Dear Sony, why is it so difficult for you to get the flip-out screen right? It's as though you're trying to do absolutely everything you can with your screen except give us what we've been asking for. How many times do we have to ask you Sony? Almost everyone asked for the flip-out touch screen, instead, you gave us a completely useless flip-up screen.
Apparently, the Sony a6400 is a camera designed predominantly for YouTubers and vloggers. Clearly, Sony hasn't thought this one through or they think that vloggers don't need microphones. Just so that it's extremely clear, flip-up screens suck. I mean how are you supposed to use the flip-up screen when you have something like a shotgun mic connected to the hot shoe? This is why Canon is number one, they just get the basics right. Most people who vlog with their cameras tend to use a microphone because almost all cameras are terrible for recording audio. The dumbest thing about this is that Sony also markets their shotgun mic with the a6400. Seriously, you can't make this stuff up.
I can already imagine what Sony's excuse is going to be. More than likely they're going to say something like, "Well, we saw how people were attaching monitors to their hot shoe and thought oh, that's what people want".
Sony, please, enough with the excuses and feigning ignorance. You know what customers have been requesting for what seems like an eternity. Please, for the love of God, give us a flip out screen. Not a tilt screen. or a weird vertical screen and definitely not a flip-up screen. An actual proper flip out touch screen. Just in case there's any confusion, take look at the image below of a camera from a company that gets it right.
No matter what Canon get's wrong they always seem to get the very basics right. This is one of the reasons why Canon continues to dominate the industry. Recent data suggest that Canon is now the number one manufacturer for both DSLR cameras and mirrorless in Japan; that didn't take long did it?
What annoys me the most about the choices Sony makes for their screens is the fact that they're the one company that shouldn't be getting this wrong. I mean, It's Sony, you know, the company that makes stuff with high-quality screens like TVs and smartphones. Even without considering the flip-out issue, the screens they have in their cameras are terrible. How is Sony the company to not get this right?
My guess is that Sony will probably disappoint with their potentially upcoming cameras like the a7S III and the a7000. These cameras are not going to have flip-out touch screens, because Sony just wants to be awkward.
Ok, I'm done with my little rant now; what are your thoughts on Sony and why do you think they refuse to offer a proper flip-out touch screen in their cameras?
It's not just Sony...
I’m assuming it’s a mix of a patent issue and they might be developing a mark 4 body that incorporates one.
Patents could definitely be holding them back. Also wondering if Sony et al patenting the 'easy' IP caused Canon some grief wrt designing sensors.
Camcorders had flippy screens in the 1980s. Any patents on the basic technology expired long ago.
My thoughts? Most people don't care. Even people claiming to be vloggers. No, seriously. Think about it NOT in terms of the most popular YouTubers, think about it in terms of each individual user. Weight whoever the most popular YouTuber is equally to that annoying kid Brian who lives down the street who wants to buy a camera because his phone isn't cutting it for his videos that get 17 views a month. To Sony, those two people are equal. There are exponentially more "Brian's" out there than top YouTubers (or Usman's) when you think about sales and Brian's don't have the money for an external mic when they're dropping $900 on a camera but more importantly, they don't care because the on-camera audio is easy and easy is what they want.
Additionally, for those who might want to use a mic, there's a good chance that A) they're happy using a clip on mic and/or B) they'll have someone holding the camera.
Finally, the total package is smaller when using a tilting screen than a flip out screen. Personally, I'll never buy another camera with an articulating screen. It's a deal-breaker for me. Tilting screens only, for me.
In summary, the crowd who wants to record themselves and use a hotshoe-mounted mic is much smaller (exponentially) than the crowd who doesn't and Sony is looking to entice more people, not fewer.
Couldn't agree more. A lot of articles like this just go in with the assumption that a flip out screen is unilaterally superior to a tilting screen. But for shooting stills from high or low vantage points a tilting screen is way better. Faster to actuate, doesn't block the left hand grip, and keeps the body much smaller. For a flip screen you need the width of the hinge to the left of the screen and I'm glad to not have an extra 10mm on that side of my Sony.
Everything about the rest of the A6xxx line is making the camera as compact as possible. Range finder style, small grip, and smaller battery all keep it tiny. Their mount being ~5mm smaller than the competition helps as well. So I'm not surprised they didn't go flip out for the A6400, giving up one of the advantages of the body.
"assumption that a flip out screen is unilaterally superior to a tilting screen."
but it is...
Reasons a tilt screen is better: "Faster to actuate, doesn't block the left hand grip, and keeps the body much smaller."
Those are minor detractions when you consider the overall benefits. Tilt screens can only tilt, hence the name. A fully articulating screens offer far more movements and also the ability to put the screen away offering some extra degree of protection.
A fully articulating screen is obviously better than a screen that only tilts.
"Obviously better" is subjective based on preferences you have. It's subjectively "obviously inferior" based on preferences I have.
Honestly, I'd prefer a screen which tilts up and down for portrait orientation as well. But as I mentioned elsewhere, articulating screens are a deal breaker for me. I simply won't buy another camera with one.
