p.3 #1 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
doc4x5 wrote:
I currently use an A7R4. It's a wonderful camera. My long time wish has been for Sony to add lossless compressed RAW, focus bracketing, and to improve pixel shift...
Wait, that sounds like an A7R5!
My questions for lucky A7R5 owners are:
1. Am I likely to see significant file size savings from using large lossless compressed RAW? Being an occasionally non-rational quality freak, I essentially ALWAYS use regular uncompressed RAW on my A7R4. This generates 117MB images in Lightroom Classic and 344MB images when sent to Photoshop. They grow from there. My final images in Photoshop are usually in the 1GB range. It would be nice if they were smaller, partly for drive space, but mostly for improvements in saving and other intensive operations.
2. I often focus stack, usually in the landscape but also closer in. What operational, or quality improvements am I likely to see compared to my current manual approach?
3. I have used pixel shift with the A7R4, usually I'm not that impressed with the improvements. And, of course, it can't be used with any movement in the scene. Lloyd Chambers has demonstrated what he sees as impressive improvements with the A7R5. My most common print size is 9x13, occasionally 13x20. What have been others' experience with pixel shift on the A7R5?
I really shouldn't be thinking seriously about the A7R5, but...
The lossless compression only compresses the ARW files (by about 25-45%). The size of your PSD files depends on the number of pixels and the number of layers - neither of those is affected by lossless compressed RAW files.
Focus bracketing in the A7R5 will capture the frames for the stack automatically - no intervention required to turn the focus ring. And it may tempt you to use more images - capturing 100 images for a stack manually would be rather tedious! However, I suspect the really big winners on this one are likely to be the macro shooters more than landscapers.
The pixel shift with movement advance is in the processing software, and apparently it works on A1 as well as A7R5 pixel shift, but not A7R4 :-(
p.3 #2 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
I really like the a7rv on paper. But $4000. for a camera body seems like a LOT. So I look at the a7rv, take away the features I don't want and the features I can live without, and come up with my a7rii.
p.3 #3 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
Tony Ross wrote:
The pixel shift with movement advance is in the processing software, and apparently it works on A1 as well as A7R5 pixel shift, but not A7R4 :-(
That's classic Sony, if you want the best new feature, you will need the newest body.
p.3 #4 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
RoamingScott wrote:
That's classic Sony, if you want the best new feature, you will need the newest body.
Is that really any different in other brands?
Jan 14, 2023 at 12:27 PM
JohnSC 9 Offline • [X]
p.3 #5 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
jhapeman wrote:
I have both and have used both extensively, with a whole suite of GM lenses; it's not an exaggeration. The "stickiness" is only what you see on the screen with the green boxes. That *looks* good when you're shooting, but when you go pixel-peep the images the percentage of shots in critical focus is much lower than the A1 (or even the A9) and much lower than those green boxes would imply. Part of this is no doubt the fact that the slower readout on the sensor means vastly fewer AF calculations per second; the AI chip can only help locate the objects to focus on, it can't compensate for what happens with motion in between those readouts and AF calculations.
This is why for action and/or fast-moving subjects the A1 does so much better. I spent several full days in my blind shooting birds with the A7RV and down at my favorite place for shooting BIF. It's a great camera. IMO its a huge leap up from the previous A7 series cameras in terms of AF performance (although not so huge over the A7IV which is really quite good as well), but it's just not in the same class as the A1. Static subjects or very slowly moving ones it can excel, and the AI chip actually gives it an edge on finding subjects and locking onto them vs. an A1, but that again doesn't mean a greater total number of keeper shots at the end of the day. Even perched small birds tend to rapidly move their head around, and in bursts with both the A7RV and A1 I still get more critically sharp images from the A1, in no small part due to the fact that at 2-3x the fps you simply statistically increase your odds in a linear fashion.
If you're a mixed-use shooter and you don't do a lot of action photography, the A7RV is a superb camera and really the best choice, but if you like to shoot any kind of action the A1 is the vastly superior option.
This!
I sold my A1 to buy this A7RV and I returned it 1 week later after doing intensive tests.
I’m really used to shoot with the A1 electronic shutter which is horrible with the A7RV. It’s useless for everything that moves even at slow speed.
The mechanic shutter was too loud as well and overall the IA autofocus is not that impressive. I was a victim from YouTube reviews that praise that feature as game changer. It is indeed stickier but only when the subject (when is people) is static or don’t move fast.
I shoot street photos while I’m walking fast and people are walking towards me. I missed the same amount of photos that I was missing with the A1 (2 or 3 out of 10). The issue is that sometimes these 2 or 3 photos missed were the best of the bunch …this is why I wanted to try the new autofocus.
I’ll certainly miss the new screen (really helpful for portrait shots) and the new improved menu though.
