Canon R6 Mark II vs Sony A7 III
The Canon EOS R6 Mark II and the Sony Alpha A7 III are two enthusiast cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in November 2022 and February 2018. Both the R6 Mark II and the A7 III are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are equipped with a full frame sensor. Both cameras offer a resolution of 24 megapixels.
Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.
Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Canon EOS R6 Mark II and the Sony Alpha A7 III? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.
The side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Canon R6 Mark II and the Sony A7 III. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Sony A7 III is notably smaller (10 percent) than the Canon R6 Mark II. Moreover, the A7 III is slightly lighter (3 percent) than the R6 Mark II. In this context, it is worth noting that both cameras are splash and dust-proof and can, hence, be used in inclement weather conditions or harsh environments.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. Hence, you might want to study and compare the specifications of available lenses in order to get the full picture of the size and weight of the two camera systems.
Concerning battery life, the R6 Mark II gets 450 shots out of its LP-E6NH battery, while the A7 III can take 610 images on a single charge of its NP-FZ100 power pack. The battery packs of both cameras can be charged via USB, which can be very convenient when travelling.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you would like to visualize and compare a different camera combination, you can navigate to the CAM-parator app and make your selection from a broad list of cameras there.
|1.||Canon R6 Mark II||138 mm||98 mm||88 mm||670 g||450||Y||Nov 2022||2,499||amazon.com|
|2.||Sony A7 III||127 mm||96 mm||74 mm||650 g||610||Y||Feb 2018||1,999||amazon.com|
|3.||Canon R5 C||142 mm||101 mm||111 mm||770 g||320||Y||Jan 2022||4,499||amazon.com|
|4.||Canon R7||132 mm||90 mm||92 mm||612 g||660||Y||May 2022||1,499||amazon.com|
|5.||Canon R3||150 mm||143 mm||87 mm||1015 g||760||Y||Sep 2021||5,999||amazon.com|
|6.||Canon R5||138 mm||98 mm||88 mm||738 g||320||Y||Jul 2020||3,899||amazon.com|
|7.||Canon R6||138 mm||98 mm||88 mm||680 g||360||Y||Jul 2020||2,499||amazon.com|
|8.||Fujifilm X-H2S||136 mm||93 mm||85 mm||660 g||580||Y||May 2022||2,499||amazon.com|
|9.||Nikon Z6||134 mm||101 mm||67 mm||675 g||310||Y||Aug 2018||1,999||ebay.com|
|10.||OM System OM-1||135 mm||92 mm||73 mm||599 g||520||Y||Feb 2022||2,199||amazon.com|
|11.||Panasonic GH6||138 mm||100 mm||100 mm||823 g||360||Y||Feb 2022||2,199||amazon.com|
|12.||Panasonic GH5 II||139 mm||98 mm||87 mm||727 g||400||Y||May 2021||1,699||amazon.com|
|13.||Sony A7 IV||131 mm||96 mm||80 mm||659 g||580||Y||Oct 2021||2,499||amazon.com|
|14.||Sony A7R IV||129 mm||96 mm||78 mm||665 g||670||Y||Jul 2019||3,499||amazon.com|
|15.||Sony A7R III||127 mm||96 mm||74 mm||650 g||650||Y||Oct 2017||3,199||ebay.com|
|16.||Sony A9||127 mm||96 mm||63 mm||673 g||650||Y||Apr 2017||4,499||ebay.com|
|17.||Sony A7 II||127 mm||96 mm||60 mm||599 g||350||Y||Nov 2014||1,999||ebay.com|
|Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.|
The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The retail prices at the time of the camera’s release place the model in the market relative to other models in the producer’s line-up and the competition. The A7 III was launched at a somewhat lower price (by 20 percent) than the R6 Mark II, which makes it more attractive for photographers on a tight budget. Normally, street prices remain initially close to the MSRP, but after a couple of months, the first discounts appear. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down.
The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Both cameras under consideration feature a full frame sensor, but their sensors differ slightly in size. The sensor area in the A7 III is 1 percent smaller. They nevertheless have the same format factor of 1.0. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.
Even though the R6 Mark II has a slightly larger sensor, both cameras offer the same resolution of 24 megapixels. This implies that the R6 Mark II has a lower pixel density and larger individual pixels (with a pixel pitch of 5.98μm versus 5.94μm for the A7 III), which gives it a potential advantage in terms of light gathering capacity. In addition, the R6 Mark II is much more recent (by 4 years and 8 months) than the A7 III, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time.
The Canon EOS R6 Mark II has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 102400, which can be extended to ISO 100-204800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Sony Alpha A7 III are ISO 100 to ISO 51200, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 50-204800.
In terms of underlying technology, the R6 Mark II is build around a CMOS sensor, while the A7 III uses a BSI-CMOS imager. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.
Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. This service assesses and scores the color depth ("DXO Portrait"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports") of camera sensors, and also publishes an overall camera score. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
|1.||Canon R6 Mark II||Full Frame||24.0||6000||4000||4k/60p||25.4||14.6||3154||96|
|2.||Sony A7 III||Full Frame||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||25.0||14.7||3730||96|
|3.||Canon R5 C||Full Frame||44.8||8192||5464||8k/60p||25.4||14.5||3082||96|
|5.||Canon R3||Full Frame||24.0||6000||4000||6K/60p||25.0||14.7||4086||96|
|6.||Canon R5||Full Frame||44.8||8192||5464||8K/30p||25.3||14.6||3042||95|
|7.||Canon R6||Full Frame||20.0||5472||3648||4k/60p||24.2||14.3||3394||90|
|9.||Nikon Z6||Full Frame||24.3||6048||4024||4K/30p||25.3||14.3||3299||95|
|10.||OM System OM-1||Four Thirds||20.2||5184||3888||4K/60p||23.4||13.4||1553||77|
|11.||Panasonic GH6||Four Thirds||25.0||5776||4336||5.7K/60p||23.4||13.4||1555||77|
|12.||Panasonic GH5 II||Four Thirds||20.2||5184||3888||4K/60p||23.7||13.1||1136||79|
|13.||Sony A7 IV||Full Frame||32.7||7008||4672||4K/60p||25.4||14.7||3379||97|
|14.||Sony A7R IV||Full Frame||60.2||9504||6336||4K/30p||26.0||14.8||3344||99|
|15.||Sony A7R III||Full Frame||42.2||7952||5304||4K/30p||26.0||14.7||3523||100|
|16.||Sony A9||Full Frame||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||24.9||13.3||3517||92|
|17.||Sony A7 II||Full Frame||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||24.9||13.6||2449||90|
|Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.|
Many modern cameras cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the R6 Mark II provides a higher frame rate than the A7 III. It can shoot video footage at 4k/60p, while the Sony is limited to 4K/30p.
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The two cameras under consideration are similar with respect to both having an electronic viewfinder. However, the one in the R6 Mark II offers a substantially higher resolution than the one in the A7 III (3690k vs 2359k dots). The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Canon R6 Mark II and Sony A7 III in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras.
|1.||Canon R6 Mark II||3690||n||3.0 / 1620||swivel||Y||1/8000s||12.0/s||n||Y|
|2.||Sony A7 III||2359||n||3.0 / 922||tilting||Y||1/8000s||10.0/s||n||Y|
|3.||Canon R5 C||5760||Y||3.2 / 2100||swivel||Y||1/8000s||12.0/s||n||n|
|4.||Canon R7||2360||n||3.0 / 1620||swivel||Y||1/8000s||15.0/s||n||Y|
|5.||Canon R3||5760||Y||3.2 / 4150||swivel||Y||1/8000s||12.0/s||n||Y|
|6.||Canon R5||5760||Y||3.2 / 2100||swivel||Y||1/8000s||12.0/s||n||Y|
|7.||Canon R6||3690||n||3.0 / 1620||swivel||Y||1/8000s||12.0/s||n||Y|
|8.||Fujifilm X-H2S||5760||Y||3.0 / 1620||swivel||Y||1/8000s||15.0/s||n||Y|
|9.||Nikon Z6||3690||Y||3.2 / 2100||tilting||Y||1/8000s||12.0/s||n||Y|
|10.||OM System OM-1||5760||n||3.0 / 1640||swivel||Y||1/8000s||10.0/s||n||Y|
|11.||Panasonic GH6||3680||n||3.0 / 1840||swivel||Y||1/8000s||14.0/s||n||Y|
|12.||Panasonic GH5 II||3680||n||3.0 / 1840||swivel||Y||1/8000s||12.0/s||n||Y|
|13.||Sony A7 IV||3686||n||3.0 / 1037||swivel||Y||1/8000s||10.0/s||n||Y|
|14.||Sony A7R IV||5760||n||3.0 / 1440||tilting||Y||1/8000s||10.0/s||n||Y|
|15.||Sony A7R III||3686||n||3.0 / 1440||tilting||Y||1/8000s||10.0/s||n||Y|
|16.||Sony A9||3686||n||3.0 / 1440||tilting||Y||1/8000s||20.0/s||n||Y|
|17.||Sony A7 II||2400||n||3.0 / 1230||tilting||n||1/8000s||5.0/s||n||Y|
|Notes: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.|
The reported shutter speed information refers to the use of the mechanical shutter. Yet, some cameras only have an electronic shutter, while others have an electronic shutter in addition to a mechanical one. In fact, both cameras under consideration feature an electronic shutter, which makes completely silent shooting possible. However, this mode is less suitable for photographing moving objects (risk of rolling shutter) or shooting under artificial light sources (risk of flickering).
The Canon R6 Mark II and the Sony A7 III both have an intervalometer built-in. This enables the photographer to capture time lapse sequences, such as flower blooming, a sunset or moon rise, without purchasing an external camera trigger and related software.
The R6 Mark II writes its imaging data to SDXC cards, while the A7 III uses SDXC or Memory Stick PRO Duo cards. Both cameras feature dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. Both the R6 Mark II and the A7 III support UHS-II cards, which provide for Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 312 MB/s (the second slot of the A7 III only offers slower UHS-I transfer rates, though).
For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Canon EOS R6 Mark II and Sony Alpha A7 III and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
Mic / Speaker
|1.||Canon R6 Mark II||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||micro||3.2||Y||-||Y|
|2.||Sony A7 III||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||micro||3.1||Y||Y||Y|
|3.||Canon R5 C||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||micro||3.2||Y||-||Y|
|4.||Canon R7||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||micro||3.2||Y||-||Y|
|5.||Canon R3||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||micro||3.2||Y||-||Y|
|6.||Canon R5||Y||mono / mono||Y||Y||micro||3.2||Y||-||Y|
|7.||Canon R6||Y||mono / mono||Y||Y||micro||3.2||Y||-||Y|
|8.||Fujifilm X-H2S||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||full||3.0||Y||-||Y|
|9.||Nikon Z6||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||micro||3.1||Y||-||Y|
|10.||OM System OM-1||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||micro||3.0||Y||-||Y|
|11.||Panasonic GH6||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||full||3.2||Y||-||Y|
|12.||Panasonic GH5 II||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||full||3.2||Y||-||Y|
|13.||Sony A7 IV||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||full||3.2||Y||-||Y|
|14.||Sony A7R IV||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||micro||3.1||Y||Y||Y|
|15.||Sony A7R III||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||micro||3.1||Y||Y||Y|
|16.||Sony A9||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||micro||2.0||Y||Y||Y|
|17.||Sony A7 II||Y||stereo / mono||Y||Y||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-|
Both the R6 Mark II and the A7 III are recent models that are part of the current product line-up. The A7 III replaced the earlier Sony A7 II, while the R6 Mark II followed on from the Canon R6. Further information on the features and operation of the R6 Mark II and A7 III can be found, respectively, in the Canon R6 Mark II Manual (free pdf) or the online Sony A7 III Manual.
So what conclusions can be drawn? Is the Canon R6 Mark II better than the Sony A7 III or vice versa? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.
Reasons to prefer the Canon EOS R6 Mark II:
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (4k/60p versus 4K/30p).
- More detailed viewfinder: Has higher resolution electronic viewfinder (3690k vs 2359k dots).
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1620k vs 922k dots).
- More flexible LCD: Has a swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
- More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (12 vs 10 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.2 vs 3.1).
- More modern: Reflects 4 years and 8 months of technical progress since the A7 III launch.
Advantages of the Sony Alpha A7 III:
- Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.78x vs 0.76x).
- Longer lasting: Gets more shots (610 versus 450) out of a single battery charge.
- Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
- More affordable: Was released into a lower priced segment (20 percent cheaper at launch).
- More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in February 2018).
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the R6 Mark II emerges as the winner of the contest (8 : 5 points). However, the pertinence of the various camera strengths will differ across photographers, so that you might want to weigh individual camera traits according to their importance for your own imaging needs before making a camera decision. A professional wildlife photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a family photog, and a person interested in architecture has distinct needs from a sports shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.
How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Canon R6 Mark II and the Sony A7 III place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listing whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.
In any case, while the comparison of the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the R6 Mark II or the A7 III. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable.
This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The table below provides a synthesis of the camera assessments of some of the best known photo-gear review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], digitalcameraworld [DCW], dpreview [DPR], ephotozine [EPZ], photographyblog [PB]). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.
|1.||Canon R6 Mark II||5/5||+ +||4.5/5||91/100||..||5/5||Nov 2022||2,499||amazon.com|
|2.||Sony A7 III||..||+ +||4.5/5||89/100||5/5||5/5||Feb 2018||1,999||amazon.com|
|3.||Canon R5 C||..||+ +||..||..||..||..||Jan 2022||4,499||amazon.com|
|4.||Canon R7||4.5/5||+||5/5||..||4.5/5||4.5/5||May 2022||1,499||amazon.com|
|5.||Canon R3||5/5||o||4.5/5||..||5/5||4.5/5||Sep 2021||5,999||amazon.com|
|6.||Canon R5||4.5/5||+||4/5||91/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||Jul 2020||3,899||amazon.com|
|7.||Canon R6||5/5||+ +||4/5||90/100||4.5/5||5/5||Jul 2020||2,499||amazon.com|
|8.||Fujifilm X-H2S||5/5||+||5/5||90/100||5/5||5/5||May 2022||2,499||amazon.com|
|9.||Nikon Z6||5/5||..||5/5||89/100||4.5/5||5/5||Aug 2018||1,999||ebay.com|
|10.||OM System OM-1||5/5||..||..||87/100||5/5||4.5/5||Feb 2022||2,199||amazon.com|
|11.||Panasonic GH6||5/5||+ +||5/5||87/100||5/5||5/5||Feb 2022||2,199||amazon.com|
|12.||Panasonic GH5 II||4.5/5||..||4.5/5||85/100||4.5/5||5/5||May 2021||1,699||amazon.com|
|13.||Sony A7 IV||5/5||+ +||4.5/5||89/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||Oct 2021||2,499||amazon.com|
|14.||Sony A7R IV||5/5||+||4.5/5||91/100||4.5/5||5/5||Jul 2019||3,499||amazon.com|
|15.||Sony A7R III||..||+ +||4/5||90/100||4.5/5||5/5||Oct 2017||3,199||ebay.com|
|16.||Sony A9||5/5||+ +||4.8/5||89/100||5/5||5/5||Apr 2017||4,499||ebay.com|
|17.||Sony A7 II||5/5||+||4/5||82/100||4.5/5||5/5||Nov 2014||1,999||ebay.com|
|Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.|
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.
- Canon 400D vs Canon R6 Mark II
- Canon 5DS vs Sony A7 III
- Canon 70D vs Sony A7 III
- Canon G1 X Mark III vs Canon R6 Mark II
- Canon R vs Canon R6 Mark II
- Canon R5 vs Canon R6 Mark II
- Canon R6 Mark II vs Sony A7S III
- Canon R6 Mark II vs Sony HX99
- Fujifilm X-H2 vs Sony A7 III
- Olympus E-P5 vs Sony A7 III
- Panasonic LX10 vs Sony A7 III
- Sony A6400 vs Sony A7 III
Specifications: Canon R6 Mark II vs Sony A7 III
Below is a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the two cameras to facilitate a quick review of their differences and common features.
|Camera Model||Canon R6 Mark II||Sony A7 III|
|Camera Type||Mirrorless system camera||Mirrorless system camera|
|Camera Lens||Canon RF mount lenses||Sony E mount lenses|
|Launch Date||November 2022||February 2018|
|Launch Price||USD 2,499||USD 1,999|
|Sensor Specs||Canon R6 Mark II||Sony A7 III|
|Sensor Format||Full Frame Sensor||Full Frame Sensor|
|Sensor Size||35.9 x 23.9 mm||35.6 x 23.8 mm|
|Sensor Area||858.01 mm2||847.28 mm2|
|Sensor Diagonal||43.1 mm||42.8 mm|
|Sensor Resolution||24 Megapixels||24 Megapixels|
|Image Resolution||6000 x 4000 pixels||6000 x 4000 pixels|
|Pixel Pitch||5.98 μm||5.94 μm|
|Pixel Density||2.80 MP/cm2||2.83 MP/cm2|
|Moiré control||Anti-Alias filter||Anti-Alias filter|
|Movie Capability||4k/60p Video||4K/30p Video|
|ISO Setting||100 - 102,400 ISO||100 - 51,200 ISO|
|ISO Boost||100 - 204,800 ISO||50 - 204,800 ISO|
|Image Processor||DIGIC X||BIONZ X|
|DXO Sensor Quality (score)||..||96|
|DXO Color Depth (bits)||..||25.0|
|DXO Dynamic Range (EV)||..||14.7|
|DXO Low Light (ISO)||..||3730|
|Screen Specs||Canon R6 Mark II||Sony A7 III|
|Viewfinder Type||Electronic viewfinder||Electronic viewfinder|
|Viewfinder Field of View||100%||100%|
|Viewfinder Resolution||3690k dots||2359k dots|
|LCD Framing||Live View||Live View|
|Rear LCD Size||3.0inch||3.0inch|
|LCD Resolution||1620k dots||922k dots|
|LCD Attachment||Swivel screen||Tilting screen|
|Shooting Specs||Canon R6 Mark II||Sony A7 III|
|Focus System||On-Sensor Phase-detect||On-Sensor Phase-detect|
|Manual Focusing Aid||Focus Peaking||Focus Peaking|
|Max Shutter Speed (mechanical)||1/8000s||1/8000s|
|Continuous Shooting||12 shutter flaps/s||10 shutter flaps/s|
|Electronic Shutter||up to 1/8000s||YES|
|Time-Lapse Photography||Intervalometer built-in||Intervalometer built-in|
|Image Stabilization||In-body stabilization||In-body stabilization|
|Fill Flash||no On-Board Flash||no On-Board Flash|
|Storage Medium||SDXC cards||MS or SDXC cards|
|Single or Dual Card Slots||Dual card slots||Dual card slots|
|UHS card support||UHS-II||Single UHS-II|
|Connectivity Specs||Canon R6 Mark II||Sony A7 III|
|USB Connector||USB 3.2||USB 3.1|
|HDMI Port||micro HDMI||micro HDMI|
|Microphone Port||External MIC port||External MIC port|
|Headphone Socket||Headphone port||Headphone port|
|Wifi Support||Wifi built-in||Wifi built-in|
|Near-Field Communication||no NFC||NFC built-in|
|Bluetooth Support||Bluetooth built-in||Bluetooth built-in|
|Body Specs||Canon R6 Mark II||Sony A7 III|
|Environmental Sealing||Weathersealed body||Weathersealed body|
|Battery Life (CIPA)||450 shots per charge||610 shots per charge|
|In-Camera Charging||USB charging||USB charging|
138 x 98 x 88 mm
(5.4 x 3.9 x 3.5 in)
127 x 96 x 74 mm
(5.0 x 3.8 x 2.9 in)
|Camera Weight||670 g (23.6 oz)||650 g (22.9 oz)|
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.