p.3 #1 · What's in the future for the Sony A7Cr II?
Jack Flesher wrote:
If they improve the EVF, the camera body will likely have to be a bit larger to accommodate that. Adapt it for the new A7R6 battery and the grip are definitely has to be larger. These two changes will likely result in a camera now only marginally smaller and lighter than the A7R6. As an owner of both, I can tell you if the A7CII/R get any larger in the next iteration, there will be zero reason to own one over the A7R6 other than entry cost.
As it is, given the relatively small differences in size and weight at the cost of sub-par EVF, lesser battery life, only one SD card slot, poorer AF and a bit smaller file size compared the A7R6, I am questioning my keeping the A7CR. The only reason I have so far is it is somewhat smaller being carried than the A7R6, it doesn’t look like a pro camera and I think it looks cool (at least in silver) and the files are still quite excellent; and I admit to still enjoying using it for casual “walk around” imaging with a small prime mounted. For those reasons it’s still around, but maybe not for long…...Show more →
I tend to agree, Jack. I had the A7RC twice, never gelled with it. To ME, the smaller size/weight is not worth the compromise in features vs the A7RV. The regular R bodies without the L bracket are pretty compact already, except the EVF hump. Ironically, the CR's EVF is the # 1 complaint., it seems. It's interesting the used A7RV was selling at about the same or even lower price as the used A7CR, even before the introduction of the A7RVI. If the slightly smaller size/weight is the top priority, I can see why some folks love them.
Will be interesting to see what Sony will come up with in the next generation.
p.3 #4 · What's in the future for the Sony A7Cr II?
chiron wrote:
Also, for people who want to be discreet and not call attention to their camera and picture-taking, and who don't want to intimidate their subjects, the CR is far superior to a full-size camera.
Also one of the reasons that some of us prefer to pair a small camera with small primes for things like street photography.
tuomkok wrote:
Everything is relative. A7CII/r EVF resolution is kind of ok compared to what was typical 10 years ago,…
FWIW, I’m in the camp that isn’t so concerned about optimal viewfinder quality. For me the viewfinder is mostly a tool to see my subject and compose the image, something that doesn’t necessarily require a perfect display. (In any case, even a little EVF is far easier to use than, say, the backwards and vignetting display of old school TLRs… much less things like view cameras! ;-)
- - -
Separately, but also from the FWIW Department, things are different if you happen to use more than one camera. For those (likely the majority) who prefer one do-it-all camera, compromising on various performance features might be a big problem — e.g. the viewfinder than you want when you photograph birds in flight with a 600mm lens may not be the viewfinder you get in a camera designed for small size. (The opposite is equally true.) But if you do use more than one system, a compromise that may be unacceptable to a one-camera photographer might not be an issue at all — you just choose the other system that better fits what you are doing at the time. (For my part, I have a honking-big DSLR system with lots of big lenses for things like landscape and wildlife and a very small mirrorless system mostly used with small primes for street and travel.)
Balancing specialized features (for a particular kind of photography) against generalized adaptability for a wide range of uses is always tricky.
p.3 #5 · What's in the future for the Sony A7Cr II?
gdanmitchell wrote:
Also one of the reasons that some of us prefer to pair a small camera with small primes for things like street photography.
FWIW, I’m in the camp that isn’t so concerned about optimal viewfinder quality. For me the viewfinder is mostly a tool to see my subject and compose the image, something that doesn’t necessarily require a perfect display. (In any case, even a little EVF is far easier to use than, say, the backwards and vignetting display of old school TLRs… much less things like view cameras! ;-)
- - -
Separately, but also from the FWIW Department, things are different if you happen to use more than one camera. For those (likely the majority) who prefer one do-it-all camera, compromising on various performance features might be a big problem — e.g. the viewfinder than you want when you photograph birds in flight with a 600mm lens may not be the viewfinder you get in a camera designed for small size. (The opposite is equally true.) But if you do use more than one system, a compromise that may be unacceptable to a one-camera photographer might not be an issue at all — you just choose the other system that better fits what you are doing at the time. (For my part, I have a honking-big DSLR system with lots of big lenses for things like landscape and wildlife and a very small mirrorless system mostly used with small primes for street and travel.)
Balancing specialized features (for a particular kind of photography) against generalized adaptability for a wide range of uses is always tricky.
Your perspective on the viewfinder is absolutely correct, but I never enjoyed shooting through the viewfinder and for me that was enough to get rid of the camera. I just pulled my eleven year old A7Rii from storage to try the new $99 TTArtisan 24mm f/3.8 fixed aperture lens. This is a 42MPix setup that was in the early Sony years of face and eye detection, but the body is barely larger than the A7Cii/A7CR. The punch line here is that it has basically the same EVF as the A7CR. If Fuji can get a much more complicated Hybrid 0.66x OVF with 3.69m-Dot OLED EVF in the X100vi, Sony can certainly up their EVF game.
I 100% agree with your ‘shoot with small lens’ suggestion. I can’t praise the little 90mm f/2.8 and 17mm f/4 Sigmas enough. They are both optically first class and small. The Sony 40mm f/2.5 G lens deserves equal praise. What I couldn’t replace was one of my favorite lenses, the 24mm f/1.4 GM. You can carry all three of the compact lenses in pockets, or belt lens cases.
p.3 #6 · What's in the future for the Sony A7Cr II?
The a7C* models are designed around minimizing size. Every feature is a compromise to meet the size metric. The fact that Sony managed to shove everything they did into the a7C and make it 3/4 the weight of the a7* bodies is a minor miracle. While I'd appreciate a bigger EVF, I would not want the weight to increase. So something else would have to give. I'd be OK with a smaller LCD but not a smaller battery.
Sony engineers are doing a balancing act with the a7C design. If they add anything which makes it bigger or heavier, it no longer offers any real advantages over using a full size a7 body. If they take anything else away, it risks becoming unusable for some percentage of current users. Every change to the a7C has to fit within the narrow size and weight constraints Sony has established.
p.3 #7 · What's in the future for the Sony A7Cr II?
aCuria wrote:
A7RVI is quite a high end camera. If Sony drops that sensor into an A7CRII its going to be expensive.
This is normal for the range, though current volatility in pricing and tariff increases are moving prices around a bit. The C bodies have always been priced reasonably closely to the full size bodies they share sensors with.
A7C vs A7iii at launch: $1799 vs $1999
A7Cii vs A7iv at launch: $2198 vs $2499
A7CR vs A7Rv at launch: $2999 vs $3899
Currently A7CR and A7RV are within $100 of each other at B&H.
p.3 #8 · What's in the future for the Sony A7Cr II?
The a7r and a7r II had that weenie little battery that lasted hardly at all. You could reach the 4th battery in a day of shooting. Sony can probably keep the NP-FZ100 with the hardware from the a7rVI in the a7CRII if they slow it down a little. However, the NP-SA100 is only about 2mm thicker with same length and width.
p.3 #9 · What's in the future for the Sony A7Cr II?
If you trim down the battery and give up IBIS, you end up with the a6400. The size and weight of the a6400 makes it perfect in some ways. But you are giving up a lot by losing those features. I only use mine with bigger OSS equipped lenses which mostly cancels out the size benefit. Plus I always have to carry spare batteries because a fully charged FW50 seem to be at 80% as soon as I turn the camera on. The FW50 may be 1/2 the weight of the FZ100, but carrying two or three of them nullifies that benefit.
p.3 #10 · What's in the future for the Sony A7Cr II?
That might be the last camera I’ll ever buy. It’ll be perfect as I still have my smaller Zeiss Touits, Sonnar 24/1.8 and the superb 15/1.4 G. However I’ll wait for what comes after the A6700.
p.3 #11 · What's in the future for the Sony A7Cr II?
Canuck-Nick wrote:
This is normal for the range, though current volatility in pricing and tariff increases are moving prices around a bit. The C bodies have always been priced reasonably closely to the full size bodies they share sensors with.
A7C vs A7iii at launch: $1799 vs $1999
A7Cii vs A7iv at launch: $2198 vs $2499
A7CR vs A7Rv at launch: $2999 vs $3899
Currently A7CR and A7RV are within $100 of each other at B&H.
I considered Cr overpriced already from day one. Now that A7rV is in discount, it looks even more expensive.
A7CII is much more balanced camera and also more reasonably priced. As a A7rV user I know that the 60mp sensor is superior to the 33mp in very few use cases. For the typical A7C series camera user the 33mp sensor is better choice.
Camera pricing is also about hype. There is something very tempting in the idea of cramming max amount of resolution in very small body
With right improvements, especially better EVF and LCD, the A7V based A7CIII is the camera worth waiting!
