Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Sony’s new A6400  (Read 1004 times)

Martin Kristiansen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1095
    • Martin Kristiansen
Re: Sony’s new A6400
« Reply #20 on: January 17, 2019, 11:03:37 am »

Thanks hogloff. I’m leaning that way.
Logged
Commercial photography is 10% inspiration and 90% moving furniture around.

Dan Wells

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 978
Re: Sony’s new A6400
« Reply #21 on: January 17, 2019, 12:08:32 pm »

It seems like the really smart flip screen arrangement has a Canon and/or Panasonic patent on it that they either won't license, or other manufacturers won't pay for (or the mechanism takes up too much space).
Logged

Martin Kristiansen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1095
    • Martin Kristiansen
Re: Sony’s new A6400
« Reply #22 on: January 17, 2019, 12:14:13 pm »

It seems Sony sees value in selling a very well priced camera with very good specs. Do thy think that all is not lost to the cell phone market?

I know it’s anecdotal but I know a number of people who recently either sold their entry level DSLRs to buy APSC and a few who go at interested in photography via cell phones and decided to buy a “proper” camera. I think this 6400 is well pitched at this market.
Logged
Commercial photography is 10% inspiration and 90% moving furniture around.

HywelPhillips

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 64
Re: Sony’s new A6400
« Reply #23 on: January 18, 2019, 03:21:10 am »

Off topic Hywel

I have a A7RII. I have a choice to upgrade between a A9 and a A7RIII. I figure I already have the bigger sensor in the A7RIII so might go for the A9. But I reLly like the A7RII. My question is would you reccomend the upgrade to the III? Is it that much better than the II?

Hi Martin,

I'd say that unless you're constantly hitting one of the small number of limitations of the A7RII, the III is not worth the upgrade.

I bought one because I needed a second body and I thought I might as well get the tweaked III version as get a second II. If I need another body I'd probably buy a second Mark II at this point.

The menus are different, slightly improved but still find myself going through almost every page at least once per shoot.

There are small improvements in a number of areas. Eye AF works better, but it was already pretty decent. AF in video seems better to me but I've not done any tests. The battery life is way better, which was something that I used to run into quite a lot.

The Mark III's battery life feels more on a par with a "normal" camera, rather than the "OMG I have a pocket full of spare batteries but I really need it to get through this 15 minute one rolling take shot before I can swap batteries". It's less of a concern for a couple of days in the mountains for sure.

The touch screen for focus control helps but I find myself using it less than I'd expected because the control ergonomics are not that great. The AF works, but the mode control and ability to poke at the screen and have the camera grab focus and stick to the object is way less convincing than a Canon 1DX Mark II.

I'm sure there are other differences but its a measure of how insignificant they mostly are for my use of the camera that I can't actually think what they are without going down to the kit room and comparing the two side by side to remind myself, which I think tells the tale.

If you have a use for the A9's features, I suspect you'll find it a better companion to the A7RII, although it is too low res for me so I've not actually tried one. But it certainly has different strengths, whereas the A7RIII is the same camera in a new set of clothes.

Cheers, Hywel


Logged

Martin Kristiansen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1095
    • Martin Kristiansen
Re: Sony’s new A6400
« Reply #24 on: January 18, 2019, 04:34:07 am »

Thanks for the very helpful reply Hywel.
Logged
Commercial photography is 10% inspiration and 90% moving furniture around.
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up