A6300

[pilsburypie]

According to Gary Fong on twitter.......

[pilsburypie]

4d focus

425 PD AF points

4k no pixel binning

11fps continuous

24.2mp

0.05 sec autofocus speed

[Fujimore_Fujitsu]

no IBIS???

[addicted2light]

no IBIS???

 

 

Nope, and neither the rumored 36Mp sensor. Sony, seriously, no IBIS in 2016?  

[delewin]

I agree with addicted2light.

 

Seriously Sony.

 

NO IBIS

 

All Sony cameras should have IBIS. This is 2016 not 1996 

 

No excuse Sony. Charge a few hundred extra $$ and do it right.

 

I would not buy the a6300 as it stands. 

[ethierbach]

Yeah, no IBIS is a *big* disappointment. Improved AF and ISO performance are nice, sure, but not enough to pry the card out of my wallet, especially at $1000 US.

 

I'll sit this one out, and keep enjoying my A6000 for now. If I decide I want something 'better' or just different, I'll look at all the mirrorless options -- Sony FF, Fuji, Olympus, maybe other competitors by then.

 

-Ed-

[chrisqphoto]

Nope, and neither the rumored 36Mp sensor. Sony, seriously, no IBIS in 2016?  

not needed to make good photos. who cares?

[addicted2light]

not needed to make good photos. who cares?

 

 

Well, I do care when the "old" A6000, if you're not into video, has basically the same specs for half the price

[wedge]

Well, I do care when the "old" A6000 has basically the same specs for half the price

 

I thought that too, until read all the detailed specs

Let's compare whats the same and not.

 

Whats different:

 

-Greatly improved viewfinder

-Silent shooting

-4K video

-1080p120 video including slow motion video

-mic input

-More AF points

-Faster AF

-Phase detect with A-mount lenses

-Improved ISO & noise performance

-Alloy body (vs plastic)

-Dust & Moisture resistant (they still not willing to call it "weather sealed", but still better than nothing)

-Upgraded lens mount (no more need for Tough Mount)

-ISO Auto w/minimum shutter speed (finally! still hoping they introduce this in fw on a6000)

-On body AF/MF switch

-Hard U1/U2 switches instead of soft MR function (so much better usability)

-I like that it has an 8fps drive mode.  11 is sometimes too fast (gets lots of wasted shots), and 6fps often isn't fast enough.  8 is a good number to fill that gap.  Would really like a6000 to get that in a fw update too.

-Eye-AF with AF-C (that's cool)

 

Whats the same:

 

-Size and layout

-Image resolution

-Buffer size (this is the biggest shame IMO)

-Flash sync speed

 

Out of all the big specs that matter, what else is the same that I'm missing?

 

It seems to me that the a6300 has many minor changes that will be seen as huge improvements by those who are more professional.  Especially for sports/action, or anyone who takes it out of the studio.  It will definitely give the 7Dii and even the D500 a run for their money, given how much cheaper it is.  And it really does render the a77ii almost obsolete, since they are nearly the same price.

 

All that said, will I upgrade?  Not right away, certainly not at launch price.  I'd much rather pick up the 70-200 F2.8 first, and then maybe get an a6300 in about a year or so, once the price has dropped.

 

 

I honestly don't see the big deal about IBIS.  Almost all e-mount lenses have OSS anyway, and that system works great on its own.  The e-mount's that don't have OSS are either really low end (ie Rokinon) or really high end (ie Loxia).  And if you're cheaping out on lenses, then why would you be getting the most expensive aps-c body?  And if you're getting the high end lenses, then you're probably putting them on an A7 anyway.  

I know IBIS + OSS work together even better.  But how slow of a shutter speed do you really need?  Once you get that slow, you'll get nothing but blur from subject movement anyway.  Unless you're shooting something stationary, in which case you can just pull out the tripod and be much better off.

 

Seriously, the a6xxx series is obviously geared towards speed, with the high burst rate, and constantly bragged about AF.  And when you're shooting fast, then stabilization can sometimes hurt more than it helps.

If you want IBIS you have to get a bigger body.  They will never fit that into such a tiny body.  If IBIS is a deal breaker for you, then get the a7ii.  It adds IBIS and FF, and sacrifices burst rate, and everything else is the same or better.

 

 

Sony, seriously, no IBIS in 2016?

I will go so far as to say that I'm glad it doesn't have IBIS.  Because that would just make it bigger/heavier/more expensive, and it would not improve my shots one bit.

[LiveShots]

I'm definitely going to take a look at this when it comes out, I'll read more on the specs and hopefully someone will post some hands-on reviews soon but I think I know what my next piece of equipment will be.

[oneand0]

Well said Wedge!! Those are a lot of things that have changed and improved. It's so easy to skip over them, when you're hoping and wanting one thing and they don't add it (IBIS).

 

I'm amazed at how slow I can shoot handheld with IBIS. You're right, things have to be stationary, otherwise it's still a blur with a moving object with 1/5 to 1/20th of a sec. IBIS comes in handy when I have my A7RII on a tripod waiting for the right moment in a landscape around susnet and sunrise, and I pull out the A7SII with IBIS and start collecting other shots that are happening around me in low light, with different lenses and compositions. It's great for those moments, but don't use it much at all except for those moments.

 

I would much rather take all those improvements you mentioned rather than trade them in for IBIS.

[whassan]

To be honest, I am also very disappointed due to the lack of IBIS!

 

I was hoping for an A7 II or A7RII with an APS-C sensor  , anyone know if we would see something like that in an A7000 for example?

[delewin]

Hi All,

 

The reason for my focus on IBIS is:

1. I am not as young as I used to be and now find I cannot hold my camera "super" still any more.

2. We are all living longer and those of us that are Photographers want to keep taking pictures.

3. To enjoy those pictures they must be sharp in the areas we want them to be sharp.

4. The A6300 is a small format camera suited to be used by travellers where weight is a factor so tripod is not really an option.

 

For me, all the high tech features are useless if all I end up with is a blurry image. 

[Guest all8]

Hi All,

 

The reason for my focus on IBIS is:

1. I am not as young as I used to be and now find I cannot hold my camera "super" still any more.

2. We are all living longer and those of us that are Photographers want to keep taking pictures.

3. To enjoy those pictures they must be sharp in the areas we want them to be sharp.

4. The A6300 is a small format camera suited to be used by travellers where weight is a factor so tripod is not really an option.

 

For me, all the high tech features are useless if all I end up with is a blurry image. 

 

 

That is fair enough, check out the Olympus PEN-F!

[Jens G]

I had hoped for touch screen and IBIS, but am glad the size stays almost the same.

 

Buffer has to be bigger, since I guess 14 bit RAW files are bigger than 12 bit, and number of files in buffer stays the same. 

[C47]

I was also hoping for IBIS. But wouldn't it have made the body bigger?

 

Sent from my Aquaris X5 using Tapatalk

[Apollwnios]

4 k video without stabilization hahaha thank you will not get

[Golem]

I agree with addicted2light.

 

Seriously Sony.

 

NO IBIS

 

All Sony cameras should have IBIS. This is 2016 not 1996 

 

No excuse Sony. Charge a few hundred extra $$ and do it right.

 

I would not buy the a6300 as it stands. 

I was considering selling my small Sonys in anticipation

of new versions with IBIS. I prefer legacy lenses so IBIS

is only reason why I have an A7-MkII instead of a more

affordable original A7. I don't care at all about any of the

other technical advances between the earlier series and

the Mk-II or between the Nex series and Alpha versions

of the APSC series. So I'm disappointed, but I do get to

save a few bucks cuz nothing is urging me to upgrade.

[Lioneye]

I was considering the a6000 when I heard Sony was coming out with the upgraded model. I like the feel and configuration of the a6000 and Wednesday afternoon after they announced the a6300 I went to Samy's in Santa Barbara and put a deposit on the a6300 and a couple of lenses. Like delwin (above), I, too am an older guy, a retread from the Kodachrome days, but I like the simplicity and quality of the a6300 and I'm getting the OSS lenses FE 70-200 and 16-70 both in F4, maybe a 1.8 50 mm prime, so hopefully that will help steady my hand. I used an a57 for a couple of years and had a great deal of fun with it. I used Minolta manual everything when I started, then switched to Nikon for autofocus, back in the day, and lugged around a huge Bogen tripod. With the a57 I think I used the tripod once. Yeah, IBIS would have been nice, but considering my budget and not wanting to heft a lot of heavy lenses, and my style of shooting, I'm going for what I see is the best deal for "me". You may have other needs. It will be fun to see the reactions once we all get some experience with the a6300.

[Jens G]

Has any one seen if the A6300 can be used while attached to USB power?

[D700]

Well, I do care when the "old" A6000, if you're not into video, has basically the same specs for half the price

 

A6000 was much to cheap compared to competition.

Have a look at Fuji X-T1/X-pro1, Samsung NX1 (RIP) and Top models from Canon and Nikon APS-C cameras.

So the A6300 price is within the same range!

 

And do the others (mentioned) have IBIS?

[beautiful queens servant]

not that i know of sir

[calleng]

Received my A6300 today. Got kit lens and the PZ 18-105.

Very pleased so far. Have tried the canon 70-200mm 2.8 II lens with the cheaper fotodiox adapter. Focus leaves some to be desired but images are tack sharp.

My normal Cameras are the Canon 1Dx and the 5Diii. Very impressed with the image quality. Need to find software for processing RAW files. I usually use Lightroom 6.

[gunmetal]

Noob to the forum and noob to photography but have settled in on Mirrorless and Sony.  I'm just trying to figure out if I should go with the 6000 or the 6300.  Seems like I could use the money saved with the 6000 and put it towards some nice lenses.  On the other hand, video is important to me and I like the 4K and the 120 FPS 1080 options on the 6300.  Anyone have any thoughts on the matter?  Thanks!

[nomad]

Sort out your priorities. The A6300 is not a great video camera, but a very good photo camera:

 

– massive rolling shutter artifacts in 4K, some of the worst ever (and no IBIS)

– less RS, but very muddy quality in HDTV

– overheating even in 25 degrees Celsius environments after 20-25 minutes

– Slog-2 or Slog-3 (god beware) are just marketing gimmicks on a 8 bit camera

 

While the A6300 is quite a bit better than the A6000 for photography, good lenses are very important for what you really get in the end.