GAS attack imminent: Sony has just announced its release of the a6300 and B&H has the body for a mere $998. There is a new zoom lens but I didn't copy the details. The sensor remains...

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Sony has just announced its release of the a6300 and B&H has the body for a mere $998. There is a new zoom lens but I didn't copy the details. The sensor remains at 24.x Mp. The announcement has a bunch of other improvements. So now I am an owner of an old Sony. :?

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Create a mask.

Erv Loc: Medina Ohio

LOL!! Janny tells me old is good John!!!:)

John_F wrote:

Sony has just announced its release of the a6300 and B&H has the body for a mere $998. There is a new zoom lens but I didn't copy the details. The sensor remains at 24.x Mp. The announcement has a bunch of other improvements. So now I am an owner of an old Sony. :?

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Take some gas x.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

John_F wrote:

Sony has just announced its release of the a6300 and B&H has the body for a mere $998. There is a new zoom lens but I didn't copy the details. The sensor remains at 24.x Mp. The announcement has a bunch of other improvements. So now I am an owner of an old Sony. :?

Take a look at this comparison:

http://www.cameradebate.com/2016/sony-a6300-vs-a6000/

And decide for yourself. I like the added focus points and improved finder, but an increase of 0.01 seconds in focus speed does not impress me. I'll hold off until I can see some results.

chapjohn Loc: Tigard, Oregon

I am not impressed with the A6300 or the A6000. However, the just announced FE 24-70 G lens looks realy nice.

CO

B&H Photo sends me newsletters all the time. They announced the Sony Alpha a6300 and three new G lenses:

FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM
FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS
FE 85mm f/1.4 GM

CO

My computer entered the same twice.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

John_F wrote:

Sony has just announced its release of the a6300 and B&H has the body for a mere $998. There is a new zoom lens but I didn't copy the details. The sensor remains at 24.x Mp. The announcement has a bunch of other improvements. So now I am an owner of an old Sony. :?

The question that might be asked is, have my photographic skills exceeded the capabilities of the equipment I'm currently using? That should end your GAS problem.
--Bob

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

John_F wrote:

So now I am an owner of an old Sony. :?

Old is good. I tell myself that every time I look in the mirror. :D

bimmer124 Loc: Woodstock, New York

jerryc41 wrote:

Old is good. I tell myself that every time I look in the mirror. :D

True, then it becomes easier to agree with yourself.

cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

jerryc41 wrote:

Old is good. I tell myself that every time I look in the mirror. :D

I agree. There is always reason to be pleased with yourself. And there is always a new product to give you GAS attacks!

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Today's dpreview e-newsletter has reviews on the a6300 and the lenses. All are worth a read.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Mogul wrote:

Take a look at this comparison:

http://www.cameradebate.com/2016/sony-a6300-vs-a6000/

And decide for yourself. I like the added focus points and improved finder, but an increase of 0.01 seconds in focus speed does not impress me. I'll hold off until I can see some results.

Seems to me the most significant difference between the two models concerns the video recording capabilities.

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Reading deeper in the dpreview article I discovered the sensor is the same size as the a6000, namely 23.5 by 15.6 mm. Something about copper wiring, but I don't have the faintest meaning about what this means beyond that 'what the a6000 uses no copper' which seems a stretch. The a6300 ARW (Sony version of RAW) remains at 14 bit depth pixels. Using 2 bits as inter-pixel separation bits leaves 12 for colors, 4 each for R, G, and B. This means 16 shades of R, G, and B. So this digital data is fed to Photoshop will get interpolated up to 8 bit color RGB channels, or 256 shades of each. Given this sparse bit depth, might it be that a 'camera' pixel is for either R, G or B such that it takes 3 'camera' pixels to capture any intermediate color, such as orange. :?: