Initial thoughts on A6700

It's not quite initial thoughts from me, after around three weeks from announcement of A6700, plus some reviews and comments in the forum.

I don't like the screen that flips to the side. Then it was the doubt about noise at ISO 6400 and I still want to know more about that. In the three weeks what I like most is the AI autofocus, the revised menu and full access to the menu with the touch screen. Two more things that keep me from not getting A6700 is the price and the size getting bigger. To me even A6100 is bigger than I want, but I had one for work when it was released with 90 macro lens, then after using it for 9 months I got an A6100 for me. At least 18-135 seems balanced on A6100, but big for A5100 that I have. I would get a 5100 successor with autofocus updates and full access to the menu with touch screen. Small size camera matters to me now as it did in 2010 when I jumped to buy Nex-5.
Sony APS-C was my initial choice for a mirrorless camera and I purchased an a6000 in the first year of its release. I was also an early purchaser of the a5100. The a6000 is long gone but I still have two a5100 cameras that I have used over the years for short HD video clips (3-5 minutes) to avoid the thermal issues. I love the small and light form factor, the tilting screen that rotates upward 180 degrees and the side compartment location of the SD card slot. I didn't like the lack of an EVF and hot shoe. I would be very interested in an a5100 successor with modern internals, a hot shoe and a pop-up EVF like on the RX100 series cameras. While that would be ideal from my point of view, I would be shocked if Sony released an a5100 upgrade with those modifications. When you mentioned the a5100 in your post, it was a nice reminder that there are others who admire its compact form factor and its tilting/flip up screen.

Regarding the initial thoughts and reactions to the a6700, I have been watching review videos and reading everything that I can find. On the one hand, I am very impressed and attracted to some of the new features. Sony has taken the AF to a new level and finally added touch control to the menus. The ergonomics has improved and there is finally a front command dial. Sony also added in-camera 10 bit video to bolster the hybrid capabilities. On the other hand, Sony continues the pattern of model differentiation, leaving out key features that have become standard in competing cameras such as dual card slots and faster maximum shutter speeds (i.e., 8,000 instead of 4,000). Although the a6700 does have IBIS that will help with photos, adding what Sony calls Dynamic Image Stabilization could have been a huge difference maker for video creators (another example of model differentiation). Speaking of video creators, leaving out the "Product Showcase" feature found on lower end cameras like the ZV-E10 and ZV-1 seems petty.

After my initial attraction to the compelling features of the a6700, in which my single reservation was the swing out screen, the various omissions gradually cooled my purchase impulse. I can appreciate why Sony would rather have FF rather than APS-C customers. However, leaving out features won't make me a FF customer but adding those features could have made me an a6700 customer.

Jim
 
I like the articulated screen more than the a6400 tilt screen, I really can't understand how people prefer this type of screen.
I would just shortly comment your screen section. I find A6400 screen really great. I had opportunity to directly compare it with Canon RP fully articulating screen. As most of my screen movements is for low shots (mostly daughter, insect, flowers), tilting make it easy one movement step in opposite of RP's two steps, which move the screen in unnatural off-axis position. Also camera feel more fragile in my hands with screen hanging on the side.

So the screen is the main reason why I'm strongly hesitating to upgrade. But as I want to stay at Sony, I will probably not have adifferent option in longterm.
How do you handle low angle shots in portrait orientation? This is impossible with the current flip out screen of the 6400. Aren’t there are some cameras that have potential for flipping out in both landscape and portrait orientation? This would be my preference. I have no need for selfies or vlogging but will enjoy the new fully articulating screen for the ability to do Luengo portraits.
 
You have reminded me that IBM used to be known to some of its customers as a marketing company that also made computers.

I do wish Sony would stabilise its features' names. Would make such a difference to model vs model comparisons.
 
I like the articulated screen more than the a6400 tilt screen, I really can't understand how people prefer this type of screen.
I would just shortly comment your screen section. I find A6400 screen really great. I had opportunity to directly compare it with Canon RP fully articulating screen. As most of my screen movements is for low shots (mostly daughter, insect, flowers), tilting make it easy one movement step in opposite of RP's two steps, which move the screen in unnatural off-axis position. Also camera feel more fragile in my hands with screen hanging on the side.

So the screen is the main reason why I'm strongly hesitating to upgrade. But as I want to stay at Sony, I will probably not have adifferent option in longterm.
How do you handle low angle shots in portrait orientation? This is impossible with the current flip out screen of the 6400. Aren’t there are some cameras that have potential for flipping out in both landscape and portrait orientation? This would be my preference. I have no need for selfies or vlogging but will enjoy the new fully articulating screen for the ability to do Luengo portraits.
How do you take pictures from waist level without drawing attention at gatherings, or street photography? I take these pictures more often than low angle portrait orientation. When that is needed I just look at the screen from the side, with the screen flipped 90 degrees, or even more. Or, I just take in landscape orientation and crop the sides, if I don't need them.
 
Last edited:
<snip>

Although the a6700 does have IBIS that will help with photos, adding what Sony calls Dynamic Image Stabilization could have been a huge difference maker for video creators (another example of model differentiation).
a6700 has added Active SteadyShot. Is that the same as Dynamic Image Stabilization?"
No, "Active SteadyShot" is a separate digital stabilization feature. I came across a repeated reference to Dynamic Stabilization in a YouTube video by Diana Gladney, who moved to a Sony FF ZV-E1 camera and after experiencing the Dynamic Stabilization, now considers it a key requirement. I think this involves the AI capabilities of the camera with digital stabilization.

Jim
 
<snip>

Although the a6700 does have IBIS that will help with photos, adding what Sony calls Dynamic Image Stabilization could have been a huge difference maker for video creators (another example of model differentiation).
a6700 has added Active SteadyShot. Is that the same as Dynamic Image Stabilization?"
No. Dynamic Image Stabilization is another level beyond Active Stabilization.
 
I like the articulated screen more than the a6400 tilt screen, I really can't understand how people prefer this type of screen.
I would just shortly comment your screen section. I find A6400 screen really great. I had opportunity to directly compare it with Canon RP fully articulating screen. As most of my screen movements is for low shots (mostly daughter, insect, flowers), tilting make it easy one movement step in opposite of RP's two steps, which move the screen in unnatural off-axis position. Also camera feel more fragile in my hands with screen hanging on the side.

So the screen is the main reason why I'm strongly hesitating to upgrade. But as I want to stay at Sony, I will probably not have adifferent option in longterm.
How do you handle low angle shots in portrait orientation? This is impossible with the current flip out screen of the 6400. Aren’t there are some cameras that have potential for flipping out in both landscape and portrait orientation? This would be my preference. I have no need for selfies or vlogging but will enjoy the new fully articulating screen for the ability to do Luengo portraits.
Yes, these are more difficult with A6400 screen, sometimes with some guessing of the right angle. But I do most of my low shots in landscape orientation. So from my perspective, positives of tilting screen win about large margin.

I don't need to racionalise my choice. I tried it for few moths, simply don't like fully articulating screen. Unfortunately it's mainstream in screens now :-(
 
Xterrapixel wrote Was hoping for the same Anti-Dust function like in the A7RV where the shutter can be set to closed when camera is turned off. But this is not available in the a6700, not sure why.
I've seen comments like this before and I'm puzzled by them. The shutter is extremely delicate, the sensor has a protective filter in front of it which can be swabbed. Why do you want to put the shutter at risk when the lens is removed?
So that you don't:
  • get sensor dust on your pictures
  • need to clean your sensor
I have anti-dust in my R5. It's great, really.
 
I like the articulated screen more than the a6400 tilt screen, I really can't understand how people prefer this type of screen.
I would just shortly comment your screen section. I find A6400 screen really great. I had opportunity to directly compare it with Canon RP fully articulating screen. As most of my screen movements is for low shots (mostly daughter, insect, flowers), tilting make it easy one movement step in opposite of RP's two steps, which move the screen in unnatural off-axis position. Also camera feel more fragile in my hands with screen hanging on the side.

So the screen is the main reason why I'm strongly hesitating to upgrade. But as I want to stay at Sony, I will probably not have adifferent option in longterm.
How do you handle low angle shots in portrait orientation? This is impossible with the current flip out screen of the 6400. Aren’t there are some cameras that have potential for flipping out in both landscape and portrait orientation? This would be my preference. I have no need for selfies or vlogging but will enjoy the new fully articulating screen for the ability to do Luengo portraits.
How do you take pictures from waist level without drawing attention at gatherings, or street photography? I take these pictures more often than low angle portrait orientation. When that is needed I just look at the screen from the side, with the screen flipped 90 degrees, or even more. Or, I just take in landscape orientation and crop the sides, if I don't need them.
Exactly. As a street photographer, the stick-out-the-side screen is cumbersome and ruins stealth. For that reason, the a6700 is useless to me. So glad I have an a6400, which may have the last of the non-fully articulating Sony screens. Also I certainly don’t want bigger and heavier out on the street.

--
Sam K., NYC
“I’m halfway between tightrope walker and pickpocket.” HCB

__
Smugmug Galleries:
http://skanter.smugmug.com

Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/sam.kanter/
 
Last edited:
How do you take pictures from waist level without drawing attention at gatherings, or street photography? I take these pictures more often than low angle portrait orientation. When that is needed I just look at the screen from the side, with the screen flipped 90 degrees, or even more. Or, I just take in landscape orientation and crop the sides, if I don't need them.
That’s a good idea. Never thought of trying that approach. Oh well, I’ll be fine with the 6700’s screen. I’ve had them on other cams in the past.
 
Coming from an a55, it's almost overwhelming customizing the camera and adjusting to a new shooting workflow. I'm surprised how much customization has to be dedicated to managing the AF system. I feel like I went from a base model sedan in right hand drive, to a left hand drive manual sports car. However, it's crazy to turn on your camera, and instantly get a burst of shots all in focus of your kid running by against a crowd of others. I usually don't say a body improves photography, but the a6700 will do just that for me. The cons of the camera seem so small now that I wielded the power of the photo & video capabilities.
 
As an ex-A55, then ex-A77ii, then ex-A6600 shooter, I share your wonder (in anticipation). Loved the AF on the A55, but can't think how we got by on "only" that!

Cheers

Mike M
 
As an ex-A55, then ex-A77ii, then ex-A6600 shooter, I share your wonder (in anticipation). Loved the AF on the A55, but can't think how we got by on "only" that!
…and yet hundreds of great photographers shot masterpieces without “that” for the past 100 years! Maybe it has something to do with their eye?

--
Sam K., NYC
“I’m halfway between tightrope walker and pickpocket.” HCB

__
Smugmug Galleries:
http://skanter.smugmug.com

Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/sam.kanter/
 
Last edited:
I am sure you are right about the past, Sam. My eyes aren't too good these days, as my 75th birthday - and the tests I need to pass to renew my driving license - approach. I don't see any point in closing them to the advantages new tech offers us. Loved my A55, best camera I ever had until the A77ii arrived; and that was the tops until my a6600 (I must confess the increase in quality was good, but not as good as the step up from Coolpix 8000 to A55, or from A55 to A77ii). And etc., as long as Sony keeps on producing cameras I can afford.

I don't think the tech has changed the way I see the world, just my ambition about how much of it I can capture.

Cheers

Mike
 
Bummer, I brought the gear to take some tennis pics but unfortunately they won't allow it due to size. I've been told that only 50mm lens are OK. Anyway, I really wanted to try out the electronic shutter in high shutter speed especially after one youtuber was able to take some bird shots using ES without distortions. So I went to take pics of airplanes instead.

The jpegs look OK albeit there's a lot of haze in the sky. Also, I lifted the shadows/blacks in particular the blades of the engine. Up close it made that area a bit noisy so I put Topaz Labs Photo AI into good use. I also used a bit of the white neutralizer filter of the Nik 6 Color Efex. I'm impressed by the subject (airplane) recognition.











 

Attachments

  • 4372385.jpg
    4372385.jpg
    1.6 MB · Views: 0
  • 4372387.jpg
    4372387.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 0
Was the tennis at a different venue than the one at which you used the 135GM last year (or was it the year before?)?. I guess you couldn't strap a 50 on the camera and hide the 135 in a poacher's pocket :-D

Cheers

Mike
 
Was the tennis at a different venue than the one at which you used the 135GM last year (or was it the year before?)?. I guess you couldn't strap a 50 on the camera and hide the 135 in a poacher's pocket :-D

Cheers

Mike
Yeah Mike. Yesterday was the first time ever that I couldn't bring my gear in. On the way back to the parking lot, I spoke to a guy carrying a Nikon with I believe a 70-200 lens. Needless to say they turned him back too. He was on his way back to his car to leave his gear and go back to the stadium. I didn't want to do that because someone could break in my car and it will be too hot to leave the gear in the trunk. Anyway it was a free day (both stadium entrance and parking) so not much $$$ lost except for the hassle.

I think this happened before where the security people got tight but the following year they allowed camera gears again. Hopefully they'll do the same next year.
 
Was the tennis at a different venue than the one at which you used the 135GM last year (or was it the year before?)?. I guess you couldn't strap a 50 on the camera and hide the 135 in a poacher's pocket :-D

Cheers

Mike
Yeah Mike. Yesterday was the first time ever that I couldn't bring my gear in. On the way back to the parking lot, I spoke to a guy carrying a Nikon with I believe a 70-200 lens. Needless to say they turned him back too. He was on his way back to his car to leave his gear and go back to the stadium. I didn't want to do that because someone could break in my car and it will be too hot to leave the gear in the trunk. Anyway it was a free day (both stadium entrance and parking) so not much $$$ lost except for the hassle.
I think this happened before where the security people got tight but the following year they allowed camera gears again. Hopefully they'll do the same next year.
I am not sure that I understand rational for not-allowing lenses with more than 50mm FL on a tennis match. Can you enlighten me?
 
I am guessing that the promoters sold the image rights to some consortium of TV and Press companies. But I speak as someone who only watches one tournament (Wimbledon) and that on the television.

Cheers

Mike M
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top