I started with the a6000 and just recently upgraded to the a7vi both are amazing cameras. When it comes to photo quality the a6000 was ahead of the game in 2014.
@habibniyat it would be great for street only. When buying a lens for the Sony a6000, look for one that has OSS. That's Sony's optical image stabilization in their lenses.
I've been using a6000 since 3 years. And it's such a great camera not really in low lights but outdoor and indoor with good lighting believe me you can be creative as much as u can. I'm using 35mm 1.8 for me it's better than 50mm
to be honest nowadays when we have iphone 14 pro max cam, pepole dont need anymore "professional" cams like sony a6500 or A7IV, the difference is almoust 2%, while you have smal and so usefull think like iphone 14 in pocket, this tool can make very professional photos and videos
this was so nice to watch, i just got my first camera (a6000) and seeing how well it performs in photography compared to newer cameras makes me feel like it was such a smart purchase, great video man.
@@antoniodavis4290 To be fair, I shoot weddings in low light with prime lenses, Never have that problem.... I'm fully booked out for 2 years! The quality that comes from the a6000 in the right hands is amazing. My only gremlin is the battery life is terrible!
I admire how Jason has so much love and confidence for his trusty A6000. Not a lot of people are making new content about this amazing camera. It's truly a great standard for a mirrorless camera and is still very significant after almost a decade from it's release. I'm looking forward to using mine for many years to come. Keep up the great work mate. 😎
I got mine this year had like 150 shutter activations logged must have been owned by someone who didn’t like photography 😂 I’ve shot about 25,000 and counting the old girl has some good stuff in her and will serve as a dive camera in a sea frogs housing for scuba diving 🤿.
I started with the A6000 and jumped to the A7IV a year later when I felt like I could justify an upgrade to full frame. Just being able to get the focus more reliable was such a big move. More forgiveness with cropping as well is fantastic when you need reach and can't reframe perfectly in the moment.
Ofc it's better :-) It's just really good to have options for those that have tighter budgets. Crop sensors are way cheaper comparatively and their lens options are also cheaper.
I moved from Pentax to Sony a6000 6 years ago, loved using them. Have upgraded to a7ii and then a7rii. Currently own a7iii and a6400, the a6400 autofocus is greatly improved.
I bought a new a6000 7 years ago and many Sony accessories thinking it could replace my much heavier Nikon D90 but it could not give me speed (between 2 shots) even with the fastest SD cards. I decided to buy a Nikon D500 before a trip to Japan (I ordered online and collected it at an ABC shop in Sapporo). I keep the a6000 for videos and decided buy a new Sony zv-e10 recently to get more pixels
My first camera was an Nex5R which I upgraded to the A6000 when it came out. I have to admit, I wasn't happy at how huge that body was in comparison. I was mostly shooting film then and digital was just for coverage. But I continued to happily use the A6000 for six years because the performance was so amazing at that price point. In fact, it was so popular that people would come up to me in museums, the street or wherever and ask if I was shooting the A6000 and talk about how great and cheap it was. After upgrading to the A7RIV nobody has ever come up to me about that camera. There was something very special about the A6000 that excited people. I'm sure performance to $$ unlike the current Sony line($$$$). I was able to identify the two cameras in your test, but it wasn't the slam dunk I thought it was going to be. It was mostly the details. Awesome video.
Owning both an a6000 and a full-frame Sony camera (A7C for me), I was pretty confident about the answer, and I was right--it's the nuances that make the differences, ultimately, but the a6000 can produce amazing shots regardless. I'm selling my a6000, sadly. Ultimately, even though I do like it, it sits on my shelf. It's a great little camera, on paper I should adore it for its size, versatility, lens mount compatibility, and lack of pretension, but sometimes that's just how it goes. I picked up a Fuji X-E4 as my new everyday casual camera, and I'm much more drawn to it. C'est la vie! Sometimes we are very fickle beings.
Great idea to test the two Jason! I still have my a6000 plus an a6400, a7iii, and a7iv, and love shooting with all of them. The quality of the a6000 is still amazing! I have some great shots with it and do admit I love the features on the a7iv a ton!
Brilliant stuff, it's amazing to think that the A6000 can still hold it's own after all this time. I got mine for an absolute steal and I'm reluctant to upgrade!
I this shows just how far ahead of its time the a6000 was. It still holds up incredibly well and I'd argue it paved the way for Sonys cameras despite a woefully thin lens lineup once upon a time.
Yeah there's no reason why it can't still be used for professional photographers. I would say its better than picking up a similarly priced older dslr if this is your budget.
I have the A6000 and recently upgraded to the A7IV. What makes the A7IV a better camera for me is when shooting photos and videos with tamron 70-180mm F2.8 at my son's basketball sport events. Focus , better ISO and stabilized body would make the difference. Other than that A6000 is still exellent with good APSC lens like the Sigma's series or its new Zoom lens 18-50mm that I use also on the A7IV for shooting videos...
I guessed correctly, for a few subtle things - detail on the face, background bokeh, colors. There’s a certain UMPH you can see if you’re experienced but for the average insta-consumer, they won’t know. I still use my crop bodies a fair amount, some of my best images from that convenient system.
Camera a: a6000 b: a7IV. The easiest way to see it without píxel peeping is compresion. You can match the frame but the compresion on 85 is bigger than 50. Dof is also noticeable but easier to spot compresion. Great video, clearly shows that knowladge is always more important than gear.
I been using the a6000 and when I upgraded to the A7IV I was impressed on how good the a6000 was compared to my A7IV, I sometimes miss using the a6000, but the A7IV has given me the advantage on the eye focus, and low lighting. BTW I used the 50mm 1.2 on my a6000 and it's amazing it just goes to 1.3 I think because of the APS-C.
For the low price - plus a really good lens though - the a6000 is a really great photography camera probably about 90% of a full frame, unless you want to do major cropping.
I use my a6000 for weddings etc and love the output. You must know what you are doing also I edit with capture one and have created and auto settings that applies once I import the images. Fun tip, I changed the camera type in capture one to a more expensive Sony camera and works great you can actually see the changes in color changes.
@@JavedAkterSuman Portrait with contrast +1 Saturation 0 Sharpness +1, if I want a more gun and run approach I make the saturation +2. When it comes to Capture one. I play with the rbg curve and open the shadows in the Luma curve. The rest you can adjust to your taste and see how it goes. If you need more details, hit me up.
