Reading mode: Light Dark

Is it worthwhile pre order the new Sony a7 IV or should I go for the Sony a7 III?

Go to last post
ricktachtig said:
The A7 IV looks amazing and I really like the video features and the articulating screen. It is of course the better camera. But a few months ago I pulled the trigger on the A7 III during a Sony cashback deal and got the A7 III for $1740 new. The A7 IV is $3250 in my country. That's a difference of $1510. I could almost buy two new A7 III camera's for the price of one A7 IV.
Click to expand...
For such a price difference, the A7iii is a great purchase indeed! Congrats!
 
BrentSchumer said:
This is overblown. Sony lossy compression only matters in edge cases.
Click to expand...
Compression and 12 bit. That may matter when pulling shadows or lowering exposure to protect highlights.

This is not the end of the world but something to be aware of.
BrentSchumer said:
And doubly so underwater, where many (most?) people use external strobes that aren't shooting at 10 FPS.
Click to expand...
That's a good point, still some subjects could benefit from higher fps under available light. It's just about having more options or understanding limits of the gear in use.
 
ricktachtig said:
The A7 IV looks amazing and I really like the video features and the articulating screen. It is of course the better camera. But a few months ago I pulled the trigger on the A7 III during a Sony cashback deal and got the A7 III for $1740 new. The A7 IV is $3250 in my country. That's a difference of $1510. I could almost buy two new A7 III camera's for the price of one A7 IV.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I went with a used A7RIII over the A7RIV, because it's the best my budget allowed.

Nothing wrong with making a wise choice for your personal situation.
 
BrentSchumer said:
Scott Alan said:
Fbbrv said:
The most interesting thing for me would be the improved autofocus, I'm never getting really interested in the video side. The other interesting thing is the full HDMI port, in the future some underwater case producer could use it for external monitor (at the moment those monitors already exists using mini HDMI).
Click to expand...
If you are looking for truly huge change in AF speed, accuracy, and tracking consider the A9 used. It is an older camera but first with stacked sensor meaning D-RAM on the sensor for very fast read out speeds and AF. But it will be behind in othe way 24 MP (should be enough), 8-bit video, tracking but not the latest (still good), older menus, and smaller, grip. But the AF grabs very quickly and good low light performance. It is a compromise for very good AF. You might want to rent and try first.
Click to expand...
The A9 AF is likely a downgrade to the A7IV, and would be a regression in many other areas.
Click to expand...
It'll be better where fast sensor readout improves results.

The A7IV will be better where the processor and algorithm improves results.

A1 is best of both worlds.
 
dwalme said:
BrentSchumer said:
Scott Alan said:
Fbbrv said:
The most interesting thing for me would be the improved autofocus, I'm never getting really interested in the video side. The other interesting thing is the full HDMI port, in the future some underwater case producer could use it for external monitor (at the moment those monitors already exists using mini HDMI).
Click to expand...
If you are looking for truly huge change in AF speed, accuracy, and tracking consider the A9 used. It is an older camera but first with stacked sensor meaning D-RAM on the sensor for very fast read out speeds and AF. But it will be behind in othe way 24 MP (should be enough), 8-bit video, tracking but not the latest (still good), older menus, and smaller, grip. But the AF grabs very quickly and good low light performance. It is a compromise for very good AF. You might want to rent and try first.
Click to expand...
The A9 AF is likely a downgrade to the A7IV, and would be a regression in many other areas.
Click to expand...
It'll be better where fast sensor readout improves results.

The A7IV will be better where the processor and algorithm improves results.

A1 is best of both worlds.
Click to expand...
For fast subjects 60 AF calculations per second is 4 times better than 15 per second. For slower subjects the A7IV maybe slightly better. The A9 has a lower res evf but it is black out free with very little lag and will be much easier to follow fast subjects in evf versus A7IV.
 
Very interesting, especially regarding AF. I have been contemplating moving from a Canon 7d Mk ii plus Sigma 150-600mm C lens to the A7 III with Sigma MC-11 adapter (which many say works well on the A7 III) for wildlife. My impression is that the AF on the 7d ii and the A7 iii are pretty comparable, if not that the Sony is better. The A7 iii has a reasonable cashback deal on it at the moment, but reading this thread is now making me think this might be a false economy and that I'll just end up wanting the A7 iv anyway! Also, I'm a bit concerned by the number of reported reliability issues with the A7 iii, especially failing shutters.

Is there any word on the shutter situation? Have Sony definitely solved it for the mk iv? (Sounds similar to the Nikon D600 debacle of some years ago!)

Also, does anyone know if the amazing new AF performance of the mk iv should work via the MC-11 adapter?
 
mikew5163 said:
Very interesting, especially regarding AF. I have been contemplating moving from a Canon 7d Mk ii plus Sigma 150-600mm C lens to the A7 III with Sigma MC-11 adapter (which many say works well on the A7 III) for wildlife. My impression is that the AF on the 7d ii and the A7 iii are pretty comparable, if not that the Sony is better. The A7 iii has a reasonable cashback deal on it at the moment, but reading this thread is now making me think this might be a false economy and that I'll just end up wanting the A7 iv anyway! Also, I'm a bit concerned by the number of reported reliability issues with the A7 iii, especially failing shutters.

Is there any word on the shutter situation? Have Sony definitely solved it for the mk iv? (Sounds similar to the Nikon D600 debacle of some years ago!)

Also, does anyone know if the amazing new AF performance of the mk iv should work via the MC-11 adapter?
Click to expand...
the nikon debacle was the biggest in photographic history, there are plenty of A7iii users to this day, the most sold FF camera ever. lensrentals should be able to answer that question.

there's always the original A9 if you're ok with used, works much better with adapted lenses than the A7iii and no way will the A7iv match with the exception of bird eye af and video.
 
Mr_Win said:
mikew5163 said:
Very interesting, especially regarding AF. I have been contemplating moving from a Canon 7d Mk ii plus Sigma 150-600mm C lens to the A7 III with Sigma MC-11 adapter (which many say works well on the A7 III) for wildlife. My impression is that the AF on the 7d ii and the A7 iii are pretty comparable, if not that the Sony is better. The A7 iii has a reasonable cashback deal on it at the moment, but reading this thread is now making me think this might be a false economy and that I'll just end up wanting the A7 iv anyway! Also, I'm a bit concerned by the number of reported reliability issues with the A7 iii, especially failing shutters.

Is there any word on the shutter situation? Have Sony definitely solved it for the mk iv? (Sounds similar to the Nikon D600 debacle of some years ago!)

Also, does anyone know if the amazing new AF performance of the mk iv should work via the MC-11 adapter?
Click to expand...
the nikon debacle was the biggest in photographic history, there are plenty of A7iii users to this day, the most sold FF camera ever. lensrentals should be able to answer that question.

there's always the original A9 if you're ok with used, works much better with adapted lenses than the A7iii and no way will the A7iv match with the exception of bird eye af and video.
Click to expand...
Mr_Win, the A7IV's Bird, Animal and Human Eye AF is a vastly superior feature to be just discounting it up against the A9. Also, don't forget the A74's Shutter can cover the sensor during lens changes to cut down on sensor dust. That's a very welcomed feature the A7III & A9 will never have and has spoiled many a shoot.

I suspect and hope that Sony engineers have learned from the shutter problems of the A7III and have made the necessary improvements.
 
goodbokeh said:
Mr_Win said:
mikew5163 said:
Very interesting, especially regarding AF. I have been contemplating moving from a Canon 7d Mk ii plus Sigma 150-600mm C lens to the A7 III with Sigma MC-11 adapter (which many say works well on the A7 III) for wildlife. My impression is that the AF on the 7d ii and the A7 iii are pretty comparable, if not that the Sony is better. The A7 iii has a reasonable cashback deal on it at the moment, but reading this thread is now making me think this might be a false economy and that I'll just end up wanting the A7 iv anyway! Also, I'm a bit concerned by the number of reported reliability issues with the A7 iii, especially failing shutters.

Is there any word on the shutter situation? Have Sony definitely solved it for the mk iv? (Sounds similar to the Nikon D600 debacle of some years ago!)

Also, does anyone know if the amazing new AF performance of the mk iv should work via the MC-11 adapter?
Click to expand...
the nikon debacle was the biggest in photographic history, there are plenty of A7iii users to this day, the most sold FF camera ever. lensrentals should be able to answer that question.

there's always the original A9 if you're ok with used, works much better with adapted lenses than the A7iii and no way will the A7iv match with the exception of bird eye af and video.
Click to expand...
Mr_Win, the A7IV's Bird, Animal and Human Eye AF is a vastly superior feature to be just discounting it up against the A9. Also, don't forget the A74's Shutter can cover the sensor during lens changes to cut down on sensor dust. That's a very welcomed feature the A7III & A9 will never have and has spoiled many a shoot.

I suspect and hope that Sony engineers have learned from the shutter problems of the A7III and have made the necessary improvements.
Click to expand...
A9 read out speed is 60 per second. AIV is not a stacked sensor and likely only reads out 15 per second. So A9 is going to focus much quicker and more accurately.
 
Scott Alan said:
goodbokeh said:
Mr_Win said:
mikew5163 said:
Very interesting, especially regarding AF. I have been contemplating moving from a Canon 7d Mk ii plus Sigma 150-600mm C lens to the A7 III with Sigma MC-11 adapter (which many say works well on the A7 III) for wildlife. My impression is that the AF on the 7d ii and the A7 iii are pretty comparable, if not that the Sony is better. The A7 iii has a reasonable cashback deal on it at the moment, but reading this thread is now making me think this might be a false economy and that I'll just end up wanting the A7 iv anyway! Also, I'm a bit concerned by the number of reported reliability issues with the A7 iii, especially failing shutters.

Is there any word on the shutter situation? Have Sony definitely solved it for the mk iv? (Sounds similar to the Nikon D600 debacle of some years ago!)

Also, does anyone know if the amazing new AF performance of the mk iv should work via the MC-11 adapter?
Click to expand...
the nikon debacle was the biggest in photographic history, there are plenty of A7iii users to this day, the most sold FF camera ever. lensrentals should be able to answer that question.

there's always the original A9 if you're ok with used, works much better with adapted lenses than the A7iii and no way will the A7iv match with the exception of bird eye af and video.
Click to expand...
Mr_Win, the A7IV's Bird, Animal and Human Eye AF is a vastly superior feature to be just discounting it up against the A9. Also, don't forget the A74's Shutter can cover the sensor during lens changes to cut down on sensor dust. That's a very welcomed feature the A7III & A9 will never have and has spoiled many a shoot.

I suspect and hope that Sony engineers have learned from the shutter problems of the A7III and have made the necessary improvements.
Click to expand...
A9 read out speed is 60 per second. AIV is not a stacked sensor and likely only reads out 15 per second. So A9 is going to focus much quicker and more accurately.
Click to expand...
Scott, you need to catch up on Sony AF technology. The A7IV Bird, Animal, Human AF is similar to the A1's AF. It 's a whole new ball game of focus accuracy which the A9 simply can't touch. The A9 offers speed but not the eye accuracy.

So, for example you could get a lot of sharply focused A9 photos of a running dog's nose or ears to weed out just to find one well focused photo. While the A7IV will have given you multiple well focused photos of the Dog's eye to choose from.
 
mikew5163 said:
Very interesting, especially regarding AF. I have been contemplating moving from a Canon 7d Mk ii plus Sigma 150-600mm C lens to the A7 III with Sigma MC-11 adapter (which many say works well on the A7 III) for wildlife. My impression is that the AF on the 7d ii and the A7 iii are pretty comparable, if not that the Sony is better. The A7 iii has a reasonable cashback deal on it at the moment, but reading this thread is now making me think this might be a false economy and that I'll just end up wanting the A7 iv anyway! Also, I'm a bit concerned by the number of reported reliability issues with the A7 iii, especially failing shutters.

Is there any word on the shutter situation? Have Sony definitely solved it for the mk iv? (Sounds similar to the Nikon D600 debacle of some years ago!)

Also, does anyone know if the amazing new AF performance of the mk iv should work via the MC-11 adapter?
Click to expand...
I don’t think we will have answers to much of that until people have the camera in hand. You can look to see how well the mc11 with sigma glass works with other cameras with real time tracking AF like the a1, a7R IV, a9 series, a6400 or a6600. Speaking of the a6600 that camera would be a better choice for wildlife as it has the same killer real time tracking af and gives you the reach you’re used to. Look up zackiedawg on the Sony crop forum here. He posts outstanding wildlife photography shot on Sony a6xxx bodies. His work is inspiring.

Also if you have a bunch of canon glass you may want to look at the R6 as well. It has great AF and it’s lower 20mp sensor means readout times are fast enough for 20fps burst shooting. It also can shoot EF glass as if it were native.
 
goodbokeh said:
Scott Alan said:
goodbokeh said:
Mr_Win said:
mikew5163 said:
Very interesting, especially regarding AF. I have been contemplating moving from a Canon 7d Mk ii plus Sigma 150-600mm C lens to the A7 III with Sigma MC-11 adapter (which many say works well on the A7 III) for wildlife. My impression is that the AF on the 7d ii and the A7 iii are pretty comparable, if not that the Sony is better. The A7 iii has a reasonable cashback deal on it at the moment, but reading this thread is now making me think this might be a false economy and that I'll just end up wanting the A7 iv anyway! Also, I'm a bit concerned by the number of reported reliability issues with the A7 iii, especially failing shutters.

Is there any word on the shutter situation? Have Sony definitely solved it for the mk iv? (Sounds similar to the Nikon D600 debacle of some years ago!)

Also, does anyone know if the amazing new AF performance of the mk iv should work via the MC-11 adapter?
Click to expand...
the nikon debacle was the biggest in photographic history, there are plenty of A7iii users to this day, the most sold FF camera ever. lensrentals should be able to answer that question.

there's always the original A9 if you're ok with used, works much better with adapted lenses than the A7iii and no way will the A7iv match with the exception of bird eye af and video.
Click to expand...
Mr_Win, the A7IV's Bird, Animal and Human Eye AF is a vastly superior feature to be just discounting it up against the A9. Also, don't forget the A74's Shutter can cover the sensor during lens changes to cut down on sensor dust. That's a very welcomed feature the A7III & A9 will never have and has spoiled many a shoot.

I suspect and hope that Sony engineers have learned from the shutter problems of the A7III and have made the necessary improvements.
Click to expand...
A9 read out speed is 60 per second. AIV is not a stacked sensor and likely only reads out 15 per second. So A9 is going to focus much quicker and more accurately.
Click to expand...
Scott, you need to catch up on Sony AF technology. The A7IV Bird, Animal, Human AF is similar to the A1's AF. It 's a whole new ball game of focus accuracy which the A9 simply can't touch. The A9 offers speed but not the eye accuracy.

So, for example you could get a lot of sharply focused A9 photos of a running dog's nose or ears to weed out just to find one well focused photo. While the A7IV will have given you multiple well focused photos of the Dog's eye to choose from.
Click to expand...
I don’t do birds or a ton of animals other than my cat, and the A9 smokes my A7siii…. Assuming the A7iv is around that level.
 
Mr_Win said:
goodbokeh said:
Scott Alan said:
goodbokeh said:
Mr_Win said:
mikew5163 said:
Very interesting, especially regarding AF. I have been contemplating moving from a Canon 7d Mk ii plus Sigma 150-600mm C lens to the A7 III with Sigma MC-11 adapter (which many say works well on the A7 III) for wildlife. My impression is that the AF on the 7d ii and the A7 iii are pretty comparable, if not that the Sony is better. The A7 iii has a reasonable cashback deal on it at the moment, but reading this thread is now making me think this might be a false economy and that I'll just end up wanting the A7 iv anyway! Also, I'm a bit concerned by the number of reported reliability issues with the A7 iii, especially failing shutters.

