I don't think so. Sony sheeeps will queue up to buy one regardless

I thought CanNikon were sheep, by flowing Sony in to FF mirrorless...

@ EXkurogane: Never seen sheep buying or using a camera.

"Old wisdom and skipped the number 4".
The Playstation 4 was and still is a huge success.
I guess Sony did well not to skip the # 4.

@ pollup: Old wisdom is mostly outdated, since it builds on myths.

Such number symbolism or mysticism might be nice for those who think conspiratorially, though. :-)

So... you do know what humour is?!

You need to watch more Monty Python or Blackadder 🤪

Only the A1 and A7IV have USB PD, so the battery will not discharge.
The A7siii doesn't have PD.
The A7IV consumes 3.8W in stills mode when using the EVF, and 5.7W in movie mode when using the EVF.

It is true that I don't have a problem with fat fingers but I do have large hands and 2XOS size knuckles. I think the extra room would help with not only lens clearance but space between controls on the back of the camera. I have a problem with pressing buttons when I don't want to.
The A7IV will not replace my A7RIII.

"Maybe your fingers are too big"

I did not know there are regulation sizes for fingers.

Lots of people have mentioned the space between the lens and the grip on Sony full frame cameras being problematic. I have thin fingers and mine is not comfortable either - ridiculous to just reply with your fingers are too big. Look at YouTube videos of any of the A7 cameras being used and all the YouTubers' finger joints are rubbing the lens barrel. I love the cameras for the features/IQ, but the ergonomics are terrible; small is not always good.

I did not know that I had a choice of hand size.

I had the 73 and still have an A9, the 73 was nothing like an A9, not even vaguely close.

And this exceeds the A9 II in almost every way, except sensor readout / fps. The A7 III wasn’t notably faster. I love how obsessions move in photography circles.

I love how spec sheet readers claim which device is better than another.

I have had the two devices we're discussing (73&9) and put thousands of hours onto each.

The 73 was nothing even close to the A9 in terms of actual output. The 9 would yield far, far more keepers, the AF in video was by far and away totally usable where AF-C needed to be used, the algorithm used to determine where to focus, for instance, in AF-C wide, was infallible, it always chose the right subject, very quickly, stuck to it and delivered correctly exposed images.

The 73 was a great camera, but it lagged behind the A9, real world, in every scenario, by a notable margin and that manifested in significantly less keepers as a result.

So did I. My already great a7 III got improved in so many aspects. Looking forward to the new one.

Did you have equal outrage when the R6 was announced? At least the A7IV splits the difference between 24 and 45MP.

@Magnar W: I doubt that removing anything is necessary to reach a lower price. The A7ii sells for much less than initially, and we can assume that Sony wouldn't sell it at a loss. If anything must be removed, for me it would be most video features.

@focuspulling

Don't forget that A7IV has the same powerful processor as A1, the same body with heatsink as A7s3... I don't see any reason why it has to be cheaper than R6

This "incremental" upgrade just shows how good the a7iii is.

I think if you don't have an a7iii and have sony lenses then this is the camera to get. And if you want something cheaper the a7iii or a7c still exist.

Most people don't care about speed or resolution. If you need speed I'd get the a9. Video a7siii. Resolution a7riv. Everything A1.

Well it is a typical sony. Once you caught in their prorietary things like emount, magic gate, md disks, betacam and etc, they think they can charge higher prices.

Wait…. You talking about E-Mount as a proprietary thing?? like it’s some how more proprietary than Z-mount?

Look around.

Ironic given only minutes ago DPR reports Tokina announces 3 new AF lenses for e-mount.

honestly people are complaining about things like uncompressed RAW burst shooting, rolling shutter, LCD resolution....those things are so minor compared to all the other tech they trickled down from their top models. if it had all those things, why would anyone spend more money on more expensive models? you're asking for the best of the best in a $2500 camera. then people would be complaining all sony's top models provide is a higher MP count for $1000+ price bump. just having all those video features (codecs, downscaled 7k, etc.) and class-leading AF performance and IQ in a lower level model is great. if you need 15FPS uncompressed RAW, well, go find a camera that does that for you. no one seems to be complaining about Canon getting a faster burst rate by adding compression behind the scenes.

Almost all of the complaints are from people invested (emotionally or financially) in competing systems...

