Sony a6100 vs a6400: Which Should You Buy?

The Sony a6100 and a6400 are both remarkable, feature rich cameras, but some of you will not need (or want) the features that increase the price of the a6400.

Sony’s brand new a6100 is a full featured camera with a pro-level sensor, but was released into an already crowded Sony camera lineup, and is priced at only $150 or so below the impressive a6400. With Sony, it can be hard to keep track of all of the differences between models, and hard to decide which to buy. Let me simplify things.

First, here’s a quick chart of the significant differences between the two cameras. Explanations can be found below.

Features Sony a6400 Sony a6100
Price (body) $898.00

$748.00

Electronic Fiewfinder Resolution 2.4 Million Dots 1.4 Million Dots
Body Material Magnesium Alloy Plastic
Dust/Weather Sealed Body Basic Sealing None
Body Weight 403g 396g
S-Log Profile Available Yes No
Battery Life 360 shots CIPA Standards 380 shots CIPA Standards
Matthew Gore | Light And Matter I shot this with an a6600 and the new Sony 16-55 f/2.8 lens, but the sensor (and image quality) would be identical with the a6100 and a6400. ISO 1250

The Basics

In fact, the Sony a6100 and a6400 are almost identical: they use the same sensors, the same autofocus systems (including real-time eye detection for humans and animals), they can both shoot action at 11fps, and they will produce the same quality photos. Period.

However, there are some differences in build quality, and there are some differences in the video features.

Sony Sony The flip-up screens on the a6100 and a6400 are identical.

Body & Build Quality

If you’re paying attention you may notice that the Sony a6100 body is lighter (396g) and made primarily of polycarbonate, while the a6400 has a magnesium alloy body (403g) and basic weather-sealing. However, the weight difference is tiny: just 7g (0.25 oz.), not something that you’ll appreciate while traveling or backpacking.

Comparison of Sonya6100 and a6400 Top Views
Sony Sony The two cameras look nearly identical from the top.

The rear LCD screens of the two cameras are identical, but the OLED electronic viewfinder (EVF) of the a6400 has significantly higher resolution (about 63% higher) than that of the a6100. The a6100’s EVF has 1.44 million dots, and while that is sufficient, it is disappointingly low compared to the more common 2.4 million dot OLED EVFs on the market today.

Matthew Gore | Light And Matter Matthew Gore | Light And Matter

Otherwise, the bodies and controls of the cameras are virtually identical. On the back of the camera, the a6400 offers a switch to change the “Exposure Lock” button into an AF/MF button where the a6100 just as an “Exposure Lock” button. They’re identical otherwise.

Video Quality

Both cameras can shoot a wide range of video sizes and frame rates, and both can shoot high-quality 4K video at 24 or 30fps or 1080p video at up to 120fps. However, only the a6400 can shoot with the S-log and HLG (Hybrid Log Gamma) profiles, a flat profile that is typically use by professional film makers who expect to tone and color-grade the video in post-processing.

Why Get One of These Cameras?

There are a lot of cameras on the market, but few of them can begin to match the features, flexibility and image quality offered by Sony’s APS-C cameras. They offer action shooting at 11 frames per second, the best autofocus system in their class with excellent tracking, and sensors with excellent resolution, dynamic range, and low-light performance.

Sony has been producing compatible E-mount lenses for about a decade, including the professional-class G Master lenses for their full-frame cameras that can also be used on the a6100 and a6400. Sony recently announced the 16-55 f/2.8 lens for APS-C E-mount, which is not cheap but is the equivalent of a professional quality 24-70 f/2.8 for a 35mm camera.

Matthew Gore | Light And Matter Matthew Gore | Light And Matter Again, I shot this with the Sony a6600 and 16-55 f/2.8 lens, but this time in even lower light. ISO 3200

Nikon and Canon, on the other hand, have very lens limited offerings for their mirrorless cameras, as Nikon only launched their Z-system last year (the Z50 is a good option if you can live with the lens options), and Canon’s “M” mount cameras are aimed at the amateur market and require adapters to use lenses from the R or EF mount systems.

Fuji produces the best cameras to compare with the Sony, with the Fuji X-T30 the best competitor in the same price range.

Which One Should You Get?

