Depending on what it is that you do no, not really. At most it's an A roll camera, B roll, especially if you're a 4K60 log person it's a no. Best bang for buck is basically the Z6III...depending, if you need high rez stills definitely the Z8 in my opinion. Personally for B roll I like the look of the Fuji XH2S so I use that a lot, grades well and easily too. chez wrote:
Many photo video shoots can be done with the less than $1000 A7r3.
Meh. For the same money, I’d get a used a7rV - AND - a used a7v (my current kit that cost me $4800), that will give you the same photo IQ and superior video (a7v doesn’t line skip so it’s more detailed, more DR, less RS, and a higher second base ISO means better noise), plus a backup body, and cross compatibility with grips and cages and batteries and such. Sony’s price hikes make it easy to achieve the same or better with a combination of other bodies.
If you’re already a Sony shooter, this isn’t much of an upgrade to what’s available.
IMO as someone that likes shooting with two bodies. YMMV.
JadedWriter wrote:
Depending on what it is that you do no, not really. At most it's an A roll camera, B roll, especially if you're a 4K60 log person it's a no. Best bang for buck is basically the Z6III...depending, if you need high rez stills definitely the Z8 in my opinion. Personally for B roll I like the look of the Fuji XH2S so I use that a lot, grades well and easily too.
Sure…but most Sony shooters have a mitt full of EF lenses so just buying a Z8 is not the whole story. Let’s not even bring up the pig sized Z8…never carry that beast during travels.
I shot Sony for 4 years. Me personally I never enjoyed those cameras. Literally had a battery grip on all of them. I have covered parades in 90 degree heat for hours with two Nikon Z9's. Would honestly rather just use something I enjoy holding than trying to save weight. Also the precious EF glass can be adapted to Z mount so I don't even know what you're trying to say here. You can adapt more glass on Z mount, even Sony's E mount lenses. chez wrote:
Sure…but most Sony shooters have a mitt full of EF lenses so just buying a Z8 is not the whole story. Let’s not even bring up the pig sized Z8…never carry that beast during travels.
May 13, 2026 at 08:42 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
aCuria wrote:
It seems to be that the A7RVI is better than the R5ii for the intended use case of landscape / portrait / studio type photography. The 16 stop dynamic range, higher MP, and 14 bit raw bursts all come into play here.
If you want fast readout in electronic shutter mode (I do), then neither camera is for you. A9iii (0ms), A1ii (1/256s), Z8 (1/268s) are far and away faster than the R5ii (1/158s)
The A1 II and Z8 (and of course the A9 III) are faster than the R5 II, but I wouldn't call the difference far and away faster. In ms we are talking 0ms for the A9 III, 3ms for the Z8, 4ms for the A1 II, and 6ms for the R5 II, and now we know the A7r VI is 19ms, which is 16ms. The Canon R5 II at 6m is the same sensor scan speed as the Canon A9 and A9 II.
In my mind there are clearly four classes of cameras here in sensor scan speed:
1) The A9 III with its global shutter
2) The Nikon Z8 and Z9, Sony A1, A1 II, A9 and A9 II, and Canon R1 (3ms), Canon R3 (5ms), Canon R5 II with very fast sensor scan speed suitable even for sports and wildlife
3) Sony A7 V (16ms), Sony A7r VI (19ms), Nikon Z6 III (14ms), Canon R5 (16ms), Canon R6 III (13ms), Canon R6 II (14ms) and Canon R8 (14ms) with fairly fast sensor scan speed suitable for moving targets but not those moving very quickly like often seen in sports and wildlife photography.
4) Older cameras that are slower like the A7r V (99ms), Nikon Z6 II, Nikon Z7 II, and Canon RP which have some danger of movement distortion with most moving targets.
JadedWriter wrote:
I shot Sony for 4 years. Me personally I never enjoyed those cameras. Literally had a battery grip on all of them. I have covered parades in 90 degree heat for hours with two Nikon Z9's. Would honestly rather just use something I enjoy holding than trying to save weight. Also the precious EF glass can be adapted to Z mount so I don't even know what you're trying to say here. You can adapt more glass on Z mount, even Sony's E mount lenses.
Adapting is never the same as native.
Shooting a couple of hours sitting watching a parade go by is totally different than dragging your camera with you for 12 hour days through the streets of Mumbai or Fez.
What exactly did you shoot during the parade that an A7r6 could not handle? So many just compare specs and chase the specs rather than getting the equipment that just does the job.
Steve Spencer wrote:
The A1 II and Z8 (and of course the A9 III) are faster than the R5 II, but I wouldn't call the difference far and away faster. In ms we are talking 0ms for the A9 III, 3ms for the Z8, 4ms for the A1 II, and 6ms for the R5 II, and now we know the A7r VI is 19ms, which is 16ms. The Canon R5 II at 6m is the same sensor scan speed as the Canon A9 and A9 II.
