A6300 vs a7 classic

[davidstock]

Although it makes complete logical sense to give up the 35 and just have the 28 and 55, there's no way I'm giving up the 35. I just love it. I've not touched my 28 since getting it. I could probably give up the 28.

The 35 f2.8 is a fine lens, IMO. I use it occasionally on my A7RII, but I find it to be especially good on the a6500, where it is excellent as a "normal" lens. Sharp corner to corner and, of course, showing much less vignetting than on full frame.

 

[JimKasson]

A difference that may seem minor, but that's the kind of difference for which people pay thousands in lenses, so not negligible.

Just as an addendum, a full frame camera may need f11 to get the depth of field of an APSC camera at f8. If you are photographing in that part of the shooting envelope, the difference in resolution between cameras becomes even smaller.

That is correct.

(Plus, the APSC camera gives you another stop of shutter speed for hand-holding.)

Not if you want the same noise in both pictures.

Jim

 

[davidstock]

A difference that may seem minor, but that's the kind of difference for which people pay thousands in lenses, so not negligible.

Just as an addendum, a full frame camera may need f11 to get the depth of field of an APSC camera at f8. If you are photographing in that part of the shooting envelope, the difference in resolution between cameras becomes even smaller.

That is correct.

(Plus, the APSC camera gives you another stop of shutter speed for hand-holding.)

Not if you want the same noise in both pictures.

Jim

--

Agreed, if both cameras use the same sensor tech. But isn't the a6300 that the OP asked about close to or maybe even better than the A7 when it comes to noise?

 

[Michael Everett]

There is one factor difference between the A7xx and the Axxx that I don't think has been mentioned. I went from the Nex-7 and A6000 to the A7 and finally the A7RII, and I immediately noticed a nicer tonal gradation in the FF sensor than the APS-C. It's hard to describe what it is, and it's not necessaily resolution and noise, but there is a difference in the gradations.

 

[JimKasson]

A difference that may seem minor, but that's the kind of difference for which people pay thousands in lenses, so not negligible.

Just as an addendum, a full frame camera may need f11 to get the depth of field of an APSC camera at f8. If you are photographing in that part of the shooting envelope, the difference in resolution between cameras becomes even smaller.

That is correct.

(Plus, the APSC camera gives you another stop of shutter speed for hand-holding.)

Not if you want the same noise in both pictures.

Jim

--

Agreed, if both cameras use the same sensor tech. But isn't the a6300 that the OP asked about close to or maybe even better than the A7 when it comes to noise?

At high ISO, yes:

Point taken.

Loading…

www.photonstophotos.net

Jim

 

[JimKasson]

There is one factor difference between the A7xx and the Axxx that I don't think has been mentioned. I went from the Nex-7 and A6000 to the A7 and finally the A7RII, and I immediately noticed a nicer tonal gradation in the FF sensor than the APS-C. It's hard to describe what it is, and it's not necessaily resolution and noise, but there is a difference in the gradations.

Photon transfer curves for the two cameras don't show any meaningful gradation differences. Below nosebleed ISOs and away from camera shutter modes that invoke digital filtering, all of those cameras pretty much obey the model.

However, as far as I know, there is no quantitative metric for "niceness".

Jim

 

[CollaborationWithLight]

Just to update: I returned the 50 1.8 and got the Zeiss 55. Utterly happy with my decision, that lens is as fab as everyone says it is.

 

[PPierre]

Mmm... Own both. Good luck with getting sharp results under 1/100, and also, good luck if you need to get closer to the subject. The Zeiss is pretty good, yep, but the Sony is 99% as good IQ wise on APS-C, and OSS + shorter minimum focus distance make it a winner IMO.

 

[slstr]

Mmm... Own both. Good luck with getting sharp results under 1/100, and also, good luck if you need to get closer to the subject. The Zeiss is pretty good, yep, but the Sony is 99% as good IQ wise on APS-C, and OSS + shorter minimum focus distance make it a winner IMO.

 

[CollaborationWithLight]

Mmm... Own both. Good luck with getting sharp results under 1/100, and also, good luck if you need to get closer to the subject. The Zeiss is pretty good, yep, but the Sony is 99% as good IQ wise on APS-C, and OSS + shorter minimum focus distance make it a winner IMO.