Help on choosing my first Alpha - A7s or A6300?

[thedirtythirty]

Hey Guys, 

 

Long time lurker, first time poster.

 

I have been a fan of sony for a long time. I currently am in love with My RX100 MKIII, but am itching to get something with interchangeable lenses and beginning the transition into better glass. 

 

My wife and I love to travel and take cinematic style video of our adventures. I'm not so concerned with being a gallery photographer, as I am taking stunning video. 

 

This leads me to where I am now. If you had to choose a camera to take with you on trips, that would be your workhorse for both stunning photos and incredible video, do you choose the A6300 or A7s? 

 

I've read every article imaginable on both cameras, but I can't seem to reach a decision. 

 

What are your thoughts, and what would you choose & why? 

 

Any help would be appreciated!

 

Cheers,

[Golem]

...............

 

My wife and I love to travel and take cinematic style video of our 

adventures. I'm not so concerned with being a gallery photographer,

as I am taking stunning video. 

 

This leads me to where I am now. If you had to choose a camera to 

take with you on trips, that would be your workhorse for both stunning

photos and incredible video, do you choose the A6300 or A7s? 

 

.............

12MP is plenty for video, and you never know what darkness

you may be filming under, so that's the a7S. 12MP is also at

least enuf for still if you don't crop heavily. And the low noise

at high ISO will get you some of those "stunning photos". 

    

But, you travel a lot, and the a6300 and APSC lenses are so

much more compact. Neither camera has IBIS ... for that you

have to step up to the a7S-MkII. Sony has no IBIS for APSC.

  

Results-wise, the a7S is the way to go. But you hafta decide

about bulk and weight. No one else can do that for you. Also

you point out you're not so concerned with "gallery" stuff. So,

you aren't likely the "ISO 50 on a tripod, ultra high resolution,

pixel peeper" type. For that level of photo nerdiness, there is

no advantage to the a7S. It's advantages come into play at

mid-high thru ultra-high ISO speeds.

  

I dig making photos of a world most peeps don't usually see.

They walk thru it, but don't see it. They don't see it cuz it's so

dark. But properly exposed, it's quite a sight, and reasonably

familiar to those who finally get to see it, cuz they've been in

it, but not reeeeeally seen it. Like this: 

  

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

   

  

  

   

  

   

All of these were taken with an APS-C and a cheapo kit lens.

Why that gear for somewhat more challenging scenes ? Cuz

it is small and so I had it with me, even tho photography was

NOT at all the reason I happened to be at those places. But

you are avid travelers, so you probably are more intentional

about knowing that you will be photographing where you go.

[thedirtythirty]

Awesome response, and great photos. Thanks for the input. 

 

I'm definitely not the, post up on a tripod, wake up at 4a.m. golden hour single photo to blow up for my home gallery type. I'm more of a, let's take some awesome video and a few solid photos as we go. 

 

I know that the a6300 can use the E mount lenses as well, but ultimately I guess it goes back to what you are saying about high ISO. 

 

The A7s is slightly less portable, but really isn't much bigger. It is only 3-4 oz difference without a lens. 

 

I don't know what to do haha. 

[loonsailor]

For me, the question is not hypothetical.  I have chosen APS-C over full frame, primarily because of size and weight.  Realize that not only is the body a few ounces smaller, but every lens is also smaller and lighter for APS-C.  It does just fine for most night work, so the high ISO is not really a problem.  There are a few times when I'd like a full frame (especially for the more flexible flash capability), and I may get an A7R2, but the APS will remain as my primary camera, and almost certainly my only travel camera.  I can put the body, some lenses (most travel days a 10-18, 18-200, and 8mm Rokinon), cleaning stuff, a kindle and a water bottle is a very small sling bag and I'm good for the day.  That's just much harder with a full frame.  If you prefer primes, the Sigmas are very small and very good, the Zeiss Touit's bigger and somewhat better.  I do occasionally use the minuscule kit zoom which is not a bad lens and very convenient.

 

You can see a bunch of my stuff taken with my NEX6 (I just got a 6300, but nothing posted yet) at http://jfiddler.smugmug.com/.  The Spain 2015, Japan 2014, travel/Nepa, events/burning man 2015, and vacation/Salmon Lake 2015 galleries.  If you want to see night stuff with the NEX6 look at events/Oakland First Friday, and there are some astro shots in the Salmon Lake gallery.

 

Here are a couple images:

 

[thedirtythirty]

Wow. Stunning photos, and great advice. Thanks for the insight! 

[Snowfun]

I also have an interest in video and travel.

The rx1004 and Blackmagic pocket is a wonderful combination.

Both have battery issues! All Sony "stills" (non-rigged) cameras used for video have battery issues!

If you have the rx1004 then you can almost guarantee that you will have your camera with you at all times (but you'll know that from the rx1003). That is a huge advantage when travel and filming are used in the same sentence.

You mention "cinematic style" so I'm assuming you enjoy some grading and work in post - the high quality prores (or raw) files from the pocket are superb for this.

 

The only time I use my A7S (with an Atomos Shogun) is for aurora filming (iso 25k).

The benefits of "better glass" for video and much less than for stills photography and if video is the priority I'd be tempted to ignore that aspect of an upgrade (having said that you can adapt more or less anything to the mft mount of the Pocket).

 

Enjoy whatever you travel with!

[rdgeorge55]

What about an RX10 ii or an RX10 iii?  This would arguably be better for video use than the a6300 (I have an a6300) and would be decent for stills as well.

[benmao]

 

 

. So,

you aren't likely the "ISO 50 on a tripod, ultra high resolution,

pixel peeper" type.

Don't use ISO 50 if you can avoid it. Dynamic range is one stoo worse conpared with ISO 100. At least this is true for the A7.

[Golem]

Don't use ISO 50 if you can avoid it. Dynamic range is one stoo

worse conpared with ISO 100. At least this is true for the A7.

  

I was just describing a type of user ... the "ISO50 on a tripod"

type. I coulda just as easily called him/her the "ISO25, tripod,

and Leitz lenses" type. But don't worry about me, cuz I have

almost zero use for ISO less than 4-digits. Not only do I shun

fancy lenses, but if Dynamic Range is your thing, try some of

my verrrrry non-Leitz lenses, the ones that have enuf veiling

flare to add 2 or 3 stops of DR, especially at night :-)