If you want an interchangeable lens camera and a nice balance between image quality and portability, APS-C cameras are the happy medium between the smaller Micro Four-Thirds and the larger full-frame systems.
Sony, Fujifilm, Canon and Nikon all make APS-C cameras and lenses which are brand-specific. Canon's crop sensors are a tad smaller than the others, however, giving them a crop factor of 1.6x, compared to 1.5x for the other brands. On a technical level, Sony, Fuji and Nikon therefore have a slight edge since their image sensors are ever so slightly larger than Canon's.
Brand Recommendations
For anyone starting fresh, Sony and Fujifilm are both good options. Those are the brands that put the most effort into their APS-C lines and have the widest selection of native lenses.
Nikon and Canon seem to focus on full-frame primarily, so getting an APS-C camera from either of those makes the most sense if you already use their full-frame cameras, or plan on shooting full-frame further on. That is because you can use your current Z (Nikon) and RF (Canon) mount lenses on both your full-frame and APS-C cameras since both systems now use the same mount. Sony also has that advantage, though, with its E-mount.
Lens Selection and Compatibility
As we already touched upon, APS-C and full-frame lenses are cross-compatible on newer Sony, Canon and Nikon cameras. This is both good and bad, depending on how you look at it. If you use both APS-C and full-frame cameras of a certain brand, it's beneficial to share lenses between them.
On the other hand, if you only ever plan to use crop sensor cameras, the whole point of having a smaller system goes out the window if you put large and expensive full-frame lenses on it.
While there is no detriment in image quality using full-frame lenses on APS-C cameras, it's a bit of a waste, since you only use a small portion of the glass, and carry around lenses that are bigger than they would been for native APS-C. Reversely, if you use APS-C lenses on a full-frame camera, you only get to use a small portion of the camera sensor and lose a lot of image resolution, which is an even bigger waste.
As you can tell by the list below, a lot of the cross-compatible lenses have full-frame coverage. While Sony has the widest selection overall, Fujifilm owns it when it comes to lenses made specifically for APS-C.
Native Lens Availability
| Lens Mount | Number of Lenses |
|---|---|
| E-mount (Sony) | 206 (142 Full Frame) |
| X-mount (Fujifilm) | 89 |
| Z-mount (Nikon) | 49 (39 Full Frame) |
| RF-mount (Canon) | 43 (39 Full Frame) |
Source: CameraDecision (as of Feb, 2024)
Top Pick: Sony Alpha a6700
Sony's latest and greatest cropped-sensor camera might be a serious contender as the best APS-C camera overall.
Sony has been killing it in the auto-focus compartment for a while now, especially regarding their reliable continuous AF, which other manufacturers have struggled with. Having reliable focus-tracking is extremely valuable when shooting concerts with artists constantly moving around, with the risk of getting out of focus. With the a6700, you'll get a lot less (if any) shots out of focus.
The a6700 also has great IBIS (in-body image stabilisation), which is also really beneficial, especially for filming a show handheld, giving you a smoother, less shaky video. Speaking of video, the a6700 lets you shoot at 4K in up to 120 frames/second!
As we have come to expect from Sony, the image quality is also top-notch, with excellent sharpness, low-light performance and dynamic range.
All of this combined really makes the a6700 the ideal APS-C camera for concerts!
The only downside really is the high price point, which makes it a harder sell, given the competition from smaller full-frame cameras, like the Sony a7C. If you want a more affordable Sony APS-C, check out our budget picks below!
While the a6700 is a fantastic camera, it's not the lightest and certainly not the cheapest. If you want to save a few hundred bucks, look no further than the previous model; the Sony a6600. With that model, you get a 24-megapixel sensor rather than 26. The video specs of the a6600 is also less spectacular, but it offers 4K video at 30 fps (while the a6700 also supports 60 and 120 fps). You also lose out on Sony's latest, most intelligent auto-focus and auto-exposure. While both cameras have IBIS, it's also more stable on the newer model. The a6600 also has a tilting screen, rather than a fully articulating one that's on the a6700.
Even though both cameras seem very similar at first glance, you get a lot for your money when you move up to the a6700. Whether it's enough to warrant the price premium is entirely up to you and what you plan on using the camera for. If you shoot a lot of video, the a6700 surely is more capable, but if you mostly use it for photography, the a6600 might be a better buy.
If the a6600 is still too pricey, a smaller, cheaper and more basic camera like the Sony ZV-E10 might tickle your fancy.
The ZV-E10 is marketed as a vlogging camera, which translates to a light body with a flippy screen but no electronic viewfinder (EVF). It also comes with a very fundamental button layout, not even including a mode dial(!). It still performs just as well as its bigger brothers in the Alpha 6000 lineup, but at a cheaper price, which makes it a good deal if you mostly shoot using the LCD screen and typically stay in one mode, such as aperture priority or full auto. Like the lower a6000 series models, the ZV-E10 unfortunately has no IBIS, making it less than ideal for handheld videography.
Another budget-friendly route would be the older models of the a6000 series. These give you a more traditional camera control layout, rather than the "dumbed-down" ZV-E10. Both the original a6000 and even the old a5100 are still viable if 1080p video is good enough. Go for the a6000 if you prefer a tilting screen and a viewfinder. Go for an a5100 if you want an even lighter body with a flippy screen but no viewfinder.
If you move up to the a6100 or a6400 you get your money's worth, though, since you get a better image sensor as well as 4K video recording. However, if you are serious about filming shows, you should really aim for the higher models a6600 and a6700 (or an a6500 if you can still find one). Those higher models come with IBIS (in-body image stabilisation), which helps get less shaky footage when you shoot handheld.
If you want a real bargain, check on the used market for even older models, like the Sony NEX series. These can often be found for a couple of hundred bucks or even less.
Sony Alpha a6600
Sony Alpha a6400
Sony ZV-E10
Great Value: Fujifilm X-S20 (and X-S10)
Fujifilm has a lot of APS-C cameras to offer, and they all start with an X, followed by another letter and a number or two. The X-S line debuted with the X-S10 in 2020 and had a lot to offer, including a 26-megapixel sensor, 4K video recording, in-body image stabilisation and a fully articulated screen.
The newer X-S20 came out in 2023 and came with a healthy amount of upgrades. The video resolution got bumped up to 6K, and while the S10 had a record limit of 30 minutes, the S20 lets you record indefinitely. The S20 also has a significantly larger battery, lasting for about 750 shots, compared to 400 on the S10.
Both models are highly competent, though, and if you don't need the absolute latest and greatest in video recording, the older X-S10 is certainly no slouch and can be found substantially cheaper.
Premium option: X-T5
While the X-S line is very capable, it's mainly geared towards hobbyists. If you want more "pro" features, you should check out the X-T5 and X-H2. Both offer 40-megapixel sensors, weather sealing, and dual SD card slots. The X-H2 is the pricier of the two, and what it offers over the T5 is mainly for video enthusiasts. This includes 8K video resolution and 240 fps, whereas the T5 tops out at 6K and 120 fps, which is probably good enough for 99% of people. The H2 also comes with a fully articulated screen, whereas the T5 only has a tilting screen.
Budget option: X-T30
The X-T30 is a getting a bit old at this point, but still a good option if you want a more traditional SLR-styled body with a lot of onboard manual controls. There is also a Mark II of the X-T30 which essentially only has newer firmware and a higher resolution LCD as its selling points. Kinda sketchy and greedy of Fuji to not just offer all X-T30's a firmware update if you ask me, but it is what it is.
Fujifilm X-T5
Premium Option
Fujifilm X-H2
Premium Option
Fujifilm X-T30
Budget Option
Budget King: Canon R50
A while back, Canon discontued their old EF and EF-M mounts in favour of the current RF mount, fitted on both their APS-C and full-frame cameras. Since then, the company has flooded the market with new 'R' bodies, like the full-frame R5 and R6, then R7 which is APS-C, then jumping back to full-frame for their R8. Then they skipped the number 9 and went straight to R10 which was again APS-C. Confused yet?
Well, their more recent model R50 makes a real compelling offer at its quite modest price point, and could be seen as the spiritual successor of the popular M50.
The R50 is a light SLR-style body that only weighs 375 grams. It has a decent 24-megapixel sensor, records 4K UHD at 30 fps, and can shoot photos in bursts of 12 fps (mechanical shutter) or 15 fps (electronic shutter). It also has an EVF, built-in flash and a flippy screen. Unfortunately it lacks IBIS though, so you'd have to buy stabilised lenses if you want more stable shots.
Apart from the R50, there is also the even cheaper R100, which you shouldn't even consider. It's cheap, but as it's sold without a lens, so you have to add that to your calculation. It also lacks fundamental features like a touch screen. The darn screen doesn't even tilt or swivel either. Welcome to 2007...
Also Decent: Nikon Z30 and Z50
We lumped these models together since they share very similar hardware and optics but come in two different bodily flavours, so to speak. They both share a 20.9-megapixel sensor, that unfortunately lacks stabilisation (IBIS). Both cameras can shoot 11 fps bursts, and record video in UHD at 30 fps. Both bodies are also weather-sealed.
Viewfinder and flash vs. improved screen and video handling
Now to the differences. The most notable is the Z50 has a viewfinder, pop-up flash and a screen you can angle and flip down for handheld selfies, while the Z30 lacks both viewfinder and flash, but has a screen that flips out to the side and has full rotation/articulation. The lack of an EVF makes the Z30 a bit more sleek and compact, but surprisingly that doesn't stop the Z50 from still being ever so slightly lighter.
When it comes to video, the Z30 is the clear winner, though. Z30 has unlimited video recording, while the Z50 is capped at 30 minutes. The Z30 also has digital video stabilisation, which remedies the lack of sensor stabilisation somewhat. The Z30 can also double as a webcam with power delivery via USB. So for anything video-related, the Z30 is a lot more practical to use.
For stills photography, it's a toss-up between the two. If you need a viewfinder and pop-up flash, the Z50 is the obvious choice.
A minor gripe with the Z50 is that is uses the old USB 2.0 and Micro USB connector, while the Z30 has the newer and faster USB 3.2 with a USB-C connector.
Nikon Z30
If you want flip screen and improved video features
Nikon Z50
If you value having a viewfinder and built-in flash