Bad news, Fence-sitters. The FE70-300mm is very nice!

4K video (3840x2160) is basically 4x the resolution of HD (1920x1080) If you have a 4K TV or projector, the difference is very visible. If not, the extra resolution is wasted. The bitrate can be compared to JPEG compression on a still photo. Low bitrate movie = standard JPEG still, high bitrate movie = xfine JPEG still (approximately). Lower bitrates require more compression to be applied to the video stream which may not reduce the perceived quality when it is viewed but the file compression may limit the amount of manipulation that can be done to the video before visible quality starts to suffer. If you are producing a video that may require a lot of post-processing for broadcast or professional presentations, the higher bitrate provides a cleaner, less compressed original to work with. In the real world of home travel video to be trimmed, brightened and shared on YouTube, a 1080p (HD) MP4 may be all you ever need.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In Body Image Stabilization. In a nutshell, most cameras rely on stabilized lenses but some have stabilization built in by shifting the image sensor to offset camera motion. Both types work well but IBIS allows for stabilization even with older manual or adapted lenses.

 

 

 

Dave

Thanks Dave.

I've read fair amount about full frame sensors creating vertical ghosting if (for video) panned too quickly.

1) Do the FE 70-300 or 200 mentioned earlier in this thread contribute to this, or are they fast enough. Consider both the A6300 and A7RII for this answer.

2) Sorry, for clarity... Is it the full frame sensor or some other part of this newer technology that really causes stuff to get blurred when moved too quickly?)

THANK YOU!

~Bob

In body image stabilization. Can be done by shifting the sensor, or for video, it can be done digitally. (Digitally -- it will crop the image, and constantly adjust the crop to compensation for minor motion).

 

 

 

Since it is difficult -- nearly impossible -- to hold a camera perfectly still for a continuous period, without some pretty decent stabilization, video will look very wobbly.

 

And that's what I find with the A6300 video -- extreme wobbles.

 

In terms of a USEFUL video feature -- IBIS or digital stabilization would be far more beneficial than all the fancy bit rates.

Thank you. What 4K video capable cameras with 20+ megapixel picture capability are at the top of their game with regard to IBIS?

BOB:

Tom #1 posted this on the A6300 section - great video reference!

"Good information on how to take video with success with your A6300

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony...rience%3Fv%3D1"

Tom-2

BOB:

 

 

 

Tom #1 posted this on the A6300 section - great video reference!

 

 

 

"Good information on how to take video with success with your A6300

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony...rience%3Fv%3D1"

 

 

 

Tom-2

'http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony...rience%3Fv%3D1' is a broken link.

[emoji20][emoji15]

'http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony...rience%3Fv%3D1' is a broken link.

[emoji20][emoji15]

Go to the A6300 page - reference works!

Thank you. What 4K video capable cameras with 20+ megapixel picture capability are at the top of their game with regard to IBIS?

The A7rii, the RX10iii, etc.

Remember, apart from Sony, nobody else has yet done much with combined video/still cameras that have large sensor, that can do 4k.

But personally, I find 4k very very overrated -- I don't have a 4k viewing device, and don't expect to invest in a 4k viewing device any time in the foreseeable future.

So I'll certainly notice if a video is wobbly, but I'll never notice if its 4k vs HD.

Thanks Dave.

 

I've read fair amount about full frame sensors creating vertical ghosting if (for video) panned too quickly.

 

1) Do the FE 70-300 or 200 mentioned earlier in this thread contribute to this, or are they fast enough. Consider both the A6300 and A7RII for this answer.

THe lens has nothing to do with the "ghosting" or "jelly legs" effect. See answer to #2 :)

2) Sorry, for clarity... Is it the full frame sensor or some other part of this newer technology that really causes stuff to get blurred when moved too quickly?)

 

THANK YOU!

~Bob

The "jelly legs" effect which causes vertical lines to tilt while panning is caused by the basic difference between CCD sensors (used in most dedicated video cameras) and CMOS sensors (used in most modern stills cameras) A CCD sensor dumps the data for each exposed frame at once where the design of the CMOS sensor requires the data to be read out one line at a time. (Picture a photo on a scanner where you move the scanned picture while it is being scanned.) While this read-out is very fast (and becoming faster with each generation) there is still some lag between the first line and the last for each frame recorded. This is simply a fact of life that video shooters have to deal with shooting with a large sensor CMOS camera. FYI, the A6300 has an extremely fast readout and reviewers have commented that the distortion seems to be less because of it. The upside is that if you pan reasonably, you may never notice the effect and the ability to separate the subject from the background with a shallow depth of field can give you a more movie-like quality to simple travel videos.

Dave

THe lens has nothing to do with the "ghosting" or "jelly legs" effect. See answer to #2 :)

 

 

 

The "jelly legs" effect which causes vertical lines to tilt while panning is caused by the basic difference between CCD sensors (used in most dedicated video cameras) and CMOS sensors (used in most modern stills cameras) A CCD sensor dumps the data for each exposed frame at once where the design of the CMOS sensor requires the data to be read out one line at a time. (Picture a photo on a scanner where you move the scanned picture while it is being scanned.) While this read-out is very fast (and becoming faster with each generation) there is still some lag between the first line and the last for each frame recorded. This is simply a fact of life that video shooters have to deal with shooting with a large sensor CMOS camera. FYI, the A6300 has an extremely fast readout and reviewers have commented that the distortion seems to be less because of it. The upside is that if you pan reasonably, you may never notice the effect and the ability to separate the subject from the background with a shallow depth of field can give you a more movie-like quality to simple travel videos.

 

Dave

Thank you, Dave.. That was very helpful!!

Just to throw another option at you - how about the A7ii - without the R in it.

Are you planning on shooting in Raw or JPEG format for stills? If Raw, the A7Rii will chew up a lot of disk space. I wanted a camera that I could shoot in Raw so went with the A7ii instead of the A6300, but when I found out how much space I'd need (I shoot A LOT of pictures) I decided against the "R". The A7ii is also a lot cheaper.

Just to throw another option at you - how about the A7ii - without the R in it.

 

I wanted a camera that I could shoot in Raw so went with the A7ii instead of the A6300, but when I found out how much space I'd need (I shoot A LOT of pictures) I decided against the "R". The A7ii is also a lot cheaper.

I may be missing something but doesn't the A7iiR have a larger sensor and would take less photos since it would capture more?

The A6300 also photographs in RAW format and probably capture more pictures - but then it has a small sensor and less detail.

But if each photograph is going to be enlarged to, say 16x20,24x30 or larger, or shown on a big screen, a big sensor makes sense.

The A7II and the A6300 both have 24MP. The difference is full-frame vs. APS-C. However the A6300 is a generation newer in the sensor with copper vs. aluminum wiring making the image quality close enough for the main consideration to be the A7II's in-body stabilization.

Dave

I have the A7RII with the FE 24-240mm F3.5-6.3 OSS so I am not sure this would do a lot for me. I like your photos and am looking at a larger zoom.

I am kind of torn between this one and the 70–400 mm F4–5.6 G SSM II with the LA-EA4 adapter. I know it's much bigger, but it's bigger AKA more zoom.

I have been bidding (unsuccessfully) for a 70mm-00mm lens.

It is a tad faster than the 70mm-300mm lens and if DxO is to be believed, sharper than the 300mm. (of course the bodies used for the measurements may have had something to do with the measurements.)

On the other hand, the 300mm has a greater reach and more so if extenders can be used on the lens.

If you look at Justin's photos taken with the 70mm-300mm, they look awfully sharp to me

What to do?

Bringing back this thread. I am now thinking I can pickup the 70-300 and an A6300 cheaper than the 70-400 and adapter. And that combo should give me up to 450 zoom equivalent

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

After a weekend with the 70-200 f/4 I'm thinking I should've traded a little speed for the extra 150mm equiv length.

For the surfing, I really would've liked the extra reach. I had to crop a lot of my shots.

Went from this:

to this:

So, I am trying to figure out if this lens is what I want for Christmas. I do have the 24-240mm, which I love. But we are planning trips to Hawaii early next year and Alaska the year after. Will I be on my whale watching tours longing for the extra reach if I don't get it?

Thanks,

Vic

You're starting to get into super crazy variable land (that is distance/weather/motion of the ocean etc..) When I went whale watching in SD/Hawaii/Alaska we were close enough that a 300 would've probably been overkill. Your existing lens (especially if its a constant fast aperture...) sounds perfect. Just don't forget your lens hood;)

Zackidawg: You made my day! I was looking all over for someone to give a review of the Sony a6300 with the 70-300 and you hit it spot on for me. I rented it while in FL this week...went to the swamp and took photos...almost every one was a keeper! A hawk flew overhead VERY high up...the lens and camera hit him spot on and kept him in focus...too far for a real photo to keep, but it allowed me to zoom in and see that it nailed it. After spending two days with this lens, (rented from lensrentals) I ended up buying it! When I get home, ALL my Canon gear will go on sale...5d3, 70-300 f/4, etc... No need to haul that stuff around anymore. Thanks for helping me make this decision!:)

Congrats Jan (and/or Chris!) on the new lens addition...glad to hear the combo performed for you to my experiences. I do love this combo and I've been using it heavily, especially for birding in the wetlands, pretty much every weekend since my original post. The croppability of this combo is really surprisingly good too - even when you can't get close enough physically. I do still keep a DSLR kit around, mostly for use with a big 150-600mm lens, but got rid of almost all my DSLR lenses except my two longest ones, as the A6300 kit covers me from 10mm to 300mm beautifully.

I just got back from Disney World this past weekend, enjoying the FE70-300mm lens at Animal Kingdom shooting all the various African and Asian animals - it doesn't disappoint.

Thanks, Justin...

I had de-prioritized the 70-300 enough to focus on other things but that's all over now.

Southern Caribbean this spring promises birds and other distant things.

*sigh*

Dave