Sony a6300 vs a7r ii

[handymanshandle]

So I'm starting to get interested in photography again, but now I'm starting to be more interested in mirrorless, but I'm torn between the a6300 and the a7r ii. 
Though I had been interested in getting a T6s or 80D or D7100 or D7200 but from a previous topic I had made in this sub forum, I've gone more towards getting a mirrorless possibly but I'm not sure what the major differences are between the a7r ii and a6300 besides megapixel count and cost.

Like do they have similar or the same features. Both are obviously going to be really sharp but I'm aware the a7r ii will be limited by the lenses if I don't get Zeiss, Batis, EF or EF-L lenses.

(EF and EF-L on an FE to EF adapter). Where as it wouldn't hurt to have Zeiss, Batis or EF/EF-L glass on the a6300 but it's not as essential as having good glass on something like the a7r ii or 5DSR...

Anyways, I'm not sure if the a6300 has some or most of the features of the a7r ii but with a smaller and lower resolution sensor than the a7r ii.

Also what glass should I possibly get to start off one of those cameras with? If I did go with the a7r ii, I'd probably want to get something Zeiss or EF+Adapter.

I wouldn't need much zoom or any zoom, primes should be fine for me at least to start off with.

[TriFlix Films]

Glass > Camera specs in my opinion... Camera technology advances so fast, 4k was several grand 4 years ago. Now every smart phone comes with 4k cameras. I suggest the 6300 and get a good/expensive low f-stop cinema lens. ONLY if you plan on staying with sony though.

Just my 2 cents

[handymanshandle]

3 minutes ago, TriFlix Films said:

Glass > Camera specs in my opinion... Camera technology advances so fast, 4k was several grand 4 years ago. Now every smart phone comes with 4k cameras. I suggest the 6300 and get a good/expensive low f-stop cinema lens. ONLY if you plan on staying with sony though.

Just my 2 cents

How are cine lenses for photography, I mean I do have some interest in doing some video work but that's probably not going to be the bulk of what I do with the camera.
I'm guessing an FE lens so that it'd work just fine if I ever went up to a full frame/35mm equivalent body.

Edited April 27, 2016 by wcreek

[nickl]

Just saying, the A7Rii is full frame, while the a6300 is APS-C...

[TriFlix Films]

"Best" photography lens for sony - http://www.cameralabs.com/lenses/lens_buyers_guide/Sony_Alpha_lenses/Which_portrait_lens/Which_Sony_Alpha_portrait_wedding_low-light_lens.shtml

But you could always get an adapter (smart or dummy) and use any other lens mount considering its photography, you really don't need the electronic functionality if you go manual

[handymanshandle]

1 minute ago, nickl said:

Just saying, the A7Rii is full frame, while the a6300 is APS-C...

I knew the a7r ii is ff/35mm equivalent, and the a6300 is aps-c, I was more so asking feature wise. Is there anything Sony leaves out on the a6300 that's very useful on the a7r ii and would be as well on the a6300?

 

I suppose I might be able to make the a7r ii and FE 55mm f/1.8 Zeiss some how work for me and how much I really wanted to spend.

 

 

[handymanshandle]

1 minute ago, TriFlix Films said:

"Best" photography lens for sony - http://www.cameralabs.com/lenses/lens_buyers_guide/Sony_Alpha_lenses/Which_portrait_lens/Which_Sony_Alpha_portrait_wedding_low-light_lens.shtml

But you could always get an adapter (smart or dummy) and use any other lens mount considering its photography, you really don't need the electronic functionality if you go manual

I don't mind the extra cost to keep the electronics of the lens working.

 

[TriFlix Films]

My step dad used as Zeis 24-70 F4 with his A7R ii and he absolutely loves it... if that helps at all.

Only suggest it since you said you don't mind price, its a $1500 lens.

[handymanshandle]

Well the price of the a7r ii kinda makes me unsure of buying that. I mean it's such a good camera but I mean I'm not sure if there's really anything in between it and the a6300.

the A7/A7ii is mostly for video work, the a7r ii is best for photography and the a7s/a7s ii is best for low light work.

I'm really not sure if the a6300 is that happier middle ground. 

 

[TriFlix Films]

What do you plan on shooting (subject)

[handymanshandle]

3 minutes ago, TriFlix Films said:

What do you plan on shooting (subject)

A bit of everything...

Wildlife, Astrophotography, Landscapes/Skyscapes, maybe some still life. 

