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.
Dillon Frazier: I wonder if we'll get a silver variant...
I was wondering the same thing. I'd love to see it in silver. Or maybe with a titanium/grey colored top plate.
CameraLabTester: Hold your horses and don't worry folks... It's just an APPLICATION for Patent.
April Fool or not, they may get to hold of this for about 14 to 20 years, depending on Utility or Design application.
But don't expect any development from Canon.
They just want to hold their aces up their armpits for this silly idea.
They cant even implement EYE CONTROL® on their DSLRs, let alone this.
Yeah, I'd much rather have Eye Control. Or at least expect it to have a higher chance of being implemented in a DSLR. I loved it in my Canon film SLRs. It's amazing that they couldn't or wouldn't put that into their DSLRs...a technology that they already had successfully implemented for years, across several different film SLR models.
T3: If true, it'll make DSLRs that much more expensive than mirrorless cameras, which already have a whole lot of parts and components that mirrorless cameras don't need.
First of all, lets's see this patent become a reality in an actual product. Let's see how well it performs. And let's see what it does to the cost of the camera. And if that day ever comes, let's see how far mirrorless cameras will have advanced by then. In the end, I think most people will say, "Gee, that's kind of neat"...before going back to using their mirrorless cameras that already have very advanced EVFs.
I think it might be a product that is neither here nor there, pleasing no one. Mirrorless users won't like it because it will mean using a clunky, heavy DSLR that they've already moved away from. And OVF users won't like it because they already have a heavy bias towards just a plain old OVF.
Ultimately, if this thing ever came to fruition, I think it will mainly just be a means to project a menu onto the focusing screen in a semi-translucent manner, as depicted in the patent. I don't think it will be a true competitor to a good EVF.
If true, it'll make DSLRs that much more expensive than mirrorless cameras, which already have a whole lot of parts and components that mirrorless cameras don't need.
Karl Persson: "Sony emphasizes its compact and lightweight design and indeed, the lens weighs in at a svelte 186g/6.6oz." Size 60x66 mm, according to spec.
The Nikkor 50/1,8D AF is 38x63 mm and weighs 155g. And that´s a DSLR lens.The old Nikon E series 50/1,8 is smaller still.Just as the new Sony they have 6 elements i 5 groups.
I'd compare it to the latest Nikkor 50/1.8 AF-S. Same weight as the Sony, shorter in length than the Sony, but larger in girth than the Sony (72.1mm max diameter vs 59.5mm for the Sony). The filter size tells lot: the Nikon filter size is 58mm, while the Sony's filter size is only 49mm. The Sony is still a compact lens. And when mounted on a Sony FF mirrorless, you still get a noticeably smaller and lighter overall package when compared to a FF DSLR.
Donnie G: Its amazing! Canon's new Rebel T6 entry level ILC has received over 700 comments here. Of course most of those comments were from closet Canon fans who whine to hide their lust for all things Canon. Well whine no more folks because Canon will be shipping the first gazillion T6 cameras to your favorite big box store in April. Isn't that exciting? That way you'll be able to come out of that dusty old closet just in time for the start of this year's summer vacation season. See you on the beach. :))
"lust for all things Canon."
That's basically you, Donnie G, isn't it? Canon's biggest fan here on dpreview. I'm starting to wonder if you actually work for them.
"Cooper 15 pretty heavy fully loaded"
Seems pretty heavy, even empty. I think bags should be as light as possible, while still doing their intended job. No need to carry more weight, especially for a bag, than is necessary.
Richard Franiec: Same ol' will bring more cash than any mirrorless could dream about. Not even talking lenses and future upgrades to higher end models.As long as Canon and Nikon are most recognizable names in photo industry, they will play this game forever.
"Forever" is a long time, and many companies have gone down thinking that they could do it "forever" based on their "recognizable names". It's hubris. And it's sad that people cheer it on. As for "future upgrade to higher end models", what's the upgrade to the Rebel? The 70D and 80D, right? I'm not so sure Canon is getting as many upgraders to these cameras as they used to. On Amazon's Best Sellers in Interchangeable Lens Cameras rankings, the 70D is currently ranked #37 and #46, the 80D is #47. In comparison, the A6300 is ranked #5 and #9 in sales (screenshots):http://postimg.org/image/lmg5hv46j/http://postimg.org/image/g3i8w5cex/http://postimg.org/image/hd3izc4a9/I think we are starting to see the very, very early stages of a shift in the market. I can only imagine what things will look like a few years from now, when mirrorless cameras are even more mature.
T3: I find it astounding that people here are defending Canon-- even cheering them on-- for selling such re-packaged mediocrity, and for a fairly high price, too.
@Yake - I don't know where you get "full-frame 6D is going for just $999". It's going for $1,399:http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/892349-REG/Canon_8035b002_EOS_6D_Digital_Camera.html
Your 6D price is off by 40%!
Canon does tend to skimp. Consider the Canon XC10, a $2500 "hybrid" camera with a variable aperture zoom, no EVF, and no RAW (Canon says it can't do RAW because RAW is too expensive). It's only consolation is that the XC10's street price is "only" $2000...for a camera that can't shoot RAW.
Canon used to be a company that offered excellent value and features for the money. Now, they seem to just be trading on their brand name. I think, eventually, this will catch up to them.
I find it astounding that people here are defending Canon-- even cheering them on-- for selling such re-packaged mediocrity, and for a fairly high price, too.
jonny1976: Those who buy this camera, instead of any camera made by pentax nikon samsung sony olympus panasonic fuji in the last 5 years....new refurbished used...should be taken to an hospital. i'm sure that the bulk of canon sales is this series of plastic toy with any feature minuscule ovf and noisy sensor, and that it's the proof that people buy 99% without any knowledge
@TMHKR - Google "Canon Error 99", "Canon front/back focus problem", and "Canon mirror falls out". Canon have had their problems, just like many other brands. I've been a long time Canon user. I see no need to put them up on a pedestal. They don't deserve it.
TMHKR: The first thing a beginner should do before he chooses a certain camera system is to check how reliable the brand is. I've spent half a year reading reviews and opinions, user reports and videos on dozen entry level models, and at the end of the day, Canon is indeed the most reliable brand.
I've been a long-time Canon user. Canon's have had their issues. I've had Canon's Error 99 issues with a few of my Canon DSLRs. I've had Canon point-and-shoots that went dead on me for seemingly no reason. I don't think Canon, as a brand, is really that much more reliable than any other brand. I use Canon, Sony, Fuji, Samsung, and Olympus. I would not recommend any one of these brands over another based on "reliability of the brand". Stuff happens, and it happens to any brand.
pkcpga: Great camera wish it had apsc sized lenses to match up with it. No point in a small camera if the g master or full frame zeiss are the only worthy glass. Every reviewer states the same that they like the g master lenses with it and the old e mount lenses don't do it justice. Any chance Sony has plans for new glass for apsc sensor size? I see no reason to buy this camera if I'm still going to pay for and lug around full frame glass.
There's plenty of excellent "worthy glass" for Sony APS-C. I recently traveled to Asia with an A6000. The glass I took with me was the Sony 18-105/4 OSS, 35/1.8 OSS, 50/1.8 OSS, 55-210 OSS, and Rokinon 12/2. All performed superbly, delivering excellent image quality. The image quality was just as good as the Canon DSLR glass I used to travel with, including plenty of L glass. People who use glass as an excuse are just grasping at straws, and probably spend too much time pixel peeping rather than spending time out in the real world taking real photos, or have delusions that their images are going to be printed up 6' high wall-size for some national ad campaign or something. Get over it. There's definitely good glass for the A6300. And even when I mount my Canon L glass on my A6000, it's still lighter and more compact, and my camera bag is lighter, than lugging around a comparably spec'd DSLR.
Androole: "...one thing is clear: Sony anticipates the a6300 to be another top seller."
I imagine that a lot of the A6000's popularity came from its remarkably low price tag. It was a high-quality sensor and processor wrapped in a simple, inexpensive body with no extra features or frills to drive up the cost. The A6300 very much follows in its footsteps with a similar template, but at a 60% (!) increase to its starting MSRP for a very similar camera, it doesn't look like nearly the same bargain value proposition in a very competitive market.
Likewise, it's hard to feel like a camera at this price tag will stand the test of time and "look impressive, even two years down the road," with ergonomic oversights you've highlighted like the missing direct controls, no touchscreen or AF joystick, and not being weather-sealed despite the $1000 price point.
It's a nice camera, but doesn't feel like it moves the bar the way the A6000 did unless you only care about 4K and incremental AF improvements...
@Scott Nicol - The A6300 should not a huge surprise once reviewed, because it's just building on the A6000, which is currently ranked #11, #13, #14 (in various kit packages) on Amazon's Best Sellers in Interchangeable Cameras list: http://postimg.org/image/lrlskez2n/And those aren't pre-order numbers for the A6000. The A6000 is the A6300's predecessor. It's been on the market for a while. In comparison, the highest current ranking for a Canon 70D, the 80D's predecessor, is #32: http://postimg.org/image/bwctjp8f5/
Canon: "Missed Photo Ops a Thing of the Past"
Really? That's as dumb as the their disastrous "At Canon, We See Impossible" slogan.
justmeMN: (Regarding Sony's sales claims.)
The last IDC worldwide ILC market share numbers I could find are Canon 43.3%, Nikon 32.1%, and Sony a weak 13.0%.
The A6300 is selling very well on Amazon. On Amazon's "Best Sellers in Interchangeable Lens Cameras", which includes both DSLRs and mirrorless, it is currently ranked #5 (body only) and #9 (kit). The only other two bodies in the top 10 are the Rebel T5 and Nikon D3300. Here's a screenshot:
In comparison, the Canon 80D is currently ranked #66.