Jump to content

wobba

Members
  • Content Count

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by wobba

  1. Yet in every example/comparison I have ever seen, PDAF has proven to be vastly superior to CDAF, particularly with respect to continuous AF video performance.
  2. WOW ... no PDAF, yet again! CDAF is barely adequate on a m4/3 size sensor that is aided by a deep depth of field. On a full frame sensor, with a narrow depth of field, CDAF will be a disaster.
  3. The A9 sensor is an Exmor RS, according to official Sony specs, which is BSI.
  4. The A9 has a stacked BSI sensor with 13.2 stops of DR vs 13.9 for the A7RIII.
  5. In this VLOG, Casey explains why he's shooting with a GH5. He also provides pros/cons of the GH5 vs A6500.
  6. There's no getting around the small sensor look with m43. APS-C is the sweet spot when you account for the 16:9 crop, providing generous looking DOF as well as lovely in-out focus transitons. The difference in sensor size between APS-C and 4/3 is larger than it appears (when cropping to video formats) if you just compare absolute sensor sizes. Cropping a 4/3 sensor to 16:9 requires sacrificing more sensor real estate than APS-C given the squarer proportions of a 4/3 sensor. A 16:9 cropped 4/3 sensor is not that much larger than a 16:9 cropped 1" sensor.
  7. Fake information! The A6500 does not overheat after 3 min ... http://www.newsshooter.com/2016/10/14/sony-fix-overheating-issue-with-new-setting-on-the-a6500/
  8. Are there any videos showing AF tracking of moving subjects?
  9. You've just outlined a very compelling reason to buy an A6500. Based on your cherry picked list, you essentially need to buy 4 camera systems to get all the features offered by the A6500. While the Sony may need be perfect, it sure beats investing in and lugging around 4 camera systems.
  10. Cheaper, yes? Better, how? The GX85 lacks an effective AF system. And the exposure stepping is downright ugly. The audio preamps in the GX85 are also extremely noisy.
  11. I was responding to your statement that there are better cameras for $1500. Where can I buy an XC15 or C100 for $1500?
  12. The fact that you need the above mentioned multiple cameras/systems to replicate what the Sony can achieve in a compact form factor for $1500 makes the A6500 look pretty remarkable.
  13. With 4K, IBIS, touch screen and effective AF in video?
  14. I'm not sure I understand the relevance of some of your comparisons in this review. In Australia, a 1DX mkII will set you back $8500 vs $1400 for an A6300!
  15. Sony are more conservative/cautious than Samsung. I have owned numerous products from both companies and Sony gear has always been superbly reliable. On the other hand, our experience with Samsung gear has been less than stellar. Our 1 month old 65" Samsung TV recently blew up. Samsung washer's had to be recalled because they were going up in flames. And the Galaxy 7 is an exploding death hazard. There were massive delays at Melbourne Airport this morning due to scanning of carry-on luggage for Samsung handsets. I have zero interest in anything from Samsung going forward.
  16. And with an AF system that allows you to shoot stills and video for subjects that are not stationary.
  17. There's plenty of material on-line comparing high-res full frame to m4/3 for photography. When it comes to low light performance, resolution, dynamic range and tonality, the A7Rii competes with medium format while m4/3 is closer in performance to 1".
  18. Panasonic competes with Sony on video only. For stills, Sony cameras are in a different league. For me, this needs to be factored into the price since with Panasonic, I need to also commit funds to a stills outfit.
  19. The 5DIV has significant rolling shutter in 4K which, I would add, is a major operational limitation. So rule this out as well.
  20. The 1.17x crop in 4K is a major showstopper with the XT2.
  21. The IBIS in the GX80 is indeed impressive. I only shoot 4k nowadays and, therefore, much prefer the A6300 which shoots impeccable 4k, free from the peculiarities occasionally observed with the GX80.
  22. There isn't a single camera I would be happy to shoot handheld without some form stabilization.
  23. Nonsense. With a stabilised lens like the 18-105, 4k is superb on the A6300.
  24. I couldn't decide and bought both the GX85 and A6300. I ended up keeping the A6300. The key issue wiht the A6300, overheating, has essentially been resolved. Rolling shutter is slightly worse with the A6300 but still very evident with the GX85. The GX85 records shockingly poor audio, the worst I've ever come across, due in part to the constant background noise generated by the IBIS. AF tracking with the GX85's contrast detect system is also useless. The A6300's hybrid phase/contrast detect AF, on the other hand, is sensational and only falters in difficult conditions (e.g. strong backlighting). I like to shoot with shutter priority (1/50s) letting the camera adjust exposure on the run. In this mode, the GX85 changes the aperture in discrete (annoying) steps. The A6300 makes stepless aperture adjustments resulting in seamless transitions when shooting in varying lighting conditions. The IBIS is great with the GX85 but this, on it's own, did not compensate for these major shortcomings.
×
×
  • Create New...