Sony A700 vs. Sony A6400: A Hands-On, In-Depth Comparison for Serious Photographers

As someone who has spent over 15 years in the trenches testing cameras - from rugged DSLRs in harsh landscapes to mirrorless bodies at bustling sports venues - I find it fascinating to revisit two Sony cameras that epitomize different eras and philosophies in DSLR and mirrorless design. The Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 (released in 2007) and the Sony Alpha a6400 (announced in 2019) represent a significant leap forward technologically, yet they also cater to overlapping user groups: advanced enthusiasts and professionals seeking performance and image quality in a compact package.

Through exhaustive field testing, lab analysis, and countless hours shooting portraits, landscapes, and fast action, I’ll unpack the real-world strengths and trade-offs of these two cameras - going beyond specs sheets to paint a vivid picture grounded in hands-on experience.

The First Impression: Size, Ergonomics, and Handling

When I first held both cameras side-by-side, I was struck by their physical contrasts. The Sony A700 inherits the classic mid-size SLR silhouette weighing 768g with a sturdy grip and robust build. Its body measures 142x105x80mm, providing a substantial feel and reassuring heft that serious photographers often appreciate. This DSLR features a well-damped shutter and a large pentaprism optical viewfinder with 95% coverage. It’s built to endure: Sony’s environment sealing adds some splash resistance - I found it dependable on misty days.

On the other hand, the Sony A6400 is distinctly smaller, at 120x67x50mm and a featherweight 403g. This rangefinder-style mirrorless design feels nimble and is ideal for photographers on the move or those who prefer less bulk in their rigs. Despite its reduced size, it still manages excellent ergonomics with a deep grip and cleverly placed controls.

Ergonomics-wise, I noted that the A700 offers more tactile buttons reachable without removing my eye from the viewfinder, which I preferred in sports and wildlife shoots. Meanwhile, the A6400’s tilting touchscreen adds a modern flair to interface interaction - particularly useful for street and travel photography.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of Performance

The transition from the A700’s 12-megapixel CMOS APS-C sensor to the A6400’s 24.2-megapixel APS-C CMOS sensor is substantial. Both cameras share the same sensor size: 23.5x15.6mm (366.6 mm²), indicative of standard APS-C crop factors.

From my testing, the A6400’s sensor delivers a noticeable bump in resolution and dynamic range - supported by its DXOMark scores: an overall score of 83, compared to the A700’s much older 66. The A6400 boasts a wider dynamic range (13.6 EV vs. 11.9 EV), better color depth (24.0 bits vs. 22.3 bits), and superior low-light ISO performance (ISO 1431 vs. 581). That means cleaner images at high ISO, more subtle highlight recovery in landscapes, and richer color gradations.

In real-world shooting, this translated into sharper, more detailed prints and more flexible RAW files from the A6400. The A700’s images, while respectable for their era, show more noise creeping in beyond ISO 800, necessitating slower ISOs or tethered flash more often. That increased sensitivity on the A6400 is crucial for wildlife and night photography.

Shooting Experience: Autofocus, Viewfinders, and Controls

Autofocus Systems

The A700’s 11-point phase-detection AF system was impressive back in its day but shows its age now. In fast-paced situations, such as sports or bird-in-flight shooting, I found it less reliable in tracking moving subjects consistently. It supports single, continuous, and selective AF modes but lacks face or eye detection, which makes portraits trickier to nail in live conditions.

The A6400 leaps ahead here with a staggering 425-point hybrid AF system combining phase-detection and contrast-detection points covering nearly the entire frame. Its real-time tracking and eye autofocus for both humans and animals deliver accuracy and confidence in any lighting - especially critical for wildlife and portraiture. The continuous AF at 11fps burst shooting allows me to capture split-second action with sharp results more often than the A700’s modest 5fps.

Viewfinders and LCD Screens

The A700’s optical viewfinder is bright and natural but with just 95% coverage and 0.6x magnification, some framing edge cases get clipped. The A6400’s electronic viewfinder is a high-res 2.35-million dot OLED with 100% coverage and 0.7x magnification, providing a much more precise preview of exposure and depth of field. It also offers real-time focus peaking and histograms - game changers for manual focus and learning exposure control.

The A700 sports a fixed 3-inch LCD with 920k dots, which I found reasonably clear but unremarkable. The A6400’s 3-inch tilting touchscreen with 922k dots is responsive and flips upward for self-portraits and low-angle shots - a useful feature for vloggers and street photographers wanting flexibility. Touch AF and menu navigation modernize the operational flow without overwhelming newcomers.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance

Weather sealing can be a subtle yet critical factor for professional reliability. Both cameras offer environmental sealing designed to resist dust and moisture exposure, but the A700’s build is noticeably more rugged with a magnesium alloy chassis. It held up sturdily against knocks in rugged locations during my alpine assignments.

The A6400, though lighter and more compact, also has good sealing but feels more plastic in hand. It’s still solidly built for travel and street shooting, but I’d hesitate to use it in extreme conditions without extra protective gear.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

Lens choices can make or break your system’s usability. The A700 fits the Sony/Minolta Alpha A-mount lenses - 143 compatible options including many legacy lines adapted from the Konica Minolta era. While versatile, modern lens development has slowed, and the classic AF motor systems sometimes result in less silent or slower focusing.

The A6400 uses Sony’s E-mount lenses, which have flourished in recent years and number around 120. This system boasts fast, quiet autofocus, especially critical for video. Additionally, with adapters, the A6400 supports many vintage and third-party lenses, offering incredible creative flexibility. It's worth noting that most modern E-mount lenses are compact and optimized for mirrorless physics, perfectly complementing the A6400’s small size.

Performance Across Photography Genres

I put both cameras through their paces across multiple photography disciplines - here are my insights:

Portrait Photography

The A6400 excels thanks to face and eye-detection AF that locks on quickly, ensuring sharp eyes and smooth skin tones. Its 24MP sensor captures fine details and colors faithfully, and paired with fast prime lenses, it produces beautiful bokeh and depth.

The A700 is still capable of pleasing portraits under controlled lighting but requires more deliberate focusing technique; no eye detection means more misses in candid moments. However, its subtle sensor-based stabilization aids handheld shooting with longer lenses.

Landscape Photography

Landscape shooters will value the A6400’s wider dynamic range and higher resolution for capturing intricate textures and tonal gradations in shadow and highlights. Its touch-screen live view assists in composing tricky scenes, and while it lacks built-in stabilization, many modern E-mount lenses include optical IS.

The A700, with its sturdy build and weather sealing, encourages rougher use outdoors. Its stabilization system also helps with handheld low-ISO shots. While the lower 12MP sensor might limit ultimate print sizes, the image quality remains solid.

Wildlife Photography

Here the A6400’s AF tracking and higher burst rate (11fps vs 5fps) shine - allowing me to follow unpredictable subjects and capture fleeting behavior. The animal eye AF feature is a real boon, improving keeper rates in demanding field conditions.

The A700’s FPS and AF struggle to keep up with fast wildlife but remain a capable entry-level option for photographers prioritizing optics over speed.

Sports Photography

Fast-action events penalize the A700’s autofocus and burst limitations, though it remains usable for slow-paced sports. The A6400’s higher frame rate and superior AF tracking really deliver in dynamic scenes like soccer matches or skating competitions.

Street Photography

Street photographers may appreciate the A6400’s compactness, tilting touchscreen, and discreet operation - including silent electronic shutter modes (although limited max shutter speed applies). It’s ideal for stalking moments in low light thanks to its excellent ISO performance.

The A700’s bulk and louder shutter are more obtrusive when roaming busy streets but provide a satisfying tactile shooting experience.

Macro Photography

Neither camera is specialized for macro, but I found the A6400 easier to use due to precision AF points and real-time manual focus assist. Its lack of sensor stabilization requires a steady hand or tripod.

The A700 offers sensor-shift stabilization, beneficial for macro work with slower shutter speeds or longer lenses.

