Sony a6300 announced

I'm in. I'd like to know what lenses they are using in that video? as much as I really want the native AF for video, trading out fast Canon lenses for F4 Sony's, just meh.
 
Osslund said:
I'm also looking at the 6300 to use as sidekick to my FS7. But as I have no intention buying any other lens than the set of ten Canon L lenses I already have question is how it'll work with these and speedbooster?
Click to expand...

Tomorrow, Sigma is supposed to be announcing an electronic EF to E adapter. This may solve all of EF glass owners problems.

C100Scottie said:
I'm in. I'd like to know what lenses they are using in that video? as much as I really want the native AF for video, trading out fast Canon lenses for F4 Sony's, just meh.
Click to expand...
I think it said 35mm F1.4 prime on one. On the other, it had the G label. There are two new G Master lenses, 24-70 and 70-200, both in 2.8.
 
The street footage was pretty exciting to see. That is seriously improved AF coming from Sony. So are we going to see an A7 III first with this new generation of chips/sensor? Pro A-mount APS-C hybrid DSLR? What technological challenges remain to migrate this to FF sensors? Is the improved heat environment from smaller transistors (and other aspects), going to make that transition easier than in the past?
 
This camera will be the solution to very high quality, inexpensive, gimbal situation. You could put this on most really smelly gimbals, use the AF, and get pretty stunning 4k in LOG format. Unless, there is a big "gotcha"...I think this camera is going to rock.

Heck, for fly in shoots, you could back a portable gimbal in your backpack with this little guy and get amazing shots.
 
I've been conditioned by the generally lousy autofocus in video, to never even bother with it, and always go manual. Is the AF in the a6300 a game changer, or is it more of the usual hype? I ask, because I've seen such claims made for AF in video before, and they always end up not fulfilling their promise. What makes me skeptical in this case is that in that AF test video above, we don't see any AF in low light interiors, which is what I'd be interested in. In general, already I am not super excited by the a6300 on account of low light performance sure to be much worse than the A7s(ii) - if you have the A7(ii) what is the incentive to get the a6300... supposedly it's because the a6300 has usable AF in video - except I don't believe it does under real-life use scenarios. I realize the a6300 is $1K vs $3K for the A7sii, but it's cheaper for a reason - it's less capable in some key respects, most crucially to me in low light... and I doubt it compensates with real-life usable AF as claimed. I'll reserve judgment until the a6300 is out in the field to be tested by ordinary users, but I suspect that the AF performance is more hype - as it's always been the case so far when it comes to autofocus in video (I'd love to be wrong!).
 
OldCorpse said:
I've been conditioned by the generally lousy autofocus in video, to never even bother with it, and always go manual. Is the AF in the a6300 a game changer, or is it more of the usual hype? I ask, because I've seen such claims made for AF in video before, and they always end up not fulfilling their promise. What makes me skeptical in this case is that in that AF test video above, we don't see any AF in low light interiors, which is what I'd be interested in. In general, already I am not super excited by the a6300 on account of low light performance sure to be much worse than the A7s(ii) - if you have the A7(ii) what is the incentive to get the a6300... supposedly it's because the a6300 has usable AF in video - except I don't believe it does under real-life use scenarios. I realize the a6300 is $1K vs $3K for the A7sii, but it's cheaper for a reason - it's less capable in some key respects, most crucially to me in low light... and I doubt it compensates with real-life usable AF as claimed. I'll reserve judgment until the a6300 is out in the field to be tested by ordinary users, but I suspect that the AF performance is more hype - as it's always been the case so far when it comes to autofocus in video (I'd love to be wrong!).
Click to expand...

I don't think low light will be this camera's strength. It must be one of it's limitations, something has to give. I would be happy with the AF working well in well lit situations since I never shoot in low light.
 
I was also on the "only manual focus will work for me" camp. My current camera is an RX100 IV, and I set it on AF basically all the time: it's about 50% AF, 40% pre-shot-locked-AF, and 10% MF.

Shooting 1080p at 60 fps or less, it does face detection and it works... most of the time: if the subject is turned away from the camera, or hair is covering one eye, it won't detect a face and then it's prone to error. If there's a clear face in the frame, it's better than what I can do manually most of the time.

Shooting 120fps or 4K... it doesn't seem to be doing face detection, and it's not nearly as good. Hopefully the a6300 will do face tracking at 4K too.
 
OldCorpse said:
I'll reserve judgment until the a6300 is out in the field to be tested by ordinary users, but I suspect that the AF performance is more hype - as it's always been the case so far when it comes to autofocus in video (I'd love to be wrong!).
Click to expand...

Seems like you have not tried DPAF from Canon yet...not hype at all...it just works, even if the light is so low that I have to shoot at f1.8 and 6400 ISO with my 70D.
If a6300 is as good, considering all the other features and price...I think we will see a best selling camera!!!
However...lack of a touch screen is a REALLY BAD DECISION from Sony and its the same mistake Canon made with the 7D mkII. If you want to FULLY take advantage of such AF systems, a touch screen is essential in my opinion.
Canon probably realized that finally, and put a touch screen on the new 1DXII...my guess is, there will be a touch screen in all Canon models with DPAF from now on...including the C line.
Anyway...that a6300 is very interesting, I ve said to myself this one will be my first Sony...haha, we ll see:-)
 
Yes, I forgot to comment on low-light AF: not a problem on the RX100 IV either. I routinely use it at ISO 1600 f/2.8 and it works just as well as it does in sunlight. When it doesn't work, it's not because it can't focus, but because it decides to focus at something that's now what I had in mind (most common: the face-detection goes off when hair, hands, etc, cover an eye).
 
Really thinking of biting the bullet and pre ordering one. Main thing is how will audio controls work and how well can you monitor your levels. Also how have peoples experinces been with the audio moduals for the sony cameras? I love the Sony Wireless lav and will pick that up for it but what about for grabbing audio with B roll and hwen you can't use a lav? Should I stick with a rode or is there a better option that offers more control on adjusting levels while recording?​



 
Well, if the AF really, really works, then this might be a game-changer. I just never experienced one. Also, when I mean works - no focus hunting with every movement please... nothing kills footage for me worse than focus-hunting. I'm still not pre-ordering it though - learned my lesson long ago to never pre-order... if it's all that, then there will always be plenty of time to buy - a few days or weeks are not critical unless you have no access to any other camera and need it immediately - not a scenario that happens too often. And with any new camera there are almost always some issues and bugs. Let's see how it works in the wild. But like I said, if it's all that, then I'll look at seriously buying it, especially for $1K - my use scenario would be to put it on a gimbal... focus has always been an issue, and if the AF works, then you really can have the option to use a bit more shallow depth of field.
 
In my experience with the A7S A7RII and A7SII, the AF is generally pretty awesome for video and doesn't hunt much at all, but I found the A7RII AF is sometimes even too fast that it can seem unnatural. I did notice there are a few AF tracking and drive speed settings that I messed with but it was still sometimes too fast. That said, it's amazing for doing something like a push in to someones face as it can track even from wide to nearly macro pretty better than most 1st ACs, but it can be a little too fast when doing a shot where changing focus subject and is part of the shot since it won't let there not be a subject in focus for long so if you pan from one subject to another it may go to the background in the pan before the second subject enters or becomes prominent in frame... Whereas on the A7S/A7SII it's slow enough that there is a more natural delay that allows that transition to be a bit smoother but has more trouble tracking a subject that changes its distance quickly. You certainly do have to design your shots a little around the AF behavior but for many kinds of shots its pretty amazing to not have to run a huge rig with wireless follow focus etc when on a gimbal. I did a job once with my A7RII on a gimbal and more than a few seasoned crew members jaws practically dropped when they saw how good the AF was on a complicated gimbal shot at F2.0 when watching playback. I didn't see a way to turn off PDAF on the A7RII but perhaps there was a way so that I could slow it down for certain shots?

Ideally the a6300 will be capable of the fast PDAF that the A7RII has but with adjustable speed or perhaps an option to disable PDAF for when it's too fast on certain kinds of moves.
 
The more I see from the a6300, the more impressive it looks for a $1000 body - looks like its going to punch above its weight. I have one preordered, will pit it against my A7rII. Now that I have a Beholder Ds1, its actually making me think about selling the A7rII in favor of a Ninja Assassin for the a6300 and A7s, along with a focal reducer and a couple of lenses.

Good times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top