Sony A7C II Photo & Video Review
Recently, I transitioned full-time to the Sony A7C II. I had previously owned the Sony A7C, the Sony A7S III, and the Sony A6700. The A7C is essentially an amalgamation of these three cameras. I believe it might be the perfect camera for content creators and photographers. Let me explain why in my review.
I want to first discuss the content creation aspect of the A7C II, as many people perceive it to be a less capable version of the ZV-E1 or the Sony A7S III. As someone who owned the Sony A7S III for a few years, I can attest that it was a very capable camera, but realistically, it exceeded my needs. I owned the Sony A7S III concurrently with the A7C and often found myself using the A7C for certain tasks and the A7S III for others. When I finally considered the A7C II, I realized it was the best decision for me as a content creator and photographer.
So, why is it so good for content creators? It features what I believe to be the best-designed user interface that Sony has produced to date. It is nearly identical to the A6700, which I owned previously, and also resembles the ZV-E line. It has the updated menu system found in all of Sony's latest cameras, the ability to shoot in S-Cinetone in full 10-bit 4K at 30fps, and the option to use active stabilization in addition to the in-body image stabilization (IBIS). It also includes the new improved hot shoe interface, which is compatible with some external accessories, although I have not yet had the opportunity to test this feature.
However, I do have some complaints about the A7C as a content creator, starting with the lack of improvement in the electronic viewfinder (EVF). The EVF has been a source of frustration for me on the original A7C and the A6700, as all three of these cameras in Sony's high-performance rangefinder style have relatively lackluster LCD displays. It seems to be an area where they save costs, which is why Canon cameras tend to be more expensive. I find it quite annoying how dim and low-resolution their LCD displays are. While they are usable, they are frustratingly low resolution given the technology available today.
When shooting outdoors and trying to frame shots, the dim screen forces you to rely on the EVF, only to discover that the EVF is also low resolution and has a small magnification. This makes it usable but frustrating, especially considering the price of these cameras. The interface is good in terms of ergonomics and customizable buttons, but the quality of the LCD and EVF is disappointing, to say the least.
When it comes to recording video with the A7C II, it is essentially the A7C but with the specifications of the A7 IV. That is literally what this camera is. However, when I shoot with it, I don't often compare it to the A7C in my mind; it feels like a capable replacement for the A7S III. The main area where you might feel it underperforms compared to the A7S III is the lack of 4K 50fps uncropped or 4K 120fps options. If you want to shoot at 100fps or 120fps, you must switch to full HD mode. However, in my experience, as I mentioned in my A7C review, this is not something that is particularly noticeable or concerning. For my needs, it is sufficient.
From a photography perspective, the A7C II is quite similar to the A7C. You gain 7 megapixels in resolution when in full-frame mode and not in crop mode, but apart from that, I don't see any major benefits. If I were deciding between the A7C and the A7C II, the video specifications would be the deciding factor. From a photography standpoint, I would likely choose the A7C. The display and the number of buttons are the same. However, the A7C II does feature a front dial, which I have set to shutter speed, and the rear dial is set to aperture control.
Speaking of dials, the exposure compensation dial found on the A7C is now a multifunction dial on the A7C II. I still have it set to exposure compensation, but it can be configured for various functions, providing an additional dial to work with, though it is not one I frequently consider.
Another area for improvement on the A7C II, as well as on the A6700, is the inclusion of a full HDMI port. These cameras still utilize a micro HDMI port, which, due to the port layout, seems to be the largest option feasible. However, when compared to the A7S III, they are quite similar in size, so a full HDMI port should be possible on these cameras.
If I were choosing between the Sony A7C, the A7S III, and the A7C II, considering their differing price points, I believe the A7C II offers the best of both worlds. The A7C, as I mentioned in my original review, is one of the best bang-for-buck full-frame options available if you are okay with not having 10-bit 4K. Nevertheless, the original A7C can still deliver high-quality photos and videos, and you won't notice much difference. The A7S III is, of course, a low-light powerhouse, excellent for video, and produces low-resolution photos that still look very nice. It likely has the best interface of the three cameras, given its high-resolution EVF and superior LCD screen.
However, with the Sony A7C II, we gain some of that punchy, higher-quality video in terms of 10-bit 4K at up to 60fps, and we can also shoot in 10-bit 1080p at 120fps. Additionally, we benefit from the 33-megapixel sensor over both of the other cameras. It also includes all the new advanced AI functions, although I cannot say that I have noticed a significant difference in the AI autofocus compared to either the Sony A7C or the A7S III; they seem quite comparable.
If it were up to me and I had the choice to buy two A7Cs or one A7C II, I might lean towards purchasing two A7Cs. I will leave it here for now; don't be surprised if you read another blog from me soon in which I have sold my A7C II and bought two A7Cs. Or three—why not? Have a good day.
