Sony A6300 fags BTFO

>>2941946

Well at least they update their bodies frequently.

>>2941981
Nikon BTFO


[spoiler];___;[/spoiler]

>>2941946
so what? Sony like every other electronic company has the release dates already set for the next 3-5 models that will be "so much better" than the last

>>2941946
Torn between an a7sii, a7ii, and the a6500 right now

>Trusting Sony
>buying a 1/4000 second cuck digital camera
>buying a camera without a shutter speed dial
Truly Sony has given more gearfags the gift of aggressive buyers remorse

>>2942012
it actually has a second dial, but it's on the back and requires you to change your grip to reach it.

>>2942012
Shutter speed goes up to 1/32k on the a6500, you're confusing them with fuji.

And it does have a ss dial if you're in ss priority.

>>2942066
>you're confusing them with fuji
fuji has 8k mechanical shutter + they had 32k shutter already back in 2014. Do your research before shitposting faggot.

>>2942066
kek no
>it does have a SS dial
yeah, nah

>>2942087
real patricians use lenses with manual aperture rings, so yes, it is a ss dial.

>>2941998

Wait for a7iii in early 2017.

>>2941946
Cool. Maybe I can get an a6300 for cheap soon.

:^)

>>2942117

Entire a7 series already $300-500 off on Sony Japan.

>>2942110
wait for an A7iv in mid 2017

>>2942110
wait for an a7v mid-late 2017

>>2942163
I guess when your sensor tech evolves at a rate like Sony, you gotta keep your bodies up.

Now let me get back to my re-runs of Saved by the Bell and my Canon DSLR.

>>2942163
Wait for an a7RmVi in late 2017

>>2942275
You joke, but honestly, any of the Sony crop sensors (and their other manufacturer equivalents) made since 2012 are more than good enough for pretty much anything.

>>2942295
What a dumb comment.
You could have a sensor with triple the dynamic range, 10 times the sensitivity, 24 bit colour depth.

it's just easy to not miss what you don't have yet.

>>2942299
>no anon, I don't understand the concept of diminishing returns
>why?

>>2942307
So skin doesn't look like a lifeless orange blob?
So I can shoot at 1/4000, f8 in the middle of the night?
So I don't have to compromise my photo due to my environment?

Many, many reasons young summerfag.

>>2942315
>So skin doesn't look like a lifeless orange blob?
This has nothing to do with the camera.

>So I can shoot at 1/4000, f8 in the middle of the night?
This simply demonstrates that you haven't mastered the exposure triangle enough to understand how ridiculous your example is.

>So I don't have to compromise my photo due to my environment?
All photos are inherently environmental compromise, you also need to brush up on your photophilosophy.

>Many, many reasons young summerfag.
I'm not sure what question you think you're even answering, I didn't actually ask you one. I mocked you for rhetorical effect. Sorry if the question mark threw you off. :^)

>>2942295
Was only a half joke - they gave the industry fantastic sensors. If they never got better, I still could die satisfied.

>>2942145
>implying I want something from the a7 series

A 6k power user here and I love it.

>>2942321
>this has nothing to do with the camera
Why does film render skin with such a wider range of tones then? Protip, colour depth.

>haven't mastered the exposure triangle
What's ridiculous about it, I might be shooting a flock of bats coming out of a cave and wish to keep a deep dof. Even your imagination is preventing you from thinking outside the box, a more sensitive sensor would allow such shenanigans. Imagine when people had to sit in a brace to keep them still whilst having their photo taken, someone piped up that it would be fab if they could get shutter speeds fast enough to crisply capture a man mid jog, and some unhygienic cunt in the corner yells "you don't understand the exposure triangle well enough to know how ridiculous that is". This is how dumb you're being right now, graphene based sensors have shown the potential to be 1000 times more sensitive.

>all photos are comprimised by the environment.
Yes, but to a FAR lesser degree than they used to be, imagine having the freedom to choose whatever aperture and ss you wanted, regardless of the available light.

>i mocked you
K, where? To me it just seemed like me teaching you how not to be short sighted :^)

>>2942734

I like a7 simply because crop factor isn't an issue on adapted lenses. Some lens ranges are just weird on a crop.

>>2942321
maybe he shoots iso 6million.

>>2942831
If there was no noise, nor reduction in dr/colour depth, why would shooting at 6 million iso be relevant.

That's exactly why i left iso out of my comments, i don't see it being relevant in the future. If you had 50 stops of dr, again, what would be the relevance of iso. It's a compromise that future sensor design will bypass.

>>2941946
>no top LCD
DROPPED

>>2942851
>If you had 50 stops of dr
Why would I want/need 50 stops of DR anon.

>>2943514
Not that guy but, it would be enough to shoot everything at base ISO and not get noisy images for one, second reason would be to apply any sort of tone mapping without any significant loss of IQ.

>>2943514
Never worry about shadows/highlights or setting proper sensitivity in general.
50 stops of DR is enough to have the Sun (35 EV) and a dim star cluster (-15 EV) in the same frame with neither being over- or underexposed.

>>2943521
So your saying I could turn taking photos merely into an exercise about composition and framing and choose my exposure later?

K, I'm on board.

>>2943525
Yes. Although I don't think this will ever happen.

Consider that 50 EV is more than the ENTIRE ADJUSTMENT RANGE of modern cameras - the difference between taking a shot at f/22, 1/32000s, ISO 50 and taking a shot at f/1, 60s, ISO 51200 is only 40 stops.

>>2942803
Keep in mind that 1000 times is only about 10 stops

>>2943529
don't worry Sony will a new sensor out in 2030 that can do it

>>2942315
Summers over faggot. KYS

thanks all you fags