Sony SLT A99 vs Sony NEX 7

Winner
Sony SLT A99

66

Sony NEX-7

49

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Sony SLT A99

Great image quality
Overall image quality
89.0
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Sensor shift
Weather sealed
Weather sealed
Shoot in extreme weather
Barely any delay taking photos
Shutter lag
127 ms shutter lag
 

Reasons to buy the Sony NEX 7

Size
Really small
Compact (111×59×38 mm)
Thickness
Thin
1.5"
Weight
Light-weight
350 g
Built-in flash
Built-in flash
External flash not needed

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Sony NEX-7.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Sony SLT A99.

competitors

Sony SLT A99 Competitors

Sony SLT A77 II

Sony SLT A77 II

Pro DSLR

$998 body only

$1,598 with 16-50mm lens

Focus points More focus points
Continuous shooting Shoots faster
Overall image quality Worse image quality
Sony Alpha a99 II

Sony Alpha a99 II

Boutique

$3,198

Focus points Many more focus points
True resolution Much higher true resolution
Storage slots Has fewer storage slots
Sony A7

Sony A7

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$1,098 - $2,898 body only

$1,398 with 28-70mm lens

Size Significantly smaller
Low light performance Lower noise at high ISO
Startup delay Much more startup delay

Sony NEX-7 Competitors

Sony Alpha A6000

Sony Alpha A6000

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$548 body only

$626 - $648 with 16-50mm lens

Image stabilization Image stabilization
Focus points Significantly more focus points
Size Slightly larger
Sony Alpha NEX-6

Sony Alpha NEX-6

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$549 body only

$700 with 16-50mm lens

Focus points More focus points
Weight Slightly lighter
Startup delay Much more startup delay
Sony Alpha a6300

Sony Alpha a6300

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$948 - $998 body only

$1,091 - $1,148 with 16-50mm lens

High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Focus points Many more focus points
Size Slightly larger

discussion

Sony SLT A99
SLT A99
Sony

Report a correction
Sony NEX-7
NEX 7
Sony

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments