قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Technology / Sony a6400 review: a good camera held back by an aging design

Sony a6400 review: a good camera held back by an aging design



If you had to solve a CAPTCHA challenge every time you opened an app on your phone, would you still use that app? That's how I tried using the new Sony a6400, where leafing through settings and submenus to change vital settings makes using an otherwise solid mirrorless camera unreasonably frustrating.

Sony a6400 is a follow-up to the three-year a6300 and shares some features with the more expensive a6500. It has a lot of things to do for this – like a reliable image quality and a fast hybrid AF system – but these positive traits are buried by a twisted menu base and uncomfortable ergonomics. Everything exceptional about this camera is hidden under a menu, obscured by warnings or not present at all.

The main highlights are the real-time AF autofocus and tracking features, an updated image processor and a 1

80-degree launch. touch screen. At $ 899 for the body alone, $ 999 for the 16-50mm lens, or $ 1299 with an 18-135mm zoom, the 6400 has the parts to be the ideal compact powerhouse for any fan of photography or vlogger, but is missing at execution.

Using the 6400 in the last few weeks, I discovered that it was not exactly the compact mirrorless camera that I was hoping to change, but rather a harmless camera with some good qualities.

7

Score of verge [19659007] http://www.theverge.com/ "/>
    
  

Good Stuff

  • Intelligent and versatile autofocus system
  • The quality of the image is exceptional
  • Compact body

Bad Stuff

  • No IBIS
  • The system of Sony menu is still a casino
  • The tilting display does not articulate and is not functional in the menus
  • Short battery life

Most improvements to the 6400 wheel around its updated hybrid autofocus system with more points of focus; a total of 425 contrast points and 425 phase detection, which achieved the maximum of 169 contrast points AF a6300 and a6500. It can even stand comparison with the best full-frame cameras from Sony, covering 84% of the image area compared to 93% of Alpha A9.

Sony supports a 0.02 second focus acquisition and I can confirm that the a6400's autofocus is really fast, reacting immediately to a half-press of the shutter button and correctly identifying its targets most of the time.

Number of points of focus apart, the real meat of the new AF system of a6400 are the new features of real-time AF and Eye Tracking AF by Sony. Real-time monitoring on a6400 uses Sony's algorithms and artificial intelligence to recognize subjects and follow them.

Similarly, "Real-time Eye AF" tracks the subject's eyes and body using artificial intelligence, and will be updated to support animals by the end of the year. Both features are useful in portrait photography, where a model could move gradually or entirely to a different area of ​​the frame.

Having real-time Eye AF activated meant I simply had to follow my subject with the camera, making sure the photo was framed at my leisure, rather than having to refocus each time and adjust the settings if the subject has ever moved from the position.

But before I can do this, I need to actually turn on the features and they are not enabled by default. It shouldn't be that hard, right? After going through fourteen pages of still images (don't worry, there are another 14 pages for video only ) using only the navigation buttons, I was able to activate continuous autofocus, I & # 39 ; eye and subject tracking throughout the frame. It's March of 2019 and Sony still refuses to allow their Alpha touchscreens to be compatible with system menus, for reasons unknown and that I can't understand.


  http://www.theverge.com/

If you are asking for the quality of the image: it is solid. Not much has changed in Sony's Alpha cameras in recent times; the a6400 is no exception and largely uses the same image sensor as a6500. Pop colors, objects and subjects appear sharp, ISO can be set from 100-32.000 in native mode, with an ISO expanded up to 102.400 for dimmer scenarios. Most of the shots look good in my test scenes, but the quality drops noticeably around ISO 12,800, where the details appear stained. The effect is reduced with RAW images compared to JPEG files (RAWs are always better for editing), although this is predictable due to the additional data available in the file.