6D trade for a6500?

[ph2003]

Hi guys, I need some opinion.
I'm thinking its about time to trade my 6D for another sony camera. (easier to match the grade in post)
currently I own a7s GH4 (with Atomos Assassin for 4k 10bit) and a 6D.

For video work:
I do mostly wedding on a7s and 6D as Bcam (if light is okay I will be using GH4)
and GH4 4k 10bit for commercial/Interview work, a7s as Bcam.

For still work:
6D is main camera and a7s as second cam.

I have limited budget, so a7rII or a7sII is out off question.
I actually didn't wanted to buy a7sII for now because it doesn't have tourch screen PDAF (that why I got a7s instead) so maybe a7sII ;P

now the a6500 is out and it has all the spec I wanted (But an apsc sensor, \I wont getting a speedbooster because I want the PDAF)
my concern is:
-how soft is the 1080p in this cam? from what I read the a6300 1080p is so soft, only 4k is crisp. so a6500 will be the same as a6300? they used the same sensor.
-will the 1080p 120fps usable? (a7s 120fps is quite soft, how it compared to the a7s 120fps @720p?)
-will a6500 still raw can hold up against the 6D? will I regret it for still photography? I suppose the a65000 24mp will be better than 6D 20mp?
-ISO in low light will it better than 6D in video and still?

Anyone have the a6500, can give some input?
Thanks!

 

[Samuel H]

I think the a6500 1080p is soft, but still better than that from the 6D, which IIRC has relatively bad aliasing/moire. Plus, the Sony has lots more DR.

And yet I'm not sure you'd want to switch: for stills, unless you're shooting at low ISO, the 6D is clearly better. In terms of resolution, at low ISO the a6300 is actually sharper, but at ISO 3200 the 6D is still clean and the a6300 is already showing noise. According to dxomark, the 6D advantage is around one stop.
(I'm always assuming a6300 and a6500 have the same image quality, and IBIS is the only difference)

 

[ph2003]

And yet I'm not sure you'd want to switch: for stills, unless you're shooting at low ISO, the 6D is clearly better. In terms of resolution, at low ISO the a6300 is actually sharper, but at ISO 3200 the 6D is still clean and the a6300 is already showing noise. According to dxomark, the 6D advantage is around one stop.
(I'm always assuming a6300 and a6500 have the same image quality, and IBIS is the only difference)

Wow I didnt know Dpreview has a image tools like this, very nice! (hope there will be a video library sample like this too haha)
From the sample I see there, I can live with the 1 stop noise and trade up for IBIS and PDAF for video.
I hope the sample is accurate tho ;P

Thanks!

 

[Samuel H]

Well, it's shot with the actual camera, so it should be accurate... for those settings. They use a decent prime, stopped down. In this case, Canon 85mm f/1.8 set at f/5.6, and Sony 55mm f/1.8 set at f/5.6.

I expected to see a bigger difference: FF is usually sharper than APS-C, but I guess by f/5.6 it's just a megapixel thing. In my case, since my lens set is designed for FF, I'd have to use them with a speedbooster, and that means softer images, specially in the corners (link). Then again, a photography kit based on the a6300 would cost me $2k-$3k, whereas based on the a7R II it would be $7k; much better, sure, but worth the price difference? Luckily I don't have the $$$$ at hand right now so I don't have to answer yet...