May I buy a6300 over any APS-C camera, 1D X II & D5 for sports, indoor games and bird photography?

[Thuravi Kumaaran]

May I buy a6300 over any APS-C camera, 1D X II & D5 for sports, indoor games and bird photography?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/8090146652/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-ii-studio-tests

Look at the Raw DR: Exposure Latitude “catching ups” of EOS-1D X II to the a6300 (an APS-C sensor).

And a6300’s Telephoto Continuous AF test “catching ups”; “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.”

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a6300/8

As per DPR, a6300s Telephoto Continuous AF is better than any APS-C camera including 7DMII & D500 and it is on par with 1D X II & D5 !

And a6300 is so compact compared to 1D X II & D5.

So as per DPR, I am obligatory to buy a6300 over any APS-C camera, 1D X II & D5 for sports, indoor games and bird photography.

See the huge price difference at B&H a6300 = $998.00 @ 404 g, 1 D X II = $5,999.00@1530 g & D5 = $6,496.95@1415 g!

Is Canon and Nikon is utilising the innocence of a camera buyer and doing the business on it or is it a 2016 serious Sony business techs/joke?

But, no other reliable Camera reviewing sites support the DPR finding of Sony a6300.

Being a novice in this area, I am in total confusion.

 

[EthanP99]

May I buy a6300 over any APS-C camera, 1D X II & D5 for sports, indoor games and bird photography?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/8090146652/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-ii-studio-tests

Look at the Raw DR: Exposure Latitude “catching ups” of EOS-1D X II to the a6300 (an APS-C sensor).

And a6300’s Telephoto Continuous AF test “catching ups”; “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.”

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a6300/8

As per DPR, a6300s Telephoto Continuous AF is better than any APS-C camera including 7DMII & D500 and it is on par with 1D X II & D5 !

And a6300 is so compact compared to 1D X II & D5.

So as per DPR, I am obligatory to buy a6300 over any APS-C camera, 1D X II & D5 for sports, indoor games and bird photography.

See the huge price difference at B&H a6300 = $998.00 @ 404 g, 1 D X II = $5,999.00@1530 g & D5 = $6,496.95@1415 g!

Is Canon and Nikon is utilising the innocence of a camera buyer and doing the business on it or is it a 2016 serious Sony business techs/joke?

But, no other reliable Camera reviewing sites support the DPR finding of Sony a6300.

Being a novice in this area, I am in total confusion.

--
pktk

Here

Loading…

pmrphoto.blogspot.com

 

[ttran88]

If you are really asking this question than you really don't need the D5 or the Canon flagship sports camera.

 

[chipmaster]

If you are really asking this you really don't understand sports / action photography needs or the lense required for many of us, LOL.

You will be much happier and just get the a6300, its the best thing in the world for those that don't know what they need, and don't need to.

If you really do know, then no need to ask here. THis is the wrong forum for a serious discussion.

As a novice who is serious, trust me don't short change your equipment decisions and think you can do anything on the cheap, the extreme photography, the best gear really does give you and edge. You wonder why the era of sports photography and photo journalism has died, its because great equipment mated to a rich novice can produce amazing results, show up with a A6300 and trust me you won't be coming back with the same pictures the other people with the Canon and Nikons will ;-)

--
" Today's Pictures Are Tomorrow's Memories "

 

[Thuravi Kumaaran]

Here

http://pmrphoto.blogspot.com/2016/03/sony-a6300-sample-files-g-master-85-24.html?m=1

In this review; “First, a confession. While I have been a huge fan of Sony mirrorless and SLT cameras for the last three years………..”

And it is incomplete.

So can’t rely on this review.

Anyway thank you for the kindness.

--
pktk

 

[Thuravi Kumaaran]

If you are really asking this question than you really don't need the D5 or the Canon flagship sports camera.

 

[Thuravi Kumaaran]

If you are really asking this you really don't understand sports / action photography needs or the lense required for many of us, LOL.

You will be much happier and just get the a6300, its the best thing in the world for those that don't know what they need, and don't need to.

If you really do know, then no need to ask here. THis is the wrong forum for a serious discussion.

As a novice who is serious, trust me don't short change your equipment decisions and think you can do anything on the cheap, the extreme photography, the best gear really does give you and edge. You wonder why the era of sports photography and photo journalism has died, its because great equipment mated to a rich novice can produce amazing results, show up with a A6300 and trust me you won't be coming back with the same pictures the other people with the Canon and Nikons will ;-)

--
" Today's Pictures Are Tomorrow's Memories "

A great and respected reviewing site like DPREVIEW compelled me to ask this question. I am a novice on par with DPREVIEW experiences, so really in confusion.

I may be like the child, who said the ‘king is without dress’ in the “Magic weaver and the Great? King" story.