North Head Lighthouse at Cape Disappointment
Want a Better Lens?
Although a kit lens is nice and compact, there are huge advantages to getting a lens that will let in more light and give you better resolution.
I think that the Tamron 17-70 f/2.8 is the best all-around lens for these cameras on the market right now. Watch my video below to see why.
Video / Review

My general camera buying advice is this: buy the least expensive camera that will meet your needs and the best lenses that you can afford. But beyond the low price, there is nothing to recommend the a6100 over the a6400.

With that in mind, the first thing is to check and see if you like the viewfinder of the a6100 (it will still be much better than EVFs from digital point and shoot cameras and video cameras from several years ago). If you do, great. If not, then you can forget everything else; the EVF such an important feature of a mirrorless camera that it’s not worth buying a camera if you don’t like the EVF. Buy the a6400.

If either EVF is fine for you, consider how important shooting video is to you. If you’re going to want S-log or similar flat gamma profiles, get the a6400. Otherwise, stick with the a6100 and save yourself some money so that you can buy better lenses.

Questions? Let me know!

If you’re having trouble deciding on a camera, or have any questions that I haven’t addressed above, just let me know in the comment section below, and I’ll answer as soon as I get a chance!

Editor-in-Chief
  1. Hi, do you know the video recording limitations in duration before overheating ?
    I currently have a a6000 and wanna upgrade because the 30 mins limitation is bothering me (as well as the lack of jack 3.5).
    Thanks !

    1. The a6400 does not have an video recording limit (technically, it might be 12 hours or 13 hours, but that’s not something that people are likely to run into). As for overheating… this is something that will always depend on environmental factors, your recording resolution and format, etc, but in general, these cameras do not overheat. In some cases, it’s helpful to change the camera’s settings so that the Overheat Shutoff is set to “High”, but I haven’t found that necessary.

  2. Hello. Do you have a suggestion for a lens for either Sony model. This will be my initial step into using a camera, but my initial need is for shooting my children’s school performances and ceremonies. I would like to be able to shoot some shots close up and get zoom shots from a distance. I’m hoping I can have a single lens for now and buy more in the future. It would be great to be able to get some clear shots from a distance without being that annoying parent who is blocking people or always rushing up to the front to use my cell phone to get a good shot. I would appreciate your thoughts.

    1. Hi Darren,
      Yes. There are lots of good lenses for specific purposes, but I’d say that the Tamron 17-70 f/2.8 VC is probably the best general shooting lens for APS-C Sony. My review of that lens, with a video, is here: https://www.lightandmatter.org/2021/equipment-reviews/tamron-17-70-f-2-8-vc-review-the-perfect-lens/
      If you want to shoot from a distance, though, things become tricky… most affordable lenses have a dramatic fall-off in how much light they let through, and if you’re shooting indoors in low light, then getting good image quality will be very hard. For example, a 70-300mm lens from Sony or Tamron will generally have a maximum aperture of f/5.6 or 6.3 at 300mm, and that will only let in 1/4 of the amount of light that an f/2.8 lens would.
      So, they’re expensive… but I’d recommend something in the range of a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens. The Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 lens is a little shorter, but lets in lots of light and has great image quality, and the new Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 is also really good, but quite a bit more expensive, and the Sony version is nearly $3000. (300 or 400mm lenses at f/2.8 will cost $10k or more).
      Otherwise, get the Tamron 17-70 and use your creativity to get closer to the stage. Good luck, and let me know if you have any more questions!

      1. Thank you I appreciate your honest opinion and what I have to consider in order to get the best picture I can. I will take a look at your review and the lenses you recommend.

  3. Hello, this article was helpful thank you, but I do have a question. I currently have a Canon EOS Rebel T6, bought it a few years ago. But I am looking for something smaller I can take with me on my travels, that will take good quality pictures. I have been looking into the Sony 6100 but I recently saw Canon has an EOS M50. Which one between the two would you recommend best? I am no professional photographer, I just appreciate the better quality pictures compared to the ones on my iPhone.

    Thanks!

    1. Hi Ashley,
      Both the M50 and the a6100 are great cameras, but I’d go with the Sony. The Sony has more lens choices and probably better autofocus, but more importantly, the Canon EOS M line of cameras is slowly being discontinued in favor of their RF mount cameras. Speaking of which… Canon just announced the camera that will probably be considered the replacement for the M50: the Canon R50. You might want to check it out… it should be pretty similar to the Canon T6, but mirrorless and updated features.

