Sony A6600 vs A6400 - my thoughts...

[rpcrowe]

Sony has a plethora of APSC cameras. I just thought that I would put down my initial thoughts on the A6600...

I have decided to sell my A6500 and have purchased the A6600 in a kit with several really nice accessories from Adorama. IMO, the $200 price reduction of the A6600 makes the camera more competitive. Usually when a retailer packages accessories with a camera these accessories are crap. This is not the case with A6600 Adorama package from Adorama https://www.adorama.com/isoa6600d.html. This is really a free offer since the cost of the camera with this package is the same as the cost of the package alone However, I plan on selling the flash that was included in this package since I already own two identical units.

BTW: Adorama has an upgraded package that I probably would have purchased had I seem it. It includse a 128GB SD card vs. 64GB, two extra batteries vs. one, dual charger vs. single charger, Peak Design SlideLite strap and Flashpoint Wave Commander intervalometer for an extra $50 USD.

First of all - I love my A6400 and plan to keep shooting with it in tandem with the new A6600 which has just arrived. I will often photograph over a hundred dogs a year for Maltese Rescue California and the Animal Eye-AF of both these cameras is nothing short of outstanding. The small form factor of each of these cameras combined with Animal Eye-AF makes it easier to shoot one handed while I am offering the dog treats with the other hand.

Here are a few parameters of the A6600 which I really love. I have numbered them in their importance to me personally in my style of shooting. Other photographers would certainly list them in a different order.

1. LARGER GRIP... The grip of the A6600 is significantly larger (actually it should be described as "deeper") than any other A6xxx series camera in order to fit the Z battery. The larger grip is a lot more comfortable to hold than the smaller grips of the previous A6xxx cameras. This is especially beneficial when shooting one handed and/or when shooting with a slightly larger lens such as the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 or the Sony 70-350mm f/4.5-5.6.

2. ISO 50... This has not been addressed by any reviewer that I have noticed. I really like the ISO 50 capability of the A6600. The top shutter speed of any A6xxx camera is 1/4000 second which sometimes is too slow when I want to shoot wide open with a very fast lens in bright conditions using ISO 100 which is the lowest ISO of previous A6xxx cameras.. I have often wished that I had the advantage of 1/8000 second shutter speed. However, the ISO 50 capability should often allow decent exposure wide open at 1/4000 second. This ISO also makes using a very slow shutter speed sometimes feasible without an ND filter.

3. EASIER REMOVAL REPLACEMENT OF SD CARD... The larger Z battery allows space for positioning the SD card slot in a location that makes it easier to remove and replace the card.

4. IBIS... Since I don't shoot video, the lack of IBIS in the A6400 and the IBIS capability of the A6600, is not a deal breaker for me. However, it is nice to have when I am shooting with non-OSS lenses or when I am shooting hand-held with the 70-350mm f/4.5-5.6 G OSS lens. I have not yet ascertained just how slow I can shoot using the IBIS/OSS combination with the A6600 but, in early trials it seems that I can effectively hand hold at slower shutter speeds than with the OSS lens and a non-IBIS A6400.

5. GREATER BATTERY CAPACITY... Again, I am not a video shooter so the relatively low capacity of the FW50 batteries of the previous A6xxx series cameras has not impacted on my shooting to any great degree. I always carry extra batteries and my Meike battery grip for the A6400 will provide just about equal battery capacity. This grip will also extend the height of my grip on the camera but, will not impact the depth of my grip. Given the size of my hand (I wear extra large USA size gloves), my grip on the A6600 is basically with my middle and ring fingers around the grip, my index finger operating the shutter button and my small finger curled under the camera body. This is to me a very comfortable and secure grip. I am thinking that a hand strap would even increase the comfort somewhat; since with a hand strap some of the camera weight would be supported by the back of my hand...

6. TWO ADDITIONAL CUSTOM BUTTONS... The C3 and C4 custom buttons allow even more customization of the A6600.

[Antonio Correia]

A simple revue of 2 cameras.
GAS, GAS...

[rpcrowe]

A simple revue of 2 cameras.
GAS, GAS...

Absolutely right Antonio! Image wise, the quality of the imagery is not increased from the A6500 that I was shooting with and for many uses it equals the IQ of the A7iii. My Canon gear also resulted in some pretty fine imagery...

However, what the benefit I derive is my increased enjoyment while shooting with the Sony cameras in general and now, with the A6600 in particular...

An analogy is in fly fishing for trout. I can catch as many fish with a $29.95 fiberglass fly rod than I can with a custom split bamboo or graphite rod that costs upwards of ten times that amount, The difference between the rods is not the fish I catch but, the pleasure that I get using a fine piece of equipment.

When I shot for a living (either in the U.S. Navy or in civilian life) my criteria for gear was totally measured by image quality and the ability to capture those images. If a camera was heavy or somewhat awkward to handle, that was O.K. by me as long as it produced.

Now that I have the privilege of shooting entirely for my personal enjoyment, how much I like handling a camera is way up there in importance, as long as the image quality is what I demand.

I am lucky to be in a situation in which, I am able to afford some good gear and to buy pretty much what I want. That was not always the case. When I was in the Navy, I was fortunate in that I was able to use some of the best photo gear available. However, my Navy pay severely limited what personal cameras/lenses I could own. However, I still shot for enjoyment but, I am enjoying photography even more now than I did then.

GAS "AIN'T SO BAD... As long as the GASSER realizes that it is not the camera but what is six inches behind the camera that is the most important factor in photography. A new camera may or may not result in better imagery but, if selected wisely, the new camera can and should increase the enjoyment of using it...

[Antonio Correia]

I do like what you said Richard. Very wise. Thank you for your thoughts.
Cheers in 2020 ! (it is too early for wishes?)

[DanK]

Sony has a plethora of APSC cameras.

And even more FF cameras. Altogether, they now have 18 (!!!) MILCs on their website. I suppose this must be a successful marketing strategy, given their growing market share, but I found it to be very annoying when I recently toyed with the idea of buying one. On the positive side, it helped deter me from going further. Someday I will get a MILC, but it can wait.

[Antonio Correia]

If MILC stands for Mirrorless interchangeable-lens camera, I do not understand !

[DanK]

If MILC stands for Mirrorless interchangeable-lens camera, I do not understand !

Yes, that’s what it stands for. I will stick with my DSLRs for now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rpcrowe]

Here is a size comparison between the grips of the A6400 (image left) and the A6600 (image right):



Here are size comparisons between the A6400 (image left) A6600 (center) and A7iii (image right)/ You can notice that 6400 grip is quite a bit deeper than the A6400 and about as deep as the A7iii. Both the A7ii and A6600 grips are a bit more comfortable for me to hold and the A6600 weighs only a bit more than the A6400 (453 grams vs 403 grams). However, due to its light weight, there is no problem holding the A6400 either.









While the A7iii is considerably smaller and lighter than the full frame Canon 5D Mark-IV (650 grams vs. 800 grams), where the weight difference is really telling is between the Sony APSC A6xxx cameras and a Canon APSC DSLR such as the 7D Mark-2. The Sony APSC mirrorless cameras weigh less than half as much as the Canon APSC DSLR.

[Antonio Correia]

Richard you have to get more Anchor Links and perhaps change those !

[Manfred M]

Richard - concentrating on the weight of the camera body alone ignores the fact that the camera body alone does not take any pictures and that the total weight of the body + lens is really what we have to consider when making buying decisions.

I had a chance to chat with the manager of one of the local bricks and mortar camera stores regarding the technology, sales, etc. for an hour or so last week. He was speaking at the photo club I belong to. They as well as the main competition are located just a few blocks apart from the downtown. I've gotten to know him quite well; he received his national judges certification just before I did and I have been on the same jury as he has been a number of times. He's been shooting almost as long as I have and has been in the camera business all his working life. He has been published in a number of major publications, his work has been displayed in a number of galleries and he has sold his works to individuals and corporate clients.

Over the past year, their top sellers have been the FujiFilm line, closely followed by Sony, Canon and Nikon. The other cameras are bringing up the rear, with Olympus being in #5 position. He works closely with commercial customers.

He shoots both DSLR and mirrorless cameras and has had a chance to work with all of the main ones. His personal preference is the Nikon Z7, but he still uses his D850 for a lot of work, especially when shooting moving subjects. If money were no object, he would jump at a FujiFilm GFX 100 in a heartbeat. He seems less impressed by both the Sony and Canon entries, based on customer comments and warranty support requirements.

The main strengths of mirrorless cameras are the aforementioned lighter weight and the optical advantages of having the end of the lens closer to the sensor plane (i.e. better optical performance). The lighter body also means controls have been relocated to the menu, which slows down his shooting. There is no back focus / front focus issue with mirrorless cameras and the camera electronics can do a lot more (eye tracking, etc) than with a DSLR. Burst mode is far better than with DSLRs.

Battery life, lower quality viewfinders versus an optical viewfinder and performance issues in focus tracking of moving subjects are still the downside of these cameras, in his view. Motion tracking has been the most improved area with some cameras coming close to what DSLRs can do, battery life, especially with the higher end models and their larger batteries have improved but he finds that the electronic viewfinders are still not close enough to optical ones.

His view is that we will definitely get to the point where DSLRs are likely to be replaced by mirrorless cameras, especially in the amateur and semi-pro lines, but DSLRs are likely to continue to be the choice of pros, at least in the medium term.

His comment is that Canon, Nikon and Sony are rumoured to be introducing a number of new bodies and lenses, especially at the higher end. They always do this in a year where the Olympics occur, and as the 2020 summer games are in Japan, this will be even more important to them.

[rpcrowe]

It was difficult for many experts to come to grips that digital will replace film... After all, when you have a large amount of cash tied up in film cameras and lenses and have accumulated years of experience shooting any type equipment it is difficult to come to terms with dumping it. I suspect that the same dynamics might be true regarding experts and mirrorless equipment vs. DSLR gear.

I am making a bet that the upcoming Olympics will see a great increase in the use of mirrorless cameras by professional sports photographers covering the games. Sony has already introduced a large number of new lenses suitable for professional sports photographers and I sincerely doubt if there is a DSLR camera that will surpass the Sony A9 Mark-II for sports photography.

However, I shoot Sony because I enjoy shooting it and it's equipment suits me quite well. Certainly the camera body alone does not account for the weight of photo gear. Still the Sony mirrorless full frame cameras (especially APSC format cameras) and lenses for those cameras both Sony and third party such as the excellent Sigma prime lenses for the Sony APSC cameras as well as the three Tamron lenses (17-28mm f/2.8; 28-75mm f/2.8 and the soon to be introduced 70-180mm f/2.8) are lighter in weight and far less expensive than some of the Sony G Master lenses and are of a quality that makes many photographers consider them - rather than the overly expensive GM lenses. And the mirrorless combinations are often a great deal lighter in weight than DSLR cameras and lenses. As an example a Canon 7D Mark ii and 17-55mm f/2.8 lens weighs about 1555 grams while an equivalent Sony A6600 and Sony 16-55mm f/2.8 G lens weighs only about 987 grams.

Weight has become an important selection criteria in my choice of photo equipment When I was younger and in good health, I would never shy away from carrying two and sometimes three SLR or DSLR cameras. However at my advanced age (turning 80 in June) and limited physical capability (two knee replacements, extensive back surgery and now some cardiac problems) weight is a very important factor in my lugging around any photo equipment. I can achieve the same capabilities now with five or six pounds of mirrorless photo gear as I had with ten or twelve pounds of DSLR gear.