I’m sure that the new A9iii or A1 ii will have these features. Until there (I’ll certainly buy the A1 II) I’ll keep shooting with the current A1. For me the A7RV was a bad experience and I’ll only buy Sony cameras with stacked sensors from now on.
p.3 #10 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
jhapeman wrote:
I have both and have used both extensively, with a whole suite of GM lenses; it's not an exaggeration. The "stickiness" is only what you see on the screen with the green boxes. That *looks* good when you're shooting, but when you go pixel-peep the images the percentage of shots in critical focus is much lower than the A1 (or even the A9) and much lower than those green boxes would imply. Part of this is no doubt the fact that the slower readout on the sensor means vastly fewer AF calculations per second; the AI chip can only help locate the objects to focus on, it can't compensate for what happens with motion in between those readouts and AF calculations.
This is why for action and/or fast-moving subjects the A1 does so much better. I spent several full days in my blind shooting birds with the A7RV and down at my favorite place for shooting BIF. It's a great camera. IMO its a huge leap up from the previous A7 series cameras in terms of AF performance (although not so huge over the A7IV which is really quite good as well), but it's just not in the same class as the A1. Static subjects or very slowly moving ones it can excel, and the AI chip actually gives it an edge on finding subjects and locking onto them vs. an A1, but that again doesn't mean a greater total number of keeper shots at the end of the day. Even perched small birds tend to rapidly move their head around, and in bursts with both the A7RV and A1 I still get more critically sharp images from the A1, in no small part due to the fact that at 2-3x the fps you simply statistically increase your odds in a linear fashion.
If you're a mixed-use shooter and you don't do a lot of action photography, the A7RV is a superb camera and really the best choice, but if you like to shoot any kind of action the A1 is the vastly superior option.
p.3 #11 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
aCuria wrote:
This really has been the main downside of the A7iv and Riv for me… sound like the RV is not what I am looking for
Don't get me wrong; its definitely a vast improvement over the old RIV, and having used the A7IV as well, it's an improvement there--it's just not going to get anyone to A1 levels, and honestly I can't see why anyone would seriously expect that. But if you want a jump up from an A7RIV this is a very worthy upgrade IMO, unless all you do is macro and landscape shooting.
p.3 #12 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
So far that's not what im seeing after 15k in images so far it stuck like glue and never left walking models doing runway even when they turned away. I shot mechanical and maybe that's it. Need to work to the strengths of these systems and that proof for me at least is in the pudding. Im very happy so far. It may not work for everyone but like to hear more about what USERS find as its strengths instead of this electronic stuff as its not fair really that was not the design of this R model, that's for the A9II and A1 if that's what one needs than go spend the cash a 6500 vs 3800 is a huge chunk of change
But Im not hear to argue no idea what you where shooting but e shutter is a limitation on this model. It's easy just to shoot mechanical we have for decades and if you don't need e shutter then no issue. Maybe the A1II would be better with these feature sets but that's a ways away,
p.3 #13 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
GMPhotography wrote:
So far that's not what im seeing after 15k in images so far it stuck like glue and never left walking models doing runway even when they turned away. I shot mechanical and maybe that's it. Need to work to the strengths of these systems and that proof for me at least is in the pudding. Im very happy so far. It may not work for everyone but like to hear more about what USERS find as its strengths instead of this electronic stuff as its not fair really that was not the design of this R model, that's for the A9II and A1 if that's what one needs than go spend the cash. ...Show more →
It's definitely best to shoot it in mechanical shutter. I would consider models on a runway to be in the "slower" action that I felt the A7RV did well with; it's also more predictable motion. With wildlife shooting, animals and birds in particular don't necessarily follow perfectly predictable paths. When they do--like panning a bird flying by--the A7RV also performs extremely well. It's also a lot easier to find and stick to a human head/eye vs. birds and animals which come in a huge variety of body and head shapes and sizes.
My point has only been that it's not an A1 replacement if your uses cases involve a lot of action photography or a lot of wildlife photography.
p.3 #14 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
Agree models are not Mountain Lions and such for sure. The pace is slower and it did very well. I don't think Sony had thoughts as a replacement us users did . I thought long and hard on this one and I did love the A1 just was not using it to its full extent and decided to go with this as a couple things really caught my eye. Will see what comes next but I can live with this for awhile.
p.3 #15 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
I've tried my best to get the electronic shutter to illustrate an issue. I don't shoot fast moving subjects nor a flash at this time. So far there has been NO evidence of ANY artifacts, loss of dynamic range (it remains 14bit by the way), rolling shutter or anything else for that matter. Same same as far as I'm concerned. I love the quiet as I've shot with just ES for several years now with other cameras I had or have (such as the OM-1). Unless I'm going to be in a situation where electronic shutter is KNOWN to have issues I'll use it. There are no real world down sides for what I'm shooting (real estate, wildlife that isn't flying or running, portraits and landscapes.
p.3 #16 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
dcisive wrote:
I've tried my best to get the electronic shutter to illustrate an issue. I don't shoot fast moving subjects nor a flash at this time. So far there has been NO evidence of ANY artifacts, loss of dynamic range (it remains 14bit by the way), rolling shutter or anything else for that matter. Same same as far as I'm concerned. I love the quiet as I've shot with just ES for several years now with other cameras I had or have (such as the OM-1). Unless I'm going to be in a situation where electronic shutter is KNOWN to have issues I'll use it. There are no real world down sides for what I'm shooting (real estate, wildlife that isn't flying or running, portraits and landscapes. ...Show more →
Your best obviously isn't trying very hard. . Seriously though, nothing has changed with the sensor readout, so its just as easy to get artifacts with e-shutter on the RV as it was on the RIV. Anything moving faster than the sensor readout speed is going to show it. Slow-moving objects won't show it, and anything moving fairly quickly will. Your typical shooting doesn't include anything that's moving very quickly so of course it's fine for you. Nothing new there and not even sure why it's a point of discussion.
