jewy asked in Consumer ElectronicsCameras · 2 years ago

Sony a6500 or Canon 7d mark ii ?

for video and photos which is better

4 Answers

Relevance
  • 2 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    The A6500 has in-body image stabilization which makes it better for video than any Canon DSLR. Having IBIS allows you to use any lens and get about a 5 stop advantage over a Canon DSLR. Many buy the 50mm f/1.8 for that blurry background look, but no one makes a stabilized 50mm. With the A6500's in-body image stabilization, you will get 5 stops of stabilization with a 50mm f/1.8 just like you'd do with all lenses you decide to use. That's a HUGE! advantage when making videos, shooting in low light hand held.

    The A6500 has a touch screen, which means you can focus on an area just by touching the screen. That's another advantage that the A6500 has over the 7D Mark ii. Remember, you're using a camera that's first and foremost designed for still photography. When in video mode, no digital camera is going to be able to provide you with the efficient and easy workflow that you'd get from a camcorder costing 1/2 the price. That's just the sacrifice must make when using one device for multiple uses.

    The downside to the A6500 is that it doesn't have an external headphone jack so that you can check the audio while on site. This is not a problem if you plan on using an external audio recorder. If you don't, then you will eventually run into situations where you "thought" the audio was fine, just to find out the next day that the wind ruined the video or the mic wasn't set properly. You need to be able to check the audio while on site. This is a major reason NOT to get the A6500 for video and instead, go with the Panasonic GH4 ($999 at B&H) or the new GH5, instead.

    The 7D Mark ii is specifically designed for the wildlife and sports photographer. If that isn't you, then the A6500 is the better choice. Yes, the A6500 can shoot at 11fps to the 7D ii 10fps, but the 7D ii has a much larger buffer that will allow to shoot at 10fps much longer than the A6500. Again, the only people who really need this kind of capacity are wildlife and sports shooters.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • keerok
    Lv 7
    2 years ago

    For photos, the 7D is far much superior but since you are doing video also, the a6500 would be better. DSLR's were never meant to do video.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 2 years ago

    Both are very capable, both can do video and stills quite well. Canon has a wider lens lineup than the Sony E-mount bodies, but you can adapt almost anything to them, including Canon EF.

    It boils down to personal choice. Do you prefer the size and weight and limitations of the mirrorless bodies and lenses, or the size and weight and cost of Canon's offerings?

    I have a 7D MkII and a Sony A65. The Canon is a fantastic piece of gear, but I rarely use it for video. The A65 is no slouch in most regards, other than high-ISO noise which is much worse than the Canon. It is also older and a LOT cheaper. For stills, whichever I have in hand is fine for me. For video, I prefer the Sony way of doing things over the Canon way. The actual video is not an issue from either, it the method used to get that video. Sony is much more camcorder-like in operation and (to me) just much simpler to use for video. The A6500 is slightly different than the A65 due it being a mirrorless, but I believe it is going to be a simpler video capture device than the Canon.

    You'd really need to get one of each in hand and determine which you prefer. Looking at pictures and reviews all day doesn't help in that regard, unless one model has a feature the other doesn't, and you absolutely require that feature. In that case, you get the camera that has that required feature.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 2 years ago

    sonny

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.