As others have pointed out, this article very badly needs a table that shows the specifications / features of the various models side-by-side for comparison.

=== UNLIMITED VIDEO RECORDING TIME? ====
Excellent comparative review. Is it only the 6100 that has unlimited video recording? Don't the 6500 and 6400 give this feature, too?

BTW, a colleague has shown his brand new buy: an A5100. I told him to get prepared to massive overheating, if he wanted longer recordings, but he explained that he typically shoots 1 - 3 minutes of clips, so overheating is non issue to him.

well that poopooed all over the a6000
sure the a6100 is better but you would hope so
this new 'entry level' model is almost exactly DOUBLE the price of the a6000 right now
it definitely deserves more consideration than shown
the a6100 is also a fair bit more than the a6300 and even the a6500 have been in the past
value for money has to be a factor at some point else a6600 is the only choice from these

How bad is the old sensor in these cameras?
It is limited to 11 FPS, while the Fujifilm camera can do 30 FPS and M43 does 60 FPS.
It has the hornedous rolling shutter causing video and images taken with the electronic shutter to look warped and distorted.
And the sensor has virtually no advantage over M43 cameras like the EM1.2 for noise and DR.
Every spec I looked at compared between the Sonys vs. EM1.2, and Oly won. Except for IBIS, the XT3 also beat the Sonys. If you hold an EM1.2 and one of the Sonys you will quickly feel which is the superior camera too.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-A6000-versus-Sony-A6300-versus-Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-Mark-II___942_1072_1136

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-A6000-versus-Sony-A6300-versus-Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-Mark-II___942_1072_1136

I finally gave up after a month of heavy research and yesterday ordered an a6400. It just ticks all of my own idiosyncratic checkboxes and priorities better than anything else right now.

The Fuji's are phenomenal photographer's cameras, and I would love to have one if I didn't have some specific priorities. They need to catch up to Sony in AF, gain 180 flip out screens, and lose the overheating in 4k. I mean, 10 minutes, XT30?

Was waiting for the a6600, but decided against it. IBIS would be great - if Sony's version of it were as anywhere as good in video as say Panasonic's. Instead it's the same old minimally effective version from the a6500. The bigger battery would be nice, though I don't give a whit about the headphone jack. That in no way adds up to a $500 price premium above the a6400. I can put that money toward a better lens and a gimbal and a few $20 batteries. Basically when the 6600 debuted, it made me realize what a good camera the 6400 is for the price.

It would be interesting to directly compare the A6600 with 16-55 f2.8 to the A7III with 24-105 f4 as you suggested. The FF has slightly more reach but the money, weight, aperture, resolution, are all pretty comparable. It would be a neat way to compare the current state of APS-C vs FF in the market today.

Do any have
USB-C
USB 3.0 or newer
H.265
4k 60p
10 bit video
a video bit rate greater than 100Mbps
A fully functional touchscreen
An LCD display with more than 333K pixels (1 million dots)
1/8000th max shutter speed
12+ FPS

Do any of these cameras have any one of those features?

This is Sony, these are typical Japanese industry's reflexes. 6 models-variations in less than 6 years just because they can do it. And they can do it because it's their way they comprehend market's needs. Very Canonish. Almost worse than Japanese motorcycle companies in the 90s. Or else the aesthetics of global marketing.

To me a used Sony A7R II seems like a better deal than the a6600. You can adapt tons of cheap lenses, good lenses, dirt cheap manual lenses, fast lenses, lenses lenses lenses.
You can shoot 4k in FF and APS-C, full HD 2.3mp viewfinder, higher resolution. Only 100g heavier. Less awesome AF, less battery life, IBIS not as good. Worst, no flip up screen.

But still, seems like a much better deal. Now if I only find a spectacular deal for a used A7R II :D

They have released too many models with their confusing naming systems, if Sony really listens to their customers they should cut them down.

Sony needs to stop this annual, incremental spec increase, because it's really annoying. I think I'll wait until the Sony A6999 comes out with ALL the features in one camera.

So if you don't want the advantages of a small camera that doesn't change settings when you take it out of a bag and that fits in a jacket pocket, that you can use one handed and carry all day in your hand and you don't mind a central EVF hump—and you don't find the XT series uncomfortable to hold and fiddly to use then why not get the Fuji? I wouldn't—but then I appreciate those features of the a6x00 series and was not looking for an accessory.

"The a6000 has been one of the world's best selling cameras "

This couldn't be more false. (did you get it from Sony marketing, LOL!!)

First smartphones, security cameras, and even film cameras like the Fujifilm Instax, greatly outsell ANY ILC. So there are dozens of better selling cameras.

Second, for ILCs, whether going by Amazon, BCN or most other sales sites, there are always plenty of Canon DLSRs ranked higher. For example, the Canon T7 is ranked #3 on Amazon's "digital" cameras list, the RX100vii is #7, and the best selling Sony ILC is a distant #42 (mirrorless still isn't doing well in the US).

I am sure Sony marketing wants everyone to think they are selling a lot of these, but relative to other cameras, their numbers are low.

I think there is also one significant difference that you should mention in your comparison:
The a6600 is missing an internal flash that all other models have!

I have used mine on the a6300 a lot bouncing it off the ceiling indoors.
For me that would be a major argument not to buy the a6600. I would rather go for an a6400 or a6500 if I would need a new camera.

Given the pricing, the only logical update from A6000 is A7III.

The never ending "which is best for you" series.

My a6300 tracks subjects beautifully without "realtime Af". No reason to "upgrade". Terrific camera, especially with Sony's small, light lenses.

If the Fujifilm X-A7 has their 26MP sensor, it might be a better camera than the A6000, A6100, A6300, or A6400.
The Fujifilm images are just so much better SOOC, and they are a lot easier to use. (Sony doesn't even have a fully working touchscreen) .

Hm, I expected to read a little bit more about the A6500 but it's clear that it's 'obsolete' to most since the AF of its successor and the A6400 is vastly improved.

Lessee, you can get it used and in good condition for less than an A6400, it has IBIS and a better grip than the A6400, which actually matters to some. Do you shoot lots of things in the daylight that requires great AF or do you spend a lot of time handholding the camera in front of static subjects at dusk?

Also that jpeg improvement..one critical reason for me to not just shoot with my phone besides handling and tele and noise characteristics and all that is the malleability of modern Sony raw files in a raw editor.

Although hand-held twilight is nice and produces nicer jpegs than my Pixel phone..of course hht isn't available in "GOD SPEAKS" / A6400?

Sony to cameras : Apple to phones

The Canon bashing NEVER stops here:
.
." It's the a6400, which has to square up against the Fujifilm X-T30 and Canon's new EOS M6 Mark II that's probably the least compelling of this trio".
.
A fricking waste to send a invitation of any sort to DPR.
I've noticed Canon-Europe about the 'R'bashing; probably the followup didn't reached the US.....
DPR in 'Atlanta'?
As said, a waste imho !

The only product I prefer to buy from Sony is their high end televisions.

“The a6400 offers some benefits over the a6100 but you may find better options from other camera makers”.

Everything has been said. I you are an APSC shooter just buy the X-T30 for almost the same money.

The a6100 would have been good enough for me except the EVF. I'm even surprised the EVF in the others is acceptable to everyone. It's too pixelated, the exposure changes are distracting, and it doesn't reflect reality in many cases. It's awful. I miss an OVF.
The 6600 is almost twice the cost of the 6100; both are too much.

The AF tracking is great, but I continue to fight the fact that you can't simply toggle it on/off via a custom button. It WILL come on spontaneously in AF-C, even if I don't want it.

I have come to the conclusion that Sony menu/UI is designed by tech nerds for tech nerds. The common sense of simplicity is not prioritized, leaving the more artistically oriented scratching their heads.

Very helpful information, thank you! I would have loved to see a comparison table as dpreview often does for the reviews.

Sony is like the Pharma industry: if a patent is about to run out, just change the formula with a molecule that still has a patent, and put it on the market again. They didn't make enough money with A6300 anymore, there comes the A6400 with improved AF and few tweaks.

I ended up going with the A6400 when it came out to replace my A6000, and it was great to pick up better AF and a touchscreen.

The A6100 isn't cheap enough to justify a janky EVF, weaker build quality, and other downsides vs the A6400. The A6600 is a joke for $1,400 with one top dial, an old sensor, and UHS-1 interface.

Neither :)

Dear dPReview, could you make one big table with all the A6xxx models and all their features listed? just like you can find one for all the RX100 models... it's already getting a little complicated for quite experienced A6000 and A6300 user like me ;)

EDIT: I just realized someone else asked for the same earlier...

When I clicked on this I expected a comparison table, not a 12 page slide show haha. Seems like the table that DPR already makes with the green/red highlights to show differences would be perfect for this.

I wouldn't buy any new camera w/o IBIS, UHD-II and USB type-C these days, esp those that claimed to be the flagship model.

I think Sony prefers to focus on their FF and 1” sensor lines. The APS line is there for some extra pocket change since they are already making most of the APS sensors and it is nice to compete with your customers (companies that buy their sensors). So I see Fuji as an APS company, Olympus as a m43 company, and Sony as mostly a FF and 1” company.

Always remember when considering a camera that it is both the camera and lens combo that matters. Sony APS lenses are not as impressive as their FF line

If you're going to invest in the Sony APS-C system, look closely at the lenses first. Most of the budget/kit zoom lenses are quite frankly awful. Virtually every other system has improved the optics of their base lenses to keep up with the higher MP of the sensors. We're not shooting 6mp cameras anymore.