Is there any word on the shutter situation? Have Sony definitely solved it for the mk iv? (Sounds similar to the Nikon D600 debacle of some years ago!)

Also, does anyone know if the amazing new AF performance of the mk iv should work via the MC-11 adapter?
Click to expand...
the nikon debacle was the biggest in photographic history, there are plenty of A7iii users to this day, the most sold FF camera ever. lensrentals should be able to answer that question.

there's always the original A9 if you're ok with used, works much better with adapted lenses than the A7iii and no way will the A7iv match with the exception of bird eye af and video.
Click to expand...
Mr_Win, the A7IV's Bird, Animal and Human Eye AF is a vastly superior feature to be just discounting it up against the A9. Also, don't forget the A74's Shutter can cover the sensor during lens changes to cut down on sensor dust. That's a very welcomed feature the A7III & A9 will never have and has spoiled many a shoot.

I suspect and hope that Sony engineers have learned from the shutter problems of the A7III and have made the necessary improvements.
Click to expand...
A9 read out speed is 60 per second. AIV is not a stacked sensor and likely only reads out 15 per second. So A9 is going to focus much quicker and more accurately.
Click to expand...
Scott, you need to catch up on Sony AF technology. The A7IV Bird, Animal, Human AF is similar to the A1's AF. It 's a whole new ball game of focus accuracy which the A9 simply can't touch. The A9 offers speed but not the eye accuracy.

So, for example you could get a lot of sharply focused A9 photos of a running dog's nose or ears to weed out just to find one well focused photo. While the A7IV will have given you multiple well focused photos of the Dog's eye to choose from.
Click to expand...
I don’t do birds or a ton of animals other than my cat, and the A9 smokes my A7siii…. Assuming the A7iv is around that level.
Click to expand...
Well Mr_Win I photograph birds and a sharply focused eye and 33MP (optimal for telephotos) is all important. So for me the A9 is not the tool.
 
Yeah I briefly thought about the A9 vs the A7IV... if you need the speed for human focused stills then the A9 is it; otherwise the A7IV is better at everything else from what I've seen. I think I'm going to buy one next year
 
Fbbrv said:
Hi there,

first post here, always used the forum in a “passive” way (reading and learning).

For a series of reasons I want to switch from my current fuji aps-c setup to a Sony full frame camera.

a part from underwater photography (main reason for why I’m looking to change the rig) I’m quite into street photography and I’m planning to learn more about wildlife photography in the coming months.
Im quite new to the full frame world and I can’t define myself an expert on the photography world, I’m an amateur that likes taking photos.

So, in your opinion, is it worthwhile spending more for ordering the new Sony a7 IV or go for Sony a7 III? Does the technical differences justify the price difference? If yes I don’t have any problem in prenorderinng the Sony a7 IV but if is not worthwhile for someone that is approaching the full frame with the money saved I could buy an extra after market lens
Click to expand...
Simple: Yes it’s worthwhile to pre order the A7IV.
 
mujana said:
Fbbrv said:
Hi there,

first post here, always used the forum in a “passive” way (reading and learning).

For a series of reasons I want to switch from my current fuji aps-c setup to a Sony full frame camera.

a part from underwater photography (main reason for why I’m looking to change the rig) I’m quite into street photography and I’m planning to learn more about wildlife photography in the coming months.
Im quite new to the full frame world and I can’t define myself an expert on the photography world, I’m an amateur that likes taking photos.

So, in your opinion, is it worthwhile spending more for ordering the new Sony a7 IV or go for Sony a7 III? Does the technical differences justify the price difference? If yes I don’t have any problem in prenorderinng the Sony a7 IV but if is not worthwhile for someone that is approaching the full frame with the money saved I could buy an extra after market lens
Click to expand...
Simple: Yes it’s worthwhile to pre order the A7IV.
Click to expand...
Not so simple. For me (for example), it is NOT worthwhile upgrade. Bigger memory cards, slower transfer speeds to the computer, slower computer processing (unless you also upgrade your computer).

I am a full-time wedding photographer and believe that (at least for now), 20mp is a sweet spot for me and my clients.

g
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top