The biggest giveaway was the color. I got a chance to use the a6000 when it first came out and use it that camera led me to buy an a6500. Neither are perfect cameras but they are definitely good. I never really liked the ergonomics of the Sony APSC cameras. Also the color always needed tweaking. I learned so much with that camera as I was starting out. Sony has improved their color a lot over the last 8 years. a6000 still a great entry/hobby camera. I use Sony professionally but own a fuji for fun and family.
This was a great video! i had the a6000 for a year now and i am very happy with it. I just got my hands on the Sigma 16mm 1.4 but i havent really had time to try it out yet. The only thing i think is a bit bad about the a6000 is that there is quite alot of noise witch i dont find any reason for. I might be pixelpeeping.
I have the a6500 and the A7IV. I like the IV a lot but the 6600 isn't too far behind. The battery life is incredible on both. Eye AF is great on both. IBIS is just okay on both. Overall Sony makes some really great cameras. After a recent negative experience with Panasonic's warranty, I am showing loyalty to Sony. Hopefully if I ever need to use their warranty services they'll be better than Panasonic.
I have the a6600 and the a7iv and do mainly product photo/video and I did a side by side and the a6600 can hang photo wise with the a7iv. The only difference is the ease of editing the files.
I got the a6000 when it came out in 2014, did photography for a bit but gave it up. Now starting back up and thinking of upgrading, the biggest reason why I want to upgrade is the autofocus. The biggest give away for me in these photos was the depth of field on the stairs, with the larger sensor on the a7iv
The big difference for me is on the crop/pixel peeping side which won't really show on RUclips. Plus the consistency of the autofocus. I've used cameras with awful autofocus and I also own an A7IV which has almost supernatural autofocus. I have made them all work. The difference is how many times you have to try and how many missed shots when you're reviewing the raw files. Now I only shoot as a hobbyist shooter. So there's no client expectations or pressure there. However, I discovered over time there is a pressure for me. My primary focus for learning photography was firstly as a hobby to keep my brain happy and secondly for travel and family moments. I realised that family moments happen in the moment and if your camera is having a Benny, you miss those keepers. Secondly, on trips. Think about it, you're spending good money to be somewhere and you're on the clock. For me I did Edinburgh last Christmas and I am doing NYC this Christmas. It's basically going to be most of a days travel to and from the UK to get there and then time in the city and area on the clock. Middle of Winter so daylight is limited and the weather will add to the odds of days where I can't do the shots I want. So when I am there, I need to make every second count, especially if I want to be doing more than spending my whole holiday in the EVF and chimping. Modern (ish in the case of my X-T3) get my business done and I can trust them (A7IV especially) to do what I require and then get on to the next thing. As well as capturing that in the moment street shot. If I am having to work around the limitations of a camera and I'm only what I'd personally describe as a slightly above average photographer. Then I'm using the wrong camera. I hit my happy spot with the Fuji X-T3 as that was the camera that really I didn't find myself especially limited with beyond the extreme points of photography with things like animal eye AF and low light hand held action shooting. Which the X-T3 struggles with, heck the X-T3 eye detect only works on humans and even then it's unreliable outside of well lit, staged shots. So I bought my A7IV and closed that gap. I do need a long lens though as currently my longest lenses are the 55-200 on Fuji and the Tamron 70-180 on Sony. So not a long reach. TL:DR gear DOES matter when you're in a hurry and are capturing things that are not set up photo shoots. No matter how skilled you are. Performance gives you time and moment buffers that skill alone can't.
@@JasonMorrisphotocinema The A7IV is not a flagship camera even. It's the enthusiasts Alpha full frame I think they call it? Premium economy lol, but it's a £2599 camera just for the body and they don't even give you a charger! When I bought my X-T3, the X-T4 had recently come out so I got that for £1149 with a genuine vertical battery grip and genuine leather half case brand new from a UK retail store. So the Sony is an expensive camera for an "entry level enthusiasts" and is by far the most I've spent on a camera in my life. Plus everything for it is more expensive, lenses especially. I have zero regrets though. Law of diminishing returns. To get 10% more, you often have to pay 200% more. I bought a little while ago a Sony A7ii with 1600 shutter activations with the not great 28-70 Sony lens and several batteries, charger and other bits for £500. It was a nice entry into the FF Sony ecosystem and convinced me I needed to go for the A7IV. The autofocus on that Sony is awful. Almost unusably bad. I really enjoyed the dynamic range and image quality though. I've kept it as a backup as doing spot focus taking your time photography, it still does the business. It's not unusable as a camera but it's hugely outclassed by current offerings. It seems around 2018 in the camera world there was a big change in technology. It made older cameras basically obsolete in focus and things like 4k video terms.
I personally think the huge reason why the Sony a6000 is still so popular today simply because of its model name. The "6000" number is simple, has a catchy ring to it, easily pronounceable and people can recall it compare to the many confusing "6x00" model numbers now. Sony's newer models is a blessing and a curse in our already tech laden terminology filled world but the "a6000" model name simply works and sticks. If someone walks in the camera section in a store or google search, the a6000 model number simply stands out. The "6000" number sounds iconic, rolls of the tongue nicely and it looks great on paper too. This also doesn't mention the fact that this camera was Sony's game changer since 2014, which is the testament to this number's current strong presence.
I have a A6000 as well as a A7III & I've paired em both with my GM 35mm 1.4 and I'd say upgrade your glass before your camera, it's definitely more important & it'll push you to move more
I have a a6300 and the number one reason to 'dump it'... is OVER HEATING. Nothing else is in need of an upgrade for me... but the OVER HEATING is a major killer.
I managed to guess correctly but I'm surprised by how well the A6000 still holds up. I'm still rocking the A6000 but would like to upgrade in the near future
I love my a6000. I use it mostly for macro now. Only thing I really don’t like, is the battery life, but it has been good to me. I upgraded to the a7III a couple years ago for the low light capability. I shoot a lot of Astro, so that was my reason for convincing my wife lol. I would like to buy the a7IV just for the screen. That would help so much during astro when shooting vertically. One day i’ll get it.
The only ways i guessed that camera A was sony A6000 was the tiny difference in the colors and the depth of them. Sony A7IV had a bit better colors and on the tracking pictures sony a6000 revealed it self. But yea overall great camera for its time and still going on. I have my a6000 for 2 years bought it brand new. Never ever did I regret buying it.
Colors look way better on the A7iv. I just upgraded from an 6400 to an A7iv and it was a world of difference. I barely have to do any editing to my raws because they already look so good. With the A6400 I had to do so much more to get decent looking colors and contrast
I've never owned a Sony APS-C camera but my Sony A7IV, well I just call it the supernatural calculator as it just keeps pulling the magic out of the hat with mathematical accuracy.
I have to edit my RAWs a lot, but the difference between my A7 II and A7 IV is that when I want to go for a certain look, there's much less I have to fix and tune on the IV. The colors fall into their places much more easily. Also the built-in color profiles are epic and way more inspiring. Often times I just try to emulate the SOOC thumbnail colors in Lightroom, because it feels right.
This video is amazing, it would be cool to have a tutorial that explains how to match sony a6XXX or a7iii color with an a7iv (color match in video). I own 6300, 6500 and a7iii. I will buy an A7iv but I don’t want to sell my previous cameras because I’m planning to use them as second cameras or backups.
I bought an a6000 as a second camera for my a6100 and it took great shots as long as there was enough light! I found the iso performance was significantly worse on the a6000 compared to my a6100 though. Still the best/cheapest hybrid camera imo. can get one for like $400 bucks used, slap a 16mm 1.4 on it and you've got an incredible webcam, video camera, and photo camera.
I think you can get very similar shots in well-lit outdoor situations except for AF. It would be interesting how the A6000 performs indoors or with less light. If the AF is off sometimes when someone is moving outdoors it would probably be worse indoors.
That was easy to guess, but i have to admit A6000 footage still looks really good. Differences were depth of field, skin tone, local contrast, tonal transitions, bokeh, amount of details. The real life difference may be have you actually made a shot or did your AF just missed. Still - both cameras are great for a price! What would be interesting is a battle between A6000 and ZV-E10.
This totally tickled my funny bone, comparing peas to carrots, with a smile on your face! It's experience that tells you only 12mp is ever needed, and nearly any camera with good glass will get you top notch results if you know how to use it. I have Nikon, Canon, and Sony, but I am defo a Sony fanboy! Great video, seen through a cynics eye!
you can tell that A is the a6000 by the shadows of the skin tone. Ive used this camera for the the past 4 years and the only thing that I hate about this camera is the part for the skin where its going from highlights to the shadow. it has wierd green orange banding thingy(orange when you really punch in). also the video aspects of this camera leaves alot to be desired today. other than that I dont mind the autofocus or any other aspect of the camera. everyting is great.
I have the A6000 and the A7III and it's easier to get the colors right on the A7III, even though the A6000 is a great camera. Wouldn't want to miss it, when I'm traveling.
wow, got it wrong... I have an a6000, so this makes me feel good! My next small upgrade will be to an a6400, for the touchscreen, weather proof and eye focus.
Great video just subscribed today . I’ve got the newer a6400 with the new sigma 18-50 mm f2/8 and was thinking of going full frame with a74 but still getting great results and a great travel set up many thanks phil
I think my main issue with these type of comparisons is that they're always in super ideal, portrait shooting scenarios. Photos will be nearly indistinguishable in these kind of situations. The more expensive equipment will shine in low light or fast paced photography. Try shooting moving subjects in bad lighting and you'll see a major difference.
Hi guys, you can check my youtube channel.. there are all the videos I made using a Sony a6000 camera with a Sigma 30mm F1.4 lens and a Meike 35mm F1.7
Great video! I've been considering upgrading off of an old MFT camera (the Pan G5, from all the way back in 2012) to the a6000 for a variety of reasons, and it's always good to see that the gear one's considering can hold up. That said, I did spot which camera was which, and it was through the bokeh. Bokeh always gives away the game in crop/FF comparisons. But of course, crank out to f/1.8 and you'll still melt the backgrounds on even the most tightly cropped sensors, so it's really just a tell for these sort of "we shot the same photo with the same settings" tests. The fact that I even have to use a tell instead of being able to figure it out from the broader photo says a ton for how well the a6000 keeps up despite age *and* position.
I think the technology in terms of 'image quality' has peaked decades ago. You can take a fantastic picture with a very old mechanical camera. All the improvements thereafter are related to "technical" stuff - more pixels, faster chips resulting in faster focusing, eye tracking tech, etc. The real things about an "image quality" itself evolve very very slowly.
The difference is noticeable, because the full frame sensor from what I've seen has a more aggressive bokeh, compared to the aps-c sensor. I love the world of photography, but due to the high cost I only recently got a mirrorless camera, with a micro 4/3 sensor why? I wanted a not too expensive and very compact system to always carry with me, and I chose the Panasonic GX80/85 and despite being dated since it's from 2016 it's already giving me some good shots... But I entered the world of photography convinced that it is not the camera or sensor that makes the difference, but the photographer who makes the difference with his style and his skills (My English is terrible, so I get help from google)
Nice video, I still use my a6000 even after 5 years of use, but believe it or not I'm using more my Sony Zv-1 with a Godox flash. I'm no professional, just enjoy photography.
Very enjoyable. In have an a74 and I would like an aps-c sensor second body to give me extra reach in some wildlife situations. The crop mode in the a74 produces about 14 megapixel images and the A6000 and other members of the series have a 24Mp sensor. I am not sure whether to get an A6000 series body with IBIS and the upgraded autofocus or not. I suspect that Sony has another surprise waiting in the A6000 series line up, but it would certainly be more expensive than existing models.
That 14MP is still pretty decent in the crop mode. Really just depends what you use it for and where it gets posted or displayed. A cheap a6000 could do the trick
Probably any modern camera will perform very nice in good light conditions. But AF and especially low light conditions performance... That's where the biggest difference is. Also when comparing different sensor sizes.
Maybe I should see how the Sony NEX-3 (the first entry-level E-mount camera) compares. I bought one a few weeks ago out of latent curiosity as I was originally going to see how the FX30 would look with the cheap 16-50mm lens, but gave up on the FX30 after delays with the preorder. I don't have any other Sony camera to compare against right now though (but maybe I might see how it compares with my Panasonic S5)
I have an Alpha 6600 and somehow the cam A pictures looked more familiar. I think the skin tones are better on the A7, but it's hard to say, I think the pictures were edited. And most obvious at 5:44 when you zoomed in, the cam A picture was much more grainy and from that second I was sure which camera was A and which was B. But it is impressive what the little and honestly outdated APSC lineup is capable to.
The downside of A6000 series is more on the body control. The lack of buttons make it more enjoyable to shoot on a FullFrame than APS-C. Beside that, great cameras.
