Thuravi Kumaaran: ‘Upwardly mobile: Sony a6300 Review’ – DPREVIEW.
Telephoto Continuous AF test“This is a really impressive result: the closest we've seen to a 100% hit-rate in this test so far. The Canon 1D X II and Nikon D5 may well be able to match this performance, but there isn't a DSLR that can focus so far out towards the edge of the frame as this. What's all the more impressive is that there aren't any complex settings that need to be configured to get this result - it's essentially point and shoot.”
So, we may buy a6300, instead of 1D X II & D5.Is it a wonderful humour of 2016, may be?
But another reviewer didn't exaggerate things ; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoNRXWFTFa4&feature=youtu.be&t=5m24s
An another reviewer has different opinionhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2RNNVO2U68
And ‘Tony & Chelsea Northrup’ opinion in the fallowing link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXFgURp8NjI
Different people, different ways, but to every doings, we are going to get it back.
Same with my A7RII and A7SII, and it IS a complete pain to be told to wait while the camera writes to card, particularly if you are using either in a journalistic or fast-moving situation.
GaryJP: This is optimistic.
I'm using both Canon and Sony these days. I still prefer the colour of Canon. Too many Sony users are producing horrible fudgy looking low contrast pictures that look like they are shot on expired film. I can often spot a Sony image also by the predilection for green tinged faces and horrible over-modulation of blues, particularly from LED light sources (which DPReview never seems to want to own up to). And it is an aesthetic I try hard not to let creep into my work.
If the new 5D has better dynamic range and usable 4K, my A7RII and A7SII will be for sale. I get tired of struggling with the colours.
Been there. Done that. Got the t-shirt. Before you try being patronising, try to figure out a few things about who you are talking to.
If you can seriously market a profile that matches Sony colour to Canon colour in every respect , do it. No one else has managed. Not only will Canon users love you, Sony will love you and probably supply it with their cameras. You will make a small fortune.
Others have tried - I have actually BOUGHT them and used them - and they don't work well enough. But no doubt YOU are the genius to solve it.
TORN: I wished people would be able to create photos and videos up to the same standard they demand from their equipment. Nowadays it is the user who fails not the technology most of the time.
I am attending big Sony and Canon user groups on a regular basis and I am still waiting to see a HD, 4k or any other video that is worth my time and I am still waiting to see that the camera system makes a difference. There are only a few really talented people around and a lot of amateurs with more ambition and demand for best technology than actual skill.
Of course I like any improvement on cameras since it makes our hobbies easier and more fun. And it is nice to see that ALL vendors make constant progress in the areas where they have weaknesses. Canon is not the only vendor who has to do his homework.
One of the most sensible comments here, but this is a gear heads' forum, full of people like those guys who buy expensive hi fi sets with gold wires and only play the most dismal music on it.
flashcactus: The zoom adapter seems intended for video, yet the camera won't do the current industry standard of 4K. The autofocus sounds great, but still doesn't track? All seems a bit pointless to me.
4K is NOT industry standard, unless you are talking cinema production. It is industry hi-end. I still shoot for some European TV channels in SD, although I shoot HD or 4K and down res it often. 4K, having no real popular mode of distribution at the moment, and not generally required for broadcast, is largely a hobbyists' dream.
@hellraiser, as someone wrote just a little above: " If a camera starts from a point closer to what you want, it helps hugely."
As someone says in one of those links, which mirrors my experience in both stills and video: "The difference for me has been that with Canon and Red files the first hour or so of grading is correcting the colour (removing weird casts, exposure, getting skin in the right area, making it look natural) and then I can go onto working the general look and feel. Whereas with Sony - in any colour profile you choose - the first stage of 'fixing' the image so that it looks natural never really ends. I find it very hard to ever reach a point of having a natural look I'm satisfied with, and then any additional change I make to the image tends to knock all my previous work out of whack. "
This isn't religion you know. Preferring Canon colour is not a heresy. Hundreds of thousands do.
0MitchAG, Unlike most of those who Canon bash, sometimes over YEARS, most of us having issues with Sony colours have actually paid a LOT of money to actually use the cameras. It's been a major topic on the video-making forums for quite some time
And the blue LED issue is hardly a secret, except to the true believers.
@Hellraiser As I already wrote: "Yes, as the argument goes, with effort you can use profiles to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse, but with extra effort you can overcome the limitations of almost ANY camera brand."
If you have a preset you can recommend to get more Canon-like colours out of my Sonys I'd be interested. I've actually bought a couple for the A7SII and I don't think they did a particularly good job.
