Help me with some logic

[Architeuthis]

It makes no sense to me. The difference between the a7rv and the a7riv is fairly limited imo. It really boils down to better ibis, slightly better af in certain circumstances and the 8k - if you use it. Both the ibis and the af improvements are not that relevant in use cases where the r series excels, and the a7riv is already good enough for any situation short of something that requires a stacked sensor.

I should get the A7R V by the end of next week, and I have a 14-day return window, so I'll have both the A7R IV and A7R V with me. I might try to get to Yosemite at least for half a day, still a long shot but it might happen. After thoroughly testing and comparing both and if I truly decide is not worth the update, I can return it as I'll be in LA for the next 3 weeks.

makes sense! The difference always appears larger when you use cameras side by side but, to my recollection, the riv is also meaningfully smaller

Regarding the difference between A7R5 and A7R4, I may ad that it really depends on the usage. Maybe for overwater photography the difference is small (I am eager to hear what Martin will say after he tested A7R5).

What I know for sure is that for underwater photography the difference is big. The Sony 90mm f/2.8 macro was known amongst UW-photographers to have slow and pumping AF, even with A7R4 (UW, floating free in 3D, good AF is essential for macro). Quite some preferred to take the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 IS macro with adapter on this camera (also imperfect, but better). Since the advent of the A7R5, AF UW, even with Sony 90mm macro, works very well.

The appearance of A7R5 (Z8/9 from Nikon and R5(II) from Canon), simply because of AF, was the trigger for the majority of UW-photographers to switch to mirrorless systems (from previous DSLR)...

What may be a neglectable difference for some can be very well a huge difference for others (depending on area of application)...

 

[Impulses]

• Lossless RAW

doesnt the a7riv already have this? In any case, who cares?

Mark IV has lossy compressed RAWs and uncompressed, no lossless option, though I agree overall... The number of situations where the lossy compression could matter and you'd spot any artefacts is very very small, though it's there.

IBIS, AF and the hybrid tilt/FAS display seem like the main motivators to me, though I do think the Mk V was a bigger jump from the Mk IV than the IV vs the III. For me personally the option to shrink the EVF when wearing Rx glasses would be another appealing motivation to upgrade.