*Hey mate, do you know anywhere I can find realistic backdrops [office/bedroom/timber-wall] for my green screen?* I'm struggling to find something that looks realistic [maybe even a bokeh blurred backdrop of a room]. Cheers mate.
A much closer comparison would be the a6400 and the a7IV. The AF is close but not as good as the a7IV. The problems start showing up with overall image quality though. Worse noise and much more loss of detail at higher ISOs with the a6400. That’s where the full frame camera shines. I also think taking images of pretty models is distracting when making these camera comparisons. The old saying of if you want better images find better subjects blurs the lines a bit. With this said I do have an a6400 and an a7IV and when traveling the a6400 is a nice option. It’s super compact and with the right light and or fast lens the image quality is excellent. Overall though the image quality and especially the shooting experience is so much better with the a7IV.
Bro very nice compare, you should do it with zve10 since it's the most recent apsc from Sony, I had an a6000, moved to fullframe a7ii but moved back to apsc Sony zve10. Soooooo many features
Kinda odd, but i'd rather rate the editing on this video. Note that i don't hate the editor, it's just that things aren't polished enough to let's say "Professional." I know i'm just a no one, but i'd rather tell you a heads up. Still a great video and comparison still.
It was pretty easy to guess them out.Sony a6000 has poor to mediocre lens compared to full frame E-Mount.I had a Sony a5100(same sensor) + Sigma 16mm 1.4 for 4 years and finally i switch to a micro 4/3 Olympus EM5 Mk.2. I consider this a real upgrade cause of ergonomics, weather sealing, insane good IBIS, professional grade lens lineup, High-Res Mode,focus stacking,focus bracketing and so on.
@@JasonMorrisphotocinema haha to be fair I went A6000 -> A6600 -> A7iv within 2 years but yes, hell of an upgrade. My eye and shooting life has greatly improved!
I've guessed it right, but just because of the eye autofocus while shooting burst mode. Tha a7iv was more in focus there. The other pictures were really hard to tell in daylight.
What were your camera settings for the a6000 for the model's hair to look so TACK SHARP?? I ultimately guess right but I struggled bc sometimes my a6000 images don't get as tack sharp on the edges of my subject that well. please make a video about this or just type out what u remember putting your camera as.
i have a a6000 and have been wanting to upgrade. I dont shoot photos, but i make mainly videos. I hope Sony will release a new APSC camera soon, a7iv is way too expensive for me.
A bad camera can perform 60-70 percent as good as an awesome professional camera, under good light... The moment you get in low light or some more challenging situations, thats when you notice a great difference
Could figure out that the camera A was A6000 and B was Sony A7IV. Reason: For the same f stop lens and same composition, Cropsensor camera usually does less background blur due to the multiplication factor. so even if you used f1.4 for both the cameras, full frame will have f/1.4 effective apperture and crop sensor will have effective f/(1.4*1.4) = f/1.96 effective apperture ie. less background blur. Its not visible in all the picutres but some pictures its pretty clear.
I noticed about the a6000 because of the chromatic aberration on the stairs, otherwhise on both A and B there were good photos made with good lenses.. difficult to differenciate
Something you didn't touch on, which is the big difference with these cameras and lenses, is price- Sony A6000 with lens= £700 | Sony A7IV with lens= £3500
Interesting so im not the only one who jumps from a6000 to the IV ...COOL. And YES the a6000 ist still a very capable cam to this day. Always recommend it for people who just want to start out. BUT. Yes for a portrait shooting it´s easy. Now go and shoot pets/kids running around. Yes i´ve done it for years. the a7IV makes you go laaaazy. Still, I agree its amazing how well the a6000 holds up.
I started with the a6000 and just recently upgraded to the a7vi both are amazing cameras. When it comes to photo quality the a6000 was ahead of the game in 2014.
How about the sony a6000 camera for street photography only?Which lens would be better? Which contains stabilizers.
@habibniyat it would be great for street only. When buying a lens for the Sony a6000, look for one that has OSS. That's Sony's optical image stabilization in their lenses.
I've been using a6000 since 3 years. And it's such a great camera not really in low lights but outdoor and indoor with good lighting believe me you can be creative as much as u can. I'm using 35mm 1.8 for me it's better than 50mm
So good! 35mm f1.8 is a brilliant lens
to be honest nowadays when we have iphone 14 pro max cam, pepole dont need anymore "professional" cams like sony a6500 or A7IV, the difference is almoust 2%, while you have smal and so usefull think like iphone 14 in pocket, this tool can make very professional photos and videos
@@bizneslupa3629 2% difference? Yeah nah. iPhones cannot do what cameras can do. RUclipsrs just like making these videos
@@bizneslupa3629 i cant believe that you have this opinion
@@bizneslupa3629 zoom pls, compare it to a camera
this was so nice to watch, i just got my first camera (a6000) and seeing how well it performs in photography compared to newer cameras makes me feel like it was such a smart purchase, great video man.
Remember that it mat struggle in low light
@@antoniodavis4290 the 6300 seems to do find in low light
@@antoniodavis4290
To be fair, I shoot weddings in low light with prime lenses, Never have that problem.... I'm fully booked out for 2 years! The quality that comes from the a6000 in the right hands is amazing.
My only gremlin is the battery life is terrible!
How about the sony a6000 camera for street photography only?Which lens would be better? Which contains stabilizers.
@@habibniyat
Go for the 17-70 f2.8 throughout.... Amazing results!
I admire how Jason has so much love and confidence for his trusty A6000. Not a lot of people are making new content about this amazing camera. It's truly a great standard for a mirrorless camera and is still very significant after almost a decade from it's release. I'm looking forward to using mine for many years to come. Keep up the great work mate. 😎
I got mine this year had like 150 shutter activations logged must have been owned by someone who didn’t like photography 😂 I’ve shot about 25,000 and counting the old girl has some good stuff in her and will serve as a dive camera in a sea frogs housing for scuba diving 🤿.
I started with the A6000 and jumped to the A7IV a year later when I felt like I could justify an upgrade to full frame. Just being able to get the focus more reliable was such a big move. More forgiveness with cropping as well is fantastic when you need reach and can't reframe perfectly in the moment.
Ofc it's better :-)
It's just really good to have options for those that have tighter budgets. Crop sensors are way cheaper comparatively and their lens options are also cheaper.
@@barreltitor1419 you can run the same lens for a6000 on a7iv.
How about the sony a6000 camera for street photography only?Which lens would be better? Which contains stabilizers.
I moved from Pentax to Sony a6000 6 years ago, loved using them. Have upgraded to a7ii and then a7rii. Currently own a7iii and a6400, the a6400 autofocus is greatly improved.
I bought a new a6000 7 years ago and many Sony accessories thinking it could replace my much heavier Nikon D90 but it could not give me speed (between 2 shots) even with the fastest SD cards. I decided to buy a Nikon D500 before a trip to Japan (I ordered online and collected it at an ABC shop in Sapporo). I keep the a6000 for videos and decided buy a new Sony zv-e10 recently to get more pixels
My first camera was an Nex5R which I upgraded to the A6000 when it came out. I have to admit, I wasn't happy at how huge that body was in comparison. I was mostly shooting film then and digital was just for coverage. But I continued to happily use the A6000 for six years because the performance was so amazing at that price point. In fact, it was so popular that people would come up to me in museums, the street or wherever and ask if I was shooting the A6000 and talk about how great and cheap it was. After upgrading to the A7RIV nobody has ever come up to me about that camera. There was something very special about the A6000 that excited people. I'm sure performance to $$ unlike the current Sony line($$$$). I was able to identify the two cameras in your test, but it wasn't the slam dunk I thought it was going to be. It was mostly the details. Awesome video.
Owning both an a6000 and a full-frame Sony camera (A7C for me), I was pretty confident about the answer, and I was right--it's the nuances that make the differences, ultimately, but the a6000 can produce amazing shots regardless. I'm selling my a6000, sadly. Ultimately, even though I do like it, it sits on my shelf. It's a great little camera, on paper I should adore it for its size, versatility, lens mount compatibility, and lack of pretension, but sometimes that's just how it goes. I picked up a Fuji X-E4 as my new everyday casual camera, and I'm much more drawn to it. C'est la vie! Sometimes we are very fickle beings.
Great idea to test the two Jason! I still have my a6000 plus an a6400, a7iii, and a7iv, and love shooting with all of them. The quality of the a6000 is still amazing! I have some great shots with it and do admit I love the features on the a7iv a ton!
Absolutely. Great camera
I have them all also. Im just missing the a7IV. I use my a7III for photos and video and the rest for just videos.
Brilliant stuff, it's amazing to think that the A6000 can still hold it's own after all this time. I got mine for an absolute steal and I'm reluctant to upgrade!
Good job, Interesting comparison.
A is a6000, and B is A7IV,
really hard to tell until the auto focus zoom-in photos.
I this shows just how far ahead of its time the a6000 was. It still holds up incredibly well and I'd argue it paved the way for Sonys cameras despite a woefully thin lens lineup once upon a time.
Absolutely. Seems still good for photos in 2022
Yeah there's no reason why it can't still be used for professional photographers.
I would say its better than picking up a similarly priced older dslr if this is your budget.
I have the A6000 and recently upgraded to the A7IV. What makes the A7IV a better camera for me is when shooting photos and videos with tamron 70-180mm F2.8 at my son's basketball sport events. Focus , better ISO and stabilized body would make the difference. Other than that A6000 is still exellent with good APSC lens like the Sigma's series or its new Zoom lens 18-50mm that I use also on the A7IV for shooting videos...
I guessed correctly, for a few subtle things - detail on the face, background bokeh, colors. There’s a certain UMPH you can see if you’re experienced but for the average insta-consumer, they won’t know. I still use my crop bodies a fair amount, some of my best images from that convenient system.
Camera a: a6000 b: a7IV. The easiest way to see it without píxel peeping is compresion. You can match the frame but the compresion on 85 is bigger than 50. Dof is also noticeable but easier to spot compresion.
Great video, clearly shows that knowladge is always more important than gear.
Yes depth of Field is the tell tale sign. Incredible that with knowing that there isn’t much difference
I been using the a6000 and when I upgraded to the A7IV I was impressed on how good the a6000 was compared to my A7IV, I sometimes miss using the a6000, but the A7IV has given me the advantage on the eye focus, and low lighting. BTW I used the 50mm 1.2 on my a6000 and it's amazing it just goes to 1.3 I think because of the APS-C.
I like that you push the fact, the photographer is the biggest factor. We don't have to have the latest and most expensive camera gear.
a6000我已经用了5年了，搭配上适合的镜头，比如sigma 30 f1.4，它依然能拍出不输全画幅的照片。而且在体积和重量上，a6000的优势很大，是一台适合旅游带出去的相机。
Been using the Sony a6000 since October 2017...love the camera as it was my first camera.... Planning to get a Sony A74 soon
For the low price - plus a really good lens though - the a6000 is a really great photography camera probably about 90% of a full frame, unless you want to do major cropping.
I use my a6000 for weddings etc and love the output. You must know what you are doing also I edit with capture one and have created and auto settings that applies once I import the images.
Fun tip, I changed the camera type in capture one to a more expensive Sony camera and works great you can actually see the changes in color changes.
Oh nice trick haha
If you could specify which camera settings look good for a6000 in Capture One.
@@JavedAkterSuman Portrait with contrast +1 Saturation 0 Sharpness +1, if I want a more gun and run approach I make the saturation +2. When it comes to Capture one. I play with the rbg curve and open the shadows in the Luma curve.
The rest you can adjust to your taste and see how it goes.
If you need more details, hit me up.
Just goes to show that older cameras isn’t necessarily bad cameras just because new technology is released ☺️ Nice video ☺️👌🏻
I think the conditions in this video where very favorable for the A6000, lots of light and pretty slow or no movement from the subject.
Agreed. Very favourable conditions but none the less stop very close battle for portraiture
The biggest giveaway was the color. I got a chance to use the a6000 when it first came out and use it that camera led me to buy an a6500. Neither are perfect cameras but they are definitely good. I never really liked the ergonomics of the Sony APSC cameras. Also the color always needed tweaking. I learned so much with that camera as I was starting out. Sony has improved their color a lot over the last 8 years. a6000 still a great entry/hobby camera. I use Sony professionally but own a fuji for fun and family.
This was a great video! i had the a6000 for a year now and i am very happy with it. I just got my hands on the Sigma 16mm 1.4 but i havent really had time to try it out yet. The only thing i think is a bit bad about the a6000 is that there is quite alot of noise witch i dont find any reason for. I might be pixelpeeping.
