Hey Guys, so sorry I got the the resolution kinda wrong, well it seemed right in my head and while editing but you guys have posted some great thoughts about it, was I was really referring too was the PPI for printing and cropping. 24 mp is 24mp but you don't have as much resolution as a full frame due the the PPI when you resize a image, that's way a iPhone with 48mp isn't the same as a canon R5 45MP. Im planning a video with about APSC vs full frame vs medium format this coming month lets hope I get it right ahahhahaah. For everyone that wants to learn more about APSC crop factor, for field of view and depth of field check this article from Canon- www.canon-europe.com/get-inspired/tips-and-techniques/aps-c-vs-full-frame/ This article for printing - www.nigeldanson.com/blog/how-big-can-you-print-your-photos-aps-c-vs-full-frame-vs-medium-format And for the resolution of full frame vs resolution check this blog from Canon - www.canon-europe.com/get-inspired/tips-and-techniques/aps-c-vs-full-frame/#:~:text=Both%20APS%2DC%20and%20full%2Dframe%20sensors%20produce%20images%20with,APS%2DC%20format%20image%20sensor.
RE: Resolution: the Canon blog post is correct because it is talking about size, not resolution. In cameras, resolution is indeed the number of pixels. If you were talking about size or even pixel density, then a full frame sensor is actually 2.33x APS-C: 864mm^2 vs. 370mm^2. At 6:56 your video clearly suggests that the 26MP sensor of the A6700 (incorrectly listed as 24MP) is somehow equivalent to 16MP, which makes no sense. Maybe you could say that somehow the space occupied by the APS-C sensor is equivalent to some fraction of the 33MP full frame sensor (actually 14.2MP in this case)... but this is not useful in comparing the cameras.
This is the resolution of a7iv that will be divided that way when setup to work in crop mode. So for using apsc lens on a7iv will have lower resolution than with same apsc lens on a6700 which is 26mp
No, at minute 6:56 he says that a 24 mp apsc sensor divided 1.5 crop factor is equal to 16 mp in full frame. And then he says that a 33 mp a7iv has twice the resolution of the 24 mp sensor. That is incorrect all the way.
Look at this article from canon - www.canon-europe.com/get-inspired/tips-and-techniques/aps-c-vs-full-frame/#:~:text=Both%20APS%2DC%20and%20full%2Dframe%20sensors%20produce%20images%20with,APS%2DC%20format%20image%20sensor. Both APS-C and full-frame sensors produce images with a standard aspect ratio of 3:2, and APS-C sensors can have the same number of megapixels as full-frame sensors. However, a full-frame image sensor is physically about 63% or 1.6x larger than an APS-C format image sensor.
Credible comparison, Gerard. Here’s how to assign a custom button to recenter the focus point: Menu > Focus > Focus Area > AF Area Registration > On. (It is off by default). You will see a screen that says “You can register a focus area by long pressing the Fn button in the shooting screen. The registered focus area can be recalled with the custom key”. Press OK. Next, back out of the menu into shooting mode. Recenter the focus point as you would normally and then long press the Fn button. You will see a brief confirmation that says “Registered focus area.” Now you can assign a custom key to AF>MF >Focus Area Register AF Area Hold, Toggle, or Re. AF Area + AF On. Your choice. Play with options and see what you prefer.🎉 The menu wording “Register” in the custom key place in the menu should really be “Recall Registered Area” to be clear, but that’s Sony for you. Once an area is registered it appears as a second blinking area should you select another area by the conventional method. The AF/MF menu as an entry to delete a registered area - blinking stops. Hope this helps.😊 Now for the picky stuff. Don’t get pissed, Gerard, but some spell checking is in order. I get the Aussie “colour” vs US “color”, but not “Qaulity” vs “Quality”. “Qaulity” appears several times in the vid (4:15, 5:44, 8:10). Also, camera “Pro’s” and “Con’s” should be plural “Pros” and “Cons”. Finally, web site screenshot has heading “Tools & Assests” that I think you intend to read “Tools & Assets”. Little things like that add up and, IMO, can detract from your otherwise stellar professional appearance.😊 Cheers!
The Gamma Display Assist works BETTER than any LUT on Sony cameras. The key is to expose properly for SLOG3 not 709. Grey card, 41% zebra, done. That will usually result in +1.3-+1.7 overexposure which is the real sweet spot for SLOG3. I can tell from your example footage that you are underexposing the SLOG3 by at least a half stop. Give it a shot!
Great video! I'm really surprised by the image quality of the Sony a6700. I would love to watch a comparison video between the Sony a6700 and the FX30. I don't know which one I should buy
Great video! I have watched a lot of comparison videos and several reviews with the a6700, Yours is by far the most useful. So many others comparing these cameras are so biased for ff that nothing else is even acceptable. You explained the differences in an unbiased way, that was great! I watched your a6700 low light video also and subscribed, very helpful. It would be nice to see more low light comparisons between the two cameras. Thanks!
I shot insects with both the A74 and A6700. Shooting models, big things will yield the same in autofocus, and the big butt here is insects. The a6700 runs rings around the A74 due to the AI chip being in the a6700. So, if insects are not your thing, either camera will do. As for video, I can't say as I mostly shoot stills. I need precise focusing the a6700 gives me. I suspect as Sony continues to upgrade their cameras, there will be a new killer FF camera, the A75 with the AI chip. The A74 was a good camera, but it wasn't the camera I thought I wanted. Keeping my A7R3 and the a6700. My real interest is in the A7CR. One correction you need to make is the A7CII is not an A74, but more A7R5 in a smaller body. This error will confuse people. Be smart, get your facts right, dig into the specs like a scientist. Your comparison is akin to saying the a6700 is basically a upgraded a6600. Nothing could be further from the truth. I notice you young kids are not detail orientated and therefore display ignorance that will mislead others. From my experience, the images you get from the a6700 are so good you will think it was made on a larger camera with a bigger sensor. There is not much difference in pixels, though in low light, the larger sensor will be better, if low light is your thing. But don't discount the a6700. It is an incredible camera. Another thing, these memory cards rarely fail. Some professionals, by their own admission, use only one card knowing full well there are two slots. This is why viewers need to check and double check what RUclipsrs say. They are not pros in all things and rarely in one thing. Years of experience is lacking in this young kids. People who have been shooting for decades, going back to last century will be far wise and better to judge than these kids who do one thing, take portraits of models. Want to know a lot about photography, get into photojournalism and you will learn a lot more than you could ever imagine. You will even learn how to take pictures of people, not just pretty girls.
I still think the A7CII is basically the same as the A7IV same sensor ect, but it’s a mixture of the A7IV and the A6700, those cameras had a child and the A7CII was born
I can see your point but you have to admit the A7CII is a vastly improved camera though it uses the same sensor. It's the other hardware that makes it superior to the A74. The A7R5, along with the a6700 and the A7CR/II are major moves forward. We can't live in the past while the future keeps moving on in technology.
I enjoyed your video! I’ll contribute to the comments if it helps lol. The stated resolution of a sensor is what you’ll always get, unless you’re shooting photos (not video) in APS-C crop mode on a full frame camera. The images from an a6700 or FX30 are actually larger than those from an a7III or a7C when using the same file type.
Maybe i am too late to ask this but i'm really thinking about getting a digital camera (I just shot film with a Canon A1), just something amateur, ocasional, not a big video fan but I can use it sometimes, which would be better, A7III - A7IV - A6700? The price it's "not that important" but the difference between A6700 and A7III in used terms are maybe 200-300€ difference (being A6700 higher). Do you think the A7III or A6700 in 2-3 years won't be good?
A7III is a great camera man for photography, there isn’t a major difference between autofocus I mean it will be a big jump in autofocus from the A1 one ahaha Love my A1 and the FD 28mm
1) A FF sensor isn't 1.5x larger but 2.25x (1.5 x 1.5). 2) "Twice the resolution of the A6700" would mean having a 104 MP sensor (no matter what size it is). 3) Highlight recovery capability is NOT dependent on sensor size. Indirectly at beast because you have more exposure latitude, hence more leeway to deliberately underexpose for highlight protection. *sigh*
So Aps-c is not professional? What about pros that use micro 4/3 or smaller sensors in the past? Your photos and videos look great and very professional with either camera. In many of the side by sides i prefer the final rendering of the a6700 photos.
APSC can be a pro camera like the Fuji H2S, but not the a6700 due to the one card and a max shutter of 1/4000. But plenty of people take the risk with the one card, not me
I’ve shot pro since 2018. Started with an A6400 and upgraded to the A7IV, I loved it but ended up going to the A6700 and I like it better. I’ve never needed two memory cards.
Was just wondering how 1/4000 isn't enough for your line of work? Could you elaborate? I just picked up the 6700 and I am blow away by it. I would have no issue using for client work. Although I wish it had dual slots I am never had a card fail me( only use good cards). I use godox ad 600 and 300 and I have not needed 1/8000 shutter. Good ND filters like nisi and others work wonders. Cheers✌️📸
Yeah been shooting for years and never had a card fail. I don’t reuse cards either - they’re cheap. I’m thinking they wear out if you’re constantly overwriting and formatting them.
1/4000s vs 1/8000s can make the difference between needing an ND filter or not. I don't want to mess around with ND filters, that's so annoying. With 1/8000s I'm just more flexible and can use wider aperture more often.
Difference will be more visible with busy background. And ofc depends of the lens . For example new Viltrox 27 1.2 for crop is rly good and looks like 35 1.4
Moving from APS-C to FF I am on the fence between building A7IV or A7C II, I love compact size but bigger size is good for grip and stabilising. Would my best option to get A7C II and buy a battery grip so it gets bulkier similar to A7IV and I can remove it anytime for travel ? Btw I will use prime lenses with it mostly
The a7c ii is just so incredible... It's better than the a7iv on specs and loses out on things that you can very much live with... The autofocus on that thing is just unreal... The latest and greatest in a travel friendly form is just the cherry on top... I'd pick it up in a heartbeat if I were to be in a situation where I'm contemplating which one to get... I'm personally very sure about the a7c ii...
@@prof_jesus true and thats why i wanna get a7c ii but from ur video and many others the grip in the a7 iv has better ergonomics due to its size. I haven’t tried it yet since I use a6400 and i’m used to compact size. Either way, since I’m getting the a7c ii for both photo and video i’ll get a cage for rig so that would add more weight for stability and bigger grip to compensate compared to a7iv What’s your opinion!
I did a 24x36 inch (2'x3') print using an image taken at night on my a6700. It's super crisp. I'm sure if you are going some something that's like 5'x10' or something absolutely massive you will see the difference. But 24x36 is also pretty big and is probably larger than most people are willing to hang in their home so I think (from experience of doing it) printing with APSC, even at larger sizes is just fine, even in low light. I'd be happy to link the photo but don't want it to seem like I'm looking for clout haha
The MP comparison is completely wrong. Otherwise a good video. To see 26MP on a6700 is still 26MP, resize your A74 photo to 16MP and compare with the a6700 photo. You will see more details on the a6700 file. Then resize your A74 photo to 26MP then you will see the same details on both files. You mixed the crop factor with MP. MP is the number of photosites on the sensor. It doesn’t depend on the sensor size.
