Looks like a wonderful little video making tool. Sure, the a6300 has it's limitations, but I don't think there is another camera out there this small that can take that kind of footage, especially in low light.
I agree with others here that this probably means the end of development. Google essentially overpaid for the company to have exclusive rights to the image editing algorithms which they plan to implement in Google Photos and mobile platforms. Free may be good for our short term enjoyment, but the Nik suite will slowly become more and more unsupported to it's eventual death. Nik was really on to something special until Google purchased it.
Damn, that lens looks incredibly sharp, even in those conditions.
It remains to be seen what the image quality will be like, but if it's good, this would be a great hikers lens when wanting to keep the kit as small as possible. Just my two cents.
iudex: Just like the last slide says: for Pentaxians it´s dream that has come true and even if it didn´t have anything more the competition has, it has a FF sensor and that would be enough. However the spec list is impressive and there are many novelties the Canon/Nikon fullframe cameras don´t have.And for non-Pentaxians there is this huge appeal of fantastic price: 1000 bucks cheaper than comparable D810 and even cheaper than lower-positioned D750. I cannot imagine the price of the rumoured (less specced) K-2.
Agreed. Someone who desires a highres dslr can buy it with the 24-70 2.8 for just a little bit more money than the d810 body alone. It's implied that the K-1 will not be a anywhere near as good at shooting moving subjects as the 810, but I don't think that is what people are using the 810 for anyway. Two areas I think this camera pulls ahead of both Canon and Nikon is for landscape and product photography, especially if there is static subjects.
veritalens: Question! I have never used any Ricoh/Pentax cameras (although I would like a GRII), is the pixel-shift procedure output comparable to Sigma's Foveon tech? Is the output similar?
I would say the pixel shift on static subjects is better looking than the foveon when done correctly. Just take a look at the K-3ii sample images to see how noise free, color accurate, and sharp they look. I can't imagine what this will look like on a full frame camera. Obviously, the big limitation is that you have to have a static image.
Though it doesn't have quite the AF as Nikon and Canon, this seems to be a landscape photographers dream. Tiltable LCD for difficult angles, IBIS, pixel shift capture for static subjects, and weather sealing at this price point are insane.
Given the video improvements and the video codec, I wonder if the video quality has been improved over previous versions. Canon's 1080p video is notoriously soft in their enthusiast line. The video has always seemed to have been lower resolution scaled up to 1080p. 4k would have been amazing, but it would be very interesting if the camera delivered true 1080 or downscaled 1080 from an oversampled capture. Anyways, we will see.
Very nice. Now all those wide angled lenses that couldn't take filters before will now be able to take filters.
schaki: Clearly not very impressed so far. The lens have somewhat rough out of focus rendering. Which can be seen in the picture with the red tractor and also the picture to the left of the dog-pictures.The default jpeg ouput looks somewhat flat and I get the impression that the default NR setting for jpeg not is off, as it the look seems to indicate. Also the trees doesnt look too well which probably is down to NR. At Fujifilm have not overcooked it with too much sharpening.Maybe better than standard settings could push the ooc jpeg output towards something better.But that oof rendering as mentioned before... Wont be easy to get away from that.
Both cameras are great
straylightrun: Juat get an old X-E2, upgrade to the new 4.0 fw and get a 18/2. Itll be cheaper, faster, you get an evf and its capable of changing lenses.
I did. I bought an x-e2 with 18-55 in almost new condition. The x70 is still nice though.
The camera's video is perfectly usable for most people who want a camera first and have the ability to get a decent video when needed. Besides, I don't think the aim of this camera was video, but it looks pretty good as an afterthought.
mxx: What happened to the a6100 and a6200?
They were going to release them, but since Canon kept releasing mirrorless turds, they didn't need to.
I'm sorry. I couldn't help myself.
fairfaxian: Anybody have enough Sony/Panasonic HANDS-ON experience to compare this to the Panny GH4? I was just about to pull the trigger on the GH4 as a 4K video cam w/SloMo (important features to me) As a Canon user, I have a collection of Canon glass -which I can adapt w metabones to either brand. Sony has a larger sensor, but the panny has an EVF, and a huge range of peripherals/accessories. Sony probably has better still IQ, and low light advantage. But I have never even held either cam in my hand (or any other sony for that matter) I love my Canon 7DII -but its a relative blunderbuss for size. And no 4K or SloMo video. Canon is typically slow to the feature wars, but I would tend to go with them if features were equal. Alas . . .
Times change and technology moves one. While the GH4 is still a fantastic camera and has more professional features, controls and options like anamorphic, time coding and no limit recording, the Sony wins on video quality, iso usability, and AF. People say AF is not a big deal for video and prefer to use manual focus, but for a solo run and gun style shot, the a6300 is probably a better choice. But who cares about all that. It's about getting the shots you want.
Technology changes fast. Videographers don't suffer as much from fanboyism and will use the most logical solution available. Sony may be the best option today on a budget, but Panasonic may be the best option tomorrow.
I would say wait until you can try it out before you buy.
Damn you Sony! I just bought new gear. Couldn't you have announced this a few weeks earlier? Oh well. Nice tech.
It's a spec monster, especially on the AF and video side. I love seeing all this technology creep it's way down into consumer enthusiast cameras. Even if I don't buy it, it will be pushing other companies to deliver comparable products. I bet there will be camera companies rethinking their mirrorless update because of this camera, and that is good for all of us.
Looks like this is going to be the go-to camera for quality video on a budget. If the video part of it lives up to it's spec sheet, this camera will sell very well.
For still imaging only, it's nice, but not really the leap some were hoping for. The a6000 offers better bang for the buck if all one wants to do is take photos. The lack Sony APS-C specific lens choices hurts this camera's potential too.
Anyway, nice camera. It is tempting for a video/photo combo.
I won't comment on the camera itself as I am certainly not it's intended user, but I wonder if this signals a trickle down to better video in Canon's lower priced cameras to come. The limiting factor before was supposedly readout speed for their sensors, but it looks like that is improving. Only time will tell.