All the differences between the rV and the cr have been well discussed here, but people keep referring to them as limitations on the cr. Limitations only if they are things you need. I can deal with one slot and 8 fps for instance. The fewer buttons are at least partially compensated by the three pre-sets on the dial. One difference that has been mentioned often is the EVF. I used the rIV for years and the Fuji X-T5 recently, and was quite surprised to fine the EVF as good as it was. Nothing like the EVF on the early A6x00 series. It may not be as good as the rV EVF but it ain't bad, and certainly not a deal-breaker IMO. I don't believe it to be as bad as has been made out. Let me add I like very much the EVF on the left edge rangefinder style. That to be makes the difference worthwhile in itself.
Michael Everet wrote:
All the differences between the rV and the cr have been well discussed here, but people keep referring to them as limitations on the cr. Limitations only if they are things you need. I can deal with one slot and 8 fps for instance. The fewer buttons are at least partially compensated by the three pre-sets on the dial. One difference that has been mentioned often is the EVF. I used the rIV for years and the Fuji X-T5 recently, and was quite surprised to fine the EVF as good as it was. Nothing like the EVF on the early A6x00 series. It may not be as good as the rV EVF but it ain't bad, and certainly not a deal-breaker IMO. I don't believe it to be as bad as has been made out. Let me add I like very much the EVF on the left edge rangefinder style. That to be makes the difference worthwhile in itself....Show more →
We love comparing specs from sheets rather than actual usage. Many people putting down the A7cr are just looking at sheets.
Th A7Cr and the A7RV are both fine cameras. Which one you choose says more about you as a photographer than it does about the cameras. Arguing about which one is "better" or the "right" one to get is pointless and silly. I prefer the A7Cr, but that doesn't make me "right" or make someone who chooses the the A7RV "wrong." It's more likely that we just use our cameras in different ways.
I agree. It's a silly comparison to be honest, they serve different needs. If you need the features that are limited on the CR, the RV or a6700 is your camera. I enjoy that I have a 61 MP sensor which works great in a pinch as a b-cam albeit with a few limitations I can live with, yet it offers some distinct advantages compared to just having another a9ii. I was able to shoot a sporting event with the 70-200 and benefit from cropping and also do a portrait session albeit with limited sync speed but again benefiting from 61mp. Though it's primary use remains my compact main carry to be used with my smaller lenses.
Michael Everet wrote:
All the differences between the rV and the cr have been well discussed here, but people keep referring to them as limitations on the cr. Limitations only if they are things you need. I can deal with one slot and 8 fps for instance. The fewer buttons are at least partially compensated by the three pre-sets on the dial. One difference that has been mentioned often is the EVF. I used the rIV for years and the Fuji X-T5 recently, and was quite surprised to fine the EVF as good as it was. Nothing like the EVF on the early A6x00 series. It may not be as good as the rV EVF but it ain't bad, and certainly not a deal-breaker IMO....Show more →
Doing without (or already having) the A6xxx doesn't make the A7CR or a7Rv less expensive.
If it's a struggle to go for the $1400 aps-c based kit, telling them they could go for a $3000 body instead is a non-starter. A $3000 camera is still $1600 more than a $1400 camera.
Already having a variety of aps-c and ff bodies and lenses puts one in an entirely different position as to what one might "need" or want or can afford.
Craig Gillette wrote:
Doing without (or already having) the A6xxx doesn't make the A7CR or a7Rv less expensive.
If it's a struggle to go for the $1400 aps-c based kit, telling them they could go for a $3000 body instead is a non-starter. A $3000 camera is still $1600 more than a $1400 camera.
Already having a variety of aps-c and ff bodies and lenses puts one in an entirely different position as to what one might "need" or want or can afford.
I’m talking about people that want a full frame camera for their daily shooting along with a smaller compact camera for their travels or their daily walk around camera. Typically people would purchase a larger full frame camera and a smaller aps-c camera to handle these scenarios. Now, the A7cr can handle both situations quite nicely. No need buying another aps-c camera thus saving you $1400.
If you only want one compact camera and are on a budget…then yeh, an app-c is probably the way to go…but there is an awful lot of members that have multiple cameras and many buy a more compact camera for their travels.
Definitely is two different cameras for different users. If the price stays at the sale price of $2600 or maybe less I think it’s going to be a big win for Sony. If it goes back to MSRP then it’s not as appealing to me as I think Sony held back on a lot of features just to make more money (which is fine as they are in the business of making money).
Jbantillo wrote:
Definitely is two different cameras for different users. If the price stays at the sale price of $2600 or maybe less I think it’s going to be a big win for Sony. If it goes back to MSRP then it’s not as appealing to me as I think Sony held back on a lot of features just to make more money (which is fine as they are in the business of making money).
A7CR is not on sale for $2600. Few got lucky (including my friend) from Greentoe and we have a seller who is selling it currently for $2650, but, these are not official sale. Price is still $2999.99 + tax at major retailers.
By “sale” I did mean Greentoe and the gentleman that sells it here. Yes, not an “official sale” but still a sale and it comes with a proper receipt for warranty. So if you’re a decent shopper you can find these “sales” and save yourself a few hundred dollars.
nepali wrote:
A7CR is not on sale for $2600. Few got lucky (including my friend) from Greentoe and we have a seller who is selling it currently for $2650, but, these are not official sale. Price is still $2999.99 + tax at major retailers.
Jbantillo wrote:
By “sale” I did mean Greentoe and the gentleman that sells it here. Yes, not an “official sale” but still a sale and it comes with a proper receipt for warranty. So if you’re a decent shopper you can find these “sales” and save yourself a few hundred dollars.
What gets sold via Greentoe and this forum is just a drop in the ocean. That is not a good representative of the trend at all.
I didn't mind the A7cR price as it's a perfect long-term solution to a consistent use case of mine.
I just got back from Maui with it and got shots I wouldn't have gotten otherwise because we went some places that my A1 would have been too big/heavy to bother with. But the A7cR came along as a "just in case" and ended up getting used. To me that's the value vs. any individual spec.
Price difference is subjective because not all discounts are equally accessible. Some people compare a heavily discounted a7rv with the MSRP of a7cr, which would make the price difference seem really small. It is a fair comparison if you can only access those prices now. Give it a few months however, and prices on the a7cr will likely drop more than the a7rv (since the latter is already heavily discounted). YMMV
The strategy of reducing specs in exchange for lower prices and smaller form factor, while retaining the same sensor, is not new. For Fuji, it was the X-T30 vs X-T3 ($600 diff at MSRP), and X-S10 vs X-T4 ($700). I notice a lot of similarities in the compromises like the 1/4000s shutter speed, lower EVF/LCD resolution, single card slot, lower fps, articulating vs fancy flip-out screens, slower flash sync speed etc., which suggest that the industry has reached some consensus that these compromises would reduce cost and weight enough without decreasing its appeal to most photographers.
Also, a savings of $600 is roughly 40% based on the X-T3 MSRP of $1499. That is a lot percentage-wise! The a7cr is $900 cheaper than the a7rv at MSRP, but it represents only a 23% savings. In other words, the absolute savings is very similar across all 3 comparisons, but the percentage savings differ a lot.
The value proposition / marketing angle is also slightly different. For X-S10 and X-T30, they are marketed as sub-$1000 cameras with the same sensor as the big and fancy Fuji flagships. For the a7CR, it is about shooting amazing 60mp images with a really compact camera that's a first in Sony's product line. The sub-$1000 narrative is going to drive a lot more sales than a simple reduction in form factor.
Here's a different perspective. Price might seem like a huge factor at first, but once you have the camera, you won't really think about it anymore. On the other hand, specs and ergonomics become more important since you experience them every time you shoot.
chez wrote:
We love comparing specs from sheets rather than actual usage. Many people putting down the A7cr are just looking at sheets.
Exactly!
Most of the whining people are missing specs, which can easily be bought with an A7 IV or A7R V.
They don't really need or want asmall c-class Sony and don't understand that there must be differences due to size/weight.
For me it makes absolutely no sense to compare these two models, as they are build for two different customer needs.
Should be very easy to understand...
EVIL_guy wrote:
For me it makes absolutely no sense to compare these two models, as they are build for two different customer needs.
Should be very easy to understand...
Sony does it right!
While I agree Sony does it right it perfectly reasonable to compare the A7RV and A7CR. I have but I already owned the RV when the CR was announced and then added the CR to both use along side the RV and to travel separately with for its small size. Most times I like to have two bodies with me to deal with any potential failures and having the second camera be smaller is a huge requirement. With the CR smaller but having the same sensor is really nice.
Then other times I just need one small setup and either the CR or CII will meet that needs. I am a long time photographer who has been shooting since the mid 1970’s so I feel I know what I want and what I need. The new smaller full frame bodies are a great addition to the marker that I’m glad to see Sony embrace them. Now where is a nice, high quality 28mm to use with them?
Just a side note, I like the Sigma I-Series DG DN lenses to use along side the bigger GM lenses I use on my full size full frame bodies.
EVIL_guy wrote:
Exactly!
Most of the whining people are missing specs, which can easily be bought with an A7 IV or A7R V.
They don't really need or want asmall c-class Sony and don't understand that there must be differences due to size/weight.
For me it makes absolutely no sense to compare these two models, as they are build for two different customer needs.
Should be very easy to understand...
Sony does it right!
Right! Folks who bought the new A7C series are perfectly happy. It's folks who don't own one are complaining about missing specs/features when they already have a model that provides it all. If one has no plans of owning an A7C line then why even complain about it.
nepali wrote:
Right! Folks who bought the new A7C series are perfectly happy. It's folks who don't own one are complaining about missing specs/features when they already have a model that provides it all. If one has no plans of owning an A7C line then why even complain about it.
Maybe you can try not to care to much about the whiners? They will whine no matter what.
nepali wrote:
Right! Folks who bought the new A7C series are perfectly happy. It's folks who don't own one are complaining about missing specs/features when they already have a model that provides it all. If one has no plans of owning an A7C line then why even complain about it.
I can’t use it for Pro work. I shoot 40 k in images for two gigs a year under LED and make close to 20 grand doing it. The A7Rc won’t work as well as other models. So to me it’s a 20k net losss out if the gate. That’s not whining but real world reality. I need a A7RV or A9II or a A1, so pardon my comments as I have needs this cam can’t cover. So I’ll shut up and go sit in a corner because my comments are not valid. Is that what you’re saying. I’ve been on this forum for years helping you hobbyists but you guys can’t handle the reality. There are two sides going down the street not a one way
I think we need to reel things in here a bit. The OP has no mention of using either camera for anything professional. He is looking for a camera to take family photos and one he can take with him on walks. Let’s not get things all mixed up by bringing in the needs to shoot professionally. That’s a total different discussion that should be kept out of this thread that has nothing to do with shooting professionally.
