Camera

I wasn't trying to convince, just giving my honest opinion, but I am glad it helped you decide :D most welcome and good luck in your journey!

The a6700 is a safer option for hybrid shooters. It's true, there are people out there that have the need of the extra 7 megapixels for cropping, but like mentioned before, I personally never felt limited by resolution, and resolution is never a priority for me when choosing a camera.

26MP is plenty for me, in fact, in video I work with 4K (12MP) footage most of the times which I still crop in when needed. on youtube most of my older videos are exported HD and nobody ever mentioned that my videos are too soft. Which only further proves that resolution is not a first priority most of the time. Even tho, yes 4K is nicer if we are to compare, but the idea is resolution is not the most important factor when viewing a movie. In exchange, with the a6700 you get faster sensor readout, the same color science as the FX30 cinema camera, and a lot more frame rate options in video mode.

As to why I choose Sony? In most cases because Sony listens and understands its customer base. They are not perfect, but look at the evolution of sony cameras. You didn't like the little shitty NP-FW50 batteries that older cameras came with? Here are NP-FZ 100 batteries which are the best in its class, you don't like the color science, let's improve on that, don't like the menus? we can make them better.

Sony improves, and it forced the competition to do the same, or get out of the game.

Before Sony, there was a constant battle between Canon and Nikon, and there was no camera to offer you the best of both worlds. Canon kept crippling all their cameras so you would always end up wanting a different camera for a very specific need. Nikon wasn't great for video, mainly for sports wildlife and nature photography. I personally felt extremely limited by both brands and had no idea which way to take it.

Just to be clear, I was a Nikon user and after an infinite battle between moving over to canon or staying on nikon, I finally decided to settle on the Nikon D850 which costed €3,799 at the time, featured great photo specs and introduced 4K into a DSLR. It was a pretty big thing 5 years ago when hybrid cameras weren't all that common, and I thought 'finally, this seems like a camera for my needs'. Good thing it took me some time to save the money because, 7 months later sony comes with the Sony a7III, a camera with great battery, amazing autofocus, amazing video, 4k video in 24-30fps, slow motion up to 120fps in HD, great low light capabilities, and many other features which no other camera brand was offering, all at 2000 euro? I got mine at 2000 euro with the kit lens included. Are you crazy?

This camera changed the whole game.

Sony changed the game.

And it still pushes the envelope, 90% of the time.

Sony is not perfect, and I don't like some of their policies, like not offering updates on the a7S III or higher end cameras, and other things, but at the end I will buy a Sony camera, and it will work in pretty much any condition. I won't feel limited by my camera.

I've used many Canon cameras over the past couple of the years, the R5, R5C, R6, C70 etc. and I absolutely hate most of them. You put 8K in a camera but it overheats after 5 minutes of using? what about the R6? records 4k 50fps but after 15 minutes it overheats while I am recording indoor corporate work? If I cannot do my job, it's not acceptable. A lot of little cripples so you would buy into other more expensive cameras or simply just a bad choice by canon's management. I think they pushed the R5 before it was ready, only to stay relevant. They were desperate that Sony was getting so ahead. Nikon stayed behind for so long. Poor guys. I thought they were out of it until recent cameras which look impressing on paper, but have no experience with their Z line, so cannot comment.

Panasonic are great, and they get very technical with the video codecs framerates and such, and sometimes offer software updates on older products, like 10bit implementation in cameras that before could only do 8bit footage? Amazing! But the Autofocus was terrible from what I've seen in the past, and you can fix pretty much anything in post Noise, Stabilization, Bokeh, Color, but if the shot is out of focus, it's out of focus, nothing to do here. I cannot risk to take an amazing shot and for the subject to be out of focus.

Nowadays I saw panasonic improved their autofocus and are similar to sony's? but not sure. I don't keep up with all the new cameras from all the brands. Lately I realize I am less and less attracted by specs and numbers, and more attracted by storytelling, so you'll have to do your own homework in this regard.

Same with Fuji, no autofocus. Fuji has great colors, but autofocus is not reliable. I would rather fix my colors in post, than have to torture myself with 'out of focus' shots.

BTW, I am talking about solo projects, where you cannot hire a focus puller, and you need to rely on the autofocus.

So this is why I stood with Sony. Overall the best. Competitive price, Great value, probably the most functional cameras in the game. Downfalls? Not the best color and their cameras lack personality. Also, menus used to suck ***. So hard to find anything really. Now it's better color and usability wise. And I hope it keeps getting better, as they did the last couple of years.