I think everyone missed the point of the video. It wasn’t a direct comparison as it would be unfair to compare a APS-C camera with a full frame. The A6700 is still a great camera. The point I'm making is that for anyone buying the A6700, maybe consider the A7IV. For a bit more money, you can get a full frame all around better camera! So what are your thoughts on the A6700?
Or for a bit more money buy the A7R IV which is better than the A7IV. If someone is considering A6700 it will be for the advantages APS-C offers; compact body and lenses with greater reach than the equivalent FF.
@@leighhaynesthe point made is not determining which camera is better because they both have their upsides, but instead can you get more value buying something like the A7IV used
You should change the title of your video. Really guys, stop complaining about everything. The a6700 for its price is fantastic. I'm an experienced photographer, and I produce better photos with an APS-C camera than many self-called professional photographers with high-end equipment and a lack of composition and color grading knowledge. People are more concerned about getting a full-frame camera to be considered good photographers than improving as a photographer.
100% agree with this! I took a 2008 point and shoot to a portrait session last week and got some amazing photos with it! However when im buying gear and already spending a lot, I always look at getting the camera with the most value for my money even though I may never actually utilize all of its features. Its weird I know haha but just the way I look at things!
YEEEEEEES FINALLY SOMEONE'S TALKING THE TROUTH the internet has caused so much waffle and with out blueberries or mapple Syrup. 98.8% of cameras has been good for a long long time now.stop talking about gear and comparing and complaining and actually practice getting better at taking photographs and videos. My Sony RX100 mrk 3 takes as good photos as my Sony A7R mrk 3 in the right light EASILY!!!! that's a 1inch 20.1 megapixel sensor vs a full frame 42. megapixel sensor Pride yourself in your photos not your gear your cameras are insanely good try match your talents with the camera capabilities and see how your howl world changes. No disrespect to this guy at all just wanted to comment on that comment.keep snappin
@@thomaswilliams7601 Final work should be more important than the gear! I have friend who is a professional photographer and when you go to his website you will not notices the photos he took with his Canon 80D and the ones with his Sony a7III and IV. I follow a RUclipsr that uploads a lot of shorts moving his cameras and when you see the pictures haha that guy should be selling ice cream. Some people get famous because the gear they show and a lot of views of people who can't buy it.
Better gear won't get you better photos and better skill will get you great photos from cheep gear. It's all about skill we all strive to gain more skills in what ever art form we work in.a bad tool will slow you down for shaw but we ain't talking about a £35 disposable camera Vs a £3000 camera we are talking hairline difference between modern cameras that all take stunning pictures. the funfimentals of photography doesn't change its the same with good and cheep gear,If you have an eye for composition and choosing the right subject matter it doesn't matter what camera you have you will get great images.better gear won't teach you to see better and learn what it takes to become a Great photographer.skill is everything and gear is a distraction.
Not only is the a6700 cheaper, there's tons of good glass that is also cheaper. The money saved can go into other things like learning lights, movement, equipment, a million other things. The price difference is enormous and also to get the great shooting specs that you speak of require expensive CF Express type a cards. And large expensive lenses. When you compare full kit to full kit, the a6700 wins
Every time! I was this 👌 close to getting the A7IV but I stumbled across the 6700 and realized I'd get way more value from it along with cheaper lenses.
The a6700 is a prosumer camera for enthusiasts whereas the A7iv is a professional camera hence no need for dual card slots, the a6700 has the ability of 4k 120fps if you need it (nice to have), in 4k 60p there is no crop, APS-C lenses and camera weight are a blessing no heavy riggs to drag your ass around. It has AI framing and is great for wildlife and sports and has S-Cinetone and user imported LUT's, to me the a6700 is much more desirable for what i need not to mention the cost and weight savings. Unless you plan to do professional work the a6700 is a better camera in my humble opinion.
I think this is the best comment so far! I think you nailed it right on the head. The A6700 is a great camera in many aspects and the point of the video is not to shit on the A6700 because I do think it's an amazing camera in it's own ways. I think the problem is all these other RUclipsrs that are saying it's a professional camera but as a professional, I wouldn't get the A6700 as my main rig. So my video was for those people and to say, look at all the other great cameras you can buy for cheap now used, that might be of more value to you with, in many cases, better specs and features!
I guess I’ve been lucky. 9 years shooting a6000 and never had an SD failure using sandisk extreme. Another problem i have is all my lenses are aps c so on top of $500 I would need 5k in lenses. That’s why I’m looking at 6700
The A7IV is obviously a better camera than the A6700 but I think it depends on the user. I agree, if you’re a professional who wants better specs go with a used A7IV. If you don’t care about full frame, two card slots and everything else, go with the A6700!
For me its 1000$ extra, and for the same full frame lens as sigma 56mm its another 1200$. And maybe 500$ for new memory cards. That’s 2700$ more, and if I want more lenses it’s gonna add up even more. A6700 is smaller and much more budget friendly. I started professionally with a micro 4/3 and have had everything in between and preferred the apsc much more then full frame. :)
I preordered an A6700. I don’t really feel your comparison is a fair one. For me, who this will be their first “real” camera (only had go pros and insta 360s), I feel it’s a good starting point. Of course the A7iv is a better camera but you’re talking about a used one at 53% higher price than a new camera (mpb has it for 2,150). It’s almost like comparing a 2023 Hyundai to a 2022 Porsche.
Don't get me wrong it's still a powerful camera and a great starting point. But this video wasn't a straight up comparison. Whether it's new or old, for $500 more you can get a used A7IV which would be a better camera in terms of specs and features for the price. To spend an extra $500 and get a full frame camera with better features, is a no brainer!
@@replay0712 You're absolutely right, lens prices are generally pricier for full frame cameras if you're looking at native sony lenses. You can rock third party lenses like Sigma lenses that I use, that are of super high quality and half the cost of native sony lenses. Not saying that the A6700 is a bad camera at all, cause I think it's a great camera if you like the benefits of what APS-C has to offer!
@@dsking1003 Do you already have full frame or APS-C lenses? This will make all the difference. I would also wait until the ends of the month for Sony to release the A7CII. I have a video going out about it tomorrow so I’d definitely recommend you watch! It might just be a camera worth waiting for!
The smaller the sensor, the easier it is to do a good job in ibis. You would be surprised by the ibis performance of m43 cameras from almost a decade ago.
Can't really agree here, they make wide apsc lenses so the crop isn't a huge deals. The a6700 is a great camera for more entry level shooters. I think the person starting out doesn't really have the extra $500 and if they do they should spend it on cheaper apsc lenses rather then expensive full frame lenses.
You’re absolutely right and that’s why I said you probably won’t use 4k120 with tighter lenses. Still I used to have the Canon M50 and the 1.5x aps-c crop with another 1.5x crop for 4K was horrendous even with wider aps-c lenses! It’s still a good camera I personally just think if you’re going to spend this much money on a camera, you might as well spend another $500 to make sure you get the most for your money! The video is not a head to head comparison, the point im making is you can get an entry level camera or spend only an extra $500 and get a professional full frame beast with much better specs all around
@@StefanoLombardoYT - If you believe most users probably won't use longer focal length lenses with 4k120 shooting, there's really no reason to bring it up as a negative point. The 6700 isn't an "entry level" camera - it's a legit pro-user quality rig. The ZV-E10? There's your entry level camera - and it's still pretty damn good in it's own right. The 6700 Is $1,400. The a7IV is $2,500. Even if you can get the a7IV at $2,000 - that $600 price point difference will pay for one or two damn good lenses (Sony, Sigma, Viltrox, or Tamron) for the 6700. So you'll need to spend anywhere from $2,500-$3,000 for a camera and lens with the a7IV.
@@craigjohnchronicles2504it may sway your judgement if you know that the a6700 costs 1700€ in EU and the A7IV costs 2500€. Also the A7C sold for 1420€ during prime day incl cashback
@@DDHDTVthe point is that in my own opinion, there’s other cameras you can now buy used whether that be an a7iv or a7riv that would get you more value, better specs and features for your money!
You have to take into account buying full frame lenses, which are much more expensive. If you have APS-C E Mount lenses the A6700 is just the logical option, unless you really want to move to full frame.
You’re absolutely right if you go with native Sony lenses! I’ve been rocking full frame Sigma lenses they’re extremely high quality and half the price of native Sony lenses! If you have APS-C lenses already, the A6700 is a no brainer! The point was that if you do spend the extra bit of money you can get a full frame camera with much better features and specs overall
The a7iv is $1500CAD MORE than the a6700 lol, that's not just a "bit" more expensive. If you're buying used, you're not getting a warranty. You're also getting a much slower sensor read out, the rolling shutter on the a7iv is attrocious. The a7iv will also not have as good of IBIS stabilization in video because the FF Sony E mount IBIS is worse than the ASPC due to physical limitations of the mount.
@@StefanoLombardoYT Of course, but you're now giving up every warranty, and if you want to shoot 4k60, it's the same as shooting on the crop camera. Crop or not, the a7iv doesn't even offer 4k120, so if you want super slow motion tight shot b-roll the a7iv isn't for you. You're getting the better AI AF that will never get put into the a7iv. I think people are really selling this a6700 short. And I don't really think it's priced bad, even having 1 card slot. It out performs the r7 and the XS20 for basically the same price. My main complaint is the LCD screen, it should be 1.8m dot like the XS20.
@@RiposteThis Oh trust me I don’t think it’s a bad camera at all and I think it’s well priced and it will suit a lot of peoples needs! There’s no argument there!
A7IV owner looking at the A6700 for the weight and size savings. In that regards I think a6700 edges out even the a7c as the 50mm f/2.5 gets me closer to my prefered 85mm without the weight of it. Ultimately, ricoh needs to get off its butt and makes 60mm+ plus compact. Yeah, I know it would be super niche and never happen.
You got a great point but for me, if you pick A7IV, you are not just going to adjust your budget for the Camera body because you have to consider that the lineup for full frame lenses are expensive as well.
I think people forget that you can use full frame lenses on aps-c and you can use aps-c lenses on full frame. Put an APS-C lens on your Full Frame, go into your settings and turn on aps-c crop... done. Now you can use more affordable aps-c lenses on a full frame body. I've done it many times.
@StefanoLombardoYT yeah, I totally agree with that. FF and Apsc lenses can be used to whichever body you get without much of an issue. I am just telling that if you are gonna buy fullframe body, obviously you wanna have to invest on lenses dedicated to it in order for you to max out the fullframe benefits. And those lenses are expensive as well. At least for me It's something to think about. Just wanted to add. BTW I love your content. I'm subscribing 😊
I just bought the Sony a6700 today after browsing for a Sony a7iv for 2 weeks.. used a7iv - $2k + another solid lens $1k-$2k so it would’ve been a $3k-$4k build But I went with the a6700 because I already have a sigma 30m and Sony 11mm so I’m set for a bit with those. Eventually I’ll go FF
That's awesome! If you already have APS-C lenses then the A6700 is a great choice and I would argue probably the best choice for APS-C cameras by Sony right now!
