Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
p.6 #1Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
I guess we are all different in how we use the cameras. I tried the Nikon Z9, stupid big! tried the Z8, still too big. The current Sony A7RV A1II, A1 with an L bracket are perfect size for me, even with heavy lenses like the 600 GM or the 400-800. Agree, the Z8 and 5RII are much better value proposition, strictly from a spec/dollar perspective.
Dec 11, 2025 at 05:46 AM
p.6 #2Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
TravelinBriNY wrote:
Problem is the Canon R5 Mark II with a full frame stack sensor at 45 Mpixel is selling at $3899 that is discounted by $500 for the holidays that sits right in the middle. It’s currently about $2600 to $3100 cheaper than the A1 II. If we look at it only gives up 5 Mpixels to the A1 II and some think it’s AF is on par with the A1 II and it sensor readout is only 2.6 ms slower than the A1 II but but cost 40% less.
So what can Sony offer its customer in this price / performance category that is more than the A7V? Any proposals?
Or does Sony need to reduce the A1 II $1000 to $1500 to make it more competitive?Interesting. I agree with you - and would love to see the A7RVI get a partially stacked sensor to compete with the R5 and Z8 lines - but i actually thought you would be speaking about the lack of a true entry level full frame camera - something priced around 2000 USD. I think that is there biggest gap. Perhaps the A7C will remain that camera?
I guess the A7CII is the lowest priced full frame camera I currently also own but never compared it to Nikon or Canon bodies in that price range since I was already in the Sony system when I got it. Owned the original A7C for a short while and don’t know how that compares to other brands.
swldstn wrote
Now that we have seen the new A7V with 34 Mpixels partially stacked sensor I’m feeling Sony has a hole in their full frame camera family. There is the A7V @ $2898 US, the 61 Mpixel A7RV @ $3298 with the current $900 discount, the 24.3 Mpixel A9III @ $6798, and the 50 Mpixel A1 II @ $6998. These are of course the current price of Sony’s full size full frame offering in the US. These are all full size full frame bodies that can take a battery grip.Problem is the Canon R5 Mark II with a full frame stack sensor at 45 Mpixel is selling at $3899 that is discounted by $500 for the holidays that sits right in the middle. It’s currently about $2600 to $3100 cheaper than the A1 II. If we look at it only gives up 5 Mpixels to the A1 II and some think it’s AF is on par with the A1 II and it sensor readout is only 2.6 ms slower than the A1 II but but cost 40% less.
So what can Sony offer its customer in this price / performance category that is more than the A7V? Any proposals?
Or does Sony need to reduce the A1 II $1000 to $1500 to make it more competitive?
I guess the A7CII is the lowest priced full frame camera I currently also own but never compared it to Nikon or Canon bodies in that price range since I was already in the Sony system when I got it. Owned the original A7C for a short while and don’t know how that compares to other brands.
Dec 11, 2025 at 07:25 AM
p.6 #3Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
nineblade wrote:
aCuria wrote
The Z8 is also too big imoNikon got the body size right in the D750 era, I am not sure why they made the Z8 so big
I don't think I'd have an issue traveling with the Z8 (given that I used to haul around a D800 and a D850), but it's not preferred. But the camera feels really comfortable and high quality in the hand.
I had the same problem with Sony too. It was hard to find a multi-purpose 'do it all' camera. I traveled with the A7R4, but while it was decent, it...Show more →
Z8 $4300
Z7II $2500
Zf $2200
A7Cii $2500
You have a lot of money in those bodies. Enough to buy the A9iii or A1ii at full price. More cameras = more depreciation, so I try to keep the camera body count down.
nineblade wrote:
But the camera feels really comfortable and high quality in the hand.
The Z8 feels like a brick in my hand, the grip is too big and the body is oversized compared to other Nikon’s. I would have no problems travelling with it in the camera bag, but it is not comfortable in hand.
I prefer a form factor similar to the Nikon D750 or Canon EOS3. The A9iii / A1ii / A1 is a good size for me.
Dec 11, 2025 at 08:07 AM
p.6 #4Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
Agreed. The z8 and z9 are heavy clunkfests. I prefer small, light, sleek, and agile.
aCuria wrote:
Nikon got the body size right in the D750 era, I am not sure why they made the Z8 so bigPhotography is so funky to me now. I agree that the Z8 is a bit too big, and it's not the camera I travel with. I travel with the Z7II or the Zf...
