a7ii or a6400 for a beginner?

[gmanfsu1973]

I used to be heavily in to photography as a hobby around a decade ago. Earlier this year, now that my kids are older and I can get away to go take photos, I bought myself an a7iv with a few nice lenses, but haven't had the time to really get back yet.

But my 15 year old really wants to learn. He definitely has a natural eye for abstract and capturing interesting lighting and shapes on his phone. I don't quite trust him with the iv yet (he lost one of his month-old airpod pros at the gym), but want to get him started with a better camera.

Obviously, I'd like to stick with the E mount lenses so he can use my lenses.

So I'm down to with the a6400 or an a7ii. Both are going for $1k with a 20something-70something (effective) zoom lens. 

What's the best choice? I'm leaning towards the a6400 as it's 5 years newer and has better AF points and tracking, and can shoot 4k if he decides to do any video stuff. But kinda torn due to that full size sensor on the ii. I'd feel more confident in the decision if I was fully back in the hobby, but I've gone out photographing exactly one time since 2010 or so...

Thoughts?

[rodeo_joe1]

I haven't used either of those cameras, but was quite happy with a used a6000. The kit 17-50 lens is a bit soft though, but the a6000 is now permanently attached to my film copying rig together with an enlarging lens, and the quality of the kit lens is no longer relevant. 

All I can add is: Coming from a phone camera to an APS sensor will be a big step up in sensor size anyway, as well as a big step-down in depth-of-field. So the a6400 may actually be an easier transition for him. 

 

[howardstanbury]

If it's an important consideration, the A7 II has in-body stabilisation. The sensor though is pretty much the same as the A7 I; it's not bad just not a huge step forward, the progress was more with the IBIS. The other advantage is that A7 IV lenses are a better match for the A7 II.