Any Sony A6400 owners upgrading to A6700?

[tjmckay4]

I own a Sony A6400 and I'm going to upgrade to a 6700. The upgraded video specs, UI and stabilisation being my major factors. Anyone else?

 

[Adam-T]

Sensor doesn`t offer anything worth the cash in DR or high ISOs and 2Mp more is barely noticable at this end of the resolution scale, the body has gained way too much girth so it won`t fit in a coat pocket like the A6400 does . the EVF and LCD have stayed the same , I like twisty screens but its far from essential for me - I don`t bird or shoot sports so the Real Time Tracking AF of the 6400 is more than good enough (it didn`t get any worse since the Ai Powered A7R5 landed) and I never ever EVER shoot Video , like Ever on these kind of cams . I like the battery and the card location but I`ve got loads of FW50s so not a dealmaker either .

The A6400 is a bit of a sweet spot in the Sony range and still is despite its age and tiny sharp fast lenses like the Sigma 18-50 F2.8 and Sony 10-20 F4 make it even moreso

--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **

 

[Canon2018]

I still love my a6400 and for 95÷ of my photography the AF is more than sufficient. Only when shooting faraway subjects with my 70-350G the AF tends to struggle but I don't know whether the A6700 would be the solution here. I guess I'll wait for a good deal, maybe Black Friday and then I'll get one. Apart from the AI AF the A6700 does not offer anything substantial new that I really need. IBIS is nice to have, of course, but I hardly miss it as I can shoot my 16-55 wide open.

 

[gkstar]

If A7C II does not have higher res sensor and is more or less a recycle from A74 (Sony specialty), then I will likely upgrade to the A6700 as it has better video, IBIS+digital stabilization and better tracking. Extra wheel, new button layout and true touch menus are a bonus but I am "gaining" bulk (every reviewer is raving about the even bigger grip). Still PQ improvements are still a question mark.

If I did not care about video and had only stabilized lenses, it would be a though proposition.

 

[Steel_1]

I agree. My A6700 is on order but no plans to get rid of my A6400.

 

[PhotoFactor]

Sensor doesn`t offer anything worth the cash in DR or high ISOs and 2Mp more is barely noticable at this end of the resolution scale, the body has gained way too much girth so it won`t fit in a coat pocket like the A6400 does . the EVF and LCD have stayed the same , I like twisty screens but its far from essential for me - I don`t bird or shoot sports so the Real Time Tracking AF of the 6400 is more than good enough (it didn`t get any worse since the Ai Powered A7R5 landed) and I never ever EVER shoot Video , like Ever on these kind of cams . I like the battery and the card location but I`ve got loads of FW50s so not a dealmaker either .

The A6400 is a bit of a sweet spot in the Sony range and still is despite its age and tiny sharp fast lenses like the Sigma 18-50 F2.8 and Sony 10-20 F4 make it even moreso

Agree with this. My son has an A6600 and I was a bit surprised at the greater girth of that model. And the 6700 is similar (or maybe even a bit thicker yet?).

One of my main drivers is size versus quality of image. I already feel my Sony APS-C is bigger than I want, but I tried M43 and didn't like the drop in image quality. I have my phone for small size and quick shots, and my A6400 for the good ones. That is enough. Not wanting to go FF due to even greater size and then bigger, expensive lenses.

 

[Adam-T]

Agree with this. My son has an A6600 and I was a bit surprised at the greater girth of that model. And the 6700 is similar (or maybe even a bit thicker yet?).

The 6700 is a LOT girthier than the 6400 (and a good bit thicker than the 6600 too ) . I like the coatpocketabiity of the 6400 with the 16-50PZ on ( i have an excellent copy) and even the 10-18 if the coat is big enough ;-)









--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **

 

[Barnie25]

Agree with this. My son has an A6600 and I was a bit surprised at the greater girth of that model. And the 6700 is similar (or maybe even a bit thicker yet?).

The 6700 is a LOT girthier than the 6400 (and a good bit thicker than the 6600 too ) . I like the coatpocketabiity of the 6400 with the 16-50PZ on ( i have an excellent copy) and even the 10-18 if the coat is big enough ;-)



--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **

The A6700 size is kind perfect in my opinion. I am of two minds about it. Last month I started my search for a new camera and tried to A6600 but returned it due to the A6700 being released soon. I couldn't resist being a different camera and so now I have an A6400 with a cage grip instead. I used some of the money I intended to spend on the A6700 on real life stuff and got a great deal on an A6400 so I jumped on it.

Would I love to have the A6700 now instead? Yeah probably but it would also mean I would only have a Sigma 18-50 as my only lens.

Do I regret getting the A6400 with multiple lenses instead? No in the end I probably don't. I found that the flash of the A6400 is very easy to bounce of the ceiling. The image quality is still really good and the autofocus system is very potent.

Do I see myself switching to the A6700 somewhere in the next 18 months? Most probably if good used deals will be available by then. For handheld video I am probably just getting a small gimbal anyways so the IBIS isn't that crucial.

 

[skanter]

I own a Sony A6400 and I'm going to upgrade to a 6700. The upgraded video specs, UI and stabilisation being my major factors. Anyone else?

Nope! The cumbersome stick-out-the-side screen is a dealbreaker for me doing stealthy street photography. Not doing video right now, i see no other benefits either. The a6400 is a great camera - smaller and lighter as well. All my lenses are OSS.

--
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/

 

[Craig Gillette]

I have both an A6400 and A7Riv. The video and AI, etc., focus system upgrades interest me and for use with my 200-600 and as a "back up," too. Alternatives could be the A9s, likely used, or an A7RV. All of which may have advantages or the disadvantage of higher prices. Plenty of time to make a decision.

 

[dht]

I've used the a6400 since it came out in 2019, and pre-ordered the 6700. I agree that the 6400 really is a sweet spot in the lineup in terms of features for the money, but for me the additional a6700 features of IBIS, the larger battery, the more comfortable grip, the front dial, the newer (and hopefully faster interface), and uncropped 30p and 60p video make the upgrade worth it. I acknowledge that its not the most rational upgrade from a purely financial perspective, but I know I will make use of these new features.

 

[Martin_99]

I would like to have improved camera, but the major downside for me is articulating screen. A6400 have so great screen solution for me, that is not easy to change.

 

[Jeff Style]

If I was asked a week ago I would have said yes, but after thinking about it I don't I can justify $1400+tax for a personal use body. My 6400 gives me no issues and the things I like about the 6700 (better grip, real IBIS, extra control dial, improved AF) I have to be honest about with myself. If it had 2 card slots it would be an instant buy, I'd much rather use a 6700 for long events than my A74 but oh well. I think I should wait to see what the 6400 replacement does as the 6700 parts trickle down. Or better yet, a 6100 replacement with the trickle down part LOL.

 

[alphaZ]

I own a Sony A6400 and I'm going to upgrade to a 6700. The upgraded video specs, UI and stabilisation being my major factors. Anyone else?

Benefits of the a6700 are as follows;

Better "overall" ergo, grip/front dial/menu/rear screen shape/size/sd door

IBIS, if you want to use many of the new lens, primes and zooms, many have no ois

Object Tracking, its nice and works supremely well, multiple objects video too.

Battery, a longer battery life and less swapping is a definite plus, cold weather can also diminish the capacity too, so bigger the better.

Evf, seems strangely better than the equivalent evf in the Fuji X-S20, its not quite up to the A7IV evf but its extremely colorful, fluid and good contrast, I doubt anyone unless they a-b obsessively between A7IV and a6700 would realize there's any difference if casually swapping, which is quite incredible, but it's instantly better than X-S20 which I don't understand. Low light it's not really grainy at all, its an impressive evf for the size of camera, not sure what Sony has done to it's optics but its really good and a step-up from X-S20 and close to parity in general use with the A7IV.

IQ, the imx571 is all about color, it's no match for some of the higher end FF bodies that can score 26 bits or more but its squarely in the second tier and is definitely going to match a7iv and below of any FF, so for aps-c through Dxo/Lr denoise we are going to have parity with most FF bodies from raw in terms of color and dr/response/details all the way upto iso3200, from iso 6400 there's going to be between 0.5, 2/3 stop and iso12.8k you'd probably see the full stop if you pp extreme. It will depend on lens, application, how much cropping of a FF lens you need to make etc etc, there's no free lunch as many of us know, are you willing to carry Z8/A1/R5 and a top tier 2.8 zoom or 1.2/1.4 prime, this is the reality if you want meaningful differences. Sure you can get better iq on Z7/AR3,4,5/R5 for landscape, casual shooting, but they will not be able to do what the a6700 can do either (Canon R5 can'ish) so it depends on what you are after.

Here's my take anyway;

Sony A7IV + 20-70 /24-105 f4's or Sony a67k +16-55 2.8, I'll take the latter

Sony A7IV + Tam/Sig 28-70 2.8 or Sony a67k + 16-55 2.8, I'll take the latter

Canon R6II + 24-105 f4 or Sony a67k + 16-55 2.8, I'll take the latter

Nikon Z6 II +24-70/24-120 f4/28-75 2.8 or Sony a67k + 16-55 2.8, I'll take the latter

Higher end bodies, a7r5, Canon r5, Nikon Z7/Z8 its difficult, you might have a reason for the extra pixels/performance, but its never going to be as light/compact as a67 even with the 150-500/200-600 offering 200-900mm f8-9 equivalents, you'll need OM-1 and 150-400 to get close to that in a single zoom, no changing.

Compared to Fuji, I'd avoid X-H2/X-T5 40mp sensors until its better understood, X-S20 is offering a lot of the a6700 too, probably more but xtrans is not for everyone, the 16-55 2.8 on Fuji is massive and there's no equivalent to Tamron's 70-180 either. The 11/15 primes are also very unique offerings along with that tiny 10-20 f4 too, add in the 70-350 and 200-600 and I'd say Sony shades the X-S20 with a better evf (despite spec's), 11fps mechanical shutter, bayer array, lens selection (zooms especially) and more robust af, although X-S20 is mighty impressive too for overall shape/size.

All in all I don't see personally any pre a6700 Sony aps-c cameras as even remotely similar, apart from the shape it would be hard for me going back to such cameras, the thin 16:9 rear lcd, the lack of front dial, the uhs-1, old generation menus, original object tracking, tiny batteries, etc, etc and smaller grip are not something I'd be willing to compromise on, when cameras of a6700 caliber exist, in such a small form factor and with such powerful capabilities.

Will check it out more over the coming weeks but at the moment a6700 is really impressive and I for one can't see myself buying/needing anything else for the foreseeable, I'll retain the a7iv for now, a mkii a1 might convince me otherwise but it will be the same old compromise, size/weight/cost etc...

 

[Adam-T]

All in all I don't see personally any pre a6700 Sony aps-c cameras as even remotely similar, apart from the shape it would be hard for me going back to such cameras, the thin 16:9 rear lcd, the lack of front dial, the uhs-1, old generation menus, original object tracking, tiny batteries, etc, etc and smaller grip are not something I'd be willing to compromise on, when cameras of a6700 caliber exist, in such a small form factor and with such powerful capabilities.

The point for the older a6K apart from the 6600 is SIZE .. the A6400 packs an amazing amount of camera into a coat pocket (with the 16-50PZ, small primes or the 10-20 F4) , its AF is still up there with the best, its batteries are almost free they`re that plentiful and the sensor still stacks up today (only loses out in scan speed compared to the 26Mp one in any significant way) . also you get to do waist level and overhead shooting without faffing around with a twisty screen .

This, I think you`ll find is why the "keeper" score counter is leading - it`s a sweet spot - the 6700 is there for those who want the features it offers and don`t mind or even prefer the far fatter body and yes, it really does give value for money in a way the 6600 never did , that cam was really just a big battery but it`s defintely Not a no brainer upgrade for A6400 owners any more than an XH2S is for XT4 owners or a Canon R7 for M6-II owners . Choice is a great thing and we`re all Different with different needs and wants .

 

[skanter]

I own a Sony A6400 and I'm going to upgrade to a 6700. The upgraded video specs, UI and stabilisation being my major factors. Anyone else?

Nope! The cumbersome stick-out-the-side screen is a dealbreaker for me doing stealthy street photography. Not doing video right now, i see no other benefits either. The a6400 is a great camera - smaller and lighter as well. All my lenses are OSS.

BTW, I use a hand strap (don’t confuse with wrist strap) , so “better grip” is irrelevant. I recommend these, the camera is attached to your hand and you do not have to grip it. I’ve used them on every camera I’ve ever owned.

--
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/

 

[Kirwin]

Your survey is interesting, but is missing one category. Curious to know how many a6400 owners would be tempted to move over to the a6600 when its price will be made more affordable. I can see a6600 prices in the US being reduced somewhere between $798 to $898 (body only) for next Black Friday during the holidays.

--
Regards,
Kirwin

 

[skanter]

Your survey is interesting, but is missing one category. Curious to know how many a6400 owners would be tempted to move over to the a6600 when its price will be made more affordable. I can see a6600 prices in the US being reduced somewhere between $798 to $898 (body only) for next Black Friday during the holidays.

All my lenses (except 20mm pancake) are OSS, so I have no need for bigger, heavier IBIS. a6400 is perfect for me.

 

[Michael Fritzen]

Not for now.

As a stills and mainly RAW shooter I don't see advances that justify investing now, even more so that RAW support is likely to take some time and I'd most probably need to upgrade to a current version. So I'll sit and wait - but might be tempted by the current offers on the A6400 to get a 2nd body.

 

[IT Troll]

I’m upgrading. In fact my a6700 is now sat at my local courier depot (shipped sooner than the original Sony estimate). Unfortunately I’m away at the moment and so have had to defer delivery.