Jump to content

Sony a6300 4k


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 773
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hey Andrew, I appreciate the response, and I'm glad you like the content Chris and I put out. We look forward your feedback on anything we produce, and I've gained a lot of useful information and

Hey Jordan No way! It kills me to have a misunderstanding like this I am an avid follower of your videos at The Camera Store, I abs

The lack of touch screen is unforgiveable.  For all the people that moan that pros don't need a touch screen in models like the A7 and RX series, seeing Dan Chung's News Shooter touch screen demo clea

Posted Images

You know these senors have bayer filter arrays?

Yes, I do but as hmcindie said

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.

That's why an 11.6 MP sensor is enough oversampling for an 8MP (4K) image.

Come on, there are several reasons why Sony develops different sensors for video cameras and stills cameras. Not to trash the a6300 which looks like a very promising video camera, even one I might buy... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I do but as hmcindie said

That's why an 11.6 MP sensor is enough oversampling for an 8MP (4K) image.

Come on, there are several reasons why Sony develops different sensors for video cameras and stills cameras. Not to trash the a6300 which looks like a very promising video camera, even one I might buy... 

but apart from a little better sharpness -which is questionable-, color is not improved by pixel density and noise in generally worse.

First you said color was not improved, now it's useless because of 4:2:0 following hmcindie. Noise will not be worse but better, reason? Blue channel noise, the more pixels you have, the less purple crap will be prominent from the blue pixels. Color is better because you are sampling colors more often, this will give a better image, the 4:2:0 losses will make it worse, but that also happes to the not oversampled image, so it will still be better. Sharpness will be also better, just compare a 12mp file to a downsized 36mp, it's obvious. But hey, come up with what you want, I don't get a price or anything for doing this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Noise will not be worse but better, reason? Blue channel noise, the more pixels you have, the less purple crap will be prominent from the blue pixels.

That's not true, the Arri Alexa is WAY better in the blue channel than Red Epic. And it has way less pixels too. We did a test and compared similar shots for VFX usage, the blue channel in the Epic was considerably worse than the Alexa.

Also comparing sharpness is quite odd, both 12mp and 36mp fit a 4k image quite well and will show no sharpness difference (all else being equal) scaled to 4k. The difference comes if you add sharpening (which you must if you want a "sharp-looking" shot) or scale in a bad algorithm that adds aliasing.

Why do you think camera makers choose a certain amount of pixels (alexa is at 2.8k and looks several magnitudes better than it's competition)

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not true, the Arri Alexa is WAY better in the blue channel than Red Epic. And it has way less pixels too. We did a test and compared similar shots for VFX usage, the blue channel in the Epic was considerably worse than the Alexa.

Also comparing sharpness is quite odd, both 12mp and 36mp fit a 4k image quite well and will show no sharpness difference (all else being equal) scaled to 4k. The difference comes if you add sharpening (which you must if you want a "sharp-looking" shot) or scale in a bad algorithm that adds aliasing.

Why do you think camera makers choose a certain amount of pixels (alexa is at 2.8k and looks several magnitudes better than it's competition)

You compared an Arri to an Red Epic, the sensors are totally different.

Take an A7sii and a A7rii, one is 12mp and gives 1:1 4K, take the A7rii in crop mode which is 18mp, the second is much sharper.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And make all their lenses obsolete?  I can't see that happening.  It would be nice just to have a multi aspect sensor like the GH2 with no crop for 4k.  That would be a 1.8/1.9 crop and still alow their lenses to be used.   There would still be pleanty of options to entice:  Global shutter, 10 bit all I internal/ raw.

multi aspect sensor would be ideal!

The 1.8x crop would be more or less close enough to Canon's 1.6x and same as Red Raven's! lol

It is weather sealed !! and the lcd screen movements are good enough. The lenses have stabilization, depending on which you buy. The biggest downside is removing the touch autofocus which was on the a5100

right you are, it BOGGLES the mind that they removed the touchscreen! !

Does the release of a6300 mean we will see a a5300 with the usual touchscreen? That would drive some people crazy, right :d

hope so!! :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The a6000 doesn't have a touchscreen, there's nothing missing, just Sony's usual segmenting. Touchscreen is for amateurs, EVF, more controls and hot shoe is for enthusiasts. It sucks they don't see the value of a touchscreen for something as simple as moving the focus point while shooting - especially with the awesome tracking abilities of the PADF. I would love one on my A7rII.

