Sony Announces A6300 and 3 New 'G Master' Lenses

http://www.dpreview.co​m …p-a6300-mirrorless-camera

http://www.dpreview.co​m …aster-lenses-for-fe-mount

-------

My opinion? The a6300 looks nice but it is quite expensive, $1000? Really? For a system which hasnt seen a new lens in quite a while? For a system that STILL lacks any proper wildlife or big lenses? Whats the point of the 499-point AF without a 300+ lens to go with it..

The new lenses? Sure, they're needed, but the 24-70 weighs MORE than Canon's, the 70-200 weighs as much, and the 85mm f/1.4 weighs more than a Nikon 85mm f/1.4

I also predict that 70-200 is gonna be $3200, albeit the price isnt up yet.. the 24-70 is $2200 and the 85 is $1800

Sony, We're still stuck at 200mm unless you want to convert a lens. Also we keep making the same bloody focal lengths.

But more positive things, the lenses will probubly be very nice, and the 70-200 has a 1:4 repro ratio which does make me interested for things like larger flower specimens and such, Nikon's f/4G is the only other 70-200 offering that. The 85mm looks to have good bokeh, The issue is less in "Are these good for people already into Sony" its more "Will they convince others to switch" and I just do not know about that.. Still feels theres a big gap in their coverage.

I got to try an a6000 this week and I have to say that it is a very nice piece of kit. It really is the ultimate auto mode camera.

FWIW I think its a nice camera, Sony's problem is most of their affordable lenses are not cheap and cheerful like a Nifty Fifty or Nikon's 50mm f/1.8G, and they lack futureproofing in the sense that if you buy an A7 basically you're starting over (the cheap 50mm f/1.8 OSS is APS-C only for example) and Sony's commitment to APS-C lens development has been questioned...

Pretty much all the Sony APS-C lenses are garbage except the 16-70mm f/4, 35mm f/1.8, 50mm f/1.8 and the 24mm f/1.8. Heck the 30mm f/3.5 Macro is a piece of garbage, how you screw up a macro i do not know...Plus you're limited to a whopping 200mm focal length pretty much.. Forget wildlife or even sports

I dont hate Sony, nor am I saying you cant produce good images with the Sony, however their entire lineup is priced very premium... Is some of it worth it? Of course. But most of their less expensive stuff just isnt

The great thing about these Sony cameras is that they work well with so many different companies lenses, the AF improvements over the a6000 should help with AF adapters and you get 4K video.