Hahaha zoom out. Stop pixel peeping ;) haha
I have the a6500 and the A7IV. I like the IV a lot but the 6600 isn't too far behind. The battery life is incredible on both. Eye AF is great on both. IBIS is just okay on both. Overall Sony makes some really great cameras. After a recent negative experience with Panasonic's warranty, I am showing loyalty to Sony. Hopefully if I ever need to use their warranty services they'll be better than Panasonic.
I have the a6600 and the a7iv and do mainly product photo/video and I did a side by side and the a6600 can hang photo wise with the a7iv. The only difference is the ease of editing the files.
Easily guessed it correctly. Biggest thing for me was the improvements made to the color science in the a7iv, especially in skintones
I got the a6000 when it came out in 2014, did photography for a bit but gave it up. Now starting back up and thinking of upgrading, the biggest reason why I want to upgrade is the autofocus.
The biggest give away for me in these photos was the depth of field on the stairs, with the larger sensor on the a7iv
Sony mic sounds great. I got the smaller version and have been really happy with it.
Yeah I think they’re amazing mics
The big difference for me is on the crop/pixel peeping side which won't really show on RUclips. Plus the consistency of the autofocus. I've used cameras with awful autofocus and I also own an A7IV which has almost supernatural autofocus. I have made them all work. The difference is how many times you have to try and how many missed shots when you're reviewing the raw files.
Now I only shoot as a hobbyist shooter. So there's no client expectations or pressure there. However, I discovered over time there is a pressure for me. My primary focus for learning photography was firstly as a hobby to keep my brain happy and secondly for travel and family moments. I realised that family moments happen in the moment and if your camera is having a Benny, you miss those keepers. Secondly, on trips. Think about it, you're spending good money to be somewhere and you're on the clock. For me I did Edinburgh last Christmas and I am doing NYC this Christmas. It's basically going to be most of a days travel to and from the UK to get there and then time in the city and area on the clock. Middle of Winter so daylight is limited and the weather will add to the odds of days where I can't do the shots I want. So when I am there, I need to make every second count, especially if I want to be doing more than spending my whole holiday in the EVF and chimping. Modern (ish in the case of my X-T3) get my business done and I can trust them (A7IV especially) to do what I require and then get on to the next thing. As well as capturing that in the moment street shot.
If I am having to work around the limitations of a camera and I'm only what I'd personally describe as a slightly above average photographer. Then I'm using the wrong camera.
I hit my happy spot with the Fuji X-T3 as that was the camera that really I didn't find myself especially limited with beyond the extreme points of photography with things like animal eye AF and low light hand held action shooting. Which the X-T3 struggles with, heck the X-T3 eye detect only works on humans and even then it's unreliable outside of well lit, staged shots. So I bought my A7IV and closed that gap. I do need a long lens though as currently my longest lenses are the 55-200 on Fuji and the Tamron 70-180 on Sony. So not a long reach.
TL:DR gear DOES matter when you're in a hurry and are capturing things that are not set up photo shoots. No matter how skilled you are. Performance gives you time and moment buffers that skill alone can't.
Yes auto focus I found was the biggest difference for me when using them
@@JasonMorrisphotocinema The A7IV is not a flagship camera even. It's the enthusiasts Alpha full frame I think they call it? Premium economy lol, but it's a £2599 camera just for the body and they don't even give you a charger! When I bought my X-T3, the X-T4 had recently come out so I got that for £1149 with a genuine vertical battery grip and genuine leather half case brand new from a UK retail store.
So the Sony is an expensive camera for an "entry level enthusiasts" and is by far the most I've spent on a camera in my life. Plus everything for it is more expensive, lenses especially. I have zero regrets though. Law of diminishing returns. To get 10% more, you often have to pay 200% more. I bought a little while ago a Sony A7ii with 1600 shutter activations with the not great 28-70 Sony lens and several batteries, charger and other bits for £500. It was a nice entry into the FF Sony ecosystem and convinced me I needed to go for the A7IV. The autofocus on that Sony is awful. Almost unusably bad. I really enjoyed the dynamic range and image quality though. I've kept it as a backup as doing spot focus taking your time photography, it still does the business. It's not unusable as a camera but it's hugely outclassed by current offerings. It seems around 2018 in the camera world there was a big change in technology. It made older cameras basically obsolete in focus and things like 4k video terms.
I personally think the huge reason why the Sony a6000 is still so popular today simply because of its model name. The "6000" number is simple, has a catchy ring to it, easily pronounceable and people can recall it compare to the many confusing "6x00" model numbers now. Sony's newer models is a blessing and a curse in our already tech laden terminology filled world but the "a6000" model name simply works and sticks. If someone walks in the camera section in a store or google search, the a6000 model number simply stands out.
The "6000" number sounds iconic, rolls of the tongue nicely and it looks great on paper too. This also doesn't mention the fact that this camera was Sony's game changer since 2014, which is the testament to this number's current strong presence.
That's the silliest thing I have read in this comment section lol
I have a A6000 as well as a A7III & I've paired em both with my GM 35mm 1.4 and I'd say upgrade your glass before your camera, it's definitely more important & it'll push you to move more
I can never get these comparisons correct. I own an a6000 now for 6 years and still love it.
I have a a6300 and the number one reason to 'dump it'... is OVER HEATING. Nothing else is in need of an upgrade for me... but the OVER HEATING is a major killer.
I managed to guess correctly but I'm surprised by how well the A6000 still holds up. I'm still rocking the A6000 but would like to upgrade in the near future
I love my a6000. I use it mostly for macro now. Only thing I really don’t like, is the battery life, but it has been good to me. I upgraded to the a7III a couple years ago for the low light capability. I shoot a lot of Astro, so that was my reason for convincing my wife lol. I would like to buy the a7IV just for the screen. That would help so much during astro when shooting vertically. One day i’ll get it.
Camera B of course wins! Much better light/shadows, much better boket, much more details/sharpness, etc.
The only ways i guessed that camera A was sony A6000 was the tiny difference in the colors and the depth of them. Sony A7IV had a bit better colors and on the tracking pictures sony a6000 revealed it self. But yea overall great camera for its time and still going on. I have my a6000 for 2 years bought it brand new. Never ever did I regret buying it.
I really loved this comparison, I have the Sony a6000 since 2018, I liked that you included technical specs. You have a new subscriber 👏
Colors look way better on the A7iv. I just upgraded from an 6400 to an A7iv and it was a world of difference. I barely have to do any editing to my raws because they already look so good. With the A6400 I had to do so much more to get decent looking colors and contrast
I've never owned a Sony APS-C camera but my Sony A7IV, well I just call it the supernatural calculator as it just keeps pulling the magic out of the hat with mathematical accuracy.
Colors are definitely more vibrant and contrasty out of camera
I just bought the a6400 😭
I have to edit my RAWs a lot, but the difference between my A7 II and A7 IV is that when I want to go for a certain look, there's much less I have to fix and tune on the IV. The colors fall into their places much more easily.
Also the built-in color profiles are epic and way more inspiring. Often times I just try to emulate the SOOC thumbnail colors in Lightroom, because it feels right.
@@JasonMorrisphotocinema agreed. I think the colors are more true to life as well.
This video is amazing, it would be cool to have a tutorial that explains how to match sony a6XXX or a7iii color with an a7iv (color match in video). I own 6300, 6500 and a7iii. I will buy an A7iv but I don’t want to sell my previous cameras because I’m planning to use them as second cameras or backups.
what is the lens ? combined with sony 6000 ???
I bought an a6000 as a second camera for my a6100 and it took great shots as long as there was enough light! I found the iso performance was significantly worse on the a6000 compared to my a6100 though. Still the best/cheapest hybrid camera imo. can get one for like $400 bucks used, slap a 16mm 1.4 on it and you've got an incredible webcam, video camera, and photo camera.
I think you can get very similar shots in well-lit outdoor situations except for AF. It would be interesting how the A6000 performs indoors or with less light. If the AF is off sometimes when someone is moving outdoors it would probably be worse indoors.
I might have to do a low light scenario video too
That was easy to guess, but i have to admit A6000 footage still looks really good. Differences were depth of field, skin tone, local contrast, tonal transitions, bokeh, amount of details.
The real life difference may be have you actually made a shot or did your AF just missed.
Still - both cameras are great for a price!
What would be interesting is a battle between A6000 and ZV-E10.
This totally tickled my funny bone, comparing peas to carrots, with a smile on your face!
It's experience that tells you only 12mp is ever needed, and nearly any camera with good glass will get you top notch results if you know how to use it. I have Nikon, Canon, and Sony, but I am defo a Sony fanboy! Great video, seen through a cynics eye!
People are mistaking features for quality of image. A6000 still gets great images. Just doesn't have all the bells and whistles of the a74.
Great video mate, I just subscribed and can't wait to watch more of your stuff!
Would've kept the A6000 longer, but the green shadows killed it for me. Upgraded to the A6300 and everything looks normal again.
you can tell that A is the a6000 by the shadows of the skin tone. Ive used this camera for the the past 4 years and the only thing that I hate about this camera is the part for the skin where its going from highlights to the shadow. it has wierd green orange banding thingy(orange when you really punch in). also the video aspects of this camera leaves alot to be desired today. other than that I dont mind the autofocus or any other aspect of the camera. everyting is great.
I have the A6000 and the A7III and it's easier to get the colors right on the A7III, even though the A6000 is a great camera. Wouldn't want to miss it, when I'm traveling.
I love the a7iii
wow, got it wrong... I have an a6000, so this makes me feel good! My next small upgrade will be to an a6400, for the touchscreen, weather proof and eye focus.
A6000 old series has a green cast, when a7iv is much more accurate in skintone. That was obvious. Good job making photos so similar
That’s correct. Newer Colors are great
Great video just subscribed today . I’ve got the newer a6400 with the new sigma 18-50 mm f2/8 and was thinking of going full frame with a74 but still getting great results and a great travel set up many thanks phil
How tf does your channel not have more subs? I'm not trying to compliment you I'm legitimately confused... your visuals are 🤌
I think my main issue with these type of comparisons is that they're always in super ideal, portrait shooting scenarios. Photos will be nearly indistinguishable in these kind of situations. The more expensive equipment will shine in low light or fast paced photography. Try shooting moving subjects in bad lighting and you'll see a major difference.
Hi guys, you can check my youtube channel.. there are all the videos I made using a Sony a6000 camera with a Sigma 30mm F1.4 lens and a Meike 35mm F1.7
I have two a6000 bodies with tamron 17-70 and sony 70-350 + luminar neo. Perfect for my needs. Still waiting for new a6xxx release.
Oh nice!!! Such a good camera
Great video! I've been considering upgrading off of an old MFT camera (the Pan G5, from all the way back in 2012) to the a6000 for a variety of reasons, and it's always good to see that the gear one's considering can hold up.
That said, I did spot which camera was which, and it was through the bokeh. Bokeh always gives away the game in crop/FF comparisons. But of course, crank out to f/1.8 and you'll still melt the backgrounds on even the most tightly cropped sensors, so it's really just a tell for these sort of "we shot the same photo with the same settings" tests. The fact that I even have to use a tell instead of being able to figure it out from the broader photo says a ton for how well the a6000 keeps up despite age *and* position.
It was very easy to guess..although pretty close, 50 and 85 do make the difference
I started my production company with an A6000 Great little camera even after all these years.
I think the technology in terms of 'image quality' has peaked decades ago. You can take a fantastic picture with a very old mechanical camera. All the improvements thereafter are related to "technical" stuff - more pixels, faster chips resulting in faster focusing, eye tracking tech, etc. The real things about an "image quality" itself evolve very very slowly.
The difference is noticeable, because the full frame sensor from what I've seen has a more aggressive bokeh, compared to the aps-c sensor.
I love the world of photography, but due to the high cost I only recently got a mirrorless camera, with a micro 4/3 sensor why? I wanted a not too expensive and very compact system to always carry with me, and I chose the Panasonic GX80/85 and despite being dated since it's from 2016 it's already giving me some good shots...
But I entered the world of photography convinced that it is not the camera or sensor that makes the difference, but the photographer who makes the difference with his style and his skills
(My English is terrible, so I get help from google)
Nice video, I still use my a6000 even after 5 years of use, but believe it or not I'm using more my Sony Zv-1 with a Godox flash. I'm no professional, just enjoy photography.
Very enjoyable. In have an a74 and I would like an aps-c sensor second body to give me extra reach in some wildlife situations. The crop mode in the a74 produces about 14 megapixel images and the A6000 and other members of the series have a 24Mp sensor. I am not sure whether to get an A6000 series body with IBIS and the upgraded autofocus or not. I suspect that Sony has another surprise waiting in the A6000 series line up, but it would certainly be more expensive than existing models.