(Stonejack is a good example)

'Almost all of the complaints are from people invested (emotionally or financially) in competing systems...'

That equally sums up the vast majority of complaints posted on articles about Canon, Nikon, etc.
The fact that so many people post just to be contrary and provoke responses is a sad indictment of how the internet has turned otherwise personable people into t..ts.
The problem then becomes that valid critisisms are drowned out by the noise created by those trolling a product and reasonable debate is virtually impossible.

Exactly. Well stated follow up. Thanks for that.

Perhaps it is time for the Sony A5 launch.

Indeed, the A7Cii might be an interesting model and in some ways the true A7iii successor.

Folks I am not going to agree this has in the least been fairly widely reported an vetted. However it was of interest how folks responded included DPR staff on this article. So folks can decided for themselves what were the actual conclusions.

DPReview TV: Why lower resolution sensors are not better in low light
Published Aug 14, 2021 | dpreview staff

https://www.dpreview.com/videos/7940373140/dpreview-tv-why-lower-resolution-sensors-are-not-better-in-low-light

@mick232

"Indeed, the A7Cii might be an interesting model and in some ways the true A7iii successor."

I think you just might be right!

There may never be an A7CII.

The camera was designed to move aps-c shooters into FF and may have served its purpose.

I don't think Sony could fit either the hardware or the spec of this camera into the A7C body, even if they wanted to.

@Kit Katt: I don't necessarily disagree with your post, but just to be clear, the difference in DXO scores here is negligible. DXO defines low-light ISO as the highest ISO that allows SNR of 30dB (excellent image quality) while keeping a good dynamic range of 9 EVs and a color depth of 18bits.

The A7III clocks in at 3730, the A7RIII at 3523, and the A7RIV at 3344. That's less than 1/3 of a stop between 24MP and 61MP. DPR's statement for this brand new 33MP sensor is that "low-light performance is unlikely to suffer perceptively," which seems like a pretty safe bet.

Of course, everyone will have to decide for themselves, but I'd be quite surprised if high ISO noise is even remotely a differentiator between the A7III and the A7IV.

They could surely fit the same sensor into an A7C II and tweak some stuff (cough, second dial), I mean that body already has real time AF and a fully articulated display so they're probably not in a hurry to change it but the only thing that would be questionable would be the video capabilities (A7C body might not have the necessary heat dissipation).

I imagine if they were to update the A7C sooner rather than later it'd carry on with some of the same drawbacks tho (always-on EFC, 1/4000 max shutter), and some are just inherent to the form factor (lower quality EVF, single card slot). I think if they wanna keep it as a lower budget option and/or if they wanna try different stuff then it might make more sense to stagger the A7 & A7C updates tho.

I hope they switch it up and go with a tilt screen on the next A7C just to offer people different options.

BackToNature1: If you want a more complete, nuanced explanation of why there's no downsize to smaller pixels for most photography, we have published a more technical article..

The only thing, IMO, holding back an a7cii is the global chip shortages. I don't think it's an matter of if but when. The vast majority of the R&D has already been done. IMO, via the a7iv.

@BackToNature1

"The vast majority of the R&D has already been done. IMO, via the a7iv."

You don't seem to understand what the A7c is. It's a FF camera Sony made to get aps-c shooters and people who like small cameras into their FF system.

It's not a process that Sony applies to all of its cameras.

Sony will solve that with firmware update.

Take a bit of paint & mark 0 & + &-...I know we can get through this w/out a huge controversy

Well said. If a change is not for the better, don't criticize; get a can of paint. The point is, Sony is innovating. Might make things better, might make them worse, but it's innovation and that's what matters.

I have a better idea than asking the buyer to make their own indexing lines. How about if Sony simply puts a single line on the dial and a single indexing dot on the body so that you have the minimum amount of type yet it still helps you reset back to +-0 EV in default config? Then if you reassign the knob YOU can ignore the tiny little dot.

@82DMC12 That is a GREAT idea -- sadly, too late for this model.

@focuspulling I would posit that MOST owners of the A7IV will NOT bother reassigning the Exp Comp dial (there are plenty of other dials and custom buttons as it is) and they will wish the dial looked like it "should", and has, until now. Very strange design choice in my opinion. Like caving to the minority - answering a question no one asked, and actually making things worse in the end.

Umm, neither paint nor a sticker will be a solution unless there's a way to easily zero out the dial, and that's still a kludge. I definitely wouldn't paint it without trying out how it works in practice first with a sticker or some tape. What happens if you've got it set to +2 and a battery swap or something resets your compensation setting, now it's not lined up with the dial?

That's probably why they removed the markings when they made it programmable and removed the hard stops, they knew there would situations where they just wouldn't line up. I'd prefer to have them too FWIW, but it's gonna take more than a Sharpie to figure out an alternative.

Fortunately i have top LCDs to tell me that.

Index markings wouldn't work since the dial has no hard stop, I mean it can rotate in one direction forever.
So if you reach the lowest value, you can still turn so the markings stop making any sense. It would be very confusing actually. For example you would see +2 but in fact it's -3.

I would pick this over an A7R III, at the same price at least, used A7R III will surely undercut it, but if I really wanted a lot more res I'd go A7R IV, which is what I did. It's nice to have options, I don't see what's so weird about it.

They probably had two options, they could do a somewhat faster reading sensor and stay at the same res (similar to what Canon did w/R6) or they could bump the res. I think the latter is a more obvious differentiator but both have their merits.

But you can view say a 4K image on an 8K TV without seeing the pixels at any reasonable viewing distance.

The big gain is being able to really crop in with sharp lenses.

@ Thoughts R Us: Worked over time with one? Or just reading the specs? Feedback shows many happy A7C readers that find the EVF okay.

@Thoughts R Us

"Sony if they wanted to could have created a much better EVF for that camera, and still kept the small size."

No they couldn't. The A7III is 2.5cm taller than the A7c.

https://j.mp/3ksZwQI

Magnar: I did try out the A7c at a local Best Buy. Played around with it quite a bit. I wanted to like it but that EVF is horrible. It's like something from an old point and shoot.

Sony is the king of miniaturization; they could have found a better solution. Or just made that part of the camera a bit larger.

Otherwise to me the body build quality and look is far superior to the A7 series.

@Thoughts R Us

"I wanted to like it" 😅

@ Thoughts R Us: Knowing more people who actually have this camera and love it. I find the viewfinder okay, and by no means awful. Contrast is fine, and no problem fine tuning manual focus. You can find lots of satifsfied users over at the Sony forums, too.

Build quality and feel seems to be about the same for both series.

Sure, everything could have been better, but then you also had to pay more for the camera.

That's enough about the A7C for now, back to topic, the A7IV. :-)

@Tristimulus: The inflation-adjusted price of the A7iii is about $2,185, so even after adjusting for inflation, the A7IV still reflects a price increase of more than 15%.

Of course, it's also a more capable camera, and it's no longer Sony's entry-level full-frame offering. And as always, the market will let Sony know if it got the price right. Just wanted to clarify that it definitely reflects a price increase.

@Kit Katt
That's why I asked what settings. Most GM, G, and Sigma lenses have physical aperture rings, where seeing the aperture is easy. And until the A7 IV, exposure comp was also visible at a glance.

For my personal shooting style, I don't need it. Just wanted to understand what you want to see

Agreed, been confusing me of late. The Z series has a big advantage over equivalent Sony and Canon for me, not sure it's something I'd want to give up.

I don’t think there’s really any practical benefit or downside to having or not having it unless you regularly turn your back screen off completely. (I.e. if you’re shooting in a dark theater.)

Practically the key information is available in the always on LCD and even so the top display, while it can and does show some more advanced status/modes, it’s mostly used for shutter speed, aperture, and ISO and I tend not to forget how the camera is set.

I think if you don’t have it, you get used to not having it and it doesn’t hold you back at all. And in the case of Sony (which is I think who you’re referring to here) the my would have to make the camera larger to accommodate the top LCD or eliminate the control wheels/drive dial. So for me, I’m glad they didn’t make the camera bigger and glad they didn’t drop the drive dial. It’s immensely convenient to switch the frame rate while shooting and without having to remove my eye from the viewfinder.

My camera has such an LCD but in all the years I never have looked at it.

I barely use the back screen anymore let alone the top plate...

I've never used the main LCD display to check settings - to me it's something that stays off until I want to check over some recent images, and as a battery hog and bright torch (in darker event-type settings), it's not something I really want to use much. Plus twisting the camera around just to check settings is a pain - I like to glance down quickly to check a few basics every now and again.

I think what's clear, though, is that some people have no need for the top display and some people use it regularly. And that's cool, people work in different ways. Definitely a big cross in the usability column for me if it's lacking though.

I personally hate the top plate LCD. Its a waste of space to me. I can see all my aperture, SS, and ISO on two different screens, and I don't really need a third dedicated to that function. I would much, much rather have a dial and some buttons over what I see as a redundant display. I know this is a personal position, but I find the top mount LCD to be a carry-over for when information wasn't found everywhere else.

Tend to agree, I still use it on my 10yo D7000 and it's very useful. Maybe with the new LCD systems it's less relevant, as I use it a lot when on a tripod. But even when shooting hand-held, I prefer to look at changes I make in the top LCD than on the VF or rear screen. I use mostly manual controls, like manual exposure, so maybe that's why I find it relevant to have it displayed w/o having to look into the VF.

Yep. It’s a trade off. For some they wanna see their settings on a third screen. For others including myself I prefer more hard controls and less button or touchscreen pressing for stuff like changing burst rate.

Indeed if there is no top display i won't buy the camera.

For people who camp a lot on a tripod under bright sun, it's an asset to have.

I really hope Sony doesn't add a top LCD. And your description of the grip is soooo biased. I can't stand the Nikon Z6 grip. Its too close to the flange. And I found the 90 degrees bad.

There aren't absolutes here. I like Sony's better, particularly with a larger lens. It doesn't make one right or wrong. And saying a brand understands photographers more or less, is errant. It just means you like their design better. Its not that big of a deal.

@Kit Katt
On your image, you cannot see the grip shape.
1. You don't see the indent for your fingers:
https://www.cined.com/content/uploads/2021/10/Sony-a7-IV-1.jpg
2. The Sony grip is deeper: https://camerasize.com/compact/#883,795,ha,r

The original comment was about the more expensive bodies. The A9II and A1 don’t have room for the top LCD because they have additional controls. I agree there is space on the opposite side of the less expensive bodies but Sony’s best cameras have more controls. And I prefer the controls.

Nikon and Canon have gone down the modal control route, so need a top screen. Without it you wouldn't even know what exposure mode the camera was in.

That said only one of the cameras that competes with the A7IV has a top plate LCD - the Z6II. The R6 and S5 don't.

You should really try holding a Sony camera with a big lens attached, and then a Nikon. What you are arguing is VERY user-specific. And if you like it, great. But if you think you can say that the shape of the grip works for every photographer's finger length and width, palm length and width, and with various sized lenses, you are not very aware of our own inherent bias. I acknowledge that different grips fit different people better. The same is true for anything with a grip - firearms being a great example. It is COMPLETELY subjective.

And the top LCD has data that is reproduced in TWO other areas. Why is it so necessary to have it in a third place? It can be on the EVF and the LCD. To many, that level of redundancy is silly. And using your food analogy, it is more like a hamburger place requiring you to have onions. You can take it off, but the effects of it linger. The left hand (even for those of us who are left handed) belongs supporting the camera. Controls should be most accessible by the right hand. It is simply an inefficiency to have three locations providing the same information, and one with a dedicated screen to do so. The top LCD needs to die!

I also only use the top display. The higher ranked Canon and nikon cams have them. They seem to be more dedicated for professional use. The r5 is nice, even if it's a bit pricey... Damn, I would love to have a 5D Mark V

The top plate only serves as a quick glance gauge with shorter lenses that let the camera sit facing forward on a strap and/or if you're standing over it when on a tripod...

With longer lenses it's no longer a quick glance tool and indeed the rear display is more visible, and it was more of an advantage on DSLR because it kept battery use low.

On MILCs you'll need to use some sorta display constantly to get anything done so there isn't much of a battery saving advantage to the top display. Some higher end MILCs have turned to it in favor of a mode dial, that's more subjective.

I've used cameras with and without top display of settings and found no advantage. You're getting all the exposure settings as soon as you look through the EVF or LCD.

@BrentSchumer
But you *have* to look through it. I always look onto my cam and prepare for the next shot. Exposure settings, aperture... And the only view through the lens is while taking the picture. I grew up with top plates, no camera will ever get into my important bag without it. Sometimes the small things are very important. For me, for example, the direction of the zoom, focusring or aperture is also important. Canon is the opposite of nikon or Sony. So, a change to nikon or Sony is nothing for me...

And I belive nikon users also won't like to change everything they are known to use...

I used cameras with top LCDs years ago using DSLRs but with mirrorless, most of the information can be in the EVF anyway (plus more) so I do not get the need for top plate LCDs now as they can put buttons or dials in that space.

"You're getting all the exposure settings as soon as you look through the EVF or LCD"

I toggle them off when composing an image on screen. An absolute nuisance in landscape photography when you want to make sure your corners and edges are all perfect with no unwanted objects creeping into your shots. A clutter of information surrounding the screen is the last thing i want to see.

The top LCD is where i see my existing settings.

@james _
Only mirrorless cam users look for battery status :)

@Yohan Pamudji
The ISO f. e., just to name one of many...

Because some compare at pixel level and these pixels are smaller => noisier. They ignore the fact that the photo as a whole is not noisier. YMMV

@Rhaegar

This 'hands on' has been published five days after the launch.

The last Nikon and Canon camera launches got their hands ons on the launch day.

There's been comparatively little coverage of this camera so far by the usual standards.

Do you understand this is a site dedicated to digital cameras, and they make their money out of talking about the new ones? You should be complaining if they didn't do that.

Sorry Mike, the layout isn't the same. a7iv has completely new video/ stills selector, and a7r4 has video button on rear that cannot be repurposed for the same function as my a7s3 C1 button in that same location.

Yes the design language is similar within the lineup. But the three current 7 series cameras cannot be operated with the same muscle memory.

That’s true. Although I don’t consider the mode dial so much because usually you’re not operating the mode dial with your eye up to the viewfinder (although once or twice I have switched from aperture priority to shutter priority without taking my eye off the EVF)

The customization of the record button is an add that was done more recently. The older cameras don’t have that customizability.

Still when I look at competing product lines I can’t imagine muscle memory helping at all going from one body to another. At least not nearly on the level/diversity of the Sony bodies.

That's exactly my point. The Sony control button conformity was "appreciated", and a positive against other brands. That competitive edge is dulled on newest 7's with different menus, controls and functions. Keep in mind my photojournalism roots has two or three cameras around neck and wants them all to work the same for fast consistent operation.

That's why I hope at the very least Sony will provide the more expensive pro cams with the additional features on a7iv. Breathing comp and full time MF belong on the pro cams.

Yeah. That could be handy although sometimes I bump the AF ring by accident. I would welcome the option on the A1.

And thank you for suffering my rant in such a pleasant and civil manner. I look forward to hearing more of your perspective in the future.

I’m going to ask my Sony pro support guy about some of this. Likely he won’t tell me what is coming in a future firmware update but he does feedback to the firmware team.

Yup. Specifically it has a couple of additional contacts on the other side of the connector. Normal MicroUSB cables interface with the standard contacts, other accessories (including intervalometers/cable triggers) interface with the additional ones.

Something to that effect, yes.

"has gotten an upgrade" is correct grammatically.

It's a variant of the past tense, the past participle.

'Gotten' is circa 17th century English and modern American English usage.

'Got' is modern English usage.

Unless I'm mistaken Carey is American so it makes sense that he says 'gotten'.

@brighter_summer_day

"...overpriced camera which falls short in key areas" how and in comparison to what? You make that statement but offer no evidence.

Slow reading sensor? All it's contemporaries are the same. The Canon R6 review mentions rolling shutter in stills and video and to shoot at its maximum 20fps it drops to 12 bit capture in stills, must use the e-shutter making rolling shutter issues more likely. Sony went with 10fps (hardly slow) but with a 33megapixel sensor.

There are plenty of other nice features on the IV so you pays your money and takes your choice but I fail to see where it lags in key areas.

Unless you had the unrealistic expectation it would have a stacked sensor I can't see why you think that it falls short as it is as good as or better than its contemporaries spec-wise which also have compromises.

@brighter_summer_day "Egads," you really paint a sweaty/oily picture of uptight British people. I have "gotten nauseated" by reading your grammatical tsk-tsk.