Why a Sony A7 IV over a A7r IVa

cialome said:

Am curious why someone would choose a A7IV over a A7rIVA when the price difference on the market is 500 dollars. Are there new features I am missing in the (slightly newer) A7IV which make it better than what appears on the surface. The surface being a 33 MP engine versus the 61 MP on the Sony A7r IVa.

Is there something appealing in the newer IV that you can point me to? I am confused because $500 doesn't seem to be a huge barrier.

Thanks for the input.

Thomas

Click to expand...

The IV has lots of minor and incremental improvements all over that make it a better and improved camera overall. But Sony was careful to not have it encroach on R series territory, thus the RIV has things that the IV can't approach. So that's the EVF (size and resolution), 60 vs 33 MP, and lack of an AA filter on the R camera.

If you want the highest stills image quality that's technically possible you would get the R. For a more general purpose camera that does everything well, that's newer and has minor improvements everywhere, the IV would be best. So I think the IV would suit the majority of people best.

blse59 said:

So that's the EVF (size and resolution), 60 vs 33 MP, and lack of an AA filter on the R camera.

Click to expand...

THOSE TWO ALONE ARE BIGGIES in my opinion. Better EVF translates to more joy while taking the photo. It also makes manual focus or fine tuning much easier. Both translates to better images.

Presence or absence of AA filter also makes a BIG DIFFERENCE. Perhaps even more so than the difference in pixels....?

4Photos said:

4Photos said:

So that's the EVF (size and resolution), 60 vs 33 MP, and lack of an AA filter on the R camera.

Click to expand...

THOSE TWO ALONE ARE BIGGIES in my opinion. Better EVF translates to more joy while taking the photo. It also makes manual focus or fine tuning much easier. Both translates to better images.

Presence or absence of AA filter also makes a BIG DIFFERENCE. Perhaps even more so than the difference in pixels....?

Click to expand...

Yes, that's why I haven't moved to the A7IV. But I would say most people won't need or notice these things. You and I just want to extract the highest technical quality possible.

4Photos said:

4Photos said:

So that's the EVF (size and resolution), 60 vs 33 MP, and lack of an AA filter on the R camera.

Click to expand...

THOSE TWO ALONE ARE BIGGIES in my opinion. Better EVF translates to more joy while taking the photo. It also makes manual focus or fine tuning much easier. Both translates to better images.

Presence or absence of AA filter also makes a BIG DIFFERENCE. Perhaps even more so than the difference in pixels....?

Click to expand...

It's amusing the lengths people will go to in order to rationalize the superiority of their chosen product.

In reality, especially in this example, there is no clear "winner" -- It really comes down to uses and subjective preferences.

Yes, the EVF of the Sony A7r4 has higher resolution. I've used it. You can tell the difference, but just barely. The Sony A7iv has the same EVF as the Sony A7riii, which was always a very comfortable EVF for me. But, if all else was equal, the higher resolution EVF is better. But not all else is equal --Maybe the slightly better EVF does increase your comfort and joy in the shooting experience. But for others, maybe the fully articulating LCD and true touch screen really enhance the joy and comfort of the shooting experience.

As to the AA filter, there is no confirmation on this yet, but testing by myself and others suggests the A7iv has a very light AA filter. It may have a minuscule effect on pixel level sharpness (which is one reason I'm keeping the A7R3). But for the minuscule pixel sharpness you may lose, you gain sharper images in other ways, such as a better AF system, more precisely nailing focus more often.

Again, I'm definitely not denying that the A7R4 has advantages. But for a vast number of shooters, those advantages are extremely minor and outweighed by the advantages of the A7iv. Certainly, there are shooters who will be swayed by the advantages of the A7r4.

havoc315 said:

4Photos said:

havoc315 said:

So that's the EVF (size and resolution), 60 vs 33 MP, and lack of an AA filter on the R camera.

Click to expand...

THOSE TWO ALONE ARE BIGGIES in my opinion. Better EVF translates to more joy while taking the photo. It also makes manual focus or fine tuning much easier. Both translates to better images.

Presence or absence of AA filter also makes a BIG DIFFERENCE. Perhaps even more so than the difference in pixels....?

Click to expand...

It's amusing the lengths people will go to in order to rationalize the superiority of their chosen product.

In reality, especially in this example, there is no clear "winner" -- It really comes down to uses and subjective preferences.

Yes, the EVF of the Sony A7r4 has higher resolution. I've used it. You can tell the difference, but just barely. The Sony A7iv has the same EVF as the Sony A7riii, which was always a very comfortable EVF for me. But, if all else was equal, the higher resolution EVF is better. But not all else is equal --Maybe the slightly better EVF does increase your comfort and joy in the shooting experience. But for others, maybe the fully articulating LCD and true touch screen really enhance the joy and comfort of the shooting experience.

As to the AA filter, there is no confirmation on this yet, but testing by myself and others suggests the A7iv has a very light AA filter. It may have a minuscule effect on pixel level sharpness (which is one reason I'm keeping the A7R3). But for the minuscule pixel sharpness you may lose, you gain sharper images in other ways, such as a better AF system, more precisely nailing focus more often.

Again, I'm definitely not denying that the A7R4 has advantages. But for a vast number of shooters, those advantages are extremely minor and outweighed by the advantages of the A7iv. Certainly, there are shooters who will be swayed by the advantages of the A7r4.

Click to expand...

One could simply say: I want it!

No need for arguments! ;-)

cialome said:

... I am confused because $500 doesn't seem to be a huge barrier.

Click to expand...

There eventually comes a point at which $500 is enough of a barrier (for most people). If that weren't the case, everyone would own extremely expensive cameras because every jump of $500 for certain desirable features wouldn't be a huge barrier. Adding to that the fact that not everyone desires the same features in a camera should lessen the confusion.

Magnar W said:

havoc315 said:

4Photos said:

Member said:

So that's the EVF (size and resolution), 60 vs 33 MP, and lack of an AA filter on the R camera.

Click to expand...

THOSE TWO ALONE ARE BIGGIES in my opinion. Better EVF translates to more joy while taking the photo. It also makes manual focus or fine tuning much easier. Both translates to better images.

Presence or absence of AA filter also makes a BIG DIFFERENCE. Perhaps even more so than the difference in pixels....?

Click to expand...

It's amusing the lengths people will go to in order to rationalize the superiority of their chosen product.

In reality, especially in this example, there is no clear "winner" -- It really comes down to uses and subjective preferences.

Yes, the EVF of the Sony A7r4 has higher resolution. I've used it. You can tell the difference, but just barely. The Sony A7iv has the same EVF as the Sony A7riii, which was always a very comfortable EVF for me. But, if all else was equal, the higher resolution EVF is better. But not all else is equal --Maybe the slightly better EVF does increase your comfort and joy in the shooting experience. But for others, maybe the fully articulating LCD and true touch screen really enhance the joy and comfort of the shooting experience.

As to the AA filter, there is no confirmation on this yet, but testing by myself and others suggests the A7iv has a very light AA filter. It may have a minuscule effect on pixel level sharpness (which is one reason I'm keeping the A7R3). But for the minuscule pixel sharpness you may lose, you gain sharper images in other ways, such as a better AF system, more precisely nailing focus more often.

Again, I'm definitely not denying that the A7R4 has advantages. But for a vast number of shooters, those advantages are extremely minor and outweighed by the advantages of the A7iv. Certainly, there are shooters who will be swayed by the advantages of the A7r4.

Click to expand...

One could simply say: I want it!

No need for arguments! ;-)

Click to expand...

Agreed!!

But honestly, discussions about pros and cons are helpful to people trying to pick between cameras. But it's silly to look at it like a competition, where you need to convince everyone that your camera is the best.

Probably an obvious point, but 60MP+ Is valuable feature if you come to full frame from apsc and already own some quality apsc glass (e.g., sigma 56mm, 16mm, Sony 70-350, tamron 11-20). These all perform wonderfully on the a7riva in crop mode and generate 26mp files. For example, I get better portraits shooting with my sigma 56mm in crop mode than my Sony 90mm macro or Tamron zoom in full frame. If you shoot wildlife from a distance, the ability to crop is, of course, super valuable, as is also the high resolution EVF. Absent the advantages of cropping and the desire to use apsc lenses, the A7IV looks very attractive.

havoc315 said:

. The Sony A7iv has the same EVF as the Sony A7riii, which was always a very comfortable EVF for me.

Click to expand...

The R3 and R4 do not share the same EVF. The R4 has 5.76m-Dot Tru-Finder OLED EVF. The R3 has a 3.69m-Dot Tru-Finder OLED EVF, while the new 4 Base has a 3.68m-Dot EVF.

havoc315 said:

But for others, maybe the fully articulating LCD and true touch screen really enhance the joy and comfort of the shooting experience.

Click to expand...

Very subjective ... it's a "deal breaker" for perhaps as many photographers as those who would find it a "joy" or "comfort".

havoc315 said:

But for a vast number of shooters, those advantages are extremely minor and outweighed by the advantages of the A7iv.

Click to expand...

That's a rather bold and unsubstantiated assumption I think. To those who want\need the features of the 4R, I'm sure those are not "extremely mild" to them. The numbers may be "less vast" than you imagine.

Same can be said for the vlogger who wants the 4 Base for selfies: that can't be an "extremely mild" feature, to spend $2,500 on a piece of equipment I might think their iPhone can handle equally well. I'd say it must be darn important to them.

The 4RA and 3RA have a higher resolution LCD than the 4 Base. And the 4R has a number of other features not found in the 4 Base.

That said, the 4 Base if better "jack of all trades", and Sony made the 4 Base more video capable, and blessed it with a better AF than even the 4R.

My mistake, I confused the EVF of the A7iv with that of the A7c. Didn't intend to convince anyone of the "superiority of my chosen product:

The difference in IQ between having AA and not having AA is very much real though, and to my eyes significant enough not wanting to sacrifice that degree of clarity.

Do you have experience with how much better the AF is on the A1 and IV versus the IVr? I’d really like better tracking of walking subjects in the city with shallow depth of field and my IVr is pretty marginal on reliably getting eyes in focus.

I have the A7M4 but somehow I still prefer more pixels for shooting.

However when I do the ISO scene comparison I started to have some hesitation especially after 1600 ISO. This includes A1 as well

ne beginner said:

havoc315 said:

. The Sony A7iv has the same EVF as the Sony A7riii, which was always a very comfortable EVF for me.

Click to expand...

The R3 and R4 do not share the same EVF. The R4 has 5.76m-Dot Tru-Finder OLED EVF. The R3 has a 3.69m-Dot Tru-Finder OLED EVF, while the new 4 Base has a 3.68m-Dot EVF.

Click to expand...

Read -- I did not say that the the R4 and R3 have the same EVF. I said the A7iv and A7r3 have the same EVF -- I have compared them side by side, there is absolutely no perceptible difference.

ne beginner said:

ne beginner said:

But for others, maybe the fully articulating LCD and true touch screen really enhance the joy and comfort of the shooting experience.

Click to expand...

Very subjective ... it's a "deal breaker" for perhaps as many photographers as those who would find it a "joy" or "comfort".

Click to expand...

YES! Very subjective! Including, just how valuable is an EVF of 5.76m Dots vs 3.69M dots. For me, once you get to 3.69m dots and higher, it's almost impossible to tell the difference. I've used the 5.76m A7r4. If everything else about the cameras was equal, I would take the higher resolution EVF. But it really is a pretty minor factor in my experience. And not all else is equal.

ne beginner said:

ne beginner said:

But for a vast number of shooters, those advantages are extremely minor and outweighed by the advantages of the A7iv.

Click to expand...

That's a rather bold and unsubstantiated assumption I think. To those who want\need the features of the 4R, I'm sure those are not "extremely mild" to them. The numbers may be "less vast" than you imagine.

Click to expand...

I'm not talking about the 61mp resolution -- That will have a fair number of subscribers. Are you saying that people would throw their cameras in the garbage without a 5.76m EVF? What did those R4 owners do before the R4 existed?!?!?!

So no, don't pretend anybody "needs" a 5.76m dot EVF. It's a nice feature. Nobody needs it. And the A7iv has tons of nice features that the A7rIV lacks. If the R4 had a 24mp sensor, do you think it would still have lots of buyers just to get the 5.76m EVF? (And I'd say that not many people are going to buy the A7iv just for a customizable exposure comp dial though it's a feature I really like).

As to which features matter the most, that's a subjective question. But I don't see hordes of people getting a camera SOLELY for a higher resolution EVF.

ne beginner said:

The 4RA and 3RA have a higher resolution LCD than the 4 Base. And the 4R has a number of other features not found in the 4 Base.

Click to expand...

Thing is, it's a rather small number of features. The only "positive" features that the 4R has, IMO, are the higher resolution EVF and LCD. Now, this is my subjective opinion -- not trying to start a fight -- But for me, the R4 sensor is a negative. I have written extensively on it, I hate it. But that is a subjective issue -- I know there are plenty of people who love it.

So objectively -- The only positive features in the 4R are the higher resolution EVF, higher resolution LCD, and pixel shift technology. That's it -- those 3. Then 1 big subjective difference -- the sensor, which is a positive for some people, and a negative for other people.

For me, the A7iv -- Subjectively, it has a better sensor than the R4. Now objectively -- It has a true touch screen, it has lossless compression, CF Express support, the newest AF system, the newest menu system, 60p 4K support, articulating LCD, customizable exposure compensation dial, more advanced networking including the new Visual Story app, and a slew of other features.

ne beginner said:

That said, the 4 Base if better "jack of all trades", and Sony made the 4 Base more video capable, and blessed it with a better AF than even the 4R.

Click to expand...

Yes, which is why the A7iv is better for many people. The R4 is great for those who want the ultra high resolution.

susan2012 said:

Can you tell me what the benefits of the faster processor are? Is it better AF subject tracking and eye focus?

Click to expand...

What I've noticed is the camera is more responsive. When you turn the camera on it's immediate. My A7III is soooooo sllllooowwww compared! Can't remember how the A7RIV reacted. The AF is improved over the A7RIV. The file sizes are more manageable. It's a little more customizable. New menu system which is touchable.

I've only tried the AF on stuffed animals. Now I live in sunny north central AZ. The day my A7IV arrived it rained with record breaking volume. It's been cloudy and rainy ever since. And starting tonight through Wednesday we are getting 4-6" of snow. It looks like I won't get out to test the AF on real live subjects until Sunday.

Back to AF. It's sticky. Really sticky. Not 100% perfect, but far better than my A7III. I now have the option in the menu to set it up to see where my AF was. That is 100% accurate. And it appears faster than the A7RIV. For now the Eye AF is right on the money. Real time tracking will have to wait for a test when I get out of this north east like weather pattern!

havoc315 said:

ne beginner said:

havoc315 said:

. The Sony A7iv has the same EVF as the Sony A7riii, which was always a very comfortable EVF for me.

Click to expand...

The R3 and R4 do not share the same EVF. The R4 has 5.76m-Dot Tru-Finder OLED EVF. The R3 has a 3.69m-Dot Tru-Finder OLED EVF, while the new 4 Base has a 3.68m-Dot EVF.

Click to expand...

Read -- I did not say that the the R4 and R3 have the same EVF. I said the A7iv and A7r3 have the same EVF -- I have compared them side by side, there is absolutely no perceptible difference.

havoc315 said:

havoc315 said:

But for others, maybe the fully articulating LCD and true touch screen really enhance the joy and comfort of the shooting experience.

Click to expand...

Very subjective ... it's a "deal breaker" for perhaps as many photographers as those who would find it a "joy" or "comfort".

Click to expand...

YES! Very subjective! Including, just how valuable is an EVF of 5.76m Dots vs 3.69M dots. For me, once you get to 3.69m dots and higher, it's almost impossible to tell the difference. I've used the 5.76m A7r4. If everything else about the cameras was equal, I would take the higher resolution EVF. But it really is a pretty minor factor in my experience. And not all else is equal.

havoc315 said:

havoc315 said:

But for a vast number of shooters, those advantages are extremely minor and outweighed by the advantages of the A7iv.

Click to expand...

That's a rather bold and unsubstantiated assumption I think. To those who want\need the features of the 4R, I'm sure those are not "extremely mild" to them. The numbers may be "less vast" than you imagine.

Click to expand...

I'm not talking about the 61mp resolution -- That will have a fair number of subscribers. Are you saying that people would throw their cameras in the garbage without a 5.76m EVF? What did those R4 owners do before the R4 existed?!?!?!

So no, don't pretend anybody "needs" a 5.76m dot EVF. It's a nice feature. Nobody needs it. And the A7iv has tons of nice features that the A7rIV lacks. If the R4 had a 24mp sensor, do you think it would still have lots of buyers just to get the 5.76m EVF? (And I'd say that not many people are going to buy the A7iv just for a customizable exposure comp dial though it's a feature I really like).

As to which features matter the most, that's a subjective question. But I don't see hordes of people getting a camera SOLELY for a higher resolution EVF.

havoc315 said:

The 4RA and 3RA have a higher resolution LCD than the 4 Base. And the 4R has a number of other features not found in the 4 Base.

Click to expand...

Thing is, it's a rather small number of features. The only "positive" features that the 4R has, IMO, are the higher resolution EVF and LCD. Now, this is my subjective opinion -- not trying to start a fight -- But for me, the R4 sensor is a negative. I have written extensively on it, I hate it. But that is a subjective issue -- I know there are plenty of people who love it.

So objectively -- The only positive features in the 4R are the higher resolution EVF, higher resolution LCD, and pixel shift technology. That's it -- those 3. Then 1 big subjective difference -- the sensor, which is a positive for some people, and a negative for other people.

For me, the A7iv -- Subjectively, it has a better sensor than the R4. Now objectively -- It has a true touch screen, it has lossless compression, CF Express support, the newest AF system, the newest menu system, 60p 4K support, articulating LCD, customizable exposure compensation dial, more advanced networking including the new Visual Story app, and a slew of other features.

havoc315 said:

That said, the 4 Base if better "jack of all trades", and Sony made the 4 Base more video capable, and blessed it with a better AF than even the 4R.

Click to expand...

Yes, which is why the A7iv is better for many people. The R4 is great for those who want the ultra high resolution.

Click to expand...

So, the 4 Base and the 4R are each "better" than the other, in different ways, for different people, based on those people's individual needs, and each camera's feature set, right?

Just as the features you list above as making the 4 Base "better" than a 4R are, to many others, minor and inconsequential, because those specific feature you like so much might be exactly why they chose a 4R INSTEAD of a 4 Base.

For example, for "vastly" many people, the 4R sensor is better than the one in the 4 Base.... for what THEY want. And the selfie LCD on the Base is a negative, not a positive; just as the added video capability, the touch screen functionality, and many of the "slew of other features" you mention, valueless.

LOL, these are just tools. And there are many different tools and processes we can prefer to use over others to get the task done. The 4 Base is not "vastly" anything over the 4R, and visa versa, EXCEPT when it comes to what each of us wants, for the way we want to get the job done.

Always amazing to see people, with a wave, try to dismiss and marginalize one tool, and invalidate anyone who uses it, just because it isn't the tool they prefer to use, instead of respecting that this same tool is perfect for what many others prefer to use.

I don't have either of these cameras, find both equally interesting, and if handed either one, could use it to happily take pictures ... even if I preferred one over the other... even I had to use the one with the flippy vlogger-selfie screen, or the other one with a few more MP's and dots in the EVF.

ne beginner said:

havoc315 said:

ne beginner said:

havoc315 said:

. The Sony A7iv has the same EVF as the Sony A7riii, which was always a very comfortable EVF for me.

Click to expand...

The R3 and R4 do not share the same EVF. The R4 has 5.76m-Dot Tru-Finder OLED EVF. The R3 has a 3.69m-Dot Tru-Finder OLED EVF, while the new 4 Base has a 3.68m-Dot EVF.

Click to expand...

Read -- I did not say that the the R4 and R3 have the same EVF. I said the A7iv and A7r3 have the same EVF -- I have compared them side by side, there is absolutely no perceptible difference.

ne beginner said:

ne beginner said:

But for others, maybe the fully articulating LCD and true touch screen really enhance the joy and comfort of the shooting experience.

Click to expand...

Very subjective ... it's a "deal breaker" for perhaps as many photographers as those who would find it a "joy" or "comfort".

Click to expand...

YES! Very subjective! Including, just how valuable is an EVF of 5.76m Dots vs 3.69M dots. For me, once you get to 3.69m dots and higher, it's almost impossible to tell the difference. I've used the 5.76m A7r4. If everything else about the cameras was equal, I would take the higher resolution EVF. But it really is a pretty minor factor in my experience. And not all else is equal.

ne beginner said:

ne beginner said:

But for a vast number of shooters, those advantages are extremely minor and outweighed by the advantages of the A7iv.

Click to expand...

That's a rather bold and unsubstantiated assumption I think. To those who want\need the features of the 4R, I'm sure those are not "extremely mild" to them. The numbers may be "less vast" than you imagine.

Click to expand...

I'm not talking about the 61mp resolution -- That will have a fair number of subscribers. Are you saying that people would throw their cameras in the garbage without a 5.76m EVF? What did those R4 owners do before the R4 existed?!?!?!

So no, don't pretend anybody "needs" a 5.76m dot EVF. It's a nice feature. Nobody needs it. And the A7iv has tons of nice features that the A7rIV lacks. If the R4 had a 24mp sensor, do you think it would still have lots of buyers just to get the 5.76m EVF? (And I'd say that not many people are going to buy the A7iv just for a customizable exposure comp dial though it's a feature I really like).

As to which features matter the most, that's a subjective question. But I don't see hordes of people getting a camera SOLELY for a higher resolution EVF.

ne beginner said:

The 4RA and 3RA have a higher resolution LCD than the 4 Base. And the 4R has a number of other features not found in the 4 Base.

Click to expand...

Thing is, it's a rather small number of features. The only "positive" features that the 4R has, IMO, are the higher resolution EVF and LCD. Now, this is my subjective opinion -- not trying to start a fight -- But for me, the R4 sensor is a negative. I have written extensively on it, I hate it. But that is a subjective issue -- I know there are plenty of people who love it.

So objectively -- The only positive features in the 4R are the higher resolution EVF, higher resolution LCD, and pixel shift technology. That's it -- those 3. Then 1 big subjective difference -- the sensor, which is a positive for some people, and a negative for other people.

For me, the A7iv -- Subjectively, it has a better sensor than the R4. Now objectively -- It has a true touch screen, it has lossless compression, CF Express support, the newest AF system, the newest menu system, 60p 4K support, articulating LCD, customizable exposure compensation dial, more advanced networking including the new Visual Story app, and a slew of other features.

ne beginner said:

That said, the 4 Base if better "jack of all trades", and Sony made the 4 Base more video capable, and blessed it with a better AF than even the 4R.

Click to expand...

Yes, which is why the A7iv is better for many people. The R4 is great for those who want the ultra high resolution.

Click to expand...

So, the 4 Base and the 4R are each "better" than the other, in different ways, for different people, based on those people's individual needs, and each camera's feature set, right?

Click to expand...

Yes.

ne beginner said:

Just as the features you list above as making the 4 Base "better" than a 4R are, to many others, minor and inconsequential, because those specific feature you like so much might be exactly why they chose a 4R INSTEAD of a 4 Base.

Click to expand...

But there is such a thing as honest discussion, which requires people to be honest with themselves.

There are features that are major difference makers, which drives purchase decisions. The 61mp resolution being an example of such a feature.

There are features that may be somewhat minor to some people, major to others. The a7iv shooting 4k60p May be important to some, meaningless to others.

Then there are things that are truly small. Combining a bunch of small things may drive a purchase decision, but it would be pretty rare for 1 of those small things, alone, to drive a purchase decision. Few people are going to sell their a7r4 and buy the a7iv solely for lossless compression. And few people would switch to the a7r4 solely because of a higher resolution EVF.

ne beginner said:

For example, for "vastly" many people, the 4R sensor is better than the one in the 4 Base.... for what THEY want.

Click to expand...

Other than the poor grammar, absolutely true!!! The resolution difference is a significant factor for many people! The EVF -alone- is not.

ne beginner said:

And the selfie LCD on the Base is a negative,

not a positive; just as the added video capability, the touch screen functionality, and many of the "slew of other features" you mention, valueless.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. Different things will have different levels of value to different people. But if anybody said that the A7iv was the better camera than the A7r4 solely because of lossless compression or solely because of focus depth mapping… Such statements would seem hollow.

ne beginner said:

LOL, these are just tools. And there are many different tools and processes we can prefer to use over others to get the task done. The 4 Base is not "vastly" anything over the 4R, and visa versa, EXCEPT when it comes to what each of us wants, for the way we want to get the job done.

Click to expand...

That’s where you’re wrong. The a7r4 has vastly higher resolution than the a7iv. For someone wanting ultra high resolution, the a7r4 is the vastly better camera.
For someone who doesn’t want 61mp resolution, the a7iv is indeed the vastly better camera.

That’s just objective and honest discussion. Would anybody say the Sony A100 dslr is vastly better than the Sony A1? You could certainly make the argument… the a100 had an OVF, and therefore it’s better than the A1. But that would be a pretty desperate argument.

ne beginner said:

Always amazing to see people, with a wave, try to dismiss and marginalize one tool, and invalidate anyone who uses it, just because it isn't the tool they prefer to use, instead of respecting that this same tool is perfect for what many others prefer to use.

Click to expand...

Agreed—- and that’s the opposite of what I’m doing. I’m not marginalizing either camera. The a7r4 is FANTASTIC if you want the highest resolution. The a7iv is FANTASTIC if you don’t care about ultra high resolution but you want the newest and most advanced features.

This was my original statement that sparked your protests:

“Again, I'm definitely not denying that the A7R4 has advantages. But for a vast number of shooters, those advantages are extremely minor and outweighed by the advantages of the A7iv. Certainly, there are shooters who will be swayed by the advantages of the A7r4”

ne beginner said:

I don't have either of these cameras, find both equally interesting, and if handed either one, could use it to happily take pictures ... even if I preferred one over the other... even I had to use the one with the flippy vlogger-selfie screen, or the other one with a few more MP's and dots in the EVF.

Click to expand...

That’s interesting. Because I have used both cameras. I returned the R4 because it wasn’t for me, but I still own an R3.

So here is a thought… The people I don’t trust are those who assume the superiority of their camera, but haven’t any experience with the cameras they are comparing. Maybe people with actual experience… just maybe their opinions have a bit more credibility.

cialome said:

Am curious why someone would choose a A7IV over a A7rIVA when the price difference on the market is 500 dollars. Are there new features I am missing in the (slightly newer) A7IV which make it better than what appears on the surface. The surface being a 33 MP engine versus the 61 MP on the Sony A7r IVa.

Is there something appealing in the newer IV that you can point me to? I am confused because $500 doesn't seem to be a huge barrier.

Thanks for the input.

Thomas

Click to expand...

The 61mp thrives on premium glass and make your deficiencies as a photographer more obvious, also its older so A7IV should take the lead as far as AF is concerned but if its outright IQ in ideal light, the A7IV would take a backseat.

sybersitizen said:

cialome said:

... I am confused because $500 doesn't seem to be a huge barrier.

Click to expand...

There eventually comes a point at which $500 is enough of a barrier (for most people). If that weren't the case, everyone would own extremely expensive cameras because every jump of $500 for certain desirable features wouldn't be a huge barrier. Adding to that the fact that not everyone desires the same features in a camera should lessen the confusion.

Click to expand...

Yes, it's sufficient barrier to keep A7RivA from having a large impact on the sales of A7iv. The Riv is already heavily discounted and probably don't have good profit margin, and A7iv is brand new with high profit margin. I suspect Sony needs to drain the stock of Riv by the time Rv model comes out, so it runs deep discounts, but still they need to price it high enough not to damage 7iv sales.

AZheaven said:

susan2012 said:

Can you tell me what the benefits of the faster processor are? Is it better AF subject tracking and eye focus?

Click to expand...

What I've noticed is the camera is more responsive. When you turn the camera on it's immediate. My A7III is soooooo sllllooowwww compared! Can't remember how the A7RIV reacted. The AF is improved over the A7RIV. The file sizes are more manageable. It's a little more customizable. New menu system which is touchable.

I've only tried the AF on stuffed animals. Now I live in sunny north central AZ. The day my A7IV arrived it rained with record breaking volume. It's been cloudy and rainy ever since. And starting tonight through Wednesday we are getting 4-6" of snow. It looks like I won't get out to test the AF on real live subjects until Sunday.

Back to AF. It's sticky. Really sticky. Not 100% perfect, but far better than my A7III. I now have the option in the menu to set it up to see where my AF was. That is 100% accurate. And it appears faster than the A7RIV. For now the Eye AF is right on the money. Real time tracking will have to wait for a test when I get out of this north east like weather pattern!

Click to expand...

I rarely see pictures in Arizona where weather is anything but sunny. Would love to see some for an alternative perspective on an A7iv. Would be a great addition to your library

havoc315 said:

For someone who doesn’t want 61mp resolution, the a7iv is indeed the vastly better camera.

Click to expand...

You are vastly stretching the word "vastly" here, don't you think so? Amazing, to what length people go to justify their purchasing decisions

As still photographer, the flippy screen already is a deal breaker for me. But if someone would hand me an A74, I could get my work done. In the end, what counts is the results, and for me, having pixels pretty much trumps the rest.