Now that the A7R V has been released the prices on the a7r iv are really coming down. I can pick one up for $2000 easily. My question is, I can also pick up an a7 iv for around $2300; and at that point is it worth stepping up to the a7 iv for the better af, better ergonomics, and better software? I don't really have a need for the 62 mp of the a7r iv. My thinking is that I may as well get the A7 IV so that later I can get the A7R V as a second body for landscapes and it'll match my A7 IV. Does anybody have any input?
What are you shooting? Both are pretty mature cameras, but if you don't need 60mp the A7IV is likely the logical choice.
While I'm sure there are some people putting the high megapixel bodies to good use, the idea that you need to buy a second camera with 60mp to take good landscape photos is insane to me.
I owned the A7r4a before I sold it to get an A7iv before I rebought the A7r4a to compare it to my A7iv and finally selling the A7r4a again.
The A7iv is the way to go honestly. It's such a better camera with all the upgrades that were made. It's definitely nice to have lossless compressed RAW among so many other features. 61 MP is nice but 33 MP without an AA filter is no slouch either.
If you're patient, you can snag an A7iv for $2100.
Ludvig83 wrote:
I owned the A7r4a before I sold it to get an A7iv before I rebought the A7r4a to compare it to my A7iv and finally selling the A7r4a again.
The A7iv is the way to go honestly. It's such a better camera with all the upgrades that were made. It's definitely nice to have lossless compressed RAW among so many other features. 61 MP is nice but 33 MP without an AA filter is no slouch either.
If you're patient, you can snag an A7iv for $2100.
What type of stuff are you shooting? I'd say 75% of the reason I'm looking to upgrade from my G9 is landscapes, remaining 25% scattered across people, events, video. A7IV is obviously the better hybrid, but for landscapes the A7riv is a big pixel bump.
Everyone has unique needs on the "image capture box".
Personally, I appreciate the 61MP sensor, and often combine two images vertically for a square-ish image with even more MP!
The viewfinder imaging is also outstanding on the a7R4 -- I sort of cringe every time I have to manual focus with my a7R2 viewfinder. (I've got no experience with the a7IV)
I will eventually want to pick up a second a7R4 and probably sell my two a7R2's.
I shoot mainly stationary subjects handheld for photos, not video. So far the a7R4 suits me best (for imaging, if not ergonomics and menus) of the cameras I have owned.
Looking forward to prices coming down on used a7R4!
If you don't know whether you need 62mp, that means most likely, you don't need it. I print 24" wide and crop quite a bit and yet, my 42mp camera is plenty enough. That's why I never upgraded to A7r iv because I just didn't feel any need for more mega pixels. So if it were me, I would look into factors other than resolution to choose one over the other. You also need to make your mind for yourself.
I shoot a majority of people, some video, and the remaining is landscapes. The 33 MP is definitely enough for landscapes. I used a D810 (36 MP) for a long time back in the day, and it worked well with everything. The A7iv at 33 MP reminds of that camera and I'm getting a lot of images that I am happy with just like with the D810 or my current Z7.
The biggest strength of the A7iv vs the A7riv is how quickly you can switch to the modes you need. With the A7riv I had to make a conscious effort (photo vs video settings) to switch to video because it lacks the photo, video, and S&Q switch of the A7iv.
Also, I do panorama shots as needed to take landscapes pictures. That gives me a large bump in MP when I combine three pictures or more.
I would say 61mp is a negative effect for those who don't need corp. You should see better high iso performance on a7iv. Also lower mp is more friendly to ibis.
I have the A7Riv. It's a fine camera. In the $2000 range it's one of the best of it's time bodies at practically entry level pricing. It was the first "iv" body type, etc. The A7Riv full resolution and lack of lossless compression leads to very large files. The A7iv has picked up a number of incremental improvements for "faster" handling, smaller files move faster, store smaller, video improvements, etc.
So, for the most part, unless you "need" the higher res, I'd think go with the A7iv. But there's nothing substantially wrong with the A7Riv. You need to look to your priorities. I remember as we moved from 2 or 3 Mp to 6, to 10, 12, 16 and gasp 24 Mp. None of them because impossibly too noisy to use, none of them became impossible to handhold.
Can someone share the differences between these two cameras from a video perspective? I've read that the IV is better for video but I don't really understand why besides the oversampling on the IV being better. Would love to get insight from those that are more knowledgeable.
I'm new to this forum, so apologies if this question has been asked before.
