A77II vs A6300

[wedge]

This has been discussed before, but the A6300 has been out for awhile and people have a much better idea of what it can do by now.  So I figured I'd open this discussion again.

 

 

I'm an A6000 shooter, and there's a few things I don't like about this camera, so I'm looking to switch.  Both the A77II and the A6300 seem like they would resolve most if not all of the things I don't like about the A6000.

Any of these cameras are great for day to day stuff I might shoot.  The main problems are when I'm shooting rally cars, and nature, and basically anything moving fast and unpredictably.

 

Top 3 problems I have with the A6000:

1. Lack of weather sealing

2. Viewfinder lags in burst mode (you only see what you just shot, instead of what you're about to shoot, makes it really tough to get good shots while tracking a moving subject)

3. AF reliability in AF-C mode while bursting (When you combine AF-C and burst mode, the AF just can't keep up most of the time, I've missed too many good shots because of this and its really frustrating)

 

Both these cameras claim to solve both 1 & 2 on that list.  But honestly I don't trust the weather sealing on the A6300, has anyone looked at the battery compartment?  It's got no sealing at all!  Does Sony think that just cause it's on the bottom that no water/dust can work its way in?

 

#2 is solved by both, but the A77II can do it at 12fps while the A6300 would be limited to 8fps.  Of course 8fps is plenty, but 12 is better

 

As for #3, I don't think the A6300 is capable of solving it.  Because the sensor is blocked with every shot, and so it simply can't do a good job focusing during a burst.  Certainly not when both the subject and the camera are moving.  The A77II is known for being excellent at tracking focus, mainly because it can keep focusing 100% of the time, even while the shutter is closed.  No mirrorless will ever be capable of that.  The only chance a mirrorless has of keeping up is by using prediction, but that will always be hit or miss.

 

 

There's other factors I'm considering, but those are my top 3.  A few other things I'm thinking of: easy to grip, excellent articulating screen, choice of lenses.  And the A77II wins in all those areas too.

 

 

And then there's cost.  

 

For me, the final nail in the coffin for E-mounts is the price of the SEL70200GM.  It hasn't been officially announced yet, but it's pretty certain that it's going to be some between $3k and $3.5K

 

I've done some price checking, and figured I can sell my A6000 and all my E-mount lenses for ~$1600.

Then I can buy an A77II and all equivalent lenses for about ~$1200 (used of course).  So I'd come out $400 ahead!  Really?  The body is more, but the lenses are so much cheaper.

Or I could sell just the A6000 body and get an A6300, but that would cost me ~$500.

 

Then I need to buy a 70-200 2.8 (don't currently have one, I just rent the 70200F4 when needed).  In E-mount I'd be looking at $3000+.  But in A-mount I could pick up a SAL70200G for ~$1400, minus the $400 I saved from switching from E to A, so that lens would only cost me a grand.

 

 

 

If feels like the A77II would be a downgrade compared to the A6300.  Because E mount is supposed to be better than A mount.  And supposedly A mount is dead/dying.  But I think that's just all the marketing hype getting to me...

But thinking logically, the A77II is the winner for all of my criteria, and it would be cheaper too.  So this should be a no-brainer for me.

 

 

 

Thoughts on the matter?  Anything I'm missing/overlooking?

[wedge]

A bit more background:

I originally went with the A6000 because I specifically wanted a mirrorless.  I wanted small/light and not expensive.  It also felt better because I bought into the "mirrorless is the future" hype

 

It was my first "real" camera and it's served me very well.  But now I've learned a lot since then.  I know what I like, and don't like, and what I need and don't need.
And so I think my mind is made up that mirrorless just isn't the best for me.  At least not any currently existing mirrorless.

 

 

My biggest fear is that I sell off all my E-mount gear for A-mount, and then Sony comes out with an A6500 or A7000 that completely changes the game...  and then I'd be like: "God dammit Sony!"  But I suppose I wouldn't be the first person to say that... lol

Edit: Then again, I suppose it's a question of "when" rather than "if" that happens.  But on the other other hand, it's also probably just a matter of time until they release an A77III.  

Edit Edit: But on the other other other hand.  The A lenses can be adapted back to E mount, so that's an easy path to follow, if need be.  I'm over-thinking this aren't I?  Whatever choice I make, I just don't want to be stuck without an upgrade path.  But that's practically impossible anyway, right?

[yoeddy007]

E-mount is the more "future-proof" option, particularly with the adaptors for other lens mounts (not just for A-mount lenses)

[Golem]

Sounds too obsessed with technology. Technology is

waaay overrated. Keep your current stuff and work on

your technique. Technique is waaaay underrated.  No

single-generation tech upgrade is gonna deliver any  

major improvements in hardware-related results. "Lab

Test Review" numbers may be expressed so as to

appear like a quantum improvement, but thaz NOT

what you're gonna see in resulting real world images.   

