Which Sony?

Photo courtesy CameraSize.com

If it were you, or if you were advising someone else, which would you rather have: the Sony A6600 with a Sigma 30mm ƒ1.4 DC DN Contemporary (45mm angle-of-view equivalent), or a Sony A7C with a Sigma 45mm ƒ/2.8 DG DN Contemporary? 

Here are the main differences:

• The A6600 is APS-C while the A7C is full-frame.
• The A7C has a flip-out viewing screen and the A6600 has a flip-up screen.
• The 30mm is two stops faster than the 45mm.
• The 45mm has an aperture ring and the 30mm doesn't. This is significant because the A6600 has only one top dial, so you can either assign exposure compensation or aperture to it, but not both at the same time.
• The A6600 has a deeper handgrip.
• With these lenses, the A7C is actually the lighter of the two, at 724g vs. 768g.
• The A6600 has only two directly-accessible memory settings while the A7C has three.
• $1,662 vs. $2,347.

?

Mike

Book o' the Week:

Ernst Haas: New York in Color 1952–1962. "When Haas moved from Vienna to New York City in 1951, he left behind a war-torn continent and a career producing black-and-white images. For Haas, the new medium of color photography was the only way to capture a city pulsing with energy and humanity. These images demonstrate Haas's tremendous virtuosity and confidence with Kodachrome film and the technical challenges of color printing."

This book link is a portal to Amazon.

Today at B&H Photo

Original contents copyright 2020 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Huw Morgan: "I've owned both cameras and liked them both. I moved from the A6600 to the A7C because I was shooting events and needed a backup camera that could share lenses with my main shooter. Both cameras are little marvels, perfect for travel and street photography. I'd give the picture quality edge to the A7C because of its high ISO performance. I use the 28–60mm kit lens when I'm just carrying the camera around. It's compact and has a very useful zoom range. I've tried using primes, but always feel like the focal length is a compromise. I really like having the ability to select the right focal length for the shot without fumbling around changing lenses."

Stephen S.: "It never ceases to me amaze me that Sony went from being the first company to put three command dials on an interchangeable-lens camera, in the NEX-7, but then went on to make so many 'enthusiast' cameras with only one dial—or only one on the top deck—essentially going from the best company to the worst when it came to putting command dials on their cameras. Even the A7 cameras with two command dials often put one of them in a position with such terrible ergonomics that they become downright painful to use."

Mike replies: This seems to be one of the best aspects of the Nikon Z's. They're homely to look at, but they appear to have been designed with ergonomics, usability, and comfortable operation give priority.

GHS: "I own both cameras and think you would find them equally easy to use. Two additional differences—the A6600 has a dedicated button for exposure lock, the A7C does not, and the A7C has fewer buttons you can customize. I'm using Sigma's 90mm I-series lens on the A7C and like it a lot, so I tend to think their 45mm FF lens would be the better choice. That said, if you ever want to venture beyond prime lenses, then I value the smaller and lighter-weight zooms available for the APS-C camera. By the way, I can't tell you last time I bought a brand new camera or lens; buying used can save you a lot of money."

Bernard Schneider: "I have both lenses but neither camera; the 30mm ƒ/1.4 on a Pen-F and the 45mm ƒ/2.8 for my Leica SL-2S. While I enjoy using both, the 45mm is the one to go for. Lovely build, aperture ring and good close focus with really nice bokeh. And it makes the Leica feel well-balanced, which is a miracle in itself. Just not a fan of Sony cameras based on the ones I've owned in the past."

Arg: "I would rephrase the question.

"Real people have a budget, and want to know what they get for their budget. In this case the advisee can obviously afford $2,400, so the point of advice is comparing:

• A7C with 45/2.8, or
• A6600 with 30/1.4 and $700 worth of gear.

"First things first: the A6600 combo wins in low light! One featured comment said the opposite (I think 'high ISO' was the wording), but it can't overcome a two stops slower lens, so the A6600 combo above will have less noise in those twilight, indoor and other dim situations. Important! Also better background separation when needed. But what about the $700 worth of gear? So many options, but TL:DR is that it will make the camera vastly more capable for the needs of its owner.

