I currently have a Sony A6400, the 16-55G and the 70-350G. After the price for a the A6700 has fallen quite a bit, I have thought about an upgrade. Has anyone switched from 6400 to 6700 and can help me with my questions? I am generally very happy and thus uncertain if an upgrade would make sense at all. I hardly use video, only photography, mainly kids and family, BIF, landscapes and planes. What annoys me about the 6400 is the crappy smartphone connection, the menu system, the lack of a proper touchscreen and the old micro-USB-port.
1. Some reviewers say that the A6700's low light performance is worse. Is this true? Do you see a difference in real world performance?
2. IQ in general: color science, sharpness, dynamic range: is there a noticeable difference?
Forget about that. Unless you are pixel peeping, IQ is going to be the very same. 2 MPx is just no difference and sensors are just too good in both cases.
I haven't made any direct comparison between my old NX1 and my new a6700 (because of the broken lens and because I don't care) but I don't miss the 2 MPx I've lost in the transition and I feel IQ is more or less the same no matter what noise and dynamic range technical graphs say (as example photonstophotos.net where a6700 is "better" than NX1).
DON'T TAKE YOUR DECISION (either yes or no) BECAUSE OF THIS.
3. How much of a difference does IBIS make?
A LOT in the right circumstances. (Static target and not excess of light, ie interiors).
Haven't you ever used either it or a stabilized lens?
As example: From my old Canon 7D (stabilized lens) to my former Samsung NX1 (stabilized lens) to my brand new 6700 I am capable of consistently shooting at 1/6th when in 50-55mm. Or even 1/4th with a lucky shot. (2s self-timer obviously and being well rested, relaxed and concentrated and with a extremely tight grip and through viewfinder so the camera also lays on my face). And that's a lot of feasible ISO gain and therefore IQ, much much much more than the difference in sensor intrinsic IQ.
(But also remember to turn it off when shooting on tripod. In that situation, IS blurries your picture rather than sharpening it, because it continues to work when it shouldn't).
And also remember it's not magic (although sometimes it feels like it). You must focus on what you are doing. IS is not going to work with carefree shooting. You need a very tight grip.
4. How much better is the new menu system and the touch screen functionality?
At least for me, menu organization is just another irrelevant thing. You get used to whichever one that camera or brand uses. I'd never ever change my camera because of this.
I don't really use touchscreen, (I'm an old buttons-dials-and-viewfinder guy), but it offers "touch and start tracking with no need to half-press shutter button". Also it offers full access to all shooting capabilities or even a touch shooting button which can be very useful while in tripod or a selfie picture.
I haven't really used it but I feel it is quite comprehensive and useful in the right circumstances along the fully articulated screen
5. Is it much easier to connect the camera to your smartphone? The implementation on my A6400 is so bad that I use a card reader to transfer the pictures. How fast is the transfer over wifi?
I don't use these features. But I've swapped from card reader (with Samsung) to directly use the camera (MTP connection, not MassStorage one) because Sony folder and file naming system is quite weird with movies and stills with different names and locations... NX1 was much clear with just date and a consecutive number in each file.
6. How much better is the AF? Does it only add subject recognition or is it generally faster and more accurate?
I cannot compare with 6400 but with NX1 it is just worlds ahead. Now I just use AF-C and tracking nearly 99% of the time. I mean I use AF-C even with static targets and its great tracking allows you to recompose without needing to manually move the focus point in most of the situations. (Being an old button guy, as I formerly said, I even don't have any direct access to Focus Mode any more but I use FN menu instead...)
And yes target recognition (humans, animals and birds at least not moving extremely fast) works pretty, pretty well. There are some misses but they're pretty few.
In my old NX1, AF-C was neither precise nor reliable. You had to use AF-S in general and when forced to use it with moving subjects, you had to pray to whichever god or devil you believed in.
7. How much better is the battery in real life use?
Again a nearly unimportant issue. People/reviews say that it's way better because of the bigger battery. But I think you must always have at least two more spare and fully charged batteries. In this way you forget about charging the battery in the camera till it depletes, (even at the beginning of your day), and two fully charged batteries should last a full day no matter what you do (in normal conditions, I mean). This is a general rule for any camera.
The important thing here, that I don't know if it happened in 6400, is that 6700, like every single new Sony camera, "does not support" third party batteries. I mean you get an annoying message at about 30s of inserting them which effectively blocks your camera till you OK it.
I'm not going to start a discussion about the risks or not risks of using third party batteries but you must know what happens in order to either live with that "unexpected block message till OKed" or expend more money on Sony batteries.
. I wanted, rather than needed, all the new fancy capabilities. I haven't regretted it though. It is a noticeable step up in capability for me.... but I still love and have kept a6400. I sometimes use them together. I have attended events where I wanted to used fast primes and minimize changing out lenses. They both fit nicely in a bag like the Peak Design 10l sling and I have had fun using them together.