I don't think I'd have an issue traveling with the Z8 (given that I used to haul around a D800 and a D850), but it's not preferred. But the camera feels really comfortable and high quality in the hand.
I had the same problem with Sony too. It was hard to find a multi-purpose 'do it all' camera. I traveled with the A7R4, but while it was decent, it always felt better for landscape. So I got an A7CII for travel. I tried using either one for sports, but they both were horrific.
It's why the A7V seems so attractive. It covers a lot of bases, and doesn't cost $7000.
I have a lot of fondness for the Z8 and Zf. I walk past the camera and I want to pick it up and go find stuff to take pictures of. I have no such fondness for Sony bodies. LENSES... the handful of Sony GM's I have, yes, I want to grab them and go find things to take pictures of. But the bodys all feel like Toyota Corollas to me... while the Nikons all feel like Ferraris.Z8 $4300
Z7II $2500
Zf $2200
A7Cii $2500
You have a lot of money in those bodies. Enough to buy the A9iii or A1ii at full price. More cameras = more depreciation, so I try to keep the camera body count down.
The Z8 feels like a brick in my hand, the grip is too big and the body is oversized compared to other Nikon’s. I would have no problems travelling with it in the camera bag, but it is not comfortable in hand.
I prefer a form factor similar to the Nikon D750 or Canon EOS3. The A9iii / A1ii / A1...Show more →
aCuria wrote:
nineblade wrote
aCuria wrote
The Z8 is also too big imoNikon got the body size right in the D750 era, I am not sure why they made the Z8 so big
I don't think I'd have an issue traveling with the Z8 (given that I used to haul around a D800 and a D850), but it's not preferred. But the camera feels really comfortable and high quality in the hand.
I had the same problem with Sony too. It was hard to find a multi-purpose 'do it all' camera. I traveled with the A7R4, but while it was decent, it always felt better for landscape. So I got an A7CII for travel. I tried using either one for sports, but they both were horrific.
It's why the A7V seems so attractive. It covers a lot of bases, and doesn't cost $7000.
I have a lot of fondness for the Z8 and Zf. I walk past the camera and I want to pick it up and go find stuff to take pictures of. I have no such fondness for Sony bodies. LENSES... the handful of Sony GM's I have, yes, I want to grab them and go find things to take pictures of. But the bodys all feel like Toyota Corollas to me... while the Nikons all feel like Ferraris.
Z7II $2500
Zf $2200
A7Cii $2500
You have a lot of money in those bodies. Enough to buy the A9iii or A1ii at full price. More cameras = more depreciation, so I try to keep the camera body count down.
nineblade wrote
But the camera feels really comfortable and high quality in the hand.I prefer a form factor similar to the Nikon D750 or Canon EOS3. The A9iii / A1ii / A1...Show more →
Dec 11, 2025 at 08:41 AM
p.6 #5Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
Personally, the Nikon Z8 has been my favorite body to hold and use. I would like to see Nikon make a smaller body with a 45MP or more sensor to use as a second camera and for when size / weight is more important. Ideally, I would like a ZF with the Z7II sensor, but I would happily take a Z7III, that's a Z7II with Expeed 7. I wonder if Nikon could make a ZR with an add on EVF and a Z9 / Z8 sensor 🤔
Dec 11, 2025 at 10:39 AM
p.6 #6Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
aCuria wrote:
Struggling with which system I should embrace and try to eliminate. Generally I now favor the Sony ecosystem but the EOS R5 Mark II to me is a great buy at between $3500 to $4300 for a fully stacked 45 Mpixel camera. Sony only competes at this price point with a used A1 with no pre-capture and aging firmware and no plan that I am aware to make further upgrades to it. Going forward I’m concerned Sony thinks the older A1, with missing modern function/features is competitive in this high mid tear price point and has no plans to compete here.May be the wrong mental model to think about it as a “stacked” sensor. Thats just marketing nonsense
As the end user we only care about how the sensor performs. Thinking of the R5ii as a camera with a 1/160s readout speed is more accurate.
