Sony recently announced an exciting new 4K mirrorless camera, the a6300, which is already generating a lot of buzz. At under $1,000, it’s one of the most affordable interchangeable lens 4K cameras on the market without too many compromises.
Since the original A7S, Sony has gained significant momentum with its camera lineup and won over many former Canon and Panasonic users. Over the past few years, we’ve seen multiple iterations of the A7, A7R, and A7S, the launch of the FS7 and FS5, and significant improvements to the pro line F5 and F55.
While it’s incredible what Sony has accomplished in such a short period of time, the number of camera options they now offer is almost overwhelming, leaving some potential customers unsure of where to invest their money.
Personally, I purchased the A7S II last fall and generally enjoy shooting with this camera. The low-light capabilities and dynamic range are strong, and the overall image quality is great. As I’ve mentioned before on this site, I’m not a fan of Sony’s color science, and generally don’t immediately find images on their cameras to look “cinematic”, But have some love for color kitsthey look great.
Having said that, if the Sony a6300 had been available when I bought the A7S II, I would certainly have considered it a viable alternative. In many ways, the a6300’s specs are comparable to those of the A7S II, with a few exceptions.
Before we continue, here’s a look at some of the highlighted camera specs:
- 24.2MP APS-C Exmor CMOS sensor, maximum resolution 6000 x 4000
- BIONZ X image processor
- XGA Tru-Finder 2.36 million dot OLED EVF
- 3.0″ 921.6k dot flip LCD monitor
- XAVC S: 3840x2160p / 30 frames/second (100 Mbps) / 30 frames/second (60 Mbps) / 25 frames/second (100 Mbps)
/ 25 frames/second (60 Mbps) / 24 frames/second (100 Mbps) / 24 frames/second (60 Mbps) - XAVC S: 1920x1080p / 120 frames/second (100 Mbps) / 120 frames/second (60 Mbps) / 100 frames/second (100 Mbps)
/ 100 frames/second (100 Mbps) / 60 frames/second (50 Mbps) / 50 frames/second (50 Mbps)
/ 30 frames/second (50 Mbps) / 25 frames/second (50 Mbps) / 24 frames/second (50 Mbps) - S-Log3 Gamma and Display Assistance
- Built-in Wi-Fi and NFC
- 4D focusing with 425 phase detection points
- ISO 100-25600 (Extended mode: 100-51200)
- Up to 11 fps shooting
- Maximum clip length: 30 minutes
- Weatherproof magnesium alloy body
Clearly, there’s a lot to be excited about here. An interchangeable lens camera that records 4K internally with S-Log3 is enough to win over many potential buyers, especially at a price under $1,000. Not to mention, other features like 1080/120p recording, 4D focus, and a weatherproof body will make this camera a great choice for many filmmakers.
At the same time, there are some important differences between the a6300 and its big brother, the A7S II:
First, the A7S II is equipped with a full-frame sensor, while the a6300 is equipped with an APS-C size (or Super 35mm) sensor. The A7S II also has built-in 5-axis image stabilization, an innovative feature not found on the a6300.
The a6300’s low-light performance may be relatively strong, but it’s certainly not on par with the A7S II, which can shoot up to 409,600 ISO in extended mode (versus the a6300’s top ISO of 51,200). This is mainly due to the A7S II’s lower megapixel count (12MP compared to 24MP for the a6300), which means the A7S II can take advantage of larger pixels for sharper low-light results.
But by the same token, many of the differences between the two cameras won’t be an issue for most shooters, and in fact in some ways they can be seen as advantages for a6300 users.
Take sensor size as an example. Many filmmakers who came out during the 5D era/digital DSLR revolution have become accustomed to shooting full frame, but many others prefer the Super 35mm sensor, myself included. Super 35 means fewer focus pull challenges, a more traditional film aesthetic, and more lens options.
In-camera stabilization is certainly a great feature, but in my opinion it’s more of a luxury than a necessity. When I purchased the A7S II, one of the biggest selling points was the internal stabilization, but after using the camera for a few months, I actually found that I didn’t use it very often. Whenever the camera is mounted on a rig (which is most of the time), I get better results by turning off stabilization and letting the rig/balance do the work.
The same goes for the A7S II’s low-light capabilities. Understandably, for some users the ability to shoot at such insanely high ISOs is advantageous, but for many it doesn’t really matter that much. Personally, I rarely need to shoot above ISO 1600, only occasionally going up to 3200 as needed. A well-lit image at a low ISO will always look better than a poorly lit image at a high ISO, no matter how noise-free it is.
The point is that from a practical perspective, there really isn’t that much difference between the A7S II and the a6300. Yes, the A7S II has more features (and it should cost nearly 3 times as much), but the a6300 is nothing to sneeze at either.
Sony a6300 Alpha Mirrorless Digital Camera – $998 at B & H
If you’re in the market for a mirrorless camera and absolutely don’t need some of the bells and whistles of the A7S II, I highly recommend considering the a6300. Spending less on a camera means you can save more money for lenses, lighting, or other equipment, which may be a better investment in the long run.
Once the a6300 is actually released and I’ve had a chance to shoot with it, I’ll be sure to post some updates and test shots as a follow-up. Now, tell me what you think below!
