Does Sony A6300 Have Image Stabilization

by -73 views

Image Stabilization between the a6300 & a6500

Baurox •

New Member

• Posts: 19

Image Stabilization between the a6300 & a6500

I’thou because either buying the a6300 or a6500 but having difficulties about justifying paying a expert more chunk of change solely for the epitome stabilization.

Hither is a perfect example of what I’m trying to attain filming wise and giving y’all a better idea of what exact I’m trying to practice;

Any advice helps, looking to do a lot of cinematic work on the mountain. Thanks!

I’g pretty adept at post-production image stabilization but withal could use a helper here an there if the 6500 is still a practiced option that helps.

I’m looking for a HUGE difference, something like 30-40% increment noticeable look, non just little tid $.25 here an at that place.

I know this topic has been covered earlier, merely I institute this video and find it incredibly powerful in my decision TOWARDS a 6500;

https://www.youtube.com/sentry?v=Q5mgiiJag_w

BUT….is that much of a divergence noticeable on a snowboarding (moving camera) video ?

So that’south more of my dilemma when it comes to the microscopic level, haha.

ANSWER:

This question has not been answered still.

Euell •

Veteran Member

• Posts: v,256

Re: Image Stabilization between the a6300 & a6500

Baurox wrote:

I’one thousand considering either buying the a6300 or a6500 but having difficulties about justifying paying a good more clamper of change solely for the image stabilization.

Here is a perfect example of what I’m trying to accomplish filming wise and giving yous a better thought of what exact I’g trying to practice;

Any advice helps, looking to practice a lot of cinematic work on the mountain. Thanks!

I’1000 pretty proficient at mail service-production image stabilization merely all the same could utilise a helper here an there if the 6500 is still a practiced option that helps.

I’m looking for a HUGE difference, something like 30-forty% increase noticeable wait, not merely little tid bits hither an in that location.

I know this topic has been covered before, only I found this video and find it incredibly powerful in my decision TOWARDS a 6500;

BUT….is that much of a difference noticeable on a snowboarding (moving camera) video ?

Then that’southward more of my dilemma when it comes to the microscopic level, haha.

What unstabilized lens or lenses are you proposing to use?



Sony RX100



Canon EOS 7D



Sony a6500



Sony a7R Three



Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

+16 more

Re: Image Stabilization between the a6300 & a6500


2

Baurox wrote:

I’yard considering either buying the a6300 or a6500 just having difficulties about justifying paying a skilful more than chunk of change solely for the image stabilization.

Here is a perfect instance of what I’g trying to achieve filming wise and giving you a improve idea of what verbal I’m trying to practise;

Any advice helps, looking to do a lot of cinematic piece of work on the mountain. Thanks!

I’grand pretty good at post-production image stabilization but still could utilise a helper hither an at that place if the 6500 is still a practiced choice that helps.

I’m looking for a HUGE departure, something like 30-40% increase noticeable look, not just little tid $.25 here an there.

I know this topic has been covered earlier, but I institute this video and find information technology incredibly powerful in my decision TOWARDS a 6500;

BUT….is that much of a difference noticeable on a snowboarding (moving camera) video ?

Then that’s more of my dilemma when it comes to the microscopic level, haha.

A6300 with the money saved for a gimbal will be better than simply the a6500 solitary.

— hide signature —

Some Sony stuff

OP
Baurox •

New Member

• Posts: 19

Re: Prototype Stabilization between the a6300 & a6500

Euell wrote:

What unstabilized lens or lenses are you proposing to use?

Don’t know just nevertheless, but I read somewhere that the 6500 makes all lenses use stabilization either style when fastened?

But I feel it will be either a unproblematic 16mm, no zoom when I’m riding / following the rider.

I’m more looking for a reason to save $300-500 and use that extra $$ towards more gear vs the 6500 and really simply seeing a slight improvment that either;

A: shows a significant difference

b: Doesn’t show a meaning difference that isn’t noticeable to 90% of the viewers

Welcome to my brain, lol.

CE3 •

Contributing Member

• Posts: 706

Re: Image Stabilization betwixt the a6300 & a6500

Baurox wrote:

I know this topic has been covered earlier, but I found this video and find it incredibly powerful in my decision TOWARDS a 6500;

Merely….is that much of a deviation noticeable on a snowboarding (moving photographic camera) video ?

So that’s more of my dilemma when it comes to the microscopic level, haha.

Interesting. I really found I preferred the A6300 footage in that video most of the time. The OSS in the 18-105 is very well optimized, though.

The 18-105 is an fantabulous lens option to consider for video. The zooming mechanism of the eighteen-105 is all internal (no extending), so you won’t observe a better zoom to pair with a gimbal.

For the kind of footage you programme to shoot, you’re going to need some kind external stabilization (gimbal / steadicam) setup regardless. You might too desire to invest in an extended ADH warranty, or wait into more than rugged camera bodies for snowboarding like the Olympus E-M1 Mark II and the Panasonic GH5.



Sony a6400



Sony a7R IV



Sony 85mm F1.iv ZA Carl Zeiss Planar T*



Sony 135mm F1.viii ZA Carl Zeiss Sonnar T*



Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 Nokton

+half dozen more

PRS CU24 •

Forum Member

• Posts: 93

Re: Prototype Stabilization between the a6300 & a6500


1

I’ve read many reviews on the a6500 IBIS and I think the consensus is that it’south valuable if y’all’re shooting stills or shooting video standing still, but information technology will still be pretty jumpy if you’re walking and won’t be helpful at all if you’re running

I’d also recollect getting the a6300+gimbal would be your all-time bet

Re: Paradigm Stabilization between the a6300 & a6500

PRS CU24 wrote:

I’ve read many reviews on the a6500 IBIS and I think the consensus is that it’s valuable if yous’re shooting stills or shooting video standing notwithstanding, simply information technology volition still be pretty jumpy if you’re walking and won’t exist helpful at all if you’re running

I’d too call back getting the a6300+gimbal would be your best bet

I agree with the to a higher place.

I have both and love/need the stabilization for shooting photos. Yet, even though I don’t do much video, whenever y’all’re walking or running with a tele lens, you’ll even so observe the jerkiness.

I would start look at what lenses you’re thinking of buying – that might exist the simplest approach to solving your problem. In my stance, if you lot’re considering the 18-105, save the coin because the lens is superbly stabilized. Similarly, many of Sony’s lenses are neat for video and as well stabilized.



Sony a6300



Sony a6500



Carl Zeiss Touit i.8/32



Carl Zeiss Touit 2.8/12



Zeiss Touit 50mm F2.eight

camcom12 •

Junior Member

• Posts: 47

Re: Image Stabilization between the a6300 & a6500

Sorry to change gears hither but a friend who owns top notch DLSRs uses a Sony AX-series Handycam for most of his 4K video. He tin virtually “run” with it handheld and get pretty decent & steady video out of information technology. Unless you need depth-of-field control, very low-lite, or superwide/supertelephoto focal lengths, the camcorder option may work best and save $.