Love my A6100. With the release of newer apsc line ups. I can buy the older apsc. The 7R3 is my main camera but I like carrying lighter set up. I love prime lens and learnt that the best thing is to bring multiple bodies with the lens attached and get them depending on the need. The zoom lens are too expensive than getting multiple primes and multiple bodies. 7R3 on 24 GM A6100 on 90 G 2.8 another apsc on 55 zeiss. I don’t do much videos sold my 16-35 Zeiss and 70-300 G for the GM and the macro. The 90 on apsc is equivalent to 135 2.8. On the street I use the A6100 with 24 GM giving about 35 ish GM look at 24 MP or the 35 2.8 if I want to go super light. I notice that even hand held on A6100 I get 99% sharp shots. Loving apsc vibes and they have cheap lenses I want to explore soon. Will be getting the IBIS apsc soon when a deal presents itself. I love the A6000 series and it really gave me more pleasure than with the FF as I am just hobbyist and has small hands probably. Thanks for the spectacular videos.
Awesome comment and a very interesting approach. Im just like you liking the primes on multiple bodies but then feel awkward in some city with two cameras attached to my chest lol How are you enjoying the GM lenses on APS-C? Great results? Oh and if you want IBIS in your apsc then the A6700 will probably be a really good option for you. Check out perhaps second hand, they seem extremely sturdy to last a long time.
Great video.. I use ff mostly as general purpose , street , landscape , portraits , walk around.. I use apsc for sports , i like watching motorsport , motogp , f1 , etc. I use m43 , for wildlife , birds , etc. So the further the reach , the smaller my camera.
Thank you for your thoughts. I´m thinking, that full frame has it´s advantages for portrait shooters, wedding shooters, concert shooters and so on. But for me, the usal landscape, architecture, macro, sometimes tele shooter is it not nessessary. I like the advantages in cost, weight, size for body and lenses and more reach for tele and more dof for macro. I can shoot the milkyway and for sure I have a 1.4 prime for portraits. Someday I will swich from my A6400 (which replaced my A6000) to the A6700. I don´t missing anything, I woudn´t change for the same mony to full frame, the things full frame can do better don´t interest me for real, but I dont´m want the disadvantages. So I´m happy to found the right system for me. It´s always a personal choice.
Very wise words. Its just so important to find what truly works for you and not be overwhelmed and influenced by others (or industry) that tells you need to have best of the best or nothing. Im in same exact boat as you, we know how we use the gear and that its sufficient for our needs. Btw, the A6700 is a killer camera. Once I got it, I had even less reasons to carry FF.
I have the a6700 camera, also. Your review is right on. The quality of images from that camera and good lenses rivals that of the larger FF cameras. The one area where the a6700 rocks is with the AI focusing and object recognition. It really is way ahead of the older A74. Not to fault the A74, it is older and has the older Bionz chipset. The a6700 has the same setup as the A7R5, and wow, it makes an incredible difference.
@@bondgabebond4907 it really does! At first I sort of dismissed this new, trendy “ai features “, but they help massively. A7V will be dropping soon (hopefully) and I hope it will up a notch even more!
I have an FX30 which is similar in size to an A74. I left for a gig on Saturday and decided to take my smaller zve10 instead of the fx30 because I didn’t want the extra size along with all my musical gear. I wanted to take some images of the venue we were playing in for social media. The FX30 would have taken better images but it didn’t matter for my purposes. If I only had large cameras I may not have bothered. Just saying. Great video! I’m saving for a 6700! 👍
I love to read stories like that. More and more I feel like the convenience is more important than the best possible image quality. Thanks for sharing 💪
One counterargument for smaller/cheaper lenses is that you should really be considering equivalency when comparing lenses. Obviously, a 24 mm f/1.4 on full frame is going to be much bigger and more expensive than on APS-C. But those are not equivalent lenses; the equivalent lens on full frame would be like a 35 mm f/2, which is indeed much smaller and cheaper. E.g. - Sigma 23 mm f/1.4 for APS-C: 550 USD; 330 g - Sigma 35 mm f/2.0 for Full Frame: 639 USD; 325 g There are other good reasons to get APS-C, but I don’t think that the difference in size and cost of lenses alone are a good enough justification.
You are right, it does come down to that many times, especially with primes, however zoom lenses I think don’t really fall in that category. The Sigma 18-50 f2.8 is half the price and size of Sony’s 24-105 F4 even though they are close in focal length and aperture (although Sigma falls short on long end). I think the argument about additional gear (gimbals, filters, tripods etc) that need to support bigger setup also plays in the “size and weight“ category
@@TomsJurjaks even more true with the sigma 10-18mm. Compare that lens with the sony 16-35mm f/4 on full frame, and the sigma is half the size and half the price for nearly identical depth of field/low-light and focal length. For primes, there's less of an edge, but you can get the sony 15mm f/1.4 and a6700 for about $800-$1,000 less than a sony a7iv/a7cii with the sigma 24mm f/2 prime.
I think generally people overestimate the full-frame advantage. It's about 1 to 1.5 stops of ISO for the same noise/DR, and about 1 aperture stop shallower depth of focus. That's it. If you need that extra low-light, it can be worth it but you have to take the shallower DoF to get its benefit. There are many situations where you don't really get much benefit. Also, like you say, newer ASPC tend to perform better than older FF; the a6700 has much better dynamic range and noise performance than the A7i and A7ii, or classics like the 5Dmk2. Using good glass/lighting and capturing interesting content will make a bigger difference IMO. For personal use, I don't think the extra cost and bulk is worth it to me. For paid/professional use where you need to deliver the absolute best results you can offer, I'd say it's worth the investment.
Hey Toms, thanks for a fantastic comparison. I've been trying to decide between de A67 and the A7IV and I'm still undecided, right now I have a A6000 and I struggle with the low light performance and the lack of IBIS. IBIS is something you don't strictly need since good stance and breathing will eliminate shake quite a bit but I find that with the worse low light performance I need lower shutter speeds to achieve a well lit shot which requires beter stability or a tripod. My objective is to be able to shoot stable, sharp photos on the streets even when lighting conditions aren't great. The A7IV seems like a great choice since it has superior low light performance and IBIS but the A6700 also has IBIS and improved low light performance compared to the A6000 due to the improved technology. Can you do a night shoot with both cameras to show how the low light performance compares in a street photography setting?
Hey buddy, I would probably just crank up the ISO and “close my eyes” a bit on the noise. This is something you will have to do with both cameras. As you can see in the second part of the video where I do ISO test - A7IV seems a bit better with tiny bit less noise, but is it worth the extra cost (especially investment in FF lenses)? Im not too sure.
@henkondemand What lenses are you using? Going FF you get about 1 - 1.5 stops of noise advantage, and a reduced depth of field (which may or may not be good). Some f/1.2 or f/1.4 lenses help a ton at night, but also the a6600/a6700 seem to have less noise and better dynamic range compared to the a6000.
Thanks a lot for this review. The "well known fact" that FF is better in low light is true when you compare at same ISO. If you compare at same aperture diameter (as you would if you were trying to get identical images), you'd end up with an ISO 2.3 times lower on the APS-C, and you'd get the same noise and dynamic range, as shown in your results. For instance, if you compare the sigma 16mm f1.4 DC DN with the sigma f2 DG DN, you'll get almost identical results on the two cameras and you'd save $150 on the lens. That said, for those with unlimited budget, FF has much better lens selection. There isn't any APS-C equivalent to a Sony FE 24mm f/1.4 GM, but that's atrociously expensive. For wildlife, it is not a good idea to choose the A6700 because there aren't any native APS-C wildlife lenses with sony e-mount (adapting from FF is possible, but then more than half the light is always wasted - on a $2000 lens, that's over $1000 worth of light wasted).
@@fabianlehr4318 you are absolutely right. A full frame equivalent of 525mm f-9 is still usable for some wildlife, even if the autofocus isn't very fast. I shouldn't have dismissed it.
Saw your video from Sao Paolo and that was amazing! I bought the a6700 a few weeks ago and it's amazing, but the A7iv is only 200$ more now with Sony's cashback. It feels strange to still go for the a6700 when I can get a FF cam for only 200$ more. I have a few more days to think, can return the a6700 and get the A7iv. Feels like I will miss the 4k120fps for videos though! What would someone as skilled as you do? Hybrid shooter, amateur wanting to learn and eventually do paid work.
Thanks buddy! Good news is - whatever you will choose, it will be great. The 2 "downsides" with A7IV is not only the camera being a little bit more expensive, all the full frame lenses are also cost a lot more, so be prepared to keep spending in a long run. Second thing, yes the 4K120, but also 4K60. A7IV has it cropped so essentially you are using a lot smaller part of the sensor while A6700 uses almost all of it. I have both of the cameras and love them both, I don't choose A7IV over A6700, it just depends on a day, the lenses I wanna use etc so whatever you will choose, it will be a great option :)
Thanks a lot for the detailed feedback! I'm aware of the lenses being more expensive. It has something to do with the "I will eventually upgrade to a FF" - thought that is in the back of my mind. A stupid thought I know, but that's what you get when you watch too many camera-youtube videos 😅 I think I'll trade in the 6700 for the a7iv, get a nice lens that I can use for future Sony FF cameras.
@@JohannesDalenMC thanks to people like you our “lens review videos” still get plenty of views 😅👌 Go for it! Its a nice camera, definitely more pro and if you don’t mind spending a little extra, you definitely won’t regret it ✌️
beSt decision I mde was going from the older a6000 to A7C II 🔥. Still Great size with a little more heft but man, night and day difference in terms of performance so long as you invest in good glass! Love your channel brother chat soon 👑
So glad to hear you are happy and you are liking the channel. I recently got the A6700 and let me tell you - its a beast so I will make a comparison with A7CII to see if there is much of a difference! Cheers
@@Chris-wv8cn image quality probably A7IV has the edge because of the Full Frame sensor and low light capabilities as well as more megapixels, but AF is better on A6700 due to the AI features.
hello tom , i am fuji xt 20 user but i wana switch to sony a7r series ..but i watch this .. i better inlove with 6700 .. but what should i buy really dont know.. beacsue i save some money for buy the realism.. mostly i shooot photos only lesss video..
Hey buddy. A7R series is worth if you really need a crazy resolution sensor. If you don’t do it professionally, I don’t really see a reason for it. In my opinion A6700 is great for what it offers. Probably most important thing is investing in high quality lenses and you will have a great setup.
it will nice is compare 6700 to a7c2 instead of a7.4 in weight and feature. If light weight I would carry a zve10 , and the very obvious like what you said full frame cost a lot more to buy it
I actually have exactly that idea to compare these two cameras side by side. More like an in depth actual 2 camera comparison rather than FF vs APSC. Will hopefully do that rather soon.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
I love how you do your camera reviews, They aren’t too long, but they still tell you so much as well as you rise senario with it
Really glad to hear that buddy! Thank you 🙏
Love my A6100. With the release of newer apsc line ups. I can buy the older apsc. The 7R3 is my main camera but I like carrying lighter set up.
I love prime lens and learnt that the best thing is to bring multiple bodies with the lens attached and get them depending on the need. The zoom lens are too expensive than getting multiple primes and multiple bodies.
7R3 on 24 GM
A6100 on 90 G 2.8
another apsc on 55 zeiss. I don’t do much videos sold my 16-35 Zeiss and 70-300 G for the GM and the macro.
The 90 on apsc is equivalent to 135 2.8.
On the street I use the A6100 with 24 GM giving about 35 ish GM look at 24 MP or the 35 2.8 if I want to go super light. I notice that even hand held on A6100 I get 99% sharp shots. Loving apsc vibes and they have cheap lenses I want to explore soon. Will be getting the IBIS apsc soon when a deal presents itself. I love the A6000 series and it really gave me more pleasure than with the FF as I am just hobbyist and has small hands probably. Thanks for the spectacular videos.
Awesome comment and a very interesting approach. Im just like you liking the primes on multiple bodies but then feel awkward in some city with two cameras attached to my chest lol
How are you enjoying the GM lenses on APS-C? Great results?
Oh and if you want IBIS in your apsc then the A6700 will probably be a really good option for you. Check out perhaps second hand, they seem extremely sturdy to last a long time.
Great video..
I use ff mostly as general purpose , street , landscape , portraits , walk around..
I use apsc for sports , i like watching motorsport , motogp , f1 , etc.
I use m43 , for wildlife , birds , etc.
So the further the reach , the smaller my camera.
Thank you for your thoughts. I´m thinking, that full frame has it´s advantages for portrait shooters, wedding shooters, concert shooters and so on. But for me, the usal landscape, architecture, macro, sometimes tele shooter is it not nessessary. I like the advantages in cost, weight, size for body and lenses and more reach for tele and more dof for macro. I can shoot the milkyway and for sure I have a 1.4 prime for portraits. Someday I will swich from my A6400 (which replaced my A6000) to the A6700. I don´t missing anything, I woudn´t change for the same mony to full frame, the things full frame can do better don´t interest me for real, but I dont´m want the disadvantages. So I´m happy to found the right system for me. It´s always a personal choice.
Very wise words. Its just so important to find what truly works for you and not be overwhelmed and influenced by others (or industry) that tells you need to have best of the best or nothing. Im in same exact boat as you, we know how we use the gear and that its sufficient for our needs. Btw, the A6700 is a killer camera. Once I got it, I had even less reasons to carry FF.
I have the a6700 camera, also. Your review is right on. The quality of images from that camera and good lenses rivals that of the larger FF cameras. The one area where the a6700 rocks is with the AI focusing and object recognition. It really is way ahead of the older A74. Not to fault the A74, it is older and has the older Bionz chipset. The a6700 has the same setup as the A7R5, and wow, it makes an incredible difference.
@@bondgabebond4907 it really does! At first I sort of dismissed this new, trendy “ai features “, but they help massively. A7V will be dropping soon (hopefully) and I hope it will up a notch even more!
I have an FX30 which is similar in size to an A74. I left for a gig on Saturday and decided to take my smaller zve10 instead of the fx30 because I didn’t want the extra size along with all my musical gear. I wanted to take some images of the venue we were playing in for social media. The FX30 would have taken better images but it didn’t matter for my purposes. If I only had large cameras I may not have bothered. Just saying. Great video! I’m saving for a 6700! 👍
I love to read stories like that. More and more I feel like the convenience is more important than the best possible image quality. Thanks for sharing 💪
One counterargument for smaller/cheaper lenses is that you should really be considering equivalency when comparing lenses. Obviously, a 24 mm f/1.4 on full frame is going to be much bigger and more expensive than on APS-C. But those are not equivalent lenses; the equivalent lens on full frame would be like a 35 mm f/2, which is indeed much smaller and cheaper.
E.g.
- Sigma 23 mm f/1.4 for APS-C: 550 USD; 330 g
- Sigma 35 mm f/2.0 for Full Frame: 639 USD; 325 g
There are other good reasons to get APS-C, but I don’t think that the difference in size and cost of lenses alone are a good enough justification.
You are right, it does come down to that many times, especially with primes, however zoom lenses I think don’t really fall in that category. The Sigma 18-50 f2.8 is half the price and size of Sony’s 24-105 F4 even though they are close in focal length and aperture (although Sigma falls short on long end). I think the argument about additional gear (gimbals, filters, tripods etc) that need to support bigger setup also plays in the “size and weight“ category
@@TomsJurjaks even more true with the sigma 10-18mm. Compare that lens with the sony 16-35mm f/4 on full frame, and the sigma is half the size and half the price for nearly identical depth of field/low-light and focal length. For primes, there's less of an edge, but you can get the sony 15mm f/1.4 and a6700 for about $800-$1,000 less than a sony a7iv/a7cii with the sigma 24mm f/2 prime.
I think generally people overestimate the full-frame advantage. It's about 1 to 1.5 stops of ISO for the same noise/DR, and about 1 aperture stop shallower depth of focus. That's it. If you need that extra low-light, it can be worth it but you have to take the shallower DoF to get its benefit. There are many situations where you don't really get much benefit. Also, like you say, newer ASPC tend to perform better than older FF; the a6700 has much better dynamic range and noise performance than the A7i and A7ii, or classics like the 5Dmk2. Using good glass/lighting and capturing interesting content will make a bigger difference IMO.
For personal use, I don't think the extra cost and bulk is worth it to me. For paid/professional use where you need to deliver the absolute best results you can offer, I'd say it's worth the investment.
Hey Toms, thanks for a fantastic comparison. I've been trying to decide between de A67 and the A7IV and I'm still undecided, right now I have a A6000 and I struggle with the low light performance and the lack of IBIS. IBIS is something you don't strictly need since good stance and breathing will eliminate shake quite a bit but I find that with the worse low light performance I need lower shutter speeds to achieve a well lit shot which requires beter stability or a tripod. My objective is to be able to shoot stable, sharp photos on the streets even when lighting conditions aren't great.
The A7IV seems like a great choice since it has superior low light performance and IBIS but the A6700 also has IBIS and improved low light performance compared to the A6000 due to the improved technology. Can you do a night shoot with both cameras to show how the low light performance compares in a street photography setting?
Hey buddy, I would probably just crank up the ISO and “close my eyes” a bit on the noise. This is something you will have to do with both cameras. As you can see in the second part of the video where I do ISO test - A7IV seems a bit better with tiny bit less noise, but is it worth the extra cost (especially investment in FF lenses)? Im not too sure.
@henkondemand What lenses are you using? Going FF you get about 1 - 1.5 stops of noise advantage, and a reduced depth of field (which may or may not be good). Some f/1.2 or f/1.4 lenses help a ton at night, but also the a6600/a6700 seem to have less noise and better dynamic range compared to the a6000.
I have the a6000 and the a6700 I’m having fun I just need more lenses.
Thanks for your videos I been enjoying this hobby.
So happy to hear that! Luckily there are plenty of lenses from Sony (and third party) to choose from 👌
tbh the sony a6700 looks so good!
Im telling you man! You need to take it for a spin. Throw on your 50mm GM and you gonna be surprised how it performs 🤌
Thanks a lot for this review. The "well known fact" that FF is better in low light is true when you compare at same ISO. If you compare at same aperture diameter (as you would if you were trying to get identical images), you'd end up with an ISO 2.3 times lower on the APS-C, and you'd get the same noise and dynamic range, as shown in your results. For instance, if you compare the sigma 16mm f1.4 DC DN with the sigma f2 DG DN, you'll get almost identical results on the two cameras and you'd save $150 on the lens. That said, for those with unlimited budget, FF has much better lens selection. There isn't any APS-C equivalent to a Sony FE 24mm f/1.4 GM, but that's atrociously expensive.
For wildlife, it is not a good idea to choose the A6700 because there aren't any native APS-C wildlife lenses with sony e-mount (adapting from FF is possible, but then more than half the light is always wasted - on a $2000 lens, that's over $1000 worth of light wasted).
The very sharp and pretty lightweight 70-350 certainly can be considered a wildlife lens, giving you 525mm full frame equivalent.
@@fabianlehr4318 you are absolutely right. A full frame equivalent of 525mm f-9 is still usable for some wildlife, even if the autofocus isn't very fast. I shouldn't have dismissed it.
Saw your video from Sao Paolo and that was amazing!
I bought the a6700 a few weeks ago and it's amazing, but the A7iv is only 200$ more now with Sony's cashback. It feels strange to still go for the a6700 when I can get a FF cam for only 200$ more. I have a few more days to think, can return the a6700 and get the A7iv. Feels like I will miss the 4k120fps for videos though! What would someone as skilled as you do? Hybrid shooter, amateur wanting to learn and eventually do paid work.
Thanks buddy! Good news is - whatever you will choose, it will be great. The 2 "downsides" with A7IV is not only the camera being a little bit more expensive, all the full frame lenses are also cost a lot more, so be prepared to keep spending in a long run. Second thing, yes the 4K120, but also 4K60. A7IV has it cropped so essentially you are using a lot smaller part of the sensor while A6700 uses almost all of it. I have both of the cameras and love them both, I don't choose A7IV over A6700, it just depends on a day, the lenses I wanna use etc so whatever you will choose, it will be a great option :)
Thanks a lot for the detailed feedback!
I'm aware of the lenses being more expensive. It has something to do with the "I will eventually upgrade to a FF" - thought that is in the back of my mind. A stupid thought I know, but that's what you get when you watch too many camera-youtube videos 😅 I think I'll trade in the 6700 for the a7iv, get a nice lens that I can use for future Sony FF cameras.
@@JohannesDalenMC thanks to people like you our “lens review videos” still get plenty of views 😅👌 Go for it! Its a nice camera, definitely more pro and if you don’t mind spending a little extra, you definitely won’t regret it ✌️
Great video man! Got the a6700 since a view days and im super happy! Thanks for your Videos 👍
Oh so happy to hear that! And you are very welcome. Hope the A6700 will last you a long time 💪
beSt decision I mde was going from the older a6000 to A7C II 🔥.
Still Great size with a little more heft but man, night and day difference in terms of performance so long as you invest in good glass! Love your channel brother chat soon 👑
So glad to hear you are happy and you are liking the channel. I recently got the A6700 and let me tell you - its a beast so I will make a comparison with A7CII to see if there is much of a difference! Cheers
Awesome video Toms 😊
Back when I had my A7 full frame I did prefer my aps-c just because of the size.
Thanks Lars! Sonys APS-C cameras for sure are a nice investment 💪
I never asked - what are you using now? 🤔
@@TomsJurjaks sadly I still haven't gotten a new camera yet 😔
But I will be getting the 6400 hopefully soon
Very good choice brother @@Lars_Olsen its still an excellent camera
Is the Sony a6700 better than the Sony a7iv in terms of image quality and autofocus. I already have a Sony a7lll
@@Chris-wv8cn image quality probably A7IV has the edge because of the Full Frame sensor and low light capabilities as well as more megapixels, but AF is better on A6700 due to the AI features.
Sir which camera is best for low ligh performance a6700 or a7c2
Full frame cameras typically are better in Low Light performance so A7CII will be better.
hello tom , i am fuji xt 20 user but i wana switch to sony a7r series ..but i watch this .. i better inlove with 6700 .. but what should i buy really dont know.. beacsue i save some money for buy the realism.. mostly i shooot photos only lesss video..
Hey buddy. A7R series is worth if you really need a crazy resolution sensor. If you don’t do it professionally, I don’t really see a reason for it. In my opinion A6700 is great for what it offers. Probably most important thing is investing in high quality lenses and you will have a great setup.
Is it just me or does the a6700 look better for some reason?
Doesn’t look like you’re using premium glass. That’s the review I’m interested in. I have premium glass and want a b cam
Glass is everything. Thats the point I was mentioning. If you have a premium glass, you will get great results even with apsc camera
it will nice is compare 6700 to a7c2 instead of a7.4 in weight and feature. If light weight I would carry a zve10 , and the very obvious like what you said full frame cost a lot more to buy it
I actually have exactly that idea to compare these two cameras side by side. More like an in depth actual 2 camera comparison rather than FF vs APSC. Will hopefully do that rather soon.
@@TomsJurjaks I’m waiting for your video mate