I sold my a7 to fund a 16-70, but that didn't work for me. I am thinking about the 18-105, but I also think it may have been a mistake to sell the a7. So... if I buy an a7, here's my question: For folks who've had both: Ignoring the fact that the APS-C lenses have longer reach and the size issue, both of which would be a non-issue for my use case, is an a7 + 28-70 a better combo than an a6000 with either the 16-70 or 18-105? I am kind of thinking that resolution, sharpness, and maybe (?) color of even a mediocre kit lens on FF is better than either of those APS-C lenses on an a6000??? DXO seems to think so, but I was hoping for more real world input. EDIT: To the use case -- this is for outdoor school events. I can put the 70-200/4 on the a6000 and the 28-70 on the a7, and this would give me a great 1-2 punch. In this use case, corners are not that important. For the indoor events (e.g. school plays) I would switch to the 70-200/4 on the a7 and the 28/2 on the a6000, and bring the RX100 for 28/1.8 needs. I've been very successful with this indoor trio, so I was wondering about the outdoor use case. I guess I could also just go a6000 + 18-105 for outdoor use and just go one lens....hmmm, maybe I should think about that.