Jump to content
Nikkor

Sony a6300 4k

Recommended Posts

EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

I wonder about moire. The a6000 is one of the worst cameras ever in that respect. I general 4K doesn't have much but its noticeable from time to time in for example the NX1.

What are you talking about? Show us moire from the a6000. Have you tried the camera?. You must mean  sony nex6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder about moire. The a6000 is one of the worst cameras ever in that respect. I general 4K doesn't have much but its noticeable from time to time in for example the NX1.

What are you talking about? Show us moire from the a6000. Have you tried the camera?. You must mean  sony nex6

Sure,
Here is a test I made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the sensor literally the same one as in the fs5?

Nope. The sensor listed for the FS5 is 11.6MP s35 and the one on the a6300 is 24.2MP aps-c. Makes sense since in a video camera a full pixel readout is a given, and those additional 12MP don't really add anything to video... It is to be expected that heat management and rolling shutter will be better in the FS5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. The sensor listed for the FS5 is 11.6MP s35 and the one on the a6300 is 24.2MP aps-c. Makes sense since in a video camera a full pixel readout is a given, and those additional 12MP don't really add anything to video... It is to be expected that heat management and rolling shutter will be better in the FS5.

These extra 12mp add a lot to video, sampling from more pixels gives a better image (color, sharpness, noise), the problem is rolling shutter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dayum, the XC10 looks great. Probably the most organic image of them all with no sharpening artifacts and (probably?) a good gradeable image. NX1 has great resolution too. I'm almost having bad feelings about buying the RX10 ii instead of the XC10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dayum, the XC10 looks great. Probably the most organic image of them all with no sharpening artifacts and (probably?) a good gradeable image. NX1 has great resolution too. I'm almost having bad feelings about buying the RX10 ii instead of the XC10.

I obviously choose the XC10 over the RX10ii. And I have never regreted it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't expect a S35 or exotic sensors in the GH5 - probably will be the 20mp sensor from the GX8 and Olympus Pen F. They are with the hands tied by Sony - Panasonic was not developing sensors from a long time, just recently they started again (read it somewhere). The organic sensors are still in the future too, I guess. PDAF is probably out, too - looks like that Panasonic bets all in the DFD technology.

The only way to improve the low light perfomance with the current tech is to go the BSI way; but Sony is holding the technology for their cameras - their clients are not receiving BSI sensors, only the Sony cameras. Samsung is the only other sensor manufacturer that makes a large BSI sensor (in the NX1), but looks like that they are out of the game (a GH5 with a Samsung BSI sensor would be great).

The A6300 might be a low light monster - if the BSI tech in its sensor is the same from the A7RII, the pixel pitch of the sensor will be even greater than the A7RII.

Well there is no BSI image sensor in Panasonic stable, but they have something called SmartFSI ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPec2EaBSSM  ) that's actually very smart technology , but looking like Panny is still struggling with yield and they probably still unable to put the tech onto a large sensor application. The other big sensor tech is stacking , but right now only Sony shown capable to do it on a scale. Ominvision and Samsung all shown them but can only do very limited delivery and they have not employ it on anything big. My take is Sony also is trying to further the technology. So until they can safely made all or some of them to fit together in a sensor and give good yield. The stick with the trial and true older tech but made do with still more improvement.

The new Organic Thin Film Sensor development Panasonic just announced was in itself a BSI structure but its not likely to even hit production until he 2020's and this is likely for industrial, automotive and medical application too. So for now I am more willing to believe Panasonic is simply running with limited set of technical know how that they can deploy to a 4/3 sensor ( or Super 35 as in their VariCam). I wonder though if intrim they can take their tech that step further, say bring that SmartFSI to 4/3 or perfect their BSI fab so they can employ that to a traditional MOS sensor

 

I obviously choose the XC10 over the RX10ii. And I have never regreted it.

The XC10 is one of those love it or hate it affair, Canon should ditch their marketing saying its for Still and Video ( the still capability is a joke ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These extra 12mp add a lot to video, sampling from more pixels gives a better image (color, sharpness, noise), the problem is rolling shutter.

I disagree... There should be more than just the necessary pixels in order to remap blown pixels, etc. but apart from a little better sharpness -which is questionable-, color is not improved by pixel density and noise in generally worse. Usually, the bigger the pixels, the more light they gather and the lower noise is... if that 24MP sensor were better for video they wouldn't have used the 11.6MP one on the F5 and F55 -rolling shutter would not be so problematic on those cameras with more computing power-. That's why people speculated with the possibility of a FF video camera with the A7S sensor, because MP count makes almost more sense for video than stills -unlike most full frame sensors-.

The a6300 is a hybrid camera and as such it has to be a capable video AND stills camera. The 11.6MP is listed as having around 9M effective pixels, which most photographers -pro or enthusiast- would deem too few. I'm sure the a6300 is a very nice stills camera. What remains to be seen in video is if they have managed to overcome the extra difficulties implied in using a stills aps-c sensor. On paper it sounds great...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dayum, the XC10 looks great. Probably the most organic image of them all with no sharpening artifacts and (probably?) a good gradeable image. NX1 has great resolution too. I'm almost having bad feelings about buying the RX10 ii instead of the XC10.

The reason the XC10 isn't showing moire in that clip is because it is not resolving the slats at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Sony stick with their usual (very careful) market segmentation, it'll have just enough limitations and lack just enough must have features such that it doesn't impact on A7 sales.  

When the full reviews come out, I'll bet there are loads of people on here and in other forums saying 'if only it had xx like the A7' or 'why didn't they give it xx, they could have done it easily'.  I'll bet we're all just a bit disappointed...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree... There should be more than just the necessary pixels in order to remap blown pixels, etc. but apart from a little better sharpness -which is questionable-, color is not improved by pixel density and noise in generally worse. Usually, the bigger the pixels, the more light they gather and the lower noise is... if that 24MP sensor were better for video they wouldn't have used the 11.6MP one on the F5 and F55 -rolling shutter would not be so problematic on those cameras with more computing power-. That's why people speculated with the possibility of a FF video camera with the A7S sensor, because MP count makes almost more sense for video than stills -unlike most full frame sensors-.

The a6300 is a hybrid camera and as such it has to be a capable video AND stills camera. The 11.6MP is listed as having around 9M effective pixels, which most photographers -pro or enthusiast- would deem too few. I'm sure the a6300 is a very nice stills camera. What remains to be seen in video is if they have managed to overcome the extra difficulties implied in using a stills aps-c sensor. On paper it sounds great...

You forget, physical pixels have a beyer filter in front of them. The final image you see has pixels that are a combination of information from adjacent physical pixels in order to reconstruct color.

The most accurate image would be one reconstituted from an oversampled sensor.

Information is summed from an oversampled sensor, so although the physical pixels are smaller, the net effect is not too different from larger pixels in terms of noise, especially if you are using something like a BSI sensor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason the XC10 isn't showing moire in that clip is because it is not resolving the slats at all.

I disagree. Do you mean the soft and shitty Nex 5 is "resolving better" because it moires like hell? :D The XC10 beats all of those cams except the NX1 in resolution and the NX1 looks quite sharpened.

Cameras are supposed to cut off the resolution just above the nyquist limit so that the moire doesn't appear. The slats are not supposed to be resolved!

You forget, physical pixels have a beyer filter in front of them. The final image you see has pixels that are a combination of information from adjacent physical pixels in order to reconstruct color.

Sure but you are talking about color and the human eyesight is very shitty in discerning the sharpness of specific color channels. Luminance is the most important one and it definitely does not need to be sampled 200%. 

If a camera uses 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 color sampling, it will through away massive amounts of color information anyway and that's AFTER the oversamplings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree... There should be more than just the necessary pixels in order to remap blown pixels, etc. but apart from a little better sharpness -which is questionable-, color is not improved by pixel density and noise in generally worse. Usually, the bigger the pixels, the more light they gather and the lower noise is... if that 24MP sensor were better for video they wouldn't have used the 11.6MP one on the F5 and F55 -rolling shutter would not be so problematic on those cameras with more computing power-. That's why people speculated with the possibility of a FF video camera with the A7S sensor, because MP count makes almost more sense for video than stills -unlike most full frame sensors-.

The a6300 is a hybrid camera and as such it has to be a capable video AND stills camera. The 11.6MP is listed as having around 9M effective pixels, which most photographers -pro or enthusiast- would deem too few. I'm sure the a6300 is a very nice stills camera. What remains to be seen in video is if they have managed to overcome the extra difficulties implied in using a stills aps-c sensor. On paper it sounds great...

You know these senors have bayer filter arrays?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...