Sony Alpha A6000 vs Nikon D7100

Winner
Placeholder

89

Placeholder

70

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Sony Alpha A6000

Really small
Size
Mid size (120×67×45 mm)
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
Large viewfinder
Viewfinder size
0.70x
 

Reasons to buy the Nikon D7100

Screen size
Large screen
3.2"
Weather sealed
Weather sealed
Shoot in extreme weather
Lens availability
Slightly more lenses available
230 lenses
Badge
Built-in focus motor
Autofocuses with more lenses

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D7100.

competitors

Sony Alpha A6000 Competitors

Placeholder

Sony Alpha a6300

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$898 body only

$880 - $998 with 16-50mm lens

High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Weather sealed Weather sealed
Viewfinder size Significantly smaller viewfinder
Placeholder

Sony Alpha a6500

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$1,398 body only

$1,498 with 16-50mm lens

Weather sealed Weather sealed
Touch screen Has a touch screen
Image stabilization Worse image stabilization
Placeholder

Sony Alpha A5100

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$448 body only

$548 with 16-50mm lens

Touch screen Has a touch screen
Autofocus Faster autofocus
Image stabilization No image stabilization

Nikon D7100 Competitors

Placeholder

Nikon D7200

Entry-level DSLR

$799 - $997 body only

$1,297 with 18-140mm lens

Overall image quality Better image quality
Shutter lag Less shutter lag
Movie continuous focus Doesn't focus continuously recording movies
Placeholder

Nikon D5300

Entry-level DSLR

$500 - $697 with 18-55mm lens

Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
GPS Has a GPS
Built-in focus motor Doesn't have a built-in focus motor
Placeholder

Nikon D5500

Entry-level DSLR

$549 with 18-55mm lens

Touch screen Has a touch screen
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Built-in focus motor Doesn't have a built-in focus motor

discussion

Placeholder
Alpha A6000
Sony

Report a correction
Placeholder
D7100
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments