I think the multiple realities in some of these threads are interesting. The A7Rvi thread has some, too. There are some objective differences in any two things under comparison. They seem to change from critical to compelling to mildly interesting depending on the user, observer or inquirer and not all have the same conclusions. The "newer" photographer, or budget sensitive, or opportunities limited, inquirer can easily have trouble interpreting things. The A7Rvi and A1 series comparisons are doing some of the same sorts of things. I have concluded, and maybe safely, that the resolution difference between the A7Cii, A7CR and A7Rvi doesn't weigh enough to concern me. And laws of physics aside, 5-8 ounces weighs more later in the day or higher up the elevatorless tower.
gdanmitchell wrote:
While a poster may (or may not) know “everything offered in this thread,” there is a real fear of making the wrong choice among many who are about to invest a lot of money, and looking for reassurance and confirmation is a reasonable thing to do.
Ahh, good points. I poorly stated my perspective, which was that his rational was sound. I purchased the A7CR and then sold it. I would wait for the next generation of these two cameras, which should be here by mid 2027., but this wasn’t in consideration.
As you read the responses, you realize different people have different preferences. It will be hard to say which one is the one you will end up liking more as nobody knows your preferences and sensitivities and, how you will respond to either of these cameras. Considering you are undecided, I would guess either one will make you equally happy.
Subjectively, I would go for A7cr. As I find 33mp is not enough for me while 60mp is more than what I'd like to have. My ideal resolution is 50mp (A1 series) but that costs way more. That said, after switching to A7rv with a 60mp, I now think 60mp ain't really that bad primarily because modern software do a good job of noise reduction/elimination. On storage aspect of things, lossless compressed files of A7rv are smaller than uncompressed files of my previous camera (A7r iii), so I wouldn't complain about that either. So I would say if you aren't sure, go for the higher mp that is A7cr.
Re “waiting for the ‘new’ model.” By the time it gets released, you’ve missed 8 to 12 months of using the current model. Not only that, by then there will be another new model of something significantly better, albeit in a different form factor. But that will drive the next revision for the A7C series a few more months in the future. Point is, gear ages. If you get a couple years of good use out of any new tech today, that’s a win. Get a year with used tech and sell it for 90% of what you paid for it, that’s a huge win. For most things, good enough usually is.
I had a pair of A7CIIs I used professionally and for travel. I loved them. However, too many compromises. Sold them both and now have two A7Vs and an A7RV. Get the RV. it's not that much bigger, full mechanical shutter dual cards, joystick, way better EVF. Too many compromises with the smaller bodies.
Jack Flesher wrote:
Re “waiting for the ‘new’ model.” By the time it gets released, you’ve missed 8 to 12 months of using the current model. Not only that, by then there will be another new model of something significantly better, albeit in a different form factor. But that will drive the next revision for the A7C series a few more months in the future. Point is, gear ages. If you get a couple years of good use out of any new tech today, that’s a win. Get a year with used tech and sell it for 90% of what you paid for it, that’s a huge win. For most things, good enough usually is. ...Show more →
Good luck selling a 1 year old camera for 90% of what you paid for…especially when a new camera has been announced.
chez wrote:
Good luck selling a 1 year old camera for 90% of what you paid for…especially when a new camera has been announced.
Not a one year old camera. A 2 yr old camera you bought when it was a year old and are selling it a year later. I have done this multiple times across different systems; but I take good care of my gear and it may be 85% so I give you that.
Edit: relevant to this thread and my comment, there is a rangefinder vs SLR ethos when we compare the A7C’s to the A7R’s, and that is the main reason I have kept the A7CR. But if you wander over to the A7R6 thread, my A7CR ownership may be short lived…
I have bought and sold cameras in the used market numerous times and I live in a big city. Selling a used camera for %90 or even %85 of the original paid money is extreme luck in my opinion. Unless, there is a catch somewhere. The seller may declare the camera as open box, new or something else is going on.
This is not about one or two times luck when a clueless buyer shows up. I would never buy a used camera at %90 of it retail value. I don't even buy a brand new camera at %90 of its retail value in a private sale when no warranty is to be transferred. Why taking a risk only to save %10? I know other buyers in general would not do that either. Unless people have different psychology at other parts of the world (lol), I think this is the case everywhere.
I echo what others said. A used camera is a used camera. There is a risk involved even if you can transfer warranty. The body may have been dropped or mismanaged in ways where is no external damage but internal one. At time of purchase in a f2f sale, it is impossible to check everything. If it is via post, there are other risks involved there too. Personally, I wouldn't expect a 90% resale value after a year or even the next day. You may still get it though, if lucky. I have been such lucky by timing the sales to geo-political events, like component shortages and Trump's tariffs. Global logistics are still a mess and memory/ storage shortage is nowhere near sorted so more price hikes might be in the horizon.
I know the A7C II sensor well from the A7 IV. I also have a Zf. If you expect any image quality upgrade, you will be disappointed.
I also know the A7CR sensor from the A7RV. There is a clear image quality difference. However, that comes at an expense often overlooked: file size. Lossless compressed (L) is 75-95MBs and uncompressed RAW is 120-140MBs. Not only you need storage, but you also need a better computer to handle it. I found my workflow noticeably slower —and I have a 7800X3D RTX 5090 64GBs RAM desktop— with the A7R V files over the A7 IV or even the Z8's 45Mpxls files. Also, to get the most out of that sensor, you need to use very good glass, e.g. Sony's GM or Sigma's ART lines, which kinda defeats the purpose of having a 'compact' body.
Personally, I wouldn't get the A7CR as a backup/ travel camera. I would have gone for the A7RV or A7RVI as a primary camera, if I genuinely needed the resolution. The extra weight is negligible, but the quality of life improvements are not.
Seriously, in today’s world you guys still worry about file sizes? Have you considered buying larger cards? Or maybe you machine-gun shoot a lot more than me? I can get over 5,000 lossless A7R6 raws on a 512gb card — the way I shoot I probably won’t fill that up in a week of travel, certainly not in a day. And when I do, it’s easy to stick in a fresh card and/or offload to my laptop and remote image drives. What am I missing?
I have a lot of 8TB and smaller HDD drives in the closet full of images from the last 14 years and it wouldn't be nice to accumulate more of those drives twice as fast when there's no real benefit from the higher resolution images for me. Those drives haven't been getting cheaper either in recent times. I could spend more time deleting images that are not the best but I don't enjoy that so I keep most of them. I don't have duplicate backups though.
(Edited to fix a bizarre autocorrect error that turned “selling” into “seizing.”)
raminolta wrote:
As you read the responses, you realize different people have different preferences. It will be hard to say which one is the one you will end up liking more as nobody knows your preferences. Considering you are undecided, I would guess either one will make you equally happy.
That’s a key fact that is too frequently forgotten in forums: the reason that different versions of cameras exist is because different features have different value to different photographers and types of photography. Neither of the two cameras discussed here is objectively “the best” — they simply have a different feature set. Rather than picking “the best camera,” the goal is to pick “the camera with the features that best match my needs.”
That isn’t easy to do, for a variety of reasons. There are too many “experts” (youtubers, forum participants, etc.) invested in naming one thing “the best.” And because opinions about gear are so varied, a person trying to sort them out can be overwhelmed.
In the case in this thread, I suspect that either camera could make our OP happy…
- - -
Recklesscoding wrote:
I echo what others said. A used camera is a used camera…
True for cameras and lenses. How many times do we read in this forum and elsewhere something like the following: “I was not happy with the way this [lens/camera/etc.] performed, so I’m selling*it…”
and there’s a non-zero chance that someone is buying that “unhappy” gear.
There’s also a chance that the gear is fine. (My first full frame camera, something like 20 years ago, was used, and it worked out fine.) You just can’t know. And if there is an issue you can’t return it and you’ll have no warranty coverage.
Does this mean you should not buy used? No. It just means that you need to weigh any cost advantage against the risks you may be taking and decide whether the balance is comfortable for you. (Generally, I think getting used gear from a reliable source is a fine idea if you simply cannot afford a new product.)
- - -
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I have a lot of 8TB and smaller HDD drives in the closet full of images from the last 14 years and it wouldn't be nice to accumulate more of those drives twice as fast when there's no real benefit from the higher resolution images for me. Those drives haven't been getting cheaper either in recent times. I could spend more time deleting images that are not the best but I don't enjoy that so I keep most of them. I don't have duplicate backups though.
Drives don’t last forever, as I can tell you from painful experience. I also have quite a few 8TB drives (usually combined into larger capacity volumes) to store old files. When one dies periodically I replace with a larger size, usually at the same or lower price — usually lower in inflation-adjusted terms. (I agree, right now we have a price anomaly due to the AI stuff.)
FWIW, I have over 20 years of raw files, (rather large) photoshop files, and a backup of my system drive on a 16YB volume. (And, yes, I have more than one backup elsewhere.)
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I have a lot of 8TB and smaller HDD drives in the closet full of images from the last 14 years and it wouldn't be nice to accumulate more of those drives twice as fast when there's no real benefit from the higher resolution images for me. Those drives haven't been getting cheaper either in recent times. I could spend more time deleting images that are not the best but I don't enjoy that so I keep most of them. I don't have duplicate backups though.
8tb will hold about 240,000 lossless A7Cii raws — that’s basically the average pro-level cameras lifespan... And you have several of those plus a bunch of smaller ones all filled up with images? I’d never have time to edit them let alone enjoy them OR the process if I shot that much. Obviously you must be a working pro or do nothing but shoot images all day, so I’ll simply say okay then and respect that file size is a thing for you.
I might be the odd one out but after trashing an A7CR in a motorcycle accident I replaced it with the A7RV. I decided that I preferred the way the A7CR felt in the hand so I sold the A7RV and bought another A7CR. I find the handling works for me with a larger lens when I put on the grip extension.
I really wish they gave us another 0.5-1cm between the lens mount and the grip. My big fingers don't like being pinched between lens and grip.
No one said you have to use 100% of the sensor 100% of the time. If I'm taking event photos where I expect to deliver 4K resolution at best or if it's just a documentary photo I'm happy to drop to a medium or small compressed raw file or shoot in crop mode.
Jack Flesher wrote:
8tb will hold about 240,000 lossless A7Cii raws — that’s basically the average pro-level cameras lifespan... And you have several of those plus a bunch of smaller ones all filled up with images? I’d never have time to edit them let alone enjoy them OR the process if I shot that much. Obviously you must be a working pro or do nothing but shoot images all day, so I’ll simply say okay then and respect that file size is a thing for you.
I shoot RAW+JPEG and edit with C1 Pro and store all originals and all C1 Session output (edited images etc.) on the HDDs. I takes about 1 year or up to 1.5 to fill up one 8TB drive usually although I'm not a pro at all, just an enthusiastic hobbyist. Those drives cost around 35K yen each currently so it wouldn't be so appealing to buy them more often. In the past (say 3-4 years ago and earlier) the capacity of the similarly priced drives was still smaller so I accumulated a lot of 4 TB drives etc. I'm on my 3rd 8TB drive now if I remember right. You can of course shoot as large resolution as you like, pro or not, but it seems you are not very accepting of other people's different preferences.
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I shoot RAW+JPEG and edit with C1 Pro and store all originals and all C1 Session output (edited images etc.) on the HDDs. I takes about 1 year or up to 1.5 to fill up one 8TB drive usually although I'm not a pro at all, just an enthusiastic hobbyist. Those drives cost around 35K yen each currently so it wouldn't be so appealing to buy them more often. In the past (say 3-4 years ago and earlier) the capacity of the similarly priced drives was still smaller so I accumulated a lot of 4 TB drives etc. I'm on my 3rd 8TB drive now if I remember right. You can of course shoot as large resolution as you like, pro or not, but it seems you are not very accepting of other people's different preferences. ...Show more →
It’s all good and clearly makes sense for you. But I think for most folks it’s a less burdensome issue. I don’t shoot nearly as many frames as you do, so having them twice or even 4x bigger is trivial in today’s storage world for me. It’s great we have options!
Jack Flesher wrote:
Seriously, in today’s world you guys still worry about file sizes? Have you considered buying larger cards? Or maybe you machine-gun shoot a lot more than me? I can get over 5,000 lossless A7R6 raws on a 512gb card — the way I shoot I probably won’t fill that up in a week of travel, certainly not in a day. And when I do, it’s easy to stick in a fresh card and/or offload to my laptop and remote image drives. What am I missing?
Same as @Juha Kannisto, I have a 32TB NAS which I use, amongst other things, for complete backups of my memory cards—even when abroad—in addition to whichever files I have on desktop or laptop. I have filled a 512GB CFExpress when I did a full weekend of F1 with a Z8, thankfully I had a second card with me. With the A7R V, I had almost filled my 250GB CFExpress when I did 3 weeks abroad and only had a corporate laptop —which I didn't want to offload shots to. Though when I travel, I shoot RAW + JPEG as quite often I will just do some quick edits on a JPEG and send it on socials/ friends. It is so annoying that Sony sticked with Type A cards; more expensive and they are the only ones using them.
Storage prices have skyrocketed and are expected to get worse in 2027; each 8TB drive nowadays costs 340+ euros (compared to around 220 in 2024). Even memory cards have gone up in price.
Also bigger file size also means more RAM when you process the file —again, I was lucky to have gotten 64GBs on my desktop and 32GBs on my laptop before the price hikes— and an overall more powerful machine is needed.
With above said, it is less of a complaint but something that the OP or anyone getting a high-res camera needs to be made aware of: there are some extra costs wether those are in memory cards or in computer hardware in order to get a pleasant experience. It is not once that I have seen people complaining about the speed of processing high-res photos (from the A7R line or medium format) and being surprised that their 5 years old machines were slow.
True for cameras and lenses. How many times do we read in this forum and elsewhere something like the following: “I was not happy with the way this [lens/camera/etc.] performed, so I’m seizing it…”
and there’s a non-zero chance that someone is buying that “unhappy” gear.
There’s also a chance that the gear is fine. (My first full frame camera, something like 20 years ago, was used, and it worked out fine.) You just can’t know. And if there is an issue you can’t return it and you’ll have no warranty coverage.
Does this mean you should not buy used? No. It just means that you need to weigh any cost advantage against the risks you may be taking and decide whether the balance is comfortable for you. (Generally, I think getting used gear from a reliable source is a fine idea if you simply cannot afford a new product.) ...Show more →
Exactly. I am more skeptical of recently released lenses to be bad copies and more willing to buy used older lenses —particularly manual ones. My experience with local shops or even larger international ones like MPB is that their grading system varies a lot and not always what you expect. At least, the return is easier than what you will find on your local 'craigslist'. Japanese eBay shops on the other hand have been excellent. If they say that a lens is mint or almost mint, they mean that the lens could be mistaken for new. Plus, you usually get a nice handwritten note thanking you for the purchase which is a nice touch.
Drives don’t last forever, as I can tell you from painful experience. I also have quite a few 8TB drives (usually combined into larger capacity volumes) to store old files. When one dies periodically I replace with a larger size, usually at the same or lower price — usually lower in inflation-adjusted terms. (I agree, right now we have a price anomaly due to the AI stuff.)
I agree. I always suggest a RAID 0 or SHR if on Synology setup. For most important data, an offsite backup is also a must.
Jack Flesher wrote:
It’s all good and clearly makes sense for you. But I think for most folks it’s a less burdensome issue. I don’t shoot nearly as many frames as you do, so having them twice or even 4x bigger is trivial in today’s storage world for me. It’s great we have options!
Exactly right for me. I just got back from a 2 week trip to Newfoundland and brought back less than 2,000 images. That’s me out every day taking photos.
