As of today, Sony has a strong line of APS-C interchangeable lens mirrorless cameras, from budget-friendly options to high-end cameras with rich feature sets. From the original and highly successful Sony A6000 to the latest A6600 and everything in-between, Sony has done a great job with this line-up, providing options for both beginner and enthusiast photographers. With the growth of the Ax00 line, it is now getting more and more difficult to identify differences between all these cameras. For this reason, we decided to put together a comparison of all Sony A6x00-series cameras starting from the A6000 all the way to A6600.
It is interesting to see how the Sony A6x00 series evolved overtime. Sony initially released the A6000, which instantly became a popular camera, because it had the right set of camera features at the right price. The Sony A6300 and A6500 were strange releases, considering that Sony skipped models in-between. Then came the oddball A6400, which in some ways was better than the higher model A6500. Now Sony has the A6600 to crown them all, with the stripped down version of the A6400 in the form of the A6100. Confused? You bet!
Due to the number of cameras in this comparison, it was impossible to put all the data into a single table, so we split it into two tables. The first one contains the Sony A6000, A6100, A6300 and A6400, while the second table contains the Sony A6500 and the A6600.
|Specification||Sony A6000||Sony A6100||Sony A6300||Sony A6400|
|Sensor Resolution||24.3 MP||24.2 MP||24.2 MP||24.2 MP|
|Sensor Size||23.5 x 15.6mm||23.5 x 15.6mm||23.5 x 15.6mm||23.5 x 15.6mm|
|Native ISO Range||100-25600||100-32000||100-25600||100-32000|
|Image Processor||BIONZ X||BIONZ X||BIONZ X||BIONZ X|
|Phase Detect AF Points||179||425||425||425|
|Contrast Detect AF Points||25||425||169||425|
|Autofocus Sensitivity||0 to +20 EV||-2 to +20 EV||-1 to +20 EV||-2 to +20 EV|
|Real-Time Eye AF||No||Yes||No||Yes|
|In-Body Image Stabilization||No||No||No||No|
|EVF Resolution||1,440,000 Dots||1,440,000 Dots||2,359,296 Dots||2,359,296 Dots|
|Continuous Shooting Speed||11 FPS||11 FPS||11 FPS||11 FPS|
|Buffer Size||49 JPEG / 21 RAW||77 JPEG / 33 RAW||44 JPEG / 21 RAW||116 JPEG / 46 RAW|
|Memory Card Slot||SD UHS-I||SD UHS-I||SD UHS-I||SD UHS-I|
|LCD Screen||3.0″ Tilting, +90°/-45°||3.0″ Tilting, +180°/-90°||3.0″ Tilting, +90°/-45°||3.0″ Tilting, +180°/-90°|
|LCD Resolution||921,600 Dots||921,600 Dots||921,600 Dots||921,600 Dots|
|Video Recording||Full HD (up to 60 fps)||UHD 4K (up to 30 fps), Full HD (up to 120 fps)||UHD 4K (up to 30 fps), Full HD (up to 120 fps)||UHD 4K (up to 30 fps), Full HD (up to 120 fps)|
|4K HDR Video Recording||No||No||No||No|
|Slow Motion Video||No||Yes, 4x and 5x||Yes, 4x and 5x||Yes, 4x and 5x|
|Built-in Intervalometer||No, via App||Yes||No, via App||Yes|
|Built-in WiFi / Bluetooth||Yes / No||Yes / Yes||Yes / No||Yes / No|
|USB||2.0, Charging||2.0, Charging||2.0, Charging||2.0, Charging|
|Battery Life (EVF/LCD, CIPA)||310/360 shots||380/420 shots||350/400 shots||360/410 shots|
|Weight (Battery + Card)||343g||396g||404g||403g|
|Price (as of 08/29/2019)||$449||$749||Discontinued||$899|
And here is the comparison of the Sony A6500 and the A6600:
|Specification||Sony A6500||Sony A6600|
|Sensor Resolution||24.2 MP||24.2 MP|
|Sensor Size||23.5 x 15.6mm||23.5 x 15.6mm|
|Native ISO Range||100-25600||100-32000|
|Image Processor||BIONZ X||BIONZ X|
|Phase Detect AF Points||425||425|
|Contrast Detect AF Points||169||425|
|Autofocus Sensitivity||-1 to +20 EV||-2 to +20 EV|
|Real-Time Eye AF||No||Yes|
|In-Body Image Stabilization||Yes, 5-Axis||Yes, 5-Axis|
|EVF Resolution||2,359,296 Dots||2,359,296 Dots|
|Continuous Shooting Speed||11 FPS||11 FPS|
|Buffer Size||233 JPEG / 107 RAW||116 JPEG / 46 RAW|
|Memory Card Slot||SD UHS-I||SD UHS-I|
|LCD Screen||3.0″ Tilting, +90°/-45°||3.0″ Tilting, +180°/-90°|
|LCD Resolution||921,600 Dots||921,600 Dots|