I'm getting the a6300 to replace my a5100, I will miss the touchscreen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

If it has 3 things right:

-Regular heat management, normal 30min recording repeatedly. Normal battery life (45-45min)

-Nice colour rendition (like A7rII - Not a7s original or a6000 I hate their look)

-Ability to get zero sharpening in PPs for a filmic feel. 

 I always said one of the Nex/Ax000 APS-C Sony models is going to be the next t2i for budget film. This looks like it. A camera for every shooter to buy and every lens to use.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it has 3 things right:

-Regular heat management, normal 30min recording repeatedly. Normal battery life (45-45min)

-Nice colour rendition (like A7rII - Not a7s original or a6000 I hate their look)

-Ability to get zero sharpening in PPs for a filmic feel. 

 I always said one of the Nex/Ax000 APS-C Sony models is going to be the next t2i for budget film. This looks like it. A camera for every shooter to buy and every lens to use.

 

Glad to hear you mention 'Nice colour rendition (like A7rII - Not a7s original or a6000 I hate their look)' as I was looking at future projects where a couple of guys will be running the A7sII and FS5 and this might be a better option to have in the kit bag over the Nikon stuff they currently use. 

Does anyone have any recommendations for a run and gun style lens to use for events style shooting? The kit lens won't cut it. I could look at the 35/50 Sony 1.8 but also needed a workhorse zoom with decent enough low light capabilities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 18-105mm f4 sounds interesting. Would be a new way of working as it has the zoom rocker over a zoom twist.

The Sony 24-70mm f/2.8 would be too costly for me. Would it not also crop to 36 to 105? I do have a Nikon 24-70 that I could use via an adapter but thought it might be better to get native lenses to maximise the use of the body.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew, thanks for the heads-up.  Sony has been very busy as of late.  I'm a very amateur GH-4 user with a couple of lenses for birds and insects.  What would, in your opinion, a GH-5 have to have to at least meet these new Sony specs and the $1000 price tag.  It's going to be a challenge for Pana but I don't want to bale on them until I at least see what the GH-5 has.  Thoughts?

Is Panasonic really playing catchup? I know the sensor is smaller but this seems to be more of an issue if you don't have the right lenses.  I mean we don't write-off super16 or the digital bolex because of sensor size.  Isn't the GH4 the only 'consumer' camera that can offer a true log profile 10bit 4:2:2 output? If you add the $295 ninja star you get a pretty small 1080P downscaled from 4K 10bit 4:2:2 prores package for v-log.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to hear you mention 'Nice colour rendition (like A7rII - Not a7s original or a6000 I hate their look)' as I was looking at future projects where a couple of guys will be running the A7sII and FS5 and this might be a better option to have in the kit bag over the Nikon stuff they currently use. 

Does anyone have any recommendations for a run and gun style lens to use for events style shooting? The kit lens won't cut it. I could look at the 35/50 Sony 1.8 but also needed a workhorse zoom with decent enough low light capabilities.

there is a video comparing the autofocus speed of the a6000 to a6300 and the colour rendition looks the same between them

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

Glad to hear you mention 'Nice colour rendition (like A7rII - Not a7s original or a6000 I hate their look)' as I was looking at future projects where a couple of guys will be running the A7sII and FS5 and this might be a better option to have in the kit bag over the Nikon stuff they currently use. 

I am not in contact with Sony as I am with Canon. The colour rendition and the 3 points are things I WANT it to have not things it HAS.

I have no idea about the A6300. 

 

Since you're project is using already Nikon SLRs, I am pretty sure they'll be at first absolutely hateful to Sony cameras in SLOG (fs5/a7s/7r/a6300/rx10ii) and be disappointed compered how their Nikon files looked absolutely gorgeous straight off the card. That's the only ''thing'' with Sony. They'll find amazingly new eye-opening sharpness and cropping resolution in 4K with these Sonys, that coupled with how they'll find an EVF working in video mode, tilty screens, zebras, peaking, magn. while recording, all out-weigh the Nikon advantage.

They'll be happy during shooting, just make sure you make your client understand how Sony files look and be there in the grading process. With care and a subtle eye you can get them to look very similar to nikon images thy're used too, just effort/experience in the grading process. If grading experience time is not vailable, use a normal Sony PP or better shoot on the Nikos with Standard profile (gorgeous). A new sony is better than a nikon for video in everyway except for pretty colours. If Nikon/Canon would sebd off their colour engine to Sony and receive those high DR Sony chips we'd have two killer cameras from Canon and Sony.

 

Tips to get a Canon/Nikon look-ish for Sony's (it CAN be done!)

Image6.thumb.jpg.0405610d50c8f68df7cf82e

1- Add a simple S curve to get the contrast needed (De-Log it)

Image1.thumb.jpg.3e79c8d2e60314d19b9fbd0

untitled.thumb.JPG.07adf16503b87e7e68e22

2- S-Log2 and Sony cameras are always, always shifted towards green/yellow on the colour wheel, while Nikon cameras are biased to the opposite direction, and Canon even more to red/orange. Skin looks better red/pink and healthier, just better than green/yellow. 

Solution: apply a colour wheel/color curve or whatever your NLE offers and shift the it away from green/yellow  (preferably just affect mid-tones not a global shift) = Sony images come to life (faces in particular) and approx.replicates what Caon/nikon processor does in-camera colour science.

Image2.thumb.jpg.54d57550fc47e955c100610

untitledd.thumb.JPG.a3e04450697a1b2a7605

Now i have a Base Cannikon-ish image, that I can farther grade due to a7s low noise and good codec. 

-I can add some NR for prettier skin if I/client wants

Image3.thumb.jpg.a3f6646c429327b4602999f

 

Most Sony samples on the web aren't ''graded'' for a look, they just add contrast and a punch of saturation o S-Log flat images, which is flat nd almost B&W for you to COLOUR IT WITH YOUR CRAYONS THE WAY YOU WANT. Want an Instagram hippy look? be my guest:

Image4.thumb.jpg.595e7bf0efaf667dc38416a

Want a super contrasty thick look? 

Image5.thumb.jpg.2fa46a90b95b2eb14141057

That's the point of LOG/RAW. COLOUR IT. PLAY. TWEAK. and leaving it as is, is bad. We end up with YT video tests that look like this

Image1.thumb.jpg.4a7a84af86c654dfe0bb0fe

While with simplist grading it could look like this

Image2.thumb.jpg.54d57550fc47e955c100610

So an open letter to Sony users: Colour your S-log footage do't just correct it. You're hurting he brand name more than it deserves (it deserves a little blame forr this colour science/shifts) 

Nd If you want a fast pretty image GET A FREAKING NIKON OR CANON DSLR! (D5500/D750/D810/5DIII/7DII) are all HD vido cameras with gorgeous colours 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

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.

You can only get moire if the slats are being resolved. The XC10 doesn't have moire in those shots because it simply isn't resolving the detail that is there. That is why it looks like a uniform sheet of color rather than actual slats. The XC10 footage in that youtube video looks like it is out of focus anyway, so operator error might be plausible in that instance.

Most XC10 footage that I have seen posted on the web has poor resolution. I could accept the argument that individual clips here and there may be due to operator error, but when they are all like that then it has to be the camera.

Is Panasonic really playing catchup? I know the sensor is smaller but this seems to be more of an issue if you don't have the right lenses.  I mean we don't write-off super16 or the digital bolex because of sensor size.  Isn't the GH4 the only 'consumer' camera that can offer a true log profile 10bit 4:2:2 output? If you add the $295 ninja star you get a pretty small 1080P downscaled from 4K 10bit 4:2:2 prores package for v-log.

No. Panasonic have better processors than Sony, which is why the GH4 could record 4K internally whereas the a7S (which are of the same generation) could only do it externally. Sony are the ones playing catchup.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 18-105mm f4 sounds interesting. Would be a new way of working as it has the zoom rocker over a zoom twist.

The Sony 24-70mm f/2.8 would be too costly for me. Would it not also crop to 36 to 105? I do have a Nikon 24-70 that I could use via an adapter but thought it might be better to get native lenses to maximise the use of the body.

 

You can still zoom on the Sony by twisting the zoom ring.

 

24mm is still 24mm on APS-C. Still your Nikon lens on a DX camera and you'll get the same field of view as you would on an A6300.

And yes use your Nikon first with a cheap but effective twenty buck adapter on a Sony before rushing out to buy Sony lenses :)

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...