Upgrade from A6400 to A6700: my questions

[Canon2018]

After the price for a the A6700 has fallen quite a bit, I have thought about an upgrade.

B&H has it for $1398. Isn't that the initial price?

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1776281-REG/sony_a6700_mirrorless_camera.html

Where have you found it for a price much lower?

Recently, these sites offered slightly used copies for around $1000 that had not been available earlier, obviously, as the the camera is still so new. The fallen price makes the camera a lot more appealing but I still haven't made up my mind. There are so many contradicting reviews and posts out there with the main controversies being high ISO noise and AF accuracy compared to the older models. Many reviewers say that noise is worse and AF is good but not noticeably better than on the 6400.

 

[Craig Gillette]

I've seen "the noise is worse" applied to several cameras. Only a few ever suggested that the cameras were "too noisy." There is usually a less noisy camera of some sort. The A6700 is heaver, too. I don't find the differences noticeable in use or my images. The new focus system is far more sophisticated. One may not use all the features. The A6400 is fast, the a6700 perhaps more selective and stickier.

 

[Henry Richardson]

After the price for a the A6700 has fallen quite a bit, I have thought about an upgrade.

B&H has it for $1398. Isn't that the initial price?

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1776281-REG/sony_a6700_mirrorless_camera.html

Where have you found it for a price much lower?

Recently, these sites offered slightly used copies for around $1000 that had not been available earlier, obviously, as the the camera is still so new. The fallen price makes the camera a lot more appealing but I still haven't made up my mind. There are so many contradicting reviews and posts out there with the main controversies being high ISO noise and AF accuracy compared to the older models. Many reviewers say that noise is worse and AF is good but not noticeably better than on the 6400.

Okay, you are talking about the used prices have fallen, not the new prices. I misunderstood.

 

[Canon2018]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions. I finally decided to keep my A6400. I looked through last year's photos and noticed that there was hardly any situation in which my camera wasn't fast enough.

The 6700 is certainly more comfortable to use with its new menu system and the touchscreen.

I also researched many review sites and found several comparison tools: in all of them high ISO noise was noticeably worse for the A6700 so I wasn't even sure if the new camera would be an upgrade at all in terms of image quality.

Maybe I'll reconsider once there are more affordable A6700s on the used market. Until then I will continue to enjoy my good old A6400.

 

[DirkPeh]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions. I finally decided to keep my A6400. I looked through last year's photos and noticed that there was hardly any situation in which my camera wasn't fast enough.

The 6700 is certainly more comfortable to use with its new menu system and the touchscreen.

I also researched many review sites and found several comparison tools: in all of them high ISO noise was noticeably worse for the A6700 so I wasn't even sure if the new camera would be an upgrade at all in terms of image quality.

Maybe I'll reconsider once there are more affordable A6700s on the used market. Until then I will continue to enjoy my good old A6400.

I think you made the right decision. The A6400 with the Sigma 56 is incredible. Maybe there will be a successor to the A6400 this year.

 

[piticoto]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions. I finally decided to keep my A6400. I looked through last year's photos and noticed that there was hardly any situation in which my camera wasn't fast enough.

The 6700 is certainly more comfortable to use with its new menu system and the touchscreen.

I also researched many review sites and found several comparison tools: in all of them high ISO noise was noticeably worse for the A6700 so I wasn't even sure if the new camera would be an upgrade at all in terms of image quality.

Maybe I'll reconsider once there are more affordable A6700s on the used market. Until then I will continue to enjoy my good old A6400.

I look at A6700 too, compared to A6600 and other cameras, thinking that I may buy one if some cameras show up on used market, but it's too early for that. Of course, the AI recognizing subjects, less shutter lag are on my wish list, but it's larger camera, no HDR, no built in flash, more noise at higher ISO if true I would say it's an evolution in the wrong way. So, I can't stop thinking what is wrong with my A6100 to make me spend $1400 for questionable camera evolution for me. Yes, IBIS, larger battery, extra controls like front wheel and dedicated mode wheel for pictures, video, are improvements, but not for my beginner and user style. The only thing I miss on A6100 is weather sealing. I'll be happy to use the A6100 for few more years. I would spend on a wide angle prime for low light conditions instead of new APS-C camera.

 

[piticoto]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions. I finally decided to keep my A6400. I looked through last year's photos and noticed that there was hardly any situation in which my camera wasn't fast enough.

The 6700 is certainly more comfortable to use with its new menu system and the touchscreen.

I also researched many review sites and found several comparison tools: in all of them high ISO noise was noticeably worse for the A6700 so I wasn't even sure if the new camera would be an upgrade at all in terms of image quality.

Maybe I'll reconsider once there are more affordable A6700s on the used market. Until then I will continue to enjoy my good old A6400.

I think you made the right decision. The A6400 with the Sigma 56 is incredible. Maybe there will be a successor to the A6400 this year.

I had Sigma 56, but it doesn't have image stabilisation. I took the camera with only the Sigma 56 to a wedding reception, as I got it just before the wedding, but focal length was too long for people around the table, pictures with subjects far away had too much noise on dim lights, or blurred with lower shutter speed, then videos were bad with no image stabilisation.

 

[DirkPeh]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions. I finally decided to keep my A6400. I looked through last year's photos and noticed that there was hardly any situation in which my camera wasn't fast enough.

The 6700 is certainly more comfortable to use with its new menu system and the touchscreen.

I also researched many review sites and found several comparison tools: in all of them high ISO noise was noticeably worse for the A6700 so I wasn't even sure if the new camera would be an upgrade at all in terms of image quality.

Maybe I'll reconsider once there are more affordable A6700s on the used market. Until then I will continue to enjoy my good old A6400.

I think you made the right decision. The A6400 with the Sigma 56 is incredible. Maybe there will be a successor to the A6400 this year.

I had Sigma 56, but it doesn't have image stabilisation. I took the camera with only the Sigma 56 to a wedding reception, as I got it just before the wedding, but focal length was too long for people around the table, pictures with subjects far away had too much noise on dim lights, or blurred with lower shutter speed, then videos were bad with no image stabilisation.

If you buy a 56 f/1.4 lens, you have to know what this focal length is about. It’s not the lens fault.

Subjects far away in dim lights being noisy has exactly nothing to do with the quality of a lens. The Sigma is one of the best lenses you can buy for APS-C, the optical qualities are incredible for the price.

 

[ProDude]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions. I finally decided to keep my A6400. I looked through last year's photos and noticed that there was hardly any situation in which my camera wasn't fast enough.

The 6700 is certainly more comfortable to use with its new menu system and the touchscreen.

I also researched many review sites and found several comparison tools: in all of them high ISO noise was noticeably worse for the A6700 so I wasn't even sure if the new camera would be an upgrade at all in terms of image quality.

Maybe I'll reconsider once there are more affordable A6700s on the used market. Until then I will continue to enjoy my good old A6400.

I think you made the right decision. The A6400 with the Sigma 56 is incredible. Maybe there will be a successor to the A6400 this year.

I had Sigma 56, but it doesn't have image stabilisation. I took the camera with only the Sigma 56 to a wedding reception, as I got it just before the wedding, but focal length was too long for people around the table, pictures with subjects far away had too much noise on dim lights, or blurred with lower shutter speed, then videos were bad with no image stabilisation.

I'm surprised anyone would trust a reviewer much these days. Considering the click bait habits let alone their slanted review methods. According to Photon's measurements off the sensor, there is NO question there was an advancement in the newer 26mp sensor used on the A6700. Whether every user uses it in a manner to extract that remains questionable. DR ratings of 10.51 vs. 10.95 on the 6700 may not be a huge jump but it's not static. Low Light sensitivity is where it jumped from the 6400's 2470 rating to 2643. Low light EV sensitivity jumped from 9.63 to 9.72 once again not huge but nevertheless forward.

I get your not desiring to move into a new camera. I'll say this however. The focus system on the A6700 alone IS light years ahead of any previous generation. This may only mean something if you're shooting wildlife, birds and children moving around. The boost in the brightness and speed of the EVF is welcome to say the least. I find in daylight NO lag at all. And the electronic shutter has been moved big time forward with a speed that mostly avoids rolling shutter in photography I've found. The larger more ergonomic grip, more buttons, articulated screen etc.

I just don't care for people who diminish the technical advancements that HAVE been made to a product. Only if they don't take advantage of them. But denial of their existence isn't' dealing with real world usage for many of us.

 

[DirkPeh]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions. I finally decided to keep my A6400. I looked through last year's photos and noticed that there was hardly any situation in which my camera wasn't fast enough.

The 6700 is certainly more comfortable to use with its new menu system and the touchscreen.

I also researched many review sites and found several comparison tools: in all of them high ISO noise was noticeably worse for the A6700 so I wasn't even sure if the new camera would be an upgrade at all in terms of image quality.

Maybe I'll reconsider once there are more affordable A6700s on the used market. Until then I will continue to enjoy my good old A6400.

I think you made the right decision. The A6400 with the Sigma 56 is incredible. Maybe there will be a successor to the A6400 this year.

I had Sigma 56, but it doesn't have image stabilisation. I took the camera with only the Sigma 56 to a wedding reception, as I got it just before the wedding, but focal length was too long for people around the table, pictures with subjects far away had too much noise on dim lights, or blurred with lower shutter speed, then videos were bad with no image stabilisation.

I'm surprised anyone would trust a reviewer much these days. Considering the click bait habits let alone their slanted review methods. According to Photon's measurements off the sensor, there is NO question there was an advancement in the newer 26mp sensor used on the A6700. Whether every user uses it in a manner to extract that remains questionable. DR ratings of 10.51 vs. 10.95 on the 6700 may not be a huge jump but it's not static. Low Light sensitivity is where it jumped from the 6400's 2470 rating to 2643. Low light EV sensitivity jumped from 9.63 to 9.72 once again not huge but nevertheless forward.

I get your not desiring to move into a new camera. I'll say this however. The focus system on the A6700 alone IS light years ahead of any previous generation. This may only mean something if you're shooting wildlife, birds and children moving around. The boost in the brightness and speed of the EVF is welcome to say the least. I find in daylight NO lag at all. And the electronic shutter has been moved big time forward with a speed that mostly avoids rolling shutter in photography I've found. The larger more ergonomic grip, more buttons, articulated screen etc.

I just don't care for people who diminish the technical advancements that HAVE been made to a product. Only if they don't take advantage of them. But denial of their existence isn't' dealing with real world usage for many of us.

There’s no question that the A6700 is superior to the A6400, IBIS (that is even much improved over the A6600), the larger battery, the video abilities, but it’s double the price! I am sure that the AF with the new AI chip is great, but it was already great in the A6600/A6400, so my definition of lightyears would differ a bit from yours

But it is simply rational to not waste tons of money for every next generation camera or other gadgets, instead of weighing your own needs and demands and maybe ignore one generation or invest into a better lens or some photography lessons.

The AF on the A6400 is plenty fast…

Yesterday:

 

[piticoto]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions. I finally decided to keep my A6400. I looked through last year's photos and noticed that there was hardly any situation in which my camera wasn't fast enough.

The 6700 is certainly more comfortable to use with its new menu system and the touchscreen.

I also researched many review sites and found several comparison tools: in all of them high ISO noise was noticeably worse for the A6700 so I wasn't even sure if the new camera would be an upgrade at all in terms of image quality.

Maybe I'll reconsider once there are more affordable A6700s on the used market. Until then I will continue to enjoy my good old A6400.

I think you made the right decision. The A6400 with the Sigma 56 is incredible. Maybe there will be a successor to the A6400 this year.

I had Sigma 56, but it doesn't have image stabilisation. I took the camera with only the Sigma 56 to a wedding reception, as I got it just before the wedding, but focal length was too long for people around the table, pictures with subjects far away had too much noise on dim lights, or blurred with lower shutter speed, then videos were bad with no image stabilisation.

If you buy a 56 f/1.4 lens, you have to know what this focal length is about. It’s not the lens fault.

Agreed. I have Sony 50 f1.8 for a long time and I got Sigma 56 f1.4 as being praised the best optics on E mount APS-C lens. I knew what 56 mm focal length will do.

Subjects far away in dim lights being noisy has exactly nothing to do with the quality of a lens.

Not with the optics, but feature like stabilisation matters to allow reduced shutter speed, even if f1.4 lets more light to the sensor.

The Sigma is one of the best lenses you can buy for APS-C, the optical qualities are incredible for the price.

Price is good, that's why I tried it. It was my first tryout of the lens at the wedding. I was disappointed of the results without optical stabilisation. Most likely I could get less noise on pictures with subjects far away in dim lights by using longer shutter speed at lower ISO if it had optical stabilisation. Video with this lens has to be on tripod. IBIS helps for pictures, but not that effective on video.

 

[DirkPeh]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions. I finally decided to keep my A6400. I looked through last year's photos and noticed that there was hardly any situation in which my camera wasn't fast enough.

The 6700 is certainly more comfortable to use with its new menu system and the touchscreen.

I also researched many review sites and found several comparison tools: in all of them high ISO noise was noticeably worse for the A6700 so I wasn't even sure if the new camera would be an upgrade at all in terms of image quality.

Maybe I'll reconsider once there are more affordable A6700s on the used market. Until then I will continue to enjoy my good old A6400.

I think you made the right decision. The A6400 with the Sigma 56 is incredible. Maybe there will be a successor to the A6400 this year.

I had Sigma 56, but it doesn't have image stabilisation. I took the camera with only the Sigma 56 to a wedding reception, as I got it just before the wedding, but focal length was too long for people around the table, pictures with subjects far away had too much noise on dim lights, or blurred with lower shutter speed, then videos were bad with no image stabilisation.

If you buy a 56 f/1.4 lens, you have to know what this focal length is about. It’s not the lens fault.

Agreed. I have Sony 50 f1.8 for a long time and I got Sigma 56 f1.4 as being praised the best optics on E mount APS-C lens. I knew what 56 mm focal length will do.

Subjects far away in dim lights being noisy has exactly nothing to do with the quality of a lens.

Not with the optics, but feature like stabilisation matters to allow reduced shutter speed, even if f1.4 lets more light to the sensor.

The Sigma is one of the best lenses you can buy for APS-C, the optical qualities are incredible for the price.

Price is good, that's why I tried it. It was my first tryout of the lens at the wedding. I was disappointed of the results without optical stabilisation. Most likely I could get less noise on pictures with subjects far away in dim lights by using longer shutter speed at lower ISO if it had optical stabilisation. Video with this lens has to be on tripod. IBIS helps for pictures, but not that effective on video.

IBIS certainly is useful in some occasions, but let’s just assume at your wedding you would take shots with 1/20th or 1/10th of a second with no camera shake, it is highly likely that your subjects would move and force you to use a higher shutter speed and the noise is back and IBIS of little use. There’s a reason that wedding photographers nearly always use off camera flash.

 

[ARSPR]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions. I finally decided to keep my A6400. I looked through last year's photos and noticed that there was hardly any situation in which my camera wasn't fast enough.

The 6700 is certainly more comfortable to use with its new menu system and the touchscreen.

I also researched many review sites and found several comparison tools: in all of them high ISO noise was noticeably worse for the A6700 so I wasn't even sure if the new camera would be an upgrade at all in terms of image quality.

Maybe I'll reconsider once there are more affordable A6700s on the used market. Until then I will continue to enjoy my good old A6400.

I think you made the right decision. The A6400 with the Sigma 56 is incredible. Maybe there will be a successor to the A6400 this year.

I had Sigma 56, but it doesn't have image stabilisation. I took the camera with only the Sigma 56 to a wedding reception, as I got it just before the wedding, but focal length was too long for people around the table, pictures with subjects far away had too much noise on dim lights, or blurred with lower shutter speed, then videos were bad with no image stabilisation.

If you buy a 56 f/1.4 lens, you have to know what this focal length is about. It’s not the lens fault.

Agreed. I have Sony 50 f1.8 for a long time and I got Sigma 56 f1.4 as being praised the best optics on E mount APS-C lens. I knew what 56 mm focal length will do.

Subjects far away in dim lights being noisy has exactly nothing to do with the quality of a lens.

Not with the optics, but feature like stabilisation matters to allow reduced shutter speed, even if f1.4 lets more light to the sensor.

The Sigma is one of the best lenses you can buy for APS-C, the optical qualities are incredible for the price.

Price is good, that's why I tried it. It was my first tryout of the lens at the wedding. I was disappointed of the results without optical stabilisation. Most likely I could get less noise on pictures with subjects far away in dim lights by using longer shutter speed at lower ISO if it had optical stabilisation. Video with this lens has to be on tripod. IBIS helps for pictures, but not that effective on video.

IBIS certainly is useful in some occasions, but let’s just assume at your wedding you would take shots with 1/20th or 1/10th of a second with no camera shake, it is highly likely that your subjects would move and force you to use a higher shutter speed and the noise is back and IBIS of little use. There’s a reason that wedding photographers nearly always use off camera flash.

IS, (in lens or IBIS, it doesn't matter), is never ever going to work with either people or animals because they are always moving even if slightly. IS is just for fully static targets: if pictures allowed a museum where you cannot use flash, the interior of a cathedral, city landscapes at dawn, whatever...

 

[DirkPeh]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions. I finally decided to keep my A6400. I looked through last year's photos and noticed that there was hardly any situation in which my camera wasn't fast enough.

The 6700 is certainly more comfortable to use with its new menu system and the touchscreen.

I also researched many review sites and found several comparison tools: in all of them high ISO noise was noticeably worse for the A6700 so I wasn't even sure if the new camera would be an upgrade at all in terms of image quality.

Maybe I'll reconsider once there are more affordable A6700s on the used market. Until then I will continue to enjoy my good old A6400.

I think you made the right decision. The A6400 with the Sigma 56 is incredible. Maybe there will be a successor to the A6400 this year.

I had Sigma 56, but it doesn't have image stabilisation. I took the camera with only the Sigma 56 to a wedding reception, as I got it just before the wedding, but focal length was too long for people around the table, pictures with subjects far away had too much noise on dim lights, or blurred with lower shutter speed, then videos were bad with no image stabilisation.

If you buy a 56 f/1.4 lens, you have to know what this focal length is about. It’s not the lens fault.

Agreed. I have Sony 50 f1.8 for a long time and I got Sigma 56 f1.4 as being praised the best optics on E mount APS-C lens. I knew what 56 mm focal length will do.

Subjects far away in dim lights being noisy has exactly nothing to do with the quality of a lens.

Not with the optics, but feature like stabilisation matters to allow reduced shutter speed, even if f1.4 lets more light to the sensor.

The Sigma is one of the best lenses you can buy for APS-C, the optical qualities are incredible for the price.

Price is good, that's why I tried it. It was my first tryout of the lens at the wedding. I was disappointed of the results without optical stabilisation. Most likely I could get less noise on pictures with subjects far away in dim lights by using longer shutter speed at lower ISO if it had optical stabilisation. Video with this lens has to be on tripod. IBIS helps for pictures, but not that effective on video.

IBIS certainly is useful in some occasions, but let’s just assume at your wedding you would take shots with 1/20th or 1/10th of a second with no camera shake, it is highly likely that your subjects would move and force you to use a higher shutter speed and the noise is back and IBIS of little use. There’s a reason that wedding photographers nearly always use off camera flash.

IS, (in lens or IBIS, it doesn't matter), is never ever going to work with either people or animals because they are always moving even if slightly. IS is just for fully static targets: if pictures allowed a museum where you cannot use flash, the interior of a cathedral, city landscapes at dawn, whatever...

…never ever… I don’t know. I think with all due respect, Piticoto falls a bit into the trap that whatever problem you have, solve it with new gear (I have been there, too!) or if you don’t get the results you wanted, it’s the gear's fault. In this case the brilliant Sigma prime.

But in the real world - not if you make professional photos for paying clients that expect super sharp conventional photos - in the real world, there’s a significant difference between a picture taken at 1/15th of a second without IBIS and lots of camera shake and subject movement and one taken with IBIS at the same SS and a bit of subjects movement. I was shocked when seeing some results of my little Ricoh GR with IBIS at ridiculous low SS in low light.

 

[piticoto]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions. I finally decided to keep my A6400. I looked through last year's photos and noticed that there was hardly any situation in which my camera wasn't fast enough.

The 6700 is certainly more comfortable to use with its new menu system and the touchscreen.

I also researched many review sites and found several comparison tools: in all of them high ISO noise was noticeably worse for the A6700 so I wasn't even sure if the new camera would be an upgrade at all in terms of image quality.

Maybe I'll reconsider once there are more affordable A6700s on the used market. Until then I will continue to enjoy my good old A6400.

I think you made the right decision. The A6400 with the Sigma 56 is incredible. Maybe there will be a successor to the A6400 this year.

I had Sigma 56, but it doesn't have image stabilisation. I took the camera with only the Sigma 56 to a wedding reception, as I got it just before the wedding, but focal length was too long for people around the table, pictures with subjects far away had too much noise on dim lights, or blurred with lower shutter speed, then videos were bad with no image stabilisation.

I'm surprised anyone would trust a reviewer much these days. Considering the click bait habits let alone their slanted review methods.

Not one reviewer, and if the manufacturers give them the cameras I see these reviews as good enough information.

According to Photon's measurements off the sensor, there is NO question there was an advancement in the newer 26mp sensor used on the A6700. Whether every user uses it in a manner to extract that remains questionable. DR ratings of 10.51 vs. 10.95 on the 6700 may not be a huge jump but it's not static. Low Light sensitivity is where it jumped from the 6400's 2470 rating to 2643. Low light EV sensitivity jumped from 9.63 to 9.72 once again not huge but nevertheless forward.

I get your not desiring to move into a new camera.

Desire to move into a new camera is one thing, actually doing it is different based on improvements vs price. I don't like the flip out screen, it has no built in flash, HDR mode from previous models is gone. Then there is the question about noise at higher ISO. Just this if true is enough for me to pass A6700. I'll pay attention to as many reviewers and sites that evaluate A6700 as I can.

I'll say this however. The focus system on the A6700 alone IS light years ahead of any previous generation. This may only mean something if you're shooting wildlife, birds and children moving around.

The intelligent autofocus is the only reason I still look at A6700. Did you have one of 2019 ASP-C Sony releases? These also have better autofocus than the previous generations.

The boost in the brightness and speed of the EVF is welcome to say the least. I find in daylight NO lag at all. And the electronic shutter has been moved big time forward with a speed that mostly avoids rolling shutter in photography I've found.

I agree, improvement in shutter lag is good. I didn't have, or noticed trouble with shutter lag so far on A6100.

The larger more ergonomic grip, more buttons, articulated screen etc.

I just don't care for people who diminish the technical advancements that HAVE been made to a product. Only if they don't take advantage of them. But denial of their existence isn't' dealing with real world usage for many of us.

Just 2 MP more, still 11 fps and high ISO noise question, these are not technical advancements compared to 2019 releases to pay $1400. Sure, the old camera can be sold, still one has to put hundreds more for A6700. I don't care that you say I diminished technical advancements. As engineer I have my own understanding of what technical advancements are, always balancing price to features and quality.

 

[ARSPR]

For sure, nobody says a blurry picture is bad if intended or even if it breathes life, movement in it

But as you say, IS works to cancel the blurriness from the photographer side of the equation, never from the target side. And in both of them, blurriness is "bad" as a general rule till you get a picture where it isn't in either or both sides...

(Underexposure, overexposure, unaligned frames, motion blur, out of focus pictures are "bad" except when they aren't...)

 

[piticoto]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts and suggestions. I finally decided to keep my A6400. I looked through last year's photos and noticed that there was hardly any situation in which my camera wasn't fast enough.

The 6700 is certainly more comfortable to use with its new menu system and the touchscreen.

I also researched many review sites and found several comparison tools: in all of them high ISO noise was noticeably worse for the A6700 so I wasn't even sure if the new camera would be an upgrade at all in terms of image quality.

Maybe I'll reconsider once there are more affordable A6700s on the used market. Until then I will continue to enjoy my good old A6400.

I think you made the right decision. The A6400 with the Sigma 56 is incredible. Maybe there will be a successor to the A6400 this year.

I had Sigma 56, but it doesn't have image stabilisation. I took the camera with only the Sigma 56 to a wedding reception, as I got it just before the wedding, but focal length was too long for people around the table, pictures with subjects far away had too much noise on dim lights, or blurred with lower shutter speed, then videos were bad with no image stabilisation.

If you buy a 56 f/1.4 lens, you have to know what this focal length is about. It’s not the lens fault.

Agreed. I have Sony 50 f1.8 for a long time and I got Sigma 56 f1.4 as being praised the best optics on E mount APS-C lens. I knew what 56 mm focal length will do.

Subjects far away in dim lights being noisy has exactly nothing to do with the quality of a lens.

Not with the optics, but feature like stabilisation matters to allow reduced shutter speed, even if f1.4 lets more light to the sensor.

The Sigma is one of the best lenses you can buy for APS-C, the optical qualities are incredible for the price.

Price is good, that's why I tried it. It was my first tryout of the lens at the wedding. I was disappointed of the results without optical stabilisation. Most likely I could get less noise on pictures with subjects far away in dim lights by using longer shutter speed at lower ISO if it had optical stabilisation. Video with this lens has to be on tripod. IBIS helps for pictures, but not that effective on video.

IBIS certainly is useful in some occasions, but let’s just assume at your wedding you would take shots with 1/20th or 1/10th of a second with no camera shake, it is highly likely that your subjects would move and force you to use a higher shutter speed and the noise is back and IBIS of little use. There’s a reason that wedding photographers nearly always use off camera flash.

People at the wedding were barely moving, and slow. I could use a lower shutter speed if I had image stabilisation to help for holding camera shakes. For dance ring I tried with video, but the images were shaking bad as I tried to move slowly around. I didn't have this problem with OSS in the lens on different occasions.

 

[Joshua1209]

I am considering the A6700. I shoot street photography. Need the face detect to be accurate and quick. I also shoot a lot through the windows of cafes and restaurants. Is there a big difference between the A6400 and the A6700 when it comes to the distance from which they can pick up an eye or a face? Is there a difference in the speed of acquisition? I price difference is quite a lot.

Thanks.

 

[Henry Richardson]

I am considering the A6700. I shoot street photography. Need the face detect to be accurate and quick. I also shoot a lot through the windows of cafes and restaurants. Is there a big difference between the A6400 and the A6700 when it comes to the distance from which they can pick up an eye or a face? Is there a difference in the speed of acquisition? I price difference is quite a lot.

Thanks.

Read through the posts in this thread:

A6700: AF settings for street life

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/67548897

Examples of quick, sudden reaction shots

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/67569553

 

[Joshua1209]

I am considering the A6700. I shoot street photography. Need the face detect to be accurate and quick. I also shoot a lot through the windows of cafes and restaurants. Is there a big difference between the A6400 and the A6700 when it comes to the distance from which they can pick up an eye or a face? Is there a difference in the speed of acquisition? I price difference is quite a lot.

Thanks.

Read through the posts in this thread:

A6700: AF settings for street life

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/67548897

Thanks for the link. However, having been a Sony shooter for three years now (A6000 - A6400- A7 III), the information was basic and the discussion is mostly around which mode to use.

I was hoping to gain some insight into the difference between the A6400 and the A6700 when it comes to the speed of focus acquisition and the distance at which faces/eyes are recognised.

Can the a6700 recognise faces at a greater distance than the a6400? Can the a6700 recognise faces better in busy/difficult scenes compared to the a6400 (for example, through window panels and car windshields)?

Is there a remarkable difference between the two apsc bodies? I don't need the advanced subject detection and tracking. Just the improvements in face detection in Zone area plus AF-C is of interest to me.

Examples of quick, sudden reaction shots

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/67569553

Lovely photos. But again I have been able to get the exact results with my A7 III which has inferior AF. The problem arises when you have to shoot through window panels and windshields. The A7 III does not always recognize faces behind glass windows and stuff.

Will buying something like the a6700 or the A7C II make life easier?

Thanks.

Kunal.