Mokara

That is because those "Sony" sensors are the exact same design as the Samsung versions (Samsung designed them). All Sony are doing is manufacturing some of them under contract for Samsung in order make up the excess units required at launch. Because they are not being made by Samsung, they have a Sony part number. That is the extent of the difference. This is common in manufacturing (it is called supply management). If your own facility normally produces X units of something per year, and you need X+Y primarily during a certain period on launch, then you pay some other manufacturer to make Y for you. You give them the design and they make it. It is exactly the same as X, it is just made by someone else.

https://www.pcmag.com/roundup/361090/the-best-pci-express-nvme-solid-state-drives-ssds I would still stick with the Samsung though, even though the new HP version is not bad (as long as you get one of the larger capacity models). Remember that the 970 has been out for quite some time, there will probably be a next gen model in 2019.

There is a way to get what I think you want. Go to custom key assignments (second tab, list #5, item "Custom Key (Shoot)". Click that, then select "C Button". On the list of options select "AF/MF Ctrl Toggle". Once that is set up, if you press the C button while shooting the camera will switch from AF to manual focus. This will have the effect of locking focus on whatever you are pointing at. To go back to AF, just press the C button again. Just keep in mind that if you have peaking switch on, those will appear on your screen. You can also assign the left or right buttons to do this (they have fewer options).

The sensor returns information from specific pixels to the LSI for AF purposes, so it cannot be the same sensor if it has more points.

My understanding was that anything other than Samsung (preferably the pro line) was lesser. WD are not a memory manufacturer, they are just a generic when it comes to SSDs.

The RX100 cameras do either CAF or manual focusing in video mode, I don't think there is a focus lock function. You get more options in stills mode, but when you hit record it appears that all of the AF modes become CAF.

Storage is cheap. Data transfer rates will be less of an issue going forward into the future since higher speed interfaces are constantly being added. The main hurdle to overcome is neither storage not data speed, it is the processor overhead required to decode encoded footage. But that will get better over time as well. People who shoot home video with their 8K imaging devices are the ones who will play content of their 8K sets. And in any case, upscaling of current 4K footage will improve the overall experience just as upscaled FHD looks better of a 4K panel than a FHD panel. It will smooth out the aliasing effects that come from the panel itself. That may not improve resolution but it will reduce the artifacts you might otherwise see on a big 4K panel. So the content is already out there. You had multiple cameras and an assistant(s) to handle that. Sort of like the circled wagons of pioneer days when they had muskets. You would have multiple muskets and some guy who could shoot reasonably accurately would do the shooting, while those who could not shoot so well (women, children, etc) would do the reloading.

The a6400 has more CDAF points than the a6300, so it is a new sensor. Basic acquisition specs however may be similar. Micro focus hunting (even thought the overall image itself appears to be in focus) will do the same thing, since adjusting the focus point changes perspective slightly as well. You might not be aware that focus breathing is happening if you are using stabilization such as DIS or (possibly) IBIS, and that would create distortions that don't superficially appear to be lens related. Like I said, a lot of these things have to do with the quality and nature of the lens being used rather than the camera itself. RS will make things worse of course, since it will amplify the distortions.

What is a "cooperate image" clip?

The issue will be most noticeable with cheap wide angle lenses with objects relatively close to the camera and a distant background. The sort of thing people would do when vlogging. Small movements allow the camera to "see around" an object, and that causes the background to look like it is wobbling. The further away from the lens the foreground subject is, the less of an issue it will be. It is a problem with pretty much any sort of stabilization that relies on moving elements of the optical system. You pretty much need to keep the camera steady to avoid it. Since the camera is using the latest focusing system, and since that is a property of the LSI, it absolutely has a new LSI.

Sarcasm aside, it doesn't change the fact that it looks like HD.

A lot of the distortions attributed to rolling shutter are actually optical distortions resulting from small changes in point of view and rotation of the sensor in the image plane. RS aggravates it of course, but the problem is primarily optical and people expecting too much of the limited optics usually used on cameras like this one. You will see this sort of stuff more with short focal length and cheaper lenses. To minimize it you really need a tripod or at least a gimbal.

It looks like HD though, not 4K. Not detailed enough.

