a6300 or a6400?

nighttrain

TalkEmount Regular
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
50
I've been shooting with the a6000 for a few years and I'm pretty happy with the camera's performance. But I'd like quicker and more accurate auto-focus and better color accuracy. Currently, I have the Sigma 19/2.8 and 30/2.8 lenses, Sony 50/1.8, and two Sony zooms I seldom use (16-50, 55-210). I shoot at night a lot and in nature frequently. Moisture and dust protection would be a plus. I've seen the a6300 body used for about $650. The a6400 seems like a better choice but I'm not finding used bodies and new it's out of my budget. So I was wondering what people who have shot with both cameras would recommend? Thanks!
 

Richard Crowe

TalkEmount Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2018
Messages
428
The A6400 is a very new camera and it is unlikely that a used copy would be available. OTOH, if a used copy was available, it might have a flaw that made it unacceptable to its previous owner.
I think that the A6400 is far advanced over the A6300. If it is out of your budget range, perhaps you could sell the two Sony zooms which you state that you seldom use and add the proceeds from the sales to your budget for the A6400.
 

JonathanF2

TalkEmount All-Pro
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
1,060
Location
Los Angeles, USA
Someone was complaining on FM that the A6400 wasn't any better for focus accuracy than his previous A6xxx bodies vs his A7III and A9. Sony was hyping it up the AF to be similar. AF is faster, but continuous burst were yielding many slight OOF shots.

Unless you need to selfie screen, I'd save cash and get an A6300.
 

nighttrain

TalkEmount Regular
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
50
Thanks, Jonathan and Richard. If picture quality and focus accuracy are very close, then the 6300 seems like the way to go. I've gotten some nice shots in daylight with the 55-210, and I don't have anything else in that range, so it's worth keeping for now. But I wouldn't miss the 16-50.
 

bdbits

TalkEmount Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 10, 2015
Messages
2,029
Real Name
Bob
This thread? It's official, the a6400 in driving me insane.

Well his complaints have some caveats. In some cases he was using adapted glass and/or TCs, and he says himself when using native glass without TCs it was better for him. Toward the end he says he found he had some custom settings on the (adapted) lens itself that may be contributing, and was behind on firmware. He has updated/reset but not reported back yet whether that resolved it. Some thought his camera settings should be somewhat changed to get a better keeper rate. Others said they were not experiencing his AF issues on a variety of subjects like jets, birds, bees, and other things.

It's not an A9 or even an A7iii for AF, but it is also a fraction of the price and has other benefits. Not saying Sony hyped it or not, but I would not be quite so dismissive.
 

JonathanF2

TalkEmount All-Pro
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
1,060
Location
Los Angeles, USA
Thanks, Jonathan and Richard. If picture quality and focus accuracy are very close, then the 6300 seems like the way to go. I've gotten some nice shots in daylight with the 55-210, and I don't have anything else in that range, so it's worth keeping for now. But I wouldn't miss the 16-50.
Personally I like the A6300. As long as you don't 4k video (due to overheating), it's a good camera. I didn't like the A6500 because it drained batteries way too fast with the IBIS.

This thread? It's official, the a6400 in driving me insane.

Well his complaints have some caveats. In some cases he was using adapted glass and/or TCs, and he says himself when using native glass without TCs it was better for him. Toward the end he says he found he had some custom settings on the (adapted) lens itself that may be contributing, and was behind on firmware. He has updated/reset but not reported back yet whether that resolved it. Some thought his camera settings should be somewhat changed to get a better keeper rate. Others said they were not experiencing his AF issues on a variety of subjects like jets, birds, bees, and other things.

It's not an A9 or even an A7iii for AF, but it is also a fraction of the price and has other benefits. Not saying Sony hyped it or not, but I would not be quite so dismissive.
Yes that thread. Saying that, unless OP needs to the speed, I think he'll be fine with the A6300 at discount.
 

WNG

TalkEmount Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Messages
4,000
Location
Arrid Zone-A, USA
Real Name
Will
I would still choose the a6400 over the a6300. Why? Because the OP desires improved AF performance AND better color accuracy. The AF improvements are documented and reviewed. a6400 receives the updated color science used in the A7 3rd gen bodies. (If you edit RAWs, the color science is less of an issue.)
Image quality should be the same between the older a6300 and a6400 since the same sensor is shared, but the a6400 has a faster, less power hungry processor. The 4K video overheating is resolved if that matters, plus there is no 30 min record limit.
It comes with the built-in intervalometer, but loses the 'apps' of the previous generation a6xxx. The lowered power consumption also means a battery will last a little bit longer.

Bear in mind, the Sigma f/2.8 Art primes were 1st generation for the NEX line, and their phase detect AF is limited and doesn't take advantage of the full spread, only the center area. And unless it's verified that they utilize all the phase-detect points available on the a6300 or a6400, you will still be limited to the same AF performance of only having the center area PDAF.
 
Last edited:

Richard Crowe

TalkEmount Veteran
Joined
Sep 14, 2018
Messages
428
The A6400 auto focus is very competent. However, IMO, to achieve the best results I recommend two things:

1. Use native Sony glass if at all possible. In my experience, the native Sony glass provides generally better auto focus than adapted glass or even some of my Sigma e-mount lenses. Point in case: the Sigma 19mm f/2.8 DN is not quite as proficient in AF as is the 20mm f/2.8 Native Sony lens.
The Sigma is fast in S-AF mode but somewhat more sluggish in C-AF because the PDAF squares only work at the very center in Wide, Zone or Expand Flexible Spot mode. In any of the other modes and anywhere else across the frame, the lens relies on contrast detection autofocus.
IMO - forget about using adapted lenses if you want the absolute optimum auto focus. I have used various Canon and a few Sigma lenses on my A6500 with Metabones IV and Sigma MC-11 adapters and the results have been disappointing. This is especially true when I tried to use my Canon 70-200mm f/4L IS and Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 lenses with the above two adapters. This might be user error but, I don't think so.
On the other hand, I have achieved adequate (but not great) results using both those lenses on my A6400 with the Viltrox EF-Eii Focal Reducer. It seems to even work well with the Canon Image Stabilization - evidenced with a sharp hand-held shot at 300mm using 1/40 second. I have not tried the A6400 + Viltrox with fast moving subjects...
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

There is a slight vignetting in the corners when shooting with this combination (see above image) but, I usually can work around that!

2. I would recommend that the user keep the firmware for camera, adapter, and lens updated. This is very important since some of the firmware updates are aimed at auto focus.

3. I would also highly recommend that the user become familiar with all the autofocus parameters of the cameras/lenses being used. The AF in all the A6xxx cameras is very capable but, along those lines it is quite complex...

4. I shoot with both an A6500 and he A6400 and there are factors which I like best about each camera. I am leaning towards liking the A6400 a bit better than the A6500 (especially the continuous Eye-AF of the A6400 and I am looking forward to the Animal Eye-AF which will be upcoming soon) but, I will continue to shoot with both cameras because they complement each other.

However, the A6300 is a very capable camera which will provide excellent imagery and very good video. Used copies have sold (not listed as - but, sold for) between five and six hundred dollars recently on eBay:
Sony A6300 body | eBay
That is three to four hundred dollars less than a new A6400 which is a considerable savings...

However if buying either camera new, B&H has a new A6300 for $748 and a new A6400 for $898. Sony A6300 | B&H Photo Video
In this case, choosing the A6400 would be a no brainer...

This seems to be a fairly down-to-earth comparison between the A6300 and A6400:
 
Last edited:

nighttrain

TalkEmount Regular
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
50
Thanks, everybody, for the additional info and links. I may just wait another few months to see if the 6400 starts showing up used. It does seem odd that there are no firmware updates for the Sigma 2.8 lenses. Especially because they're still available new, haven't been discontinued.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
TalkEmount is a fan site and not associated with Sony Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2011-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom