« Open Mike: Ice Dams! (OT) | Main | Must See TV »

Wednesday, 09 February 2022


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

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.

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.

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.

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.)

A7C to experience Kleinbild, which I never shot digital.

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...


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

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).

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.

“… 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.

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.

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!

Nikkon Z

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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 :-)

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

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.

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.

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

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

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.

"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.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007