@@gerardneedham You need to read people’s comments carefully. and re-study the Canon article. Many people are more knowledgeable and experienced. MP and sensor area are completely different things.
If you look at the different look APS-C 56mm f1.4 vs. FF 85mm f1.4, that's just on another level. This was exactly the reason for me as a long time A6500 user to buy a A7 III. Still using APS-C for certain purposes, but the looks I can create with FF (that I simply can't with APS-C) are fully worth buying a FF camera. Tamron 70-180 f2.8 for portraits.... pure magic!
@@fredriksvard2603 Depends on what you're doing. At 180mm f2.8 it's a huge advantage to have the shallow DoF of the FF sensor. And you are far enough away so that you have still enough DoF to have a person or an animal fully in focus. But also for portraits @85mm f1.4 can be great, depending on what you're doing and how far you are away. For really close-ups like only the face, f1.4 is often too much, that's true. But that's the great advantage of the FF sensor. You CAN use the shallow DoF if you need it, but you don't have to. You're just more flexible in what you're doing.
@@Thunderbird1337 Yes but if you need to stop down you lose precious light... for video interviews for example i don't want to risk it with overly shallow dof.
@@fredriksvard2603 That's not really a valid argument because with a full-frame sensor the higher ISO performance compensates the needed higher f-stop (for a given DoF). So if you compare f2.8 APS-C with f4 FF, it's in the end the same thing because of the FF sensor's higher ISO capability. Of course it always depends on the used sensors, but if you compare apples to apples (similar sensors from the same company from the same generation) the argument normally is true. So there is no advantage of the APS-C sensor whatsoever besides size and price.
@@Thunderbird1337 Depends. There are 40-50+ mp ff cameras and 12 mp ones. And the idea that you can just up the iso is misguided imo, I haven't found an ff camera where I'm comfortable with more than 3200 iso. It's not just grain, it's colors and contrast too.
Yeah made a small mistake in the video please check the pinned comment. But basically I was referring to printing a photo, you will notice the pixels on the a6700 more than the a7iv when printed to a large scale
@@gerardneedhamwhy would they be more noticeable? If a picture has 24 million pixels, that’s the amount of „dots“ it is made of. Even when printing large scale in full resolution the amount of „dots“ depends on the resolution of the sensor, not its size. FF has a lot of advantages but this is not one of them.
Good comparison and one I have been pondering, especially the IQ difference in photos. But I do think you got it wrong on the resolution comparison at the 7:01 mark. Yes, there's a low light noise difference but that's trade for the size and weight savings.
Pressing center button on D-Pad unlocks the focus point movement with the D-Pad, the trashcan button wlll then recenter the focal point by default (since early sony days on cameras with no joystick) ;) Only bummer is having to press two buttons instead of joystick only on A7IV
Let me sum up the math here: 26MP APSC is equivalent to actually 26 MP * 2.25 = 59 MP Full Frame **And using 16mm f1.4 lens in ISO 100 on the 26MP APSC camera is equivalent to using 24mm f2.1 lens on the 59MP FF camera at ISO 225** f1.4 lens has the same low-light capability in both APSC and FF, only the depth of field decreases to keep the same frame (as the distance to the scene changes). Any deviation makes one better or worse than others. For example, if you have < 59MP FF sensor, your low light capability increases but pixel density decreases ( this is why lower equivalent pixels in crop-mode) if you have > 59 MP FF sensor, your low light capability decreases. So, to summarize, if you want to shoot more telephoto - APSC gives you a better deal, and if you want to shoot more wider FF is better.
Can you explain where you got the 2.25 from? I get that FF pixel density should be lower due to a larger surface area. Therefore to achieve the same level of density you will need some multiple of the APSC MP count in question. FF has a total mm size of 864 (36x24) vs APSC which has a total of 370.52 (23.6x15.7). Taking FF Sensor size / APSC sensor size in mm we get 864/37.52 = 2.331. This is all off the top of my head so I'm probably wrong here somewhere, just wondering if yo could explain!
A7cr with an APS-C lens in APS-C mode produces 26MP. Zooms included, for instance the Sony 70-350mm gives an effective field of view of 105-525mm at 26MP, the same as on the A6700. The A7cr has a greater depth of field, meaning more in focus. The (subjective) image quality of the A7cr is superior to the A6700, to me. My take, for photography, is that the A7cr is a better way to go if zooms are your thing as you can use small APS-C zooms, when travelling for instance, as well as heavier full frame zooms when size is unimportant. The same also applies to primes, but FF primes can be tiny, Samyang's F2.8 18, 24 and 35mm are minuscule, the 35, 45 and 75mm F1.8s are also small, so the prime lens size difference can be negligible. If cost isn't a deciding factor an A7cr (if the finder isn't a deal breaker) or the A7RV (if size isn't an issue) are better and much more flexible cameras than the A6700, using zooms or primes.
Hi bro lovely video! Was wondering if I only have a budget of $3000usd, would you recommend a 6700 OR a a7iv, I mainly does short form vertical content for client and mostly in a run and gun situation (1 man show LOL). And do you have any zoom lens recommendation too? I'm most likely looking at second hand gear for all. Thank you :)
I guess Aus is an expensive market, you're about the only guy who thinks the 6700 is over priced. I picked one up for £1440 compared to £2400 for the A7iv, that's a significant difference. In 15yrs of shooting I've never had a card fail either, but i guess it's what your comfortable with. If an extra card slot and a joystick is worth nearly an extra £1k to you . . . .
