Sony a6300 or Panasonic GX8

[MTBRphotodude]

Hey folks I am new to the forum here.  If this question has already been covered please refer me to the right link, but I am curious to know what people think of the Panasonic GX8 vs the new Sony a6300 that is going to be shipping next month?  I am primarily a landscape shooter now after 20+ years as portrait and commercial and I am tired of hauling my Canon 5DMIII and all the L glass along on my travels which often involve skis or a mountain bike.  I think the Sony looks like it will have a better sensor and the new AF should be a game changer, but I am curious as to how large these APC sized mirrorless cameras really let you you enlarge images.  I sell a decent amount of 24x30 - 40x60 images and obviously have no problems doing so with my 5DMIII.  If I can get decent 24x30's consistently from these mirrorless rigs I would be happy.  The other decision that makes this harder is, it seems like the Panasonic has a wider selection of super zooms so I can get away with only one or two lenses depending what I am doing.  I am not under any delusions that a Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH. POWER O.I.S. Lens is going to compete with a Canon L series lens but it sure would be nice to only have to carry that lens when mountain biking at 10,000 feet in the Rockies.  So any advice on what to buy and what lenses you really like would be great help.

Cheers!!!

[b_rubenstein]

There are any number of Sony 24mp cameras already out there, like the Sony a6000 or the Nikon D7200/5500. I doubt there will be much difference in the noise or dynamic range compared to what will be in the a6300. The presence of a mirror is irrelevant to the answer of your question. The GX8 probably uses the new 20mp Sony sensor. I do have a GX8, but haven't made any prints yet from the files. I have from 16mp Olympus µ4/3 cameras and they're fine at Super B size, but at your sizes I don't know. Everyone has a different take on what's acceptable and what's awful. (check the horrible µ4/3 noise thread) The APS-C sensor camera will almost have better noise and dynamic range specs than the 4/3's one. The 3:2 aspect ratio of the APS-C sensor may also be an advantage over the 4:3 ratio of the 4/3 sensor.

The a6300 is almost certainly smaller and lighter than the GX8, but with good lenses will make for a heavier kit. If you're trying to get the IQ of a FF camera, you probably won't be satisfied with a 14-140 lens. Think the Olympus or Panasonic 2.8 zoom lenses, or primes. Try borrowing or renting a couple of bodies and lenses. In the end, only you know what will work for you.

[stever]

Thom Hogan has some relevant comments - http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/which-mirrorless-now.html - about mirrorless in general and also the Sony 6300

by now you've probably read the 43 noise thread which include my skeptical opinion of big prints from 43 or APSC

if you're looking for large prints and typically shoot with wide angle to short tele primes, then Sony FF offers a viable option, but if you need high quality zooms, the size and weight saving over Canon or Nikon FF is minimal.  Unfortunately high quality APSC lenses are rare so APSC offers little size or weight saving over FF if you need high IQ for large prints.  Fortunately micro 43 offers high quality zooms and primes that are light weight and compact - unfortunately the sensor size limits high ISO performance and resolution.

[langier]

Bottom line, rent each system and try it side-by-side.

Long answer, I shoot the GX7 and D800 side-by-side, but during my travels, the D800 is increasing become a boat-anchor because of size and weight. I use the 7-14 and the 14-140 and with a pocket of batteries (the weak point of the system), and it is liberating!

Normal master image for me is 14x19 and the GX7 is fine. 30x40 with good craft and good technique is easy but I think pushing it, especially if you are like me and view the print from 18-24 inches. 3-4 feet away, its fine.

For travel, I'm getting older and the Nikons are heavier and bulkier. The GX7 is getting me better than my previous Nikon bodies, the D700/D300, especially in low light. I'd say that the GX7 is at least as good as the D700 and much better than the D300 by a stop or so at ISO 3200. The D800 still gets me better IQ but for all practical purposes, convenience and liberation vs. ultimate image quality is the bottom line.

The Sony is a good system, has a good set of lenses and one can adapt many other lenses to it, but then you are back to the size/weight issues that your present camera gives you.

Yes, there's ultimate IQ and noise issues with the M43 system, it lags behind current DSLR systems by a few years, but it's totally viable. The images will look different much like the images from my Hasselblad had a different look from my Nikon and large format. Not good, not bad. Different.

If you want the best pixels, stay with what you have. If you want liberation from sticking out, weight, size, impact to your joints from packing heavy iron, go with the m43 and learn to see again.

[BernardLanguillier]

I used to make excellent large prints from my D2x low ISO files nearly 10 years ago.

The sensor of the a6300 is heaps ahead and will certainly features better DR than the 5DIII at low ISO, like most recent Sony based APS-C sensors such as the one of the D7200.

The only real question is that of the lens to put in front of this excellent sensor.

