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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now Nikon needs to respond 😂

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

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

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

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

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

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

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