Dirk Nuary: I guess it'll reach up to 2k comments. I think Sony now is the most popular camera.
At the moment, the A6300 is the 5th best selling interchangeable lens camera at Amazon. The only ILC's selling better than it are the Rebel T5 (#1, #3, #4, in various kit packages) and the Nikon D3300 (#2). All of these packages are a lot less expensive than the A6300, too.
So yes, based on how well it is selling on Amazon-- one of the biggest sellers of cameras in the US-- it'd say that it is a popular camera.
Rooru S: So it is not 'real time' live view at 8fps. Still a slideshow but with added blackout effects...too bad Sony had to simulate stuff for marketing BS.
"a slideshow but with added blackout effects...to simulate stuff for marketing BS". That is a bizarre characterization. Spoken like a person with a chip on his shoulder. At the end of the day, you're talking about a viewfinder that allows you to effectively track your subjects as you shoot high speed bursts.
I don't find it to be any different, in practical use, than the blackout I get on my DSLRs when doing bursts. Is an EVF an OVF? No. They are obviously different technologies. Just like digital is different than film. Should we be upset that digital attempts to "simulate" film, and whine that it's just "marketing BS"?
joyclick: Sony has been very bold and innovatinve daring to go where none do but they still suck at a thing or two which matter immensly,the user interface being the most important among them,as also excellent but affordable lenses offering most useful focal lengths and apertures
So until they get their act together I wil go for either Panasonic or Olympus.
@Mateus1 - I own an A6000, a Fuji X-E1, and an Oly E-PM1 with VF-3 viewfinder. I've used all of them for street shooting. All of them work perfectly fine for street. If anything, the A6000 works the best for me. I certainly don't find myself "wasting time pressing these silly buttons to change or set almost every feature". As someone who uses Sony, Fuji, and Oly, I find your characterization to be absurd. For "dynamic street shooting", I just set my A6000 (or any of my other cameras) to auto ISO, aperture priority, and that's it. Any additional changes to settings are done with the exposure comp dial. It's not that complicated. I think people make photography a lot more complicated than it needs to be. If you're constantly fiddling with your camera settings, you're doing something wrong.
Thuravi Kumaaran: Richard Butler wrote,'If cameras with class-equalling image quality, class-leading AF and class-leading video don't deserve Gold, what does?'
But, no class leading lens support, no class leading user friendliness - it is something like ‘she/he is so intelligent, compact and beautiful, but non cooperative’.
Not sure why people complain so much about Sony lens support. I have the Sony 18-105/4 OSS, 35/1.8 OSS, 50/1.8 OSS, 55-210 OSS, and Rokinon 12/2 for my A6000. All these lenses perform well, and I'm very happy. And I'm saying this as a Canon DSLR user. BTW, I also adapt my Canon EOS lenses to my Sony A6000, too. Sony mirrorless bodies are the most adaptable cameras in the market, so you have a huge range of lenses you can use with them. As for user friendliness, I actually find the size and portability of my Sony gear make it more user friendly, which is probably why I use my Sony gear 80-90% of the time, my Canon gear 10-20% o the time. For travel, I only use my Sony gear because I find it travels so much better than my DSLR gear. Doesn't that count as "user-friendly"? It does to me!
People also have to remember that the Sony system is very young. Systems need time to grow. Canon's EOS system was nothing when it was introduced in 1986. It did not become "world class" overnight.
Dan DeLion: Fascinating to see that dpreview finds this Sony APS-C camera superior to a D750 or a D810. I don’t believe many other reviewers would come to the same conclusion. Does dpreview not want to offend Sony owners with the real facts? Does dpreview receive monies from Sony? Are dpreviews even worth reading? - It now seems that in order to get an accurate review one has to read between the lines. The a6300 has terrible ergonomics, can’t be trusted to shoot 14 bit stills, overheats, has terrible battery life, and has a third rate menu system. How does putting all those faults together yields a superb camera?
Silly, defensive, knee-jerk reaction.
PerL: I wonder why there is no rating for "system"? After all, that is one of the most important considerations when you buy, and in a way lock yourself into a camera brand.
That'd be a rather lame method of rating, because all it does is endorse the entrenched camera systems. Every camera system has to start somewhere. Just imagine if this method of rating existed when Canon first launched the Canon EOS system in 1986. At the time, every other camera system on the market would have annihilated Canon in the ratings because they were all established systems compared to Canon which was starting over from scratch. If such a system of rating had existed back then, it's quite possible that Canon's EOS system might have never survived. But look where they are today.
As for the "system" being the "most important consideration" because you "lock yourself into a camera brand", I think we're steadily moving towards a world where lens/camera adaptability across systems becomes more normal, especially with the advancements in smart adapters and AF communication. I think in a few years, you'll be able to put whatever lens you want onto a mirrorless body.
T3: So many things wrong with this camera. The price, the lack of an EVF, it doesn't even work with Canon's own EVF-DC1 add-on EVF, no RAW, non-removeable variable aperture zoom, a touchscreen UI that you can't touch if you're using the ginormous viewfinder eyepiece, etc. There are plenty of video-centric reviews that trash this camera, for good reason. Sadly, this is a camera that only a diehard Canon lover can love. Canon just isn't the company that it used to be. Well, at least you can use it with your existing Canon lenses. Oh...wait. Nope.
Hi grade bit rate, but sadly everything else is consumer-level...except for the price. The big problem with this camera is that that it's neither here nor there, neither fish nor fowl. It's a frankencamera. Even you state that it's a "novel experiment" and Canon just "threw out there". Yes, it is a rather throw-away product. Which is probably why it hasn't gained much traction, even with the Canon name and marketing machine behind it.
BTW, Canon has been marketing it as a "hybrid camera"...not just a "camcorder".
rrccad: IMO.. it's a novel experiment to see how it ends up being used.
I suspect this was a camera that canon just "threw out there" to see how professionals use it,etc.
what is interesting it that they showed this off or something very similar at the previous canon expo as a futuristic mockup.
4:2:2 at 300mps at h.264 4k codec is quite alot of data to push.
That certainly takes it beyond the "consumer" grade bitrates which usually top out around 100 mbps for internal recording.
What will be intriguing is the next one, and how they take this potential video / stills camera line.
Interesting review, it must have been hard to write that up keeping far more of an open mind than most of the whiners and complainers in the comment section ;)
why ARE people whining anyways.. if canon wants to toss out a video camera that shoots a little more in the stills department, guess what .. they can afford another camera in their portfolio.
@rrccad - "fanboy much?"
LOL, you're the biggest Canon fanboy here! :) I think you actually go into convulsions anytime anyone says anything critical about Canon or their products.
@rrccad - A lot of "positive" reviewers have said that it's an "interesting" camera, but not one they would want to own. That's faint praise, at best.
(unknown member): "I believe the XC10 is an ideal camera for citizen journalists. Currently there’s a new movement of citizen journalists creating compelling video reports that are seen by a global audience 24/7. Driven by social media and video sharing websites, most of this content is being viewed on mobile devices and laptops where file compression is not as big a factor."
- Social media and video sharing websites don't explicitly demand the use of Tier 1 standards that were shaped having in mind the technical limitations or demands for TV broadcasting.
- Tier 1 standards loose much of their sense when viewed on mobile.
So given it is made for "citizen journalists" why should they overpay for this camera?
Will "citizen journalists" carry a second camera for stills? The quality of the jpgs from this camera is lagging behind many mobile phones.
@rrccad - this might be fine for a camera that is well under $1K. But Canon is asking $2K for this camera. Canon was originally asking $2.5K for this camera. Clearly, they are targeting buyers such as yourself: people who will buy anything that Canon puts out, regardless of price or specs, just because it has the Canon logo on it.
So many things wrong with this camera. The price, the lack of an EVF, it doesn't even work with Canon's own EVF-DC1 add-on EVF, no RAW, non-removeable variable aperture zoom, a touchscreen UI that you can't touch if you're using the ginormous viewfinder eyepiece, etc. There are plenty of video-centric reviews that trash this camera, for good reason. Sadly, this is a camera that only a diehard Canon lover can love. Canon just isn't the company that it used to be. Well, at least you can use it with your existing Canon lenses. Oh...wait. Nope.
perry rhodan: HUH!?Considering the huge price differences it's very peculiar what body comparisons are made here. The pricepoint (at the top of the pack) and the ergonomics and lens landscape (at the very bottom of the pack) are NOT in the slightest bit appreciated in this conclusion. Oh well just saying. Tried 3 Nex/alpha milc bodies extensively the past years. The lens landscape and ergo sucked hard and there is no improvement. Period! Only some (overly expensive) non zooms are worth anything on 16 or 24 mp. Perhaps the only zoom that gets the heads up is the 10-18mm, at a price.
Mind you, I bought 3 bodies and a load of lenses the last 4 years. I wanted to like them. Also because of all the singing and dansing reviews. Every single time I was disgusted about the things I mentioned above and sold the stuff. Oh well.
@perry rhodan - Yes, plenty of people have a different experience. Absolutely. Using my Sony A6000 certainly feels different from using my Canon DSLRs, but it's not necessarily in a worse way. I *greatly* appreciate its lighter weight, more compact size, and I've found that over the years DSLR grips have grown overly large. In fact, DSLR bodies, as a whole, have grown overly large. That's not really better for ergonomics. I find that I have less hand and body fatigue after shooting all day with my A6000 than I do with any of my Canon DSLRs. But, of course, you're just going to ignore anything I've said because you don't want to hear any real and honest arguments. You just want to say insightful stuff like, "Yukkk!" and "Get a life please" and "I was disgusted"!
Solar Climber: Great enthusiast camera that lacks an APS-C lens lineup. It's like putting a chevy cruz suspension in Z06 covette. I'll pass.
"...lacks an APS-C lens lineup".
I own the Sony 18-105/4, 35/1.8 OSS, 50/1.8 OSS, and 55-210 OSS. I also own the Rokinon 12/2. All of the are APS-C, and they do great. If you want a wide angle, get the Sony 10-18 OSS. I don't get this "lacks an APS-C line-up" non-sense. Currently, Sony has 15 APS-C E-mount lenses. In comparison, Canon has 11 APS-C lenses (EF-S lenses). And Canon's system has been around a lot longer.
Jimmy jang Boo: Pardon me, but what's the point of a MILC if it still requires big lenses?
And speaking of native (cough) lenses...
It doesn't "require big lenses". I also the Sony 18-105/4, Sony 35/1.8 OSS, 50/1.8 OSS, and Rokinon 12/2. The prime lenses are very compact. The zoom is about average size, but it's light in weight and really not all that large, in spite of being a motorized, internal-zooming lens.
FuhTeng: For all the people complaining about lenses, I haven't seen anyone state what are the many lenses that are missing - aside from supertele (400 mm+ zoom), and any primes >85 mm, and the fast zooms that are coming out now.
What else would you like? tilt-shift? Do you know esoteric that is? A 300 mm f/2.8? At $6,000 each I'm sure that'll be a huge seller.
Oh no, the kit lens isn't very good - so what? It's a kit lens, it's supposed to be cheap, not necessarily good. I get along fine with mine the few times I use it.
@kolyy - I own the Sony 18-105/4 OSS (my standard zoom lens) as well as the Sony 35/1.8 OSS and Sony 50/1.8 OSS. All are very affordable and very good quality. As for a fast wide prime, I own the Rokinon 12/2, which is fast, excellent quality, and very affordable. Am I happy with my Sony setup? Absolutely. And I'm coming from the Canon DSLR world. I still own a ton of Canon DSLR gear, but the Sony gear is getting the most use. It's great to be a part of a system that has a bazillion lenses (such as Canon's), but at the end of the day, the thing that matters to me is which camera gear I choose to take with me when I'm leaving the house. And 90% of the time, it's my Sony gear that I'm taking with me. Besides, the Sony system is still maturing. In the grand picture, it's not been around that long.
I'm a long-time DSLR user who now also uses an A6000. I've traveled throughout Asia with one. Not sure what you're complaining about. I travel with Sony 18-105/4, 35/1.8 OSS, 50/1.8 OSS, Rokinon 12/2. All are fairly priced and optically excellent. No problems with the ergonomics either. To say that you are "disgusted" with your experience sounds dubious. I still have all my Canon DSLR gear, but it doesn't get much use anymore. My Sony gear travels better, delivers results that are comparable or better than my Canon gear, and the system is growing at a good pace. Overall, I'm darn happy with the system!
markie_jan61: USB charging is a deal-breaker, regardless of a camera's capabililties.
Don't know why Sony continues to travel down that road.--
I love USB charging. I wish all cameras had it. I still have a separate charger, which can be bought for cheap, and often come with the purchase of additional third-party batteries anyways. But I find USB charging to be so handy. At the very least, it gives you two chargers (one external, one internal) to simultaneously charge two batteries.
dmanthree: A long list of negatives, lossy raw compression that affects image quality, and a dearth of good native lenses designed for this sensor size, and this get a gold?
I've been shooting with an A6000 for several months now. I've yet to see any image quality issues resulting from lossy RAW. The image files blow away the quality I was getting from my Canon RAW files.
endofoto: Sony has a great sensor, and AF is great. The problem is that small cameras with high speed means overheating and decreased battery capacity. I think Sony is pushing the rules of physics.
I regularly shoot high speed on my A6000. No problems with overheating. As for decreased battery capacity, I think it's only a matter of time before Sony moves to a larger battery. The current battery is tiny. But even so, it's not a big deal. I just carry an extra couple of batteries. Like I said, they are tiny. So they don't take up much room. I recently went to Dubai, India and Thailand with my A6000, shooting in extremely hot conditions with no problems.
coolowski: That GX80 makes Sony's pricing look ridiculous
APS-C 24mp vs m4/3 16mp. That's a big difference! Sounds like their respective pricing is quite fair.