[DanK]

I'm finding this discussion useful, if a bit discouraging. I feel no real pressure to upgrade my equipment. My main camera body has been surpassed by others, but it is still as good a camera as it was when I bought it, and I there is only one lens in my set (unfortunately, one of my most frequently used) that I have any inclination to replace. However, time marches on, and the weight of my gear gets more annoying every year.

As things now stand, it seems that switching to a mirrorless FF won't really help that much, for the reason that Manfred gave. One option is to switch back to AFS-C for one body and make that one mirrorless. However, I don't find the current AFS-C options all that tempting. Canon hasn't put out a serious APS-C mirrorless, and given the sparse lineup of lenses for that mount, it doesn't seem like one is coming any time soon, if ever. The Sony models discussed in this thread are a big step up from the Canon, but for me personally, there would be several downsides. One reason I like the 5D III is that Canon got the ergonomics right, at least for my taste. Between the good ergonomics and the highly customizable nature of the camera, I can have it set up so that it is very easy and intuitive to use. In addition, by the time of the 5D III, Canon had really nailed the menu structure, which is intuitive, easy to navigate, and slightly customizable. Everything I have read about the Sony menu system is negative, and my understanding (I may be wrong) is that the Sony APS-C bodies have limited external controls. In addition, I am not about to buy a new set of lenses, so I would have to use my current lenses with an adapter. I don't know (Richard, you probably do) how well that works.

[Manfred M]

Dan - a friend (the club studio manager at one of the photo clubs I belong to) who is in his early 70s went to a Sony mirrorless about 18 months ago. Weight reduction was his goal as well. His plan was to use an adapter so that he could use his high-end Canon glass on his Sony body. Most of his work is done in the studio, but he does a fair bit of bird photography as well as aircraft photography. He does a fair bit of printing too.

His comment is that while the Canon lenses work on the Sony body, the focus is far too slow for the work he does, even in the studio. He continues to use his full frame Canon for everything other than casual shooting, which he primarily does with his Sony using Sony lenses. He has had to buy more Sony lenses than he had set out to do.

[DanK]

Manfred,

Thanks. That's a deal-breaker for me. I don't have a large number of lenses, but the ones I do have would be very expensive to replace, and I don't think there are replacements for all of them. E.g., for a 70-200, I use an f/4, to save weight as well as cost. The current Canon 70-200 f/4 weighs 780 g and costs $1200 US at B&H. The Sony 70-200 f/2.8 costs $2600 (! $800 more than Canon's spectacular new 70-200 f/2.8 III) and weighs 1340 g.

I read somewhere that Canon's EF lenses work very well on the EOR R with the Canon adapter, but I don't find the R a very appealing camera, and it wouldn't save much weight just to swap that for my 5D III.

Dan

[rpcrowe]

Dan...

As far as adapters go to convert AF lenses such as Canon's EF lineup to use on Sony bodies, I was really thrilled when I snagged my first APSC mirrorless camera,an A6500 on eBay, because the auction included a Sigma MC-11 adapter and I went to bed with "sugar plum faeries dancing in my head"

My expectation (hope) was to use the set of high grade Canon "L" lenses I owned on the Sony camera. In that hope I was disappointed I know that some folks have had success in adapting Canon glass to Sony cameras with the MC-11 but, I did not enjoy the interface. Some lenses worked O.K. while others were a complete bust.

I wanted to see just how good a native Sony e-mount lens might be on the A6500 so I purchased a used 50mm f/1.8 OSS lens and was blown away by the performance. The image quality was great (but, so was the I.Q. of my Canon lenses adapted to the A6500 when the AF worked flawlessly). The problem was that the AF did not work flawlessly and was usually a hit and miss situation. The AF of the 50mm f/1.8 lens (which BTW was pretty inexpensive) blew my mind. I just loved the Eye-AF which I actuated with a customizable button.

I tried other adapters including the Metabones IV which was not a great deal better than the MC-11 over the spectrum of my Canon glass. I had particular problems shooting with older Canon lenses as well as my telephoto L glass. Actually, the best performance with my telephoto zooms was with a cheap Viltrox EF-Eii focal reducer using those EF lenses on the crop sensor A6500.

