Addressing some of the myths around Sony a6300-MINI a7sII??!??

[Mark Romero 2]

Judging by this video, it would appear (to my eyes) that the NX1 has somewhat better 1080p at 24, 30 and 60fps, and SIGNIFICANTLY better 1080p at 120fps, than the a6300 does.

Part of it might have to do with lenses, of course.

The G7 seems to be somewhat better than the a6300 at 1080p. 

To my eyes, the 4K of the a6300 and NX1 are real close. 

[flip21]

9 hours ago, Kisaha said:

@Mark Romero 2 why do you have a second profile?!

this is a trap/troll topic from a well known DPR troll which has been banned multiple times there. He is on my ignore list, so I wouldn't like him to reply straight to me.

 

Hi,

Are you stalking me Kisaha? It's always nice to be insulted in the public square by someone  that don't really know you... 

It 's funny though, because as long as I can remember you have also been banned from Dpreview several times. You have even posted a thread explaining how, and why you were banned from the Sony APSc sub forum. Did you forget? And who cares about your ignoring list?!?!? (well, maybe your ex-girlfiend does). I can only guess the dozens of people you blocked on your facebook... you must be very important... It is you and Donald Trump...

You know what is also funny, is that it was you who told me about this forum. That it was a more video oriented forum...

Anyway, I like to thank Mr. Romero, for your honest opinion . The overheating problem of the Sony A6300 is a really concern for me. I had the Sony a58, that was always shutting off, because of the overheating. It made me mad... It was unusable to shoot video with that camera :(.

In the past I used to use camcorders to shoot video. But due to their small sensor size, the video indoor was always bad, and noisy. I don't have money, nor time to light a scene. One day, I saw the A7s. And I fall in love  Who wasn't? But it was too expensive for me, and the A7sII is even more expensive, and I want a camera that can do 4K. I Wonder, if the Canon 5d Mark III, can do 3.5K, why can't the Sony A7s one, record 4K, internally? It would be the perfect buy for me, because it is relatively cheap. The wonderful NX500 for good light, and the A7s one, for low light,  all in 4K.

By the way, the G7 seemed a great camera. In these videos, it seems the G7 is better than the Gh5, in low light. How can this be? 

It also seems to offer the same low light performance as the A6300:

The problem is that AF is very important for me. Panasonic did great camcorders, with great AF. What is happening with their AF, in their mirrorless cameras?

 

Thanks

[flip21]

On 30/10/2017 at 12:30 PM, Kisaha said:

@Mark Romero 2 why do you have a second profile?!

3. 4. NX1, plus  -bonus-NX1 is at the top 3 of the least rolling shutter in 1080p. Also NX1 has No crop in high speed options, and Andrew did recently a comparison, giving 7/10 to the NX1 and 5/10 to the Sony.

Can you, at least, tell me where is that Andrew comparison? I cannot seem to find it... 

I guess with this Portuguese hot weather the A6300 will be a nightmare to shoot with, in day light   Maybe that's why the camera seems to be so good in low light. It is not so hot at night...  

[teddoman]

I do a lot of video in the evenings under artificial lighting, and last year, I really started to notice the noise on the A6500. I just couldn't unsee it. It's most noticeable where there's a uniform background, like a wall or a sky.

I haven't used Panasonic in a long time, so maybe the A6500 compares well to the GH series. Samsung NX1 had quite a bit of noise starting at mid ISOs, as I recall, so this isn't unique to Sony.

For me personally, the noise was just starting to get under my skin, so I decided to try Sony full frame, now that people are selling their mark ii bodies at good prices.

A7Sii definitely has lower noise, but it is by no means absent. You can still see it, it's just less than the A6500. 

This is a great side-by-side comparison of the noise on Sony bodies at higher ISOs, it makes it very easy to compare:

 

What I have found is that it's hard to satisfy the urge to get the perfect cleanest footage. Once you get used to cleaner footage, you want it even cleaner. Maybe I need to shoot on an old Canon body every once in a while, maybe I'll appreciate Sony more  

 

[webrunner5]

On 1/10/2018 at 12:12 PM, teddoman said:

I do a lot of video in the evenings under artificial lighting, and last year, I really started to notice the noise on the A6500. I just couldn't unsee it. It's most noticeable where there's a uniform background, like a wall or a sky.

I haven't used Panasonic in a long time, so maybe the A6500 compares well to the GH series. Samsung NX1 had quite a bit of noise starting at mid ISOs, as I recall, so this isn't unique to Sony.

For me personally, the noise was just starting to get under my skin, so I decided to try Sony full frame, now that people are selling their mark ii bodies at good prices.

A7Sii definitely has lower noise, but it is by no means absent. You can still see it, it's just less than the A6500. 

This is a great side-by-side comparison of the noise on Sony bodies at higher ISOs, it makes it very easy to compare:

 

 

What I have found is that it's hard to satisfy the urge to get the perfect cleanest footage. Once you get used to cleaner footage, you want it even cleaner. Maybe I need to shoot on an old Canon body every once in a while, maybe I'll appreciate Sony more  

 

I really don't think Any camera, from a Arri to a GoPro, has no noise, even at low ISO on walls. I guess it has to do with digital signals. Bayer stuff, who knows.

[kidzrevil]

And this is why God created noise reduction. 

[webrunner5]

Now you are just trying to make sense Kidz! What camera you shoot that video on. Looks damn good.

[kidzrevil]

@webrunner5 LOL ??

I shot this on the Sony A6500 ! My conclusion is that all cameras need NR. You just gotta decide if applying it is worth the extra work

[kye]

On 12/01/2018 at 2:30 AM, webrunner5 said:

I really don't think Any camera, from a Arri to a GoPro, has no noise, even at low ISO on walls. I guess it has to do with digital signals. Bayer stuff, who knows.

I don't know specifically about cameras, but I've done lots of stuff with audio and all circuitry has noise.  The noise comes from analog circuits but when analog signals are digitised then the noise from the analog circuits will be captured as part of that digital signal.

If you were to generate a digital file using only mathematics (for example VFX) then you could argue that the starting signal will have no noise, but if you manipulate it afterwards then the limitations of digital resolution can be accentuated, which is what people are really talking about when discussing why 10-bits is better than 8-bits.  

The definition of noise is anything that isn't part of the signal (the bit you want) so cumulative digital errors are a source of noise, which is one of the reasons that intermediary codecs are normally high quality - you want to avoid 'baking in' as many compression artefacts and other undesirables.

Anyway, all cameras have noise.

[webrunner5]

Out of Likes, good explanation. But even film had noise in it. And people will argue that noise in Digital Cameras emulates the look of Film and hides some artifacts. So I guess some noise is a good thing. A win, win or a lose, lose thingy.

I know the old CCD sensor cameras got worse and worse the longer you had them on from heat accumulation in them. But I still do love the look of a CCD Sensor. The Original Olympus E1 was just beautiful. And the Kodak DCS 460 CCD camera I had Way back in the day was gorgeous also. Amazing camera at the time. Amazing price brand new, like 27,000 bucks.