|Video Recording||UHD 4K (up to 30 fps), Full HD (up to 120 fps)||UHD 4K (up to 30 fps), Full HD (up to 120 fps)|
|4K HDR Video Recording||No||Yes|
|Slow Motion Video||Yes, 4x and 5x||Yes, 4x and 5x|
|Built-in Intervalometer||No, via App||Yes|
|Built-in WiFi / Bluetooth||Yes / No||Yes / Yes|
|USB||2.0, Charging||2.0, Charging|
|Battery Life (EVF/LCD, CIPA)||310/350 shots||720/810 shots|
|Weight (Battery + Card)||453g||503g|
|Price (as of 08/29/2019)||$1,199||$1,399|
The Sony A6600 is surely the most well-rounded of the bunch, especially when it comes to video features. However, Sony decided to change its battery, which is great for those who want better battery life, but not all that great for those who already have a Sony A6x00 series camera and want to reuse their batteries and chargers. In addition, the A6600 is the first of the series that does not have a built-in flash, which is a problem for those who like using it (great for fill flash).
Interestingly, Sony has kept the resolution of every Sony A6x00 camera the same at 24 MP, while its competitors like Fuji and Canon are pushing for more advanced sensors that sport higher resolution and better dynamic range. At $1,400, the Sony A6600 is an expensive camera, making it a tough buy for those who want to move up from an older generation Sony APS-C camera…
What do you think? Let us know in the comments section below!
The a6400 has the Bluetooth.
Table should be corrected.
As a casual photographer, I had an a6000 for family, vacation and landscape shooting when travel, invested a few lens as sony 50/1.8, sigma 30/1.4 and sony 18-135. Only use a6000 for still pictures. I’m shooting in raw and use Capture one Express for post-processing and Pollar Photo Editor to a few fine tune.
I also owned a Fuji x-m1with kit 16-50 len and a manual-focus 35/1.7 len. I’m still love Fuji OOC Jpeg’s color, one of my favourite photo of my child is shooting from that manual len, but it’s really unreliable with manual focus, about 4/5 image is blur.
I’m considering a upgrade, and look for any advice. I don’t has a steady hand so I’m wonder will IBIS help me a lot. EyeAF is good but most shooting by a6000 is acceptable to me.
It’s seems sony had not make enough advance in a600x series.
Maybe a6400 is a choice, or trade all those body and lens for a Fuji XT-30.
I’ll sticking to APS-C for the total weight of camera body and lens.
Some of wellknown still cameras collapsed, disappeared, such as Pentax, Kodak, Olympus and Panasonic regarding mirrorless APS-C sensors.
The war makes beetween Canon, Nikon and Sony.
At the biggining Sony were a outsider. People dont thinked at that time in Sony´s capacity and quality. Then, it comes growing up, until to enter in bligerant Canon´s and Nikon´s War.
During a while Sony grows up very quikly and highly because Nikon were distracting with 1 inch sensors size. Panasonic and Olympus they lost in the 1 inch sensor desert, and they dies with thirst. Canon wake up with theirs EOS- M series and after R series. Nikon figure out that they are following into the desert, like Pana and Oly but with a smaller sensor. Then they appeared strongly with mirrorles aps-c sensor Z-series, which I supposed for the moment are the best regarding its performance in low light situations, and so on. But Sony intromises into beetween Canon and Nikon. And it´s for good. No longer the war will made only beetween them, but also with a triunviratum…
Is there any chance you could do a similar article and Table covering the Sony Full frame A7, A7S, A7R and A9 series camera
Interesting indeed. Sorry in advance for the long post, it hit a nerve…
Like so many others, I entered the Sony APS C family to seek something smaller but able to get better colours and dynamic range than point and shoots. I bought the a6000 and the price to quality ratio was outstanding. I think it still is in 2020.
Now I’ve never shot a video on it and don’t plan to. I shoot photos with my camera.