I shot with both Canon and Sony for quite a while until I gravitated to Sony alone. I must say that the learning curve with the Sony gear was pretty darn steep for me and I sometimes wondered if I was making the right decision in changing over to Sony. But, the more I got used to the Sony gear, the easier it became for me to use. Every time a new Canon DSLR camera came along most of the controls were based on previous models. I had been shooting Canon products for close to 50-years and I naively expected to pick up the Sony and use it with the same proficiency as I did with my Canons. That just did not happen

Another one of the major problems I had with Sony APSC gear at first was the lack of a mid-range zoom lens with a relatively small form factor that would match up well with the Sony APSC cameras. There was nothing in the Sony lineup that I liked. The 16-50mm kit lens was crap and I was very disappointed with both the 28-70mm f/4-5.6 and 24-70mm Sony-Zeiss Vario Tessar. The G-Master lenses were so large and so expensive hat I did not even consider them. I almost was at the point of giving up trying zooms and shooting with nothing but primes.

Sony had some excellent primes such as the 85mm f/1.8 and Sigma began to bring out some APSC primes that were great, such as the 30mm f/1.4. The thing with me is that when I shoot with primes, I like to use two bodies. I began selling off my Canon gear that I had accumulated over the years and had enough money to purchase a second APSC body. The A6400 with full time Eye-AF (no need to activate this by pressing a separate button) seemed interesting and the price was just about the same as a used A6500, so I picked one up and really fell in love with the newer Sony focusing system. Since I photograph upwards of a hundred dogs a year, the animal Eye-AF combined with Continuous AF is a pleasure to use. No more focusing and recomposing and if a lively puppy won't sit still, the Eye-AF will still nail focus on the dog's eyes.

Tamron solved my problems of not finding a zoom lens with the form factor and I.Q. that I was looking for. The 28-75mm lens is great for my dog portraits and I do like the focal range for people shooting. While it is a full frame lens (and works great on the 7iii) I love the lens and APSC body combination for people shooting and at 550 grams it is still light enough to mesh with the APSC bodies. The image quality is all I would ever ask for and then some.

More and more lenses are being offered for the Sony e-mount. That was the original problem with Sony cameras. Nikon or Canon had a many years jump on Sony and there were (and still are) far more lenses available for those cameras than for the Sony eMount system.

However, both Sony and third party manufacturers are closing the gap. Sigmas trio of 16mm, 30mm and 56mm APSC f/1.4 lenses are wonderfully sharp and the AF is as good as native Sony glass. Tamron has come out with the 17-28mm f/2.8 and 28-75mm f/2.8 full frame lenses which are great on both full frame and APSC bodies. Tamron is also going to introduce a lightweight telephoto f/2.8 zoom of 70-180mm which should be interesting for both APSC and full-frame users.

Sony has come out with the 16-55mm f/2.8 lens which (although IMO overpriced) seems to be an equal to the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 lens which I loved on my 7D and 7D Mark-2. Sony has also come out with a reasonably light weight telephoto zoom for APSC cameras. The 70-350mm f/4.5-5.6 G OSS weighs only 625 grams and both the image quality and auto focus capability are great.

I am certainly not saying that Sony Mirrorless is the only way to go. Both Canon and Nikon are still very viable manufacturers of both DSLR and now mirrorless equipment and Fuji and Olympus have a lot of things going for them, I am just tracing the evolution of my gear from Canon DSLR equipment (actually Canon SLR gear; since I began shooting Canon in the 1960's) to Sony and documenting my mistakes along the way such as thinking that I could seemlessly use my Canon glass on my Sony cameras to the point in which I am really beginning to learn and enjoy my Sony gear. The menu system no longer seems like a jumbled mess - however the early Sony cameras were terrible in the use of menus. Earlier Sony mirrorless cameras also did not have the focusing capabilities of the later models.

Like I mentioned above, it was a long and steep learning curve but, I am finally getting to the point where I a really comfortable shooting my Sony gear...

An advantage of the mirrorless revolution that will benefit every one is that the prices of used DSLR gear are going down and it has become very easy to afford a very viable Canikon setup which will provide excellent images for years to come. And I think that a used Canon or Nikon DSLR such as the 7D Mark ii is a better camera than older Sony models such as the A7.

If you can afford a newer Sony mirrorless camera and are willing to initially struggle with the learning curve, that may be a viable way to go. However, if you want to gain the benefits of Sony mirrorless gear at a lower price by purchasing an older Sony like the A7, you may very well be disappointed as I suspect you will be if you expect full Sony AF functionality from lenses adapted to the Sony bodies.

Bottom line is that if you are shooting with a modern DSLR or mirrorless camera of any type and your images are not in the very-good to excellent category, you might need to point your finger at your shooting skills not at your gear...

[xpatUSA]

Sony has a plethora of APSC cameras. I just thought that I would put down my initial thoughts on the A6600...

2. ISO 50... This has not been addressed by any reviewer that I have noticed. I really like the ISO 50 capability of the A6600. The top shutter speed of any A6xxx camera is 1/4000 second which sometimes is too slow when I want to shoot wide open with a very fast lens in bright conditions using ISO 100 which is the lowest ISO of previous A6xxx cameras.. I have often wished that I had the advantage of 1/8000 second shutter speed. However, the ISO 50 capability should often allow decent exposure wide open at 1/4000 second.

Richard, may I ask what "very fast" is for your lens?

[rpcrowe]

Richard, may I ask what "very fast" is for your lens?

The fastest lens that I own is f/1.4. In the brightest sun conditions, the ISO 50 will still not allow me to shoot wide open at 1/4000 second. However, I seldom shoot outdoor portraits (which is my main use for a fast lens except for shooting in very dim conditions) in the brightest sun and often ISO 50 would allow me to shoot wide open in a bit more subdued lighting. I could usually have shot with my f/1.8 lenses (such as the 85mm f/1.8) wide open in bright sun using 1/4000 second at ISO 50.

Since I have just received my A6600, I have not made a comparison between ISO 50 and IS 100 image quality. This is another thing I have on my "to do"list...

My hobbies keep my old brain active...

[DanK]

Richard,

Thanks. I think I should bide my time. If Canon comes out with a good R-mount APS-C body (which seems extremely unlikely), I'll be tempted. For that matter, if they release a FF R-mount body that fixes the flaws in the current model and is a big step up from my current DSLR, I might be tempted.

Dan


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[xpatUSA]

Richard, may I ask what "very fast" is for your lens?

The fastest lens that I own is f/1.4. In the brightest sun conditions, the ISO 50 will still not allow me to shoot wide open at 1/4000 second. However, I seldom shoot outdoor portraits (which is my main use for a fast lens except for shooting in very dim conditions) in the brightest sun and often ISO 50 would allow me to shoot wide open in a bit more subdued lighting. I could usually have shot with my f/1.8 lenses (such as the 85mm f/1.8) wide open in bright sun using 1/4000 second at ISO 50.

Thanks for the input!

Since I have just received my A6600, I have not made a comparison between ISO 50 and IS 100 image quality. This is another thing I have on my "to do"list...

In theory, 50 ISO should be slightly better. Double the number of photons captured resulting in a better S/N ratio. In practice, I did that test long ago and could barely tell the difference.

My hobbies keep my old brain active...

Yep, me too ...

[Manfred M]

Richard,

Thanks. I think I should bide my time. If Canon comes out with a good R-mount APS-C body (which seems extremely unlikely), I'll be tempted. For that matter, if they release a FF R-mount body that fixes the flaws in the current model and is a big step up from my current DSLR, I might be tempted.

Dan

I spoke to the manager of one of the local bricks and mortar (as well as online) camera stores last week and they are under the impression that Canon will be launching up to two new mirrorless models early in 2020.

You might get your wish sooner than expected.