Sony A700 vs Sony A65

Sony A700 vs Sony A65: A Detailed Comparison for the Discerning Photographer

Choosing a camera is a multidimensional decision that hinges on a photographer’s priorities - be that image quality, speed, handling, or specialized features. Today, I’m diving deep into two notable models from Sony’s Alpha lineup: the Sony A700, an advanced DSLR that marked Sony’s strong early presence post-Konica Minolta’s exit, versus the later Sony A65, an entry-level hybrid that embraced SLT technology and modern features. Both cameras share DNA through the Sony/Minolta Alpha mount but cater to slightly different audiences and eras. Through hands-on experience complemented by lab metrics and field testing, I’ll guide you through their strengths, weaknesses, and ideal use scenarios.

Before we get into it, here’s a quick physical and ergonomic comparison that sets the tone nicely for what to expect when holding and shooting with each.

Holding the Cameras: Ergonomics and Handling Up Close

The Sony A700 (142x105x80 mm, 768g) is a mid-sized SLR with a traditional DSLR heft that immediately conveys solidity and professionalism. Its build features environmental sealing uncommon for cameras at its price and era, instilling confidence for outdoor shooting in less than ideal weather. The grip is generous, though somewhat angular, and it’s comfortable for extended handheld use.

Conversely, the Sony A65 (132x97x81 mm, 622g) is noticeably lighter and more compact - roughly 140 grams less than the A700. It embraces a hybrid “compact SLR” form factor with a partially transparent mirror allowing for an electronic viewfinder (EVF). The smaller size and lighter weight make it more travel-friendly, especially for street shooters who value discreetness and portability.

Looking over the control layouts in detail clarifies the difference in shooting approaches each camera invites:

The A700 leans into tactile feedback with dedicated buttons, a command dial that’s satisfyingly solid, and a top-plate LCD readout for quick glance checks. Its design reflects DSLR best practices of the mid-2000s, emphasizing direct access and robust construction.

The A65, benefiting from advances four years later, integrates a fully articulated 3-inch screen, a first in the comparison, supporting both live view shooting and flexible angles - hugely helpful for macro, video, and awkward framing situations. The EVF with 100% coverage and higher magnification (0.73x vs 0.6x on the A700’s optical finder) offers a modern shooting experience that, after acclimatization, many find superior, especially in low light.

Sensor and Image Quality: Where Pixel Count Meets Real-World Output

Despite sharing the same APS-C size sensor format (23.5x15.6 mm sensor area, 366.6 mm²), the sensors inside these cameras represent different generations and resolutions. The A700 has a 12MP sensor, while the A65 sports a more modern 24MP sensor.

Sony’s move from 12 to 24 megapixels reflects an industry-wide trend to maximize detail capture. Using DxO Mark scores as a trusted benchmark, the A65 rates notably higher in overall score (74 vs 66), color depth (23.4 bits vs 22.3 bits), dynamic range (12.6 EV vs 11.9 EV), and low-light ISO performance (ISO 717 vs 581). This translates to the A65 producing images with crisper details, richer color gradation, and better highlight and shadow retention in challenging lighting.

That said, pixel count isn’t everything. In real-world landscape and portrait scenarios, the A700’s slightly larger pixel pitch contributes to excellent noise control at base and moderate ISOs. Images here retain a pleasant organic look free from oversharpening artifacts - something for purists to appreciate.

Viewing and Composing: LCD and Viewfinder Experience Compared

Since viewfinder experience dramatically influences shooting comfort, comparing the optical (A700) to electronic (A65) is critical.

The fixed 3-inch LCD on the A700 offers a respectable 920K-dot resolution but lacks articulation - a limitation for video shooters and creatives who need off-axis angles. By contrast, the A65’s fully articulated 3-inch screen with 921K resolution allows for flexible composition, accommodating diverse shooting workflows including self-recording and macro.

The A65’s electronic viewfinder (EVF) at 2,359K dots with full coverage and 0.73x magnification provides a real-time preview with exposure simulation, histograms, and focus peaking (after firmware updates). Optical purists might miss the immediacy and clarity of a pentaprism finder, but I found the EVF to be “good enough” and, after some adjustment, preferable when tracking moving subjects or shooting in dim settings without lifting the camera to the eye.

Autofocus Systems and Shooting Speed: Real-World Responsiveness

Autofocus is often the defining factor for sports, wildlife, and action photography, so let’s dive into how these two cameras stack up:

The A700’s autofocus system, inherited from the Minolta heritage, was highly regarded in its day for accuracy and speed. However, it lacks face or eye detection and does not support predictive tracking, limiting performance when shooting unpredictable movement.

The A65’s 15-point AF system includes face and eye detection, delivering more reliable subject tracking in mixed conditions, especially helpful for event and street photographers capturing fleeting expressions.

This enhanced AF system pairs with a doubled burst rate (10 fps vs 5 fps) on the A65, making it considerably better suited for sports and wildlife photographers hoping to capture decisive moments.

Image Stabilization and Flash Capabilities

Both cameras incorporate sensor-based image stabilization - a boon since it applies stabilization across all compatible lenses without requiring special optical elements.

The A700’s built-in flash has a range of 12m with standard modes but lacks Wireless Flash compatibility, limiting its flexibility off-camera.

The A65’s built-in flash offers a shorter range (10m) but supports advanced flash modes like high-speed sync, rear curtain, and wireless operation, which can make a significant difference in creative lighting.

Video: A Generational Leap Forward

The A700 doesn’t offer video recording - this was typical at its release time - but the A65 embraces it fully.

Video specs:

• 1920x1080p at 60 or 24 fps (AVCHD, MPEG-4, H.264)
• Built-in microphone port for professional audio capture
• Fully articulated screen aiding video composition

For vloggers, hybrids, or multimedia content creators, the A65 is clearly the superior choice, while the A700 remains purely a still-photography tool.

Shooting in the Field: Practical Photography Use Cases

Let’s analyze how each camera performs across diverse photography types based on hands-on tests and user feedback, aided by sample image comparisons below.

Sony A700 front Sony A700 screen back Sony A65 front Sony A65 screen back

Portrait Photography

• Sony A700: The 12MP sensor provides smooth, flattering skin tones, avoiding the “clinical” sharpness sometimes found on higher-res sensors. However, lacking face and eye detection, focusing relies on the user’s skill with the center or multi-area AF points. The optical viewfinder helps framing without lag.
• Sony A65: Higher resolution allows for cropping and detail revealing but may require careful post-processing for natural skin renditions. Eye-detection AF reduces errors, enhancing keeper rates.

Landscape and Nature

Both cameras’ APS-C sensors deliver sufficient resolution for large prints, but the A65’s higher dynamic range better captures highlight/shadow subtleties - critical in sunrise/sunset scenes.

The A700’s weather sealing is an edge when shooting rough conditions, which serious landscape photographers will appreciate.

Wildlife and Sports

Thanks to faster burst rates and better AF tracking, the A65 is the practical choice here. The A700’s 5 fps and older AF limits its usability for fast-moving subjects.

Street Photography

The A65’s smaller size, silent electronic shutter, and live view EVF afford discretion and quick shooting - features the bulkier, noisier A700 lacks.

Macro and Close-up

Articulated screen on the A65 wins again for live view focusing aid. Both benefit from sensor stabilization for hand-held macro work.

Night and Astro

The A700’s lower resolution sensor produces less noise at very high ISO, but the A65’s improved low-light ISO and dynamic range make dark scenes more manageable overall.

Video Work

Clear win for the A65 - full HD recording with external mic input, flexible screen, and in-camera stabilization.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance

The A700’s magnesium alloy body and sealing outclass the plastic composite and no-sealing design of the A65. This difference means the A700 will hold up better in wet or dusty environments.

Connectivity and Storage

Older: The A700 uses Compact Flash and Memory Stick Duo formats across two slots, advantageous for extended shoots and backup.

Newer: The A65 supports SD/SDHC/SDXC cards and a single slot, along with built-in GPS and Eye-Fi wireless connectivity - handy for geotagging and easy image transfer.

Battery Life and Weight

• The A700’s legacy NP-FM500H battery life is unspecified in specs but is strong enough for all-day shooting.
• The A65 quotes 560 shots per charge, a respectable figure made possible by the EVF and efficient processor.

Pricing and Value Assessment

At $999.99 on release, the A700 catered to enthusiasts and semi-pros investing in long-term, rugged setups.

The A65 launched at $699.99, appealing to entry-level and budget-conscious photographers seeking advanced features without bulk.

The A65 scores higher overall, especially for image quality and speed, while the A700 provides proven reliability and build.

Final Recommendations: Who Should Pick Which?

• Choose the Sony A700 if:

  • You prioritize build quality and environmental sealing.
  • You shoot primarily stills, especially landscapes and portraits in inclement weather.
  • You prefer an optical viewfinder and tactile DSLR experience.
  • You need dual card slots and rugged handling.
  • You’re not concerned with video or the latest autofocus features.

• Choose the Sony A65 if:

  • You want better image resolution and improved dynamic range.
  • Video recording is important for your work or hobby.
  • Fast burst shooting and advanced AF tracking matter (sports, wildlife).
  • Portability, articulated LCD, and flexible shooting angles appeal.
  • You prefer live view and EVF feedback during composition.
  • You need GPS and wireless file transfer for travel and street work.

Closing Thoughts

The Sony A700 and A65 illustrate a fascinating technological progression during a transitional phase for Sony’s camera lineup - from solid traditional DSLRs to versatile SLT hybrids bridging mirrorless advances. While the A700 stands firm as a no-nonsense classic DSLR with durability and simplicity, the A65 introduces features that define modern photography workflows, albeit with compromises in weather sealing and ergonomics.

Whichever you choose, both cameras remain capable of producing images with character and quality that can satisfy many photographers - even in 2024’s competitive environment. The key is aligning their strengths with your personal style and shooting demands.

In testing these, I saw the Sony A700 excelling in grit and reliability, while the A65 shone in speed, versatility, and multimedia readiness. It’s a classic tradeoff between old-school robustness and new-age features - a dilemma familiar to anyone passionate about photography gear.

Happy shooting!