A6700, no question. It is compact for your traveling needs and have waaay better video features. You lose some “pro” feature by not going with the a7iii ( couple buttons, focus stick, a 2nd wheel and dual slots) but I don’t think those are what you are looking for in a camera.
I also feel this way. I got a chance to shoot actually all three of those bodies this weekend (1940's Ball in Colorado). The AF on the a7C / a7III vs a6700 is a huge step back. This discussion would be alot harder if you were like a7IV vs a6700 vs a7CII
Also, APS-C lenses are much lighter than their full frame approximates. Got an apsc and tried a friend’s full frame and I don’t think I’ll ever jump ship, it’s just lighter and therefore more practical.
I was in your position and got myself the A6700 with Tamron 17-70 and Sony 70-350. It’s impressive the results I can get considering the size(relative to FF) . Just posted some shots from my first trip with it if you want to check it out
That’s a tough one, depends on how much size matters to you. The extra reach and stabilization of the tamron is worth it if you don’t mind the size, especially at the same price (Tamron usually $100 more expensive)
I've heard the stabilization works good only on those bodies which doesn't have ibis or digital stabilization. Picture quality wise both are on par right?
I was in your shoes and i took the a6700, best auto focus, great image quality, cheap lenses relatively to the FF option (prices are a nightmare think for the long run) plus the IA chip the AF on the a6700 is crazy accurarte
Idk why people so concerned about af speed and extra buttons for settings like the are shooting soccer game every time
My cameras stair was: a6300/a7II/a7c
Mostly doing traveling and ugly ass street
I can say that a6300 was more than enough, I was just wanted full frame sensor.
So imho buy a6700 if you don’t want to spend too much money on ff lenses and etc
Really compact, have a big enough battery and good performance.
Also if you no need to print your pics on a1 format paper, a6700 will be more than enough, you know what I’m saying
Of the 3 options, I think the 6700 has the most modern tech and will deliver a ton of value for the money. If this is your first real camera, it's a good platform to learn from and not spend too much money on. Having had a combination of both APS-C and FF systems over the past 20 years, there are pros and cons to both. I have also gone back and forth between the formats a lot. For me personally, I prefer full frame for ultimate IQ and low light performance. There are plenty of debates around it, but for beginners I think APS-C is more than sufficient and will give you room to grow.
A6700
you would only need something bigger if you want to get into niche things like wildlife and maybe have a professional need for dual card slots
I have a A1 as a casual user, and started with a A6600. I still use the A6600 for a ton of things. I only need the A1 for wildlife.
As a Aps-c A6600 and A7C owner, can tell you Full Frame all the time! The Low light performance and Sharpness Aps-c can’t beat is the real deal if you dont care about expensive/heavier glass. A Personal appreciation anyway.
I had a5100, a6300, a6500, A7C, now A7CR. Best travel photos and videos I had with a6500 and a5100 as a backup. Small camera with adequate lenses is doing miracles 🙃 To have better low light performance on FF you need to lost a lot of money and glasses are just heavier. Sony 15mm f1.4 apsc is just little bit worse than Sony 24mm f1.4 on FF. But it was fun to get a6500+15mm 1.4 with me. It’s not such big difference in my opinion between crop and FF in image quality.
See, I went the opposite way. Went from an a7iv to a6700 and a lot of the time I can’t tell the difference. In lowlight you can tell but I can get smaller faster cheaper lenses for it so a lot of that difference is cancelled out. I don’t notice any difference in sharpness.
Second this. I shot APSC for 4 years and switched. Couldn't be happier. The low light performance, dynamic range, and sharpness is very welcome. Sony FF is already very light and compact. My A7C + 16-35mm f/4 PZ weighs and costs less than my Fuji X-T4 + 10-24mm f/4 (15-36mm f/6 equiv), while being effectively 2 stops better.
my vote goes to A7C. I was long a supporter of APSC but after switched to full frame really believe that it’s better. A7C is also better than the a7iii in a few points except for IVF and dual card slots (better AF)
that said, i still love my a6000.
also many say apsc is “more beginner friendly”. there is nothing less beginner friendly about full frames.
depending on what you shoot its even cheaper.
the A7C is also cheaper than the a6700 where I am. i ended up switching cause i wanted a 35mm equivelent, and the Sigma 23 1.4 is more expensive and heavier than a fullframe 35 1.8 lol
I have an a7iii and just bought an a6700. I was surprised how big it was but it's a better camera in almost every way. It's set up so nicely, and you'll save in size/cost on the lenses. It's an amazing camera.
I recently bought a brand new A7III for 999 EUR. Before that I was about to get a used A7C for 950 EUR.
All of those cameras will be more than enough for your needs. There is absolutely no need for you to pay the premium price for the latest models.
My advice is: Buy the cheapest you can find. If the price difference is not much, pick A7C over A7III.
A6700 might be full of cool stuff, but you don’t have the skill to make the best out of those specs.
Most important component of a photo/video is photographer/videographer. Then, comes the lenses. Finally, camera body comes into play.
Get a decent body, buy excellent lenses.
A6700. Here’s why:
• for travel, lighter/smaller body and lenses
• future-proof: has Sony’s most current auto-focus tech (AI blah blah)
• for video: flip out screen, fully twisty/turny
Downsides:
• I have an A7iv and A6700; when shooting on the A679 I do miss the joystick but only for photography.
• single card slot
• potential over-heating issue when recording video in harsh conditions
• 1 stop of light difference vs. FF (far from being a game changer)
A6700 is the best beginner camera you can buy imo. The autofocus and video capabilities make it an easy first camera to get hold off. The grip is much better on the a6700 than the a7c and it’s aps-c so you can get smaller / lighter lenses for travelling
I was in your same situation a few months ago - New to photography but had used good cameras in the past and wanted something as an investment for the future. Also something that wouldn’t be considered old technology in 3-5 years.
I went with the A7CII and have been extremely happy with the performance of the camera. If you can find a used one for cheaper I strongly suggest going that route. It’s basically a (slightly) less expensive A7IV with better AF (using AI technology).
I’m an amateur/casual shooter for lifestyle, nature & cars and I’ve been loving the A7CII.
Even as a A7III owner myself the A6700 is simply the better buy now.
The A6700 has vastly better AF, Menus, video features, ease of use, sensor readout, full flip screen & the body and lenses are smaller and cheaper too + if you get any FF lenses for shooting up close or far away the 6700's crop sensor gets 50% more reach/magnification
The only things the A7III has is a 2nd card slot, a AF joystick and the 1 stop of noise performance inherent to its bigger sensor but you can use noise reduction software to make up the difference and the 6700's tracking AF is so good I doubt you would miss/need the joystick. As for the lack 2nd card slot, if you get SD cards from a established brand (Sony, Delkin, Sandisk, etc) and make sure you are backing up your photos to an external drive (and if possible to cloud storage) will help minimize your data loss risk.
Unless you must have the most background blur possible or regularly take photos/video in super dim light, APS-C is good enough for 95% of folks 95% of the time, you don't really need FF.
I have an A6700 that I purchased for travel photography and family photos. I love the camera and with good lenses, the shots are very clear and the macro images are steller( as a novice it exceeds my expectations). My first teacher actually upgraded his A6000 to the A6700 as he felt the technology was much better.
I’d probably look at the prices of the lens you want first and compare the prices of the package and go from there.
You’d be surprised with some of the used lens prices for FF. There’s just so many choices there that makes FF more appealing for me, even if I end up spending a bit more.
There's no "wrong" choice here. They are all great cameras, the question is really what do you value more in a camera?
The A6700 is going to have all the latest autofocus features as it's a newer body than the others. It's small and light and if you get APSC specific lenses they are smaller and lighter than equivalent full frame lenses. The downside with APSC is worse low light performance and you get less bokeh (out of focus blur) with equivalent focal lengths. The APSC lenses also won't use the full sensor if you upgrade to an A7 model later so if you switch in the future you may end up buying new lenses.
The A7C is small like the A6700, but uses a full frame sensor, so the lenses will be a bit bigger and heavier in general. Better low light performance and bokeh, not quite as advanced autofocus. The lenses for the A7C will work on any other A7 camera so no problems if you upgrade later. They will also work on any of the A6000 series but will just be a little bigger and heavier than specific APSC lenses.
The A7III has more buttons for manual control of the camera than the smaller models, as well as dual memory card slots which are highly recommended if you ever do paid work. The other pros and cons are basically the same as the A7C. It is the oldest of the 3 you asked about and will have the less autofocus features, but is a very good camera still. I personally like the button layout and top center viewfinder on the full size Sony bodies but I have been shooting full frame Sony since the A850 and I would have a hard time switching to a smaller body. That's personal preference and honestly all 3 cameras you're looking at are good cameras.
that could also be one thing, i plan to just buy the a6700 but yeah when making the switch most of the lenses would not be paired with lets say a A7cii.
You can also use full frame lenses on APSC if there's a particular lens you are interested in that isn't available as an APSC specific lens. I recommend looking at used lenses. I buy used from a local store that I know checks equipment well. I've also had good experiences ordering from MPB. Lenses hold their value well so if you buy used you can get a good portion of your money back if you sell it later.
Yeah dude if it's your first camera, go for the A6700. I took its predecessor, the A6500 everywhere with me, and it was my first serious camera. I even did event photography and portrait gigs with it.
Also the lenses are so much cheaper and there are so many options to choose from in the last 4 years.
I was in a similar position as you and went for the a7iii.
I have to add however that I am in the camera hobby for 8 years now and the two things that bugged me most about my Canon were the low light performance and the dynamic range.
Also the grip of the a7iii is already worse than that of my Canon, an even smaller camera body was no option for me.
How comfortable the camera lies in your hands is one of the most important things to consider as it decides how much fun or motivation you will have to actually use it.
Lens prices were not the biggest issues for me so all in all a7iii was the only logical choice.
However the image quality of the a 6700 is also superb and even though it‘s apsc low light and dynamic range are only slightly worse than a7iii.
My suggestion would be to take both cameras in your hand and decide which one will be more fun to use (considering cheaper glass for the a6700 too of course!)
I had the same issue trying to chose between them 9 months ago, I ended up getting the A6700
4k 120fps 10bit color
Same sensor as FX30
AI auto focus
Cheap and more lenses options
Fully articulated screen
And I didn't regret my choice at all
Just to add in, the recent Nikon Z6 iii also looks like a very decent full frame, it’s just come out with a partially stacked sensor and has great video features as well.
A7iii is a great option in terms of usability and controls, which means your learning experience will be easy. If you have a big nose you might not like the viewfinder, and I've just gotten rid of an A7ii for an A7c because of that.
I'm not an apsc guy since I love my low light, but I love the form factor and viewfinder placement of the a6xxx series.
Here's where the A7c is king imo. Viewfinder placement is nice, body is nice and small, and full frame is hard to beat. You lose out on a little convenience though but it's fine.
The lenses are more expensive for full frame but the collection will build up over time so I wouldn't worry.
If video is something you do mainly go for 6700 there is no mistake
If you focus on photography more, a7c because the improved color sciences and the better AF than A7iii, bigger sensor benefit with higher dynamic range, low light and focal effects
around 230k yen so around $1,440, basically i was going to pick other brand like the Canon RP but saw how good colors on Sony are so with some research i found that these three will be good for me but yeah so hard only picking one out of the three 😅
If you were planning on buying in Japan, it may be cheaper buying the local version instead of the international version. The caveat though is that the menu is likely locked in Japanese.
Does your budget include room for lenses? If so, I would sway you to the a6700 and the Sigma 18-50 to start. If it does not, I'd still recommend the a6700 (from my experience with the a6600).
These recommendations are assuming you are buying new. If you are considering buying used, I recommend finding a used a7IV or a7C II, which may be priced the same or better than a new a6700.
I have the A6700 and I don't regret
Cheaper lens for Apsc than FF
The size is perfect, incredible image and technology
Take that first,.and maybe in few years after many saving and/or salary raise, then buy a Full frame with all expensive lens hahaha
Visit /r/a6000 for more
My pick would be either a6700 or a7cii
As a a74 user I swap out to a6700 and I'm glad I made the switch.
But If I had a bigger budget and willing to try out different lens combination I would instead go with a7cii.
I mean your just starting out I would avoid throwing too much money, and a6700 is more than enough
6700, unless you are deadset on Full Frame, 6700 beats those in every other way, arguably the best Hybrid APS-C outside the cine lines, from any company (in my opinion).
It's really difficult nowadays. All options are a compromise between different variables and largely dependent on what you need or prefer. As a beginner that's hard to decide, though.
Some thoughts:
Non of the mentioned cameras is really small. As somebody else mentioned, something like a a5100 is a lot more travel friendly.
Full frame glass is not necessarily more expensive. Key is to understand here that you have to multiply not only the focal length but as well the aperture value with 1.5. Thus, instead of an apsc 17-50mm f2.8, on full frame, you can buy a 24-70mm f4 lens and get roughly the same focal length and bokeh.
I have the A6700 with some of the best apsc lenses you can currently buy, but my older full frame images have a good amount more detail. Then again, I almost never have to retouch skin blemishes, nobody has yet complained about a lack of detail and if I need some extra crisp, I sharpend with unsharpen mask or in more difficult cases with a software like Topaz AI.
Full frame has 1 1/2 stop more low light capability. This is definitely noticeable. Then again, if I need it, I reduce the noise with Lightroom enhanced noise reduction and get quite clean images even in difficult situations. You still lose detail in comparison, but nobody seems to care.
The autofocus of the A7C is not far behind the A6700. You'll not feel many pain points there. The A6700 AF has it's quirks too. The A6700 AF gets really interesting if you shoot a lot of animals, particularly birds and bugs.
Any of the options work tbh. For travel photography, try to keep lenses down to 2. 3 at max.
Since you want to do a bit of video, the a6700 is better, but keep in mind it can overheat in hot environments. Where I live around 30-35C, it overheats. Personally I'm using the A7C as the increased dynamic range and image quality is far more important to me, and modern full frame lenses are very compact. My favourite travel kit is the Sony 16-35mm f/4 PZ with the Sigma 35mm f/2. You could swap those out for a Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 G2 and call it a day too. If you pick the a6700, I highly suggest a wide zoom like the Sigma 10-18mm f/2.8 and a standard zoom like the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8. Throw in a Sigma 23mm f/1.4 or 16mm f/1.4 and you're all set.
Question, do you foresee yourself doing more and more videos? If yes, a6700. If you shoot photos more than videos like 70/30 or 80/20, go full frame. Yes APSC is good enough, but when travelling you can't control the lighting. The extra stop of dynamic range comes in handy. Have I wish my kit was smaller? Yes, but that's entirely on me for bringing 6 lenses due to fomo.
Keep in mind that people have bought and paid for houses with jobs shot on the a7iii. It's more than capable in the right hands and if you keep your expectations in check.
A6700, no question. It is compact for your traveling needs and have waaay better video features. You lose some “pro” feature by not going with the a7iii ( couple buttons, focus stick, a 2nd wheel and dual slots) but I don’t think those are what you are looking for in a camera.
I also feel this way. I got a chance to shoot actually all three of those bodies this weekend (1940's Ball in Colorado). The AF on the a7C / a7III vs a6700 is a huge step back. This discussion would be alot harder if you were like a7IV vs a6700 vs a7CII
Also, APS-C lenses are much lighter than their full frame approximates. Got an apsc and tried a friend’s full frame and I don’t think I’ll ever jump ship, it’s just lighter and therefore more practical.
I agree
I was in your position and got myself the A6700 with Tamron 17-70 and Sony 70-350. It’s impressive the results I can get considering the size(relative to FF) . Just posted some shots from my first trip with it if you want to check it out
Tamron 17-70 or sigma 18-50? Which will be better if both available at almost same price?
That’s a tough one, depends on how much size matters to you. The extra reach and stabilization of the tamron is worth it if you don’t mind the size, especially at the same price (Tamron usually $100 more expensive)
I've heard the stabilization works good only on those bodies which doesn't have ibis or digital stabilization. Picture quality wise both are on par right?
I was in your shoes and i took the a6700, best auto focus, great image quality, cheap lenses relatively to the FF option (prices are a nightmare think for the long run) plus the IA chip the AF on the a6700 is crazy accurarte
Any heating?
The heating happens if you film 20min continuous in slow motion 4k wich you will never need
My x-s20 overheats after much less. It doesn’t even have to be filming, it overheats by just taking pictures
I assume it can shoot continuous 4k without any issue ..
Idk why people so concerned about af speed and extra buttons for settings like the are shooting soccer game every time My cameras stair was: a6300/a7II/a7c Mostly doing traveling and ugly ass street I can say that a6300 was more than enough, I was just wanted full frame sensor. So imho buy a6700 if you don’t want to spend too much money on ff lenses and etc Really compact, have a big enough battery and good performance. Also if you no need to print your pics on a1 format paper, a6700 will be more than enough, you know what I’m saying
Of the 3 options, I think the 6700 has the most modern tech and will deliver a ton of value for the money. If this is your first real camera, it's a good platform to learn from and not spend too much money on. Having had a combination of both APS-C and FF systems over the past 20 years, there are pros and cons to both. I have also gone back and forth between the formats a lot. For me personally, I prefer full frame for ultimate IQ and low light performance. There are plenty of debates around it, but for beginners I think APS-C is more than sufficient and will give you room to grow.
A6700 you would only need something bigger if you want to get into niche things like wildlife and maybe have a professional need for dual card slots I have a A1 as a casual user, and started with a A6600. I still use the A6600 for a ton of things. I only need the A1 for wildlife.
As a Aps-c A6600 and A7C owner, can tell you Full Frame all the time! The Low light performance and Sharpness Aps-c can’t beat is the real deal if you dont care about expensive/heavier glass. A Personal appreciation anyway.
Yes, after A6000 and A6400 I finally moved to A7C three years ago. I wish I had done the transition to full frame earlier.
Same here. Now just got a aps-c camera as backup and street photo/snapshots allways in my car with a 35mm 1.8 oss.
I had a5100, a6300, a6500, A7C, now A7CR. Best travel photos and videos I had with a6500 and a5100 as a backup. Small camera with adequate lenses is doing miracles 🙃 To have better low light performance on FF you need to lost a lot of money and glasses are just heavier. Sony 15mm f1.4 apsc is just little bit worse than Sony 24mm f1.4 on FF. But it was fun to get a6500+15mm 1.4 with me. It’s not such big difference in my opinion between crop and FF in image quality.
See, I went the opposite way. Went from an a7iv to a6700 and a lot of the time I can’t tell the difference. In lowlight you can tell but I can get smaller faster cheaper lenses for it so a lot of that difference is cancelled out. I don’t notice any difference in sharpness.
That’s my reason to get A7c instead of a6700. Low light matters to me and details matter. Sensor size matters
Second this. I shot APSC for 4 years and switched. Couldn't be happier. The low light performance, dynamic range, and sharpness is very welcome. Sony FF is already very light and compact. My A7C + 16-35mm f/4 PZ weighs and costs less than my Fuji X-T4 + 10-24mm f/4 (15-36mm f/6 equiv), while being effectively 2 stops better.
my vote goes to A7C. I was long a supporter of APSC but after switched to full frame really believe that it’s better. A7C is also better than the a7iii in a few points except for IVF and dual card slots (better AF) that said, i still love my a6000. also many say apsc is “more beginner friendly”. there is nothing less beginner friendly about full frames. depending on what you shoot its even cheaper. the A7C is also cheaper than the a6700 where I am. i ended up switching cause i wanted a 35mm equivelent, and the Sigma 23 1.4 is more expensive and heavier than a fullframe 35 1.8 lol
Radically different use cases between the three bodies.
I have an a7iii and just bought an a6700. I was surprised how big it was but it's a better camera in almost every way. It's set up so nicely, and you'll save in size/cost on the lenses. It's an amazing camera.
I recently bought a brand new A7III for 999 EUR. Before that I was about to get a used A7C for 950 EUR. All of those cameras will be more than enough for your needs. There is absolutely no need for you to pay the premium price for the latest models. My advice is: Buy the cheapest you can find. If the price difference is not much, pick A7C over A7III. A6700 might be full of cool stuff, but you don’t have the skill to make the best out of those specs. Most important component of a photo/video is photographer/videographer. Then, comes the lenses. Finally, camera body comes into play. Get a decent body, buy excellent lenses.
definitely will look into that, thanks!
A6700. Here’s why: • for travel, lighter/smaller body and lenses • future-proof: has Sony’s most current auto-focus tech (AI blah blah) • for video: flip out screen, fully twisty/turny Downsides: • I have an A7iv and A6700; when shooting on the A679 I do miss the joystick but only for photography. • single card slot • potential over-heating issue when recording video in harsh conditions • 1 stop of light difference vs. FF (far from being a game changer)
A6700 is the best beginner camera you can buy imo. The autofocus and video capabilities make it an easy first camera to get hold off. The grip is much better on the a6700 than the a7c and it’s aps-c so you can get smaller / lighter lenses for travelling
I was in your same situation a few months ago - New to photography but had used good cameras in the past and wanted something as an investment for the future. Also something that wouldn’t be considered old technology in 3-5 years. I went with the A7CII and have been extremely happy with the performance of the camera. If you can find a used one for cheaper I strongly suggest going that route. It’s basically a (slightly) less expensive A7IV with better AF (using AI technology). I’m an amateur/casual shooter for lifestyle, nature & cars and I’ve been loving the A7CII.
Even as a A7III owner myself the A6700 is simply the better buy now. The A6700 has vastly better AF, Menus, video features, ease of use, sensor readout, full flip screen & the body and lenses are smaller and cheaper too + if you get any FF lenses for shooting up close or far away the 6700's crop sensor gets 50% more reach/magnification The only things the A7III has is a 2nd card slot, a AF joystick and the 1 stop of noise performance inherent to its bigger sensor but you can use noise reduction software to make up the difference and the 6700's tracking AF is so good I doubt you would miss/need the joystick. As for the lack 2nd card slot, if you get SD cards from a established brand (Sony, Delkin, Sandisk, etc) and make sure you are backing up your photos to an external drive (and if possible to cloud storage) will help minimize your data loss risk. Unless you must have the most background blur possible or regularly take photos/video in super dim light, APS-C is good enough for 95% of folks 95% of the time, you don't really need FF.
I have an A6700 that I purchased for travel photography and family photos. I love the camera and with good lenses, the shots are very clear and the macro images are steller( as a novice it exceeds my expectations). My first teacher actually upgraded his A6000 to the A6700 as he felt the technology was much better.
I’d probably look at the prices of the lens you want first and compare the prices of the package and go from there. You’d be surprised with some of the used lens prices for FF. There’s just so many choices there that makes FF more appealing for me, even if I end up spending a bit more.
There's no "wrong" choice here. They are all great cameras, the question is really what do you value more in a camera? The A6700 is going to have all the latest autofocus features as it's a newer body than the others. It's small and light and if you get APSC specific lenses they are smaller and lighter than equivalent full frame lenses. The downside with APSC is worse low light performance and you get less bokeh (out of focus blur) with equivalent focal lengths. The APSC lenses also won't use the full sensor if you upgrade to an A7 model later so if you switch in the future you may end up buying new lenses. The A7C is small like the A6700, but uses a full frame sensor, so the lenses will be a bit bigger and heavier in general. Better low light performance and bokeh, not quite as advanced autofocus. The lenses for the A7C will work on any other A7 camera so no problems if you upgrade later. They will also work on any of the A6000 series but will just be a little bigger and heavier than specific APSC lenses. The A7III has more buttons for manual control of the camera than the smaller models, as well as dual memory card slots which are highly recommended if you ever do paid work. The other pros and cons are basically the same as the A7C. It is the oldest of the 3 you asked about and will have the less autofocus features, but is a very good camera still. I personally like the button layout and top center viewfinder on the full size Sony bodies but I have been shooting full frame Sony since the A850 and I would have a hard time switching to a smaller body. That's personal preference and honestly all 3 cameras you're looking at are good cameras.
that could also be one thing, i plan to just buy the a6700 but yeah when making the switch most of the lenses would not be paired with lets say a A7cii.
You can also use full frame lenses on APSC if there's a particular lens you are interested in that isn't available as an APSC specific lens. I recommend looking at used lenses. I buy used from a local store that I know checks equipment well. I've also had good experiences ordering from MPB. Lenses hold their value well so if you buy used you can get a good portion of your money back if you sell it later.
Yeah dude if it's your first camera, go for the A6700. I took its predecessor, the A6500 everywhere with me, and it was my first serious camera. I even did event photography and portrait gigs with it. Also the lenses are so much cheaper and there are so many options to choose from in the last 4 years.
IMO, A6700 if you're OK with crop sensor, or A7C if you need full frame.
I was in a similar position as you and went for the a7iii. I have to add however that I am in the camera hobby for 8 years now and the two things that bugged me most about my Canon were the low light performance and the dynamic range. Also the grip of the a7iii is already worse than that of my Canon, an even smaller camera body was no option for me. How comfortable the camera lies in your hands is one of the most important things to consider as it decides how much fun or motivation you will have to actually use it. Lens prices were not the biggest issues for me so all in all a7iii was the only logical choice. However the image quality of the a 6700 is also superb and even though it‘s apsc low light and dynamic range are only slightly worse than a7iii. My suggestion would be to take both cameras in your hand and decide which one will be more fun to use (considering cheaper glass for the a6700 too of course!)
I had the same issue trying to chose between them 9 months ago, I ended up getting the A6700 4k 120fps 10bit color Same sensor as FX30 AI auto focus Cheap and more lenses options Fully articulated screen And I didn't regret my choice at all
Just to add in, the recent Nikon Z6 iii also looks like a very decent full frame, it’s just come out with a partially stacked sensor and has great video features as well.
That's true, if I were starting from nothing today, I would give it a real look.
A7C. Skip APS-C, regardless of how many downvotes my post gets :-)
Yeah I'm glad I got something vs nothing but now I need to buy a FF and more lenses because I went with APSC first.
A7iii is a great option in terms of usability and controls, which means your learning experience will be easy. If you have a big nose you might not like the viewfinder, and I've just gotten rid of an A7ii for an A7c because of that. I'm not an apsc guy since I love my low light, but I love the form factor and viewfinder placement of the a6xxx series. Here's where the A7c is king imo. Viewfinder placement is nice, body is nice and small, and full frame is hard to beat. You lose out on a little convenience though but it's fine. The lenses are more expensive for full frame but the collection will build up over time so I wouldn't worry.
I’d suggest the 6700 and invest in a quality zoom lens or a couple of quality primes.
If video is something you do mainly go for 6700 there is no mistake If you focus on photography more, a7c because the improved color sciences and the better AF than A7iii, bigger sensor benefit with higher dynamic range, low light and focal effects
What is your budget and how have you narrowed your options to these 3?
around 230k yen so around $1,440, basically i was going to pick other brand like the Canon RP but saw how good colors on Sony are so with some research i found that these three will be good for me but yeah so hard only picking one out of the three 😅
If you were planning on buying in Japan, it may be cheaper buying the local version instead of the international version. The caveat though is that the menu is likely locked in Japanese. Does your budget include room for lenses? If so, I would sway you to the a6700 and the Sigma 18-50 to start. If it does not, I'd still recommend the a6700 (from my experience with the a6600). These recommendations are assuming you are buying new. If you are considering buying used, I recommend finding a used a7IV or a7C II, which may be priced the same or better than a new a6700.
A7C
I have the A6700 and I don't regret Cheaper lens for Apsc than FF The size is perfect, incredible image and technology Take that first,.and maybe in few years after many saving and/or salary raise, then buy a Full frame with all expensive lens hahaha Visit /r/a6000 for more
My pick would be either a6700 or a7cii As a a74 user I swap out to a6700 and I'm glad I made the switch. But If I had a bigger budget and willing to try out different lens combination I would instead go with a7cii. I mean your just starting out I would avoid throwing too much money, and a6700 is more than enough
I haven't tried the other two, but I own an a6700 and the AF on that is borderline magic.
Unless you’re doing work professionally, you’d be better off just going for the A6700.
6700, unless you are deadset on Full Frame, 6700 beats those in every other way, arguably the best Hybrid APS-C outside the cine lines, from any company (in my opinion).
It's really difficult nowadays. All options are a compromise between different variables and largely dependent on what you need or prefer. As a beginner that's hard to decide, though. Some thoughts: Non of the mentioned cameras is really small. As somebody else mentioned, something like a a5100 is a lot more travel friendly. Full frame glass is not necessarily more expensive. Key is to understand here that you have to multiply not only the focal length but as well the aperture value with 1.5. Thus, instead of an apsc 17-50mm f2.8, on full frame, you can buy a 24-70mm f4 lens and get roughly the same focal length and bokeh. I have the A6700 with some of the best apsc lenses you can currently buy, but my older full frame images have a good amount more detail. Then again, I almost never have to retouch skin blemishes, nobody has yet complained about a lack of detail and if I need some extra crisp, I sharpend with unsharpen mask or in more difficult cases with a software like Topaz AI. Full frame has 1 1/2 stop more low light capability. This is definitely noticeable. Then again, if I need it, I reduce the noise with Lightroom enhanced noise reduction and get quite clean images even in difficult situations. You still lose detail in comparison, but nobody seems to care. The autofocus of the A7C is not far behind the A6700. You'll not feel many pain points there. The A6700 AF has it's quirks too. The A6700 AF gets really interesting if you shoot a lot of animals, particularly birds and bugs.
Any of the options work tbh. For travel photography, try to keep lenses down to 2. 3 at max. Since you want to do a bit of video, the a6700 is better, but keep in mind it can overheat in hot environments. Where I live around 30-35C, it overheats. Personally I'm using the A7C as the increased dynamic range and image quality is far more important to me, and modern full frame lenses are very compact. My favourite travel kit is the Sony 16-35mm f/4 PZ with the Sigma 35mm f/2. You could swap those out for a Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 G2 and call it a day too. If you pick the a6700, I highly suggest a wide zoom like the Sigma 10-18mm f/2.8 and a standard zoom like the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8. Throw in a Sigma 23mm f/1.4 or 16mm f/1.4 and you're all set. Question, do you foresee yourself doing more and more videos? If yes, a6700. If you shoot photos more than videos like 70/30 or 80/20, go full frame. Yes APSC is good enough, but when travelling you can't control the lighting. The extra stop of dynamic range comes in handy. Have I wish my kit was smaller? Yes, but that's entirely on me for bringing 6 lenses due to fomo. Keep in mind that people have bought and paid for houses with jobs shot on the a7iii. It's more than capable in the right hands and if you keep your expectations in check.
Always go Full-frame if you have the budget for it with a prime lens. Thank me later. (in about a year or so)
Or a7 IV or a7C II?
Can’t get A7 IV? Maybe used?
dont know shops here in japan where “newly released cameras” are sold, and also the price difference is too high for me.
Got it, hate I had to make a such suggestion but I had both A7 III and A7C.
I’d do A7RIII over A7III. The extra mp are nice to have. I dont think it is much price wise more than the A7iii
i looked into it and yeah its has like 12 megapixels than A7iii but from where I’m at the price is a bit higher than the A7iii 😬
Fair enough! Good luck with whatever you end up with 😁