  4. Hi there, having had both these cameras there is one very significant difference that every review I have seen so far has missed. The a6100 will auto-bracket at up to 0.7EV for 5 exposures, this is 2.8 EV of bracketing. On the other hand the a6400 brackets up to 9 images at 1.0 EV for 8 EV of bracketing, or up to 5 exposures at up to 3 EV, so 12 EV of bracketing. If you ever produce HDR images or just like to bracket your shots there is no contest, the a6400 is the one to buy.

  5. Hello, really nice article!
    I usually shoot holiday/family photos whenever we go on vacation. Having tried out the a6600 + 18-135mm this last summer I was really impressed with the size and quality.

    I started out with a NEX-6 (with a Sigma 19mm, very happy with it!) many years ago but for the last ~5 years I’ve been a Fuji shooter (which I really like for the controls and the colors).

    But now, after testing that 18-135 from Sony, and the 18-135 and 16-70 from Fuji, it seems that the Sony lens is a much better fit for my purposes.

    Now, I’ve been looking at what body to get, and I’m a bit torn between a6000 (which I can get used for $250), the a6100 (~$580, recent release), and the a6400 (~$820, is more recent, a bit weather sealed); the A6600 is too expensive for my hobby usage.

    So my main lens will be the Sony 18-135, considering the prices do you think it’s worth the difference from the A6000 (used, maybe a few months of warranty left) to the A6100 or A6400 (both new)?

    I don’t care about video, so purely from an IQ/autofocus quality in photos (landscape and zooming in on my kid, wife etc).

    Many thanks in advance, appreciate your input.

    1. I don’t think that there’s a significant difference in image quality between the Sony a6000 series cameras; they’re all very good for APS-C sensors. There may be minor differences if you shoot JPG, but if you shoot RAW and process the pictures as you like them, they should be identical.

      However, the newer cameras will have dramatically better autofocus. The eye detection and subject tracking with the a6100 and a6400 are much improved over the a6300, even… and the a6000 is a generation behind that (though still very solid).

      The only reason that I’d opt for an older camera is if it would allow you to get a better lens, and I’m of the opinion that the Tamron 17-70 f/2.8 is currently the best lens on the market for the a6000 series cameras, for general shooting. I’ve been testing it for about a month (it should be on the market any day now), and it’s awesome. Going to release a video about it next week.

      Anwyay, whatever lens you go with, I think that the improvements in autofocus are worth getting one of the two new bodies, and probably the a6400… but I’ll leave that up to you.

      1. Thank you, appreciate it!
        The Tamron sure seems interesting, but so far no reviews; looking forward to that video.

        1. The only lens that can really compete with the Tamron 17-70 is the Sony 16-55 f/2.8, which costs almost twice as much and doesn’t have image stabilization… which is huge for cameras that don’t have IBIS (and most of the a6000 line does not, of course). There are plenty of lenses for the a6000s that have good image quality, but usually they are hamstrung with an f/5.6 maximum aperture somewhere in the zoom range, which also makes them difficult when shooting in lower light. Anyway, with any luck, the video will publish on Monday…

  6. Hi Matthew,

    This is a really helpful article, thanks!

    I’m trying to find the right camera and lens for filming conducting tutorial videos (been using a good webcam), as well as taking close up product photos (my wife makes jewellery and uses an iphone 7 to photograph it).

    We want to buy a camera we can share for this, and are wondering about the a6400, but have some questions (about things we’re not sure we fully understand).

    The 1080p at 120fps sounds ideal for picking up conducting movements smoothly, but how would the auto-focus behave. If my arms are moving quickly, would it cause them to be more, or less, blurry?

    Also, I’ve had a problem with the brightness of my backdrop changing as I move. I think it may be due to our restricted space – I have to stand with the backdrop about 50cm behind me, and the camera about 2m in front of me, and the webcam has an auto-brightness and auto-focus (Logitech Brio).

    Can I avoid this issue with a mirrorless camera, or is there a lighting/spacing issue I need to fix first?

    1. Hi James,

      First let me say that the Sony a6400 should be an excellent camera for both of you, if you use the right lenses. The lenses are really much more important for most things in photography, I suppose.

