) and if the pocket help you invest on Leica-R or Zeiss Planar/Distagon.
Sony will launch two more FF E-mont zoom in the coming moths, the 16-35mm f4 and the video zoom 28-105mm f4, but obviously this kids will gonna be expensive.
 
I can't think of a better all purpose (stabilized) lens for an APS-C, E mount body than the 35mm f/1.8 OSS. If there is one, I'm going to have to cancel my order for the SEL35F18 : ) On the crop sensor, it's focal length is more or less the equivalent of a classic 50mm. Optically, it's in an entirely different league than the 16-50 kit lens. The scores for the 35 1.8 are on par with Canon L glass with an extra zero in the price tag. And, it's stabilized (where the L glass is not).

I have been using a Sigma 30mm f/2.8 DN A on my NEX-5N and can vouch for it as a extremely sharp lens that is heads and shoulders above the NEX-5N's 18-55 kit lens. The trouble with Sigma is that it's not stabilized. The trouble with the NEX-5N is that it exhibits reasonably pronounced rolling shutter (query where the a5100 will stand in that regard). But, put the two together, add coffee, and no amount of stabilization in post will make the image look like your subject is NOT entering a time warp.

Soooo....
(i) 35mm on a crop sensor / 50mm in FF works great for everything : )
(ii) lens stabilization often saves your footage
(iii) $450 for a first rate lens ain't bad : )

Best,
Andrew
 
baklava said:
I can't think of a better all purpose (stabilized) lens for an APS-C, E mount body than the 35mm f/1.8 OSS. If there is one, I'm going to have to cancel my order for the SEL35F18 : ) On the crop sensor, it's focal length is more or less the equivalent of a classic 50mm. Optically, it's in an entirely different league than the 16-50 kit lens. The scores for the 35 1.8 are on par with Canon L glass with an extra zero in the price tag. And, it's stabilized (where the L glass is not).

I have been using a Sigma 30mm f/2.8 DN A on my NEX-5N and can vouch for it as a extremely sharp lens that is heads and shoulders above the NEX-5N's 18-55 kit lens. The trouble with Sigma is that it's not stabilized. The trouble with the NEX-5N is that it exhibits reasonably pronounced rolling shutter (query where the a5100 will stand in that regard). But, put the two together, add coffee, and no amount of stabilization in post will make the image look like your subject is NOT entering a time warp.

Soooo....
(i) 35mm on a crop sensor / 50mm in FF works great for everything : )
(ii) lens stabilization often saves your footage
(iii) $450 for a first rate lens ain't bad : )

Best,
Andrew
Click to expand...

The SEL35 and 50 OSS are both quite good and make for a very economic combo if you need OS and AF. The 35 is a bit too contrasty for my taste, but it does resolve well. The corners are blurry wide open (at least on the copies I used) but you don't see them in video.

For more character (and much more $$$ but not really that much all things considered), though, consider the Sony Zeiss trio: 24/1.8, 32/1.8, and 55/1.8.

The SEL35 also doesn't focus that closely.
 
Last edited:
Thanks! Really appreciate all the help here. I'll grab an OSS lens if not the zoom and build up some legacy stuff, either nikkor or Rokinon.

Last question, ion, since everyone seems very familiar with this line in this thread: with no hot shoe, does that mean the a5100 is totally out on external flashes outside of using optical slaves? That would suck.
 
I've also been thinking about A7 vs A6000 vs A5100. The A5100 appeared in camera stores here in Tokyo on Friday, I went down and had a quick play. Didn't have an SD card with me so no samples. I used to have an NEX 5N, "upgraded" to an NEX 6 (actually a step backwards, in terms of video IQ). At the moment I shoot most of my video on a Panasonic G6, which has a wonderfully detailed image, but I've been hankering to return to a larger sensor for a while.

Anyway, back to the A5100. Man, I'd forgotten how tiny the 3/5 series styling is. No mode dial or top dial (I think the later NEX 5's, the 5T or 5R maybe added this?), and no option for an EVF, except putting a loupe on the back of the camera (which would rule out touch control), or an HDMI monitor (would this turn off the screen and also rule out touch control?)

Also, despite the touch screen, the (much improved) menu system didn't seem to be touch enabled (though there could have been an option in the menus that I missed to switch on touch menus). I also couldn't seem to switch on the "quick menu", or the function menu or whatever it was called, which I'm sure used to be available on the 5N. Basically, in my limited time with the camera, I didn't get a sense of whether the severe lack of physical controls is compensated for by a well implemented touch system. But maybe this is the kind of thing that is easier to work out from reading the user manual online then by playing around in a camera store.

But I think you'd have to really, really want that 50 mbps bitrate to choose this over the A6000. The tiny size of the A5000, lack of physical controls, no view finder would IMO make this a lot less enjoyable to use than the A6000. In my experience all the IQ in the world is no use if you have to dig through menus just to change the ISO or whatever.

So the key question is, how much of a difference does 50 mbps make versus 24 mbps (at 24 fps)? Do you only notice it in shots with lots of movement (i.e. panning across a wide infinity focus landscape), or is it evident in other kinds of shots (i.e. does it help the camera hold on to detail in dark areas of the image, increasing the usable D.R.)?

It would be great if A7S users could chip in here. How much of the A7S goodness is down to 50 mbps (rather than being down to full frame, low pixel count, and S-LOG2)?
 
I have the a6000 and unless the video on the 5100 absolutely blows the doors off the a6000 i'd go with the a6000. The handling will be so much better. However the a7s is in an entire different planet than either of them and if you can afford it, you will not regret it at all. After using the a7s it's hard to even look at my a6000. One thing to consider on lenses if you do get aps-c with the intention of upgrading to full frame is that the a7 series can't use oss on a lot of the zooms. the 16-50, 18-55 and the 55-210 for sure have oss disabled. the 50 1.8 and 35mm 1.8 have oss on the a7 series so those are really good investments. the 50mm 1.8 in particularly doesn't really vignette that much. (it's around a 60mm in full frame.)

Don't buy sigma lenses if you plan to shoot video with them. They suck at video autofcousing. Especially on the a7s.

It would be great if A7S users could chip in here. How much of the A7S goodness is down to 50 mbps (rather than being down to full frame, low pixel count, and S-LOG2)?
Click to expand...

honestly i don't think the 50mbps makes a HUGE difference. Not in 24p anyway. In 60p though you really need those extra bits. In 12p fps 50 is not enough. I'm not really that into s-log personally, the real brilliance i think of the a7s is that the image is so clean and beautiful and it stays that way from 100-6400. so you can intercut within that iso range without any noticable difference in color of noise profile. it looks solid beyond that too up to 51,200. Trust me, even if you think you don't think so, it will change the way you shoot.

Here's a link to my youtube channel. I have a couple pretty detailed videos on my thoughts on the a6000 and the a7s if anybody is interested. lots of tests.

https://www.youtube.com/user/alphaslashomega

please note, youtube destroys video quality. the actual footage from any of the cameras look much better.
 
sorry to via off topic a little here but you say the 50mm 1.8 with oss can be used full frame on the A7s without too much vignetting? That would be fantastic - please could you show an example, I presume you don't need any adapter as its e mount?
 
I haven't ran any tests to see how big the difference is, since XAVC-S is there and it's better so it's what I'm going to use. But I can say: the big difference, if any, is not the 50 Mbps thing, but the XAVC-S thing. Bitrate is an indicator of quality only if the codec is the same.
 
Has anyone here picked up the A5100 and been able to confirm that it has full sensor readout? I would love to find a comparison of the footage against the A6000. Since I have the A6000 already, the main issue for me is the full sensor readout. If it has that, then the footage should be better than the RX10 which has full sensor readout. The dpreview review of the A6000 shows mushier footage than the RX10, and I'm figuring it's the line skipping or other shortcuts that are responsible for that. But if the A5100 has full sensor readout with XAVC-S, I would imagine its video footage would be clearly superior to the RX10 and A6000. Can anyone confirm?
 
I totally agree with North Utsira: the ergonomics of the A6000 made me decide to go with this great camera over the A5100. Video quality is great, unless as already stated here, you need low light or Xavc-s.
I'd love to post some video samples for you, and I will if I'll find some spare moment this week, though it seems hardly possible! :(

I was in the same situation as yours crashwins, I had to decide between the A7s and the A6000. I decided to wait for the next A7s and get the A6000 in the meantime to get acquainted to Sony systems (I've been a Canon user for 5 years). As for lenses goes, I won't have any problem switching to a FF since I'm using only old manual lenses. I've the chance to test them out on the A7s already and it was a pure pleasure (and for all of them just 13 bucks adapters on Amazon, they work just fine). Anyway, in both cases focus peaking is truly a life safer, my pics are always in focus now, whereas on the 7D was pretty hard.

I don't think Sony will update the A6000 firmware with the Xavc-s, wish they would but it seems is not their habit giving customers that kind of treatment.

Just my 2 c.
 
I own the A7s, A7r and the A6000. The A6000 is the best compromise between video and stills. The Video is better than the videos of the A7r and the stills or not so far away from the excellent stills quality of the A7r
Benn
 
dsp_418 said:
I don't think Sony will update the A6000 firmware with the Xavc-s, wish they would but it seems is not their habit giving customers that kind of treatment.
Click to expand...
I'm starting to wonder if it's less an issue of "neglect" and more a deliberate decision to make the A5100 more fully featured as a video body and leave the A6000 as the stills body.

Can't really confirm if the A5100 indeed has full sensor readout without comparison footage against the A6000, but if it does, then the A5100 would kind of be Sony's crop version of the A7S.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top