Wish to happen good things

--
pktk

 

[Bob Janes]

May I buy a6300 over any APS-C camera, 1D X II & D5 for sports, indoor games and bird photography?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/8090146652/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-ii-studio-tests

Look at the Raw DR: Exposure Latitude “catching ups” of EOS-1D X II to the a6300 (an APS-C sensor).

And a6300’s Telephoto Continuous AF test “catching ups”; “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.”

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a6300/8

As per DPR, a6300s Telephoto Continuous AF is better than any APS-C camera including 7DMII & D500 and it is on par with 1D X II & D5 !

And a6300 is so compact compared to 1D X II & D5.

So as per DPR, I am obligatory to buy a6300 over any APS-C camera, 1D X II & D5 for sports, indoor games and bird photography.

See the huge price difference at B&H a6300 = $998.00 @ 404 g, 1 D X II = $5,999.00@1530 g & D5 = $6,496.95@1415 g!

Is Canon and Nikon is utilising the innocence of a camera buyer and doing the business on it or is it a 2016 serious Sony business techs/joke?

But, no other reliable Camera reviewing sites support the DPR finding of Sony a6300.

Being a novice in this area, I am in total confusion.

 

[Thuravi Kumaaran]

It seems like a very impressive performance, but it is not necessarily the best camera for everyone, not every task.

I'm sure it is a possible to use it for all the types of photography you mention, people might prefer a pro camera to use with longer lenses, or for following action.

Do you mean this is an all-round camera, not as a specified pro-camera for sports, indoor games and bird photography?

Then what about DPR’s claim?

Anyway thank you for the kindness.

 

[Thuravi Kumaaran]

If you are really asking this you really don't understand sports / action photography needs or the lense required for many of us, LOL.

Then what about DPR’s claim?

You will be much happier and just get the a6300, its the best thing in the world for those that don't know what they need, and don't need to.

If you really do know, then no need to ask here. THis is the wrong forum for a serious discussion.

pleas tell me which forum for a serious discussion.

As a novice who is serious, trust me don't short change your equipment decisions and think you can do anything on the cheap, the extreme photography, the best gear really does give you and edge. You wonder why the era of sports photography and photo journalism has died, its because great equipment mated to a rich novice can produce amazing results, show up with a A6300 and trust me you won't be coming back with the same pictures the other people with the Canon and Nikons will ;-)

--
" Today's Pictures Are Tomorrow's Memories "

--
pktk

 

[Aaron801]

The a6300 is very well rated for quick auto focus and would be a fine choice for sports photography. It's well priced for it's level of capabilities in that realm, but no match for a $5000 camera that's designed with shooting sports in mind.... None of that is important though. Get the Sony and shoot with it and you'll likely be very happy with the performance and then if later on you have a lot more money to spend on gear trade up to a top line Canon or Nikon and see what the difference is. There's no reason though to even think about the super high end gear until you feel like you've reached the limit of what the cheaper gear can do and the Sony is good enough that this might never even happen for you...



I feel like it's always a better idea to exploit the capabilities of the inexpensive stuff, before investing in the higher end. Once you've used the cheaper gear, you'll have a better idea of whether or not you even want to upgrade and if you do, what you'd want to upgrade to...

 

[Thuravi Kumaaran]

The a6300 is very well rated for quick auto focus and would be a fine choice for sports photography. It's well priced for it's level of capabilities in that realm, but no match for a $5000 camera that's designed with shooting sports in mind.... None of that is important though. Get the Sony and shoot with it and you'll likely be very happy with the performance and then if later on you have a lot more money to spend on gear trade up to a top line Canon or Nikon and see what the difference is. There's no reason though to even think about the super high end gear until you feel like you've reached the limit of what the cheaper gear can do and the Sony is good enough that this might never even happen for you...
I feel like it's always a better idea to exploit the capabilities of the inexpensive stuff, before investing in the higher end. Once you've used the cheaper gear, you'll have a better idea of whether or not you even want to upgrade and if you do, what you'd want to upgrade to...

 

[Chris Malcolm]

Specifically for sports and for birds in flight, some people think the Sony A77ii is better than the Sony A6300. As others have pointed out, sports and birding are a highly specialised and demanding area. The A6300 is very good as far as it goes. There are other technologies and lens ranges which can go further. As a novice you don't know how for you will eventually want to go. It will probably take you at least two years of experience to find out. By which time half the cameras you're considering may have been replaced by better models.

You mentioned indoor sports. If you want to use flash then the suitability of the flash and strobe control faciltities and accessories of your camera system could become an important consideration.

 

[Bob Janes]

It seems like a very impressive performance, but it is not necessarily the best camera for everyone, not every task.

I'm sure it is a possible to use it for all the types of photography you mention, people might prefer a pro camera to use with longer lenses, or for following action.

Do you mean this is an all-round camera, not as a specified pro-camera for sports, indoor games and bird photography?

Then what about DPR’s claim?

Anyway thank you for the kindness.

 

[barrym1966]

May I buy a6300 over any APS-C camera, 1D X II & D5 for sports, indoor games and bird photography?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/8090146652/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-ii-studio-tests

Look at the Raw DR: Exposure Latitude “catching ups” of EOS-1D X II to the a6300 (an APS-C sensor).

And a6300’s Telephoto Continuous AF test “catching ups”; “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.”

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a6300/8

As per DPR, a6300s Telephoto Continuous AF is better than any APS-C camera including 7DMII & D500 and it is on par with 1D X II & D5 !

And a6300 is so compact compared to 1D X II & D5.

So as per DPR, I am obligatory to buy a6300 over any APS-C camera, 1D X II & D5 for sports, indoor games and bird photography.

See the huge price difference at B&H a6300 = $998.00 @ 404 g, 1 D X II = $5,999.00@1530 g & D5 = $6,496.95@1415 g!

Is Canon and Nikon is utilising the innocence of a camera buyer and doing the business on it or is it a 2016 serious Sony business techs/joke?

But, no other reliable Camera reviewing sites support the DPR finding of Sony a6300.

Being a novice in this area, I am in total confusion.

 

[barrym1966]

May I buy a6300 over any APS-C camera, 1D X II & D5 for sports, indoor games and bird photography?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/8090146652/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-ii-studio-tests

Look at the Raw DR: Exposure Latitude “catching ups” of EOS-1D X II to the a6300 (an APS-C sensor).

And a6300’s Telephoto Continuous AF test “catching ups”; “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.”

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a6300/8

As per DPR, a6300s Telephoto Continuous AF is better than any APS-C camera including 7DMII & D500 and it is on par with 1D X II & D5 !

And a6300 is so compact compared to 1D X II & D5.

So as per DPR, I am obligatory to buy a6300 over any APS-C camera, 1D X II & D5 for sports, indoor games and bird photography.

See the huge price difference at B&H a6300 = $998.00 @ 404 g, 1 D X II = $5,999.00@1530 g & D5 = $6,496.95@1415 g!

Is Canon and Nikon is utilising the innocence of a camera buyer and doing the business on it or is it a 2016 serious Sony business techs/joke?

But, no other reliable Camera reviewing sites support the DPR finding of Sony a6300.

Being a novice in this area, I am in total confusion.

 

[Bob Janes]

If you are really asking this you really don't understand sports / action photography needs or the lense required for many of us, LOL.

Then what about DPR’s claim?

I'm not entirely sure what 'claim' you are talking about... it is worth noting their caveat (with my emphasis in italics):

"A caveat we should note: this test is a simplified representation of an erratically-moving subject and makes life easier for the camera by having a single subject that's at a very different depth from anything else in the scene. It's quite possible that the camera would have a harder time shooting real sports, where other players can cross in front of the subject and might be wearing similarly-colored kit. Still, it's a hugely impressive result for a consumer-level camera - especially considering the focus is working fast enough to allow shots at around 8 fps."

So, they are saying it is really good, but they are not claiming it trumps everything else - it would be a good idea to compare it to other cameras in the same price range and work out what you need compared with what you can afford.

You will be much happier and just get the a6300, its the best thing in the world for those that don't know what they need, and don't need to.

If you really do know, then no need to ask here. THis is the wrong forum for a serious discussion.

pleas tell me which forum for a serious discussion.

As a novice who is serious, trust me don't short change your equipment decisions and think you can do anything on the cheap, the extreme photography, the best gear really does give you and edge. You wonder why the era of sports photography and photo journalism has died, its because great equipment mated to a rich novice can produce amazing results, show up with a A6300 and trust me you won't be coming back with the same pictures the other people with the Canon and Nikons will ;-)

--
" Today's Pictures Are Tomorrow's Memories "

--
pktk

 

[Bob Janes]

one thing to consider though is the battery life, you only get 400 shots

You can always carry a spare battery...

 

[barrym1966]

one thing to consider though is the battery life, you only get 400 shots

You can always carry a spare battery...

thats very true its the only thing putting me off mirrorless i typically take around 3000 shots on a shoot so for me I would need loads of batteries not to mention lots of chargers, the logisitics of it just wouldnt work for me

I have seen grips though that take 2 batteries not sure if they were for this camera or not it was a while ago

 

[Bob Janes]

one thing to consider though is the battery life, you only get 400 shots

You can always carry a spare battery...

thats very true its the only thing putting me off mirrorless i typically take around 3000 shots on a shoot so for me I would need loads of batteries not to mention lots of chargers, the logisitics of it just wouldnt work for me

I have seen grips though that take 2 batteries not sure if they were for this camera or not it was a while ago

When I got my first mirrorless (NEX-7) I was really worried about battery life as i quite often went through an entire battery and into another on a day's shoot with a dSLR, so I ended up buying 4 spares... In reality I've rarely needed to change batteries - my shooting style has adapted to a stage where I turn the camera off more often and I have ended up with similar life to that I got from my old dSLR.