It’s not in the same class as mechanical shutter (1/250s), the A1 (1/250s) and the Z8 (1/256s). It’s more similar to the original A9 (1/160s)
Agree but while the R5 Mark II is only at 1/160 or 6.25 ms which is twice as slow as a A1 it’s still more than twice as fast as A7V sensor and offers ~ 36% more resolution. So it seems the next step up where the A1 sensors are 4x faster.
swldstn wrote
I shoot multiple camera systems but I’m primarily a still shooter. I have been looking at both the Canon R6III and the Sony A7V. I was looking at the Canon R6III as a backup second camera to my R5 Mark II where I currently only own one mirrorless camera (excluding the 1DX Mark II I bought at an estate sale). On the Sony side the A7V would become a backup to my A1 even though I own other Sony bodies I travel with. I’m attracted to its pre-capture feature which I only currently have in my Canon R5 mark II.Struggling with which system I should embrace and try to eliminate. Generally I now favor the Sony ecosystem but the EOS R5 Mark II to me is a great buy at between $3500 to $4300 for a fully stacked 45 Mpixel camera. Sony only competes at this price point with a used A1 with no pre-capture and aging firmware and no plan that I am aware to make further upgrades to it. Going forward I’m concerned Sony thinks the older A1, with missing modern function/features is competitive in this high mid tear price point and has no plans to compete here.
Earlier quote
EOS R5 Mark II to me is a great buy at between $3500 to $4300 for a fully stacked 45 Mpixel camera.As the end user we only care about how the sensor performs. Thinking of the R5ii as a camera with a 1/160s readout speed is more accurate.
It’s not in the same class as mechanical shutter (1/250s), the A1 (1/250s) and the Z8 (1/256s). It’s more similar to the original A9 (1/160s)
Agree but while the R5 Mark II is only at 1/160 or 6.25 ms which is twice as slow as a A1 it’s still more than twice as fast as A7V sensor and offers ~ 36% more resolution. So it seems the next step up where the A1 sensors are 4x faster.
Dec 11, 2025 at 10:57 AM
|
p.6 #7Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
swldstn wrote:
Struggling with which system I should embrace and try to eliminate. Generally I now favor the Sony ecosystem but the EOS R5 Mark II to me is a great buy at between $3500 to $4300 for a fully stacked 45 Mpixel camera. Sony only competes at this price point with a used A1 with no pre-capture and aging firmware and no plan that I am aware to make further upgrades to it. Going forward I’m concerned Sony thinks the older A1, with missing modern function/features is competitive in this high mid tear price point and has no plans to compete here.May be the wrong mental model to think about it as a “stacked” sensor. Thats just marketing nonsense
As the end user we only care about how the sensor performs. Thinking of the R5ii as a camera with a 1/160s readout speed is more accurate.
It’s not in the same class as mechanical shutter (1/250s), the A1 (1/250s) and the Z8 (1/256s). It’s more similar to the original A9 (1/160s)Agree but while the R5 Mark II is only at 1/160 or 6.25 ms which is twice as slow as a A1 it’s still more than twice as fast as A7V sensor and offers ~ 36% more resolution. So it seems the next step up where the A1 sensors are 4x faster.
I get what you’re saying about relative readout speeds, but the benefits regarding rolling-shutter reduction and banding aren’t incremental. They’re binary: either there’s banding or there isn’t, and either the rolling shutter is mild enough to be irrelevant or it’s severe enough to compromise the image.
The R5 Mark II still isn’t fast enough to outrun its own mechanical shutter, so in many situations you’ll be pushed back into mechanical mode. And that creates a catch-22: the moment you switch to mechanical, you lose the high burst rates that make the camera appealing in the first place. In fact, the R5 Mark II ends up worse than the A7V when both are in mechanical shutter mode, because the A7V enjoys a considerable dynamic-range advantage there.
The next real upgrade is a global shutter, not merely a 4× faster readout. Even with a 1/250 s readout time, flicker can’t be fully eliminated. (see pic below)
I strongly recommend global shutter, once you’ve used it, you wont go back.