The other poster was talking about their use case where the e-shutter is not sufficient, and they don't like the noise of mechanical. The fact that you don't share their problem doesn't mean it's not an issue for others. Just enjoy your A7RV but realize it's not the right tool for everyone.
p.3 #17 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
Perhaps you mistook my intent of the post. I was getting tired of the plethora of folks trying their best to get some point across as if the A7R5's ES was worthless in all regards and not worth bothering with. So many out there are not unlike me believe me. I know as I have a lot of internet friends I've gained around the country that communicate with me on a regular basis, and they too have NOT had issues with their ES usage. Sure I get it that so many might be under the impression the ES on the A7R5 is greatly improved (it has a tiny bit it's NOT identical in response to the IV) but while it's no issue to try to elevate it to full function in all regards, it's simply not incompetent altogether either. Just wanted to make the point in case there are some others out there that would like to hear some degree of a counterpoint response.
p.3 #18 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
These threads are funny to read. While the a7R V isn't the a1, it also isn't the a7R IV. They are 3 distinct cameras that oddly enough have different model numbers.
The question is what mix of features is right for you, and any person's answer can be different than someone else's answer.
I think most would agree that the a7R V has improvements over the a7R IV. And while certain features may have advanced past the a1, the a1 still has distinct advantages. Which probably shouldn't be surprising as it is a higher end model, and it's not being fully eclipsed by the a7R V. And I don't think Sony intended it to. The a7R V doesn't have to beat the a1 in every measurable way for it to be a good camera.
And believe it or not, the a1 II will be distinct from the models mentioned above, hence it will have a different model number. It most likely will include many of the advancements of the a7R V and will kick butt. And it will cost more than the a7R V, and it will be the new flagship. And we'll all go through another round of these threads.
What camera is "best" depends on what features a person is looking for. If fast readout is a high priority, then get one of the models with a stacked sensor. If it's not, there are features on the a7R V which may make it more desirable to some people than the a1. But there are definitely features of the a1 that are advantageous and important to some people. And there are some advantages of the a7R V that are important to some people. This isn't "Highlander", there doesn't have to be only one.
I feel stupid writing this, and maybe someone will tell me I am stupid for writing this. (And maybe I am stupid for writing this.)
And this thread isn't directed at anyone in particular, nor necessarily commenting on just this particular thread.
p.3 #19 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
Let me just put it THIS way. IF I were a serious birder who relied on fast action tracking of flying birds, a serious sports shooter or had to deal with any format where it dealt with erratic moving subjects, there is NO question my bill would have gone towards the A1. But since my subjects (portraits, real estate and wildlife (static) is what I'm doing I felt the added resolution coupled with the advanced subject recognition was right up my alley. I'll leave it there.
p.3 #20 · Are the A7R5 improvements worth it to you?
dcisive wrote:
One of the reasons I went for the A7R5 and NOT a A1 was I already have a fully lens stocked system with the OM-1. While some love to build up their chest boasting of the big gun A1, I've got news for them. The OM-1 handily keeps up and is perfectly capable of fast-moving subject tracking and provides wonderful files for that purpose let alone the lighter carry weight. There are a number of folks both here in the U.S. and some pro Youtube Europeans that have switched from A1's to the OM-1 for their birding. The A7R5 for ME provides the gap of high-resolution files I desire for my landscapes, portrait and static wildlife and bird subjects. If I didn't own an OM-1 I may well have opted for an A1. But now I'm very content to await the A1MkII which will have not just the speed but ALL the other goodies that have come out since used in the A7R5. I suspect it may well be over another year's wait, but I'm not in a hurry....Show more →
The thing is, the A1 is not just for birds. It is also a high resolution sensor that works with landscape or anything else that you throw at it. Plus, it is silent to boot. An all in one. The Om1 is low resolution and one purpose, in a system that won't evolve..the last of a company that exoted the business and now in the hands of a liquidator company..meanwhile, Sony is at the top of its game and releasing new producta and innovations all the time. The future is bright. If you only do birding and nothing else, yes, the om1 is good, and a good value.
. Seriously though, nothing has changed with the sensor readout, so its just as easy to get artifacts with e-shutter on the RV as it was on the RIV. Anything moving faster than the sensor readout speed is going to show it. Slow-moving objects won't show it, and anything moving fairly quickly will. Your typical shooting doesn't include anything that's moving very quickly so of course it's fine for you. Nothing new there and not even sure why it's a point of discussion.