So what do these new bodies offer to the stills photographer? Marginally better low light performance? A little. Better subject tracking? Many don’t need better than the a6000. Better colours science? Maybe.
The things that might matter, at least to me, are better weather sealing and IBIS and a better quality EVF would be nice.
You’ll get these things as you move up the Sony product line. These things come at a very steep price in my opinion. And this is why I am still using my usually trusty a6000. The only thing that let me down with the a6000 is its lack of weather sealing.
Let’s go one step further. Everyone moans about Sony’s menus. I’m OK with them given that you can move your favorites to the fn menu. What none of these cameras have is a super easy, direct way to set aperture or shutter speed or ISO – the golden trio. Isn’t there room for a nested control like they had in the 90s? Fuji seems to get this and it leads to a more engaging experience.
I like Sony. I like the APSC format. I have an investment in E lenses. Can I suggest that Sony think about splitting their a6x000 line up in the future with those who shoot exclusively photos and those who shoot some video? (There must be more than just me.) I think the needs are different for the two groups. I feel that my group has been left behind.
In a nutshell, in my case, Sony doesn’t present a very compelling case for photographers past the a6000 in APSC.
I have “forensic” like imagery to conduct on geological core in boxes on standard tables. Gimbals do not work straight down…I tried. I got a Quadrapod. The legs are just high enough to frame the whole box with an APS lens and the Zeiss 12 mm Touit lens. I found the Touit Zeiss lenses are so good at imaging rock at a $1000 price that the combo with a A6000 series body is a steal…1/3 the price of a comparable full frame setup with Zeiss lenses. Oddly I cannot get the other sony pancake, macro or sigma e-mount lenses anywhere as well for color, resolution or quality however my backup the little Leica C makes comparable images. I can’t explain why german glass renders colors so well but I push magnification on very fine grained mineral material and the textures just jump out even without image processing. I can do decent mineralogical identifications of “silt size” particles. Nothing compares so far. A full frame with a Zeiss lens…forget it. Light density onto the APSC size sensor seems best…and forget the macro rings. You lose color…because the size of the image on the sensor is “too big”…and is consequently diluted. Get things that are designed together.
I use my a6000 for casual street shooting and family vacation, I have a Zeiss 16-70 and a 35mm/1.8 (50mm equiv). I am very happy with it. It appears the improvements on the new models are more for sports and jpeg rendering. As I am fine dealing with RAW(I shoot Raw+Jpeg), I can get over the better rendering with my Liggtroom subscription. So I guess my combo will still be my smartphone du jour and the a6000. I might add a 10-18 wide angle as I am keen on more travel photography.
Thx a lot for the fine article. I wonder about UI differences: I’ve got a A6300 and would like to get an extra body which will behave as similar as possible (esp. with defining the AF point, controlling exp. speed/time and aperture while in Manual mode and so on). Obvious choice: another A6300 … However: Does A6400 come close / what’s different?
(I’ve got a NEX-7 as well and used it side by side with the A6300 – and that experience was quite annoying, as those two have quite different UIs.). Thx in advance for your efforts & best wishes, Hubert
I currently shoot underwater photos with an a6500 and love it. The issue for us underwater photographers with the new a6600 is that without a built-in flash, there is no way (that I can think of) to trigger an external strobe other than electronically using a sync cable. IOW, you couldn’t use a fiber optic control, which is how many of us trigger our strobes. I always like having the latest technology, and I like the AF upgrades, but losing the fiber optic ability makes this a no-go upgrade for me.
I very much appreciate the effort of anyone who does the work and creates opinions based on their experience and usage. It is disappointed when those who have a different view seem to try to get into an argument rather than just add their opinion. I respect points of all and use these sites like Consumer Reports and listen to what experiences people have – so I focus on that as it helps me make my buying decisions.
I have the A6400 – I love it, but do not like to bounce back and forth between photo and video, so thinking about getting another Sony A to use for photos as I love the A6400 for video (I have a gimbal so no IBIS doesn’t bother me). I was thinking about the A6100 to get the real-time tracking and eye focus – but the EVF is a little weak. Or, I could get a good deal on a used A6500 to get the IBIS for photos, but then don’t have the AF eye tracking. Trying to read what everyone likes and doesn’t like about each of these models and the tables listed above were helpful. I love the A series (previous had an A7iii – loved it but I wanted to go lighter weight as I am running and gunning and hiking to get to spots for landscapes – don’t miss it at all with the A6400!