Night and Astrophotography

The significant low-light advantage rests with the A6400, capable of clean images up to ISO 3200 and beyond. I’ve shot starscapes and night cityscapes handheld with it, harnessing its larger ISO range and sensor quality.

By contrast, the A700 exhibits more noise artefacts at night and lower ISO ceiling, demanding longer exposures on a tripod.

Video Capabilities

The A700 lacks video recording entirely, a serious limitation as hybrid shooting grows in importance.

In contrast, the A6400 offers 4K UHD video at 30p with high-bit-rate XAVC S encoding, plus microphone input for quality audio capture. Its lack of in-body stabilization means pairing with optically stabilized lenses is advisable, but overall it is a capable hybrid tool for content creators.

Travel Photography

The a6400’s light weight, compact size, and versatile autofocus - paired with Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and NFC connectivity - make it my clear pick for travel photography. Its 410-shot battery life is respectable for a mirrorless and supported by quick USB charging.

The A700’s heft and legacy storage options (CompactFlash, Memory Sticks) make it a more cumbersome choice on extended trips, despite rugged build.

Professional Workflows

The A700 supports dual card slots and has a classic interface favored for tethered studio use; however, its limited resolution and dated processor require more post-processing effort.

The A6400 supports SD cards (UHS-I compliant), single slot only, but provides faster USB transfer and superior RAW files, fitting modern professional workflows better - especially for hybrid photo/video productions.

Connectivity and Storage

Connectivity is another domain where the cameras differ sharply. The A700 offers basic USB 2.0 and HDMI output, but no wireless features - meaning image transfers require cables and dedicated card readers.

The A6400 shines here with Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and NFC for remote control and instant image sharing through Sony’s Imaging Edge app. This wireless convenience is now a standard expectation for many photographers, especially those managing tight deadlines or social media content.

Regarding storage, the A700’s dual CompactFlash/MemStick slots enable flexible backups, while the single SD card slot in the A6400 is faster but less forgiving.

Price-to-Performance Ratio

Currently, the A700 typically appears as a second-hand or used buy around $300–$600, whereas the A6400 is retailing near $900 new.

For budget-conscious buyers focusing on value, the A700 can still deliver solid image quality and build at a fraction of modern prices, especially if you already own A-mount lenses.

However, the A6400 is a significantly better investment for those seeking contemporary performance with longevity, excellent autofocus, 4K video, and a supportive lens ecosystem.

Sony A700 front Sony A700 screen back Sony A6400 front Sony A6400 screen back

Overall Performance Ratings and Summary

Bringing together technical scores and real-world testing metrics:

Regarding genre-specific performance, here’s how I rate both after extensive fieldwork:

Wrapping Up: Which Camera Should You Choose?

Here’s the bottom line from my years of hands-on testing and honest usage scenarios.

• Choose the Sony A700 if:

  • You appreciate the classic DSLR feel with a solid grip and optical viewfinder.
  • Your budget is tight and you’re happy to rely on older but robust technology.
  • You already have a collection of A-mount lenses and want a rugged workhorse.
  • Video recording is not a priority.
  • You shoot slower-paced subjects and controlled environments.

• Choose the Sony A6400 if:

  • You want state-of-the-art autofocus with eye and animal detection.
  • You need high-resolution images and superior low-light performance.
  • Video and hybrid shooting are essential to your workflow.
  • Portability, wireless connectivity, and touchscreen controls enhance your shooting style.
  • You work across demanding genres - sports, wildlife, street - and require speed and accuracy.
  • You value modern lens options and future expansion.

My Final Thoughts

The Sony A6400 stands as a testament to how far camera tech has advanced in just over a decade, blending power, portability, and intelligence. I recommend it to advanced amateurs and professionals alike looking for a versatile, reliable system that suits almost any photography pursuit.

However, the Sony A700 retains a nostalgic charm, solid ergonomics, and respectable performance for photographers valuing a hands-on DSLR experience without breaking the bank.

Both cameras serve different mindsets and times, and knowing their real strengths helps you decide which suits your vision best.

Happy shooting!

Disclosure: I have no direct affiliations with Sony. All testing and opinions are based on extensive personal use over many years.