[TriFlix Films]

I live by DXO Mark - http://www.dxomark.com/cameras#hideAdvancedOptions=false&viewMode=list&yDataType=rankDxo

his lens and camera reviews are some of the best I've seen. Out of all the reviews he's ranked the A7Rii the highest, and the Sony FE Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 55mm F1.8 ZA as the highest overall lens. http://www.dxomark.com/best-sony-lenses

 

I have to log, but if you have any other questions I'll try my best to answer them. I'm a videographer but equipment is equipment and the principles are the same... just know which specs are priority is the only difference.

[handymanshandle]

1 minute ago, TriFlix Films said:

I live by DXO Mark - http://www.dxomark.com/cameras#hideAdvancedOptions=false&viewMode=list&yDataType=rankDxo

his lens and camera reviews are some of the best I've seen. Out of all the reviews he's ranked the A7Rii the highest, and the Sony FE Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 55mm F1.8 ZA as the highest overall lens. http://www.dxomark.com/best-sony-lenses

 

I have to log, but if you have any other questions I'll try my best to answer them. I'm a videographer but equipment is equipment and the principles are the same... just know which specs are priority is the only difference.

I knew about the 55mm f/1.8 being one of the best lenses. @ShadowCaptain had pointed that out to me.

 

 

[TriFlix Films]

Then it sounds like you have your answer... best overall camera and lens by professional reviewers and unanimous vote. If you don't mind the price range the size of a small short film production, go for it haha

 

Best of Luck,

Another Enthusiast

[handymanshandle]

13 minutes ago, TriFlix Films said:

Then it sounds like you have your answer... best overall camera and lens by professional reviewers and unanimous vote. If you don't mind the price range the size of a small short film production, go for it haha

 

Best of Luck,

Another Enthusiast

Well I suppose, if I was to do something in early 2017. It's either a school/class trip to France or a $3,200 camera+$900 lens.

Well then. Um... Maybe I'll just do the  a6300 and the zeiss so that I have a decent lens when an a7r of some sort is affordable...

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2016 by wcreek
Fixed broken spoiler.

[Williamchan87]

1 hour ago, wcreek said:

Well the price of the a7r ii kinda makes me unsure of buying that. I mean it's such a good camera but I mean I'm not sure if there's really anything in between it and the a6300.

the A7/A7ii is mostly for video work, the a7r ii is best for photography and the a7s/a7s ii is best for low light work.

I'm really not sure if the a6300 is that happier middle ground. 

 

Actually the A7S series is the video work series, A7 series is standard, and the A7R series is for higher pixel photography.

 

The A6300 is a good camera for both video and photography. since it's APS-C and has a fast auto-focus and a a high FPS, it makes it a perfect camera for sports and wildlife.

 

Sony has always been lacking own company made lenses, but you can always use a metabone adapter to mount canon lenses, or use Zeiss.

 

I personally recommend you just get the A6300 and grab a few lenses, instead of getting a A7R2 unless money is not super big problem

[handymanshandle]

4 minutes ago, Williamchan87 said:

Actually the A7S series is the video work series, A7 series is standard, and the A7R series is for higher pixel photography.

 

The A6300 is a good camera for both video and photography. since it's APS-C and has a fast auto-focus and a a high FPS, it makes it a perfect camera for sports and wildlife.

 

Sony has always been lacking own company made lenses, but you can always use a metabone adapter to mount canon lenses, or use Zeiss.

 

I personally recommend you just get the A6300 and grab a few lenses, instead of getting a A7R2 unless money is not super big problem

While I like the more DSLR look of the A7r ii, I think I'll probably go with the a6300 and maybe the FE 55mm f/1.8 Zeiss but I'm not sure why it performed worse on the a6000 than the a7r to dxomark.

[handymanshandle]

8 minutes ago, Williamchan87 said:

Actually the A7S series is the video work series, A7 series is standard, and the A7R series is for higher pixel photography.

 

The A6300 is a good camera for both video and photography. since it's APS-C and has a fast auto-focus and a a high FPS, it makes it a perfect camera for sports and wildlife.

 

Sony has always been lacking own company made lenses, but you can always use a metabone adapter to mount canon lenses, or use Zeiss.

 

I personally recommend you just get the A6300 and grab a few lenses, instead of getting a A7R2 unless money is not super big problem

How is the A7ii?  I heard it's not very fast at autofocusing but otherwise a decent body? It's marginally more expensive that the a6300... 

[Williamchan87]

4 minutes ago, wcreek said:

While I like the more DSLR look of the A7r ii, I think I'll probably go with the a6300 and maybe the FE 55mm f/1.8 Zeiss but I'm not sure why it performed worse on the a6000 than the a7r to dxomark.

DXOmark isn't always really what to look at since its all lab work, and not actual testing around town etc

[Williamchan87]

5 minutes ago, wcreek said:

How is the A7ii?  I heard it's not very fast at autofocusing but otherwise a decent body? It's marginally more expensive that the a6300... 

Well a7ii is a alright camera, but once you said you want wildlife/sports the A6300 is alot better camera since it has alot faster AF and has a faster FPS, and better+more focus points from what I know, I've never thoroughly tested the A7ii (I'm more familiar with A7R2 and A6300)

[handymanshandle]

10 minutes ago, Williamchan87 said:

Well a7ii is a alright camera, but once you said you want wildlife/sports the A6300 is alot better camera since it has alot faster AF and has a faster FPS, and better+more focus points from what I know, I've never thoroughly tested the A7ii (I'm more familiar with A7R2 and A6300)

Yeah idk. I like the bulkier feel of DSLRs and the A7 series has that. But the closest I can get to that in DSLRs is Nikon but I preferred how Canon felt in the hand... I really need to find a store that carries the 70D/80D, D7100/D7200, a6300, and a7r ii... Though the Sony mirrorlesses almost all of them have weather sealing and Canon nor Nikon always do that.

[Williamchan87]

1 minute ago, wcreek said:

Yeah idk. I like the bulkier feel of DSLRs and the A7 series has that. But the closest I can get to that in DSLRs is Nikon but I preferred how Canon felt in the hand... I really need to find a store that carries the 70D/80D, D7100/D7200, a6300, and a7r ii... Though the Sony mirrorlesses almost all of them have weather sealing and Canon nor Nikon always do that.

I can't really help you on where you can go test them, since I don't know any shops in Minnesota. there area a few Mirrorless cameras with a DSLR feel like Panasonic GH4 and G7, or Samsung NX1 (Samsung made 1 or 2 decent cameras, but no one cared so now they are kind of dead)

[handymanshandle]

5 minutes ago, Williamchan87 said:

I can't really help you on where you can go test them, since I don't know any shops in Minnesota. there area a few Mirrorless cameras with a DSLR feel like Panasonic GH4 and G7, or Samsung NX1 (Samsung made 1 or 2 decent cameras, but no one cared so now they are kind of dead)

No, I have an idea where I can go. I'm not 100% sure they'll have everything on display even if their site said it carries those cameras. I can't remember if the D7100/D7200 or 70D/80D had any kind of weather resistance. 

Eh it's fine. If money wasn't too huge of a problem I'd be all over the a7r2 but at about $4,100 (see this post I made)

 

 

 

1 hour ago, wcreek said:

Well I suppose, if I was to do something in early 2017. It's either a school/class trip to France or a $3,200 camera+$900 lens.

Well then. Um... Maybe I'll just do the  a6300 and the zeiss so that I have a decent lens when an a7r of some sort is affordable...

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

[ShadowCaptain]

The A6300 (in my opinon and many others) is arguably the best APSC camera on the market and definately the best value overall camera

The video is GORGEOUS, ok it overheats a bit in long 4k videos but its fine in 1080p and if you only shoot short clips and rest between

its photos are fantastic and it has really great low light, amazing tracking and fast AF etc too and the E mount lenses are way cheaper and you can just fit FE lenses ready for a body upgrade or get FE glass and keep the A6300 as a spare body

 

Like for the money, spec for spec, quality for quality, its probably the best value camera per dollar (the A6000 is also great value, since it has dropped in price)

[TriFlix Films]

8 hours ago, wcreek said:

Well I suppose, if I was to do something in early 2017. It's either a school/class trip to France or a $3,200 camera+$900 lens.

Well then. Um... Maybe I'll just do the  a6300 and the zeiss so that I have a decent lens when an a7r of some sort is affordable...

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

I am heading to Paris in less than 2 weeks from now for 5 days... My NX500 and accessories will be arriving today. (My step dad's buisness trip and he was allowed to bring family). Again I do video and the NX500 offers the "best bang for the buck" if you dont mind a dead system. I picked it up for $437 on Amazon as an "Very Good" condition Warehouse deal. Came with a kit lens and all that Jazz.