Well from a cost prospective you will probably have to spend as much as $1800 to move up after you sell your A6500 + 16-70 to the A7III + 24-105 so that is obviously your first consideration. I owned the former and now have the later. For me it was a little different because I already owned a FF Sony A7RIII that I used alongside my A6500 that I intentionally bought for its smaller size and I had the 16-70/4 and the 24/1.8 I used with it. I sold it all and bought the A7III only because I had full frame lenses I could use with it immediately. I later added the 24-105 to give me that one lens walk around capability that I had before.
If you haven't shot FF before consider the step up carefully because of the large costs. I had been shooting FF Canon when I got into Sony for almost 10 years and film before that so I knew what to expect and what I wanted and had full frame glass already that I adapted from the start.
The a6500 is a great setup if the lenses you want are available. Personally they have not done a great job, imho, on providing highest quality APS-C lenses as they could have or as Fuji has that I shot for a while. If you really want to stay with APS-C I would consider Fuji but the FF Sony system if extremely nice if you can afford the costs and want to spend that kind of money.
Steve W
--
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe! - Words to live by. Albert Einstein
I will admit that, if you feel competent to shoot only with modern autofocus GM lenses, yes, shooting Sony full frame can be expensive.
But...the popularity of Loxia, Samyang, Voigtlander and other manual-focus lenses basically lays waste to this “expensive” challenge.
There are a lot of inexpensive, excellent manual-focus lenses that perform perfectly on Sony full-frame cameras, where the inherent advantages of a full frame sensor pass that of the best APS-C sensors at 4-8 or more times the base ISO. For landscapes, for portraits, and - in the hands of competent photographers - even action sports can be done well with inexpensive MF lenses that can be acquired for less than $200 each - often for less than $50 each.
As I noted in an earlier thread, the purchase of a TechArt Pro AF adapter and appropriate Leicaist adapters can open up the possibilities of 50mm lenses for less than $50 that challenge the vaunted 55/1.8 costing near 20X. I just bought a Canon FDn 200mm f4 for $64 that challenges lenses costing 15-20X for most subjects.
We would not assume that the cost of going to a full-size sedan should use the price of a new Tesla S or Maserati QuattrroPorte as typical. Let’s similarly not predicate the cost of going full frame meaning purchase of costly FE lenses. Many of us find the ~$200 FE 50/1.8 pretty good:
And that inexpensive lens performs brilliantly on APS-C, too:
