SONY a6700 pREVIEW: GREAT RESULTS…But UNDER-POWERED?! (vs Canon R7)

[@pf4773]

I read so many critiques of the sony A6000 series, and now see how the a6700 is not as good at full frame in this and that. This professional perspective is correct: if I am shooting a big budget movie or I'm being paid to shoot a commercial print gig with the need for blow up prints, I'm going to want more than APSC...But, Wait! 99% of consumers of cameras are CONSUMERS, HOBBYISTS, and ENTHUSIASTS who will never make a dime (or want to) out of their photos. What we want is what SONY has delivered to us for years...and that is the smallest size and weight possible. If the camera is tiny, lightweight it means that I can get the darn thing onto a plane without it ruining my baggage allowance; it means that I can shoot candid street shots without people freaking out about their privacy; it means I can easily carry the thing for hours, and not look like a fool with gear weighing me down (palming the camera comfortably in one hand); it means that my lenses for zooming (18-135, 70-350mm from Sony) are incredibly lightweight and small as well. When I see photos of full frame cameras compared to the a6600 or the a6700 I see NO difference UNTIL one zooms into the eyeball :). Come on people! The Sony A6000, and surely the A6700 is ALL a good to great photographer needs to shoot extraordinary photos. Ninety percent of the photo, or the video, is YOUR skill, NOT the darn camera :).

[@aldoelliott9316]

This🤜🤛! Well said.

[@truthseeker6804]

theres not much difference in size of this camera vs a full frame camera. if you really want something small then get the rx100vii.

[@ChristofferLund]

@@truthseeker6804 don't forget difference in price on lenses

[@zechenwei1139]

Well said!

[@careylymanjones]

The thing about APS-C glass is how incredibly lightweight and compact it is. You can put together a two kilo kit with the A6700 that will cover from 15-525mm full frame equivalent. Body and three zoom lenses that run under two kilos. Less than five pounds vs. close to 20 pounds for an equivalent full-frame kit is a godsend for the travel/adventure photographer. I shoot both full-frame and APS-C. Full-frame gives better bokeh and better low-light performance, But in decent light, APS-C will get the job done, and it will put a lot less stress on both your back and your budget.

[@gianpa]

I don't really agree, you can do exactly the same with full frame if you buy equivalent aperture lenses. Example: Let's say you want to bring a 50mm 1.8, sure, if you get a 35mm 1.8 on the apsc is smaller, but it's the equivalent of carrying with you a 50mm 2.8 on full frame. That's why it's smaller. If you want THE SAME results you'd have to buy a 35mm 1.2, but know it's probably even bigger and more expensive. Conversely, a 50mm 2.8 prime for full frame would be cheap and if you pair it to something like an a7c it's not even heavier than the apsc setup. So no, if you want the same results, the size and weight difference (and probably price) is negligible.

[@pf4773]

​@@gianpa I am completely in disagreement with your premise that you can duplicate the size/weight of a full frame camera with the incredibly small and lightweight sony a6000 series cameras. Years ago I went to a camera store and looked at the s6000 with several zoom lenses (18-135 and 70-350mm). The full frame cameras (body and lenses) were TWICE the size and weight! Please, show in a real world video what you claim and I will happily acknowledge that you are right :)

[@gianpa]

@@pf4773 As you wish, REAL WORLD EXAMPLE: Setup 1: SONY A6600 + Sony E 35mm f/1.8 Total weight = 657g Setup 2: Sony A7C with Sony FE 50mm f/2.5 Total weight = 683g Those two setups have roughly equivalent focal length and aperture (I believe the full frame is still slightly brighter but I couldn't think of something exactly the same off the top of my head), weight difference is negligible at only 26 grams. The reason why full frame lenses are bigger is because there's no market for bad lenses in the full frame world. No one would buy a £6k camera to put a 50mm 2.5 lens on it. For apsc the equivalent 35mm 1.8 is a popular lens!

[@1337Jogi]

@@gianpa But you don't always need to go same effective aperture. If you shoot landscape or high zoom ranges low apertures are mostly not needed. If you are traveling or hiking you can get the full range with A6700 + Sony 16-55 f2.8 + Sony 70-350 f4.5-f6.3 altogether for 3000$ including the camera. Those lenses have fantastic image quality corner to corner. Yes good FF lenses have slightly better quality and FF in general better better low light but you will never get good sharp lenses for that range massive range (24-525 with a small gap) for anywhere near that price, weight and especially size. There is just nothig comparable. I am not hauling around a massive 400 or 600mm low aperture zoom lense for the occasional animal I might or might not spot and for a price and weight of my complete setup.

[@gianpa]

@@1337Jogi I don't know what you are trying to say. You can find lenses that don't have a wide aperture for full frame for cheap and they are also small and light. I never said you HAVE to use wide aperture quality lenses. I just said that if you don't use them then size and weight between full frame and APSC is roughly the same...

[@JimIBobIJones]

The point of APS-C isn't to be "step up" to full frame, the "advice" is not only condescending but also misses the point of going APS-C over full frame. The prices of bodies are such in the Sony ecosystem are close enough that you could go full-frame (with an entry level body and/or buying an older model) at the same cost as going APS-C. The same is true if you are buying lenses that are at the same quality "tier". I have both full frame and APS-C Sony Cameras and most of the time, I much prefer shooting on APS-C and with "Inferior" APS-C lenses. Portability is the biggest advantage of APS-C, and you loose that if you use full-frame lenses with an APS-C camera. I can carry my camera body, 3 primes and a zoom lens in a very, very small bag (currently a billingham hadley small pro for me) which would only be able to take a full frame camera and two lenses at most.

[@butchgo8930]

When I felt the weight of my bulky DSLRs with bulging heads bearing on me I switched to Sony a6xxx series. In my seventies and no longer keen on changing lens I settled for Sony’s RX100 small fixed lens system. Now, I’m in my mid-seventies and looking forward for the RX100 viii release.

[@bensonemery]

I hope we don't wait too much longer but im not hopeful

[@MusabTahaTarik]

I hope I can busy with cameras in my seventies

[@spdcrzy]

YES finally someone brought it up. The EVFs and screens on most modern mirrorless Sony cameras have ALWAYS been shit. Why is it so hard?!?

[@Sidowse]

Me thinks the amazing-autofocus cost a lot to develop so they want the per-unit cost to be as low as possible. Also if focus is 100% reliable why do you need a decent screen to check it? Annoying for macro etc though.

[@leocompany]

I need a good screen to check my lighting and possible flare​@@Sidowse

[@Sidowse]

@@leocompany I agree with having a great viewfinder that can double as a screen. The actual screen doesn't work well in sunny conditions.

[@InstructorWest]

I just listened to this week's podcast where you discussed the 6700 and your dislike of crop sensors. The idea that there are full frame bodies in the same price and size-range is true, but I think you miss a big point- the glass. For those who want less weight and bulk (and cost), small bodies aren't the issue. Quality lenses on the a7C will negate any true weight/bulk reduction. I think there's a place for APS-C for travel, street and other types of photography, certainly for video.

[@f.iph7291]

Fuji enters the chat

[@kingghidorah8106]

​@@f.iph7291 Fuji stomps on Sony and Sony doesn't really care because they already cater towards the videographers, that's why their cameras are looking more and more like smartphones and less like actual blocks of metal with a lot of knobs and wheels to control everything you have in sight. I would get the A6700 gladly, but thing has less than half the buttons of the A7IV and definitely not a quarter of the buttons the A77M2 i been using for almost a decade.

[@EatonZ26]

The big reason ppl buy APSC isn't cost but size. Recommending ppl buy FF glass for their APSC completely ruins the camera's portability.

[@simontumpach1442]

Ff glass is sharper on apsc than on ff camera thats the reason

[@EatonZ26]

@@simontumpach1442 usually only pros care about that level of sharpness, and in that case just go with a FF body. 6700 wasn't meant for pros

[@sidha22]

That is so true. I mean, the biggest plus point is apsc have very light and small lenses with just a loss of 5-10% loss of detail under microscope. I.e for printing or viewing it is on par with FE and loose only when pixel peeping. . But pixel peepers keep peeping and than buy FE lens , and never get to enjoy the apsc experience. After that they jump to FF and start preaching that always buy FF to save money when u upgrade lol. I mean Why go apsc if u want to go FF , just buy used FF and enjoy. Like I bought apsc cause I wanted my kids to use my camera on tours and get involved in clicking pics with me. I used 18-135mm with 6600. I don't think i would have been do this with FF lens. My son is 11yrs. And he took some Damm good close ups . Will I go FF ? Never, after using point and shoot type experience , FF feels like I'm carrying bricks in bag.

[@NARRASSAFilmes]

Yes!

[@andrekaled]

if it was about size you would just get an a7c or a7cr. it's about price and we all know it

[@Eikenhorst]

I am all for the "glass, glass, glass" rant! It is the lenses that should dictate what system to shoot with, not the body. It very much depends however what you wish to shoot to know what lenses might be best for you. If, like Jared, you are interested in portrait photography, having fast primes is worth it. If sports or wildlife is the thing, having fast telephoto zoom or fast super telephoto primes is key. Astro photography: buy very sharp and fast wide primes. But if you are into travel photography and to a lesser extend landscape photography, it is not about blowing out the backgrounds, more about weight, flexibility and portability, so you might not even want the most expensive glass.

[@j16m02]

Good review Jared, but I have one bone to pick. Not all of us buying crop bodies are making that choice because we can't afford FF or are just starting. I own the A7RV and an assortment of FF glass, but some times, ok, most of the time it's overkill and I don't want to schlep that stuff around with me. I also have a nice collection of APS-C glass for all those times when size actually does matter. So for me, comparing the A6700 to the R7 makes no sense. Maybe in a few years when there are more than 3 entry level lenses.

[@StephaanBOSS56]

I don't understand. Why would comparing an A6700 to a Canon R7 make no sense? What am I missing here.

[@j16m02]

@@StephaanBOSS56 Sorry if my logic wasn't clear. At least for me, I don't want to carry a FF body with a FF lens on a walk, or at my grandkids birthday parties or sitting at a sidewalk cafe in Paris. I want a full function, very compact body with compact lenses. The R7 is not compact. It's as big or bigger than an A7IV and weighs nearly the same. It has a total of 3 APS-C lenses available, all BTW, plastic mount, entry level lenses.No primes that I know of. So unless those are good enough for you, you will be shooting with FF lenses, and Canon R mount FF lenses are notoriously heavy and expensive. So bottom line is, though they are both APS-C bodies with similar features, the R7 does not fill the same niche as the A6700 or the Fuji X-S20 or even the Nikon Z50. Of course this is my opinion YMMV.

[@sundayitodo9610]

👍

[@johndc7446]

Both a6700, R7, and XS20 are great cameras. Although im not really into these type of content creation focused cameras. I am more on the photography side. I guess the most interesting thing about these releases are there are more grumnblings against the a6700, when we can consider how it has better rolling shutter and video dynamic range than the r7. It also has the best video autofocus and lens breathing compensation, compared to the low performance of fujis when it comes to autofocus. And lastly the lens options; you cant beat sony when it comes to 3rd party lenses. I believe all of these 3 cameras are great and theres no need to grumble too much against the a6700 which is in my opinion the better choice if your mainly a content creator and not just focused on photography. Sony could have done better but the a6700 can go against the r7 and xs20.

[@ro3843]

Bingo. Plus you can start out with an a6000,6400,6500 then upgrade to the 6700 or the next aspc. Perfect beginners series but good enough for producers & pros.

[@brookeamm7655]

@@ro3843 I love my a6000, been running it for a few years now

[@jacepearson2366]

I have had the a6300 for about 6 years now. Can't wait to grab this 6700 @@ro3843

[@zaporoshti3392]

well Fuji also has lots of lens and also availability of those lenses. Fuji generally opens shops & show rooms in big cities. There you can get the better Fuji lenses with more unique features than mainstream (sigma tamron etc). Fuji also has 3rd party lenses. when it comes to Canon you can buy an ef to rf adapter and use ef lenses. So lens selection is not that important when it comes to selecting the body.

[@Elvis_Pond5]

The reason they did not put a high resolution evf and lcd was because the processing power of those extra megapixels would drastically reduce the battery life. A larger battery equals a larger camera and that defeats the purpose of this compact model.

[@ytj22]

But doesn't this have a larger battery?

[@sbkbg]

Honestly, i’d rather carry an extra battery or two and have better views with the EVF and LCD.

[@77dris]

Sony has really fallen behind Canon but are still ahead of Nikon. And I've said for years that it's weird that one of the largest LCD manufacturers in the world puts the crappiest tech in their camera screens while Canon - not an LCD manufacturer - has probably the BEST screens. Even the new A7RV has a cool flip out screen, but the actual quality of the screen is mid mid mid. PS. Great pics as always Fro/Jared! PPS. I love the little bit at the end with Manny.

[@Eihei]

Yeah, it is very weird. The most absurd example is A7II that has higher resolution LCD than BOTH A7III and A7IV.

[@awfulart7312]

@@Eiheihuh…makes me feel better about using the mkii but it’s definitely dated.

[@Eihei]

@@awfulart7312 yeah, I changed it to A7III last year and the difference in AF performance is enormous. I couldn't really trust it so I used pretty much everything in manual. By the way there is one thing related to manual focus that they changed from A7II to A7III that I am really annoyed about. A7II had this feature that when you were using magnification and half pressed shutter it would automatically exit magnification. I really miss that, it help with making sure I have the right composition. On A7III i have to press magnification button again to exit and since if you pressed it once you have the first level of magnification, the second press will magnify it further so you have to press it again so it's really awkward to use.

[@mbismbismb]

Canon is a printing company they know why to ‘delighting your eyes always’ with great colours amd pictures 😍

[@livejames9374]

Fallen behind in what way, the lower end APSC and full frame market? A1 is still better than any canon camera at 2+ years old. Canon lens line up isn’t close to Sony (running 3rd imo).

[@Eazidosit]

I think the buffer not running out is a bigger benefit than having high frame rates and buffer runs out in 2 seconds. Nice video...

[@bensonemery]

I disagree. In what situations where you need high fps would the action last more than a few seconds?

[@IvanVazquezS]

The fastest I have ever needed to shoot a photo is when the international space station transits in front of the moon. That shit lasts like 0.7s or maybe 0.9 seconds when you are lucky. I REALLY need fast burst when shooting that, wildlife and also sports and kids, and so far I have never needed to shoot more than 10 seconds of buffered pics. My a6500 can take up to 11 seconds of continuous raw pictures at 11fps because funny enough the buffer starts emptying when I'm still shooting, so I am pretty sure you don't get only 6 seconds with the a6700 but most probably 10. Again, it all depends on the needs of people, and nobody has mentioned yet this camera has freaking focus stack for macro photography which is one of the most OP features and the one most cameras lack.

[@Eazidosit]

A nice play in football can last longer than a few seconds. Some baseball action last longer than a few seconds. I have taken some pretty good shots of birds flying or taking off with the A6400 and A7 IV. For me Super fast FPS isn't necessary. Just a lot more pics to trash. To those that need faster FPS, have at it. For me though, it's not a selling point or as important. I take photos of guy riding their motorcycles for them and i have never had a issue getting the shot with accurate timing.

[@chris.fitzgerald]

Thanks for the pREVIEW. Was waiting to watch your video and Chris’. Cheers from the Jersey Shore.

[@aleksdeveloper698]

Just a heads up, some people had problems with the heating in this camera. Sony updated the firmware and many people reported that it jumped from 30 minutes overheating, to 2 hours. My camera shut down after 21 minutes of recording in 4k 50 even after update.

[@TGL2020]

Have you put the heat shut off limit to high?

[@aleksdeveloper698]

@@TGL2020 I just lowered the resolution, changed the compression algorithm and probably many other changes which I do not remember.

[@aleksdeveloper698]

@@TGL2020Auto Power OFF Temp set to High

[@uvp5000]

It is reassuring to see that camera bodies do their job very well, effectively getting out of the way to let the photographer's skill shine.

[@careylymanjones]

The problem with choosing Canon over Sony is lens selection. Canon has nice lenses, but the good ones are priced accordingly. In the Sony ecosystem, you nave a lot of more budget-friendly options. Sigma makes lenses that rival Sony's best, usually at 1/2 to 2/3 the price. Tamron also makes some great lenses for Sony. There are no third-party lenses for Canon RF. Canon's business model on the RF system seems to be to sell you a well-featured body at a low price, and gouge you on lenses. Sony charges a bit more for bodies, but gives you many more choices for glass.

[@themediocrephotographer1301]

The picture of the player walking off the field is an absolute banger. Audibly said “Dayum” when I saw it 😂

[@Sidowse]

Time stamp it!

[@Herkulez1981]

I always hated the ergonomins from the a6000, one of the worst imo this one looks much better

[@larswara2124]

Good video, good thoughts about full frame vs apc-crop! 🙂Just bought the A6700 (replacing my old A6000) with the Sigma 18-50 f/2,8, a superb combo for MY use!

[@terryly9044]

How is the sigma 18-50 I only have the sigma 30 prime lens I wanna buy the 18-50 zoom lens for travel. How is it?

[@larswara2124]

@@terryly9044 Very compact and light, tack sharp, well buildt, perfect for travel. One downside is the lack of IBIS, the reason I waited to replace my old, quite mediocre, 18-55 3,5-5.6 OS, until I had a camera with IBIS. The lack of it though, is probably one of the reasons the lens is so compact, and affordable. 😀

[@aman.2912]

Hi, I've decided to get the A6700, but I'm absolutely confused about the lenses that I need to get. I want to shoot travel vlogs, travel films and street photography/Videography why travelling. I have decided to go with the Sony 11mm F/1.8 (for vlogging and landscape); sigma 56mm F/1.4(for portraits and street stuff) and the sony 70-350mm F4.5-6.3 G as my telephoto. What do you think about these? Is this setup going to cover me in most of my needs? Is it lacking in range or quality? TIA

[@zaporoshti3392]

@@aman.2912 you can get sigma lenses to cover most focus lengths.

[@howardkahn4330]

you are 100% correct about quality glass...plus, after the camera is bought it's resale value begins to drop to Zero, HOWEVER, quality glass loses very little of it purchased price....

[@paulneedham9885]

A6000 is 10 years old and still sells for a few hundred pounds. You don't need to change cameras every other year.

[@MajorTomMusic]

This is the most useful review of A6700 ever. Love this guy!

[@egm0450]

Yeah... I still don’t regret picking up the A6400 last month

[@999slawter]

I am using the 6300 since 2017! You will be happy!

[@jhirse3547]

a6400 owner since 4 years here - I considered upgrading to the a6700, but the improvements are too little. The a6400 is a little mean machine for years to come ❤

[@lolno1474]

I’ve got an a6400 and the a6700 is definitely not worth the money. Same problem the a6600 had. Overpriced just cuz it has a Sony badge on it.

[@aurora3542]

I'd be interested to know what do you think of this camera vs the R8? Given the price, performance in video/photos (also low light), lenses, screens, ergonomics...

[@Jawad.1]

R8 is better

[@thecooldude4564]

At the end of the video he mentions the R8

[@NeverStopAdvancingTS]

I use only FF lenses they are higher quality built and better range and colors

[@GabrijelOfficiel]

I’ve never seen better stills from you. This camera is pure magic, and is a perfect match with fro pack 3!

[@juancarlosmiranda6830]

Agree

[@chrisbenn]

What is “The better glass”? Use fullframe lenses?

[@dereksorensen8019]

Maybe Sony doesn't want to associate the term flagship with an APS-C camera, even with the 6700 clearly being the best camera in the Sony APS-C range. It's definitely a very solid camera for the money.

[@Bomkz]

Agreed. Though personally in my opinion, and for my purposes, APS-C is much better than FF, only reason I'd like a FF camera at this point in time is if I were to become a portrait photograher. Other than that, APS-C. is rather perfect for all my usecases.

[@dereksorensen8019]

@@Bomkz Who?

[@giammarcotorrieri]

sorry but I do not understand why the prices on amazon are much higher "€" than these sites

[@overlanderuk5969]

Sony why no stacked sensor 11fps same again for the last 10 years! Fuji canon have jumped ahead in the apsc game

[@johankusters1496]

What is it with Sony that they keep coming up with bad LCD screens :(

[@davegalegor2865]

Sooooo....the question is to jump on the A6700 or wait to see what the A7C II has to offer? So far the ability to use sony catalyst with the A6700 and the FX30 features is a big plus over the A6600.

[@kaedenlara2484]

I’m torn as an a6000 user. I want to upgrade cuz this thing is so mid compared to other cameras now. This caught my eye but I’ve been set on an A9 as a hybrid/ wildlife/sports/landscape shooter. Idk what to choose now

[@guystokes454]

Rent them and compare the two. Even on the grey market the A9 is still a pretty penny.

[@Maiden1357]

same!! looking at the a6700 and the A7iv. However I already have good Aps-c lenses so I might just go with the a6700. AND I can also put FF lenses obv the crop, but I can still put nice lenses if I wanted too. well thats what im thinking lol

[@ElMundoDuro]

Was the high iso performance terrible? Was the depth of field not shallow enough? There are very few reasons to spend more money for a larger more expensive full frame setup today. Technology always makes things better and smaller over time. Other than some physical limitations with depth of field, the future will most certainly address all other issues with smaller sensors. Even those who once dismissed mirrorless cameras have come around as technology improved. How long before the full frame evangelists go the way of the DSLR evangelists?

[@pf4773]

such a profoundly true comment, thanks! Size and weight matter enormously. Picture quality is virtually the same between APSC and full frame cameras. It's a joke-I have the A6600 with great lenses and I use my IPHONE 13 camera all the time for all the reasons we love cell phone cameras. I would never bother with full frame as a photo/video enthusiaist.

[@DonVetto-vx9dd]

Someday we will get 1 inch sensor with better light sensitivity than current full frame. 35mm full frame will be a distant memory then. Just like medium format film.

[@f.iph7291]

That's why fuji is such a beloved company. They have excellent little primes. Like for real my xc 35mm f2 glass is 130grams. Who doesn't love that? I have a perfect street photography setup with xt300ii for 500 grams lol. FF madness and shallow depth of field madness is real! But it is getting borrring. Apsc has a lot of fans and already you can buy the likes of xt5s which totally gives FF a run for their money in image quality.

[@ElMundoDuro]

@f.iph7291 Fuji seems to be doing a lot right. I know some professionals who switched from Canon to Fuji and love it. Panasonic has some cool rangefinder style mft cameras that I have been watching for a long time, but they have lacked USB C, and that is a deal breaker. I am just waiting for a new model. Can't wait to put the ultra small Laowa 7.5mm F2 on it and go out hiking.

[@shadyninja1]

Now Nikon needs to respond 😂

[@zyx0011]

agree

[@cesarm8811]

Agree...but don't hold your breath.

[@endowpictures22]

Yes, with baby Z8😌

[@neerajkarunanidhi6804]

z30ii? Or a z50ii?

[@mbismbismb]

Zfc?

[@DanielWOstler]

I would rather have had the A7c body with an APS-C sensor. By the time you put a half decent lens on it, the size difference would be functionally imperceptible, and the additional real estate available for knobs and dials would be welcome .

[@SMGJohn]

Interesting, so what kind of lens is same size as a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 for full frame? Cause I really would love to know a zoom thats 290g and that tiny for full frame.

[@amirlozano3023]

Would you recommend this for a wedding/portrait main camera body?

[@johoba91]

Question - on the a6600 the raw files would be downgraded to 12-bit in 11fps bursts. Do you know if the a6700 is able to record full 14-bit raw files in 11fps bursts?

[@froknowsphoto]

They wouldn't disclose that info when we asked. My guess is it's similar to the Sony's in the past and is 12-bit when shooting in Hi+. -- Stephen

[@thinkinginpictures4071]

It doesn't look bad but IMO it's def. making the R7 and R10 look even better overall.

[@TohPhimmasenh]

Isn't this camera better in every way compared to those 2? what am i missing ? the screen?

[@truthseeker6804]

​@@TohPhimmasenhr7 has dual SD cards which is essential for modern professional.

[@careylymanjones]

With Canon, if you want a full lens kit, you're going to be buying full-frame glass, and paying the monetary and weight penalties for it. Canon's APS-C lens lineup is pathetic.

[@truthseeker6804]

@@careylymanjones better to buy full frame lens when you upgrade you can still use it. but you can also use EF/EFs lenses.

[@nickwilliams7867]

R7 has two card slots and shoots up to 30 photos per second 6700 only shoots 11. I also much prefer the eye cup in the middle not on the side. I'm a Sony shooter but the R7 is the better camera but Sony has better apse glass.

[@sbkbg]

That comment about the viewfinder and LCD is something I noticed way back when I tried at a6500 back in 2016. The previews looked trash but once I got the SD card in the computer there were some bangers.

[@Princeton_James]

Yup. Same on my a6600.

[@klaush.8116]

What do you think..... which camera tracks better, the Sony 6700 or the Cnon R7

[@dha588]

Should I buy this or the Canon R10?

[@bala1000mina]

Thank you Jared, very helpful and informative review as always! Good luck man!

[@Gremlack13]

I feel Sony is lacking in the speed of their cameras outside the a1. Everything else has been slow. Fantastic sensors that are intriguing, but being behind the trends on speed for versatility as an enthusiast, it is a deal breaker for me. I want to be able to have a decent all around camera. That’s why I ended up getting a r6ii. It seemed to be a better all around camera for me than the latest Sony cameras, especially when I waited to buy to see how the a7iv and a7Rv would turn out. They were just too slow. I’ll take the 24 mp to have an all around capable camera for almost any situation I run into as an enthusiast. Sony needs to step it up in my opinion. Great cameras and glass, just too slow on fps on ALL of their new cameras since a1.

[@cy9nvs]

That's why I went with the Z8. The 200-600 is the perfect lens for my needs, but Sony just has no fast cameras except for the very expensive A1. As soon as Nikon announced their 180-600 I pounced.

[@cagada]

What is slow about it? I’m debating to get the 6700 🤔

[@ryanperillo]

Started my own videography business with an FX30. I shoot photo for myself so, apsc doesn't bother me, and with the price, adding this as my second shooter gets me one camera that does both and matches perfectly. I did run into an overheating issue once, but it was in direct sunlight and I didn't have it on high.

[@assai74]

Steped up to s6700 with sony g lenses from 24-525mm FF-equivalent. For that price i would stuck with a FF-Camera with a basic lens. That thing would stay home, because I do not want to carry that bulk around. And in the end I would have to annoy anyone that it is „full format“. Only Prosumers care. The Pros shoot both and do not care what you purchase.

[@Dano-Media]

It's almost as if camera companies talk to each other. "I'll have S-log 3 in my camera but crappy LCD. I'll give you the good LCD but you gotta stick to C-log 3." Also the overheating can be improved if you open the LCD and change the heating setting to high in the settings.

[@stepheneckert4006]

Heating mode was set to high. First thing we do any time we film with a Sony. Opening door will definitely help. Still surprised at how fast it overheated on us in 4k24 in a 78 degree room with no direct sunlight

[@Dano-Media]

@stepheneckert4006 Ya it's a shame it overheats that fast with the LCD unopened

[@diesolit]

I wnana know what the battery life is like, and how long you can film before the battery dies or over heats. And I see every single person doing a review on this camera never wants to mention it or show it in action

[@soheilmasoumi3009]

Thank you for this review. one question. Which camera has better focusing system and better dynamic range? Sony a6700 or Canon R8? Do you have experience? Thank you

[@hellcat4384]

17:57: One of the more important things I learned as a beginner photographer. I do not think this is stressed enough at all.

[@RokDAWG1]

I hope that Sony will work out the slight issues with the camera. If it’s not so great I The. I’ll just grab an a7 iv

[@GrantMcWilliams]

The reason Sony is carrying on with the 6x00 series cameras is size. No, you can't get it in your pocket but if you are wise about your choice of glass you could have a tiny bag with a few lenses and the body in it. I used to have a "fanny pack" sized bag for my Canon M6 II which worked really well. It went into my carryon bag in the airport and back out on the other side. I can't see doing the same with an R7 and FF glass. I'm slightly curious about the 6700 as an upgrade to the M6 II. I've had Sony cameras in the past and didn't like the way they did things, it's just me as a lot of people like them but at this point there aren't a lot of choice of small, interchangable lens cameras.

[@creaturecomfort5545]

What kind of webcam is on your monitor? Thanks!

[@RCGJR_]

Can the raw photo be opened now in lightroom? (Jan.10,2023) ?

[@EVAEVA-dd5zq]

what kind of glass was this video shot on?,what kind of glass would you recommend for shooting a video at 6700 in the studio, the content is a sculpture made of stone,the size of the sculptures is 10-15 inches,I am not limited in my budget

[@failtef1]

Which would you go for the sony A6700 or the canon R7?

[@socc3r7k1ng]

Every camera they have ever released has had uncompressed raw, there's no way they don't add that in firmware.

[@stepheneckert4006]

Seems to be the way the market is going. Nikon doesnt offer uncompressed either in z8/z9. Sonys framerate has always been hindered by uncompressed raw setting so maybe thats why they took it out 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@socc3r7k1ng]

@@stepheneckert4006 I get it but you should also expect reduce rates with bigger files.

[@nabinbajgain3042]

Hi sir, may I know the frame rate of Sony a6700 and canon r7 both in the RAW file, and how many photos can shoots continue

[@bangjoe7845]

Hopefully Nikon launches the Nikon Z80 with the specs below -24MP FX-Format BSI CMOS Stacked Sensor -EXPEED 8 Image Processor -6K30p, 4K120p, 4K60p 10-Bit 4:2:2 Internal (full sensor) oversampled from 6K, N-LOG2 & HLG -N-RAW, ProRes RAW 12-Bit Via HDMI -ProRes 422/HQ/LT 4:2:2, H.265 codecs -8-Stop In-Body 5-Axis Sensor Shift Vibration Reduction -Anti-Dust Shutter Mechanism -15fps Mechanical Shutter, 40fps Electronic Shutter Shooting With AF/AE Tracking -AI Based Subject Detection With Deep Learning -7xx Point PDAF, 3D Tracking, Real Time Eye AF -2.36m-Dot OLED EVF With 120Hz Refresh Rate -3.2" 1.62m-Dot Vari-Angle Tilting Touchscreen LCD -Dual SD Card Slot (UHS II) -Full-size HDMI Port -5GHz MIMO WiFi, Bluetooth, and GNSS -Price Around $2000-2500

[@christopherthompson4464]

Jared, this was a really interesting piece of journalism. You hit the nail on the head with the underpowered aspect: crappy EVF and screen. I’d take issue with the APS-C glass piece though. I have the Sony 16-55 and 70-350 and they are both much better than they have any right to be. Oh, also the Tamron 11-20 which is a cracker. I love these lenses so much that I sold the A6600 and got Sony’s best APS-C camera: the A7RV. My bag weighs 10lbs which is a tad less than 5kg in real money. I’m sure it sounds silly to buy such an expensive camera for APS-C. But I chose the lenses first and then bought the best body for them. Different strokes… Good job and great images. I’d love you to do a breakdown of AF modes - zone, wide, expandable, etc. I’d say gobbledegook but don’t want to be taken for an idiot…. Bestest.

[@hatzefugsingah]

You did what?

[@shmoggy417]

What does that flagship statement from Sony mean? Will they be releasing a truly high end model at some point? (Stacked Sensor, etc.)

[@zacpdx]

Couldn’t have said any better. A good picture is a good picture is a good picture. Especially with everyone using phones. No one knows the difference

[@sharkbaithohaha9583]

I grabbed the a6600 for $858 on prime day. While the a6700 AF and video improvement are great, I am not sure if it worths the $500+ difference (I usually don't take videos).

[@JulzzmZnapclipz]

I recently bought the a6700. I uploaded 4K videos. Great camera.

[@SplitStoneMedia]

Wrong Comparison, for Some! For some people an APS-C camera is a step up from what they may have been using before and might be looked at as a step towards a full frame camera system. For others, APS-C is their preferred format. For the former an a6700 gets one into the Sony system and a comparison with Sony vs Canon (vs Nikon?) full frame cameras might be relevant to their decision. For others, APS-C is their preferred format. For the APS-C focused group, we can divide users into categories; Those who have no interest in full frame cameras and those that may already have a full frame system. For those who have no interest in full frame cameras any comparison must include Fujifilm cameras as they have the largest APS-C set of options. For those who already have a full frame system, they may not need the highest performing APS-C camera in terms of spec's, they might prioritize having a similar user interface that is like their full frame systems and the compatibility with already owned lenses and accessories. This last group may prioritize small size and weight. Personally, I look at an a6700 as a way to have a small and lightweight less flashy system as I already own a full frame system (and Nikon does not have APS-C options that interest me). The a6700's smaller size (i.e. versus a Canon R7) is a key advantage for me. The compact body design with a left corner viewfinder makes for a smaller body that does not scream serious camera the way a "DSLR style" body with a center viewfinder does. It is also smaller and lighter. People like me want a smaller and lighter system for travel and other scenarios. For me it is Sony a6700 versus some Fujifilm options as Nikon and Canon do not make a compact APS-C style body. Those with full frame systems will use those when top spec's are appropriate and an a6700 for when small, light and less flashy are priorities.

[@pramodh36]

4.02 vibe of a every Sony alpha camera since A7iii😂

[@ChuihcguRydughx]

How about Sony ZV-E10? Just bought one. But what kind of filter will be better? Kase or Nisi?

[@Eric.Estrada]

I lost my FX3, but I still have my sigma glass. Unfortunately I cant afford to replace it with another FX3 right now, don't justify buying an FX30 cause for that I just wait it out and get an FX3. Should I go for the A6700 for now and then pick up an FX3 later? It will be for video. I want a hybrid camera I can use for photos too. I considered an A7IV, too but again price point I might as just wait and go with another FX3 again.I had to revert back to my Nikon Z6 and Z50 to shoot my stuff meanwhile, and it is brutal with the inconsistent autofocus.