      When you’re shooting video, the 120fps frame rate will be helpful if you want to play back the video in slow motion… not so much difference if you play back at standard rate. Video and photography are very different in terms of what shutter speed is ideal, but they’re similar in one way: if you use a slow shutter speed to shoot fast motion, the motion is going to be blurry, regardless of how many shots you take in a second. On the other hand, if each individual frame is too sharp in a video, playback can look jagged and un-natural instead of smooth. The general rule is to use a shutter speed that is twice as fast as the frame rate (so, if you’re shooting 30fps, then use 1/60th second shutter speed). But some people who shoot sports use faster shutter speeds… so some experimentation will probably be in order.

      The issue with the backdrop changing in brightness is a common issue with automatic exposure; this means that you probably have a background that is significantly lighter or darker than yourself (or has less or more light falling on it), and the camera will sometimes meter for the background and sometimes for the subject (or some of each), and the brightness will shift around.

      The quick fix for that is to set the camera up, take a picture or two (or shoot some video) and make a note of what the shutterspeed, aperture and ISO are when it looks good to you. Then, switch the camera to manual exposure, enter those settings, and it will be consistent throughout your video. (If you’re not very familiar with how aperture, shutterspeed and ISO, and how they’re related, I made a simple video that explains it… or wrote an article if you prefer. Understanding this sort of thing is what makes an expensive camera worth owning).

      The less reliable fix is to set a camera like the a6400 to focus-based spot metering, and set the autofocus to face-detect when you’re shooting video, so that the camera will always read the light levels from your face, and the brightness will remain similar throughout the video.

      So, yes… if you get the a6400 and the kit 16-50mm lens, the 16mm end should be wide enough for your purposes (depending on how wide you need it to capture), but the 50mm end might not be ideal for jewelry. For that you might want a Macro lens. The Sigma 70mm f/2.8 Macro is amazing, and not too expensive (though not cheap, unfortunately).

      If you can live with a 16mm lens instead of the 16-50mm zoom, then the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 lens will give you dramatically more light to work with than the kit lens.

  7. Hi Matthew,

    Thanks for the nice, detailed comparison. I’m looking for a replacement for my Sony A6000 with a camera that has a fully articulating screen (for vlogging) and mic port. Will mostly use it for occasional vlogging and photography. I was deliberating between the Fuji X-T30 and Sony A61/6400, but the Fuji does not have a fully articulating screen. Meanwhile, the X-S10 has just been launched, and while it clocks all bells and whistles, it costs around $1600 with the 18-55 f2.8-4 lens here in India. Now, should I pick the Sony A6400 and buy a nice fast prime for vlogging or invest in the more expensive X-S10? I’ve read that the 18-55 is almost like a bag of primes. Appreciate your insights.

    1. A couple of things: the 18-55 lens might be about as sharp as a bunch of primes, but it’s not going to give you the large apertures that prime lenses would, and it probably doesn’t offer the same distortion correction and overall rendering that primes would. At least, that has been the case with all of the other “this zoom is as good as a bag of primes” lenses that I’ve used… and these things (aperture, rendering) are also very important aspects of using prime lenses.

      It’s also worth mentioning that 4K video is only about 8 megapixels, so whether your lens is able to capture 20 megapixels worth or detail or 30 megapixels worth of detail, most of it is going to be thrown away when the image is downscaled to 4K output. So worry about lens resolution for photography, but it’s much less important for video.

      That said, the Fuji XS10 has a huge advantage for vlogging over the a6400, and that is in-body image stabilization (IBIS). The a6400 doesn’t have it, but the a6600 does… and costs about $1300 for the body. For video work, unless you’re always going to have the camera mounted to a tripod, stabilization is very important. Some Sony lenses have it, but many don’t.

      But that all depends on how you plan to use it. Maybe IBIS won’t be important to how you intend to use the camera… you’ll have to decide.

      If you haven’t already, you’ll also want to give some strong consideration of what lens options you’re likely to want in the future, and what is available. There are a lot of good Sony and Zeiss lenses for Sony cameras, but there are also Sigma, Tamron, Samyang, Tokina and others for Sony, and some of them are VERY good for how inexpensive they are. For Fuji, you’ll pretty much have Fuji lenses to choose from. They can be very good, but not all of them are. So, make sure if there’s a lens you might want in the future… that it will be available for the system you’re deciding on.

      Sorry I can’t give you a more definitive answer. I’d lean towards the Fuji Xs10 over the a6400, but maybe the a6600 over the XS10. Good luck!

      1. Thank you very much Matthew. That was both insightful & helpful. I’m not comfortable using a Gimbal (haven’t used one but reviews on how to use them put me off!), and hence IBIS becomes an important factor. Therefore, I’m leaning towards the Fuji X-S10, which I could pair with the soon to be available Tokina 23mm F1.4 or the Fujinon 23mm F2 (Tokina has the E-mount lens mentioned in their roadmap, but that is yet to be announced)

        A couple of follow-up questions

        1. In case I decide to pick the X-S10, should I drop the 18-55 and get the body alone? Just wondering if the kit lens is of much use on top of the prime? (Same goes for the A6600, in case I decide to pick that)
        2. Does having a stabilised lens make up for a camera without IBIS or is the latter a lot more effective? While I understand that choice of lenses with OSS is limited, I really don’t see myself owning more than 2 sets of glass in the foreseeable future.

        Thanks,
        Pannaga

        1. The two kit lenses will both have their uses; it can be really nice to have the flexibility of a zoom lens, especially when you’re traveling. Some people are able to put a 35mm lens on their camera and set out in the world, but not me… I Iike to have a couple of zooms to cover any situation I encounter… but I’m a journalist and my needs are different than other people. So that’s personal taste. The Sony kit lens (16-50) is remarkably compact, so there’s some value in that, though I don’t love the image quality of that lens.

          Incidentally, the Tokina 23mm and 33mm f/1.4 lenses were announced on Nov. 10th, and should begin shipping December 11th. There is some speculation that the Tokina lenses are the same design/build as the existing Viltrox 23mm and Viltrox 33mm lenses, which are less expensive, but Tokina licensed the lens communication protocol from Fuji for the Tokina brand lenses, so AF should be better.

          I haven’t found combined IBIS and OSS to be helpful, but I also don’t really shoot video. I’ll capture a rare clip here and there, but that’s about it. I find that IBIS already handles shutter speeds down to around 1/20th of a second just fine for most lenses, and anything lower than that… there’s usually just too much motion blur from subject movement for me to want to use those speeds. But again, that’s a matter of personal taste.

          1. Thanks again Matthew.I really appreciate taking time to share your thoughts and insights. It really helped understand what I can expect to have from the options I have.

  8. Hi Matthew
    I am new to photography, considering between Fujifilm x-T30, Nikon Z50 and Sony A6400. I will be using mainly for family photos and traveling. Good video will be a bounce, But mainly interested in still photography. Also which camera is best suites for low light conditions.
    Thanks

    1. Hello Atif,

      Those are three really awesome cameras, and you’ll undoubtedly be very happy with any of them. All three have great photo and video capabilities, and all of them should be great for travel and general family photography.

      None of the three cameras have in-body image stabilization (IBIS), and all have similarly good sensors, so the best one for low-light will really depend on what lens you use with the camera.

      When it comes to lenses, Nikon has the fewest native Z-mount options, Fuji has lots of good options but they can be quite expensive, and Sony has the most options (expensive Sony, plus less expensive 3rd party… Sigma, Tamron, Samyang, etc). Using a lens like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (or any other f/1.4 lens… there’s a 16mm and a 56mm, also by Sigma), you’ll get dramatically better low light performance than with any sort of “kit” zoom lens that might ship bundled with the camera. If you can wait a bit, I’m expecting a rumored Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 lens to be announced in the next month or so, and it will be good in low light and more flexible than these prime lenses. The lens you choose will make all the difference between photos that look professional and photos that look like they could have been taken with a phone.

      The Sony a6500 and a6600 DO have IBIS, which can also make them better for low light, but of course, you pay for it.

      I personally think that the Nikon and Fuji are the most intuitive to use. I think the Sony has the best autofocus and best lens options. I don’t shoot much video, so I can’t really help there… but they’re all good.

      Anyway, don’t know if that will help… but there’s no clear “best camera” among the three. Good luck!

  9. Hello,
    which one will be the best option for amateur ?

    • Nikon z50
    • Fujifilm X-T30
    • sony a6100/a6400

    I don’t like to change camera settings etc. amd i’m looking the best camera which will do the best photo without spending hours to set up the proper setting.I dont care about video only a quality of photos.
    Thx for help!