Because it's a meaningless question. I don't like the colour balance in their picture stuck on the board, or even the tone.
Ethan, you are showing me two images of a third IMAGE in the studio test scene in which I did not particularly like the colour balance in the first place.
I'd rather shoot people in the flesh than shoot images of images.
@beavertown. I agree, but I should clarify I am not talking about jpegs. I almost never shoot jpeg. I am talking about using ARW or CR2 Raws as a starting point.
@Glenn. Both. But I am also talking about the images AND videos of other people I am seeing published.
Not true. There's a difference in the colour technology and it takes wilful blindness not to see it. It shows in the final results a LOT of Sony users publish proudly.
And if you haven't noticed the blue LED problem then you are certainly a lot less perceptive than almost any Sony video shooter I know. You have to turn colour balance to absurdly warm to reduce it and maintain detail in blue areas and then fix it later.
Yes, as the argument goes, with effort you can use profiles to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse, but with extra effort you can overcome the limitations of almost ANY camera brand.
Mikael Risedal: it is nice that Canon has waked up from the sensor slumber and now has a sensor who are better but still are behind Sony regarding DR, and where are 4K video?
Well, tbf jaykumarr, if I were you I'd worry less about language and more about logic.
Old viewers of Risedal will know he does NOT generally have an English writing problem.
A multi-year anti-Canon obsession to the point of infinite tedium, yes.
But not an English writing problem.
This is optimistic.
new fish: The video quality is very disappointing,.lack of 4K, the weakness of all Canon's camera.It will lose the most market in future.
Oh rubbish. As soon as you guys lose on thing to carp about you dig out another. It's all about the brand worship.
Earthlight: I am now very happy with my decision not to get a 5DsR last year. Give me a 5D4 with this sensor tech, say 28 mp and that is it. It would give very, very high quality 50x75 cm prints from a single frame. Stitch to get gigantic enlargements and panoramas.
I sold my 1DsMkIII in anticipation 6 months ago and have been shooting with a pair of 6D bodies since.
For me, I have the A7RII and A7SII, as well as my Canon gear, but one Sony top of the line camera has too many pixels for my everyday photography (I sometimes welcome it but not always) and the other has too few. although it shoots great video.
To me 20-25 mp is the sweet spot
Yes, I think that would be the sweet spot for me too. Particularly if it had 4K.
Lawrencew: The comments section could be greatly simplified.All we need are two posts
1. Its a Canon. Its rubbish2. Its a Canon. Its fantastic
Then people simply like the one they prefer.
Or: It's a whatever. They ALL have issues and strengths.
ovlov: But... But.. But... All I hear from the Canon apologists on here is that Canon's products are fine with the dynamic range they have. No improvement is needed!
I guess we can now safely say that even Canon disagrees with ALL of you.
Incidentally, I would add that in many ways the DR obsession isn't really much more advantageous than the previous megapixel race was, and I am often amused and horrified in equal part to see the "Look ma, I got HDR" images provided by many Sony users who want to prove it by pushing up shadow areas and dragging down highlights until every image has milky browny blacks, no "snap", and looks like it was shot by fogged film sometime in the 1950s.
I am constantly double checking myself to make sure I have not been suckered into that particular DR "vision".
And let's not even get into what my Sony sensors do to detail in blue artificial or LED light unless I push the colour temperature way, way, up and then compensate for it in post.
To which true believers will say: "None of this matters: dynamic range, dynamic range, dynamic range, dynamic range ......"
Yes, I probably will be selling one of my Sonys when the 5D4 comes out. The death of DSLR has been much exaggerated.
I use Canon, Sony A7RII, Sony A7SII, Olympus and Panasonic, for just a few.
What you ACTUALLY hear from Canon users if you don't have comprehension issues is that the dynamic range issues affect less than one in a hundred situations where we might photograph, that other cameras' dynamic range "advantage" occurs only at base ISO which we rarely use, and that other cameras also have disadvantages that make them, in many situations, less reliable or give less good IS, than our Canons.
Sony's "colour" affects EVERY shot I take with it. Yes, I CAN make it better, and do, but why should I need the extra effort on EVERY shot? Its focus speed is NOT up to DSLR levels whatever the true believers spout. And maintenance and servicing is behind Canon, as is its reliability.
DR is just the stick some brand bashing buffoons use to beat Canon. The main advantage of this upgrade is that now they will have to find another one. They seem pretty frustrated right now that this one is disappearing.