by our friends over at Squarespace.

What's going on hybrid shooters?

It's Jason Vong.

And today we'll be taking an in-depth look between

the Sony a7III versus the Sony a6500.

Two of the best mirrorless cameras

that you can get from Sony right now.

So I'm gonna be honest,

I have not used the a6500 that much, this year

and that's largely because of the a7rIII and the a7III.

It just made my life so much easier

in terms of production convenience.

Before the a7III I was using the a6500 almost exclusively

even though I have the full-frame a7rII.

I took this camera to Japan,

even shot a review with it out there

and bought a whole bunch of APS-C lenses

and I loved every bit of it.

The form factor, the video quality, the amazing auto focus.

It was literally better than the a7rII and the SII.

Well, minus the 42 megapixel from the RII

and the amazing low light capability of the SII.

The thing was this camera, albeit tiny,

packed a ton of pro features you would normally find

in those full-frame cameras that existed at the time.

Like a 120p slow motion, S-log profiles,

in body image stabilization,

continuous high auto focus, et cetera.

So even with the a7III out now, it didn't strip away

any of those amazing features that I talked about.

Those are still there in this camera.

So this video is mainly for anybody who's looking to pick up

either of these cameras for their first time

to see what they're gonna be getting themselves into

or somebody who has an a6500 already,

to see if it's worth upgrading to the a7III.

So in this video, not only will I be going over

the difference in specs,

but also the differences in user experience.

So let's first talk about how they're similar

but also different at the same time.

So they're both 24 megapixel cameras

but does that mean they yield the same image quality?

Well, this is where we get into the difference

between sensor sizes.

One is a full-frame sensor (camera shutter clicks)

and the other is

an APS-C sensor. (camera shutter clicks)

So, the full-frame sensor, is obviously a little bit bigger,

but also produces sharper results, better depth of field

and better low-light performance,

And that's not to say the a6500 is not capable of that.

(camera shutter clicks) If you pair it up

with high quality lenses,

you really know (camera shutter clicks)

your camera settings,

you're in (camera shutter clicks)

optimal lighting condition,

the a6500 can produce (camera shutter clicks)

very similar results. (camera shutter clicks)

Both cameras can shoot videos up to 4K,

30 frames per second and 1080p,

up to 120 frames per second, no cropping.

Now both cameras over samples the 4K footage,

so you're getting really crispy ass

(camera shutter clicks) videos.

Though I don't know why the a7III has a 1.2 times crop

when you're shooting 4K30.

Both cameras have touchscreen capabilities,

which allows you to change the focus point quickly

but I honestly haven't used it as much,

since the a7III now has a joystick and I much prefer

to use that and change my focus points

than touching my screen.

Both cameras have 5-axis in body image stabilization,

though the rolling shutter on the a6500,

is a lot more severe when you're shooting in 4K,

but I have gotten great results hand holding the a6500

with an 85 millimeter lens but I did do steady panning

instead of these fast whip hands.

Feels like I'm doing some sort of

medicine ball exercise right now.

(audible heavy breathing)

I'm winded now.

Both cameras are capable of face detection auto focus

making them great for vlogging

and for talking head style interviews

and both are capable of eye auto focus

making them great for portraits.

So, now let's talk about

what makes them different different.

There are only 425 face detection auto focus points

in the a6500

versus 693 in the a7III.

That means there are more focus points

spread across the screen of the a7III

and it will do a better job at keeping a moving subject

in focus across the screen.

Now the a7III (camera clicking continuously)

is only capable of 10 frames per second

versus the 11 frames per second in the a6500.

To some people (camera shutter clicks)

that one frame per second

makes a (camera shutter clicks)

world of a difference,

but if you're not (camera shutter clicks)

shooting anything fast-paced,

then the difference (camera shutter clicks)

is almost negligible.

Speaking of fast pace, (camera shutter clicks)

the writing buffer. (camera shutter clicks)

Thanks to the new

(camera shutter clicks) Bion-ekzi chip implemented

in the series III cameras, writing in photos is much faster.

Again, if you're dependent on the shot and the speedy

workflow, this also might be something to consider.

Next, let's move on to form factor.

Physical difference, it's hard to ignore.

One is rectangular and the other straight up looks

like it has a giant bulbous pimple that needs to be popped.

You're welcome.

Okay, just kidding about that.

The ideas of mirrorless cameras are that they are

lightweight and much more compact on your traditional DSLRs,

and the a6500 in my opinion,

is the living embodiment of those ideals.

The a 6500 is definitely a lot more low-profile,

travel-friendly camera,

especially when you pair it up with the APS-C lenses.

Not to make the a7III sound massive or anything,

it still loads lighter and smaller

compared to the other full-frame DSLRs in the market.

It's just, in comparison, the a7III does take up

a little bit more room than the a6500

and if you really want to maximize the capabilities

of your a7III, then you would want to use full-frame lenses,

and depending on what they are,

they can add up weight and space.

There are, of course, lightweight full-frame prime lenses

but overall the ecosystem and footprint of the a 6500

and its lenses are much smaller.

Alright, so let's go ahead

and move on to some of the biggest

reasons why I swapped from the a6500 to the a7III.

And it's largely due to convenience.

Now, the biggest convenience,

and I think a lot of people can universally agree on this,

is the battery life.

The new FZ 100 battery holds a lot more charge,

thus making the a7III lasts way longer.

Imagine only having to carry two to three

of these batteries for a whole day shoot

verses eight to nine of these FW 50 batteries.

I don't bring battery chargers to weddings anymore

and the fact that you don't have to worry about battery

is very liberating.

Next up is the screen dimming,

whenever you're shooting 4K videos,

because of the new battery there is no screen dimming

when you're shooting in 4K with the a7III or the a7rIII,

which makes it incredibly helpful

when you're shooting in broad daylight,

especially when you're flying a gimbal.

Moving on to a topic that I know I'll get questions on,

yes the a7III has a much higher heat tolerance level

than the a 6500.

No, I haven't had the a7III shut off on me

because it was too hot outside.

It did extremely well

in a high 80 degree Fahrenheit weather,

shooting 4K for roughly two and a half hours long.

With other cameras, I recommend setting

auto power off temperature to high.

This prevents a camera from shutting off

when a fuse is too hot.

Next up, is a low-light.

Again, if you're caught in a situation

where you have no control of the lighting,

the bigger sensor and the better ISO performance

can come in clutch with the a7III.

I often find myself shooting from day to night,

especially at weddings where it's super bright

in broad daylight outdoors

to really dimly lit reception area.

So the a7III definitely is super helpful in that situation.

Next up, super 35 Mode.

The a7III can use APS-C lenses without any sort of

vignetting problem, but also when you use

full-frame lenses on a7III, turn on that super 35 mode

and you'll get some extra reaches

out of your full-frame lenses.

Next up is the headphone jack, which the a6500 lacks.

This is great for monitoring audio,

which is arguably a must-have thing for filmmakers.

Next up, is something that I talked about earlier,

which is the joystick, and it just helps me

change focus points much easier and faster

and I much prefer this over the touch screen.

Moving on, dual SD card slots which the a7III has

and it's just helpful for having a redundant recording

for professional work or help you sort videos

and photos in two separate cards.

And this just goes without saying,

if you're getting paid a lot of money,

you should have some sort of backup.

Now this actually might be an inconvenience for some.

If you purchase a lot of those play memory apps

on the a6000 or the

earlier gen a7 cameras,

unfortunately you would not be able to use them

on your a7III 7-3 or your a9 or your a7rIII.

Alright, so let's go ahead and talk about

everyone's favorite topic:

Money, and how much is this gonna cost ya?

So the a6500 now has a brand new low price of $1,100

versus the a7III with its $2,000 price tag.

Now holiday sales are coming up and while I can't promise

you that the a7III will be any lower than it is now,

the a6500 might have a slight discount.

Also can't really promise you that,

but if you're in need of a discount

and if you have access to a student ID,

you can actually get either of these cameras for

about 10% off from your authorized retailers

like B&H and Adorama.

So try to check up on that.

The a7III is actually considered

the most affordable full-frame camera in the market

right now and that's relatively speaking.

Especially when you're comparing the other cameras

within the same caliber and those cost me about

three to four thousand dollars themselves.

But $900 is still a whopping difference

between these two camera systems right here.

You can really use the $900 that you save

and get some really kick-ass lenses

like the Sigma 16 millimeter F1.4

and the 30 millimeter 1.4.

And having those set of lenses right there

with your a6500 will give you a very beast combo.

And when you choose to get the a7III

you're also buying into a more expensive ecosystem.

Just to give you guys an idea between the cost

of an APS-C lens versus a full frame lens,

these two lenses that I'm putting together,

putting against each other are relatively similar

in their focal lengths with the multiplications

already added for the APS-C lenses.

So something like a Zeiss 16-17f/4 APS-C

versus a full-frame 24-105,

the APS-C version cost $900 versus $1,300

for the full frame equivalent.