That is not really possible with a small body like the a6x00 series, at least not without a major body redesign. Keep in mind that margins are kept in check by minimizing development, and that means using existing technology and designs where possible. For the a6400 it uses the a6300 body for the most part, and adds the RX100 flip up screen. All tried and tested tech without the need for a lot of development, in other words they can produce the camera for a lower cost, important for the market space the camera occupies. This is quite consistent with how Sony does things and is the main reason why they can have a fast turn around with incremental upgrades to their systems. As a manufacturer what you DON'T want is to have to reinvent the wheel with every upgrade, because that makes things much more expensive than they otherwise would have been. That looks like iJustine and her buddy.

The list price is the one you compare. Other cameras might have discounts applied to them from time to time, but so will the a6400. None. The focusing and basic video processing is handled by a separate processor called the LSI in Sony cameras. The a6300 has an older LSI, while the a6400 has the most recent one. That is the main internal difference. Btw, most of the higher end Canon cameras do the same thing, in addition to the main processor (or processors in the case of cameras with dual processors) there is an older Digic processor that handles the focussing system (it is not mentioned in the specs), which is the main reason why the more expensive cameras have more capabilities than the cheaper consumer models even though the hardware might seem similar on the spec sheet.

This market segment is aimed at consumers, not vloggers. You might use them for vlogging, but that is not what drives the sales. Modern Sony AF is very good as well. The main differences IMO likely come from how responsive the lens is, not the camera itself. People might not vlog much in 4K, but so what? Not everything these cameras are used for is vlogging, and I would say that most video shot with them is NOT vlogging. In a consumer camera it would be for better home video than what you otherwise might get from a cell phone, and for that the Sony is going to beat the Canon. You probably have the peaking tolerances set incorrectly.

List price is $780, with current discounts that Canon periodically has to move older products that are not selling. If you are shooting in 4K you definitely would use the Sony camera over the Canon one. 1080p footage is fairly similar I think.

It basically competes with the M50, which also has horrible RS in 4K (plus, AF in the M50 is crippled in 4K mode). It occupies the same market space.

Not really, it fits with Sony's long time strategy of graded products, using older tech for the sake of economy. It is very similar to what they did with the RX100 VA replacing the RX100 V while at the same time adding the VI model. These sorts of products are intended as entry level cameras, and cost of materials is critical there. So they use components they already have. In this case it is most of the a6300 with the LSI from more recent products added but without the expensive IBIS mechanisms. So, nothing really new, but it fits in the low cost entry level niche.

a6500 body sells for $1198, while the a6400 body sells for $898. It is $100 less than the retail price of the a6300 even. It is clearly intended to replace the a6300.

I think this camera is intended to replace the a6300, which was still being sold alongside the a6500 (Sony do this with a lot of their cameras, there is a range of versions at any one time). People who would normally be buying the a6300 would be buying this instead. The a6500 will be replaced by a newer higher end model and that would address a different part of the market. Just think of it as a RX100 VA with an interchangeable lens.

Current processor technology likely could encode 8K30p, but it would require serious cooling to do so, which is not practical in consumer setups. Not when people have 85" 8K TV panels as the consumer standard (and yes, that will happen sooner than you think). You can already tell the difference between UHD and FHD on a 65" 4K panel (when footage is actually shot with a camera that delivers properly resolved 4K). What do you suppose will happen when the consumer sweet spot hits 85" 8K? All of your FHD footage that is really only 720p resolution is going to look pretty dated on those screens.

They tell enough. If it came down to a tyrannical government, two things, firstly most of the gun nuts would likely be supporting them in the first place, and secondly such a government would immediately take everyone's guns without asking. Armed rebellion is a fantasy by people who have no idea what armed rebellion actually entails, which is mostly the rebels being slaughtered (your 9mm is no match for a tank). People have lots of guns, but not the right kind of guns, so they would not stand a chance against an organized military. There is not a whole lot of romantic ideal involved, it is mostly just dying.

Right, but they are doing compression with a lot of compromises (such as variable frame rates) that people who use dedicated cameras are likely not to accept, so whatever is going on in the cell phone world is not a good indicator. There are no free lunches.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate Numbers tell it all. There are plenty of guns in Canada. But, you can't just go and buy one. You have to be licensed and do a training course. There are also different classes of guns, unrestricted, restricted and prohibited. Automatic weapons are prohibited. Long guns (barrel longer than a certain length, such as rifles) have no restrictions. Guns with barrels shorter than a certain length are prohibited. In between that (ie most handguns) you can own them, but only if you have a valid reason. Most gun related homicides come from handguns, and since there are not that many of those legally around, the gun homicide rate in Canada is much lower. Canada has a hunting culture and have just as many rifles as Americans do. It is all about having a sensible national gun policy, which Canada has and the US does not.