Yes, to your question.I'd like to add a crop body with good eye-AF.
From what I've read the A6100 and A6400 have excellent eye-AF.
What about the A6500? I'd like IBIS. Is it in between the GENii and GENiii A7 series?
I agree with others that the Sony APS-C line-up is confusing: the A6500 is older technology, but has IBIS compared to the A6400. From a marketing point of view it would have made sense to have newer and better specced cameras with higher numbers. Compare that to the A7 FF cameras where a much more logical naming is used: A7/A7R/A7S/A9 are four lines of distinctly different cameras and the newer ones have higher Mark x numbering.The A6400 is an excellent camera and IMO is one of the best values (considering features) of the Sony A6xxx line.
Sony bashing is a lot of fun for some folks...
Strange that everyone complains about the confusion of the Sony multiple A6xxx cameras... After all, no one complains that there are too many varieties of Campbell soups
And no one seems to have complained about the multiple names of the same Canon camera such as:
Canon EOS 350D (Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT in North America and the Canon EOS Kiss Digital N in Japan)
It's great that they still have the A6000 and A5100 listed. Still a viable camera for many folks.I'm curious about Sony's marketing and having all the old bodies still available new. I guess it prevents having to blow out old stock. Might actually be working for them.
Maybe they're even producing new RX100v1. ( :
Speaking of which they probably should've adopted that naming convention.
A6100 > A6000ii
A6400 > A6300ii
A6600 > A6500ii
The a6000 is Sony's best selling camera with good reason. A lot of people just want a nice camera to take pictures of family vacations and pets and birds at the feeder, and the 6000 is inexpensive and does all that well, with the option of upgrading to better lenses as you go.It's great that they still have the A6000 and A5100 listed. Still a viable camera for many folks.