Jump to content

wobba

Members
  • Content Count

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by wobba


  1. 1 hour ago, Mokara said:

    Depends on the processing power and the responsiveness of lenses. There is no inherent reason why PDAF is better than CDAF, actually if you have enough processing power the reverse would be true since you are dealing with what actually appears on the image rather than a parallax difference. Consequently it is more accurate, provided you are gathering enough data.

    CDAF works better with a narrow depth of field, so putting it in a FF camera is not a disadvantage. PDAF works better with deeper depth of field, since it is essentially a crude rangefinder independent of what is in the image. This is why you will find both types in most MILCs, PDAF is used to get a rough range so the lens focus point is in about the right place, and then CDAF is used to get it set accurately. If your lens is responsive and fast enough however, you don't really need PDAF as much.

    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. 13 minutes ago, wolf33d said:

    You are wrong. A9 sensor is not BSI (see official Sony specs). That’s why they claim 15 stops of DR with A7III. It will have better IQ than A9 for sure.

    You are also wrong with the measurement between A9 and RIII. Check DXO as well as real world comparison on Dpreview. 

    The A9 sensor is an Exmor RS, according to official Sony specs, which is BSI.

     


  3. 41 minutes ago, wolf33d said:

    Man I am impressed. Sony really stepped the game here. They must do that knowing that canikon monsters will release their version this year so they wanted to be sure to have the best specs for the price. 

    Seriously, if one does not need 42mpx, this is better than the A7RIII especially when considering price. 

    Very, very impress. Can't wait to be blown away at NAB by A7SIII. Now counting on 4K60p and 10 bit easily.

    Hands on by PB: http://philipbloom.net/blog/a7iii/
     

    In fact it is even better than A9. It gets a BSI sensor, they claim 15 stops of DR. DR of A9 was pretty bad so we should see a better still image quality here. 

    The A9 has a stacked BSI sensor with 13.2 stops of DR vs 13.9 for the A7RIII.


  4. 4 minutes ago, Grégory LEROY said:

    I've never talked about DOF, I think the artificial look is about in focus out of focus transition. I'm only watching m43 footage on youtube.

    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.


  5. 2 hours ago, Fritz Pierre said:

    +1 Jon!...just tell the bride & groom that you did not get their shots because your one perfect camera that can shoot in pitch black, but started overheating after 3 min had to be turned off for 10 min at a time, and you have a disaster on your hands that I personally would not want to be around for....and the emphasis is on "a once in a lifetime event"...no bring everybody back the next day for a reshoot...only sane way is with back ups for your back ups!

    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/


  6. 11 hours ago, Kisaha said:

    @Andrew Reid a6500 will be on the spotlight for quite a while, it would be good for the forum and the community to have an unbiased review. 

    Also, there is a lot to discuss here, the camera offers more controversy than upgrade, and there are a lot of points to be made.

    From where the marketing of the industry goes, rise of prices, Sony is worst in almost everything (Fuji/Nikon better iq from the same sensors-ibis better in m4/3 land-worst touch screen implmentation/batery life/ergonomics/menus in the industry-screen dims badly in 4K recording, violent devaluation of the 7 months old a6300, AF much inferior than Canon, NX1 still the best overal experience of a hybrid! APS-C lens selection underwhelming) etc

     

    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.


  7. 31 minutes ago, hijodeibn said:

    I will better choose a GX85 everyday of the week, it´s a no brain decision, but in my particular case I will always go Canon route, the skin tones are the most important for me, and a XC15 is what I am saving to buy soon, or a C100 if there is a good deal….

    I was responding to your statement that there are better cameras for $1500.  Where can I buy an XC15 or C100 for $1500?

    31 minutes ago, hijodeibn said:

     


  8. 3 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

    Yes it sounds good on paper but in reality the detail has to be pixel peeped by us to be determined as different, for the audience they won't care.

    Ever heard of the Samsung NX1? That was doing a 6K readout 2 years ago, continuously for hours with no heat management problems.

    I just cannot see how, as a package, the A6500 is all that remarkable.

    Again it is a paper camera...

    5 axis. AF tracking. S-LOG.

    Amazing specs until you realise none of them work very well.

    5 axis is better at Panasonic and Olympus.

    AF tracking and LOG are better at Canon.

    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.


  9. 3 hours ago, Kisaha said:

    You bought a 6300 (and whatever crop Sony you had before) without IBIS and no decent APS-C lens selection anyways, and no DIS for whenever reason, except no moding/hacking scene at all, that we enjoy amazing evolution to an already very good system; One of the most important aspects (even the Sony representatives make this a huge deal) is the touch screen, that you had to buy 3 cameras (6000-6300-6500) to make it happen (a business partner here bought the a6000 with full price, the a6300 for 1500euros a month ago, and now he has to find a way to buy the a6500, on the same time, I have the same camera, that is a huge financial advancement), while it was always there on the NX1, so yes, we did enjoy our cameras more, for more continuous time and no overheating, ever, just saying (-a logic statement here)..

    It is also irrelevant and somehow futile to try to impose views on other people (another general statement, doesn't go to anyone specific). Everyone just has to enjoy whatever equipment has, and 25 years after my first (film) cameras, I have to say that we are living in exciting times and we are becoming a bit spoiled and soft!

    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.


  10. 6 hours ago, sgreszcz said:

    I'm just curious in which ways Panasonic cameras are severely deficient to Sony in stills photography?  In most ways except for ultra-shallow DoF or phase-detection C-AF for sports there is probably not a lot of difference?  Panasonic (and Olympus) have some excellent native lenses too.

    If the Gx80 is any indication, the battery life is much worse than it was on my Gx7 and LX100 (same battery type).  The IBIS is surely one of the causes, and any time I forget to shut it off for something like longer time lapses, it runs down so fast.  I am working on an external battery feed from USB battery bank.

    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".


  11. 2 hours ago, jax_rox said:

    Sony's camera bodies are also priced much higher than the GH4. The GH4's release RRP was the same as the A7II's release RRP. You're talking Panasonic's top of the line, versus Sony's middle of the line. The GH4 is half the price of an A7rII or A7sII.

    So given that essentially the GH4 is competing with the A7II, it only really needs to beat that and it will sell. It doesn't need to do anything, particularly something as 'drastic' as that, to stay in the game. If you consider the A7rII and A7sII to be high-end ILC game, Panasonic aren't competing there. They have neither the sensor size, resolution, low-light ability etc. to be able to compete at that level. But they can compete in the mid-range level a la A7II.

    I would suggest you'll get significantly improved low-light ability before you'll get 4k 4:2:2 10-bit. Maybe 4:2:2 8-bit, even 10-bit 1080p, but I just can't see it going full 10-bit in the GH5.

    Sure, right now they have no higher tier product to protect, but that's only thinking short term, and again these people are running a business and in business, you make long-term decisions for long-term sales. 

    There may not be a product on the market right now to compete with an FS5/FS7/C300 etc. but unless anyone here works at Panasonic, no-one knows what may be in the pipeline.

    If there is an AF100 successor in the pipeline at any stage of development, it will have to sit between the VaricamLT and the GH5, and those decisions are made now. And if Panasonic can do 10-bit 4k internally in the GH5, and still make a profit margin with it priced at $1600 - why would they put that in a camera whose market is largely stills shooters, when they can put it into a $5k camera aimed at video shooters and make significantly more money?

    Again, happy to be proven wrong, and more than happy to put an edible hat on the line. But I just don't see it happening.

    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.


  12. 1 hour ago, independent said:

    I'm not surprised. Aside from the unreliable promo videos, with questionable grades, I expect the actual quality of the video to be similar to the 1DX II, aside from the difference in crop and frame rates. Then again, the 1DX II is almost double the price of the 5D IV, so it's reasonable to expect some differences.

    The 5D IV is at a similar price point to the Sony a7r II, which has its own drawbacks. Color science versus crop factor? Either will be a deal breaker for some, or minor obstacles for many others. 

    Still, the 5D IV has the best implementation of video autofocus on the market, quality 4K (despite the crop), good colors out of the box, rugged body and proven reliability, and of course the widest range of available lenses. 

    Right now, there are only two small cameras with usable video autofocus that doesn't have some MAJOR operational limitation (a6300): The Sony a7r II and the 5d IV.

    Glad to see more tools out there. 

    The 5DIV has significant rolling shutter in 4K which, I would add, is a major operational limitation. So rule this out as well. 


  13. 19 hours ago, Inazuma said:

    BTW it's not clear but where the dropdown gives you options for 4k, 4k aps-c, 1080p, 1080p aps-c,  the "4k APS-C" means 4k 30p and "1080p APS-C" means 120p. Not sure why they've named them such. 

    @wobba I also bought a GX80 and then a a6300 shortly after (my wallet is pretty battered now). I agree with all those points you made. I would also add that skintones are far more accurate (with the Standard profiles or with SLOG2 and SGamut3.Cine colour). Also a big issue I have with Panasonic cameras is that flares from bright lights cause purple streaks; an issue that Sony and other manufacturers don't have. 

    I still have my GX80 because I cant decide which to keep. I have particularly shaky hands so the 5-axis is a godsend for me. And the 1080 is just so much more detailed as well..

    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.


  14. 23 hours ago, Geoff CB said:

    Yes if you use a stabilized lens, it's great with the lens you mentioned. But I use mainly adapted glass. If it had a stabilized sensor I might find it okay, but it's past the point of acceptable for me with my existing lenses.

     

    You might get away with it if you have a shoulder rig, but definitely not bare handed.

    There isn't a single camera I would be happy to shoot handheld without some form stabilization.


  15. 3 hours ago, sanveer said:

    Would love to know your results with the new firmware. Suddenly am wondering whether this is a better deal than the GX85, considering this was The Biggest issue with it (apart from a touch screen). And here the A6300 comes at a little over $999 with a Stabilized kit lens. So it's a pretty good deal. 

    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...