Canon R7 vs Sony A6600 - Full Comparison 

To me, A6600 skin tone is more natural and closer to real human skin color. Thank you for review.

It is good to see that my A6400 is still holding it’s own. I think Canon is asking a mistake in not allowing 3rd party lenses. Still, I would like to see Sony come out with a new model that had good bird eye focus. It almost seems like Sony is pushing people to the more expensive full frame. I love your BIF comparisons.

wich camera have lower noise ?

I sold my RF mount series canon camera and lenses because of the 3rd party ban. Now I'm investigating nikon and sony. This has been one of the best video comparisons. Sony is scheduled to release a successor to the A6600 Mid 2023. I imagine it will be on par with the R7. The only thing that drives me crazy about Sony is the lack of Prime BIF lenses.

Toujours très complet comme d'habitude, mais j'ai plus une question sur la technique photo sur tes photos de rapace avec ce genre d'appareils. Je suppose que tu shootes en manuel et avec des isos auto ou prédéfinis. Avec des buffers de 2 à 4s pour les RAW (R7 & a6000) (j'exclu le mode RAW 15s pour l'exemple), pour les rapaces, est-ce que tu shooterais (dans la vraie vie) en RAW quitte à recommencer plus souvent ou est-ce que tu shooterais en JPG, car pour ce genre de shoot, au final les paramètres d'expositions sont maîtrisés, les différences entre Jpg & RAW et les retouches en jpg sont au final minimes ? Merci par avance pour une éventuelle réponse de ta part.

Excelente trabajo, gracias.

Great video! Can I nudge you to check out the Xh2S with firmware 3.0 update? Curious if it would outperform these options!

Very useful comparison review, thank you. I really like the R7 features, but after seeing the cameras side by side I really like the compact nature of the 6600. I do most of my photography while travelling and after carting around a 20D +17-85mm at over 1300 grams for years I'm very keen for my next camera to be more compact and lighter while still having come strong features. So for now I think I'll wait and see if Sony bring out an A6700/7000 this year. After all I have to replace my lenses anyways if I want to go lighter and not use an adaptor.

very useful comparison Thanks for detail both cameras

Nice video,useful,Mathieu. But Arthur R said in his Y.T video that the inbody stabilization of the A6600 is not the greatest(and he is a Sony shooter). It's better to choose a stabilized lens and an A6400 I don't know, is that true?

Fantastic review....as usual. 2 things that, for me, make the A6600 my only choice. First is the size. If I'm shooting APS-C it's because the circumstances favor a compact rig. I would feel like a total dork, bringing my A7RV to my grandsons birthday party. With the R7, unless you are willing to use the kit lens, inconspicuous is not an option, and even then, it's not inconspicuous.. The same applies to travel. Second of course is the lens situation. You covered that pretty well, but a couple things to consider. If you are buying the R7 it's likely you are on a budget. Canon R mount glass is anything but budget glass. Also, consider that it is likely, given the age of the A6600, that Sony will be releasing a replacement in the near future. It will presumedly be equal to, or better than the R7 in most regards, and with the E mount lens selection will, will be near unbeatable. (Fuji shooters may disagree on that one) . Just my opinion. (Oh, a 3rd reason. I have owned the A6600 from the day it was released and have a pretty complete collection of high quality glass for it.😉)

R7 is the better camera in several important (for me) aspects. But the proverbial 'elephant in the room' are the lenses. It's a vast advantage in Sony land. If I had to pick between them, I would take the Sony based on that alone.

IMHO OFF/ON/Video switch on the R7 is a big mistake ! I had accidentally switched in all the way to Video instead of just ON a number of times ! Why not to adopt the commonly used Nikon/Fuji/Sony power on style button around the shutter button ??

Fantastic review....still i am in confusion bcs sony is more compact and i am a Canon user..

Great comparison! As a6600 user I miss the most, 4k/60 video, focus bracketing and more modern menu system.

I use an a6600 for wildlife photography. I wish this camera would get bird eye af with a firmware just like the A7III got animal eye af. This camera could have became so much better with some firmware updates. I See that cameras like the R7 have it and have higher frame rate, better specs for roughly the same price. I Feel like Canon is the only one (from Canon, Sony, Nikon triangle) that has budget friendly cameras that are good for wildlife photography. Sony hasn't even looked at their APS-Cs for a long time. I feel neglected. It makes me want to switch to Canon. But...when it comes to the lenses, that's a total deal breaker. RF 100-400 is only f/5.6-8!!! I don't want that on an APS-C. I love the Sony 200-600 f/5.6-6.3. If I want a canon lens with similar performance I have to pay a lot and I can not afford that. So this makes me stay with Sony and wait for the new APS-C that I'm sure will be expensive and I can not afford that either.. Also IF I'd buy full frame, the problem is the same. I'd buy an A7IV (that's the cheapest Sony with Bird eye af), but only 6 fps when shooting uncompressed raw? For this price why can I not get at least 20 fps? So when it comes to camera body I want Canon, but I also want a normal and affordable lens, that makes me stay with Sony. Something is missing on both sides.

Good fair comparison. I think when you introduced the A6400 as the budget one for Sony into the discussion would have been nice to also include the equivalent cheap Canon R10. Although have been a Canon user for a couple decades I won't be getting any R mount. I'm done with Canon. I will be getting a totally new mount camera just before spring just not rushing into things just yet too many good options Fuji XH2s, OM-1 and Nikon as yet to announce a Z8 which is what I really want (mini Z9) or you never know Sony might give us an A7000 with a stacked sensor they seemed to have slowed right down with new innovations considering they supply the other top cameras with their sensors well ahead of Canon.

I bought a6600 2 years ago. All I need is just second card slot and sharp full hd or 60p 4k. That's all.

Hm I like the canon look better. For a first camera should I go with canon 90D or should I just get the R7 since it’s mirrorless ?

I currently own a Sony a6600 and like it a lot. However, the Canon offers some attractive features that are absent in the Sony and that I'd really like to have. One of them is the joystick and D-pad arrangement that lets you quickly and easily set a focus point. I find I can't do that as easily with the Sony. 10-bit 4:2:2 video is also a bonus. I've always favoured Canon's menu systems because they are quite user-friendly. I'm not too pleased with their refusal to let third-party manufacturers access the RF mount. This, I think, is going to hurt Canon badly in the long run and alienate both current and future buyers. On the other hand, Canon are bringing out more affordable RF-S and RF lenses, so this may ultimately be a moot point. I'm not worried about the Canon's higher noise levels as these can be fixed in Lightroom or with a programme like Topaz AI. I've always found Canon colours to be a bit better and richer anyway. But even Sony's weird colour gamut can be fixed in Lightroom too. Now, the big question is, do I dump my Sony a6600 and 18 - 135 lens (which is a good performer, by the way), take a loss on both and then break out one of my credit cards to stump up the difference in cost? In terms of overall image quality, both cameras are more or less neck-and-neck with each other. And the fact that the Sony performs well up against the Canon despite using older technology says something. Or do I wait for Sony to announce its pending new camera, which will be up one level from the a6600, and is supposed to hit the market late this spring? If it meets or beats the Canon in terms of performance without costing an arm and a leg, I can sell off the a6600 body and keep my lens to keep costs down a little.

There is virtually no macro subject that doesn't end up totally ruined by focus stacking attempts. Better to nail the focus on selected important areas than to ruin the image by attempting to create and calculate a focus stack!

Canon not allowing to grow an ecosystem around its system is a no go, period. If MFT only had a native 3:2 image sensor format I'd have stayed there, but now I am locked into Sony. Even as this system has its quirks and Sony is asking for unreasonable prices, I am now locked into this System. I really enjoy its compactness and I am completely happy to select from APSC lenses from Sigma and Tamron ... do not miss anything here (besides Sony still didn't manage really to implement Focus Stacking for years now)

In my country the A6600 is US$550 cheaper than the R7. Canon seems to set their prices according to a specific market. The A6600 has a similar price to the R10.

Excellent as normal. Regards..

Merci pour cette vidéo très utile. Je me demandais s'il était pertinent d'utiliser un A6400 pour des photos de sport avec un 70 200 en spot suivi. Les suivis de rapaces et le cliché de football montrent que c'est une vraie possibilité.

I apologize because my English is very poor and I am using Google translate. I have a Sony a6300, which is very old. I have several Sony optics and I would like to change to the a6700. I would like you to do a review on this camera, because your opinions seem very objective to me. Thank you Greetings

Always good to see Heather.

Would like to see a comparison between r7, om1, xh2s and xh2

Another excellent review, with much appreciated detail. In discussing budget options, it would also be worth mentioning the Canon R10, which is $800 (Canadian) less than the R7 with many of its more desirable features, like bird-eye autofocus. I might also play devil's advocate on the lack of 3rd party RF lenses. Like most Canon shooters, I was annoyed by this decision, as I was a big fan of both my Tamron 100-400 Di VC and Sigma 150-600C for birding. But there may be method in their madness. Firstly, I am blown away by the quality of the RF 100-500, which is lighter than both the Tamron and Sigma that it replaced. Moreover, focus accuracy and responsiveness, image stabilization, and image quality are simply breathtaking, as one would expect for L glass. While cost is an issue, it's not like Canon is ignoring the budget market e.g. with their RF 100-400 and the F11 primes, all of which are well reviewed. Given a shrinking market for "real cameras" (as opposed to smartphones) and pressure to grow profitable lens sales, I can easily see other camera manufacturers following Canon's example if they manages to make it work. Merci pour une autre critique impressionnante!

The recent OM-5 is another compact wildlife birding option if we want to be very compact.

With the Canon the only lens choice is the Canon 100-500 which is 2700 dollars with the Sony you can use the Tampon 150-500 for 1200 dollars. this fact will help people make their choice. for birds I'd take the Sony/Tamron combo all day long

The R7 is way better the a6600 Thanks for the video

Comparing an almost new Camera with a Camera that are more than 3 years old, that alone tells how good the Sony was/are. I like that the Sony are just as compact as an APSC Camera should be, I also like that the viewfinder are out in the corner of the Camera. Best buy are the Sony, you can get so much more Lenses for the Sony !

Buy a Sony fx30 and do this proper

Canon = workhorse for wildlife Sony = toy for Travel and Family

since ibis is usless and only good for photo, instead of get 6600, u can get 6400 for saving 500 usd. With that money saving, spend more 200 usd for lens tamron 17-70. It have vr so u dont have to worry about image stab.

R7 is waaaaaaaaaaaay better. no doubt

I would not praise the R7 too much: - clog3 recording is NOISE PURE, HDR PQ is usable and nice but clog3 you better overexpose to hell to get a somewhat decent footage to edit. - 1080p120 is ok, but damn... 180 at least, better a proper 240 would have been nice. I could have lived even with a static crop for it! Or 720p 480 or so... - Canons lens options are nonsense and/or overpriced, recently proved by the new low end full frame kit lens with the 24-50 (24 is at best "a bit wide" and 50 is on full frame not even properly usable for any portrait style). In comparison, my R7 with an old EF-S 17-55 2.8 outperforms the R8+24-50 by A LOT for less than the R8 alone. - yeah its a great wildlife/photo camera with 15 fps efcs... but DONT TRUST THE 15 fps (or the rolling shutter infected 30 fps electronical)..... As a RF 800 F11 and light lens owner i can say 15 fps works only fine above 1/2000 shutter speed to make sure the images are sharp, the light weight of the R7 in combination with a not too sturdy or heavy lens lead to shutter shock issues easly. But this only affects: small, very light primes, my RF 800 F11 and EF 28-135. Funny thing is.... the EOS RP i had before never had any shutter shock issues (tho it does only shoot 5 fps, not 15, R7 in 7,5 fps mode is also fine in ANY shutter speed with EFCS) If i would have known the R7s drawbacks before i bought it (nobody mentioned ANY of them except the "bad" 4k60 once) i would have got a 2nd hand 90D instead, probably on budget even a cheaper 80D and kept just photo/wildlife centric. The shutter shock in 15 fps annoys me the most, so i am forced to use either electronic 30 fps at shutter speeds below 1/500 or go straight up to 1/2000+ for 15 fps EFCS with a one button click to switch between 15 EFCS or "silent" mode for 30 fps electronic. I adopted to this hassle already pretty good and i know when im best fitted to ES at 1/500 or slower and EFCS at 1/2000+, but just the fact that we have to live with limitations/problems no DSLR had before is pretty annoying.

Being able to use Sigma Art lenses without needing an adapter is Sony's advantage over Canon.

No 4K 60p . No bueno.

The sony skintone is so red 🫠

I hate the Sony JPEGs