Geoff,
The lighting conditions down here in Southern California are significantly better than in your neck of the wood. No wonder that my findings in terms of AF were better than yours. I noticed that the location that other FMer, @A9Lon is also quite a bit further north than mine, I believe, in Washington. I am still not claiming that the AF of the A7r IV is as good as the A9. In some sequence, it looked like that it got close but in others, it was way worse. I based my opinion on owl in-flight sequences. But in general, I am pleased with its AF performance.
Joshua
____________________________________
Well, since it is a image thread and we are touching AF, here is an image of the black skimmer that shook water off in-flight
Joshua,
Yes, I live in Spokane, WA. I do get better results with the a7r4 with really good light and the 400GM, but it just isn't an a9! I think getting the a9 first really spoiled me and it's been a real learning curve to get comfortable with the 4 and when to "trust" it...
That black skimmer image is really special!
Lon
A9Lon wrote:
Joshua,
Yes, I live in Spokane, WA. I do get better results with the a7r4 with really good light and the 400GM, but it just isn't an a9! I think getting the a9 first really spoiled me and it's been a real learning curve to get comfortable with the 4 and when to "trust" it...
That black skimmer image is really special!
Lon
Thank you for your reply and kind words, Lon! Yes, for sure the A7r IV is not the A9, AF-wise and yes, we got spoiled by the AF prowess of the A9. On the flip side, I have been using the A7r III and that help me lower my expectation, realizing that the A7r IV is only one of the A7-series bodies.
How can you even conceive of shedding the Riv ?
I know, a9 can get the decisive moment ~more often~ but the depth, the detail of the Riv is just so so so good.
But is it significantly better than your D850.......
Which reminds me. I was shooting a perch set up last week. I think I gave a Towhee a heart attack with the shutter sound of even the D500 ha!