Allie

Here I am again and thank you for your previous info. I am now trying to decide between the mirrorless Sony A6000 vs the A6300, for travel. I did do my homework and I see the A6300 has a better sensor, faster focusing. I do get that that is an advantage for video. But I am not going to do much video. My question is (and I’ve gotten conflicting information about this so I’d like to know based on your experience) would the A6300 better-sensor make any difference in picture-quality when taking still photos?

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

It’s a personal call, obviously, but when in you’re position I went with the 6000, deciding that the extra expense wasn’t worth it to me.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

I own and use one of each. Had the a6000 and have made three major trips with it. Great features, great photos. About six months ago, I hung 15 photos in an art show. Most printed 16x24 and 20x30. Only later I noticed that over half were from my a6000. (The others from my Nikon D7200 and a6300.) I purchased the a6300 as soon as Cameta had one available. Since then I have made two trips to Mexico with the a6300.

If you don't do video, the a6000 is 90=95% as good as the a6300. The main improvements in my experience are a) the focus is a smidgeon faster. The a6000 is blindly fast already. b) The EyeAF is better. A higher percentage of shots of my moving object grand daughter come out better. c)The camera has a 3.5mm jack for an external microphone. I do shoot some video and a good microphone makes a difference. d) Perhaps the color is better, but hard to tell. e) The a6300 is a touch better at very high ISO for noise. It is virtually noisefree at 6400 and good even at 12800. (I shot inside several old Mexican churches where candles were the main form of lighting and the results were good.)

repleo Loc: Boston

If you go to DxoMark you can do a side by side comparison between the A6000 and A6300. Click on the Measurements tab and it will show that the A6300 gives about a 1 stop advantage over the A6000 in Signal to Noise (higher ISO limit), Dynamic Range and Color Sensitivity. The A6300 has a better, brighter EVF.
Also, (I can't remember all of the details) the added phase detection points on the A6300 allows for more seamless use of auto focus with third party lenses.

I considered upgrading from the A6000 to the A6300 but passed on it. When the A6500 came out I started saving for that, but by the time I could actually get one in my hands, I had more than enough saved and went for the A7Rii. I still love my A6000 though. After taking the A6000 to Italy and the A7Rii to Ireland, the A6000 will be my preferred travel camera from now on.

Hank Radt

Here's a spec comparison: http://cameradecision.com/compare/Sony-Alpha-a6300-vs-Sony-Alpha-a6000.

Similar to Rab-Eye's reasoning, I chose the a6300 over the a6500, only I was looking for video capabilities, so that pretty much ruled out the a6000.

Basically, the sensors are the same, you get better video (which you know), slightly more batter life (but easily solved with a spare battery or two and a charger), more focus points (which may or may not be important depending on how you set the camera up - wide or spot - and slightly more dynamic range with the a6300, vs lower weight and less cost for the a6000. My guess is that unless you really want video, you'll be happy with the a6000. In any case, I'd also suspect that IF you upgrade at some point, you'll consider a FF camera vs. one of the a6xxxs.

Your lens choice, as in any camera decision, is also critical - I posted some links to lens reviews here: http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-491372-1.html#8280680.

Have fun deciding!

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

I am unable to compare the a6000 to the 6300 directly, but I think for travel the a6000 is the better choice. AF and AF tracking is excellent. Once the menus are learned, it is an easy camera to use. My Sony lenses now include the 16-50 kit lens (terrific for travel if taking one lens), the 50mm f/1.8 (indoor sports and family shots in low light), and newest addition, the Samyang 12mm f/2 for landscapes, travel, and some real estate. Manual focus only, so you should know that BUT, you can set it up to use as a P&S for a lot of travel shots. Check out youtubes by BradZchef. Lotsa good info using the Samyang lens from more than one site.
"Better sensor" is always a good option if it meets your needs. If faster focus in low light situations is important to you, would skip the 6300 and go to the 6500 and pay for the in-body stabilization as well. If not, would look for a deal on a refurbished a6000 with the 16-50 kit lens. Best "grab-n-go" travel set up I own. Would advise to purchase an extra battery (or two) with charger. I do not have the issue many have posted about short battery life, but I always carry a back-up in my pocket. Same for a memory card. Also suggest purchasing the book by Gary Freidman on the 6000. Best book I have read on any camera to date. Good hunting.

jmsail365 Loc: Stamford, Ct

I owned both cameras. My take away was the a6300 photos were better. That said I don't think the difference is dramatic. The best part was the upgraded focusing system. IMO, that change provided a noticeable improvement and worth the extra money.

twiceeagles

I, thank everyone who commented. Very insightful. I just bought the a6000 (haven't even received it yet), and the comments allayed my buyer's remorse.

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

You’ll love it. Especially performance bang for the dollar.

muggins88 Loc: Inverness, Florida

I own and use almost exclusively the A6000 and it does all that I want and more. I highly encourage you to buy/study Friedman's book on the A6000. It was complicated to me until I got the hang of it. I was using a Canon 7D and still do periodically but not often.

jccash Loc: Longwood, Florida

I bought the 6000 for my wife and she loves it. It’s a fun camera and does a good job for us. My son just ordered the a6500. He wanted Image stabilization and 4K. He ordered it for two reasons. First he wanted it for Video. Second, as a Sony broadcast dealer I can buy these cameras at a nice discount so he saved some money.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I bought the A6000 because it cost $550 with a lens. This is not my primary camera. I use it when I wanted something small and compact. I saw no reason to pay more for something higher up the A6xxx line. I could spend hundreds more, but would I really see any difference in the pictures? I have two links below to A6000 how-to videos by Gary Fong. Below that are links to camera comparison sites. As carpenters say (sort of) "Think twice before you spend once."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYXwCGWb7Yg
https://www.garyfong.com/products/unleash-power-your-sony-a6000

(Reviews) https://www.youtube.com/user/TheCameraStoreTV/videos
http://www.cameradecision.com/
http://cameras.reviewed.com/
http://camerasize.com/
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
http://snapsort.com/compare
http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/cameras?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=mainmenu&utm_medium=text&ref=mainmenu

LEGALDR Loc: Southern California

I believe that the carpenter proverb is "measure twice and cut once".\

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Yes, I was taking liberties. I often find it necessary to measure many times, just to be sure.

Blaster34 Loc: Florida Treasure Coast

I've had them both. I also have a Sony A77ii, still have the 6300 and use it for all my travels. The Sony 10-18, f4, OSS, while not cheap, is an awesome lens, pair that with the Sony SEL 18-200 and you got it covered. I also use it (A6300) with a Sony SAL 70-400 w/LA-EA3 and its works great with some limitations. Staying with my 6300 since I absolutely love it