Sony a6600 review: Amazing autofocus, acceptable ergonomics

Guys, one thing that would be helpful is to spell out the competition when comparing. I find it a bit ambiguous as I don’t fully know what we are comparing the a6600 to. If I’m trying to find the best in class autofocus camera then mentioning the name of the camera would make it easier. Appreciate all the effort and reviews you guys have been doing. You are one of my primary sources of research.

Thanks!

Guys, one thing that would be helpful is to spell out the competition when comparing. I find it a bit ambiguous as I don’t fully know what we are comparing the a6600 to. If I’m trying to find the best in class autofocus camera then mentioning the name of the camera would make it easier. Appreciate all the effort and reviews you guys have been doing. You are one of my primary sources of research.

Thanks!

I love this camera because it has big battery, better grip, ibis, and very reasonable price.

Dunno how DPReview can say "The a6600 will produce identical images to the existing A6400 and A6100 cameras" cos when looking at the studio scene, even from iso 100 there is a difference in detail and noise rendering, the A6600 has some of the A9 algorithms and colour science which other A6xxxx don't have, so a bit perplexed by that comment when its easy to see there is a difference...

Don't get fooled about this being a good current camera for action.
What a lot of testing sites have found are it is hampered by it s 11 FPS limit.
So older cameras like the EM1.2 which shoots at 18 FPS, and the XT3 and G9 which shoot at 20 FPS actually get more sharp keepers per second than the A6600. A lot more.
And looking though the specs the A6600 is actually a very old camera with an out dated LCD, EVF USB 2.0, etc. The very old sensor exhibits more rolling shutter than any current sensor too.
If you want to shoot action and like Sony find a used A9, or just get a better APSC camera.

SONY a6600 has IBIS which makes pictures more sharp and perfectly in focus. That slight difference makes this camera above all apc cameras recently launched. Video looks superbly clear and pin sharp. Due to IBIS low ISO is possible even I low light and that is richer color and no noise.

I have been using one and it's performance is really amazing.

Yeah one of the best product from Sony again!

So, photonto photos published their noise and dr numbers for the a6600, wowza, makes the x-t3 look like it’s 3 years out of date already, .7ev dr improvement at iso100, something the x-t3 still doesn’t have, or ibis lol. As for the little Canon m6ii, a6600 is from another universe!

disappointing price tag lead me to get the A6400 instead, it'll be my B camera.

at 1100, I might consider it, but not at the initial price. looks like the market demanded that sony drop the price, and the market won.

ive got all the apsc love i need from fuji ... that said if sony offered this body with a ff sensor at a decent price ?.... id be at B&H tommorrow at 9am sharp

This camera does not have acceptable ergonomics for left eye dominant people like me. Left side viewfinders just don't work well for left eye dominant folks. I looked and tried out this camera. My nose goes right in the middle of the back screen.

I have to ask, because I don't know where else to do so: WHERE is the S1H review? Is there some sort of holdup? And if so, it might be a good idea to throw out a tiny little disclaimer article about it.
Not to sound cranky, but it's been available for some time now.

DPReview had never liked Sony's aps-c design so now they're going to start punishing Sony in ratings. They want it bigger and we don't. Sony sold gazillions if these cameras so get over it

The Upside of this misery is, that an A7rII (Landscaper) or the A7III (more sports orientated shooter) look very attractive now. There are even a few reasonable priced and sized ff lenses for the E-Mount out there. I've got the A7rII and am still happy with ist, cause the image quality, the resolution and the post production flesh (DR, ISO-Invariance) are still fine for me, as the sort of touristic or landscape photographer, who can carry one spare battery.

The other upside is, that my A6000 (a bargain, even a few years ago) 'pocket cam' is still attractive for me. I don't feel the most urgent need to update. Sad, that the A6000 lacks an IBIS and that its post production flesh is only on a EOS 80D level, not as good as e.g. a very versatile D7200 or even the A6300. If the A6500 gets cheaper I'll change. Same with the A7rIII. When it hits the 1800 € bugs, I'll update my big camera for its bigger battery, the even better DR/ISO-invariance and the Joystick.

Trying to understand the How it Compares chart and the green vs red (orange colour?)... for instance the M6ii is 65% cheaper, +50% pixel count and 20% lighter but the chart appears to be neutral for these areas and negative for headphone socket and battery. Are the colours used to to quickly show the pros and cons? Given the M6ii's 30fps burst (@ not quite full res but includes 0.5s pre-shutter), it could have rated a "*" qualification for this aspect as well (with green). Another row could show the DPR score/award as well.

My a6500 has served well but suffers a quality problem that it appears this model continues, the markings on the mode dial are simple, vulnerable, CHEAP paint on aluminum with no embossing nor coating to protect them.
After 16 months' moderate use, very little of it with multiple bodies, the A-S-P-M-etc. marks are almost gone. I have been unable to reach anyone at Sony who seems to care. Apparently, the set cost for the repair, sending it in to them, is an absurd $389.
This is ridiculous. I've been a photojournalist since 1960(!) and never has any of the many cameras I've used had such a silly, slipshod fault.
In contrast, problems with my Olympus OM-D EM-series cameras are readily and graciously addressed by phone and email; I've done it this week.
I was converting to Sonys for everything. The RX10 III and A7R III have been super, but the a6000 and a6500 have both had this silly beancounter created problem. No more.

I had an a6000 a few years back with a couple of lenses and just didn't feel the love. The whole package just felt, well a bit flimsy/plasticky. I've now settled on Olympus EM1Mkii with some pro lenses and the experience could not be more different. I really enjoy picking up the body/lenses and admire them which inspires me to go out shooting. Even looking back at some of the Sony images with the 35 F1.8 they don't compare to the Oly 12-40 F2.8. Nothing against Sony but not for me

Ridiculously overpriced compared to my a6400.

Today I returned to The Netherlands from a 3 week shooting session in Patagonia with this a6600. I got the camera just 2 weeks before my departure (my 6500 was stolen a few weeks earlier). So I am a somewhat "experienced" user at the moment.

Mostly shooting BIF and wildlife with the 100-400 GM plus its 1.4 tc
Next to that I shot the fabulous landscapes with the 16mm 2.8 lens.
Very impressed with the number of keepers and quality of the shots.
Sometime next week I will post some of those in the sony apsc forum.

Handling was fine after I spend the first week adjusting buttons etc to my favourite private settings. The autofocus is phenomenal. Battery life incredible.

If my 6500 had not been stolen, I doubt that I would have upgraded though.
The somewhat forced upgraded however gives me markedly improved results.

Peter

And another thing.....

Can this modern wonder take a picture while filming a movie????

No it can not.

So you need two of them if you want both photos and movies at the same time.

A minor quible for some but for me it's a deal breaker when there are other cameras on the market that can take a photo while filming a movie.

Again 10000000 pages of coverage and no mention by dpreview that no canon and no sony can take a picture while taking a video while others such as panasonic handle the task nicely.

As an A6000 user, who throws up a little every time I pick up the camera I have not even looked at any of the later models.

It's a tired old design that sony needs to abandon.

Question for dpreview: Why don't you even mention, in 100000 web pages of sony coverage that for photos these NEX body styles with a movie aspect ratio screen (short and wide) are the equivalent of a 2.6" screen due to the "letter boxing" of full size photos?????

2.6" may have been awesome in the 15 years ago but these days it's totally unacceptable for photos.

Wrong title.

Amazing autofocus, UNacceptable ergonomics.

That is pretty much a $1400 investment into a High End digital camera for a 83% rating which sounds like a B-. I would expect better rating numbers if I owned a $1000 smartphone with a. decent camera to drop another $1400 to get a 83% rating out of digital camera. I have always liked this series from Sony and wanted one but hard to justify price these days for what smartphone cameras can do these days as well

Good job DP review!

Canon and Sony like a chicken does not stop producing eggs. Many cameras have the same taste

So for the a6700, Sony needs to use the XT-3 sensor, add a front dial, dual UHS-ii, a faster CPU... and call it their new flagship APS-C camera. That's it I guess?

If the ergonomics of this camera are so bad, why would Sony design it that way and keep that design for a number of years on several models?

If the ergonomics are so bad, why do so many people buy the camera and enjoy using it?

If the ergonomics are "improved," will the people who have not bought one due to its current ergonmics buy one? Is this number significant enough to justify the cost of a re-design?

single card slot? am out!

Spot on for dealing with Sony’s tech leadership vs their ergonomics and overall usability. They can and should address this.

And this is why I won't leave my DSLR. It has amazing autofocus AND amazing ergonomics. All these companies keep pumping out MILCs like they were going out of style, and they still haven't figured out how to make the ergos better. Sorry, camera makers, but I will not reward your stupidity.

The fun part is that those who buy the camera will enjoy it, while those who don't find it good enough, not worth the money, too old tech, or not their "own" brand so that they have to say something negative anyway, hopefully will enjoy something else for their photography. :-)

I would like to hear from those who actually own the the a6500 and the a6600. Improved battery life is good, but I usually carry extra batteries. I am pure amateur, so image quality is my prime concern. I own the Nex 6 and 7, and the a6000 and a6500.

Or just buy the Sony a7 mk3!

Ergonomics mean nothing. Proof? Cell phone ergonomics could not be worse if Satan himself made every one by hand, and yet people buy them by the billions. Sony obviously knows this.

A6600 got 83% Silver, and A6000 got 80% Gold. How does it compare ? I do not have a clue.