I used both tilt and flip, and for every day photography use I really don't want to go back to the flip screen. It's just slower and has no benefits. But there's also the entry level Fuji X-T100 which gives you the best of both worlds. Let's hope we see this design in future high end cameras.
"A fully articulating screen is obviously better than a screen that only tilts."
How many people have chimed into the comments disagreeing with this? I see that you have a YouTube channel so I can definitely see how much more useful you would find a flip screen. Totally feel that, they make a lot of sense for that use case. But I think it's pretty clear from these comments that it's more debatable than you're making it sound.
I'm not trying to change your mind but at this point you have to admit that there's another side of this debate.
I don't see anything bad in someone trying to change someone's mind. If you have a valid point I'm always interested. I just think to say that a tilt screen is better because of a very minor speed improvement is short-sighted. Also, there is no left side grip, people generally hold the cameras from the bottom of the lens and the actual grip. Cameras like the 80D, for example, do it really well with all of the ports on the left side still being fully accessible. The GH5 is another example.
I will clarify something though, I don't think all of Sony's cameras need a fully articulating screen just the ones they aim more towards video. The a6400 is one of those cameras and so is the potentially upcoming a7s III. For photogrpahy it may not be the perfect option but that's not what I discussed, I discussed more about video although I do see benfits for photography too.
If you don't shoot video and these cameras are aimed more towards video then doesn't that make your points moot?
I just spent the morning shooting with my A7iii with the battery grip and the 24-105mm, a reasonably sized lens. A big enough setup that I'm definitely supporting it from both sides. I usually place my palm on the left side of the body and my fingers wrap around the lens. A flip-out screen would block that and when I'm framing high or low I want the best grip on the camera for stability. I can tilt the screen with my thumb while hardly shifting my grip on the camera as I go low or high, snap the shot, and be back to shooting without missing a beat. It's fast, steady, convenient, and doesn't need fixing.
I think you're hearing a lot of pushback in the comments because despite the very small number of photographers who are in the niche of vlogging but without an external monitor they've become loud voices on YouTube decrying a lack of these very specific features. Vloggers make unilateral claims about how a camera is terrible because it lacks this specific feature or a plea to a manufacturer to add it. So all the photographers who never turn the camera on themselves feel like if we don't speak up the camera manufacturers will only hear this vocal minority. That's not your fault, it's not you or your article, it's just a very common sentiment. I think you just triggered a bit of defensiveness.
Last two paragraphs of my previous comment.
Ha! You're funny, Kyle!
It is not and I don't wan't it on my camera
He's right. It is. The flip out screen is far superior. I have a 60D with that awesome flip out screen and an XT1 with a tilt screen. I 100% prefer the flip out screen. It does everything you need it to. On the XT1 I can't tilt it up in portrait orientation to get a low to the ground shot. I also can't flip it out in any way to do a self portrait. It's only Up or down in landscape and that's it. granted it' still way more flexible than a standard non flip or tilt screen.
And I'm the outlier who doesn't want either. I look at it as one more part that can break. It's a weak point on a camera with those articulating joints. I don't have an issue crawling on the ground to get a different vantage point. I'd rather have a sturdy and durable camera.
I actually broke the top lcd dropping my 60D and the swivel was perfectly fine.
Exactly! There's more to life than YouTube. If you're a professional, get an external monitor.
On the flip side of this argument (pun intended), I'm tired of paying for video features that I'll never use. It's like buying a minivan when I just need a sedan.
If you don’t like paying for video features you never use maybe Leica is the option for you :-p.
No, i don't like paying for over-hyped and insanely priced mediocrity either.
That’s the only option I can think of that’s available with no video features. Point I’m making is that statement you made about not paying for video features is in all practicalities a little dumb because only Leica offers what you’re asking for.
Another reason is that most of not all other camera manufacturers wouldn’t want to make their cameras less compelling by removing video features.
For better or worse video features will remain in cameras and will receive further developments.
Yeah, despite being dumb, i get it.
Let’s be very clear here I didn’t and wouldn’t call you dumb I don’t even believe that to be true. I called the point you made dumb which is extremely different.
Making a dumb point doesn’t make the person dumb. We all do it.
Maybe a stupid question..... but when you want to vlog or whatever why don't you buy a videocam? I'm a photographer and i hope canon brings up a follower for the mkiv without video features and 1000 dollar cheaper.
I can't imagine it would be $1000 cheaper. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Video cameras tend to be big, heavy, and expensive if you want one that allows you to attach a lens comparable to a stills camera lens on it. Stills cameras are essentially the "budget cameras" of the video world.
Video in still cameras is kind of a freebie. When you build a sensor chip that can handle 20-50 megapixels at 10-25+fps, you can probably also handle 2 or 8 megapixel images at 24, 30, or 60fps. Video is a check-mark these days on every camera, but a few companies like Fujfilm and Olympus still make cameras primarily made for stills.
They insist on reusing the same body design that we've complained about for years. They do listen about other aspects. Clearly the marketing department decided there was demand for a vlogging camera, but didn't tell the engineering department.
The only way to effectively vlog with this is to use an external recorder and sync in post. If you're only going to record yourself, an inexpensive lavaliere plugged into your cellphone is the cheapest route. It's also the simplest.
How about using a cheap bracket to offset an external mic to either side of the camera?
That starts adding bulk and weight to the camera, although that may not be an issue with some folks. Using a lavaliere into a cellphone is still simpler and neater, and will also give you better audio.
Some may prefer the extra bulk over additional steps in post-production, but we can agree on more than one solutions for vloggers. Lavalieres are better in many situations though.
Well, it's only ONE additional step LOL! I suppose some people are lazy tho. Recording from a lav to a cellphone is "cheap and cheerful", as the Brits say, and does offer better audio quality.
Additionally, if it's within a vloggers budget (and frankly, it is) Tascam also makes a tiny XLR mount recorder you stick on the bottom of any XLR mic so you can do interviews with a handheld mic, handy if you're doing run-n-gun interviweing with one or more people.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1086779-REG/tascam_dr_10x_dr_10cx...
Heh sure.
Fancy recorder indeed (you made me go all British).
The onboard mic isn't all that bad either. Fairly clear vocals, but they do pick up ambient noises.
(ref. tiny review video from iJustine)
Well, you'll need the camera's onboard audio to sync up with, so the better the onboard mics work, the easier time it'll be for the software to sync.
Why do you have to use an external recorder and syncing in post when using an external microphone? Can't you plug it directly into the camera?
Maybe instead Sony should offer a wireless solution, maybe a builtin bluetooth audio recorder.
...and where would you mount the radio, on the hot shoe? ;-)
You could plug directly into the camera, but that has it's own set of potential complications, although it is a doable option.
Better audio quality would be one reason to use an external recorder. Bluetooth audio would also be too unreliable for any serious video work.
It’s easier to just whine about it than implement one of many easy solutions. Fact is these kind of people will never be satisfied.
Don't hold your breath. This is the company that has turned a deaf ear to the overwhelming complaints about it's UI, probably the worst in the business, and the lack of lossless compressed RAW. (I could be wrong, but I believe Sony is the only "camera" company that doesn't have that option). These changes, at the top of most reviewers' Cons list, would not cost them a dime to implement and yet they refuse to do so.
Software development is free? Ohhhhh, those poor, misinformed software developers are in for a rude awakening when they go back to work on Monday!
Also, My Menu, Fn menu, and custom buttons makes menu diving practically obsolete.
Most reviewers are YouTubers and Vlogers and I think they overestimate how many people really need one.
Little brats still not happy with Sony flipscreen because it blocks the mic.
I would like to sign this petition or whatever. FFS Sony, that tilt shit isn't cutting it, just flip that little bastard out. PLS
I own two A6000's, one Rx100III and one A7R3. None have a portrait orientation flip screen. I can live with that but I don't want to anymore. I was ready to update one of my 6000 for the 6500 but no portrait position again. The 6400... no portrait position again!. I waited for the A7R3 to have one but no. The A9? No! In the end I bought one because I needed a FF new tech body. I usually encounter situations when i need a flip screen in portrait orientation. I decided to hold updating any of my Sonys till I got one with portrait orientation-too flip screen. As a matter of fact now that Canon is in the ML camera race, I am ready to move back to Canon once they release a truly high pixel body. I am ready to sacrifice (perhaps) one or one and half step of DR for the everyday convenience of the said all orientation flip screen. I am 66 years old and bending and kneeling are not fun anymore. And not elegant in front of sitters and public. I truly miss the elegance of my 500CM for these kind of tasks. I still have 4 very sharp Canon keeper lenses. Have a happy moon eclipse shooting!
This all seems pretty obvious to me if you look at what Sony has been doing since the A9. The a6400 is the replacement for the a6300 and they didn’t want a new body design but wanted to add one thing from the RX line that could easily help potential loggers but still offer a killer camera for under 1,000 which it is. People love the a6300 and this camera is better. That processor solves the heat and gives it better battery life. It’s now what everyone wanted the a6300 to be. Granted Sony should have done this sooner but ok.
Next they will release the a7000 or mini a9 to compete with D500 level cameras and it will be sub 2000. Then they will release the a7siii for sub 4000 offering all the amazing video features. And both of these probably won’t have flip out screens. And honestly that is fine. They will have the z battery and all the amazing things previous sonys have.
Plenty of the most amazing YouTubers use cameras without them and those cameras are designed for a larger set of people. Mainly sports photographers or landscape and Wildlife that don’t use a flip out screen. Even wedding video shooters wouldn’t use it much and I’m sure that group is waaay larger and more lucrative then youtubers.
And further let’s stop with but I mount the mic in the hot shor now it blocks the screen. There are like 100 work arounds for this issue the easiest being a five dollar long plate to put the button if the camera. Five dollars! It’s not like some of the things people had to deal with on the a6300 and again people STILL love that camera! Rightfully so it’s a little beast.
Because it is not a deal breaker, most people don't care. If you are a casual vloger you usually don't need high end equipment, if you are pro, you either have another cameraman shooting you or you use external monitors.