That 14MP is still pretty decent in the crop mode. Really just depends what you use it for and where it gets posted or displayed. A cheap a6000 could do the trick
Well done for still championing A6000, looks good and holding up, looking forward to your 2023 review 😎
Holds up very well in my opinion
Exactly the video i needed! thanks!
Pls compare sony a6300 to the fx3 in depth
Probably any modern camera will perform very nice in good light conditions. But AF and especially low light conditions performance... That's where the biggest difference is. Also when comparing different sensor sizes.
Maybe I should see how the Sony NEX-3 (the first entry-level E-mount camera) compares. I bought one a few weeks ago out of latent curiosity as I was originally going to see how the FX30 would look with the cheap 16-50mm lens, but gave up on the FX30 after delays with the preorder. I don't have any other Sony camera to compare against right now though (but maybe I might see how it compares with my Panasonic S5)
I have an Alpha 6600 and somehow the cam A pictures looked more familiar. I think the skin tones are better on the A7, but it's hard to say, I think the pictures were edited. And most obvious at 5:44 when you zoomed in, the cam A picture was much more grainy and from that second I was sure which camera was A and which was B. But it is impressive what the little and honestly outdated APSC lineup is capable to.
If I am shooting personally the A6000 Client work the A7IV. The Model could even make a Panasonic image look good!
Hahaha she does make things easier
Great video. Thanks for compare. Say which 50mm lens did you used on a6000?
i have both of these cameras and i got it wrong. nice work
The downside of A6000 series is more on the body control. The lack of buttons make it more enjoyable to shoot on a FullFrame than APS-C. Beside that, great cameras.
It was really hard to tell, but what gave it away for me was depth of feild
Yes, seems like the only major difference sometimes
I kept my first camera, the a6000 when I upgraded to the A73 and AV4. I use it for timelapses.
A6000 does very well sometimes
Probably i will buy A6100 next month. I hope to make and keep some sharp photographic memory then😍😍
*Hey mate, do you know anywhere I can find realistic backdrops [office/bedroom/timber-wall] for my green screen?* I'm struggling to find something that looks realistic [maybe even a bokeh blurred backdrop of a room]. Cheers mate.
Bro your Texts are glitching :D awesome video tho, keep it up
A much closer comparison would be the a6400 and the a7IV. The AF is close but not as good as the a7IV. The problems start showing up with overall image quality though. Worse noise and much more loss of detail at higher ISOs with the a6400. That’s where the full frame camera shines. I also think taking images of pretty models is distracting when making these camera comparisons. The old saying of if you want better images find better subjects blurs the lines a bit. With this said I do have an a6400 and an a7IV and when traveling the a6400 is a nice option. It’s super compact and with the right light and or fast lens the image quality is excellent. Overall though the image quality and especially the shooting experience is so much better with the a7IV.
Bro very nice compare, you should do it with zve10 since it's the most recent apsc from Sony, I had an a6000, moved to fullframe a7ii but moved back to apsc Sony zve10. Soooooo many features
I might have to do that 🔥
It would be good to know what lens was being used on the 6000 - I assume not the kit lens? Great video for newbie like me.
Good video. Sony a6000 is really a good camera
Kinda odd, but i'd rather rate the editing on this video. Note that i don't hate the editor, it's just that things aren't polished enough to let's say "Professional."
I know i'm just a no one, but i'd rather tell you a heads up. Still a great video and comparison still.
It was pretty easy to guess them out.Sony a6000 has poor to mediocre lens compared to full frame E-Mount.I had a Sony a5100(same sensor) + Sigma 16mm 1.4 for 4 years and finally i switch to a micro 4/3 Olympus EM5 Mk.2. I consider this a real upgrade cause of ergonomics, weather sealing, insane good IBIS, professional grade lens lineup, High-Res Mode,focus stacking,focus bracketing and so on.
I don’t know about easy. They both looked pretty close on my screens and that is with no RUclips compression
The body i started on vs the body i have now
Yewww what an upgrade
@@JasonMorrisphotocinema haha to be fair I went A6000 -> A6600 -> A7iv within 2 years but yes, hell of an upgrade. My eye and shooting life has greatly improved!
How about the sony a6000 camera for street photography only?Which lens would be better? Which contains stabilizers.
Tamron 17-70mm f2.8
I've guessed it right, but just because of the eye autofocus while shooting burst mode. Tha a7iv was more in focus there. The other pictures were really hard to tell in daylight.
What were your camera settings for the a6000 for the model's hair to look so TACK SHARP?? I ultimately guess right but I struggled bc sometimes my a6000 images don't get as tack sharp on the edges of my subject that well. please make a video about this or just type out what u remember putting your camera as.
i have a a6000 and have been wanting to upgrade. I dont shoot photos, but i make mainly videos. I hope Sony will release a new APSC camera soon, a7iv is way too expensive for me.
A bad camera can perform 60-70 percent as good as an awesome professional camera, under good light... The moment you get in low light or some more challenging situations, thats when you notice a great difference
oof those titles around 2min need to go man haha. Great comparison video!
Love your videos bru
Excellent video! I was pleasantly surprised given that I have the A6500 and can't afford a full frame.
Might not need to change over
Could figure out that the camera A was A6000 and B was Sony A7IV. Reason:
For the same f stop lens and same composition, Cropsensor camera usually does less background blur due to the multiplication factor. so even if you used f1.4 for both the cameras, full frame will have f/1.4 effective apperture and crop sensor will have effective f/(1.4*1.4) = f/1.96 effective apperture ie. less background blur. Its not visible in all the picutres but some pictures its pretty clear.
I noticed about the a6000 because of the chromatic aberration on the stairs, otherwhise on both A and B there were good photos made with good lenses.. difficult to differenciate
Thanks for the comment. It really was difficult to tell
Good job mate❤
Just bought a a6000 a month ago. What cage do you have on yours?
Something you didn't touch on, which is the big difference with these cameras and lenses, is price- Sony A6000 with lens= £700 | Sony A7IV with lens= £3500
Brilliant comment!!! Thank you for bringing this is. Massive difference between the two
Great video!~ I have both cameras!
Interesting so im not the only one who jumps from a6000 to the IV ...COOL. And YES the a6000 ist still a very capable cam to this day. Always recommend it for people who just want to start out. BUT. Yes for a portrait shooting it´s easy. Now go and shoot pets/kids running around. Yes i´ve done it for years. the a7IV makes you go laaaazy. Still, I agree its amazing how well the a6000 holds up.