C$3200 vs C$1900 here in Canada, so 68% more for the A7IV, and more for lenses. I'd love a second card slot for paid work but I think I prefer the a6700. I've heard with the new cameras like a6700 you can set it up to automatically back up via phone app but haven't looked into it. Sony really needs to update the A7 to V with the AI autofocus and 4k60 without crop.
@@gerardneedham the .1 isn’t the important part, it’s you kept saying 24 megapixel. It’s just important to note because it’s not the only thing you got wrong. Otherwise…
I bought the a7cii and I'm sending it back, it would have been my first full frame ( and my own fault for not researching) but there's literally no good zoom available both on the wide end and zoom end ( like the 16-55mm 2.8 g for Sony apsc) at least not wide enough or zoomed enough for my type of photography, apsc is superior when it comes to useful focal length all-in one zooms.
Your video, comparisons, audio, análisis and everything is perfect! But at the last part you fall apart with something xd "The Sony a6700 is a travel camera and if you want to take some photos from your family... I mean, there is a bunch of phones than can do that and almost every cheaper camera come on 🤣 also i considerate this a6700 a profession camera as well but im live in Uruguay, is a different economy 😂
Your bokeh comparison to 24mm f/2.8 to 35mm f/2.8 is rubbish. You get the same bokeh on APS-C it's just more zoomed in, so you need to switch those and compare 36mm APS-C f/2.8 to 24mm f/2.8 on FF and you will find they are the same, only zoomed in. When you use a Tamron 17-28mm, you don't get much bokeh. Get the Viltrox 16mm f/1.8 FF lens and Sigma 24mm and 50mm f/1.4 DG DN Art FF lenses or Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f/1.8 ZA Lens.
@@gerardneedham No dude, when you zoom in you literally get the exact same bokeh. The bokeh is related to the focus at the focal length. If you take a 17-28mm f/2.8 Tamron lens and put it on an APS-C camera, you will get the same bokeh as when it's on full frame. You're literally just zooming in. Now take a Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 and put it on an APS-C and you will again get the exact same bokeh, it will just be zoomed in.
Hey Guys, so sorry I got the the resolution kinda wrong, well it seemed right in my head and while editing but you guys have posted some great thoughts about it, was I was really referring too was the PPI for printing and cropping. 24 mp is 24mp but you don't have as much resolution as a full frame due the the PPI when you resize a image, that's way a iPhone with 48mp isn't the same as a canon R5 45MP. Im planning a video with about APSC vs full frame vs medium format this coming month lets hope I get it right ahahhahaah.
For everyone that wants to learn more about APSC crop factor, for field of view and depth of field check this article from Canon- www.canon-europe.com/get-inspired/tips-and-techniques/aps-c-vs-full-frame/
This article for printing - www.nigeldanson.com/blog/how-big-can-you-print-your-photos-aps-c-vs-full-frame-vs-medium-format
And for the resolution of full frame vs resolution check this blog from Canon - www.canon-europe.com/get-inspired/tips-and-techniques/aps-c-vs-full-frame/#:~:text=Both%20APS%2DC%20and%20full%2Dframe%20sensors%20produce%20images%20with,APS%2DC%20format%20image%20sensor.
RE: Resolution: the Canon blog post is correct because it is talking about size, not resolution. In cameras, resolution is indeed the number of pixels. If you were talking about size or even pixel density, then a full frame sensor is actually 2.33x APS-C: 864mm^2 vs. 370mm^2.
At 6:56 your video clearly suggests that the 26MP sensor of the A6700 (incorrectly listed as 24MP) is somehow equivalent to 16MP, which makes no sense. Maybe you could say that somehow the space occupied by the APS-C sensor is equivalent to some fraction of the 33MP full frame sensor (actually 14.2MP in this case)... but this is not useful in comparing the cameras.
@@MauricioVives this is when a newbie talk about tech things.. he just should stick to his instagram because he is a real begginer..
Why are your viewers so difficult to convince, Gerard?
Because the information provided in regard to megapixels is incorrect. Even the article he cites states that crop factor do not affect megapixels, but rather the size of the the photosites, which in turn, affect low light capabilities. That being said, 26 megapixels in a crop sensor camera is 26 megapixels. You can check the resolution of a picture taken with an apsc camera in the file data, and it won’t say a 24 megapixel photo is 16 megapixels, nor can anyone convert megapixels with the ratio stated in this video.
This is from his article: “Full-frame image sensors are generally preferred for shooting at high ISO settings because they have larger photosites than APS-C sensors with the same number of megapixels, which means they can capture proportionally more light with less noise. This picture was taken in a coal mine by the light of the miners' lamps using the full-frame Canon EOS R with a Canon RF 50mm F1.2L USM lens at 1/100 sec, f/2.0 and ISO12800. © Daniel Etter”
In conclusion, even if a full frame sensor is 63% larger (in the case we use the article cited by the author of this videos), it doesn’t mean a 26 megapixel full frame camera has 63% more megapixels than an apsc camera, it means it has the same number of megapixels in a larger space, which in turn means larger photosites. But resolution wise both are the same.
The resolution relation does not work that way… 26 mpx in a crop sensor is 26 mpx. It doesn’t get divided by 1.5x.
This is the resolution of a7iv that will be divided that way when setup to work in crop mode. So for using apsc lens on a7iv will have lower resolution than with same apsc lens on a6700 which is 26mp
No, at minute 6:56 he says that a 24 mp apsc sensor divided 1.5 crop factor is equal to 16 mp in full frame. And then he says that a 33 mp a7iv has twice the resolution of the 24 mp sensor. That is incorrect all the way.
Yeah megapixels is megapixels. Even look in the exif data.
Agreed, super misleading. I recommend making a new version of this video that corrects that… kind of makes me question the rest!
Look at this article from canon - www.canon-europe.com/get-inspired/tips-and-techniques/aps-c-vs-full-frame/#:~:text=Both%20APS%2DC%20and%20full%2Dframe%20sensors%20produce%20images%20with,APS%2DC%20format%20image%20sensor.
Both APS-C and full-frame sensors produce images with a standard aspect ratio of 3:2, and APS-C sensors can have the same number of megapixels as full-frame sensors. However, a full-frame image sensor is physically about 63% or 1.6x larger than an APS-C format image sensor.
Credible comparison, Gerard. Here’s how to assign a custom button to recenter the focus point: Menu > Focus > Focus Area > AF Area Registration > On. (It is off by default). You will see a screen that says “You can register a focus area by long pressing the Fn button in the shooting screen. The registered focus area can be recalled with the custom key”. Press OK. Next, back out of the menu into shooting mode. Recenter the focus point as you would normally and then long press the Fn button. You will see a brief confirmation that says “Registered focus area.” Now you can assign a custom key to AF>MF >Focus Area Register AF Area Hold, Toggle, or Re. AF Area + AF On. Your choice. Play with options and see what you prefer.🎉
The menu wording “Register” in the custom key place in the menu should really be “Recall Registered Area” to be clear, but that’s Sony for you. Once an area is registered it appears as a second blinking area should you select another area by the conventional method. The AF/MF menu as an entry to delete a registered area - blinking stops. Hope this helps.😊
Now for the picky stuff. Don’t get pissed, Gerard, but some spell checking is in order. I get the Aussie “colour” vs US “color”, but not “Qaulity” vs “Quality”. “Qaulity” appears several times in the vid (4:15, 5:44, 8:10). Also, camera “Pro’s” and “Con’s” should be plural “Pros” and “Cons”. Finally, web site screenshot has heading “Tools & Assests” that I think you intend to read “Tools & Assets”. Little things like that add up and, IMO, can detract from your otherwise stellar professional appearance.😊 Cheers!
😎
The Gamma Display Assist works BETTER than any LUT on Sony cameras. The key is to expose properly for SLOG3 not 709. Grey card, 41% zebra, done. That will usually result in +1.3-+1.7 overexposure which is the real sweet spot for SLOG3. I can tell from your example footage that you are underexposing the SLOG3 by at least a half stop. Give it a shot!
Ahahahahah, that’s a funny one as I still over expose my footage and then bring it down in post lol, that’s how I get clean shadows
Great video! I'm really surprised by the image quality of the Sony a6700. I would love to watch a comparison video between the Sony a6700 and the FX30. I don't know which one I should buy
Coming soon!
Great video! I have watched a lot of comparison videos and several reviews with the a6700, Yours is by far the most useful. So many others comparing these cameras are so biased for ff that nothing else is even acceptable. You explained the differences in an unbiased way, that was great! I watched your a6700 low light video also and subscribed, very helpful. It would be nice to see more low light comparisons between the two cameras. Thanks!
Yeah I’ll have to do a low light video soon
I shot insects with both the A74 and A6700. Shooting models, big things will yield the same in autofocus, and the big butt here is insects. The a6700 runs rings around the A74 due to the AI chip being in the a6700. So, if insects are not your thing, either camera will do. As for video, I can't say as I mostly shoot stills. I need precise focusing the a6700 gives me. I suspect as Sony continues to upgrade their cameras, there will be a new killer FF camera, the A75 with the AI chip. The A74 was a good camera, but it wasn't the camera I thought I wanted. Keeping my A7R3 and the a6700. My real interest is in the A7CR.
One correction you need to make is the A7CII is not an A74, but more A7R5 in a smaller body. This error will confuse people. Be smart, get your facts right, dig into the specs like a scientist. Your comparison is akin to saying the a6700 is basically a upgraded a6600. Nothing could be further from the truth. I notice you young kids are not detail orientated and therefore display ignorance that will mislead others.
From my experience, the images you get from the a6700 are so good you will think it was made on a larger camera with a bigger sensor. There is not much difference in pixels, though in low light, the larger sensor will be better, if low light is your thing. But don't discount the a6700. It is an incredible camera. Another thing, these memory cards rarely fail. Some professionals, by their own admission, use only one card knowing full well there are two slots.
This is why viewers need to check and double check what RUclipsrs say. They are not pros in all things and rarely in one thing. Years of experience is lacking in this young kids. People who have been shooting for decades, going back to last century will be far wise and better to judge than these kids who do one thing, take portraits of models.
Want to know a lot about photography, get into photojournalism and you will learn a lot more than you could ever imagine. You will even learn how to take pictures of people, not just pretty girls.
I still think the A7CII is basically the same as the A7IV same sensor ect, but it’s a mixture of the A7IV and the A6700, those cameras had a child and the A7CII was born
I can see your point but you have to admit the A7CII is a vastly improved camera though it uses the same sensor. It's the other hardware that makes it superior to the A74. The A7R5, along with the a6700 and the A7CR/II are major moves forward. We can't live in the past while the future keeps moving on in technology.
wow you take photography way too seriously
I enjoyed your video! I’ll contribute to the comments if it helps lol. The stated resolution of a sensor is what you’ll always get, unless you’re shooting photos (not video) in APS-C crop mode on a full frame camera. The images from an a6700 or FX30 are actually larger than those from an a7III or a7C when using the same file type.
Yeah correction in the pin comment
Maybe i am too late to ask this but i'm really thinking about getting a digital camera (I just shot film with a Canon A1), just something amateur, ocasional, not a big video fan but I can use it sometimes, which would be better, A7III - A7IV - A6700? The price it's "not that important" but the difference between A6700 and A7III in used terms are maybe 200-300€ difference (being A6700 higher). Do you think the A7III or A6700 in 2-3 years won't be good?
A7III is a great camera man for photography, there isn’t a major difference between autofocus
I mean it will be a big jump in autofocus from the A1 one ahaha
Love my A1 and the FD 28mm
1) A FF sensor isn't 1.5x larger but 2.25x (1.5 x 1.5).
2) "Twice the resolution of the A6700" would mean having a 104 MP sensor (no matter what size it is).
3) Highlight recovery capability is NOT dependent on sensor size. Indirectly at beast because you have more exposure latitude, hence more leeway to deliberately underexpose for highlight protection.
*sigh*
So Aps-c is not professional? What about pros that use micro 4/3 or smaller sensors in the past? Your photos and videos look great and very professional with either camera. In many of the side by sides i prefer the final rendering of the a6700 photos.
APSC can be a pro camera like the Fuji H2S, but not the a6700 due to the one card and a max shutter of 1/4000.
But plenty of people take the risk with the one card, not me
@@gerardneedhamit doesn’t make sense for me too.
@@gerardneedhamI need a Sony camera under $1500 mainly for photography like in the examples you shown
@@ItsTjWilliams the a6600 is the later model that takes great photos and you should be able to pick up a second hand a6700
I’ve shot pro since 2018. Started with an A6400 and upgraded to the A7IV, I loved it but ended up going to the A6700 and I like it better. I’ve never needed two memory cards.
Was just wondering how 1/4000 isn't enough for your line of work? Could you elaborate? I just picked up the 6700 and I am blow away by it. I would have no issue using for client work. Although I wish it had dual slots I am never had a card fail me( only use good cards). I use godox ad 600 and 300 and I have not needed 1/8000 shutter. Good ND filters like nisi and others work wonders. Cheers✌️📸
Yeah been shooting for years and never had a card fail. I don’t reuse cards either - they’re cheap. I’m thinking they wear out if you’re constantly overwriting and formatting them.
Okay so the flash sync speed is only 1/125 and the max shutter is annoying when using primes during the day
@@gerardneedham It's actually 1/160
1/4000s vs 1/8000s can make the difference between needing an ND filter or not. I don't want to mess around with ND filters, that's so annoying. With 1/8000s I'm just more flexible and can use wider aperture more often.
Difference will be more visible with busy background. And ofc depends of the lens . For example new Viltrox 27 1.2 for crop is rly good and looks like 35 1.4
Yeah keep to test that lens, it’s like f1.6 in full frame
Moving from APS-C to FF I am on the fence between building A7IV or A7C II, I love compact size but bigger size is good for grip and stabilising. Would my best option to get A7C II and buy a battery grip so it gets bulkier similar to A7IV and I can remove it anytime for travel ? Btw I will use prime lenses with it mostly
The a7c ii is just so incredible... It's better than the a7iv on specs and loses out on things that you can very much live with... The autofocus on that thing is just unreal... The latest and greatest in a travel friendly form is just the cherry on top... I'd pick it up in a heartbeat if I were to be in a situation where I'm contemplating which one to get... I'm personally very sure about the a7c ii...
@@prof_jesus true and thats why i wanna get a7c ii but from ur video and many others the grip in the a7 iv has better ergonomics due to its size. I haven’t tried it yet since I use a6400 and i’m used to compact size. Either way, since I’m getting the a7c ii for both photo and video i’ll get a cage for rig so that would add more weight for stability and bigger grip to compensate compared to a7iv What’s your opinion!
I did a 24x36 inch (2'x3') print using an image taken at night on my a6700. It's super crisp. I'm sure if you are going some something that's like 5'x10' or something absolutely massive you will see the difference. But 24x36 is also pretty big and is probably larger than most people are willing to hang in their home so I think (from experience of doing it) printing with APSC, even at larger sizes is just fine, even in low light. I'd be happy to link the photo but don't want it to seem like I'm looking for clout haha
Hey man send me a DM of the print I would love to see it
@@gerardneedham sent you a DM from my “bjaxtakesphotos” account. It wouldn’t let me attach the photo, maybe it’s because it’s the first message? Idk
The MP comparison is completely wrong. Otherwise a good video. To see 26MP on a6700 is still 26MP, resize your A74 photo to 16MP and compare with the a6700 photo. You will see more details on the a6700 file. Then resize your A74 photo to 26MP then you will see the same details on both files. You mixed the crop factor with MP. MP is the number of photosites on the sensor. It doesn’t depend on the sensor size.
Check the article from canon in the pinned comment
@@gerardneedham You need to read people’s comments carefully. and re-study the Canon article. Many people are more knowledgeable and experienced. MP and sensor area are completely different things.
Is it me or do a6700 files look better
They slap
If you look at the different look APS-C 56mm f1.4 vs. FF 85mm f1.4, that's just on another level. This was exactly the reason for me as a long time A6500 user to buy a A7 III. Still using APS-C for certain purposes, but the looks I can create with FF (that I simply can't with APS-C) are fully worth buying a FF camera. Tamron 70-180 f2.8 for portraits.... pure magic!
I find the shallow dof to be a problem. It's just too much at bigger apertures than f4.
@@fredriksvard2603 Depends on what you're doing. At 180mm f2.8 it's a huge advantage to have the shallow DoF of the FF sensor. And you are far enough away so that you have still enough DoF to have a person or an animal fully in focus. But also for portraits @85mm f1.4 can be great, depending on what you're doing and how far you are away. For really close-ups like only the face, f1.4 is often too much, that's true. But that's the great advantage of the FF sensor. You CAN use the shallow DoF if you need it, but you don't have to. You're just more flexible in what you're doing.
@@Thunderbird1337 Yes but if you need to stop down you lose precious light... for video interviews for example i don't want to risk it with overly shallow dof.
@@fredriksvard2603 That's not really a valid argument because with a full-frame sensor the higher ISO performance compensates the needed higher f-stop (for a given DoF). So if you compare f2.8 APS-C with f4 FF, it's in the end the same thing because of the FF sensor's higher ISO capability. Of course it always depends on the used sensors, but if you compare apples to apples (similar sensors from the same company from the same generation) the argument normally is true. So there is no advantage of the APS-C sensor whatsoever besides size and price.
@@Thunderbird1337 Depends. There are 40-50+ mp ff cameras and 12 mp ones. And the idea that you can just up the iso is misguided imo, I haven't found an ff camera where I'm comfortable with more than 3200 iso. It's not just grain, it's colors and contrast too.
Thank you Gerard for the helpful comparative video! Good luck!
My pleasure!
Is there any chance you could make a blind shoot out? With avoiding scenes where one can just tell by the amount of background blur
Yeah that would be a good test
Surely the rear dial's button can be customized to center the focus point (on both cameras)?
Explain to me like im 5, how does effective resolution change with crop factor? a pixel is a pixel right?
Yeah made a small mistake in the video please check the pinned comment. But basically I was referring to printing a photo, you will notice the pixels on the a6700 more than the a7iv when printed to a large scale
@@gerardneedhamwhy would they be more noticeable?
If a picture has 24 million pixels, that’s the amount of „dots“ it is made of. Even when printing large scale in full resolution the amount of „dots“ depends on the resolution of the sensor, not its size. FF has a lot of advantages but this is not one of them.
Hello! What will be the best? A6700 vs Sony a7rv? … I am not professional photographer , but want good quality for many years…
Um a6700 os a great camera but not a pro camera like the RV, I really think that the A7IV would be the pick between the 2
@@gerardneedham thank you
Good comparison and one I have been pondering, especially the IQ difference in photos. But I do think you got it wrong on the resolution comparison at the 7:01 mark. Yes, there's a low light noise difference but that's trade for the size and weight savings.
Check the article from canon in the pinned comment, that will answer you doubts about APSC vs full frame for resolution differences.
Also, the aperture reasoning is incorrect. Here is an explanation of how it really works. ruclips.net/video/rNdR-k28vZ8/видео.htmlsi=3WtZVD8JBA3hzFvW
Check my pinned comment
Pressing center button on D-Pad unlocks the focus point movement with the D-Pad, the trashcan button wlll then recenter the focal point by default (since early sony days on cameras with no joystick) ;) Only bummer is having to press two buttons instead of joystick only on A7IV
Yeah I prefer a joy stick
@@gerardneedham i think everyone does. but there's a way
Great and informative video! Definitely subscribing! Keep up the great work!
Thanks for the sub broski
I've A7cii and now considering a6700 for my second Sony camera
Nice man
It's a pity so many RUclipsrs use to show sample comparisons edited. I don't see much sense, but thanks anyway.
True, I’ll pop some raw files in a google drive link in the description
@@gerardneedham thanks, man
Let me sum up the math here:
26MP APSC is equivalent to actually 26 MP * 2.25 = 59 MP Full Frame
**And using 16mm f1.4 lens in ISO 100 on the 26MP APSC camera is equivalent to using 24mm f2.1 lens on the 59MP FF camera at ISO 225**
f1.4 lens has the same low-light capability in both APSC and FF, only the depth of field decreases to keep the same frame (as the distance to the scene changes).
Any deviation makes one better or worse than others.
For example, if you have < 59MP FF sensor, your low light capability increases but pixel density decreases ( this is why lower equivalent pixels in crop-mode)
if you have > 59 MP FF sensor, your low light capability decreases.
So, to summarize, if you want to shoot more telephoto - APSC gives you a better deal, and if you want to shoot more wider FF is better.
You got it mate, there is also a correction in the pinned comment about printing
Can you explain where you got the 2.25 from? I get that FF pixel density should be lower due to a larger surface area. Therefore to achieve the same level of density you will need some multiple of the APSC MP count in question. FF has a total mm size of 864 (36x24) vs APSC which has a total of 370.52 (23.6x15.7). Taking FF Sensor size / APSC sensor size in mm we get 864/37.52 = 2.331. This is all off the top of my head so I'm probably wrong here somewhere, just wondering if yo could explain!
totally wrong information
A7cr with an APS-C lens in APS-C mode produces 26MP. Zooms included, for instance the Sony 70-350mm gives an effective field of view of 105-525mm at 26MP, the same as on the A6700. The A7cr has a greater depth of field, meaning more in focus. The (subjective) image quality of the A7cr is superior to the A6700, to me. My take, for photography, is that the A7cr is a better way to go if zooms are your thing as you can use small APS-C zooms, when travelling for instance, as well as heavier full frame zooms when size is unimportant. The same also applies to primes, but FF primes can be tiny, Samyang's F2.8 18, 24 and 35mm are minuscule, the 35, 45 and 75mm F1.8s are also small, so the prime lens size difference can be negligible. If cost isn't a deciding factor an A7cr (if the finder isn't a deal breaker) or the A7RV (if size isn't an issue) are better and much more flexible cameras than the A6700, using zooms or primes.
Clickbait on the title. Thanks.
How so, the A7CII is basically the same as the A7IV lols
The model was so lovely. The two cameras are so close
Yeah she is an amazing model
Unrelated to camera discussion but your model has very nice red hair!
Yeah and blue eye great combo for dynamic portraits
Hi bro lovely video! Was wondering if I only have a budget of $3000usd, would you recommend a 6700 OR a a7iv, I mainly does short form vertical content for client and mostly in a run and gun situation (1 man show LOL). And do you have any zoom lens recommendation too? I'm most likely looking at second hand gear for all. Thank you :)
I reckon you’ll be able to pick up a decent 2nd hand A7IV with a tamron 28-75mm, it’s a older camera so more on the used market
I guess Aus is an expensive market, you're about the only guy who thinks the 6700 is over priced. I picked one up for £1440 compared to £2400 for the A7iv, that's a significant difference. In 15yrs of shooting I've never had a card fail either, but i guess it's what your comfortable with. If an extra card slot and a joystick is worth nearly an extra £1k to you . . . .
Oh nice that sounds like a deal, A7IV is basically always on sale here.
C$3200 vs C$1900 here in Canada, so 68% more for the A7IV, and more for lenses. I'd love a second card slot for paid work but I think I prefer the a6700. I've heard with the new cameras like a6700 you can set it up to automatically back up via phone app but haven't looked into it. Sony really needs to update the A7 to V with the AI autofocus and 4k60 without crop.
Could you do a full frame kit lens vs ApsC high end zoom lens to show which wins out
Yeah that would be a good test aye, APSC would win tho
I know that f2 apsc is equal to f2 full frame.there are photographers who say that
Same for exposure but not background separation with bokeh
There is no menu guide in the description?
Hey that’s been updated thanks for the info, it’s now at the top of the description
The only thing I didnt like was you said the pro of the a6700 was affordability and then you listed one of the cons as overpriced...??? lol
Like it’s “affordable” when you look at the market
But I think the market is too high for entry level camera
may I know where is the place in Japan where the building is in th e middle?
Hey take a screenshot and dm me, then I can send the location your after
For yt both of these literally look the same and you wouldn’t be able to tell without the text on the screen saying what it is.
100% ahahahah, like mostly we use these cameras for online use lols
The 6700 has 26 Megapixel not 24.
That’s correct, I used 24mp as an example compare to full frame
What profile picture do u shoot at
I just shoot standard for photos and slog3 for video
Thanks a lot
a6700 or x100vi? 🙂
A6700 allday
Kör zero kul o se hur det går för er där inne..
☺️
FYI: the a6700 is 26.1 megapixels
😅 you really think I’m the one to say “and the Sony has 26.1 mp, so you know the 0.1 makes it compete against the 40mp XT5”
@@gerardneedham the .1 isn’t the important part, it’s you kept saying 24 megapixel. It’s just important to note because it’s not the only thing you got wrong. Otherwise…
Great vid great information
Glad you enjoyed it Carlo let’s go to Brazil
great comparison thanks
Thanks for watching!
Almost...
🙃
Hmm, which one to buy? I think I will go with Nikon Zf 😅
Keen to try that camera
Like QA, but not QAULITY😅
😅
I bought the a7cii and I'm sending it back, it would have been my first full frame ( and my own fault for not researching) but there's literally no good zoom available both on the wide end and zoom end ( like the 16-55mm 2.8 g for Sony apsc) at least not wide enough or zoomed enough for my type of photography, apsc is superior when it comes to useful focal length all-in one zooms.
Noted
wrong info.
😞
1 Gerard, love this comparison
Churrr
Your video, comparisons, audio, análisis and everything is perfect! But at the last part you fall apart with something xd "The Sony a6700 is a travel camera and if you want to take some photos from your family... I mean, there is a bunch of phones than can do that and almost every cheaper camera come on 🤣 also i considerate this a6700 a profession camera as well but im live in Uruguay, is a different economy 😂
True I’ll be making a video about the difference between a iPhone and camera next week
Your bokeh comparison to 24mm f/2.8 to 35mm f/2.8 is rubbish. You get the same bokeh on APS-C it's just more zoomed in, so you need to switch those and compare 36mm APS-C f/2.8 to 24mm f/2.8 on FF and you will find they are the same, only zoomed in. When you use a Tamron 17-28mm, you don't get much bokeh. Get the Viltrox 16mm f/1.8 FF lens and Sigma 24mm and 50mm f/1.4 DG DN Art FF lenses or Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f/1.8 ZA Lens.
No it’s accurate.
@@gerardneedham No dude, when you zoom in you literally get the exact same bokeh. The bokeh is related to the focus at the focal length. If you take a 17-28mm f/2.8 Tamron lens and put it on an APS-C camera, you will get the same bokeh as when it's on full frame. You're literally just zooming in. Now take a Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 and put it on an APS-C and you will again get the exact same bokeh, it will just be zoomed in.