[@SMGJohn]

Sony flagship APS-C body is either the FX-30 or an upcoming APS-C sensor inside A7 body

[@LoneAngler218]

Great information! This was perfect as I am currently using a A6000. I think this would be a nice update!

[@damianpiwecki1257]

looking for update? buy lumix s5ii, sold my a6300, you will be amazed

[@LoneAngler218]

@@damianpiwecki1257 I'm so new to this world. I wish I could test them all! Thanks for the suggestion! I will take a look.

[@careylymanjones]

@@LoneAngler218 One of the nice things about Sony is the huge ecosystem of lenses, both Sony and third-party. Sony encourages third-party manufacturers to make lenses for E-Mount, with relatively few restrictions (max 15 frames/sec, no focus breathing compensation). Canon is NO THIRD-PARTY LENSES, PERIOD. Nikon is no third-party lenses that compete with their lenses (no 50mm f/1.4, for example). This lets you build out a decent third-party lens kit at substantial savings over the competition.

[@LoneAngler218]

@@careylymanjones thanks for the comment! Sony's open E-mount system is what drew me to picking up the A6000 last December. I have the two kit lenses (16-50 & 55-210) I have also acquired a Sigma 16mm f/1.4. I love that lens! My biggest debate with myself is...upgrade to the A6700 or go full frame? Leaning toward the upgrade and getting full frame glass. Shoot that way for a few years to see if I really "need" full frame. Stay in touch!

[@danpro.u]

​@@LoneAngler218I also have 16/1.4. Our feelings about it will certainly be quite similar, because the quality is professional.

[@AhsanZafar]

i wanted to buy fullframe but FF glass is very expensive

[@Sidowse]

17:59 Full Frame isn't an upgrade for all cases! For Macro, smaller sensors are better. For telephoto, An A6700 with a 70-350mm is realistically all most people need because most people don't have access to a press-box! Jared you need to go to the game as a regular person in a regular seat. Then you might change your tune about full-frame. For non-professionals, full-frame is just stupid for wildlife and sports (too expensive, too heavy, too bulky, if you're not getting paid for it, all the fun is sucked out of the hobby). Also, full-frame glass on APS-C bodies isn't a great idea either because the higher pixel density really tests the "resolving power" of a lens and if you can afford a decent full-frame lens, you can already afford a full-frame camera. Plus, I think that there are undesirables associated with putting full-frame glass on APS-C bodies* at the wider end

[@froknowsphoto]

Check out my Nikon point and shoot video from the seats. Been there done that

[@Sidowse]

@@froknowsphoto Ah, but have you been in a regular seat with a Sony 200-600mm?

[@oz5wob3]

If Sony doesn't consider this a6700 to be their flagship APS-C, I have to wonder what is coming down the road. What's going to be their flagship camera (APS-C?)

[@TheYouTubeMechanic]

its probably not the flagship because they will come out with a photocentric fx30. fx30 plus mechanical shutter?

[@ItsPinecone_911]

Camera seems to be a pretty goos asp-c for Sony. And was shocked to se eit priced cheaper than than the a6600 which mean they may have another one up there sleeve for sure.

[@simonmaduxx6777]

$1,400 for this body is absolutely ridiculous. Overheating 4K and otherwise standard fps... This is just a weird one. This is a $900 camera being sold for $1,400. And they threw a garbage evf? Ironically one of the biggest reasons to get this instead of the Canon is because Cannon crop lenses are trash, the low end RF glass is buy it if you're poor only, and L glass is wicked expensive and wouldn't make sense unless you really needed to use it. The price is absolutely terrible, but pop a 30 mm 1.4 sigma on this as a walk around and you're as good as gold.

[@ItsPinecone_911]

@@simonmaduxx6777 cheaper than the A6600

[@careylymanjones]

A6600 is now $999. A6400 dropped to $749.

[@careylymanjones]

@@simonmaduxx6777 Sony's selling points have always been good AF, and big lens selection. You can buy into the system with third-party glass to start, and upgrade, if you feel the need, later on. Because Sony makes decent APS-C glass, you can take advantage of the size and weight advantages of APS-C kits. You can do a kit around the A6700 that covers 15-525mm full frame equivalent and weighs less than two kilos. That's a godsend for the travel/adventure photographer.

[@simonmaduxx6777]

@@careylymanjones Yeah i was addressing the fact what while the canon body may be better, the rf/rfs mount situation is heavily tilted in sonys favor regardless. The price of this body is still nonsensical imho.

[@konforzone]

How you are expecting to use ff glass for daily use duevto crop factor İf u have 24-70mm lens it will become 36-105mm Of you buy 16-35mm lens then it becomes 24-53mm O definetly doesnt fit the purpose. Only 70-200 lens would be nice to use for long distance shooting.

[@oliverwoodburyphotography6818]

I like everything about this camera…. Except the viewfinder. What’s the point in blazing fast AF on a crop sensor if you can’t use it for wildlife photography? Looking through that thing in bright conditions does not look fun! And for that price you could get an R10 and save money whilst also getting a bigger EVF and faster fps. To me this looks like a hybrid camera for those that don’t care/use a viewfinder.

[@careylymanjones]

It IS a hybrid camera. Stills-oriented cameras don't do 4K 120p. It does pretty much everything the FX30 does for less money, trading off some heat management for much better stills features. The sensor is basically the A7RV sensor, cut down to APS-C size. Would a better viewfinder be nice? Sure. This is a jack of all trades camera, capable of producing quality video AND stills, at a reasonable price. It's got the video quality of the FX30 (albeit with poorer heat management), the AF speed of the A7RV, and you can build a two-kilo kit around it that will cover everything from interiors to wildlife. And that kit will easily fit in a Peak Design 10L sling bag.

[@londonbudgetgardner5205]

16:55 The AI based auto framing is the next must have Good concise video

[@whyFINAL]

I want to upgrade from my old Olympus. I shoot mostly lifestyle photos and products (99% watches) Lately I've had a few collaborations with smaller brands. Should I go the full frame a7 iv route, or is the a6700 sufficient?

[@mdenjoyer831]

A6700

[@HBZERaviation]

What you said is interesting. Sony said that A6700 is not their APS-C High end ? It's mean that a real High end APS-C will come soon with better specs ? A real R7 and XT-5 killer ? They can do it, if they want...

[@piotrch0]

Does it drop to 12-bit when using electronic shutter only?

[@ItsPinecone_911]

Just started watching this video and you said that Sony said this isnt the flagship asp-c camera which means they got another asp-c up their sleeves that'll make this a6700 look not so great. Cant wait to see what Sony has up their sleeves next!😮

[@froknowsphoto]

that doesn't mean that at al. I don't think you will see anything beyond this in cropped sensor.

[@ItsPinecone_911]

@@froknowsphoto You are correct but we never really know. Guess we will have to wait and see.

[@dusty_burkhalter]

@@ItsPinecone_911 or maybe the FX30 is their flagship APSC and because so many rumors said the A6700 would be that, they just want to make sure you know that was not their intention with this camera and there is nothing else coming in APSC anytime soon.

[@jumpmansz]

Love all the Phillies shots. Saw you at game 3 of the World Series last year. Great vid 👏 would like a pro level APSC cam but this doesn’t feel like one

[@MartinB0]

nice body, but missing joystick must be painful experience :) (and yes, I am really missing joystick on my RX 100)

[@kkehoe5]

But how fast can it clear a full buffer now that it has a UHS-II card slot? I shoot marching band with my a6600 and I do outrun the buffer and it feels like it takes a while to clear on its UHS-I card slot. I have very fast UHS-II cards.

[@stepheneckert4006]

At 9:24 or so you can see in top left corner how quick the buffer cleared in realtime. Keep in mind we were using a fast v90 sd card…

[@kkehoe5]

@@stepheneckert4006 this is in real-time with raw photos? Seems like clearing that fast would allow way more raw photos than what’s advertised. Or is the advertised number just what a buffer can hold? That doesn’t make sense since it’s claimed to get over 1,000 jpeg photos so they have to be clearing to the card.

[@stepheneckert4006]

@@kkehoe5 correct, raw photos. You can see it says raw in top left of the screen. It’s just until it hits the threshold of the buffer and then has to stop and write the rest to the card. Their advertising was saying 1000 jpgs nonstop. It’ll do about 59 or so compressed raw then stop and buffer but then youre good to shoot again fairly quickly as long as you have the fastest sd card (v90). With lossless compressed raw it’ll do about 26 or so. But still plenty for quick bursts

[@mamunoz23]

Noob here, on a camera like the A1 or even other camera like Fuji that have higher continuous electronic shutter, do you still get “warbaly ball/bats”? Thank you

[@CarstenBruhn]

At the end of the day, its about keeper rate. I would rather have 8 out of 11 frames in focus, than 5 out of 15.

[@autodriv3r405]

Autofocus a6700 or eos r7? Winner?

[@ladozaartandphotography575]

Hello. Thanks for this video as I'm looking into getting a new camera and it looks like it's going to be one of these. I'm a canon 5D MK3 user of some time and torn between these two choices. The stills of the Canon is the point that's got me questioning the A6700. I want to start filming slow motion shots in 4K but also feel I'm more of a stills photographer. Is the extra megapixel difference my answer, or would the 26 megapixel be a noticeable difference to what I'm currently using?

[@jdauk04]

probably not noticeable

[@toneohm]

this is the fourth review I've watched... YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE to actually criticize Sony for the EVF and/or LCD... and to that extent, (not just a passing comment) very thorough of you.. lol, from one Philly guy to another,, thanks for being real ! PS - (the Almost Famous ' eleven ' cutaway was priceless..) haha

[@berko109]

Great review. How will you compare it to the old A9 full frame for wildlife? New technology crop sensor Vs old but full frame sensor...

[@JoeMaranophotography]

Yeah I'm curious about this for wildlife too! At the minute it's OM1 or wait for Panasonic to decide if they like money.

[@christydaniel4140]

A6700 or A7 3 Which is better

[@davidmaxfieldgolf]

Same price I don’t understand why people wouldn’t just buy a Canon R8?

[@thesharpercoder]

LOL. “When I got the JPGs back on the computer and I was like … D###!”

[@endowpictures22]

Your DP is funny 😂🤣

[@whippedcreampictures]

that boomerang rolling shutter photo - was it from the sony a6700 or canon r7 you were conparing it to?

[@stepheneckert4006]

A6700

[@Takh1]

ive had mt a6400 for over 4.5 years now its starting to get a bit long in the tooth, i think ive found its replacement

[@benoittissier58]

This camera is not designed to bring new clients to Sony. It is designed for people who already have working Sony APS-C gear and don't buy anything from Sony any more. It may be designed for A7iv owners like me who found it hopeless for sports and can't find anything in the Sony range except for an outdated A9ii and an overpriced A1.

[@8bitofit359]

Interesting. In Germany the R7 was 100 € less (1.599) than the a6700 (1.699) on release.

[@tubularificationed]

They run different strategies. - Canon uses cheap (subsidized) bodies as poisoned bait to seduce naive customers, who are unaware, that they'll become ripped off brutally when it comes to restricted lens choice. - Whereas Sony can't follow such strategy (due to huge 3rd party lens choice). Sony therefore needs to price their cameras so that they pay for themselves.

[@simonmaduxx6777]

Nope I need a z30 Mark II. I'll be ready to get one next year maybe

[@lesson.3012]

It still behind the Canon R7