In my mind there are clearly four classes of cameras here in sensor scan speed:
1) The A9 III with its global shutter
2) The Nikon Z8 and Z9, Sony A1, A1 II, A9 and A9 II, and Canon R1 (3ms), Canon R3 (5ms), Canon R5 II with very fast sensor scan speed suitable even for sports and wildlife
3) Sony A7 V (16ms), Sony A7r VI (19ms), Nikon Z6 III (14ms), Canon R5 (16ms), Canon R6 III (13ms), Canon R6 II (14ms) and Canon R8 (14ms) with fairly fast sensor scan speed suitable for moving targets but not those moving very quickly like often seen in sports and wildlife photography.
4) Older cameras that are slower like the A7r V (99ms), Nikon Z6 II, Nikon Z7 II, and Canon RP which have some danger of movement distortion with most moving targets....Show more →
Big difference between the A9III and anything else. After I purchased one, I was quite astonished coming from the A1/A7RV.
I could use it any lighting situation for any without any fear of rolling shutter issues.
Only after I used one did I realize the significance of global shutter on capturing life’s moments. I don’t have any interest in purchasing any rolling shutter sensor camera, stacked or not.
The A1 is long gone and so will be the A7RV. I probably will use the funds from trading the other bodies to get another A9III and the 100-400 4.5.
For high resolution landscape, and stationary portraits I have my trusty GFX100 S II.
The A7RVI with its 20ms rolling shutter sensor can’t even compete with a 2020 Canon R5. I think Sony primarily targeted it at A7RV owners while pricing it a segement of better performing cameras like the R5II and the Z8.
The 20ms sensor is incapable of capturing anything but the slowest moving subjects without rolling shutter issues.
Don’t believe the hoards of Sony shrills on YouTube about it being more than that.
Lifeinpictures wrote:
Big difference between the A9III and anything else. After I purchased one, I was quite astonished coming from the A1/A7RV.
I could use it any lighting situation for any without any fear of rolling shutter issues.
Only after I used one did I realize the significance of global shutter on capturing life’s moments. I don’t have any interest in purchasing any rolling shutter sensor camera, stacked or not.
The A1 is long gone and so will be the A7RV. I probably will use the funds from trading the other bodies to get another A9III and the 100-400 4.5.
For high resolution landscape, and stationary portraits I have my trusty GFX100 S II.
The A7RVI with its 20ms rolling shutter sensor can’t even compete with a 2020 Canon R5. I think Sony primarily targeted it at A7RV owners while pricing it a segement of better performing cameras like the R5II and the Z8.
The 20ms sensor is incapable of capturing anything but the slowest moving subjects without rolling shutter issues.
Don’t believe the hoards of Sony shrills on YouTube about it being more than that.
JadedWriter wrote:
If Sony wasn't the leading brand in production companies there's almost no reason to buy into the brand.
E-mount is the overall better ecosystem. To me at least. To name one aspect, compared to GM primes, Z-mount's f/1.2 primes are long and heavy without the image quality to justify the bulk, and their f/1.4 primes are non-S budget lenses, so no f/1.4 S-line primes to balance weight and image quality. Lenses attracted me to E-mount and are keeping me here. It's just a pleasant coincidence that E-mount also has the highest-resolution sensors to exploit the lenses.
Personally I don't adapt between systems, except for vintage lenses. But if your experience with E-to-Z adapting has been good, more power to you.
"Sitting watching a parade go by." Yeah...you have 0 idea about what I do or have even glanced at either my Flickr account or any of my gay pride parade posts that I've shot, but no. I don't sit and watch the parade go by. I have taken pictures by speed walking backwards in front of people for probably about an hour straight while chasing the parade while doing this on 90 degree days because that parade is always hot. You do you, but don't sit there and act like you know anything about what I deal with on the job to cover an assignment. Also let's see since I'm actually just catching up to the full post you put in. I trust the weather sealing of the Z9, B the RVI did not exist until today so it's impossible to shoot something that I have shot for 4 years straight with it. B I don't really like holding Sony cameras for that long, I remember doing the Veterans day parade with my Sony kit and I don't remember liking it much...plus I couldn't stand the colors out of the RII...RIII was fine though. I'd need to look into how the RVI deals with buffer rate since I capture a lot of fast motion and action and probably shot off like 2000 shots per camera. Then you have the fact that it's 67MP and I shoot two bodies. Do you have any idea how much of an issue that's going to be with importing and taking up even more space. Like I really don't think action and high fps action is it's strong suit, but at least it's "better" for it now. Let's also tack in the extra editing time to get the raws to look good when I always found Z9 raws to already have a good look in them. I still edit, but I don't have to do as much. Nikon basically just worked better for my work flow/clumsiness. Did Sony ever fix the wet hotshoe issues? I feel like I have shot 3 parades where rain happened and I can't have a camera go down because of that. Me personally not a Sony fan. You playing armchair quarterback on my job, which you don't even know the capacity of is just not how you have this discussion with me. chez wrote:
Adapting is never the same as native.
Shooting a couple of hours sitting watching a parade go by is totally different than dragging your camera with you for 12 hour days through the streets of Mumbai or Fez.
What exactly did you shoot during the parade that an A7r6 could not handle? So many just compare specs and chase the specs rather than getting the equipment that just does the job.
Wow, Sony Alpha Rumors and similar “sources” skewed expectations and these discussions in such a way that it seems that Sony set out to kill the A1ii and failed miserably. Why don’t we evaluate it based on it being an ‘R’ camera with better low iso performance, higher dynamic range, faster/more accurate autofocus, improved EVF, video features with less rolling shutter when compared to the A7Rv. The only real competitors here are medium format cameras, which are more expensive, larger with fewer system lenses.
JadedWriter wrote:
"Sitting watching a parade go by." Yeah...you have 0 idea about what I do or have even glanced at either my Flickr account or any of my gay pride parade posts that I've shot, but no. I don't sit and watch the parade go by. I have taken pictures by speed walking backwards in front of people for probably about an hour straight while chasing the parade while doing this on 90 degree days because that parade is always hot. You do you, but don't sit there and act like you know anything about what I deal with on the job to cover an assignment.
A whole hour? Try a month of 12 hour days in temperatures over 35 with high humidity. Yes, I have no idea of the conditions you shoot, but your example is quite pedestrian.
I personally do not adapt much and I actually really like the 50 1.2 everybody on here likes to complain about. I might be on year number 4 with that lens and I'm not getting rid of that till there's a replacement. Literally could've bought the GM when I was still on E mount, but really liked the rendering for the Z lens so bought it. Got it for stills and it eventually ended up becoming my most used video interview lens. It's just that good for it. Rialto wrote:
E-mount is the overall better ecosystem. To me at least. To name one aspect, compared to GM primes, Z-mount's f/1.2 primes are long and heavy without the image quality to justify the bulk, and their f/1.4 primes are non-S budget lenses, so no f/1.4 S-line primes to balance weight and image quality. Lenses attracted me to E-mount and are keeping me here. It's just a pleasant coincidence that E-mount also has the highest-resolution sensors to exploit the lenses.
Personally I don't adapt between systems, except for vintage lenses. But if your experience with E-to-Z adapting has been good, more power to you....Show more →
This ain't even factoring in the 3 hours of wait time before the parade gets going. Thing is an all day affair. You can respect the hustle or not, which you clearly don't, but it's a grind and you do not see me belittling any of the work that you do do you? chez wrote:
A whole hour? Try a month of 12 hour days in temperatures over 35 with high humidity. Yes, I have no idea of the conditions you shoot, but your example is quite pedestrian.
JadedWriter wrote:
I personally do not adapt much and I actually really like the 50 1.2 everybody on here likes to complain about. I might be on year number 4 with that lens and I'm not getting rid of that till there's a replacement. Literally could've bought the GM when I was still on E mount, but really liked the rendering for the Z lens so bought it. Got it for stills and it eventually ended up becoming my most used video interview lens. It's just that good for it.
Glad you enjoy it. I'm sure Nikon has its reasons to make the lens the way it is, especially noting that most of the elements in the 50 1.2 S are of moderate refractive index, and then there is undercorrected spherical aberration in the background which is helpful for smooth bokeh.
BigBabyMoses06 wrote:
I counted 6 A7RVs for sale on the B/S/T section just now, 1st page lol. Guess people want to upgrade.
I may actually buy an A7RV in a year or so to use it purely as a landscape/travel camera when the used price falls to $1500. I think it will drop below $2000 pretty soon. I don't want to take my A1II cameras for that kind of shoot, not that the A1II is bad but the A7RV is better for that type of work. If I damage it or lose it, it won't hurt so bad. I think by Thanksgiving/Christmas, we could get the A7RVI for $500 less.
Douglas L wrote:
I may actually buy an A7RV in a year or so to use it purely as a landscape/travel camera when the used price falls to $1500. I think it will drop below $2000 pretty soon. I don't want to take my A1II cameras for that kind of shoot, not that the A1II is bad but the A7RV is better for that type of work. If I damage it or lose it, it won't hurt so bad. I think by Thanksgiving/Christmas, we could get the A7RVI for $500 less.
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. I can hear my resale value evaporating!