If youre a person who uses the canera to make money, then yes, get a full frame If you just want to take nice pictures / videos on holiday or of your family then the autofocus of the 6700 might be nore appealing and for a much lower price Plus ahy spend extra 500 on a used camera with no warranty + even more on ff lenses when you wont benefit from the pro features of the a7iv
Exactly! The A6700 is a great camera and nobody is shitting on it! I just think if you're a professional this is not the camera for you and instead look at all the other great cameras you can buy for only a couple hundred dollars more!
You'd have to strip a lot: 4k120p, no crop in 4k60, 4k webcam, better focus, ai reframing, better digital stabe in video, the compact size and smaller lenses, a7iv is easily more than double the price with a few lenses - they are for different audiences really. Personally, I preordered the A6700, then thought right, I've been with APSC (Fuji) for a few years, do I really want another APSC system? - and I decided to order the ZV-E1 :) - it was a close call with the A7 IV, but I have a Fuji body for photos that I love, this will be a purely video camera.
Yea I think it depends on the user! The compact size is not for everyone, for example many people complained about the position for the viewfinder! It’s still a great camera don’t get me wrong, just my opinion, I’d much rather spend the extra money and get a used A7IV
@@DigiDriftZone I think the ZV-E1 is actually a great camera in terms of video whereas the A7IV is more of a hybrid camera good for photos and videos. The single card slot on the ZV-E1 would kill me tho!
@@StefanoLombardoYT Ah, I never used the second slot on my X-T3 so that doesn't bother me as much. If it's anything mission critical, I'll buy a new card just in case :)
@@DigiDriftZone it’s having something happen to that card after you finished a client project. I’ve had cards break or fail on me in the past and it’s nice to know when shooting something for a client it’s being backed up to both cards!
I agree!! The A6700 is a crop sensor and does lack some features that the A7IV has like the ones you mentioned. I would much rather prefer the Sony A7IV over the A6700
Great video. Thanks for your work on this. I own the A7 IV and need a 2nd camera for event video shoots and am considering the A6700. I disagree a bit with your premise of the A7 IV only being about a $500 difference though. If a new A6700 is $1300, I would need to find an A7 IV for about $1800. I haven't found anything used (good condition or better) on BH, Amazon, or eBay for less than $2000. At $700 difference, I think the A6700 is good enough for me.
For so many people, $700 is way too much of a jump that they can't afford, or that $700 could be MUCH better spent on a lens or continuing to save up for a super nice lens which matters much more for getting any specific look.
Sounds like most of the advantages are if you shoot video. I also think many people would consider the bigger camera and lenses a minus. Appreciate the video though.
IMO the decision between these two cameras is more complicated than you're portraying here. It's not just a camera body that's more powerful and slightly more expensive. It's an entirely different ecosystem to work in. Saying you should buy an a7IV instead of an a6700 is like saying you should buy a motorcycle rather than a scooter. I stick to APSC because, as a hobbyist, I can build out a library of lenses for a fraction of the price of full frame, allowing me to try more things and experiment without breaking the bank. If I were relying on my camera for a job, then I would get a higher-end full frame camera because it would be worth the long term investment. These two cameras are for two entirely different people. Maybe you could have focused a little more on the decision between full frame and APSC rather than these two specific cameras? Just some (hopefully) constructive criticism - great video though, and well edited!
Thank you but the argument wasn't about which camera is the better camera. In fact it doesn't really have to do with the A7IV at all. All I meant to say was if you're considering the A6700 because you want a "good" camera, don't overlook all the other great cameras that you can get right now for cheap used like the A7IV, A7S3, a7r4, these are all great cameras that you can get for a couple hundred dollars more than the A6700 and cameras that most people would consider better cameras in terms of specs and features, and for some people these cameras would be of better value. This was the premise of the video, not that the A6700 is a bad camera because I do think if you're someone who has their heart set on an APS-C camera, this is probably one of the best ones you can get right now in terms of what Sony has to offer. Rather the point being, for a few hundred dollars, you might find a camera that checks off more boxes for you!
Just received mine and set it up just like my A7RV. Feels just like a baby RV for lightweight filming and shooting. The IV comparison misses the point.
Probably misses the point because it wasn’t a comparison! Instead saying if you spend a little more you can actually get a full frame camera with better specs and features all around!
@@StefanoLombardoYT It doesn't have that many better specs though. Card slot, EVF, and FF sensor, that's really it. A7Iv has worse IBIS, worse AF system, worse video specs, worse battery life, slower sensor read out, slower continuous shooting.
Hi, Thanks for this video! I appreciate the care you took in making it :). So, I completely agree that full frame for PROs is going to be a much better camera---pros want great prints, and if an image or video is 2% better out of full frame than an APSC that could mean the difference between keeping clients and losing them. BUT, for 95% of camera buyers, we are NOT pros. And in head to head comparisons you CANNOT tell the difference in image quality between APSC shots and Full frame shots UNTIL you start going massive pixel peeking. So, what do I look for in a camera: simple---SMALL AND LIGHT, considering the combo of camera body and usable zoom lenses. In this case, the A6000 series (now A6700) with the Sony 18-135mm and sony 70-350mm. These are amazingly light, compact lenses along with one of the smallest camera bodies out there (A6700). I travel internationally and NO WAY will I consider large camera bodies/lenses :)! So, again, the bigger/heavier the better for quality PRO work (consider MEDIUM FRAME cameras that are even bigger and heavier, and way more expensive, for the very best in image quality. But for enthusiast, given the parity between image quality until you go beyond maybe 8 x 10 prints, just not worth the extra size, weight.
Thank you! Completely agree with you. As for image quality you can't tell a difference between the two. It's more so the benefits of both. The benefits of APS-C and the benefits of Full Frame which make a difference. It all depends on the user and what you need in a camera. If you need something small and light and don't care for a lot of the other full frame features, the A6700 is going to be a great option! The video was more so aimed at my audience, who want full frame cameras but don't have the budget for it.
No questions, the A7 IV is a great camera. But, I just need something that I can take photos and videos or my family during holidays; and, use the APSC lenses I already have. In the Sony A6000 line, this one finally really hits the mark (for someone like me). Seems like you're assuming everyone is a pro photographer.
People saying the price difference ia too big, the *6700 cost 1699 Euros conpared to 1399 USD* in the US, both body only prices. Thats something like a 350 euro difference! Putting it in a different price class and already way closer to most of sony's full frame cameras. (A7 IV body costs 2499 euros)
That's 68% more (same in Canada), about the same or more for lenses, for about 1.5 f-stops of aperture and 1 f-stop of ISO improvement and the second SD card slot.
These really can't be compared at all. People love the small size if apsc and the A7IV is just massive compared to the a6700 ... Different story with the A7C though and even that has noticibly better IQ. And its costs less in EU
You’re right the A7IV is a much different camera than the A6700 which is why it wasn’t a direct comparison. The point of the video was to say that for an extra bit of money you can get a better camera that’s full frame and has much better specs and features than the a6700
a74; heavier, larger, more expensive, lenses more expensive, and I already have aps-c lenses. If I was a pro I would heed your advice but I just need a camera I can pack light for vacations and use for visits with friends and attend reunions.
You’re absolutely right! It all depends on what you’re using it for. Do you need all the professional features in a heavier camera for vacations and stuff, most likely not! The A6700 would make for a great camera!
Lol, "just a few hundred more" for the used A7IV body. Then you pay hundreds or thousands more for equivalent reaching native full frame glass over native aps-c glass. All for results you only notice when you're 100%+ in lightroom, which is where all the money is made! Have a realistic print made from portrait shots taken from both by a skilled photographer that properly understands light, and you will see 0 difference unless you're nitpicking natural limitations like depth of field (which can be remedied by adjusting other aspects that determine depth of field). In terms of quality, both results will be the same. Do the same with wildlife and then add up the cost of a native 600 or 800mm lens full frame versus the crop sensor's natural advantage in achieving longer reach for less bulk, and by extension, cost. If you understand specific reasons you would need the A7IV, then you might need it. If you're going purely off spec sheets, shots taken in a lab, and influencers with GAS on steroids, then go pick up a used X-T3, A6500, or E-M5.II/GX85 along with a ~35 or 50mm equivalent lens and have fun taking photos and learning. So many of the "best photos taken with digital" today were taken on what influencers and blogs would call obsolete trash.
I think the a6700 is for everyday users and content creators who like to be compact but still have a powerful device; a7IV is for more professional tasks; So basically 2 groups of users will have 2 different options
Everyone is obsessed with full frame bodies at the moment without considering the cost of lenses. I agree if you have the money it’s better but there’s no point buying a budget camera if you have to spend double the price just to put a lens on it.
I think people forget that you can use full frame lenses on aps-c and you can use aps-c lenses on full frame. Put an APS-C lens on your Full Frame, go into your settings and turn on aps-c crop... done. Now you can use more affordable aps-c lenses on a full frame body. I've done it many times.
As a newbie I’m inclined to say all your points are valid.. the only thing is your title and msging are conflicting “for an extra $500 you can get a used..” I know cameras are expensive but that $500 can go towards lenses too. For the price of the camera .. $500 also isn’t that small an incremental jump it’s a third of the price.
Thank you! It all depends on what you need in a camera! Do you need all the benefits of full frame? Do you need all the benefits of APS-C? The a6700 is a great camera if you want all the benefits APS-C has to offer! Personally I like full frame and that’s what I’ll stick to but if you need help making up your mind, I posted another video on the A6700 you can watch it here: ruclips.net/video/tqGNhg26ecs/видео.html
It really depends on what type of photography you do... I do a lot of wildlifephotography and really i find the 1.5 cropfactor really handy! That way i have more reach and more details in my photos with the a6700 than the a7iv. Because with the a7iv you will lack a lot of reach. I think the a6700 is a really great wildlife camera!
There are many things to consider before recomend a full frame over apsc, the apsc lens are much cheaper and some produce sharp as hell images like the sigma trio, other thing is that if you use a gymball. The apsc will be more easy to calibrate and it will need low motor force, therefore better battery life. The focal lenght comparison only affects if you use a full frame befoe, if you have never used any camara and this will be your first. The crop factor will not matter at all, because you will learn to use different lenses. Example: if you want a wide shot probably you will use a 11mm or a 16mm instead of a 30mm in ff. Also there are much cheaper options to start building your apsc lens collection, and maybe start with a 6400 or a zv e10 then update to this a6700 and you will have a better body with all the new features with your lenses. And finally as a bonus you can use expensive ff lenses and get the best of them because you are using only the center of the optical lens. So the sharpness will be better at high apertures.
You're not wrong generally APS-C lenses are lighter than full frame lenses but as someone who has tested out and owned a lot of lenses, I would argue that you can find a lot of small full frame lenses that are lightweight. My Sigma 16-28mm 2.8 is an example of that, if you pick that thing up you'd think it's a toy. It's full frame and probably one of the lightest zoom lenses I own, and significantly light!
@@StefanoLombardoYTjust compare size of Sigma 18-50 2.8 with 24-105 f4 or 28-70 2.8. It is twice the weight and 3x the size and double the price. A7iv does not have uncropped 4k60 which is essential for travel videography. 1400+500=1900 vs 2150+800=3050$ for a a7iv which is worse as a video camera. Considering weight and size a6700 has much more logic to purchase than a7iv
Funny how you made me go for the a6700 more rather than the opposite. You also forgot to mention the 10 bit 4.2.2 recording that makes the a6700 great. Full frame is not always the best. Higher megapixel is not always the best either. There are more reasons photographers prefer aps-c bodies besides than the price point. Considering the crop factor on both the body and the 4K 120 recording, one can buy a cheaper, non-Sony aps-c lens to mitigate those crop factors. Thank you for the video. I truly appreciate the review and comparison.
Good to know about the Sony FX cameras. But for me, the DX format is a reasonable alternative to the FX cameras. DX lenses are smaller and lighter than the equivalent FX version, and to boot it is also less expensive. Also, if you use a FX lens on a DX body, you will be using the center portion of the FX lense's image circle, which is the sharpest part. Choices, choices, choices.... you have to decide which features you want for your purpose.
I owned the Sony A7iv and it was a beautiful camera. I had 2 GMaster lenses also. And a telephoto lens. Had 2 years of depression and thought there was no hope and sold all of my camera gear. I am doing much better now. 😢 I just have my a6400 and many lenses for crop sensor. I’d love to go to full frame again but just can’t swing all that cash. Don’t sale your camera gear while dealing with depression my friends you will regret it. 😢😢
No thanks to the extra heat from redundant backup. You can also save some money on the A6700 and get a ZV-E1, which will give up a better grab and go vlogging camera and both have the AI chip.
Good video, but I hate when people say full-frame gives you “more depth of field”! That’s simply wrong! It’s called “shallower depth of field” or “more bokeh”! “More depth of field” is literally the opposite of that!
Thank you! I meant shallow depth of field… talking for 30 minutes with no teleprompter and listing specs the entire time is pretty difficult and I realized I made a couple mistakes
Hey so the a6700 will be about 2100€ and I can get the Sona A7 IV used on ebay for like 1600€ so it is for sure worth it right ? What do u think about spending a premium and get the Sony 7C II
I think it's worth it but that's just my opinion. I've owned my A7IV for a over a year now, I love it and it's still one of the most loved cameras in the Sony photographers space. Probably won't ever get rid of it. In my opinion the A7CII is very similar to the A7IV
I think there are a lot of benefits you are missing on the A6700, the crop factor helps for macro and wildlife, ASP-C lenses are smaller/lighter and cheaper, the A6700 can do focus braketing. So for many none professionals the A6700 is actually a good choice ahead of a used A7 IV.
I am considering getting this camera as my first sony. I have had big canon SLRs before, but the camera I use is the one I have on me. For the last several years that has been an iPhone, which in most situations (not off camera flash) performs better than my old canon. My dream camera system will cost me $20k and weigh 35 pounds if I get it from Canon. Canon does not have a robust library of aps-c specific lenses. Sony does. I can get the 6700 and very nice set of decent lenses for around the same cost as the canon R5 plus a single good lens. And the 6700 with lenses will be small enough that I can stick a couple spare lenses in the pockets of my cargo shorts, and not be burdened by all of the gear I would need with a full frame body. There are a few reasons I am upgrading from the iPhone. 1 resolution, ie every pixel matters, none are mush. 2 lens selection. I want a fisheye, a 9mm rectilinear manual lens, the 10-20mm, 18-135mm, 70-350mm, and some standard F1.2-F1.8 primes. Off camera lighting only works with the iPhone in continuous mode. I have a 1600ws strobe and a pair of 800ws strobes plus all of the stands, tripods, umbrellas etc, and I want to use them again. Some of the stuff is canon specific, but I can get godox gear now that is superior to my canon strobes. Some of the things that you think are minor are the reason I am planning on getting this camera. Canon has excellent glass, but they are so far behind on the software and computational capabilities. Sony has that, also sony provides useful updates to cameras which are not the currently shipping model, and this camera has the hardware to take advantage of multiple functional software updates for years to come.
I'd recommend the Sigma 16-28mm if you're looking for a full frame lens. It's wide for video work and vlogging, it's wide enough at 16mm to capture real estate, it's extremely high quality, and super light. Like incredibly lightweight. It also has all internal zooming so it won't change weight or throw off the cameras balance if using a gimbal. This is what I would suggest. Here it is: geni.us/dygMz
Sony A7IV has more pixels than a6700…oh dear, yes it has but you also need to think about the pixel pitch which is quite higher on the A6700 and actually its the same pitch as in A7RV. So a6700 wins here at resolution. Ofcourse it might be noisier than A7IV due to smaller pixels
I am a beginner and have the choice between a Sony ZV E-10 with a sigma 18-50 2.8 lens, or pay an extra 250 euro , for a Sony A7iii with a standard sony lens. I like both video and photography, but am a complete beginner. What’s you recommend?
Thanks for the video. The a7iv in my area are still quite expensive new or used and I can't bring myself to spend 3100$ for any camera body. Also, isn't there a APSC to full frame adapter that solves most of the crop issue?
@@StefanoLombardoYT You have greatly helped with my decision. What I really need is a gimbal camera with AF and a b camera for interviews that I can set up with prime lens and not worry if its in focus. Skal!
It would be nice to have dual SD slots and a slightly larger EVF for event photography. Having dual SDs is a must for weddings and most events that cannot be redone.
Actually I disagree with you Stefano. Firstly, it's not so easy to get a used a7iv nowadays, especially in my country, Israel. The a7iv is a relatively new camera (about a year and 3 months), so people who have this camera don't really want to sell it in order to upgrade or to change the brand. And more importantly, FF lenses are much more expensive, bigger and havier. Definitely pro photographers should get a FF body and professional FF lenses, but a hobbiest (or even enthusiast) with limited budget will be very happy with the a6700
The truth is I can’t check every single marketplace for every country and every city to see what cameras are selling for. I know in my area there are plenty of A7IV’s for sale all being sold for around that price range
If you rock primes only, FF lenses are actually the same size and weight almost. And not that much more expensive. Thinking about Samyang 24 1.8 , Sony 35 1.8, Zeiss 55, Sony 85 Sigma 28-70 2.8 is even lighter than the 16-55 Sony for APSC
@@DDHDTV exactly! Lens size and weight vary depending on brand, type of lens, etc. Not just because one is full frame and one is APS-C! I have my 16-28 sigma on my A7IV which is extremely light but I also have my 24-70 sigma which is way heavier! Both full frame!
Problem with second hand gear in the Netherlands is that people sell the used camera at the same price as in stores. That’s why this video doesn’t work here or in the EU all together. If we buy products online or in stores, we get a standard 2-year warranty. Also our prices are TAX included.
I recently purchased the a6700 and have an A1. I bought it because of the features/capabilities it has some even not featured in the A1. Absolutely love this camera and i wasnt even considering an A7IV as it didnt have the features i was looking for. Wouldn't change my decision at all.
A6700 is for advanced hobbyst of wildlife and sport photography, or some casual vloggers that don't want to spent 2k$ on the camera itself. It has everything in to be honest, and everything over than, is for professionals that are SPECIFIC and needs a FullFrame FOR A REASON, not just "nice to have". If you don't monetize your work, you don't buy full frame, simply as that. I appreciate the possiblites from APS-C sensor, especially that it is like only 1f stop behind FF. When you have a tele-lens, it gives you free x1.5 teleconverter equivalent. It just makes you (in example) a 900 mm focal lenth, from a 600 mm lens. With a 4k 120p it is 1300 mm.. Imagine this possibilites for someone who is into a wildlife. Also it is not wrong to use this sensor format it at weddings or interior photography. There are a lot of people who earn money at that occasions even on M43 format. APS-C is seriosusly enough for professional work if you know how to use it before you decide to spend money on Fullframe. Probably if you had a chance to monetize your work from this format, you wouldn't buy a fullframe since you see no problems to earn money from what you already have.
I'm probably a bit late here but I'm selling my Nikon fullframe setup to get A6700 + 18-150mm lens. I'm just not built for carying 1.3 kg camera and few 700 g lenses on my hinking trips.
I was going to get the a7iv to replace my a7r and then this little beast is dropped....... I am now undecided, I am not a pro so the a6700 sort of getting my vote.
I love my a7iv and the benefits that come with ff. Even that extra dynamic range makes a huge difference in detail and stuff and that double sd card slot is heaven. What’s even better is that I got it for 1100 brand new! However I might be downgrading soon as I don’t have enough money for big boy lenses on the a7iv. Still deciding
Nice video and comparison, I have an Alpha 6400 and I think to do an upgrade to the 6700 but sometimes I think about ILCE-7M4 although I'm an absolute beginner in photography/videography and a full frame could be too much. PS: judging from your name/surname and appearance I would say your parents come from Sicily, are you fluent in Italian as well?
If you're talking crop factor as the lack of a6700 due to APSC camera and A7 is a Full Frame Camera, of course it will be crop factor when you use your full frame lens. My opinion, APSC is APSC, Full Frame is Full Frame. Of course it's different from sensor size. It's not an apple to apple comparison.
That’s not how it works. Unless it says “equivalent” like 50mm equivalent, regardless aps-c lens or full frame; the crop factor still applies regardless. If you get a 23mm APS-C lens you still have to do the math and know that this lens is roughly a 35mm equivalent once it’s attached to your a6700!
A7 IV is for work, A6700 is for fun. Didn't chose A7 IV just because it has similiar quality of 4k/60 like a6700, and no 4k/120 which is super fun to use. About 59 RAW limit in burst mode, I use a lot of burst mode for birding and never noticed any pause in doing shots, never had to wait for another burst, but maybe because I use V90 card. When they release A7 V with 4k/120, even if it will be serious crop, then I will go FF.
I’m still saving my Pennies for the a7cr. Currently own an a7c (get plenty of great video and photos on it) and the a7cr sounds awesome especially for its size. If I were to have a more photo focused one, I’d go a7cr and for more vid focused compact I’d go zv-e1. Ik I don’t wanna drag around bulky cams so compact is the way for me.
After watching this, I think the a6700 is better value at $500 less. $500 isn't even a small amount. It's pretty significant. And the 120 fps crop might suck for some people, but if you're shooting wildlife or telephoto, it actually gives you more reach.
You can carry the a6700 and 3 lenses in a small messenger bag.... Carrying around an equivalent FF kit worth $5000 for your own personal adventures is a massive pain in the ass. Unless you're constantly blowing your photos up to the size of a 75" 8k TV or doing massive prints nobody will never see the extra detail in the full frame. Also, f1.4 lenses do an amazing job blowing out the background and dealing with low light so you're still using a system professionals just a few years ago could only dream about.
I mean I understand everything you are trying to convey in this video, but these two cameras are worlds apart not only in price but features, therefore to me, they are not comparable
I bought the A6700 due to already having a few APS-C lenses and am really liking it but if I upgraded again in the future I would probably get a FF camera, maybe the A7CR for the 60MP sensor . (if it is made)
I don't know what to buy for astrophotography and landscapes, I read that the a7iv is better in low light, lower ISO, and the 7 R IV eats stars, but more Megapixels will be better for landscapes, and I actually don't know which one to choose
Fullframe is better for your use cases. It will give you more flexibility and better images for landscape and astro. When you shoot landscape generally you will go to really high/narrow F stop to ebsure evereything is in focus which you compensate for lower light by also lowering your Shutter speed. In this regards, you wider control/options and sharper image. For astro, lowlight -> FF. APSC can do astro too but you will get more noise in your file and less sharp image overall.
So 4K60 on the 6700 is at the native 1.5x crop, whereas on the A7 is at the 1.6x camera imposed crop? Comparing the 4K120 on the 6700 against 4K60 on the A7 is silly. Yes the A7 is a higher end camera, but it's not suitable for every use case.
That is true if you go with native Sony lenses… I’ve been using Sigma lenses since I started photography the quality is unreal and they’re about half the cost of native Sony lenses!
It's also not just about the body. I wish I didn't have to think about the budget but as an enthusiast, I need to consider lens costs. I feel like now there are great non-Sony E mount APS-C lenses in the used market for a great price (
Well done stirring debate 😜 you got me commenting too! Haha just to say for an apples to apples comparison it might need to be second hand price vs second hand price. Good insight though!!
should mention this opinion for professional use, normal user doesn't really need 2 card slot, smaller body+lens also better to carry arround. price diff not only $500, u should also mention price diff between full frame and apsc lens.
Thank you for being supportive! It was mostly an opinion piece why I would choose it over the other. I know there's many that would disagree but that's the great thing about posting videos and that's having a conversation in the comments and understanding other peoples perspective!
Im actually looking to get the a6700 as a secondary to my a7iv, you can actually buy em used now for around 1300, only thing im slightly concerned is overheating since i live in florida.
I live in Thailand and been shooting casually outdoor with the a6700 with no issue. I usually do 4K24 and 4K60 and then occasionally 4k120. So far no issue with overheating. Unless you do talking head or weddings which require longer session of shooting then I would not pick A6700.
Gotta agree with this, my view is more extreme honestly. I cannot imagine paying 1.5k for an APS-C camera, thats what i used when i was about 15. Just use an iPhone, you won't tell the difference unless half the time. Shallow DoF is the most clear benefit of a 'real' camera over a phone camera imo, so you should be looking to emphasise this advantage. You can get a FF camera like an A7Rii for less than half the price.
Absolute nonsense. The difference between an APS-C and a phone is HUGE. What are you even talking about with this nonsense? The censor size alone tells us this without even having to look at photo comparisons. Whereas the difference between APS-C and full frame is much smaller in comparison.
But, all lenses crop on an APS-C camera. An APS-C 35mm lens has the same field of view as a full frame 35mm lens when both are used on an APS-C camera.
I’d recommend watching my new video going live today, talking about the soon to be released A7C Mark ii. It will be full frame and will have a small form factor like the A6700!
Video just went live on the A7Cii, this is probably going to be a camera that you’d want to wait for! Small, lightweight but full frame! ruclips.net/video/hw6JSnnGJKU/видео.html
Agree with some comments, also.. apsc (exclusive) users don't need to do maths everytime we need to buy new lenses, we just know the depth of field we're gonna get knowing the focal, is not that hard xd Plus maybe im little angry because here (latam) is a lot harder/expensive to get full frame bodies so we use apsc cameras for work and professional tasks.. Not just for travel and "family/fun" stuff.. that's so annoying to hear from some RUclipsrs or comments on b&h. Sorry 🤣
Sir should i buy apsc sensor camera sony alpha a6700 or mirrorless sony a7c or m3 i am confused with apsc and mirrorless for wedding photography and videography
What if i'm the guy who was thinking to buy the zv-e10 as his first camera but considered looking for the a6700 for more features and more money 🤣 I can't go higher than the a6700 price point
in my situation as a 17 y.o. videographer who is short in terms of cash, i couldnt really usde the full frame because the lenses are too expensive, i already have the sony a7m2 and i use it only with apsc lenses except the 28 70 kit lens. what would you do ?
If you get to pay that much money to upgrade, it's a much better comparison, and you get much better video out of a Fujifilm XS20 and then you can spend that $500 on an amazing prime lens.
Even if you're stuck in the Sony ecosystem like I was. I would still say it's worth looking at given how you can get a bunch of amazing lenses for so little money on the x mount market.
I am thinking of getting a7iii for travel videos and was recommended a6700 as a cheaper alternative. Do you think It would be better to just spend a bit more to get an a7iv rather than a7iii for cinematic video?
The a6700 is for the most part, a better camera than the a7iii. It’s such an advanced camera compared to the iii that even in low light, the two are almost comparable.
Has it ever been a time where your SD card has failed? Then if one SD card fails, what's the surety that the other SD card won't? On the other side, guess people missed your point becos of your Title . hehe .
I really dislike how you ended the video with the A74 is the best bang for your buck camera for tech and specs. Majority of the things you said with a slight difference the 6700 has. It seems like there was some heavy bias.
I just bought a new a6700 . First I set it to 10bit, XAVC S 5K, 60P. The videos didn't play on my computer. Then I brought down the bit rate 8. Now it plays on my computer but not on my TV. What is the solution?
Didn’t say that if you watched my other video on the A6700… I don’t like the crop on both cameras as they’re the same both 1.5x. The crop for shooting on APS-C plus the 4k120 crop is just not for me
@@StefanoLombardoYT You don't have to use 4K120 on A6700 - as far as I know A7IV doesn't have that mode (max is 4k60) so it shouldn't be mentioned as disadvantage of A6700. And as I wrote - lenses for full frame are more expensive (and in general you have less choice).. beside that lower depth is not always good thing in photography. The choice between these two cameras is more about personal preferences than the technical differences.
"Cropped sensor"? In that same sense, we could also call Full Frame a cropped sensor if we compare it to Medium Format. What a bad habit they have of calling it a "cropped sensor", its correct name is APS-C. The nickname "cropped sensor" was an invention of the manufacturers to detract from the full frame.
I like how this guy is putting forward the argument : "you don t have to do the math when buying lenses" :D Nice video although i don t agree with the pov
I think everyone missed the point of the video. It wasn’t a direct comparison as it would be unfair to compare a APS-C camera with a full frame. The A6700 is still a great camera. The point I'm making is that for anyone buying the A6700, maybe consider the A7IV. For a bit more money, you can get a full frame all around better camera!
So what are your thoughts on the A6700?
Or for a bit more money buy the A7R IV which is better than the A7IV. If someone is considering A6700 it will be for the advantages APS-C offers; compact body and lenses with greater reach than the equivalent FF.
@@leighhaynes great point made!
@@leighhaynesthe point made is not determining which camera is better because they both have their upsides, but instead can you get more value buying something like the A7IV used
Nah, wait for a7cII.
You get all the FF benefit in small body
@@leighhaynes If you are only shooting landscape stills, the a7iv is a better camera in both video and any sort of AF tracking.
You should change the title of your video. Really guys, stop complaining about everything. The a6700 for its price is fantastic. I'm an experienced photographer, and I produce better photos with an APS-C camera than many self-called professional photographers with high-end equipment and a lack of composition and color grading knowledge. People are more concerned about getting a full-frame camera to be considered good photographers than improving as a photographer.
100% agree with this! I took a 2008 point and shoot to a portrait session last week and got some amazing photos with it! However when im buying gear and already spending a lot, I always look at getting the camera with the most value for my money even though I may never actually utilize all of its features. Its weird I know haha but just the way I look at things!
YEEEEEEES FINALLY SOMEONE'S TALKING THE TROUTH the internet has caused so much waffle and with out blueberries or mapple Syrup.
98.8% of cameras has been good for a long long time now.stop talking about gear and comparing and complaining and actually practice getting better at taking photographs and videos.
My Sony RX100 mrk 3 takes as good photos as my Sony A7R mrk 3 in the right light EASILY!!!! that's a 1inch 20.1 megapixel sensor vs a full frame 42. megapixel sensor
Pride yourself in your photos not your gear your cameras are insanely good try match your talents with the camera capabilities and see how your howl world changes. No disrespect to this guy at all just wanted to comment on that comment.keep snappin
@@thomaswilliams7601 Final work should be more important than the gear! I have friend who is a professional photographer and when you go to his website you will not notices the photos he took with his Canon 80D and the ones with his Sony a7III and IV.
I follow a RUclipsr that uploads a lot of shorts moving his cameras and when you see the pictures haha that guy should be selling ice cream. Some people get famous because the gear they show and a lot of views of people who can't buy it.
Its not about you vs other photographers. Would you be able to create better images with better gear? Thats the whole point. Skill is irrelevant.
Better gear won't get you better photos and better skill will get you great photos from cheep gear.
It's all about skill we all strive to gain more skills in what ever art form we work in.a bad tool will slow you down for shaw but we ain't talking about a £35 disposable camera Vs a £3000 camera we are talking hairline difference between modern cameras that all take stunning pictures.
the funfimentals of photography doesn't change its the same with good and cheep gear,If you have an eye for composition and choosing the right subject matter it doesn't matter what camera you have you will get great images.better gear won't teach you to see better and learn what it takes to become a Great photographer.skill is everything and gear is a distraction.
Not only is the a6700 cheaper, there's tons of good glass that is also cheaper. The money saved can go into other things like learning lights, movement, equipment, a million other things. The price difference is enormous and also to get the great shooting specs that you speak of require expensive CF Express type a cards. And large expensive lenses. When you compare full kit to full kit, the a6700 wins
Every time! I was this 👌 close to getting the A7IV but I stumbled across the 6700 and realized I'd get way more value from it along with cheaper lenses.
Full frame lenses are incredibly expensive which is why I like APS-C. A lot can be done with good lens and photography skills!
The a6700 is a prosumer camera for enthusiasts whereas the A7iv is a professional camera hence no need for dual card slots, the a6700 has the ability of 4k 120fps if you need it (nice to have), in 4k 60p there is no crop, APS-C lenses and camera weight are a blessing no heavy riggs to drag your ass around. It has AI framing and is great for wildlife and sports and has S-Cinetone and user imported LUT's, to me the a6700 is much more desirable for what i need not to mention the cost and weight savings. Unless you plan to do professional work the a6700 is a better camera in my humble opinion.
I think this is the best comment so far! I think you nailed it right on the head. The A6700 is a great camera in many aspects and the point of the video is not to shit on the A6700 because I do think it's an amazing camera in it's own ways. I think the problem is all these other RUclipsrs that are saying it's a professional camera but as a professional, I wouldn't get the A6700 as my main rig. So my video was for those people and to say, look at all the other great cameras you can buy for cheap now used, that might be of more value to you with, in many cases, better specs and features!
Also the a6700 has focus bracketing and the a7iv doesn't
I guess I’ve been lucky. 9 years shooting a6000 and never had an SD failure using sandisk extreme.
Another problem i have is all my lenses are aps c so on top of $500 I would need 5k in lenses.
That’s why I’m looking at 6700
I do proffesional work on a 6600... Yo can have a Panavision camera a make a disaster.
True! Me too. I have 2 lenses already. Don't want to waste more money. @@tomdemeo2708
The A7IV is obviously a better camera than the A6700 but I think it depends on the user. I agree, if you’re a professional who wants better specs go with a used A7IV. If you don’t care about full frame, two card slots and everything else, go with the A6700!
Well said! I just think if I was buying the A6700 I would spend the extra bit to get the extra features and a full frame body!
Extra $1,000 right?
For me its 1000$ extra, and for the same full frame lens as sigma 56mm its another 1200$. And maybe 500$ for new memory cards. That’s 2700$ more, and if I want more lenses it’s gonna add up even more. A6700 is smaller and much more budget friendly. I started professionally with a micro 4/3 and have had everything in between and preferred the apsc much more then full frame. :)
@@adamjonsson1291 same here
Me personally didn’t want to add an extra 1000$
I preordered an A6700. I don’t really feel your comparison is a fair one. For me, who this will be their first “real” camera (only had go pros and insta 360s), I feel it’s a good starting point. Of course the A7iv is a better camera but you’re talking about a used one at 53% higher price than a new camera (mpb has it for 2,150). It’s almost like comparing a 2023 Hyundai to a 2022 Porsche.
Don't get me wrong it's still a powerful camera and a great starting point. But this video wasn't a straight up comparison. Whether it's new or old, for $500 more you can get a used A7IV which would be a better camera in terms of specs and features for the price. To spend an extra $500 and get a full frame camera with better features, is a no brainer!
@@StefanoLombardoYT No brainer? how about prices for full frame lenses comparing to APSC lenses?
@@replay0712 You're absolutely right, lens prices are generally pricier for full frame cameras if you're looking at native sony lenses. You can rock third party lenses like Sigma lenses that I use, that are of super high quality and half the cost of native sony lenses. Not saying that the A6700 is a bad camera at all, cause I think it's a great camera if you like the benefits of what APS-C has to offer!
My area $1,000 difference. Would you still choose A7IV? Genuine question. 😁
@@dsking1003 Do you already have full frame or APS-C lenses? This will make all the difference. I would also wait until the ends of the month for Sony to release the A7CII. I have a video going out about it tomorrow so I’d definitely recommend you watch! It might just be a camera worth waiting for!
Hey, great video, but i wanna let you know that a6700 ibis is definitely better than a7iv's. I have both cameras.
Okay good to know! Yea I was wondering how much different it was going to be with the half step difference but also the AI capabilities!
The smaller the sensor, the easier it is to do a good job in ibis. You would be surprised by the ibis performance of m43 cameras from almost a decade ago.
Can't really agree here, they make wide apsc lenses so the crop isn't a huge deals.
The a6700 is a great camera for more entry level shooters.
I think the person starting out doesn't really have the extra $500 and if they do they should spend it on cheaper apsc lenses rather then expensive full frame lenses.
You’re absolutely right and that’s why I said you probably won’t use 4k120 with tighter lenses. Still I used to have the Canon M50 and the 1.5x aps-c crop with another 1.5x crop for 4K was horrendous even with wider aps-c lenses!
It’s still a good camera I personally just think if you’re going to spend this much money on a camera, you might as well spend another $500 to make sure you get the most for your money!
The video is not a head to head comparison, the point im making is you can get an entry level camera or spend only an extra $500 and get a professional full frame beast with much better specs all around
@@StefanoLombardoYT - If you believe most users probably won't use longer focal length lenses with 4k120 shooting, there's really no reason to bring it up as a negative point.
The 6700 isn't an "entry level" camera - it's a legit pro-user quality rig. The ZV-E10? There's your entry level camera - and it's still pretty damn good in it's own right.
The 6700 Is $1,400. The a7IV is $2,500. Even if you can get the a7IV at $2,000 - that $600 price point difference will pay for one or two damn good lenses (Sony, Sigma, Viltrox, or Tamron) for the 6700. So you'll need to spend anywhere from $2,500-$3,000 for a camera and lens with the a7IV.
@@craigjohnchronicles2504it may sway your judgement if you know that the a6700 costs 1700€ in EU and the A7IV costs 2500€.
Also the A7C sold for 1420€ during prime day incl cashback
@@DDHDTV When you factor in the price for the full frame lenses, the diffence is HUGE!
@@DDHDTVthe point is that in my own opinion, there’s other cameras you can now buy used whether that be an a7iv or a7riv that would get you more value, better specs and features for your money!
You have to take into account buying full frame lenses, which are much more expensive.
If you have APS-C E Mount lenses the A6700 is just the logical option, unless you really want to move to full frame.
You’re absolutely right if you go with native Sony lenses! I’ve been rocking full frame Sigma lenses they’re extremely high quality and half the price of native Sony lenses! If you have APS-C lenses already, the A6700 is a no brainer!
The point was that if you do spend the extra bit of money you can get a full frame camera with much better features and specs overall
But it's the same with APS-C lenses, where you get the Sigma and Tamron stuff for a friction of the Sony price.
@@Benjamin_Jehne You're not wrong!
@@Benjamin_Jehneor viltrox for friction of sigma price
The a7iv is $1500CAD MORE than the a6700 lol, that's not just a "bit" more expensive. If you're buying used, you're not getting a warranty. You're also getting a much slower sensor read out, the rolling shutter on the a7iv is attrocious. The a7iv will also not have as good of IBIS stabilization in video because the FF Sony E mount IBIS is worse than the ASPC due to physical limitations of the mount.
I said USED for a reason
@@StefanoLombardoYT Of course, but you're now giving up every warranty, and if you want to shoot 4k60, it's the same as shooting on the crop camera. Crop or not, the a7iv doesn't even offer 4k120, so if you want super slow motion tight shot b-roll the a7iv isn't for you. You're getting the better AI AF that will never get put into the a7iv.
I think people are really selling this a6700 short. And I don't really think it's priced bad, even having 1 card slot. It out performs the r7 and the XS20 for basically the same price. My main complaint is the LCD screen, it should be 1.8m dot like the XS20.
@@RiposteThis Oh trust me I don’t think it’s a bad camera at all and I think it’s well priced and it will suit a lot of peoples needs! There’s no argument there!
@@StefanoLombardoYT used as in no warranty if there is $1000 repair job?
A7IV owner looking at the A6700 for the weight and size savings. In that regards I think a6700 edges out even the a7c as the 50mm f/2.5 gets me closer to my prefered 85mm without the weight of it.
Ultimately, ricoh needs to get off its butt and makes 60mm+ plus compact. Yeah, I know it would be super niche and never happen.
Yea for anyone who wants something more compact and you don’t care for full frame, the a6700 is definitely the camera to buy!
You got a great point but for me, if you pick A7IV, you are not just going to adjust your budget for the Camera body because you have to consider that the lineup for full frame lenses are expensive as well.
I think people forget that you can use full frame lenses on aps-c and you can use aps-c lenses on full frame. Put an APS-C lens on your Full Frame, go into your settings and turn on aps-c crop... done. Now you can use more affordable aps-c lenses on a full frame body. I've done it many times.
@StefanoLombardoYT yeah, I totally agree with that. FF and Apsc lenses can be used to whichever body you get without much of an issue. I am just telling that if you are gonna buy fullframe body, obviously you wanna have to invest on lenses dedicated to it in order for you to max out the fullframe benefits. And those lenses are expensive as well. At least for me It's something to think about. Just wanted to add. BTW I love your content. I'm subscribing 😊
@@StefanoLombardoYTyes, but then can you use full frame as a pro for the A7IV over the a6700?
I just bought the Sony a6700 today after browsing for a Sony a7iv for 2 weeks..
used a7iv - $2k + another solid lens $1k-$2k so it would’ve been a $3k-$4k build
But I went with the a6700 because I already have a sigma 30m and Sony 11mm so I’m set for a bit with those.
Eventually I’ll go FF
That's awesome! If you already have APS-C lenses then the A6700 is a great choice and I would argue probably the best choice for APS-C cameras by Sony right now!
This!
If youre a person who uses the canera to make money, then yes, get a full frame
If you just want to take nice pictures / videos on holiday or of your family then the autofocus of the 6700 might be nore appealing and for a much lower price
Plus ahy spend extra 500 on a used camera with no warranty + even more on ff lenses when you wont benefit from the pro features of the a7iv
Exactly! The A6700 is a great camera and nobody is shitting on it! I just think if you're a professional this is not the camera for you and instead look at all the other great cameras you can buy for only a couple hundred dollars more!
I made money selling villas with Sony ZV 1 😎
You'd have to strip a lot: 4k120p, no crop in 4k60, 4k webcam, better focus, ai reframing, better digital stabe in video, the compact size and smaller lenses, a7iv is easily more than double the price with a few lenses - they are for different audiences really.
Personally, I preordered the A6700, then thought right, I've been with APSC (Fuji) for a few years, do I really want another APSC system? - and I decided to order the ZV-E1 :) - it was a close call with the A7 IV, but I have a Fuji body for photos that I love, this will be a purely video camera.
Yea I think it depends on the user! The compact size is not for everyone, for example many people complained about the position for the viewfinder!
It’s still a great camera don’t get me wrong, just my opinion, I’d much rather spend the extra money and get a used A7IV
@@StefanoLombardoYT Makes sense. What is your opinion on A7IV vs ZV-E1?
@@DigiDriftZone I think the ZV-E1 is actually a great camera in terms of video whereas the A7IV is more of a hybrid camera good for photos and videos. The single card slot on the ZV-E1 would kill me tho!
@@StefanoLombardoYT Ah, I never used the second slot on my X-T3 so that doesn't bother me as much. If it's anything mission critical, I'll buy a new card just in case :)
@@DigiDriftZone it’s having something happen to that card after you finished a client project. I’ve had cards break or fail on me in the past and it’s nice to know when shooting something for a client it’s being backed up to both cards!
I agree!! The A6700 is a crop sensor and does lack some features that the A7IV has like the ones you mentioned. I would much rather prefer the Sony A7IV over the A6700
The A6700 is still a great camera but in my personal opinion I would just spend the extra $500 to get an A7IV!
Great video. Thanks for your work on this. I own the A7 IV and need a 2nd camera for event video shoots and am considering the A6700. I disagree a bit with your premise of the A7 IV only being about a $500 difference though. If a new A6700 is $1300, I would need to find an A7 IV for about $1800. I haven't found anything used (good condition or better) on BH, Amazon, or eBay for less than $2000. At $700 difference, I think the A6700 is good enough for me.
For so many people, $700 is way too much of a jump that they can't afford, or that $700 could be MUCH better spent on a lens or continuing to save up for a super nice lens which matters much more for getting any specific look.
Exactly. The a6700 comes in at a good price. The A6700 as a back up is perfect. And for me it's the perfect main camera.
Sounds like most of the advantages are if you shoot video. I also think many people would consider the bigger camera and lenses a minus. Appreciate the video though.
IMO the decision between these two cameras is more complicated than you're portraying here. It's not just a camera body that's more powerful and slightly more expensive. It's an entirely different ecosystem to work in. Saying you should buy an a7IV instead of an a6700 is like saying you should buy a motorcycle rather than a scooter.
I stick to APSC because, as a hobbyist, I can build out a library of lenses for a fraction of the price of full frame, allowing me to try more things and experiment without breaking the bank. If I were relying on my camera for a job, then I would get a higher-end full frame camera because it would be worth the long term investment. These two cameras are for two entirely different people.
Maybe you could have focused a little more on the decision between full frame and APSC rather than these two specific cameras? Just some (hopefully) constructive criticism - great video though, and well edited!
Thank you but the argument wasn't about which camera is the better camera. In fact it doesn't really have to do with the A7IV at all. All I meant to say was if you're considering the A6700 because you want a "good" camera, don't overlook all the other great cameras that you can get right now for cheap used like the A7IV, A7S3, a7r4, these are all great cameras that you can get for a couple hundred dollars more than the A6700 and cameras that most people would consider better cameras in terms of specs and features, and for some people these cameras would be of better value. This was the premise of the video, not that the A6700 is a bad camera because I do think if you're someone who has their heart set on an APS-C camera, this is probably one of the best ones you can get right now in terms of what Sony has to offer. Rather the point being, for a few hundred dollars, you might find a camera that checks off more boxes for you!
Just received mine and set it up just like my A7RV. Feels just like a baby RV for lightweight filming and shooting. The IV comparison misses the point.
Probably misses the point because it wasn’t a comparison! Instead saying if you spend a little more you can actually get a full frame camera with better specs and features all around!
@@StefanoLombardoYT It doesn't have that many better specs though. Card slot, EVF, and FF sensor, that's really it. A7Iv has worse IBIS, worse AF system, worse video specs, worse battery life, slower sensor read out, slower continuous shooting.
Hi, Thanks for this video! I appreciate the care you took in making it :). So, I completely agree that full frame for PROs is going to be a much better camera---pros want great prints, and if an image or video is 2% better out of full frame than an APSC that could mean the difference between keeping clients and losing them. BUT, for 95% of camera buyers, we are NOT pros. And in head to head comparisons you CANNOT tell the difference in image quality between APSC shots and Full frame shots UNTIL you start going massive pixel peeking. So, what do I look for in a camera: simple---SMALL AND LIGHT, considering the combo of camera body and usable zoom lenses. In this case, the A6000 series (now A6700) with the Sony 18-135mm and sony 70-350mm. These are amazingly light, compact lenses along with one of the smallest camera bodies out there (A6700). I travel internationally and NO WAY will I consider large camera bodies/lenses :)! So, again, the bigger/heavier the better for quality PRO work (consider MEDIUM FRAME cameras that are even bigger and heavier, and way more expensive, for the very best in image quality. But for enthusiast, given the parity between image quality until you go beyond maybe 8 x 10 prints, just not worth the extra size, weight.
Thank you! Completely agree with you. As for image quality you can't tell a difference between the two. It's more so the benefits of both. The benefits of APS-C and the benefits of Full Frame which make a difference. It all depends on the user and what you need in a camera. If you need something small and light and don't care for a lot of the other full frame features, the A6700 is going to be a great option! The video was more so aimed at my audience, who want full frame cameras but don't have the budget for it.
@@StefanoLombardoYT Thanks for responding :)!
No questions, the A7 IV is a great camera. But, I just need something that I can take photos and videos or my family during holidays; and, use the APSC lenses I already have. In the Sony A6000 line, this one finally really hits the mark (for someone like me). Seems like you're assuming everyone is a pro photographer.
People saying the price difference ia too big, the *6700 cost 1699 Euros conpared to 1399 USD* in the US, both body only prices. Thats something like a 350 euro difference! Putting it in a different price class and already way closer to most of sony's full frame cameras. (A7 IV body costs 2499 euros)
That's 68% more (same in Canada), about the same or more for lenses, for about 1.5 f-stops of aperture and 1 f-stop of ISO improvement and the second SD card slot.
These really can't be compared at all. People love the small size if apsc and the A7IV is just massive compared to the a6700 ... Different story with the A7C though and even that has noticibly better IQ. And its costs less in EU
You’re right the A7IV is a much different camera than the A6700 which is why it wasn’t a direct comparison. The point of the video was to say that for an extra bit of money you can get a better camera that’s full frame and has much better specs and features than the a6700
@@StefanoLombardoYT so you made a no duh pointless video. spending more on a full frame is will usally always get you a better spec camera
a74; heavier, larger, more expensive, lenses more expensive, and I already have aps-c lenses. If I was a pro I would heed your advice but I just need a camera I can pack light for vacations and use for visits with friends and attend reunions.
You’re absolutely right! It all depends on what you’re using it for. Do you need all the professional features in a heavier camera for vacations and stuff, most likely not! The A6700 would make for a great camera!
Lol, "just a few hundred more" for the used A7IV body. Then you pay hundreds or thousands more for equivalent reaching native full frame glass over native aps-c glass. All for results you only notice when you're 100%+ in lightroom, which is where all the money is made! Have a realistic print made from portrait shots taken from both by a skilled photographer that properly understands light, and you will see 0 difference unless you're nitpicking natural limitations like depth of field (which can be remedied by adjusting other aspects that determine depth of field). In terms of quality, both results will be the same. Do the same with wildlife and then add up the cost of a native 600 or 800mm lens full frame versus the crop sensor's natural advantage in achieving longer reach for less bulk, and by extension, cost.
If you understand specific reasons you would need the A7IV, then you might need it. If you're going purely off spec sheets, shots taken in a lab, and influencers with GAS on steroids, then go pick up a used X-T3, A6500, or E-M5.II/GX85 along with a ~35 or 50mm equivalent lens and have fun taking photos and learning. So many of the "best photos taken with digital" today were taken on what influencers and blogs would call obsolete trash.
I think the a6700 is for everyday users and content creators who like to be compact but still have a powerful device; a7IV is for more professional tasks; So basically 2 groups of users will have 2 different options
Good way of looking at it!
Everyone is obsessed with full frame bodies at the moment without considering the cost of lenses. I agree if you have the money it’s better but there’s no point buying a budget camera if you have to spend double the price just to put a lens on it.
I think people forget that you can use full frame lenses on aps-c and you can use aps-c lenses on full frame. Put an APS-C lens on your Full Frame, go into your settings and turn on aps-c crop... done. Now you can use more affordable aps-c lenses on a full frame body. I've done it many times.
As a newbie I’m inclined to say all your points are valid.. the only thing is your title and msging are conflicting “for an extra $500 you can get a used..” I know cameras are expensive but that $500 can go towards lenses too. For the price of the camera .. $500 also isn’t that small an incremental jump it’s a third of the price.
Why comparing the price of new a6700 and used a7siv? 😩 compare new to new or used to used in the same condition
Want a small hybrid shooter that can make use of my small APSC lenses for travel and EDC. A6700 it is.
If you already have APS-C lenses and you have no need to go full frame, the A6700 is definetely the best camera you can buy right now!
A new a6700 is still at least $600 cheaper than a used a7IV. & What about the cost of full-frame lenses?
Great video - I am looking at the a6700 should I wait for the A7CII and A7CR ? full frame?
Thank you! It all depends on what you need in a camera! Do you need all the benefits of full frame? Do you need all the benefits of APS-C? The a6700 is a great camera if you want all the benefits APS-C has to offer! Personally I like full frame and that’s what I’ll stick to but if you need help making up your mind, I posted another video on the A6700 you can watch it here: ruclips.net/video/tqGNhg26ecs/видео.html
I am wanting the same body size as the a6700 but in a full frame camera
@@LeeMansfield yea you gotta wait for that A7CII!!
Just posted a video on the A7Cii: ruclips.net/video/hw6JSnnGJKU/видео.html
It really depends on what type of photography you do... I do a lot of wildlifephotography and really i find the 1.5 cropfactor really handy! That way i have more reach and more details in my photos with the a6700 than the a7iv. Because with the a7iv you will lack a lot of reach. I think the a6700 is a really great wildlife camera!
There are many things to consider before recomend a full frame over apsc, the apsc lens are much cheaper and some produce sharp as hell images like the sigma trio, other thing is that if you use a gymball. The apsc will be more easy to calibrate and it will need low motor force, therefore better battery life. The focal lenght comparison only affects if you use a full frame befoe, if you have never used any camara and this will be your first. The crop factor will not matter at all, because you will learn to use different lenses. Example: if you want a wide shot probably you will use a 11mm or a 16mm instead of a 30mm in ff.
Also there are much cheaper options to start building your apsc lens collection, and maybe start with a 6400 or a zv e10 then update to this a6700 and you will have a better body with all the new features with your lenses.
And finally as a bonus you can use expensive ff lenses and get the best of them because you are using only the center of the optical lens. So the sharpness will be better at high apertures.
What if you do travel photography? Lugging around all these huge heavy lenses. While top notch apsc lenses can almost fit in your pocket
You're not wrong generally APS-C lenses are lighter than full frame lenses but as someone who has tested out and owned a lot of lenses, I would argue that you can find a lot of small full frame lenses that are lightweight. My Sigma 16-28mm 2.8 is an example of that, if you pick that thing up you'd think it's a toy. It's full frame and probably one of the lightest zoom lenses I own, and significantly light!
@@StefanoLombardoYTjust compare size of Sigma 18-50 2.8 with 24-105 f4 or 28-70 2.8. It is twice the weight and 3x the size and double the price. A7iv does not have uncropped 4k60 which is essential for travel videography.
1400+500=1900 vs 2150+800=3050$ for a a7iv which is worse as a video camera. Considering weight and size a6700 has much more logic to purchase than a7iv
Funny how you made me go for the a6700 more rather than the opposite. You also forgot to mention the 10 bit 4.2.2 recording that makes the a6700 great. Full frame is not always the best. Higher megapixel is not always the best either. There are more reasons photographers prefer aps-c bodies besides than the price point. Considering the crop factor on both the body and the 4K 120 recording, one can buy a cheaper, non-Sony aps-c lens to mitigate those crop factors. Thank you for the video. I truly appreciate the review and comparison.
Good to know about the Sony FX cameras. But for me, the DX format is a reasonable alternative to the FX cameras. DX lenses are smaller and lighter than the equivalent FX version, and to boot it is also less expensive. Also, if you use a FX lens on a DX body, you will be using the center portion of the FX lense's image circle, which is the sharpest part. Choices, choices, choices.... you have to decide which features you want for your purpose.
I owned the Sony A7iv and it was a beautiful camera. I had 2 GMaster lenses also. And a telephoto lens. Had 2 years of depression and thought there was no hope and sold all of my camera gear. I am doing much better now. 😢 I just have my a6400 and many lenses for crop sensor. I’d love to go to full frame again but just can’t swing all that cash. Don’t sale your camera gear while dealing with depression my friends you will regret it. 😢😢
Sorry to hear that. Yea if you already have so many crop sensor lenses it's not worth the move to full frame!
No thanks to the extra heat from redundant backup. You can also save some money on the A6700 and get a ZV-E1, which will give up a better grab and go vlogging camera and both have the AI chip.
Good video, but I hate when people say full-frame gives you “more depth of field”! That’s simply wrong! It’s called “shallower depth of field” or “more bokeh”! “More depth of field” is literally the opposite of that!
Thank you! I meant shallow depth of field… talking for 30 minutes with no teleprompter and listing specs the entire time is pretty difficult and I realized I made a couple mistakes
@@StefanoLombardoYT Yeah, it’s completely understandable! Your videos are really clear for being without a teleprompter!
Hey so the a6700 will be about 2100€ and I can get the Sona A7 IV used on ebay for like 1600€ so it is for sure worth it right ?
What do u think about spending a premium and get the Sony 7C II
I think it's worth it but that's just my opinion. I've owned my A7IV for a over a year now, I love it and it's still one of the most loved cameras in the Sony photographers space. Probably won't ever get rid of it. In my opinion the A7CII is very similar to the A7IV
I think there are a lot of benefits you are missing on the A6700, the crop factor helps for macro and wildlife, ASP-C lenses are smaller/lighter and cheaper, the A6700 can do focus braketing. So for many none professionals the A6700 is actually a good choice ahead of a used A7 IV.
Why are people fixated with full frame?? It’s nearly as bad as those who get worked up about megapixels.
Not sure! I love my a7iv which is full frame but I also love my fx30 which is aps-c! The FX30 actually in many cases became my a cam!
I am considering getting this camera as my first sony. I have had big canon SLRs before, but the camera I use is the one I have on me. For the last several years that has been an iPhone, which in most situations (not off camera flash) performs better than my old canon.
My dream camera system will cost me $20k and weigh 35 pounds if I get it from Canon. Canon does not have a robust library of aps-c specific lenses. Sony does. I can get the 6700 and very nice set of decent lenses for around the same cost as the canon R5 plus a single good lens. And the 6700 with lenses will be small enough that I can stick a couple spare lenses in the pockets of my cargo shorts, and not be burdened by all of the gear I would need with a full frame body.
There are a few reasons I am upgrading from the iPhone. 1 resolution, ie every pixel matters, none are mush. 2 lens selection. I want a fisheye, a 9mm rectilinear manual lens, the 10-20mm, 18-135mm, 70-350mm, and some standard F1.2-F1.8 primes. Off camera lighting only works with the iPhone in continuous mode. I have a 1600ws strobe and a pair of 800ws strobes plus all of the stands, tripods, umbrellas etc, and I want to use them again. Some of the stuff is canon specific, but I can get godox gear now that is superior to my canon strobes.
Some of the things that you think are minor are the reason I am planning on getting this camera. Canon has excellent glass, but they are so far behind on the software and computational capabilities. Sony has that, also sony provides useful updates to cameras which are not the currently shipping model, and this camera has the hardware to take advantage of multiple functional software updates for years to come.
What’s the best Sony camera I should buy for amazing video and photographer for real estate
I'd recommend the Sigma 16-28mm if you're looking for a full frame lens. It's wide for video work and vlogging, it's wide enough at 16mm to capture real estate, it's extremely high quality, and super light. Like incredibly lightweight. It also has all internal zooming so it won't change weight or throw off the cameras balance if using a gimbal. This is what I would suggest. Here it is: geni.us/dygMz
I am a beginner this will be my first camera, I can't afford A7iv and on a limited budget so should I go for a6700
Figuring out what features you need in a camera should be your first step. If the A6700 checks off all boxes then it’s a great option for you!
Sony A7IV has more pixels than a6700…oh dear, yes it has but you also need to think about the pixel pitch which is quite higher on the A6700 and actually its the same pitch as in A7RV. So a6700 wins here at resolution. Ofcourse it might be noisier than A7IV due to smaller pixels
I am a beginner and have the choice between a Sony ZV E-10 with a sigma 18-50 2.8 lens, or pay an extra 250 euro , for a Sony A7iii with a standard sony lens. I like both video and photography, but am a complete beginner. What’s you recommend?
Thanks for the video. The a7iv in my area are still quite expensive new or used and I can't bring myself to spend 3100$ for any camera body. Also, isn't there a APSC to full frame adapter that solves most of the crop issue?
Totally understandable and really if you don’t need full frame it’s not worth it! They do make speedboosters that will handle most of the crop!
@@StefanoLombardoYT You have greatly helped with my decision. What I really need is a gimbal camera with AF and a b camera for interviews that I can set up with prime lens and not worry if its in focus. Skal!
It would be nice to have dual SD slots and a slightly larger EVF for event photography. Having dual SDs is a must for weddings and most events that cannot be redone.
Sir, which one is good for low light street photography and street portrait at night time?
As a stills photographer I don't give a shit about video. I want a small package so I went for the A7c. Full frame in a compact package. Nice.
The A7C is a compact beast!
Actually I disagree with you Stefano. Firstly, it's not so easy to get a used a7iv nowadays, especially in my country, Israel. The a7iv is a relatively new camera (about a year and 3 months), so people who have this camera don't really want to sell it in order to upgrade or to change the brand. And more importantly, FF lenses are much more expensive, bigger and havier. Definitely pro photographers should get a FF body and professional FF lenses, but a hobbiest (or even enthusiast) with limited budget will be very happy with the a6700
The truth is I can’t check every single marketplace for every country and every city to see what cameras are selling for. I know in my area there are plenty of A7IV’s for sale all being sold for around that price range
If you rock primes only, FF lenses are actually the same size and weight almost. And not that much more expensive.
Thinking about Samyang 24 1.8 , Sony 35 1.8, Zeiss 55, Sony 85
Sigma 28-70 2.8 is even lighter than the 16-55 Sony for APSC
@@DDHDTV exactly! Lens size and weight vary depending on brand, type of lens, etc. Not just because one is full frame and one is APS-C! I have my 16-28 sigma on my A7IV which is extremely light but I also have my 24-70 sigma which is way heavier! Both full frame!
Problem with second hand gear in the Netherlands is that people sell the used camera at the same price as in stores. That’s why this video doesn’t work here or in the EU all together. If we buy products online or in stores, we get a standard 2-year warranty. Also our prices are TAX included.
I recently purchased the a6700 and have an A1. I bought it because of the features/capabilities it has some even not featured in the A1. Absolutely love this camera and i wasnt even considering an A7IV as it didnt have the features i was looking for. Wouldn't change my decision at all.
A6700 is for advanced hobbyst of wildlife and sport photography, or some casual vloggers that don't want to spent 2k$ on the camera itself.
It has everything in to be honest, and everything over than, is for professionals that are SPECIFIC and needs a FullFrame FOR A REASON, not just "nice to have".
If you don't monetize your work, you don't buy full frame, simply as that.
I appreciate the possiblites from APS-C sensor, especially that it is like only 1f stop behind FF.
When you have a tele-lens, it gives you free x1.5 teleconverter equivalent. It just makes you (in example) a 900 mm focal lenth, from a 600 mm lens. With a 4k 120p it is 1300 mm.. Imagine this possibilites for someone who is into a wildlife.
Also it is not wrong to use this sensor format it at weddings or interior photography. There are a lot of people who earn money at that occasions even on M43 format.
APS-C is seriosusly enough for professional work if you know how to use it before you decide to spend money on Fullframe.
Probably if you had a chance to monetize your work from this format, you wouldn't buy a fullframe since you see no problems to earn money from what you already have.
I'm probably a bit late here but I'm selling my Nikon fullframe setup to get A6700 + 18-150mm lens. I'm just not built for carying 1.3 kg camera and few 700 g lenses on my hinking trips.
I was going to get the a7iv to replace my a7r and then this little beast is dropped....... I am now undecided, I am not a pro so the a6700 sort of getting my vote.
The a6700 would be a great choice for you then!
I love my a7iv and the benefits that come with ff. Even that extra dynamic range makes a huge difference in detail and stuff and that double sd card slot is heaven. What’s even better is that I got it for 1100 brand new! However I might be downgrading soon as I don’t have enough money for big boy lenses on the a7iv. Still deciding
Regarding the a6700's crop in 4k120: You do have wider APS-C lenses like the Sony 11mm f1.8 & Viltrox 13 f1.4 available at reasonable prices.
What about Sony A7iii over sony a6600 or 6700? Can someone suggest me?
6700👌🏻🔥
Nice video and comparison, I have an Alpha 6400 and I think to do an upgrade to the 6700 but sometimes I think about ILCE-7M4 although I'm an absolute beginner in photography/videography and a full frame could be too much.
PS: judging from your name/surname and appearance I would say your parents come from Sicily, are you fluent in Italian as well?
I’m thinking to upgrade from 6400, I can’t stand not having IBIS
If you're talking crop factor as the lack of a6700 due to APSC camera and A7 is a Full Frame Camera, of course it will be crop factor when you use your full frame lens. My opinion, APSC is APSC, Full Frame is Full Frame. Of course it's different from sensor size. It's not an apple to apple comparison.
That’s not how it works. Unless it says “equivalent” like 50mm equivalent, regardless aps-c lens or full frame; the crop factor still applies regardless. If you get a 23mm APS-C lens you still have to do the math and know that this lens is roughly a 35mm equivalent once it’s attached to your a6700!
Thank you for this comparing✨🎂🥂
I'm a dentist and will support you for sure 😎 didn't know about the other "dentist guy" 🧐
Haha I love this
@@StefanoLombardoYT keep smiling 😎
A7 IV is for work, A6700 is for fun.
Didn't chose A7 IV just because it has similiar quality of 4k/60 like a6700, and no 4k/120 which is super fun to use.
About 59 RAW limit in burst mode, I use a lot of burst mode for birding and never noticed any pause in doing shots, never had to wait for another burst, but maybe because I use V90 card.
When they release A7 V with 4k/120, even if it will be serious crop, then I will go FF.
I’m still saving my Pennies for the a7cr. Currently own an a7c (get plenty of great video and photos on it) and the a7cr sounds awesome especially for its size. If I were to have a more photo focused one, I’d go a7cr and for more vid focused compact I’d go zv-e1. Ik I don’t wanna drag around bulky cams so compact is the way for me.
After watching this, I think the a6700 is better value at $500 less. $500 isn't even a small amount. It's pretty significant. And the 120 fps crop might suck for some people, but if you're shooting wildlife or telephoto, it actually gives you more reach.
You can carry the a6700 and 3 lenses in a small messenger bag.... Carrying around an equivalent FF kit worth $5000 for your own personal adventures is a massive pain in the ass.
Unless you're constantly blowing your photos up to the size of a 75" 8k TV or doing massive prints nobody will never see the extra detail in the full frame. Also, f1.4 lenses do an amazing job blowing out the background and dealing with low light so you're still using a system professionals just a few years ago could only dream about.
I mean I understand everything you are trying to convey in this video, but these two cameras are worlds apart not only in price but features, therefore to me, they are not comparable
I bought the A6700 due to already having a few APS-C lenses and am really liking it but if I upgraded again in the future I would probably get a FF camera, maybe the A7CR for the 60MP sensor . (if it is made)
Yea if you already have APS-C lenses you made the right choice! The a6700 will be a great camera! Interested to see if Sony will release the A7CR
It's not even released yet and you already like it?
@@Lamin4k I said I like my A6700. IF I upgraded in the future it would be to the A7CR IF it is released.
@@Sonic-Boom Thats what I'm saying, it just got released today no? You got it several days early?
@@Lamin4k Mine arrived on the 27th.
I don't know what to buy for astrophotography and landscapes, I read that the a7iv is better in low light, lower ISO, and the 7 R IV eats stars, but more Megapixels will be better for landscapes, and I actually don't know which one to choose
Fullframe is better for your use cases. It will give you more flexibility and better images for landscape and astro. When you shoot landscape generally you will go to really high/narrow F stop to ebsure evereything is in focus which you compensate for lower light by also lowering your Shutter speed. In this regards, you wider control/options and sharper image. For astro, lowlight -> FF. APSC can do astro too but you will get more noise in your file and less sharp image overall.
So 4K60 on the 6700 is at the native 1.5x crop, whereas on the A7 is at the 1.6x camera imposed crop? Comparing the 4K120 on the 6700 against 4K60 on the A7 is silly. Yes the A7 is a higher end camera, but it's not suitable for every use case.
Full frame Sony lenses are very expensive though
That is true if you go with native Sony lenses… I’ve been using Sigma lenses since I started photography the quality is unreal and they’re about half the cost of native Sony lenses!
and when they break, (I have two out of commission just now) the repair costs are astronomical.
It's also not just about the body. I wish I didn't have to think about the budget but as an enthusiast, I need to consider lens costs. I feel like now there are great non-Sony E mount APS-C lenses in the used market for a great price (
Well done stirring debate 😜 you got me commenting too! Haha just to say for an apples to apples comparison it might need to be second hand price vs second hand price. Good insight though!!
should mention this opinion for professional use, normal user doesn't really need 2 card slot, smaller body+lens also better to carry arround.
price diff not only $500, u should also mention price diff between full frame and apsc lens.
Thank you Stefano for the helpful comparative video! useful and informative! Good luck on your photography journey!
Thank you for being supportive! It was mostly an opinion piece why I would choose it over the other. I know there's many that would disagree but that's the great thing about posting videos and that's having a conversation in the comments and understanding other peoples perspective!
@@StefanoLombardoYT You're very welcome! You did it great! I agree with you! Keep up the good work! God bless Stefano!
Im actually looking to get the a6700 as a secondary to my a7iv, you can actually buy em used now for around 1300, only thing im slightly concerned is overheating since i live in florida.
I live in Thailand and been shooting casually outdoor with the a6700 with no issue. I usually do 4K24 and 4K60 and then occasionally 4k120. So far no issue with overheating. Unless you do talking head or weddings which require longer session of shooting then I would not pick A6700.
Gotta agree with this, my view is more extreme honestly. I cannot imagine paying 1.5k for an APS-C camera, thats what i used when i was about 15. Just use an iPhone, you won't tell the difference unless half the time. Shallow DoF is the most clear benefit of a 'real' camera over a phone camera imo, so you should be looking to emphasise this advantage. You can get a FF camera like an A7Rii for less than half the price.
Absolute nonsense. The difference between an APS-C and a phone is HUGE. What are you even talking about with this nonsense? The censor size alone tells us this without even having to look at photo comparisons. Whereas the difference between APS-C and full frame is much smaller in comparison.
But, all lenses crop on an APS-C camera. An APS-C 35mm lens has the same field of view as a full frame 35mm lens when both are used on an APS-C camera.
I love FF so much but, for travel filmmaking that I want to do, it’s cumbersome to carry around the almost 5lb load with a lens and body.
I’d recommend watching my new video going live today, talking about the soon to be released A7C Mark ii. It will be full frame and will have a small form factor like the A6700!
Video just went live on the A7Cii, this is probably going to be a camera that you’d want to wait for! Small, lightweight but full frame! ruclips.net/video/hw6JSnnGJKU/видео.html
Great video and I agree! There’s still a bunch of great cameras that you can buy used like the A7IV A7R4 that would be better value
Finally one person that understood the point of the video haha🤣
It wasn’t to hate on the a6700 cause I do think it’s a good camera just to bring awareness to some of the other cameras that may be a better choice
Agree with some comments, also.. apsc (exclusive) users don't need to do maths everytime we need to buy new lenses, we just know the depth of field we're gonna get knowing the focal, is not that hard xd
Plus maybe im little angry because here (latam) is a lot harder/expensive to get full frame bodies so we use apsc cameras for work and professional tasks.. Not just for travel and "family/fun" stuff.. that's so annoying to hear from some RUclipsrs or comments on b&h. Sorry 🤣
Sir should i buy apsc sensor camera sony alpha a6700 or mirrorless sony a7c or m3 i am confused with apsc and mirrorless for wedding photography and videography
If someone wants a full frame that makes sense. But most of us are just wanting to enjoy the smaller size of the a6700.
Can we get a comparison of A7iii vs a6700. Much more on same price point
Someone is selling me a A7iii with 24-70 gm f2.8 sony lens for 2,250… what do you guys think?
What if i'm the guy who was thinking to buy the zv-e10 as his first camera but considered looking for the a6700 for more features and more money 🤣
I can't go higher than the a6700 price point
Two different cameras for different purposes..... 6700 is a superior in every way for wildlife or bird photography.
in my situation as a 17 y.o. videographer who is short in terms of cash, i couldnt really usde the full frame because the lenses are too expensive, i already have the sony a7m2 and i use it only with apsc lenses except the 28 70 kit lens. what would you do ?
If you get to pay that much money to upgrade, it's a much better comparison, and you get much better video out of a Fujifilm XS20 and then you can spend that $500 on an amazing prime lens.
Even if you're stuck in the Sony ecosystem like I was. I would still say it's worth looking at given how you can get a bunch of amazing lenses for so little money on the x mount market.
I am thinking of getting a7iii for travel videos and was recommended a6700 as a cheaper alternative. Do you think It would be better to just spend a bit more to get an a7iv rather than a7iii for cinematic video?
The a6700 is for the most part, a better camera than the a7iii. It’s such an advanced camera compared to the iii that even in low light, the two are almost comparable.
Has it ever been a time where your SD card has failed? Then if one SD card fails, what's the surety that the other SD card won't? On the other side, guess people missed your point becos of your Title . hehe .
I really dislike how you ended the video with the A74 is the best bang for your buck camera for tech and specs. Majority of the things you said with a slight difference the 6700 has. It seems like there was some heavy bias.
I just bought a new a6700 . First I set it to 10bit, XAVC S 5K, 60P. The videos didn't play on my computer. Then I brought down the bit rate 8. Now it plays on my computer but not on my TV. What is the solution?
get a better computer.
So the crop on A6700 is bad but crop on A7IV is good? BTW: full frame lenses are more expensive.
Didn’t say that if you watched my other video on the A6700… I don’t like the crop on both cameras as they’re the same both 1.5x. The crop for shooting on APS-C plus the 4k120 crop is just not for me
@@StefanoLombardoYT You don't have to use 4K120 on A6700 - as far as I know A7IV doesn't have that mode (max is 4k60) so it shouldn't be mentioned as disadvantage of A6700. And as I wrote - lenses for full frame are more expensive (and in general you have less choice).. beside that lower depth is not always good thing in photography. The choice between these two cameras is more about personal preferences than the technical differences.
"Cropped sensor"? In that same sense, we could also call Full Frame a cropped sensor if we compare it to Medium Format.
What a bad habit they have of calling it a "cropped sensor", its correct name is APS-C.
The nickname "cropped sensor" was an invention of the manufacturers to detract from the full frame.
Thanks, you helped me made my decision... A7IV.
You should check out the video I released today maybe the A7CII will be a better option! ruclips.net/video/hw6JSnnGJKU/видео.html
@@StefanoLombardoYT, you the best! Thank you, man!
I like how this guy is putting forward the argument : "you don t have to do the math when buying lenses" :D
Nice video although i don t agree with the pov
That’s okay! It’s an opinion video so I knew not everyone would agree:)