• a hotshot flash with swivelling head for $100: the difference this makes to a lot of photography is just huge, and how many people like to make their photos of their loved ones look nice? Only a few?
• an extra Sigma prime of choice?
• a macro lens?

"The big mistake IMO would be to treat this as a body-preference question."

Comments

[Edward Taylor]

A7C - Not even close IMO. But neither has enough megapixels for my liking. I used to say megapixels don't matter that much, but for a lot of what I do, they really do matter.

[Peter Komar]

Definitely the A7c just based on the 2 camera and lens comparison, the size difference is significant, the A7c is the compact system of the two. Does anyone ever regret going for the larger sensor camera ? Plus 2.8 vs. 1.4 means nothing to me, for me it’s always f8 and be there.

[Kenneth Tanaka]

The A6600.

- I prefer the flip-up/down screen rather than the video-oriented flip-out screen.

- Ability to use a mature group of excellent Sony APS-C E-mount lenses. Much smaller and lighter, and in-design for that small body. An A6xxx body is an attachment to many a full-frame lens.

- The A7 series bodies are much better suited to a full-frame camera and lenses.

[Phil K]

How about the A7C with the Samyang 45mm f1.8?

You shave 50 grams and a few hundred dollars off your totals, get a much brighter aperture over the Sigma, and keep the same angle of view.

It's an option I'm strongly considering myself.

(Apologies for giving you more options to consider. I know from firsthand experience that too much choice can quickly become paralysing.)

[clemens]

A7C to experience Kleinbild, which I never shot digital.

[Giovanni Maggiora]

No aperture ring on the lens and no way to command both aperture and exp.comp. from a direct dial? That's a killer for me... I really need to be able to control both!

As to wider aperture, as much as I love the ability to go "deep bokeh", the reality is that a 45mm lens has an approximately one-stop advantage over a 30mm lens as far as bokeh is concerned, so the 45mm f/2.8 is from the bokeh perspective an APSC 30mm f/2. Not enough of an advantage to the A6600 to justify the missing aperture ring...

But of course a 50% price difference is not immaterial either...

[Peter]

neither

[Ken Bennett]

This one is a no brainer, I like aperture rings.

[Doug Reilly]

Even compact full-frame bodies can get heavy and bulky once you start adding lenses to your kit. I lugged a Nikon D700 around Istanbul once and I didn’t regret the images but my wrist hurt for weeks. The A6600 can still pack more reach into a smaller space, if that’s a priority. For about $400 you could get the three excellent APS-C primes from TTartisan. (If manual focus is your jam).

[Kenneth Tanaka]

Sorry, I was bleary and disregarded the lens coupling for the choices! But I’ll stick with my choice anyway. I have that Sigma 45 in L-mount for an SL2. It’s nice and compact, a good tweener. And I have used that Sigma 30mm on my A6500 E mount. It’s optically excellent and I say it’s a better match for that camera’s design.

[Jeff]

“… if you were advising SOMEONE ELSE, which would YOU rather have?” Funny.

I would advise them to demo or rent the two and choose the combination that best suited their handling, workflow and output requirements.

[Ricardo Silva Cordeiro]

More than thinking about those two specific models I would rather think about the system as a whole, and thst would lead me to the A7c.

It's practically as compact as a APS-C camera, choosing the right small prime lenses can make the argument of the APS-C small/light advantage obsolete. It's much more future proof, Sony and 3rd-party manufacturers seem to be investing a lot more on FF. Also, as a system, I would rather invest on lenses that can be used on different sized ceras, like I do with the main system I have now (Fujifilm), I have the option to use small primes on a small body and bigger zooms with a bigger gripper camera.

If I weren't so much into the Fujifilm system (that I also like a lot), the Sony A7c would be on my radar, just had to be sure the small EVF wouldn't bother me, would try it on a store first.

[darlene]

I prefer lenses with aperture rings and my hands are built for smaller size grips. Megapixels do not really matter that much to me for these type of cameras (I use medium format and tripods for larger pixel needs), so the aperture ring wins my needs here, I’ll take the A7c, thank you!

[William A Lewis]

Nikkon Z

[Albert Smith]

When I was lugging around my two pound Nikon D700, I might have had another thought. Now after several years of petite APS-C camera usage, I'd go with the crop sensor Sony.

Any percieved or real advantage of full frame can be countered by actually having the camera with you, so small and light can't be ignored.

Plus... no aperture ring, no deal. I'm spoiled from the Fujifilm advantage of looking down and seeing all the must-know info at a glance.

[Steve Biro]

Another vote for the A7C... and it's not even close. Love that aperture ring - on both the Sigma 45mm f/2.8 and the Sony 40mm f/2.5. Plus, there seems to be growing discussion about the future of Sony's APS-C range of cameras and lenses.

[jseliger]

Neither: I'd say go for the Fuji XT4 or even XT40.

[SteveW]

A6600 for sure. I'm in the APS-C camp. That Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens is perfect. And the price is definitely right.

[Will Rabinovich]

The A7C. Sony has an incredibly strong and diverse lens ecosystem because they license 3rd party designs. No reverse engineering needed!

But, all the energy in the ecosystem (both OEM and 3rd party) is in full frame. While you can use a full frame lens on the A6600, the focal lengths are chosen with full frame in mind. So from a system point of view, beyond the initial camera and single lens purchase, the A7C is the way to go

Also, I've come to really appreciate aperture rings. Sigma is putting them on all its newer I-series lenses, which the 45 mm f/2.8 has been sort of retroactively included in.

[Stephen Scharf]

I'd rather shoot with the Fuji X-H1 that...I already have.

[Sroyon]

If it were me: neither, because I already have a digital camera I like. Nikon D5200, purchased new in 2013 and still going strong :-)

If it were me and I didn't have a camera: again, neither. I'd instead get the Nikon D5600, which I believe is the current version of the D5200. It's not the prettiest or coolest camera around, but it does the job, and it's cheap (and I'm cheap—or should I say, thrifty).

But that doesn't really answer the question—so let's make another assumption. What if the A6600 kit in your post was the same price as the D5600, and the A7C kit was 41% more (same proportion as above)? Despite my aforementioned thriftiness, I'd go for the A7C. Why? Size, weight, and ability to mount vintage 35mm lenses without cropping. f/2.8 on a digital camera is fast enough for me.

But these are personal factors. What if, as you say, I were advising someone else? I guess I would ask them about their budget, how they feel about size, weight, low-light capability, etc. and then try to make a recommendation on that basis. A vague answer, but I think that's what you'd do too :-)

[Ilkka]

7c without any doubt. But I would get the Zeiss 2.8/35. No benefit in getting APS size sensor in this comparison.

[Rob L.]

I'd lean towards the A7c, as the larger sensor makes the slower aperture a tad less annoying, and I can throw my M glass on it as well. I find my Z6 with the Nikkor 40 to be a very compact camera, which makes having both the 50 1.8S and 40 2 worth it.

And, well, I like aperture rings.

[Chad Wadsworth]

a7c all the way. That extra rear thumb dial makes all the difference in exposure control. Plus the usual arguments for the FF sensor - low light capability and dynamic range will contribute to an overall nicer technical image.

Downsides to the a7c are the smaller grip and the flippy screen but those negatives don't outweigh the a7C positives.

[Eric Rose]

I would take the most expensive one, sell it and buy a Panasonic FF camera.

[marcin wuu]

When in doubt, go for the bigger sensor, duh!

[John Krill]

I use Fujifilm X Series equipment but if Sigma made a Fujifilm X Series mount for the 30mm lens I would love it. For me the 45mm for full frame cameras is my choice for a normal lens and that APS-C 30mm fits that perfectly.

[Jeff in Colorado]

"No" to both combos, but A7C + SEL40F25G is a whole 'nother matter! Besides being a nicely compact lens, it's aperture ring eliminates the need for another control dial on the camera body.