From A6300 to A6600. Is it worth it?

Started 4 days ago | Discussions thread
Advent1sam Veteran Member • Posts: 8,145
Re: From A6300 to A6600. Is it worth it?

Off The Mark wrote:

I shoot mainly static architectural and only RAW.

Maybe a7 III and tamron 28-75 instead of a6600??? Don't know if the advanced AF functions of the a6600 are going to be all that helpful.

As good as the 28-75 allegedly is, the a6600 and 16-55 is surely a much better proposition, especially if the op wants to add a tele for architecture too, the 70-350 is an unbelievable bargain for landscape and wildlife, offering up again state of the art af, compact 100-525 focal range. a7iii is what it is, a pseudo milc dslr with little advantage over the a6600 in any area, personally I prefer the corner evf and the thumb controls and the 16-55 with a 24mm start is better than the 28 start any day of the week, especially landscape and architecture and the 83mm tele is better than the 75 tele too if you want a compact 2.8c zoom!

 Advent1sam's gear list:Advent1sam's gear list
Sony a6500 Sony a6600 Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS Sigma 30mm F1.4 for Sony E Sigma 16mm F1.4 DC DN (Sony) +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow