Jump to content

Surprise! Sony Alpha A6000 video mode huge improvement


Andrew Reid

Recommended Posts

As an owner of both gx7 and a6k, am actually liking the gx7 much better than the a6k, which has surprised me. Especially in stills the gx7 is pretty incredible and holds its own against the a6k which is plagued by some serious issues with banding and artifacts in deep shadows. You can pull aprox 1 stop of underexposed shadows on the a6k, that's all. The gx7 is pretty impressive and you can pull 3-4 with very good results. For stills too the af of the Sony might be decent now in terms of performance but it still feels and looks a little hit and miss in accuracy. I was blind to this initially with my new a6k toy, but bit by bit the wheels are falling off it. The lack of touch, pin-point af and of course complete silent shutter and the fabulous build and swivel evf puts the gx7 in a higher class overall, it also has a level of ibis for non is lens in still mode offering an extra stop to stop and half too. On the surface a6k is great but after a month am back to gx7 and feel like a6k is unreliable trash, sorry! 24p is native to gx7 so you don't have to swap around ntsc/pal and the mics are better too, overall gx7 is still well and truly better.

If you own both cameras then please post RAW files of the same scene demonstrating the serious banding issue and better yet, the 1 vs 3-4 stops difference in shadow recovery. Otherwise, with the superlatives and exaggerations used, you sound like a fanboy/hater bashing the A6000 purely basing on spec sheets and what you have been reading on the web

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 440
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Sony A6000 with Zeiss 50mm F1.4 on Speed Booster The Sony A600 is the best Sony consumer camera yet for video. A Nikon D5300 in a mirrorless body, with far more features, the image quality is c

Thanks for all the insights here. After shooting more than 50 music videos with my NEX5N, some idiot broke into our house yesterday while I was having a shower and stole it, along with my iPad 2. T

I think the A6000 is more than perfect for what I will use it for,1 to 2 minute properly lit scenes. I personally haven't seen the codec break down to a unusable degree yet,mainly because I keep in mi

  • Administrators

the video mode on old NEX was affected by alias, muddy detail and moire.. Now with A6000 this problems vanish.

 

No, it doesn't vanish. Still there like I said in the latest review of GX7 vs A6000.

 

Even with full pixel readout on RX10, there's moire. Sony loves those rainbows!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you own both cameras then please post RAW files of the same scene demonstrating the serious banding issue and better yet, the 1 vs 3-4 stops difference in shadow recovery. Otherwise, with the superlatives and exaggerations used, you sound like a fanboy/hater bashing the A6000 purely basing on spec sheets and what you have been reading on the web

If you own either you would know and not need to make such statements! I don't need to post the files or prove anything, go ahead buy the A6K, that's what I did? and then you will find the a6k is not very good, in fact its sensor is poor. It does not behave like the nex6 or 5n that went before or even the slt57. You have to expose the a6k like the old gh1, don't under or you'll be unable to pull shadows, as for detail forget trying to compete with Panasonic, they lost some time ago and just don't seem to be able to catch Pana.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 There is still some moire in a6000, but you get it very few occations, and it doesn't affect the overall picture you get. From all the footage I've seen so far from the GX7 camera, it doesn't convince me that its better in video than a6000. They are close, but it's not better. And in low light my eyes see a clear winner , and it's the a6000. It handles great until 3200 iso. Better than GX7.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Well you're both wrong then :) Shoot a chart and find out for yourselves!

 

And put the GX7 at -5 sharpening and turn it all the way down on the A6000 to make the results consistent.

 

Let me know what you find... Ha!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bullshit. It's still there, just less than the NEX 5N.

 

I'm not saying it's not there, but it's not visible unless you pause the video and specifically go looking for problems. Those water fountain grilles had the worst aliasing and moire out of all 55 or so videos I shot on the NEX5N. The fact that I can't see any in shots of the same grilles in the A6000 footage tells me it's no longer a problem I ever have to worry about. Not in those shots, the shot with the fine line brick wall after it, or even in the grilles of the fan on the footpath in another later shot. If I play the Cineform master file and pause it, yes, I can see some really tiny stair stepping around the water fountains with excessive motion, but those are obviously AVCHD artifacts. And I really had to look closely and put my eye up to the screen to see them! 

 

Detail isn't everything. I get clients asking me to smooth out their skin, and that's after I've used Neat Video.

 

Andrew, I've seen a number of your videos with video like overexposed shots. But if that's the look you're after, no problem there. For a lot of us though, avoiding shots like that would be a lot more important than the difference in detail between an A6000, GX7, 5D mk3, etc. And some of us may wonder why Philip Bloom with his collection of expensive cameras would over sharpen his cat? Of course maybe it's the cat who prefers looking a bit sharper than the average feline? 

 

It's all personal preference. So it's good for the Panasonic fans to know their cameras have more detail, even if they have to use an adapter for that APSC Super 35 look. And for those of us with a Sony, rather than worrying about having less detail than the Panasonic cameras, we can be happy about getting a full frame look from one of those adapters. 

 

Or better yet, shoot, edit, and ignore all this nonsense :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you own either you would know and not need to make such statements! I don't need to post the files or prove anything, go ahead buy the A6K, that's what I did? and then you will find the a6k is not very good, in fact its sensor is poor. It does not behave like the nex6 or 5n that went before or even the slt57. You have to expose the a6k like the old gh1, don't under or you'll be unable to pull shadows, as for detail forget trying to compete with Panasonic, they lost some time ago and just don't seem to be able to catch Pana.

I don't own either camera but that doesn't mean I cannot call someone out for making outrageous claim such as a 2-3 stop shadow recovery advantage of the GX7. You don't have to prove anything but neither does someone who says they are a Martian.

OK, will run a video test of the two and post the files soon, honestly I think the a6k is not bad but Sony not upto Gx7 level just yet in video. What a6k profile do you prefer?

Wait, were you talking about still or video when you mentioned the serious banding issue and 2-3 stops difference in shadow? I thought you were talking about still so I asked for RAWs. If it was about video then forget it, jpegs and clips can be easily manipulated. I'll just wait until a cheap GX7 pops up where I live and make my own judgment.
Link to post
Share on other sites

GX7 has horrible banding under fluorescent light for stills if using the electronic shutter.

 

The camera is really nice for stills but as far as banding goes, in some circumstances it is possibly the worst camera going.

 

Does not seem to have it in video though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually when I had the NEX 6, the banding thing was present too. This is just due to the how the sensor is read with electronic shutter, or in the NEX's case, with front curtain shutter turned off. You have to avoid it by using a certain shutter speed like you do in video

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Î‘fter lots of recordings with the new a6000, I have come to this conclusion for the overheating matter. In hot summer environments the camera overheats after 20-30 minutes, and then if you restart it, it keeps recording, but overheats again more frequently, and in the end it records 2 minutes clips. All this happens if you try to record with the KIT LENS , continuously , without letting the camera rest for a while.

 But if you record with other manufacturers lenses with an adapter , the camera never overheats. I used the last couple of days Nikon and Tamron lenses with an adapter, and I never had an overheating problem. Today I have recorded almost 2 hours of footage, in 30 minute clips, and I had no problem. 

 When the overheating issue appeared with the kit lens, I put a manual lens, and I started recording right on, and I had no problem. I touched the Sony lens and it was so hot!!! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 When the overheating issue appeared with the kit lens, I put a manual lens, and I started recording right on, and I had no problem. I touched the Sony lens and it was so hot!!!


Hmm, is it possible the kit lens is overheating because it is on continuous autofocus? Or is it still happening in manual focus mode?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, is it possible the kit lens is overheating because it is on continuous autofocus? Or is it still happening in manual focus mode?

 

I tested it too, with manual focus on the kit lens it still overheats, but with other lenses and the adaptor it doesn't. Maybe the extra space the adaptor gives between the sensor and the lens does the trick!!! ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

about the overheating : my guess is that the lens functions as a heat sink.  
A plastic Sony lens will be worse at absorbing heat than than a metal adapter + metal lens.  

Which might explain why using older manual lenses + an adapter (which creates more air between the sensor and glass) is a better option.

Link to post
Share on other sites

about the overheating : my guess is that the lens functions as a heat sink.  
A plastic Sony lens will be worse at absorbing heat than than a metal adapter + metal lens.  

Which might explain why using older manual lenses + an adapter (which creates more air between the sensor and glass) is a better option.

 

Using plastic nikon lenses too, with the adapter, doesn't cause overheating problems. I'm sure the adapter does the job, and gives extra space for heat absorbance. Or else it's all a trick in the firmware ;) 

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...