Cheers,
Bernard

[AFairley]

Putting aside the issue of whether you want to print that large from a "crop sensor" camera in the first place, if you tend to print near a 2:3 aspect ratio, I would opt for the ASP-C sensor, since you will cropping down out of the gate with a 4/3 sensor

[scooby70]

The Sony is a good system, has a good set of lenses and one can adapt many other lenses to it, but then you are back to the size/weight issues that your present camera gives you.

I have three AF lenses for my A7, the kit lens and the excellent 55mm f1.8 and 35mm f2.8 and I think it's with smallish primes that the A7 system works best as with these it's the size of a mini DSLR MFT camera.

[nma]

Hey folks I am new to the forum here.  If this question has already been covered please refer me to the right link, but I am curious to know what people think of the Panasonic GX8 vs the new Sony a6300 that is going to be shipping next month?  I am primarily a landscape shooter now after 20+ years as portrait and commercial and I am tired of hauling my Canon 5DMIII and all the L glass along on my travels which often involve skis or a mountain bike.  I think the Sony looks like it will have a better sensor and the new AF should be a game changer, but I am curious as to how large these APC sized mirrorless cameras really let you you enlarge images.  I sell a decent amount of 24x30 - 40x60 images and obviously have no problems doing so with my 5DMIII.  If I can get decent 24x30's consistently from these mirrorless rigs I would be happy.  The other decision that makes this harder is, it seems like the Panasonic has a wider selection of super zooms so I can get away with only one or two lenses depending what I am doing.  I am not under any delusions that a Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH. POWER O.I.S. Lens is going to compete with a Canon L series lens but it sure would be nice to only have to carry that lens when mountain biking at 10,000 feet in the Rockies.  So any advice on what to buy and what lenses you really like would be great help.

Cheers!!!

I had similar thoughts about changing from Canon FF a couple of years ago. At that time the Sony was less mature, so I went to m43 to get a lighter kit, one that was easier for me to carry and suitable for airplane travel.

I, too, concentrate on landscape photography. In my Canon days I had L-zooms covering 16 to 400 mm.  Heavy, big and expensive. I was skeptical that m43 could compete with the 5Dii. I bought the Olympus E-M1 with the 12-40 Pro zoom, the PanyLeica 35-100 and the Oly 60 mm macro lens.  These lenses more than hold their own against my Canon L glass.In particular, the Oly 12-40 has a microcontrast that needs to be seen to beappreciated.  As a landscape photographer I was surprised how capable the m43 was, with features not imagined by Canon. The E-M1 is a hoot to shoot and I assume that the GX8 is similar in that regard.  The EVF and focusing aids are something that Canon chooses not to match. The HDR and focus stacking functions  are icing on the cake.

I always shoot landscapes on a tripod. m43 prints easily to 17x22, the limit of my printer. I am very fussy about my prints and I can say I like the m43 prints better than those from the 5Dii, which were already very good.  No one has ever suggested that there was a problem with noise or resolution. Having printed Canon 10D images on canvas, up to 30x40, with good results I see no reason that the GX8 can't do the same but far better. And don't forget about stitching. I have a pano head on my tripod that makes it easy to make really big prints, if that is what you need.

[David Anderson]

Just thinking out loud here - would the the Fuji X system also be worth consideration for what you want ?

I'm thinking of getting a smaller camera for hauling around on my fishing trips and I like what I see with the X system.
Weight wise, it's near half of my Nikon stuff and from what I hear, the lenses, all dedicated to the system, are very good.
I'm waiting to see some side by side tests with the new X Pro2 and Sony a6300.

[AndreyP]

I have Nex and Oly. And I do not see any future for nex or a6300 as a compact solution due to lack of dedicated APS-C compact lens. 
If size and weight do not matter you  should think about manual control and lens prices  

[Zorki5]

Hey folks I am new to the forum here.  If this question has already been covered please refer me to the right link, but I am curious to know what people think of the Panasonic GX8 vs the new Sony a6300 that is going to be shipping next month?  I am primarily a landscape shooter now after 20+ years as portrait and commercial and I am tired of hauling my Canon 5DMIII and all the L glass along on my travels which often involve skis or a mountain bike.  I think the Sony looks like it will have a better sensor and the new AF should be a game changer, but I am curious as to how large these APC sized mirrorless cameras really let you you enlarge images.  I sell a decent amount of 24x30 - 40x60 images and obviously have no problems doing so with my 5DMIII.  If I can get decent 24x30's consistently from these mirrorless rigs I would be happy.  The other decision that makes this harder is, it seems like the Panasonic has a wider selection of super zooms so I can get away with only one or two lenses depending what I am doing.  I am not under any delusions that a Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH. POWER O.I.S. Lens is going to compete with a Canon L series lens but it sure would be nice to only have to carry that lens when mountain biking at 10,000 feet in the Rockies.  So any advice on what to buy and what lenses you really like would be great help.

Cheers!!!

I'd like to recommend to you the excellent Conversation with Ctein video available on this site:
https://luminous-landscape.com/videos/conversation-ctein/conversation-ctein/

When it comes to print quality, Ctein is as picky as it gets -- and he shoots m43.

I, just like you, got tired of lugging around 5D (mark II though), and went with a6000. Will upgrade to a6300 once it becomes available, as I'm 100% (well, 99.9%) happy with it.

[DanLehman]

If I can get decent 24x30's consistently from these mirrorless rigs I would be happy.  The other decision that makes this harder is, it seems like the Panasonic has a wider selection of super zooms so I can get away with only one or two lenses depending what I am doing.  I am not under any delusions that a Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH. POWER O.I.S. Lens is going to compete with a Canon L series lens but it sure would be nice to only have to carry that lens when mountain biking at 10,000 feet in the Rockies.

Note that the Pany 35-100/2.8 is much smaller/lighter (w/less reach, though) than the Oly 40-150/2.8 --but the Oly can be supplemented w/a 1.4 teleconverter for further reach.  The Pany 7-14/4 is similarly much smaller/lighter than Oly's new 7-14/2.8, but not weather-proofed.  In m4/3, you do have weather-proofed bodies of E-M5 (I & II), E-M1, GH3/GH4 & GX8.  GX7 is a nice light and cheap - on - used - market option to complement.  The E-M5 II offers a 40mpx option but which requires a still camera AND SETTING (breeze in trees a no-no); rumors exist that some fast-shutter tech might improve applicability, but ... .
As for "decent prints", one person's "decent" is another's "blows away"!  But do look for evidence from other landscapers of m4/3 abilities --either via direct shooting or stitching.  By now, it should be no mystery.  Whereas the size/weight is pretty objectively confirmed.  (I often bike w/GX7 + 35-100 around shoulder ; photo ops sure put a dent in one's pace!    )

Perhaps rather than the Sony you should be comparing to the Fuji, vis-a-vis lenses and weatherproofing?  I'd think that a rugged, weather-resistant camera would be a plus --though likely bringing some slight weight penalty-- for much outdoors use.  Seems that (per Imaging Resource, et al., the Sony is lacking in this regard --"Sony also notes that it has improved the A6300's dust and moisture-resistance compared to the earlier camera, although there's something of a question mark in this area. In its press materials, Sony notes that while the A6300 'is designed for optimal dust and moisture resistance,' it is 'not waterproof or splashproof.' What precisely merits consideration as a splash versus just moisture isn't really clear, but ...".
Then, again, re superzoom w/mpix (but devoid weatherproofing), there are the 1" 20mpx Sony RX100 & Pany FZ1000, which of the latter I-R claims "ISO 400 delivers a very good 20 x 30 inch print." --that's 25-400 eq. FoV!

--dl*
====

[Jason DiMichele]

If you want the best pixels, stay with what you have. If you want liberation from sticking out, weight, size, impact to your joints from packing heavy iron, go with the m43 and learn to see again.

All well said! I'm a dedicated Panasonic Lumix shooter and one of the many advantages I love about the m4/3 system is that the aspect ratio of the sensor very closely matches the day of 4x5 and 6x7 film aspect ratios. I really enjoyed shooting LF and MF and so it's kind of bringing me back to the day!

Cheers,
Jay

[acktdi]

I've been leaning towards the Fuji X series, either the X-T1 or new X-PRO2.  I too have a 5Dm3, 5Dm2, and a range of L lenses.
I had the X100S in the past and have been pixel peeping lately at those images compared to my 5Dm3.  Not quite as sharp but for me, it's a reasonable compromise for saving a lot of weight.

I like to print 24x36" images, so I don't think the m43 systems would be enough for me.  Sony's A7 look enticing but the lenses are the same weight and size as the Canon EFs.  The a6300 is another I considered but I feel it's not rugged enough.  I like the 4K video ability but honestly photography is more important than video to me.

[PrintPd]

I am looking for a camera to supplement my Leica Q and M9 (which is presently gets its sensor for the second time exchanged and thus I not sure wether I want to keep it longterm). I had a NEX 7 and used it with the Leica macro-elmar 90mm (I find 135mm equivalent perfect for macro) and a 180mm apotelyt.  I dropped that camera in a lake, the lens was fine but the camera was dead. So I am looking for a replacement and looked recently at both A6300 and GX8 in a camera store but have not made a decision.
I find the handling of the GX8 much better especially the tilting EVF is great for macro and also when I want to use a not quite so tall traveling tripod.  The main reason I still contemplate the A6300 is sensor sensitivity and especially dynamic range. I found that macro pictures of flowers (especially red, yellow) very easily oversaturate the sensor in at least on color channel.
I also was reading about the just released Panasonic 100-400 Vario-Elmar which is unique in size, weight and close focus distance. According to some reviews it is optically very good but may not so much at 400mm?