    1. All of these cameras will provide excellent image quality if you use a good quality lens. There may be slight differences in the way that they render colors, and there will be differences in the controls, but which one is “best” will be a matter of personal taste.

      I think that the autofocus system on the a6400 is the best of the three, and it’s fast and the image quality is great, but the controls are probably simpler on the other two cameras. For me, the Z50 is probably the most intuitive to use.

      That said, if I were choosing one of the three, I’d probably go with the Fuji XT30. It has the highest resolution, it has the controls that are the most accessible, and the color is excellent, right out of the box.

      You might want to visit a local camera store, though, and spend some time with each one, and figure out which one is the most intuitive and comfortable for your hands. Good luck.

      1. Thank you, hmm choosing the best one in this price range do you think is it a possibility to choose another greater camera than these three above? Which lenses will be the best for a beginner? I know thats many hard questions, but it helped mi a lot :)
        Best regards!

        1. A camera is a tool, and some tools are better suited to particular jobs. If you want to shoot photos in low light most of the time, then the Canon EOS RP ($999) has a 26 megapixel full-size 35mm sensor, which is great for a lot of things… but it’s going to be slower in some regards than the cameras above (“only” 5fps) and has no in-body image stabilization. Its lenses are going to be a lot more expensive than the previously mentioned models, too.

          I actually think that the Nikon Z5 is an amazing camera at $1400, but that’s not really the same price range.

          Otherwise, the truth is that most of the modern cameras, regardless of price point, are going to produce amazing image quality if they’re handled correctly. You’ll need to get good lenses to get the most out of them, and most people never do.

          There’s really no such thing as a good beginner lens. Every lens that you buy will have a trade-off somewhere. With cheap lenses, they’re going to be bad in low light, with poor color and contrast. Large aperture lenses are going to be big, expensive and heavy. So, you’ll need to just choose what suits your budget and your shooting style.

          If you just want a do-it-all zoom lens, there are some good ones that are in the 18-140 or so range, and they’ll give you pretty good image quality at the expense of being bad in low light.

          If you want something good in low light, you can get a 50mm f/1.8 lens (or similar) for most systems for not too much money that will be better than any zoom lens in low light, but you lose the ability to zoom with it.

          Anyway, if you have a good idea of what type of lens you want, I might be able to help you narrow it down. Good luck!

          1. Thanks a lot for all informations.
            I will buy a camera for making photos of my family, so in my opinion i dont need a zoom so much. So i will go for 50mm f/1.8. Can you give me some topic which will the best option for quality/money value?
            In the camera topic i think i will choose something between nikon z50 or fujifilm x-t30.

            Best regards

            1. It looks as though I was mistaken about the 50mm f/1.8 when it comes to these mirrorless cameras. Normally, a 50mm f/1.8 costs about $125-150 (for Canon EF mount, for example), but the 50mm f/1.8 for Nikon Z mount costs $598. Unfortunately, there aren’t a lot of lenses made for Nikon Z mount yet, since it’s still a pretty new mount. This is where Sony has a big advantage… lots of Sony lenses, plus Sigma, Tamron, Samyang, etc.

              Fuji is a little better, but not much. Their 50mm f/2 costs about $450… although there are a couple of inexpensive primes out there like the Viltrox 85mm f/1.8 for $399.

      1. Well, actually, I went for the Canon EOS M50 in the end. It was significantly cheaper and did everything I needed (including connecting as a webcam in OBS). Your review helped me work out my requirements. Thank you again!

  10. Thank you for writing this blog post. I am a small business owner who wants to record quality videos for YouTube, mostly from my desk, but sometimes maybe outdoors (Florida, so possibly sun). I care about the look of my skin, so the softness option on the VZ-1 is nice. But I want interchangeable lenses. So that’s out. I also want good battery life and the ability to plug in. And I want quality and ease of use is essential, as I’m not experienced, at all, with cameras. More than a little learning curve will not be good.

    Could you please recommend the best camera? Sony seems ideal but I can’t figure out all of their options.

    1. Hi Tina,

      I lived in Sarasota for a couple of years and loved the wildlife and Florida landscape :-)

      First, let me say this: I’m a photographer (for 25 years), and shoot very little in the way of video. Some, but not a whole lot. I’m certainly no expert in that regard. That said…

      Sony is an very good option, and the a6100 and a6400 both have USB-C charging, which can deliver constant power to the camera also, so you can power them with a portable power-bank / battery pack (this type of thing) if you happen to find that you need extended battery life when you’re outside.

      Sony is not known for their ease of use, but for shooting video, you should be able to sit down with the manual, make sure that it’s set to your desired settings, and then forget about it. You can set most things to “auto” and get great performance. Sony has excellent eye-focus to track you and not randomly focus on the background… that’s one thing that separates it from other good options. So, I wouldn’t worry too much about that. I think that the a6400 is a significantly better camera for not much more money, so I’d go that route.

      But if video is your main interest, then there are also some other good choices. The Fuji X-T30 is also excellent for video, and is about the same price. The advantage of this camera is that all of the controls are on dedicated dials on the camera. If you want to change something, you just twist the dial instead of diving into the menu system on the rear LCD and looking for some setting to change. It also has great color profiles. Lenses are very high quality, but will be more expensive than a lot of the Sony options (Sigma / Tamron / Samyang / other third party lenses are available for Sony).

      There are also some really good Panasonic micro4/3 cameras, but I don’t know a whole lot about them. They use a smaller sensor and are not as good in low light, but they’re generally great for video. The Lumix G9 is supposed to be pretty amazing for it’s price for video.

      Whichever camera you choose, there are always options to soften the image. You can do it in the software editor, if you’re good at video editing, but the old fashioned (quick and easy) way to do it is to screw a softening filter onto the end of your lens like this one (or just search for “soft-focus filter”.

  11. What one of the Sony Alpha 6000 series is best for low lighting with also maybe a lens for Macro shooting but easy to learn and for under 700-800$? Can not decide if I want to buy a kit with a lens or camera separate and then maybe a separate lens and accessory kit. Just so many options and cameras and sellers who or where is the best option for a beginner? Just so overwhelming. I would probably settle for a different name and model but as long as it was good for the low lighting and macro shooting.

    1. Hi Mellissa,

      When it comes to low-light photography, all of the a6000 series sensors are about the same, so there’s no big difference there… they’re all good, when used properly. There may be slight improvements in the newer sensors (a6100, a6400, a6600), but it’s going to be negligible for practical purposes.

      However, what makes any of them MUCH better in low light is a good lens that lets in a lot of light. You can tell how much light can get through a lens by looking at the “f” number in the lens name… the smaller, the number, the more light (watch my video for a complete explanation). So for example, an f/2.8 lens lets in twice as much light as an f/4 lens, which lets in twice as much light as an f/5.6 lens.

      So, a most of the “kit” lenses are variable… they’ll say something like f/3.5 – 5.6 , which means that they’re f/3.5 when zoomed out, and when you zoom in, f/5.6 is best that’s available. In general, this means that kit lenses are pretty bad for low light.

      For better low light shooting, you can use an expensive f/2.8 zoom lens (did I mention that they’re expensive?) or you can use a prime lens and get even more light at a relatively low cost. For example, the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 costs about $290, and the f/1.4 lens lets in a TON of light (32 times more light than the f/5.6 of a kit lens) for excellent low-light performance. Similarly, the 16mm f/1.4 from Sigma, an awesome wide-angle lens, costs about $380. The 56mm f/1.4 is a little more, but is a perfect portrait lens.

      You won’t find any f/1.4 macro lenses, but you’ll find lots of good f/2.8 macro lenses. The least expensive true macro lens for Sony is the Sigma 70mm f/2.8, which costs a little more than $450, but you may be able to find a good deal. I think there’s a cheaper 30mm out there, but it’s not really ideal for macro work.

      If you can afford it, I’d go with the a6100 body with the two lenses that best fit your needs. Good luck!

      Matthew

      1. you mentioned in the above comment that the cheaper 30 mm macro is not really ideal. Any reasons for that? It is a native mount APSC 1:1 producing macro lens and is available at around 35% of the price of sigma 70 mm macro.

        1. The only reason that it’s not ideal is the working distance that you get with a 30mm lens. In order to get to that 1:1 ratio, you need to be around 3.5 inches away from your subject, and although that might sound workable for somethings, it’s really hard to deal with in the field if you’re photographing small wildlife (which is sometimes skittish) where the camera can begin to block the light on the subject, for example. Optically it’s pretty good, though.

          The Sigma 70mm offers more working space… around 10″ instead of 3 or 4. I still prefer a 100mm or more (the Tokina Firin 100mm is not too expensive, but the AF is noisy and a bit slow), but I admit that a lot of that is personal preference.

          But if the less expensive lens will work for your needs, then by all means, buy the Sony 30mm Macro. Many people don’t really want to shoot at 1:1 anyway; they just want to be able to do general close-ups.

  12. Hi, great article but I have a question. I am looking to start making more pro quality guitar videos for YouTube, and I’m not sure what camera option is best for me. I really don’t know what to go with as far the 6100 or 6400. Is the video quality drastically different? Also how does it compare to canon m50? Thanks in advance.

    1. Hi Lester,
       
      For most people, the video quality of the a6100 will be excellent (and the same as the a6400). The S-log thing in the a6400 is a way of shooting low-contrast, dull-looking video so that you can adjust it later in your editing software to get a particular look or more shadow detail. There are advantages to it, but it’s not common, even for youtubers. But since the a6400 isn’t too much more expensive, you might consider it. Here’s a good link about shooting Log-format: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/video/tips-and-solutions/understanding-log-format-recording
       
      Both will have some major advantages over the Canon M50, which doesn’t use the full sensor for shooting 4K video (it crops to the center of the frame), and it also has other limitations, like not being able to focus if you’re shooting 120fps video.

  13. I’m looking at a mirrorless camera purchase in the near future. I shoot mainly landscape, occasionally macro. I’ve a budget of around A$1500. Want cheapest body with best wide zoom for my money. A6000 and ??? I had a Nikon d600 w/24 to 85 but had to sell on health grounds

    1. The a6000 or a6100 are good options for the body, yes. There are not a ton of wide-angle options, and it depends on what you have in mind by “Wide”. The Sony E 16-55mm F2.8 G is excellent but would eat up your entire budget. The ultra-wide Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS is a bit more manageable (close to $900 USD) Otherwise, you might want to try some primes instead of a zoom… the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 is quite good, and not very expensive, for example.

      You might want to take a look at my nearly complete list of lenses for Sony E mount.

  14. What do you think for an upcoming Video Creator. Should i buy a used 6400 or a new 6100 they are about the Same Price Range.
    My Priorities are cinematic shots and Professional produced ads.

  15. Do both have same JPEG colors. I have seen side to side comparison where there are slight differences. A6100 is newer and maybe have latest color algorithms. I suspect A6100 to have slightly better colors compared to A6400. Let me know your views.

    1. That’s a good question, and I don’t think that I can give you a very satisfactory answer. The colors from the two cameras seem very similar to me (and they were only released a few months apart from each other), but I didn’t shoot side by side color comparisons, so I can’t be sure. I always expect ANY two cameras to have slightly different colors in JPGs.

      I also very rarely shoot JPG, and always recommend that photographers shoot RAW anyway (then create a preset for color that you like and apply it to all of your shots on import into Lightroom). Sorry I can’t be of more help.

      1. Hi Mathew, I am Ajay from India. I am new in photography. i have interest in bird photography. i also want to capture portraits, landscape etc. i want to buy sony a 6400 with 16-50 kit lens. should i go with sony 70-350 in order to capture birds keeping in mind my budget that is around 2000 dollar for two lenses and camera body. should i also go with a 35 mm or 50 mm prime lens for portraits and low light photography. please suggest

        1. Hello Ajay,

          The a6400 kit with the 70-350 sounds like an excellent choice for general photography and birds/wildlife, but another good option would be the Sigma 100-400mm OS for Sony E mount (depending on the price in India). Currently, the Sigma 100-400mm costs $910 here, while the Sony 70-350 costs $898, so not much difference, and the Sigma will give you better reach, and it will work on full-frame sensor cameras if you ever borrow or buy one in the future.

          For portraits, I’d recommend the Sony 50mm f/1.8 over the 35, since the 50mm will give you a more flattering perspective. If you find a little extra money in your budget, though, consider the Sigma 56mm f/1.4, which will cost $200 more, but is an incredible lens for APS-C portraits and will give you quite a bit more light. Of course, the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is also an option, but not as ideal a portrait lens, imho.

          Good luck!

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *