A6700 vs A7CR - I have tested both

[Silat Shooter]

Interesting thread. I have the A7RV and love the files that come out of it for stills. I have a bunch of faster glass for it, mostly GM. There were days I wanted something smaller and discreet for street, travel and more casual shooting. Picked up an A7C II, felt I already had the 61mp sensor in my other camera. But those bigger GM lenses didn't balance well on the A7CII for me. Put some aps-c lenses on the A7cII and liked it considerably more but I was only getting 15mp. That seem silly to me. Tried some of the smaller FF lenses, nice. But I had the APS-c lenses too, and they're smaller still. So sold the A7CII, and picked up an A6700, and really like how responsive a camera it is. Though my GAS has me wondering if I should have picked up an A7Cr instead, but the price was more than double. And I anticipate that I would mostly use it with APS-C lenses for the smaller form factor, but have the option to go FF when image opportunity was worthy. But I wrestle with how much of use case would that be? 20%, 50%?? Not sure. On a photo specific trip I would like carry both bodies, so muting that point all together. The A6700 files are very nice for sure, the A7rV are a noticeable level up. So makes me wonder if I should sell all my APS-C lenses and the A6700 and get the A7Cr and a few smaller FF lenses for it? But I know the A6700 images are plenty good enough for the way I use the smaller cameras.

If you don't need the 10fps or full mechanical shutter or 4k120p get the A7CR.

Really good setup is a the A7CR and the 1655G. With the extended grip on the A7CR my camera feels balanced with the 50GM1.2, but my favorite setup is the 24GM.

Lastly I mainly use 26MP jpegs and you can get these files in both FF and apsc mode, so this keeps the workflow consistent. I shoot raw + jpeg but rarely use the raw files. I also use the esoteric features of the A7CR, like pixel shift (104MP file in apsc mode), 4k60p video and dynamic active stabilization for video.

A7CR is Sony's most underrated camera.

Appreciate the feedback. Think you convinced me. Thank you!

 

[José B]

Interesting thread. I thought about adding a Sony FF but instead I decided to keep on improving my existing Sony APS-C system. The new lens would complement nicely with my A6700.

 

[jhunna]

Interesting thread. I thought about adding a Sony FF but instead I decided to keep on improving my existing Sony APS-C system. The new lens would complement nicely with my A6700.

Probably the only serious contender to the Sony 1655G. I wan to get a copy to see how it compares to the 1655G, which is a god like lens to me (along with the 50GM1.2).

My guess is the Sony is going to win out for me, because its Sony native an goes to 16mm. The 55/2.8 should be the equal of 40/1.8 when it comes to the portrait look because of the added compression. But I can't wait to see...

 

[José B]

Interesting thread. I thought about adding a Sony FF but instead I decided to keep on improving my existing Sony APS-C system. The new lens would complement nicely with my A6700.

Probably the only serious contender to the Sony 1655G. I wan to get a copy to see how it compares to the 1655G, which is a god like lens to me (along with the 50GM1.2).

My guess is the Sony is going to win out for me, because its Sony native an goes to 16mm. The 55/2.8 should be the equal of 40/1.8 when it comes to the portrait look because of the added compression. But I can't wait to see...

I pre-ordered it. It'll be a great lens to bring for photo shoots with my A6700. The lens I might also take is the Sonnar 55/1.8 for heads and shoulders portrait shots. Having said that, I think the 17-40/1.8 will suffice.

 

[Craig Gillette]

I have the A7Riv and A6700. I also have the A6400 and several aps-c lenses. The A6700 was both an upgrade to my A6400 and an exploration of the A7Rv enhancements without spending for the A7Rv or A7CR.

There are threads and reviews which go into the details of the differences between all these Sony offerings.

It seems, to me, with my budget, with the gear I already had, etc., the A6700 was a good choice for me. At some point, maybe never, choosing between adding an a7Rv or vi?, or the A7CR or A7Crii?, would be a tough choice. "Get both!" is unlikely to be a resonable option.

I think i would suggest if budget sensitive, the A6700 and a couple of smaller aps-c or ff lenses, is clearly less expensive than the A7CR and those same lenses.

Aside from budget, the A6700 has the mechanical shutter and speed advantages.

Both the A6700 and A7CR offer the opportunity to have a nicely smaller kit when compared to the A7R family and the larger ff lenses.

Incidentally, for me, the 18-135 on an A6700 is a nicer carry than a 28-200 on an A7CR. If I anticipated 28-200 and larger most of the time, I'd probably go with the A7Rv, 20-70/4, etc., and smaller, more or most of the time, the A7CR.

 

[A74Me]

I have the A7Riv and A6700. I also have the A6400 and several aps-c lenses. The A6700 was both an upgrade to my A6400 and an exploration of the A7Rv enhancements without spending for the A7Rv or A7CR.

There are threads and reviews which go into the details of the differences between all these Sony offerings.

It seems, to me, with my budget, with the gear I already had, etc., the A6700 was a good choice for me. At some point, maybe never, choosing between adding an a7Rv or vi?, or the A7CR or A7Crii?, would be a tough choice. "Get both!" is unlikely to be a resonable option.

I think i would suggest if budget sensitive, the A6700 and a couple of smaller aps-c or ff lenses, is clearly less expensive than the A7CR and those same lenses.

Aside from budget, the A6700 has the mechanical shutter and speed advantages.

Both the A6700 and A7CR offer the opportunity to have a nicely smaller kit when compared to the A7R family and the larger ff lenses.

Incidentally, for me, the 18-135 on an A6700 is a nicer carry than a 28-200 on an A7CR. If I anticipated 28-200 and larger most of the time, I'd probably go with the A7Rv, 20-70/4, etc., and smaller, more or most of the time, the A7CR.

totally agree. im on holidays and have the a6700 + 18 135. nothing beats that combo. borrowed a mates a7r5 last week for a play, could have used it for a week but gave it back the next day.

 

[A74Me]

Interesting thread. I thought about adding a Sony FF but instead I decided to keep on improving my existing Sony APS-C system. The new lens would complement nicely with my A6700.

Probably the only serious contender to the Sony 1655G. I wan to get a copy to see how it compares to the 1655G, which is a god like lens to me (along with the 50GM1.2).

My guess is the Sony is going to win out for me, because its Sony native an goes to 16mm. The 55/2.8 should be the equal of 40/1.8 when it comes to the portrait look because of the added compression. But I can't wait to see...

I pre-ordered it. It'll be a great lens to bring for photo shoots with my A6700. The lens I might also take is the Sonnar 55/1.8 for heads and shoulders portrait shots. Having said that, I think the 17-40/1.8 will suffice.

perfect lens for event shoots, 2 card slots and say good by to FF

 

[José B]

Interesting thread. I thought about adding a Sony FF but instead I decided to keep on improving my existing Sony APS-C system. The new lens would complement nicely with my A6700.

Probably the only serious contender to the Sony 1655G. I wan to get a copy to see how it compares to the 1655G, which is a god like lens to me (along with the 50GM1.2).

My guess is the Sony is going to win out for me, because its Sony native an goes to 16mm. The 55/2.8 should be the equal of 40/1.8 when it comes to the portrait look because of the added compression. But I can't wait to see...

I pre-ordered it. It'll be a great lens to bring for photo shoots with my A6700. The lens I might also take is the Sonnar 55/1.8 for heads and shoulders portrait shots. Having said that, I think the 17-40/1.8 will suffice.

perfect lens for event shoots, 2 card slots and say good by to FF

yeah a lot of people here have been wanting a 'pro-like' APS-C flagship camera with two card slots and maybe one with the option to add an OEM vertical grip. Hopefully it will come someday.

 

[Craig Gillette]

When I went from my NEX6 to A6400, I also added the 18-135. Another good combo.

Having been an aps-c user from dslr days, it's often interesting to see the commentary when someone realizes, "pro bodies" and the ff f2.8 trinity aren't the only right approach.

Not that FF isn't often the best tools for particular purposes, just that some fans seem to oversell things.

 

[vett93]

...

Aside from budget, the A6700 has the mechanical shutter and speed advantages.

What mechanical shutter advantages does A6700 have? Thanks.

 

[Craig Gillette]

Less rolling shutter effects. Perhaps somewhat better with flicker or banding?

 

[jhunna]

...

Aside from budget, the A6700 has the mechanical shutter and speed advantages.

What mechanical shutter advantages does A6700 have? Thanks.

A6700 has a full mechanical shutter. It supposedly gives a better bokeh in certain situations. The a7cr has efc shutter and I have never been able to see a real difference.

The a6700 is 11 fps vs 8fps for the A7CR.

 

[Ralf B]

Less rolling shutter effects. Perhaps somewhat better with flicker or banding?

1st shutter mechanical definitely needed to avoid flicker/banding when shooting events with LED /similar light sources. Unless you have a cam with fast read-out or even global shutter. Hence a plus for the a6700 vs. the A7C / CR / CII.
Cheers,
Ralf