Canon 6D vs Sony A7

NickTB

NickTB

Messages
3,107
Name
Nick
Edit My Images
Yes
So I've been offered a swap deal, my low mileage 6D for a higher mileage A7. For no other reason other than GAS I’m considering it. I’ve always loved Sony’s but bought into Canon without really thinking about it. I have various L glass and peripheries but I understand I can get a reasonably priced adaptor.

Now, what would be the advantages/disadvantages of the A7 over the 6D? Never having used an A7 I’d like to get some info from the horses mouth so to speak.
Thanks in advance,
Nick
 
First thing to do is check the lenses. Then the 3rd party accessories. Then the spec. I wouldn' trade a low mileage 6d for high mileage a7.

Ime the 6d is the better performer overall and the main reason to go a7 would be size and weight with their smaller primes as it can make a nice small package with the right lenses.
 
Last edited:
A7 is also great for old cheap MF glass as it has better focus aids than a dslr IF you have the time to MF.
 
twist said:
A7 is also great for old cheap MF glass as it has better focus aids than a dslr IF you have the time to MF.
Click to expand...

I’m finding more and more of my work is animal (horse and dog) Photography. MF could be an issue there
 
Oh, you can also pick up a brand new a7 body for 699 as it' got 100 cashback from Sony. So you could sell the 6d and get a new one instead.
 
NickTB said:
I’m finding more and more of my work is animal (horse and dog) Photography. MF could be an issue there
Click to expand...

I think you'e going to struggle with the a7. The Af isn' great and the longer lenses will probably be an issue unless you have deep pockets.
 
It’s a shame though as I’ve always liked the aesthetics of the Sony’s and to replace my canon gear would be hugely expensive
 
It sounds like the A7 isn't a camera designed for your type of work, so burping was the right thing to do in this case. The design makes me think they were really designed for landscape, travel and social photography, rather than action, and the FE lenses aren't bargains by any stretch of the imagination.
 
Glad I asked the question tbh. GAS is an awful thing!
 
Having owned a 6d and an a7 (ii) I'd say the 6d is the better camera for what you want to do.

The only thing better about the Sony is the dynamic range/image quality and slight weight advantage (by the time you've carried the extra batteries!).
 
twist said:
I think you'e going to struggle with the a7. The Af isn' great and the longer lenses will probably be an issue unless you have deep pockets.
Click to expand...
It'll depend how fast the horses are going, Even I can photograph walking/trotting horses with my old manual lenses and in the past I photographed show jumping horses with my snail slow LXx and glacial slow Medion compact. I'm sure someone posted running dog pictures in the A7 thread recently. It's possibly a non issue.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
It'll depend how fast the horses are going, Even I can photograph walking/trotting horses with my old manual lenses and in the past I photographed show jumping horses with my snail slow LXx and glacial slow Medion compact. I'm sure someone posted running dog pictures in the A7 thread recently. It's possibly a non issue.
Click to expand...

The issue of using an a7 for anything that moves isn't just the autofocus though. It's the EVF lag in continuous burst mode which makes tracking next to impossible.
 
Craig_85 said:
The issue of using an a7 for anything that moves isn't just the autofocus though. It's the EVF lag in continuous burst mode which makes tracking next to impossible.
Click to expand...

Have you tried one? Burst mode.... do you need that for horses?

General EVF lag for the A7 or any other recent CSC for anything other than a speeding bullet may also be a non issue.
 
Craig_85 said:
Yes.
Click to expand...
Evidence? Shots hit and missed?

PS.
Mute point as the OP seems to have made his mind up but the general the level of "A7 can't do that" around makes me want to advise anyone remotely interested to seek out specifics from the better review site and bloggers.
 
Last edited:
One would want to ask if there's any reason to swap other than someone has offered the A7.
Is the 6D failing to meet the needs of the OP with fast moving animals?
The burst rate of the 6D isn't great and the AF system isn't ideal for moving subjects, but is it that bad?

The newer Sony A7 series can be fast to focus and track subjects, but you really need to be using the Sony lenses. Anything on an adaptor is going to be slower. Which means you need deep pockets.

If you already have good Canon glass, but the AF/burst rate are not keeping up, why not upgrade to a Canon 7D Mk2 or even a used 5D Mk3 both of which have faster burst rates and better AF systems.
 
Actually my horse pictures are generally static in stables or yards or trotting. It’s very rarely a full on canter/gallop or jump. This is purely based on someone offering the swap. The 6D does allnit need to do apart from sometimes being a bit hit and miss with focus points
 
I bought an A7 to replace my 6D but really disliked it for subjective reasons (handling, shutter sound, auto iso implementation etc.). It certainly won't work well with longer L lenses.

I ended up selling the A7 and keeping the 6D which is a very good camera still and has better high ISO performance (but worse dynamic range).

I've sold the 6D and gone all Fuji now, but that's another story :D
 
ive had both and whilst really liking the Sony,if I had to choose now I would have the 6D,as I prefer the DLSR 's right now
 
woof woof said:
Evidence? Shots hit and missed?

PS.
Mute point as the OP seems to have made his mind up but the general the level of "A7 can't do that" around makes me want to advise anyone remotely interested to seek out specifics from the better review site and bloggers.
Click to expand...

Evidence? This isn't a police enquiry.

The only qualification I will give to my assessment of the 6d being better at moving subjects than the a7 is that I have owned both cameras for over a year each and used them in a variety of situations.

For the OP's use it's not just that the a7 will let him down at some point, it's the question what does it do better in a way that will benefit him? Especially when the monetary value of a straight swap is against him.

The a7 series are great cameras and obviously suit you very well with your lenses Alan. Increasingly people are preferring mirrorless too. I really wanted to like it but couldn't get in with it. The Nikon D750 is a better camera in every single way and the Canon 6d is in every way apart from dynamic range.

As much as your frustrated by people putting the Sony down, it's equally frustrating hearing you saying the shortcomings are non issues, just because they are to you. For others the shortcomings and quirkiness of a mirrorless are real issues.
 
Last edited:
ABTog said:
One would want to ask if there's any reason to swap other than someone has offered the A7.
Is the 6D failing to meet the needs of the OP with fast moving animals?
The burst rate of the 6D isn't great and the AF system isn't ideal for moving subjects, but is it that bad?

The newer Sony A7 series can be fast to focus and track subjects, but you really need to be using the Sony lenses. Anything on an adaptor is going to be slower. Which means you need deep pockets.

If you already have good Canon glass, but the AF/burst rate are not keeping up, why not upgrade to a Canon 7D Mk2 or even a used 5D Mk3 both of which have faster burst rates and better AF systems.
Click to expand...

The 6d copes just fine with fast moving dogs and horses :)
 
The best description of the 6D I ever read was something along the line of 'a triumph of performance over specification' and I think that sums it up pretty well. The spec sheet doesn't look that impressive, but the performance of the camera and the images from it tell a different story. I think the 6D Mk1 was cracking value for money and I'll be keeping mine for the foreseeable future. (y)
 
Craig_85 said:
Evidence? This isn't a police enquiry.

The only qualification I will give to my assessment of the 6d being better at moving subjects than the a7 is that I have owned both cameras for over a year each and used them in a variety of situations.

For the OP's use it's not just that the a7 will let him down at some point, it's the question what does it do better in a way that will benefit him? Especially when the monetary value of a straight swap is against him.

The a7 series are great cameras and obviously suit you very well with your lenses Alan. Increasingly people are preferring mirrorless too. I really wanted to like it but couldn't get in with it. The Nikon D750 is a better camera in every single way and the Canon 6d is in every way apart from dynamic range.

As much as your frustrated by people putting the Sony down, it's equally frustrating hearing you saying the shortcomings are non issues, just because they are to you. For others the shortcomings and quirkiness of a mirrorless are real issues.
Click to expand...

Deep sigh...

woof woof said:
It'll depend how fast the horses are going, Even I can photograph walking/trotting horses with my old manual lenses and in the past I photographed show jumping horses with my snail slow LXx and glacial slow Medion compact. I'm sure someone posted running dog pictures in the A7 thread recently. It's possibly a non issue.
Click to expand...

Craig_85 said:
The issue of using an a7 for anything that moves isn't just the autofocus though. It's the EVF lag in continuous burst mode which makes tracking next to impossible.
Click to expand...

NickTB said:
Actually my horse pictures are generally static in stables or yards or trotting. It’s very rarely a full on canter/gallop or jump. This is purely based on someone offering the swap. The 6D does allnit need to do apart from sometimes being a bit hit and miss with focus points
Click to expand...

Craig_85 said:
Evidence? This isn't a police enquiry.

The only qualification I will give to my assessment of the 6d being better at moving subjects than the a7 is that I have owned both cameras for over a year each and used them in a variety of situations.

For the OP's use it's not just that the a7 will let him down at some point, it's the question what does it do better in a way that will benefit him? Especially when the monetary value of a straight swap is against him.

The a7 series are great cameras and obviously suit you very well with your lenses Alan. Increasingly people are preferring mirrorless too. I really wanted to like it but couldn't get in with it. The Nikon D750 is a better camera in every single way and the Canon 6d is in every way apart from dynamic range.

As much as your frustrated by people putting the Sony down, it's equally frustrating hearing you saying the shortcomings are non issues, just because they are to you. For others the shortcomings and quirkiness of a mirrorless are real issues.
Click to expand...

Police enquiry? There's so much exaggeration and hyperbole talked on forums that sometimes I think there should be.

Craig, yes the A7 cameras have limitations but I certainly didn't say that they are non issues but they may be non issues depending upon a host of factors including the subject and how fast it's moving. There are those who insist that a camera must be able to track a gnats privates at f1.4 and ISO 25000 but I like to take a more real world view and horses even when show jumping over fences just ain't that fast... IMO (and if my compacts could do it...) Throw tracking and viewfinder blackout and continuous shooting and focal length and aperture and what lens you're using and all the rest into the mix and maybe you've got a problem but shoot another way and maybe you haven't.

But as I said... moot.
 
Last edited:
I have an a7 as a third backup to a7Riis and to be honest I think I’d be happier with a 6D in its place. I’ve shot everything from weddings to Motorsport with both.

The shutter is painfully loud, it’s pretty laggy and I just flat out dislike the high ISO noise, it’s terribly digital in my opinion. AF is ultra-accurate for reasonably still subjects but struggles pretty badly when things get a bit tough. I actually had way, way more success with continuous AF attaching the LA-EA4 to it (which has a fairly basic AF module from a low end alpha SLT) and using alpha mount glass.

In anything down to reasonable light and with no major AF stress (or audible noise concerns) it’s a fantastic thing, but it’s pretty incredible how far they’ve come with the a7RII onwards.
 
Last edited:
I’m a bit of a Sony fan boy but the A7 is a first gen camera and the 6D is simply an incremental revision to the hugely successful tried (also spells tired;)) and tested slr format.

I’d pick the Canon of those two but a Nikon 610 would give you the best of both worlds, Sony sensor tech and slr phase detection focusing.

A Sony A7 is an ideal travel/landscape camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top