DSC06561 by acurian, on Flickr
aCuria wrote
swldstn wrote
I shoot multiple camera systems but I’m primarily a still shooter. I have been looking at both the Canon R6III and the Sony A7V. I was looking at the Canon R6III as a backup second camera to my R5 Mark II where I currently only own one mirrorless camera (excluding the 1DX Mark II I bought at an estate sale). On the Sony side the A7V would become a backup to my A1 even though I own other Sony bodies I travel with. I’m attracted to its pre-capture feature which I only currently have in my Canon R5 mark II.Struggling with which system I should embrace and try to eliminate. Generally I now favor the Sony ecosystem but the EOS R5 Mark II to me is a great buy at between $3500 to $4300 for a fully stacked 45 Mpixel camera. Sony only competes at this price point with a used A1 with no pre-capture and aging firmware and no plan that I am aware to make further upgrades to it. Going forward I’m concerned Sony thinks the older A1, with missing modern function/features is competitive in this high mid tear price point and has no plans to compete here.
Earlier quote
EOS R5 Mark II to me is a great buy at between $3500 to $4300 for a fully stacked 45 Mpixel camera.As the end user we only care about how the sensor performs. Thinking of the R5ii as a camera with a 1/160s readout speed is more accurate.
It’s not in the same class as mechanical shutter (1/250s), the A1 (1/250s) and the Z8 (1/256s). It’s more similar to the original A9 (1/160s)
I get what you’re saying about relative readout speeds, but the benefits regarding rolling-shutter reduction and banding aren’t incremental. They’re binary: either there’s banding or there isn’t, and either the rolling shutter is mild enough to be irrelevant or it’s severe enough to compromise the image.
The R5 Mark II still isn’t fast enough to outrun its own mechanical shutter, so in many situations you’ll be pushed back into mechanical mode. And that creates a catch-22: the moment you switch to mechanical, you lose the high burst rates that make the camera appealing in the first place. In fact, the R5 Mark II ends up worse than the A7V when both are in mechanical shutter mode, because the A7V enjoys a considerable dynamic-range advantage there.
The next real upgrade is a global shutter, not merely a 4× faster readout. Even with a 1/250 s readout time, flicker can’t be fully eliminated. (see pic below)
I strongly recommend global shutter, once you’ve used it, you wont go back.
DSC06561 by acurian, on FlickrDec 11, 2025 at 07:38 PM
p.6 #8Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
aCuria wrote:
Struggling with which system I should embrace and try to eliminate. Generally I now favor the Sony ecosystem but the EOS R5 Mark II to me is a great buy at between $3500 to $4300 for a fully stacked 45 Mpixel camera. Sony only competes at this price point with a used A1 with no pre-capture and aging firmware and no plan that I am aware to make further upgrades to it. Going forward I’m concerned Sony thinks the older A1, with missing modern function/features is competitive in this high mid tear price point and has no plans to compete here.May be the wrong mental model to think about it as a “stacked” sensor. Thats just marketing nonsense
As the end user we only care about how the sensor performs. Thinking of the R5ii as a camera with a 1/160s readout speed is more accurate.
It’s not in the same class as mechanical shutter (1/250s), the A1 (1/250s) and the Z8 (1/256s). It’s more similar to the original A9 (1/160s)Agree but while the R5 Mark II is only at 1/160 or 6.25 ms which is twice as slow as a A1 it’s still more than twice as fast as A7V sensor and offers ~ 36% more resolution. So it seems the next step up where the A1 sensors are 4x faster.I get what you’re saying about relative readout speeds, but the benefits regarding rolling-shutter reduction and banding aren’t incremental. They’re binary: either there’s banding or there isn’t, and either the rolling shutter is mild enough to be irrelevant or it’s severe enough to compromise the image.
The R5 Mark II still isn’t fast enough to outrun its own mechanical shutter, so in many situations you’ll be pushed back into mechanical mode. And that creates a catch-22: the moment you switch to mechanical, you lose the high burst rates that make the camera appealing in the first place. In fact, the R5...Show more →
So if you need a readout speed of 1/250 or better than 4ms then why are we so thrilled with the A7V? Are the A1, A1 II or A9III the only real Sony bodies, Canon R1,:and Nikon Z8 and Z9 that can suppress rolling shutter (neglecting cinema cameras)
swldstn wrote
aCuria wrote
swldstn wrote
I shoot multiple camera systems but I’m primarily a still shooter. I have been looking at both the Canon R6III and the Sony A7V. I was looking at the Canon R6III as a backup second camera to my R5 Mark II where I currently only own one mirrorless camera (excluding the 1DX Mark II I bought at an estate sale). On the Sony side the A7V would become a backup to my A1 even though I own other Sony bodies I travel with. I’m attracted to its pre-capture feature which I only currently have in my Canon R5 mark II.Struggling with which system I should embrace and try to eliminate. Generally I now favor the Sony ecosystem but the EOS R5 Mark II to me is a great buy at between $3500 to $4300 for a fully stacked 45 Mpixel camera. Sony only competes at this price point with a used A1 with no pre-capture and aging firmware and no plan that I am aware to make further upgrades to it. Going forward I’m concerned Sony thinks the older A1, with missing modern function/features is competitive in this high mid tear price point and has no plans to compete here.
Earlier quote
EOS R5 Mark II to me is a great buy at between $3500 to $4300 for a fully stacked 45 Mpixel camera.As the end user we only care about how the sensor performs. Thinking of the R5ii as a camera with a 1/160s readout speed is more accurate.
It’s not in the same class as mechanical shutter (1/250s), the A1 (1/250s) and the Z8 (1/256s). It’s more similar to the original A9 (1/160s)
The R5 Mark II still isn’t fast enough to outrun its own mechanical shutter, so in many situations you’ll be pushed back into mechanical mode. And that creates a catch-22: the moment you switch to mechanical, you lose the high burst rates that make the camera appealing in the first place. In fact, the R5...Show more →
So if you need a readout speed of 1/250 or better than 4ms then why are we so thrilled with the A7V? Are the A1, A1 II or A9III the only real Sony bodies, Canon R1,:and Nikon Z8 and Z9 that can suppress rolling shutter (neglecting cinema cameras)
Dec 11, 2025 at 08:10 PM
p.6 #9Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
swldstn wrote:
Struggling with which system I should embrace and try to eliminate. Generally I now favor the Sony ecosystem but the EOS R5 Mark II to me is a great buy at between $3500 to $4300 for a fully stacked 45 Mpixel camera. Sony only competes at this price point with a used A1 with no pre-capture and aging firmware and no plan that I am aware to make further upgrades to it. Going forward I’m concerned Sony thinks the older A1, with missing modern function/features is competitive in this high mid tear price point and has no plans to compete here.May be the wrong mental model to think about it as a “stacked” sensor. Thats just marketing nonsense
As the end user we only care about how the sensor performs. Thinking of the R5ii as a camera with a 1/160s readout speed is more accurate.
It’s not in the same class as mechanical shutter (1/250s), the A1 (1/250s) and the Z8 (1/256s). It’s more similar to the original A9 (1/160s)Agree but while the R5 Mark II is only at 1/160 or 6.25 ms which is twice as slow as a A1 it’s still more than twice as fast as A7V sensor and offers ~ 36% more resolution. So it seems the next step up where the A1 sensors are 4x faster.I get what you’re saying about relative readout speeds, but the benefits regarding rolling-shutter reduction and banding aren’t incremental. They’re binary: either there’s banding or there isn’t, and either the rolling shutter is mild enough to be irrelevant or it’s severe enough to compromise the image.
The R5 Mark II still isn’t fast enough to outrun its own mechanical shutter, so in many situations you’ll be pushed back into mechanical mode. And that creates a catch-22: the moment you switch to mechanical, you lose the high burst rates that make the camera appealing in the first place. In fact, the R5 Mark II ends up worse than the A7V when both are in mechanical shutter mode, because the A7V enjoys a considerable dynamic-range advantage there.
The next real upgrade is a global shutter, not merely a 4× faster readout. Even with a 1/250 s readout time, flicker can’t be fully eliminated. (see pic below)
I strongly recommend global shutter, once you’ve used it, you wont go back.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54170824145_f7eddd8ce9_b.jpgDSC06561 by acurian, on FlickrSo if you need a readout speed of 1/250 or better than 4ms then why are we so thrilled with the A7V? Are the A1, A1 II or A9III the only real Sony bodies, Canon R1,:and Nikon Z8 and Z9 that can suppress rolling shutter (neglecting cinema cameras)
Most photographers don’t need very high fps. Mechanical shutter at ~10 fps is more than enough for events, weddings, landscapes, portraits, travel...
For this crowd, the A7V is very exciting. Excellent dynamic range, solid auto-focus performance, and a much friendlier price than the flagship cameras. Not every camera has to be a race car.
aCuria wrote
swldstn wrote
aCuria wrote
swldstn wrote
I shoot multiple camera systems but I’m primarily a still shooter. I have been looking at both the Canon R6III and the Sony A7V. I was looking at the Canon R6III as a backup second camera to my R5 Mark II where I currently only own one mirrorless camera (excluding the 1DX Mark II I bought at an estate sale). On the Sony side the A7V would become a backup to my A1 even though I own other Sony bodies I travel with. I’m attracted to its pre-capture feature which I only currently have in my Canon R5 mark II.Struggling with which system I should embrace and try to eliminate. Generally I now favor the Sony ecosystem but the EOS R5 Mark II to me is a great buy at between $3500 to $4300 for a fully stacked 45 Mpixel camera. Sony only competes at this price point with a used A1 with no pre-capture and aging firmware and no plan that I am aware to make further upgrades to it. Going forward I’m concerned Sony thinks the older A1, with missing modern function/features is competitive in this high mid tear price point and has no plans to compete here.
Earlier quote
EOS R5 Mark II to me is a great buy at between $3500 to $4300 for a fully stacked 45 Mpixel camera.As the end user we only care about how the sensor performs. Thinking of the R5ii as a camera with a 1/160s readout speed is more accurate.
It’s not in the same class as mechanical shutter (1/250s), the A1 (1/250s) and the Z8 (1/256s). It’s more similar to the original A9 (1/160s)
The R5 Mark II still isn’t fast enough to outrun its own mechanical shutter, so in many situations you’ll be pushed back into mechanical mode. And that creates a catch-22: the moment you switch to mechanical, you lose the high burst rates that make the camera appealing in the first place. In fact, the R5 Mark II ends up worse than the A7V when both are in mechanical shutter mode, because the A7V enjoys a considerable dynamic-range advantage there.
The next real upgrade is a global shutter, not merely a 4× faster readout. Even with a 1/250 s readout time, flicker can’t be fully eliminated. (see pic below)
I strongly recommend global shutter, once you’ve used it, you wont go back.
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54170824145_f7eddd8ce9_b.jpgDSC06561 by acurian, on Flickr
Most photographers don’t need very high fps. Mechanical shutter at ~10 fps is more than enough for events, weddings, landscapes, portraits, travel...
For this crowd, the A7V is very exciting. Excellent dynamic range, solid auto-focus performance, and a much friendlier price than the flagship cameras. Not every camera has to be a race car.
Dec 11, 2025 at 08:38 PM
p.6 #10Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
aCuria wrote:
Nikon got the body size right in the D750 era, I am not sure why they made the Z8 so bigPhotography is so funky to me now. I agree that the Z8 is a bit too big, and it's not the camera I travel with. I travel with the Z7II or the Zf...
I don't think I'd have an issue traveling with the Z8 (given that I used to haul around a D800 and a D850), but it's not preferred. But the camera feels really comfortable and high quality in the hand.
I had the same problem with Sony too. It was hard to find a multi-purpose 'do it all' camera. I traveled with the A7R4, but while it was decent, it always felt better for landscape. So I got an A7CII for travel. I tried using either one for sports, but they both were horrific.
It's why the A7V seems so attractive. It covers a lot of bases, and doesn't cost $7000.
I have a lot of fondness for the Z8 and Zf. I walk past the camera and I want to pick it up and go find stuff to take pictures of. I have no such fondness for Sony bodies. LENSES... the handful of Sony GM's I have, yes, I want to grab them and go find things to take pictures of. But the bodys all feel like Toyota Corollas to me... while the Nikons all feel like Ferraris.Z8 $4300
Z7II $2500
Zf $2200
A7Cii $2500
You have a lot of money in those bodies. Enough to buy the A9iii or A1ii at full price. More cameras = more depreciation, so I try to keep the camera body count down.
The Z8 feels like a brick in my hand, the grip is too big and the body is oversized compared to other Nikon’s. I would have no problems travelling with it in the camera bag, but it is not comfortable in hand.
I prefer a form factor similar to the Nikon D750 or Canon EOS3. The A9iii / A1ii / A1...Show more →
I guess that goes to the heart of this discussion. There's no way I'm buying an A1ii, and the A9iii doesn't have enough megapixels to be my sole camera. There's no way I'm buying an A1ii because it's just way out of my price range.