  

A bit less noise and a bit better AF. Reduced noise will

let you stop down 1/2 or 2/3 of a stop, to help mask AF

errors ... slightly ... and the errors that get masked will

be slightly easier to mask, being a bit less out of focus

due to the upgraded AF. Look at things that way and

decide. If you have the good fortune to choose to stay

with your current gear then the difference between the

a77-II and the a6300 is no longer a puzzler. 

[wedge]

Sounds too obsessed with technology.

 

You can certainly say I'm obsessed in general.  But not with technology.  

I'm being accused of switching from a newer system to an obsolete/dead system.  You can hardly say I'm obsessed with technology, when I'm taking a step "backwards".

 

I have picked up an a77II, and I've been out to my first event with it.  And I can honestly say that my hit rate has quite significantly improved compared to the A6000.

Here's my gallery from that event.  That is by far the most number of successful shots I've taken from a single event.  So much that I was able to be much more selective in what I posted online and it's still my biggest gallery since I've started doing this.

 

 

Interestingly all the complaints I have about the Sony mirrorless cameras are the exact same complaints that Jonathan and Matt mentioned here.  These cameras are just unacceptable for this kind of use.

 

I'm taking the camera out into a dangerous situation, both for the camera and for myself.  Any time or energy that I have to expend worrying about the well-being of the camera is time or energy wasted.  

And when the time comes to take the shot, I often only have a fraction of a second to frame it up and get focus and shoot.  I must be able to depend that the camera can do that consistently.  And the mirrorless just can't consistently get the right focus at the right time.  If I miss the shot then it's gone forever, there is no second chance.

[Golem]

...........  

 

Here's my gallery from that event.  ..........

And when the time comes to take the shot, I often only have a

fraction of a second to frame it up and get focus and shoot.   

 

   ..........

 

Ben Dare Don Dat ..... hill climbs, gymkharni, etc. 

 

I took a quick view of the linked gallery. Hanging out

at one particular curve, in broad daylight. You should

have no AF lag with ANY camera cuz you don't need

to be in any AF mode. Those are textbook prefocus

shots if I've ever seen one/any ... and I've seen plenty. 

  

Therefor I find no reason to retract my "obsessed with

technology" comment ... using AF where there is no

need to focus each shot anyway. I've done work like

that with a handheld 4x5, cuz a large format size was

was needed [back then] to make trade show posters.

There is no AF in a 1965 Linhof Technica. And burst

rate is however fast you can swap sheet film holders. 

  

So, in reply to the OP, there is no functional difference

between the a77-II and a6300 when using appropriate

focusing technique. Use whatever camera offers the

least lag time from shutter button to shutter activation

when operating in its most responsive modes, which

means no automatic anything, preset everything. You

have the "gift" of a suitable subject for that method so

accept the gift :-)

[wedge]

Will switching to MF improve the weather sealing in a non-weather sealed camera?

[Golem]

Will switching to MF improve the weather sealing

in a non-weather sealed camera?

  

Only marginally. 

 

A baggy and a wireframe finder would help.

[OldNoob]

  This is the thread i've been wanting to find.

   I have the a6300. Just sold off my a6000 and bought the a6300 new through Best Buy and yep i still owe about $1200 dollars for the kit as of this posting.

I ALSO had the buy an LA-EA3 to use some older sony SAM lenses. I've pretty much excluded the mechanical drive lenses for auto focus so i discounted getting the LA-EA4

 

   The a6300 is a great camera, I really do like it! but is i a big step up from the a6000 i had?

NO. I would have to say it's seriously not worth the 600 dollar increase.

 

    However , i just noticed you can get the a77II kit with the SAL1650 2.8 for less than i paid for my a6300.

Now,,, i like the size of the a6300,, but the in body stabilization and ready lens selection is what appeals to me about the a77II.

Kinda wish i had explored the a77II option more before my a6300 purchase (i.e. Financial enslavement).

[wedge]

    However , i just noticed you can get the a77II kit with the SAL1650 2.8 for less than i paid for my a6300.

 

That is exactly one of my points.  I sold off my a6000+lenses, and picked up an A77II+1650 2.8+Vertical grip+3 batteries+a bunch of minolta lenses, and I came out with more money than I started.  And I'm very pleased with the result.  

I didn't expect how much I would love the 1650F2.8.  That lens is phenomenal for its price, I'd say it is extremely underrated.  Sony could slap a G label on it, sell it for double the price and nobody would complain.

[OldNoob]

That is exactly one of my points.  I sold off my a6000+lenses, and picked up an A77II+1650 2.8+Vertical grip+3 batteries+a bunch of minolta lenses, and I came out with more money than I started.  And I'm very pleased with the result.  

I didn't expect how much I would love the 1650F2.8.  That lens is phenomenal for its price, I'd say it is extremely underrated.  Sony could slap a G label on it, sell it for double the price and nobody would complain.

Yep it's a great lens! mine was stolen some time ago but it was very very sharp at f3 . 16mm was a bit soft at 2.8

[Golem]

........ and nobody would complain.

Acoarst we would ... IT'S WHAT WE DO  !