I haven't paid more than $3k for a camera body. Ever. Ignoring the fact that I'm in 2 (actually 3 systems), I'd rather have a Z7II and a Z8 than an A1ii... and I'd still end up paying less money.
So the release of the A7V is godsend. I am considering selling the A7Cii and the A7R4 and getting the A7V. I will miss the 60mp if I do so though.
nineblade wrote
aCuria wrote
The Z8 is also too big imoNikon got the body size right in the D750 era, I am not sure why they made the Z8 so big
I don't think I'd have an issue traveling with the Z8 (given that I used to haul around a D800 and a D850), but it's not preferred. But the camera feels really comfortable and high quality in the hand.
I had the same problem with Sony too. It was hard to find a multi-purpose 'do it all' camera. I traveled with the A7R4, but while it was decent, it always felt better for landscape. So I got an A7CII for travel. I tried using either one for sports, but they both were horrific.
It's why the A7V seems so attractive. It covers a lot of bases, and doesn't cost $7000.
I have a lot of fondness for the Z8 and Zf. I walk past the camera and I want to pick it up and go find stuff to take pictures of. I have no such fondness for Sony bodies. LENSES... the handful of Sony GM's I have, yes, I want to grab them and go find things to take pictures of. But the bodys all feel like Toyota Corollas to me... while the Nikons all feel like Ferraris.
Z7II $2500
Zf $2200
A7Cii $2500
You have a lot of money in those bodies. Enough to buy the A9iii or A1ii at full price. More cameras = more depreciation, so I try to keep the camera body count down.
nineblade wrote
But the camera feels really comfortable and high quality in the hand.I prefer a form factor similar to the Nikon D750 or Canon EOS3. The A9iii / A1ii / A1...Show more →
I guess that goes to the heart of this discussion. There's no way I'm buying an A1ii, and the A9iii doesn't have enough megapixels to be my sole camera. There's no way I'm buying an A1ii because it's just way out of my price range.
I haven't paid more than $3k for a camera body. Ever. Ignoring the fact that I'm in 2 (actually 3 systems), I'd rather have a Z7II and a Z8 than an A1ii... and I'd still end up paying less money.
So the release of the A7V is godsend. I am considering selling the A7Cii and the A7R4 and getting the A7V. I will miss the 60mp if I do so though.
Dec 11, 2025 at 09:26 PM
p.6 #11Sony’s missing camera. There is a hole in the lineup.
aCuria wrote:
They’re binary: either there’s banding or there isn’t, and either the rolling shutter is mild enough to be irrelevant or it’s severe enough to compromise the image.
That doesn't sound right. Shooting scenarios always have a spectrum.
aCuria wrote:
The R5 Mark II still isn’t fast enough to outrun its own mechanical shutter, so in many situations you’ll be pushed back into mechanical mode. And that creates a catch-22: the moment you switch to mechanical, you lose the high burst rates that make the camera appealing in the first place. In fact, the R5 Mark II ends up worse than the A7V when both are in mechanical shutter mode, because the A7V enjoys a considerable dynamic-range advantage there.
The next real upgrade is a global shutter, not merely a 4× faster readout. Even with a 1/250 s readout time, flicker...Show more →
So what's the point here? That R5ii is not a worthwhile buy that people should buy either A1ii or A7v? What if it's made by Sony (assuming Sony form factor)? Will it still be a no buy or will it change to best buy?
They’re binary: either there’s banding or there isn’t, and either the rolling shutter is mild enough to be irrelevant or it’s severe enough to compromise the image.
That doesn't sound right. Shooting scenarios always have a spectrum.
aCuria wrote:
The R5 Mark II still isn’t fast enough to outrun its own mechanical shutter, so in many situations you’ll be pushed back into mechanical mode. And that creates a catch-22: the moment you switch to mechanical, you lose the high burst rates that make the camera appealing in the first place. In fact, the R5 Mark II ends up worse than the A7V when both are in mechanical shutter mode, because the A7V enjoys a considerable dynamic-range advantage there.
The next real upgrade is a global shutter, not merely a 4× faster readout. Even with a 1/250 s readout time, flicker...Show more →
So what's the point here? That R5ii is not a worthwhile buy that people should buy either A1ii or A7v? What if it's made by Sony (assuming Sony form factor)? Will it still be a no buy or will it change to best buy?
Dec 11, 2025 at 10:24 PM