Sony has, rather quietly, released updated versions of its a7R III and a7R IV cameras that bring small improvements to the full-frame mirrorless cameras. The updated cameras now have an ‘a’ appended to their model numbers to differentiate them from their original predecessors.
According to the update product specifications, both the a7R III (model: ILCE-7RM3A) and a7R IV (model: ILCE-7RM4A) have improved rear LCD panels, up to 2.36 million dots compared to the 1.44 million dots in the original models. Sony notes in the the battery life of the updated cameras has dropped slightly (10 shots) when using the LCD panel. Also, based on the product photos on Sony’s website, the a7R IV (model: ILCE-7RM4A) no longer has the Sony logo under the LCD monitor. Aside from those details, it’s not clear what else, if anything, has changed.
Note the ‘Sony’ underneath the LCD panel on this product image of the original a7R IV.
Note The lack of the ‘Sony’ logo under the LCD panel of the newly-updated a7R IV ‘a’
Sony’s updated product pages don’t show whether or not the price has changed and, as of publication, Sony’s site isn’t linking out to any retailers with the new models in stock. Neither Adorama or B&H Photo have the new models listed as of publication. This, combined with the fact Sony hasn’t actually changed the more general name of the cameras will likely lead to some confusion for buyers, so you might want to hold off if you’re hoping to get one of these updated cameras until more information is available.
We have contacted Sony for more details and will update this article accordingly when we receive a response.
Got the same problem here with an A7RIVA, can't find anything but Imaging Edge that will open the ARW files. Tried new downloads of C One, LR and DNG converter without any luck.
Chris I am also getting the same issue with Capture One (v20) I have a ticket open with them. The Mac doesn't show a preview for the image and CO doesn't detect the same ARW file format my older A7R camera used, to import it. Sony must have changed something in the ARW file code....I wonder why and to what benefit? Hoping they can sort it soon as I am effectively camera-less.
....and is the LCD screen any 'better'? I own an A7R2 and find that the live-view image on the LCD screen is quite noisy when using it to focus in low-light. I'm hoping that the A7RIVA is a much better prospect for that use.
Not sure about Lightroom but both Capture One 2021 and Adobe DNG has been updated...so I'm guessing LR and PS has been given the same update aswell. Have no experience with the "old" A4 so can't really say if the rear screen is any better. I keep mine turned off for 99% of what I do.
Im always sad that Canon and Nikon didn't more aggressively come after SONY, when SONY started establishing itself. But I'm always glad that SONY basically kicked their butts into higher action.
Things like this weren't seen before there was a 3rd major competitor.
Mheh. Too little imrpvements. New viewfinder, new menues, fully articulating screen, then it would be something. But everyone agrees their sensors are still very good.
When I checked the firmware version on my new A7RIVA it had a Firmware version 1.0, these are just old stock A7RIV B's with a new back panel slapped on and nothing more from what I can see.
While many feel this was a forced change due to component shortage, a commenter on SAR wrote this:
The A7R4A was registered at the same time as the FX3 and a little before the a1. It sure looks like they were planning these changes since before launching the FX3 or a1. Whatever the reason, they decided to proceed anyway with the 1.44mdot panels on those new cameras despite it being a point of criticism.
I can't find the online manual for the A7R3A yet but I think it's one of the two remaining wifi registrations. That leaves one camera left of the five unknown registrations.
---end of quote---
So this indeed may have been a planned change all along...which kind of makes sense, given the lead time needed for the engineering and testing.
The other camera registered is probably the rumored a7 IV.
Read the entire post...I'm just citing what someone noted on SAR. Someone noticed the wifi registrations for new Sony cameras. There were five. It was highly reported by rumors sites like SAR. They then matched up the camera code with the online manual. That is what they found.
BTW, it makes sense that this was planned somewhat in advance...it has to be for the engineering to be done. Modern electronics are so interdependent that a change of one part can have all sorts of impact on other components and functioning.
So if you change out the LCD, you have to test things like the impact on battery life, processor load, how the software handles the higher resolution, etc. It's not a trivial change and modern cameras are not Lego's!
Then there's the manufacturing logistics. You have to source the part and test the QA off of the assembly line. You have to incorporate the new part into the current final assembly manufacturing line, which includes even arranging for proper shipping and delivery in time. None of which is trivial.
There's product registration, new manuals, billing, contracts with supplier, etc.
There are a lot of details that go into making this change and regardless of what prompted it, it would require some lead time to accomplish.
@zxaar: I would say registering the new a7RIV A model in November of 2020 and then releasing it now, or at least making it public now, is a pretty good indicator of a plan.
This is modern engineering and manufacturing. Everything has to be planned in advance. This doesn't happen by accident. If not a planned change, then what is it? Did all of a sudden these new panels appear by magic in the Sony assembly line, and Sony says "OK, let's roll with it?" :)
And every new model has to be registered and approved due to the wifi radio.
Do you really think this happened on the fly? That Sony just made it up as they went along? Geesh...
No matter what the reasons for the change, there has to be significant lead time for this to occur.
"Do you really think this happened on the fly? That Sony just made it up as they went along? Geesh..."
If I understand you correctly then what you are suggesting is absurd.
You are suggesting that a company all along had a plan to update a component by a better one for a model after say months or years while on the same time also spending time and energy on all the newest of the products.
You are suggesting they sat down and decided doing so.
If people working at sony were this stupid their company would have shut down decades ago.
@zxaar: This is not speculating. The product registrations are real. The camera codes are real. The Sony documentation is real. This is definitive proof.
If you do not like it that doesn't change the facts.
You write "you are suggesting that a company all along had a plan to update a component by a better one for a model after say months or years while on the same time also spending time and energy on all the newest of the products."
I am not suggesting. I am proving. And yes, this raises some interesting questions as to why they did this. But Sony did do this. Sorry if it offends you.
So you have no proof about the topic being discussed. You have no idea what is discussed. You just have to show everyone that you are an smart alec.
PS: I have not logged into 1x for ages so do not know what is happening there. Today after you mentioned i logged in and the account is active. You can do the stalking there too if you want.
1) Why did Sony decide to update these two older models with the better LCD screens and not the flagship a1 instead? Or even the FX3 for that matter?
2) Do these updates mean that the a7R III and a7R IV will be around longer in the Sony lineup than otherwise one might expect?
3) Will the rumored a7 IV have these better LCD panels? Or will these be reserved for now for these two older models? When will Sony put these LCD panels into their new releases?
4) Will at any point Sony issue updates to the a1 with these new LCD panels? I wouldn't expect so in the near future as there is no product registration for such a model. Remember, all new cameras will have these regulatory filings before they launch.
All this is speculation. If you say you are speculating and you strongly believe so, I can agree that this is what you believe.
There is no proof that sony planned because then you have to show that sony released a statement or someone made statement who was directly involved in making such decision. Both you can not show.
@zxaar: I really don't understand your point. The product registration proves advance planning. There is no legal way Sony could bring these new models to the market without advance regulatory filings.
But beyond that, think this through. If this was not planned by Sony then how did it occur? What is your alternative theory?
Of course Sony decided to do this. The right people at Sony had to sit down and decide to make this change. How else would it occur?
All engineering and manufacturing changes of complex electronic products take some advance planning. It's the nature of the work.
Give us an alternate explanation of how this happens with no advance planning by Sony, no decision by Sony to do this...I don't think we ever will get that from you because there is no reasonable explanation you can offer.
Of course it has been planned for a long time, but not as long back as the A1 or A7SIII. It takes much longer time to develop a new camera with a new sensor than just out a new lcd and a new board in an already existing camera........
David, no one said these revised versions of these cameras were in dev as long as the a1 or a7siii. But the point is that they were planned at least going back to last year, not as a some sudden result of part shortages, as some speculated.
Also given that Sony is now going to use updated LCD panels in these two older models, it still begs the question of why they are so stubborn in not giving these to the newer, more expensive models. Sony makes some of the best LCD panels in the world but won't use them in their own cameras, not even their $6500 flagship.
“not as a some sudden result of part shortages, as some speculated.”
Who said it’s a sudden shortage of parts? I remember a few have speculated that this could be due to a shortage of parts but don’t remember anyone saying it’s a sudden shortage of parts.
Surely in a well run organisation any change in supplier (for instance due to shortage of parts) will be planned ahead.
@Handsome90: Please...are you really going to go there? The point that some made was that this was an odd and unexpected change, and so may have been brought about by an unexpected parts shortage. That was the whole point...that the parts shortage was unexpected and relatively sudden. Hence not giving the better LCD panels to newer more expensive models already in full production runs.
At this point we are just parsing words here.
The main point is that this was planned by Sony all along, at least going back to last year. Which gets to the question that you seem to want to avoid: why not put these better panels in their far more expensive flagship model? For that matter why not put even better LCD panels in the flagship? Sony is capable of doing so; they make some of the best LCD panels in the world.
Now we are cooking with lens releases. Some of the other releases by most lens makers really didn't really peak my interest due to certain issues specific to each. These latest two by Tamron(Upcoming) have great potential. IMO. Finally,
Sony's current prices on R series lineup: 04-12-2020
Alpha a7R II Full-Frame Mirrorless 4k Video Camera (Body Only) - Black Model:ILCE7RM2/BSKU:9591139 $1,299.99 Your price for this item is $1,299.99 Save $500 Was $1,799.99
Alpha a7R III Full-Frame Mirrorless 4k Video Camera (Body Only) - Black Model:ILCE7RM3/BSKU:6154300 $2,299.99 Your price for this item is $2,299.99 Save $500 Was $2,799.99
Alpha a7R IV ILCE-7RM4 Mirrorless Camera (Body Only) - Black Model:ILCE7RM4/BSKU:6361762 $2,999.99 Your price for this item is $2,999.99 Save $500 Was $3,499.99
" Sony told us: "The current models will still be available to purchase, in line with retail stock. We don’t yet have an on-sale date for the new model."
In other words, retailers will likely be running through the rest of their current stock of the Sony A7R IV (called the ILCE-7RM4) and Sony A7R III (ILCE-7RM3), before the new versions go on sale."
So are they saying, when the current supply runs dry, no longer will the lower grade LCD panels exist in that lineup. Certainly appears so. How long before an Sony a1a version. That would really tick off many of the current buyers of the a1. That's the kind of respect spending $6500 on a Camera body gets you these days, not much.
This could easily spin into a PR nightmare for Sony as yes, Nikon and Canon intro more advanced mirrorless cameras. Nikon and Canon, don't make the same mistakes moving forward.
Sony might do it but I doubt it. After all, you knew the specifications of the camera when you bought it; evidently the back screen resolution at the time didn't bother you enough to stop you spending $6,500 on it.
Yes progress can suck but that's the way it is. I bought a GoPro Hero 8 last year and then just a few months later they replaced it with the better-spec'ed Hero 9. Even though that made my Hero 8 into an "old" model, its still one of the best action cams out there and I'm certainly not going to demand that GoPro replace my camera with the newer model.
In regard to your A1, take comfort in the fact that you still have the best viewfinder in the business at 9.4 million dots and other than the LCD screen (which has no effect on the quality of your pictures) it is still the best camera Sony has ever made.
In spite of how some folks continue to spin it, this is hardly an normal upgrade cycle since the Sony a1 was released with the inferior screen. If all of an sudden, all the models see the upgrade, then Sony's explaining why becomes shaky at best.
The a1 is a fantastic camera with so many great features that it really doesn't make a difference to many users about the back LCD screen.
Some owners of the a1 will not like the idea that Sony updated two older models with a better LCD panel than their far more expensive flagship model. And many Sony users are inclined to notice and put emphasis on spec sheet details. Remember Sony is the king of selling on specs.
@Magnar W: "Expectations is the road to disappointment ..." That is a really wise saying...almost zen like...
@BTN1: I would say that by definition disappointment occurs when reality falls short of expectations. So disappointment can only occur with expectations.
I do get what you mean...where you set a goal or expectation to be achieved. Without having a goal for achievement you may get nowhere.
So it's kind of a balance.
Also I do think it's different when talking about goal setting vs just comparing specs of your product to another. You can drive yourself crazy always trying to worry about having the latest specs.
Doesn’t quite clear up every question, as TechRadar makes clear, but according to Sony:
"We have updated the Alpha 7R III and Alpha 7R IV in response to customer needs, as we always strive to provide the best technology."
So apparently Sony does consider the updated better resolution LCD panels to offer an advantage to customers, which should put to rest the arguments by some that the quality of the back LCD is an insignificant issue.
Quite a bit different than all the bad info we were getting from these supposed Sony Users on these boards which led all the bad info given. I suspect most real Sony users don't even post on these types of boards.
Also, regardless of what's posted that's real, those folks just keep moving the goal posts. Real facts apparently aren't important to them.
Sort like all that bad info when the 50mm 1.2 was release and, "Well They Said" . Which by the way, might not actually be 50mm according to Manny.
TRU, what would you say if you had a company that changes a minor detail of the specs of a product for whatever reason? You would say something meaningless like that. It's naive to think that this sort of statement provides the real reasons.
Anyway, who cares? These are minor alterations to excellent cameras that require an administrative change; hence, the addition of the a. It so minimal that Sony itself thinks it’s not worth an announcement. Tech companies aren’t really shy when it comes to grand statements. It’s a +/- meaningless change. You would not buy a new A7RIII because of the increased screen resolution (certainly, I wouldn’t change mine for that) and most people who do buy a new camera of this class would see this as a minor improvement.
If you believed everything the marketing department told you, then you would think the R5 is actually the perfect camera for high end video productions.
I still believe this is a move driven by the supply chain. Not by the marketing department. Perhaps parts shortages became an opportunity to specify a higher resolution panel instead. We will likely never know for sure.
Why can't some admit that the quality of the back LCD screen matters to some users?
We heard the same thing from Sony apologists about the menu system: well, it's not so bad, it doesn't matter, etc. Then Sony does a major change and all of a sudden a different tune is being played.
What will you say when Sony eventually updates all of their models to a better LCD screen?
We may not know the whole story, but we do know that Sony believes the quality of that back LCD screen matters.
Also pay attention to the pricing. We still do not have a price yet. If it is higher then that is a signal that this is a value added to the customer, at least in the view of Sony. And I believe that there is a good chance the price will be higher.
@ Thoughts R Us: "Why can't some admit that the quality of the back LCD screen matters to some users?"
Why can't some take in account how the screen is used, what fine detail the eye can split at the actual viewing distance, and what the screen resolution means for real world use? Or is it just the number of dots that interests you?
Nobody have said that higher specs are NOT welcome, but higher specs doesn't always play a noticeable role for what you can do with your camera.
I suggest you place the old and new model side by side, and then evaluate the screen quality, pragmatic, with as little bias as possible. Is one not useable and the other great? Or do both screens do the job just fine?
"Why can't some admit that the quality of the back LCD screen matters to some users?"
If the quality of the back screens matters as much as you say, why aren't you castigating Canon? They don't make a single camera with a resolution as high as these new Sony screens and yet I didn't see you mention this once in the 83 posts you've made in this thread.
The 5Dmk4 - a current model - which costs 3 grand - only has a 1.6m dot screen. The D90 and the RP - both only 1m dot - less than the eight year old Sony A7 - a camera you once called 'junk'.
The D90 only came out a year and a half ago and unlike any of the Sony cameras is not a mirrorless, so lacks the second hi-res LCD in the viewfinder to check critical focus - ditto the 5D - you're stuck with the low res rear screen.
Yet I don't see you admonishing Canon for this.
You said Sony was 'shafting' its users - you must think Canon is too, then?
" We don’t yet have an on-sale date for the new model." That's per Sony.
So Canon does have time to respond and Nobody as of yet has the higher res LCDs. Of course, one could go further and talk about the touch functionality of each maker's screen compared to the other. If you really want to dig deeper into who's really getting shafted.
We still have the FAKE news from posters to as why the changes. We only know what Sony has stated thus far.
Sony A7R3. Almost 4 years ago the camera that made sure that the future of photography is mirrorless! The camera that made me realize that my Nikon D800 was not really as good as I thought and that Nikons legendary gold lenses are no longer outstanding! Nikon has now released their second attempt to match this Sony A7R3, but they are still not quite there yet! Now after almost 4 years Sony decides to give my favourite camera a rear screen update? I do not need I it but all I can say is: Thank you Sony!
Z7ii: better LCD, better sealing, better IBIS, better ergonomics, better video specs, better user interface, more PDAF points and coverage, better dynamic range at lower iso......the only thing A7riii wins out spec wise is battery life.
Not quite there in comparison with A7r3 you said? Can we have more fact-based discussion instead of misinformation....sometimes I am thinking whether people are paid to spread such obviously wrong information....
Nikon Z7II: Conclusion: 89 % SILVER ...But it's only really its slightly lower price that makes it stand out from a very competitive group. Thoroughly likable.
Sony A7R3: Conclusion: 90% GOLD .... it's a camera equally at home capturing fast action one moment, and expansive landscapes the next.
But the Nikon has one really good thing going and you can guess what, it is made by Sony!
It is quite astounding that how fan-boy-ism could erode a person's ability to make logical argument. After you find out that spec wise your 'A7r3 is better than Z7ii' argument is completely false, instead of acknowledge that you decided to raise another even more invalid point as defense?
@evaeva0705: This website is called DPR. I copied their final conclusions. This is how they rate these cameras. I was not aware that their conclusion is not valid on their own website. You should go and straighten out DPR!
Firstly, you ignore all the objective facts about Z7ii has better specs and refuse to explain why, this is an act of ignorance. Secondly, you can't copy and past conclusive statement made in different context and stitch them together, this is an act of deception. DPR have clearly stated that the scoring of a camera is relative to cameras released at the same time frame. In other words, you can't say a7rii is as objectively as good as a7riii just because they got the same DPR score. I thought this is obvious, but here again we can see how brand loyalty makes people fail to reason.
So no, it is your own conclusion that is not valid. It has nothing to do with DPR. Don't try to allocate this responsibility to others.
@whitelens: I agree with @evaeva0705: DPR clearly states that the ratings are relative to the time frame. You cannot compare the numerical scores for different cameras released in different times. That is highly misleading.
Otherwise you end up with a camera released 10 years ago having a higher score than one released this year, simply because in its time it was higher ranked relative to the competition.
OK you guys, since you claim I can not compare the Nikon Z7II to the Sony A7R3 since they are from different times, lets use the Sony A7R4, which is only one year older than the Nikon. Unfortunately that makes your Nikon look even further behind!
@Confusedabit: Why so bitter? You might have noticed that even Canon's R5 received 91% GOLD AWARD and that in spite of serious overheating! As you can see it is possible even for non Sony cameras to earn the highest reward! Nikon just has to stop living in the past and start taking mirrorless serious. Very serious!
SONY explained the reasons for upgrade, and this is not the parts shortage: "We have updated the Alpha 7R III and Alpha 7R IV in response to customer needs, as we always strive to provide the best technology." Sounds strange. First, if the intent was a noticeable camera improvement, why not associate it with changed camera names? Second, how come the same screen is good enough for their just released top of the line a1? My guess is, they sacrificed the cost a little bit to bring the camera specs up to better compete with r5, and may upgrade the a1 screen as well when r1 or z9 arrives.
But the trend is not right IMHO - if this upgrade was not forced by part shortages, why create a mess for both sellers and buyers by keeping the camera name the same? I hope this upgrade will be allowed for existing camera users for a reasonable fee through SONY service centers.
@ Vladyslav Kosulin: Don't take what you read too literally. There is a translate process in action, and everything written is interpreted by the readers. Sony is not just one person and one brain, so the answer would likely depend on who was asked. There might well be other plausible reasons for this upgrade.
Fact is, if you buy one of these cameras now, you will get some more screen resolution. Nothing to make much fuzz about.
My guess is that many amateur photographers are more picky about specs than professionals, who are result and content orientated. So upgrading the screens according to the requirements for this segment of cameras makes sense from a sales and customer satisfaction perspective.
@Magnar W, Sony: "The current models will still be available to purchase, in line with retail stock. We don’t yet have an on-sale date for the new model." My point is, we can only imagine the mess in retail, especially online, when these upgraded models hit the shelves, especially if they have the same price tag (and it looks they do, at least MSRP). If SONY made a minor visible name change (not just the ILCE), this would prevent many possible PoS issues, such as customers angry that the camera they bought has screen not as good as in specs they saw online before the purchase, customers returning cameras next day, retailers with stock of these older models, new or open box, etc.
Regarding Pros - you are right, of course. I know folks who continue to make all their money with their 5d2 and 5d3, and they do not need anything better yet.
@ Vladyslav Kosulin: How many would care if they get the old or the new screen? A few readers on photography forums, but not those screaming loudest, who use other camera brands.
This is just like other "issues" that are blown out of proportions for a few days or weeks, and after that almost nobody care.
@Magnar W, I do not know how many. But I know that I hate SONY screens (one of two main reasons why I stay away from Alpha, another being thier grip). Any improvement in this area is very welcome. All I am saying, SONY could make this improvement completely trouble free.
The point that Vladyslav is making is that the way Sony is not changing the name makes it more confusing to customers and retailers. That is undoubtedly true.
Believe it or not, not everything Sony does is perfection.
@Magnar W: in the world of business, unexpected often equals confusion.
And yes this is confusing for all of the reasons already stated. I've known people who work managing inventory at retail, and this would be a confusing issue. It would not be insurmountable, but it would be a pain.
Sony issued a different model number, but they should also update the formal name. This is esp true since they chose to update 2 older models instead of the newer ones.
Now this seems to be Exactly what I have been waiting for considering my Birding photography. The Tamron 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD Lens for Sony E was not long enough nor was I impressed with the images. At the very least, I would have the distance part covered Tamron 150-500mm f/5-6.7 FE lens! Plus it seems to be stabilized, unlike the other. Seems to be good news for Sony users that love birding but don't won't to spend a fortune. Tamron prices should be lower.
Well I say shame on Sony for taking this long to begin addressing these two issues that Most Sony Users have noted for a long time now. Poorly implemented menus system and cheap LCD panels which most Sony Users can agree on the changes are long overdue.
Shame on some posters for attempting to push their shooting preferences onto others. Clearly, everyone isn't the same. One shooting method doesn't necessarily make you better than someone else.
Shame on those posters that attempt to make that case and or try and keep you the Camera owners silent. It all starts with one voice. Then two, then,.......maybe changes are made. Same for different forums. So yeah, what you say here and elsewhere matters. The same goes for Nikon, Canon, Panasonic and all the other Camera Brands when they have missteps. Your voice matters here and elsewhere. Don't let others try and manipulate your thoughts. Say what you feel. That's America. Elsewhere go to China and or Russia. Where they will control....
Who have tried to mute others here? Except for a few noisy "visitors"?
That people don't agree with you, doesn't mean that they try to silence you! Or manipulate you!
Different opinions are highly welcome, and divergent arguments are the ground elements of any good discussion. Even heated discussions can be enligthening and helpful.
Spoken like an American. THIS is not America. This is a Japanese camera made for a global market. America don’t make cameras. None. The only users on here don’t seem to much care. The non-users are the ones stamping that users need answers.
I’ll wait for you to reply to yourself, hopefully from your actual other account this time. Don’t want to make that silly mistake again do you?
@BackToNature1 This is getting ridiculous. Shame in Sony?? Your post is laughable.
It's a camera we are talking about. If you don't like what Sony are making or are unsatisfied with their strategy then don't buy their cameras or lenses.
Two cameras have silently got a screen with some more pixels, and some react like the camera maker was fooling them instead of being happy on behalf of the new buyers. Can't those accept that others get something that they don't get themselves? Or was it just bashing, covered up as a "critical" voice?
Some can't accept that others are pleased with their cameras, or that personal skills and knowledge is the limiting factor for most kinds of photography, except for some specialized work. Those are confusing being critical with being angry. If there is an issue with a camera, just bring this to the camera maker (I can tell: this works). Shouting loudly on a forum does not help.
When looking at professional critics in any field, this is about collecting reliable information, doing anaylsis, picking a perspective for what is critisized, and then arguing from facts. The vast majority of professional critics are positive. Critisism without arguments, empty claims, is not worth listening to.
The VAST majority of criticism in this article has come from a small number of users that aren’t Sony users, have not bought either of these cameras and have no intention of buying either of these updates. Most actual users have been somewhat positive of the move or are completely nonplused. There are a small number of users who are wondering why these new screens have not been used in the latest models that have only recently been announced, which is a fair question, but certainly probably has some reasoning behind it.
@ Elisam: Agree. Unlike professional critics, which are informative, enlightening and helpful, the agenda of these visitors seems to be creating noise to pollute any discussion except for what they like or use themselves.
Nothing wrong with wondering about or questioning specifications for different camera models, though. Or discussing how you can get the most out of your gear and work around issues and lacking features. That's what a gear forum should be about, I would say.
"There are a small number of users who are wondering why these new screens have not been used in the latest models that have only recently been announced, which is a fair question, but certainly probably has some reasoning behind it."
So why doesn't Sony give us the reasoning? They have been asked. DPR sent them a request for more information. Someone on another forum who is an a1 owner, asked Sony Professional Services, and was told they were not allowed to comment on it. Why?
When a company like Sony does something, people notice. That's a good sign for Sony of their size and importance. But that also means that people naturally will ask why. If Sony doesn't explain then that invites others to fill the vacuum with speculation.
I do find it to be a fascinating mystery and business case study.
@Magnar W: this is not a small change. What you speak of are internal tweaks that are invisible to the consumer. And they do not result in a new internal model number.
This involves changing out one of the main ways that users interact with their camera, and one that is very visible.
This also involves a component that Sony has been frequently criticized for, and so it is even more notable.
We also do not know yet if pricing will change. Those type of changes you speak of do not result in a price change. So if Sony changes the price then your theory is shattered.
@ Thoughts R Us: Tweaks like this is common. Sony even added an "a" so that their customers can be aware of this change. Still, this is a minor adjustment, since the new screen does not affect image quality or camera performance as a total. You just get some more resolution on a screen that already allowed you to do super duper ultra extreme precise manual focus.
You simply try to construct an issue or a problem here, I would say.
@Magnar W, come on you’re completely over exaggerating the kind of ‘tweaks’ done to hardware throughout its lifecycle.
I’m going on record to say the trolling of this change is embarrassing, it’s being fuelled by the anti Sony crowd but no need to lower yourself to their level by making these unrealistic claims... no company upgrades their screens like this mid cycle. I work with professional grade android supply chain devices and something this significant would be a whole new model.
And if as you say ‘tweaks like this are common’, why wouldn’t it be added to the A1, being such a minor adjustment?
@Thoughts R Us Sony don't care about you, your spin and false claims and negative comments and neither do we that use Sony.
All you write here is unwanted Noise, and the only thing you achieve with your comments are to ridicule yourself. So sad Try.....
Only Sony know why they exchanged the screen and updated the USB connection. I really don't care why they did it. I am just happy with my old Alpha camera and on behalf of the new owners of an A7RIII or RIV that they get this update.
@Magnar W I don’t care either way as a non Sony user, I’m just pointing out that what you say is flawed. Whilst your comments are a clear attempt at countering the negativity this change is receiving, it’s also coming across as negative on your part for underplaying the size of the change. The words minor and tweaks are the complete opposite of what they have done here.
In reality both resolutions are more than enough for people to accurately use the display but let’s not underplay it out of fondness for your brand.
@ Woz D Boss: We simply value this improvement differently, no matter if you are a Sony user or not. And no, I don't agree that this is a major issue.
Simply use your calculator to find how much the difference means for the area that the camera screen covers, and then relate the number of dots to how fine detail the eye can separate at the actual viewing distance. That's the argument I prefer to relate to when discussing how noticeable the change is. This would be the same for any camera brand.
I was talking from an engineering/design perspective, upgrading the physical screen is not a small change that is typically done to a product mid life cycle, that you are referring to as a ‘tweak’
@ Woz D Boss: Sony made the changes, that's a fact, but they did not make any fuzz about it. At least they added an "a" to differ these new cameras from earlier production units. Fair, or what?
The word "tweak" is yours. Not what I said.
How troublesome is it for you that Sony made these changes for two very popular and attractive cameras, so that they probably can have a longer production cyclus?
You literally say the word ‘tweaks’ in your comment above Magnar, are you going to split hairs over me not including the letter s on the end? Because that’s going down the realms of silly if so.
And I already said I have no issue with them doing it, it’s a good update and more companies should do it, I’m just telling you not to sugarcoat it as some minor fix that happens all the time to electronic items mid life cycle.
Where we can find the link for this update? Also, when sony going to provide the update for closing the shutter for A7RiV when it is off (changing lenses) similar to A9i & ii.
Great feature on paper but the shutter closing feature only works in manual shutter mode so as I use electronic shutter most of the time on the A1 going into the menu to switch first before I change the Lens and then switch back is a bit of a slow down.
I've three Minolta (sony, I've put stickers over the brand out of embarrassment) a7r4 cameras I got grey from Hong Kong which don't have the Sony logo at the bottom of the LCD, obviously I like that, but anyone have an opinion on why my imported a7r4 cameras don't have it, I'm wondering if I already have the upgraded screen..
My Sony A1 and 7S3 have no Sony logo on the LCD, makes sense not to have on the S3 when the screen is flipped out upside down. Last Sony with the logo on the screen was the ZV1.
You actually have to look closely.are you even aware sony bought minolta out and minolta styling and dna still run through the cameras? I prefer to highlight the distant heritage over connections to playstations and dodgy hifi...
Mikeran that's easy to answer, its that much as I can't stand the Sony corporation, everything currently churned out by Canikon seems so much worse at the moment
Will I upgrade if Nikon updated my Z6 with new LCD? Umm, Nikon added 2 processors, two card slots, latest USB-C and and did not raise initial price for Z6II. But still Z6 is so good that I am happy with the original model. Still, thats what I call upgrade.
Bahaha Z6 II - one of the worst ‘upgrades’ in camera history and you want to spout about it here as if it was remotely relevant. Go play with your toy camera made by your favourite outmoded company with no clue about photography.
You’ve got a right to be p!ssed that Nikon gimped your camera to bring out a MkII version to try and force you to upgrade. But of course, you think it’s brilliant. Funny that.
Oh yeah, greatest upgrade in history. I know TRU thought the best upgrade ever was the M50 MkII, but Stonejack dropped the Z6 II and TRU wet himself.
Both are still stomping about Sony not explaining to them why they would do free upgrades to older camera models and not instead follow Nikon and Canon into weak sauce ‘MkII’ cameras that are virtually the same. Classic.
Interesting. Not so long ago these forums were abuzz with the opinion that a single card slot rendered a camera virtually useless. Nikon upgrade to dual card slots with the Z6MkII and its not seen as a worthy upgrade? But then again, the dual card slot issue is so 2020.
Processor (which has made little difference) and second card are the only real changes to this MkII camera. If Sony released an upgrade like that the salivating masses of trolls that have gone Gaga over the Z6 II would be decrying the end of Sony. It’s always the way. Weak updates are weak updates. The A6400/6600 are weak updates, too.
Stonejack is a trolls troll. With ridiculous double standards. I was confident he would have said something negative when Sony updated the A9 to A9II. His comment didn’t disappoint.
To refresh, Sony upgraded the A9 with a new processor, improved AF, 10FPS mechanical shutter, anti-flicker, bigger grip, improved weather sealing, Dual UHS-II slots, USB3, 5GHz WiFi, high frequency flicker reduction. And for the same prices as the previous A9.
And when did my account start? Perhaps it’s a vernacular particular to a certain location that you’re not that familiar with?
Oh and by the way, I don’t hate Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Panasonic, Olympus, Pentax, Ricoh, Fujifilm, Leica or Sony. I use and have happily used cameras from all of them. I won’t list every camera that I’ve ever owned, but I’ll list out my most recent of each brand above: M6 II, Df, Fp, S1R, E-M1X, K30, GR, X-T3, M 246, A7C.
I’m not a Sonyphant. I have had quite a few Sony’s, but don’t use them as much these days. I do have an A7C for a particular project, it’s not my favourite camera, but it’s also a pretty good camera. As they are all are these days.
Sure, in some articles about Sony where there is BS being spread. I hate BS. I don’t hate cameras or brands.
Do you read some of this stuff that gets posted? 99.9% of the time what I’m responding to doesn’t deserve courtesy. BTW I posted a fairly non-inflammatory reasoned set of possible reasons why this may have happened in the way it has and the responses were toxic at best. Not one person could actually refute any of it, just toxic bile. These kinds of responses get condescending responses.
Some of these also come from experience with certain users. Stonejack for example and Backtonature. TRU doesn’t go toxic, he just repeats things like a robot to keep his comments at the top. He will do so until commenting on a page has died out.
I’m not going to try and convince anyone that resolution in a rear screen isn’t a good thing. I’ve shot plenty of cameras with 2.1m dots and 1m dots and everything in between (and much less). The difference between the screen on my M6 IIs and my 90Ds is stark.
I DO think there could be some engineering reasons why Sony haven’t had better screens before. 1.44m and 2.1m aren’t miles apart, but the difference is definitely there. However I don’t believe there are any cameras with screens that would suit the A7/A9/A1 cameras in terms of size and aspect ratio that are higher resolution than 1.44m dots. It seems to me that Sony have been waiting for a better screen to become available and are now that it is are implementing it in an initially limited way. I suspect these will become commonplace in Sony cameras in time.
I do also note that companies like Fujifilm also opt for a lower resolution LCD on their performance oriented X-T3 and X-T4 cameras vs their X-Pro3 for example. Now I don’t think anyone is accusing Fujifilm of being incompetent.
Every engineering choice is a compromise. There is a reason why all modern cameras aren’t ~50MP for example. People seem to understand the compromises there, but somehow that doesn’t apply to LCD screens?
As such I think it makes sense to add such a screen to their resolution oriented cameras, maybe at least initially. There may be little to no difference (now that these particular panels are available, I know nothing about their performance), but it may not yet be feasible for them to roll these displays out catalog wide.
I’m just speculating of course. But so are the doomsayers, but with far less logic behind what they have asserted.
I guess if this makes those Sony cameras more competitive with the likes of the Nikon Z7 II and Panasonic S5, then so be it. It might be a very smart marketing move.
Given Sony's secrecy on the price, it will be interesting to see if Sony charges more for this upgraded version. I think there is a good chance that they will; Sony has been moving their pricing upwards across the board.
Sony is trying out the Leica strategy, and it's not necessarily a bad one from a business perspective. Sell less but make more profit. And enough of the Sony user base appears willing to pay.
"it will be interesting to see if Sony charges more for this upgraded version. I think there is a good chance that they will; Sony has been moving their pricing upwards across the board."
I speculate it will have the same RRP since Sony is still calling it α7R III/IV
There’s no secrecy. Just TRU trying to cause doubt over a nothing situation. How many posts now TRU? Still have nothing new to add? Just keeping your comments at the top?
@Elisam: by definition there is secrecy about the price. It has not been revealed.
"Sony’s updated product pages don’t show whether or not the price has changed and, as of publication, Sony’s site isn’t linking out to any retailers with the new models in stock. "
So yes, no one knows the price yet of these updated models. Given Sony's tendency to raise prices, and the fact that they rarely give you anything improved for free (they are not a charity), there is a chance that they raise the price.
@Elisam: some reasons why this is a botched rollout by Sony:
1) It leaves customers with questions...customers who may want to purchase one of these two models, and customers who may want to purchase other newer models wondering if they too will get the screen upgrade.
2) It angers some of the customers who have bought the very recently released a1 and FX3.
3) Ordinarily this new higher quality screen should have been a cause for Sony to celebrate and promote, like they did with their new menu system. It's a clear upgrade and answers some of the criticism of Sony. But it seems like now they just kind of want to hide it, maybe because of points 1 and 2.
@zxaar: I never said that Sony was evil...only that they botched this rollout of this new version of their products.
This is demonstrated in part by what you noted: that they put this new model out and don't let customers know price or availability, which is not smart business.
But I don't think they are "evil"...I think they have made some wrong decisions here. All of this could be cleared up if Sony would be more transparent on this.
BTW you can disagree with someone without resorting to personal insults.
@zxaar: Do you mean that "so the prices not known at this point is a known issue then?"
BTW, insulting someone's idea or "way of thinking" *is* insulting the person. If I did that with my wife or anyone at work they would consider it a personal insult. Most people would.
A manufacturer upgrades the hardware in an existing camera. Yet this comments section descends into a vicious argument between, it seems, two warring factions - Sony users and, for want of a better word, Sony non-users.
It's an unusual move for many reasons articulated in this discussion. But Sony's silence allows for this information vacuum and thus it is a fascinating mystery as to why Sony did this.
Because if they made a press release everyone would say what a pitiful update! Their other new cameras must be delayed. They must be losing share so they had to update SOMETHING. Etc. etc.
And let’s not forget “no one should buy Sony cameras now because maybe they will update other camera screens later”. (That one was basically yours TRU)
Thoughts R Us: It's only "unusual" and "fascinating" to you because you hate Sony so much. If your favorite company Canon had done the same thing (and I bet they have), you would be praising them, saying how wonderful it is that Canon loves their customers so much that they are upgrading their older models to make them even more happy !
@MikeRan: Sony should be transparent with their customers and not worry about what others would say in forums like these. That is not an adequate reason.
As it is, people are left to wonder and yes, some still are going to think that they should wait to buy on hopes of an updated screen. That's poor customer relations.
Level with your customers. Let them know why and make their decisions. Because now it looks like Sony has something to hide; that they made a poor decision.
Like canon was transparent about the limitations of the 8k and 4k120 modes on the R5 in the months before its release? Come on man. Your double standards are hilarious.
This is a rolling manufacturing change likely due to component issues. And it changes the product spec so they have to disclose via a new product specification sheet.
You deny it but this is the most likely and quite plausible explanation for anyone who knows how the electronics industry works.
TRU making good on his job to keep saying the same thing to make sure their comments are all over the first page of comments. A user with something to say will say it and move on. TRU has an agenda. A paid agenda.
@MikeRan: So much "whataboutism." A very defensive look.
So if this is a component shortage problem...a shortage of the lower quality LCD panels...then that begs the question: will this eventually force Sony to put the higher quality LCD's in other models, most notably their newer a1, FX3, etc?
That's the info that some customers would like to know. And certainly anyone looking to buy an a7R4 and a7R3 would like to know when these updated versions will ship, and will they cost any more?
"This is a rolling manufacturing change likely due to component issues. And it changes the product spec so they have to disclose via a new product specification sheet."
Typically rolling manufacturing changes are invisible to the customer and do not impact specs.
This change is very visible impacting one of the two main ways that a user interacts with their camera (LCD screen plus EVF). And it comes in the context of Sony being criticized for being behind the curve with their LCD screens and so it is even more notable.
Pricing will be interesting. Typically a "rolling manufacturing change" does not increase the price either.
“ It's an unusual move for many reasons articulated in this discussion”
It’s not an unusual move. As mentioned elsewhere in this discussion it’s quite a common thing. The only ones trying to spin this as a conspiracy is you and your fellow astroturfers.
@Thoughts R Us Your comments are hilarious 😂😂. But it's actually a little sad that you are wasting your life on stupid comments under every Sony news article.
It’s really simple. It’s well known that it is pretty well pointless to have plants that promote a particular brand. It is obvious and not effective. They can use much more effective marketing to promote a product. But like political campaigns, it is much much more effective to have these kinds of voices that are intended to create distrust and ‘smear’ a person / brand. TRUs job is to smear Sony. This is utterly obvious if you’ve seen his posts. No, it has nothing to do with all these brands getting together. Again they aren’t trying to promote one brand. They are trying to smear one brand seen as the competition. Politics work the same, they don’t waste their efforts on every political party / candidate. If you look at the majority of TRUs posts, even on products not related to Sony, he manages to bring up Sony and use it as an opportunity to smear them. His behaviour is extremely obvious. Unlike many other dedicated fans who just dislike Sony, his agenda is much worse.
Additionally by seeming more impartial makes him look more credible. Which again is the point.
I’m a big fan of all the camera brands, but I hate BS. Unfortunately there seems to be the most around Sony... but this is largely through users like TRU. I wouldn’t feel the need to post here at all if users like TRU didn’t exist. Most of the comments here are fairly ambiguous. This is a pretty non issue. But he’s spent considerable amount of effort to try and spin this into some huge conspiracy. He holds around 10% of all posts on this thread. That’s one in ten comments. For such a small issue about a brand this user doesn’t use... that doesn’t raise any alarm bells for you?
Well I feel I just addressed this in another post replying to you. I don’t have a particular love of Sony. Nor do I go out of my way to smear Nikon or Canon. I have brought up Nikon and Canon, in relation to some of the absolute nonsense arguments brought up in here.
I’m currently tossing up between a Nikon Z, a Fuji GFX or Fp L as my next camera. There is nothing Sony in that list. I have one Sony now, first for a few years. I have more cameras from the brands I supposedly bash than I do Sony.
@Elisam: here is what you wrote when someone mentioned the Nikon Z6II in this very discussion, in a thread above:
"Bahaha Z6 II - one of the worst ‘upgrades’ in camera history and you want to spout about it here as if it was remotely relevant. Go play with your toy camera made by your favourite outmoded company with no clue about photography."
That doesn't sound consistent with your considering buying a Nikon Z...
Those two things aren’t mutually exclusive. The Z6 II is a very good camera. The Z6 was a very good camera. The update between the two was not an amazing update as the some have suggested. It brought in much asked for features that many believed should have been in the original. In many ways it was one of those updates that reads as being pre-planned. At least they did do the update, so the Z6 II is better than before, but not by a whole lot and not by the leaps and bounds this Nikon troll makes out.
Additionally, what makes you assume that I’m looking at one of the ‘updated’ cameras?
Lastly, parts of the update that weren’t addressed are one of the reasons I’m also looking at NOT buying a Nikon.
Unlike you, I’m actually considering these products and my reservations are made around the corners cut. You aren’t looking at any of these products.
Considering the back lcd is one of the weakest points of the entire design, yes I would definitely try to get it swapped out for the new version if at all possible.
Were you fascinated when canon overhyped an 8K camera months in advance of its announcement and failed to deliver a camera that can record more than 20 minutes without keeping all the doors open and powering from external sources? Yeah. Didn’t think so.
You are fascinated because you spend so much time trying to analyze every move Sony makes and you can’t seem to figure this one out.
Yes this is fascinating to me...to each their own, right?
It is a business mystery, at a time of uncertainty in the world thanks to COVID, with all sorts of supply issues, etc. It involves a major company with deep resources. So yes, to me this is fascinating. If not to you, then fine.
Haha. Whataboutism is your MO whenever there’s a negative view of any canon story.
You are a troll through and through.
By the way I picked up my A1 today and it’s as good as all the reviews say it is. And I highly doubt any stills photographers who have looked through the EVF are at all concerned about the LCD resolution.
We still don’t know what you shoot with. You never say... fascinating.
@Stonejack - for someone who incessantly moans about ‘Sony trolls’ supposedly trolling Nikon articles, you sure spend a lot of time trolling Sony ones.
@MikeRan: You wrote " And I highly doubt any stills photographers who have looked through the EVF are at all concerned about the LCD resolution."
Please do not assume all photographers are like you. You know very well that there are photographers out there who have very good reasons for using that back LCD screen.
Also, if the LCD resolution doesn't matter, then why did Sony upgrade it on these two models? Either it matters or it doesn't.
@MikeRan: Sony could clear this up with a simple statement. They deserve all of the speculation they are getting.
Also, even if a supply issue, why doesn't Sony tout the new improved screens on these models? Usually they are the king of marketing. Why so silent and hushed about it? They aren't doing this out of charity towards their customers.
And the last mysterious piece: why no price or release date?
I explained my theory on all the above. You have seen my comments before. . You seem to have read all the comments. You just choose to ignore them. or as usual, dismiss them because they don't fit your narrative. You have 60 comments on this article. (No I didn't count. Just scanned through your history and there are 3 solid pages of comments...) 10% of the comments on this article ARE YOURS! Does that make you proud? And you wonder why some people think you get paid to badmouth Sony.
And all this talk about mystery.... The most mysterious piece is what gear you shoot with. To be honest, you have avoided this question for years. I don't even think you own an ILC.. and if you told me what you shoot with I don't think I would believe you. (no matter what you said.)
@MikeRan: I don't respond to personal attacks for a reason...it gets us nowhere. Personal attacks are not offered in good faith...even you said you wouldn't believe me if I answered your question.
But personal attacks are what people resort to when they are losing the debate...a common rule of debate and rhetoric. So in a way you are paying me a compliment!
All new sensors for lcd's are going to the auto manufacturers who are paying a premium for low end units...it pays for Sony to supply them. World wide chip problems.
Impressive how people can spin an update on existing models so negatively, most brands never update their hardware on existing products but wait till the next release... how people can complain about this is impressive... I guess for allot the glass is really half empty.
If Sony is so proud of this update, why their silence? Why not put a bit of marketing behind it? Why not respond when asked about it?
There was a Sony owner of an a1 on another forum and he asked Sony Professional Services about this and was told by the rep that they were not allowed to comment. Why?
We all know why this raises questions...it's been litigated over and over again on this discussion. Everything is in context.
Until we see any pricing, I have yet to see any on the Sony site for these two updates, pricing that is, bit of a stretch to say what degree and or spin anything is.
I don't see how Sony is any different on updates and pricing as opposed to anyone else. So it's really not about glass half empty or not, but Your particular SPIN. You are complaining in your post, so really you aren't any different. Funny how some folks never get that.
It’s not a free lunch to launch a marketing campaign, that’s why companies always make a cost benefit analysis beforehand, in this case a marketing campaign should result in a noticeable higher sales number so Sony can get their investment in marketing back, I honestly don’t believe an updated screen is a big enough update for that to be worthwhile, it’s mostly a nice to have not a need to have
nonsense, I ask people to stop moaning and complaining over something that there is nothing to complain about. seriously how can anyone spin this negativily.
The pricing you mentioned is speculative at the very best, but we all know why you have a need to comment, as your hate for Sony us well documented on this site, you are really the trolls of trolls.
@Malling: So why didn't Sony put out at least a press release about this change? Why not an article on their Alpha Universe website? Why keep the general name the same and only change the model number in small print? Why no pricing or availability?
If the updated screen is not "a big enough update for that to be that worthwhile" then why do it in the first place?
There are no good answers if you assume that is just business as usual. That's why some do these mental gymnastics to try to defend Sony. But we are missing some key information that Sony has not yet released.
@Malling It's not Sony who the real Problem, folks like you are. You and your TRIBE and I ain't talking about Native Americans. You continually 24/7 complain about what others post that doesn't fit your Narrative. Period. I have no brand loyalty. You however are suspect to say the least to what you really are.
It’s an hardware upgrade not a new product, you just don’t spend you time or resources on such thing with a hardware upgrade. It’s not gonna create allot of new customers.
there can literally be tons of reasons why Sony decided to upgrade/change it. All from the screen being discontinued, increased in production cost etc. etc. we don’t really know why and I guess we never will.
@Malling: "there can literally be tons of reasons why Sony decided to upgrade/change it." So why doesn't Sony divulge the real reason?
As to one of your theories...an increase in production cost (of presumably the lower quality screen)...that doesn't fly because the better quality screen would cost more.
In fact, it's yet to be seen if this revised version will sell for more. Sony hasn't even given price or availability.
“ As to one of your theories...an increase in production cost (of presumably the lower quality screen)...that doesn't fly because the better quality screen would cost more.”
If you knew anything about anything you would know this isn’t true. But you don’t.
What was angry about what I posted? Posting facts isn’t anger. Don’t try this angle because you’re losing here. Not that you had anything at all to stand on.
But you’ll keep posting the same BS under any poster that comes in and hasn’t already read your 65 posts in this one article.
The basic truth is that Sony has, for whatever reasons, updated the LCD screen on cheaper models while maintaining a lesser screen on the most expensive models. I don’t recall any such move in the history of digital cameras.
How many Sony a1s are being sold each month compared to how many a7R III, a7R IV? I wonder where folks are getting this info of an LCD panel shortage. I wonder why anyone would defend Sony putting an upgraded LCD in lower models but not their latest which costs almost double.
How many extra posts are made by reasoned folks that they otherwise would not have made if not for the usual suspects. This should be an thread with maybe 100 post, 200 max but if you have to defend yourself against pointless arguments, that Triples or more.
Still waiting for any real LINK to Sony as to why. Otherwise, it's just pure speculation as to why on the LCDS. Which apparently, only the usual suspect are allowed to do, Not You.
I think you are overreacting. no one here knows why Sony did this. People are are just joking that Sony couldn't get any more of those old low res screens to make new cameras, so they upgraded them to higher quality ones. It is probably not true, but just minor banter against Sony.
That's fun.. probably they got in shortage of this old panels because they had to put all of them in the newly released A1!!!! As a Sony A1 buyer (I prepaid one months ago but not yet received) I'm very surprised and I really don't know what to think.. I always criticized the choice of putting such a low-res LCD panel on a top of the line camera also because I'm shooting a lot from the LCD (because I enjoy the two eyes view I get). But now I really hope they will manage to put new and higher-res LCD also in the A1 bodies or I'll start to think that Sony is making fun of their top-spending customers!! By the way I will ask to my local shop to keep my order on waiting list leaving first cameras to other customers and I will wait to see what happen..
Prepare yourself. Zealots are coming to educate you that...
- You are not using the camera properly and should only use the amazing EVF. - You are too amateur and care too much about specs. - You should know what you are buying when putting an order, and should feel completely satisfied about each and every aspect of the product. - Human eye can't tell a difference between 1.44 and 2.36m LCD - The lower quality LCD on A1 is actually a deliberately considered engineering decision because adding LCD resolution would cast devastating effect on battery life / processing power / refresh rate / heat management.....etc.
Forget about the money you have spent on Sony. If you don't change your mind soon then get ready for being called a mindless Sony basher.
The noise is due to the sound of silence from Sony. If Sony would explain themselves here it would answer a lot of questions. They owe that to their customers.
@Elisam: well technically Sony doesn't owe their customers anything except warrantee service...but if you want to do the most responsible thing for your customers, you owe them a bit of information about this change.
They have. They’ve said that these cameras get a different LCD with different specs. It’s not going to be a surprise. Nobody is not getting what they payed for.
Where is your demand that Canon tell us what the next 70 models of EOS M are going to be and when? Surely the EF-M users NEED to hear from Canon that their system is going to continue? Some users might think that they are cancelling the system with no releases?
And what about them cancelling popular EF lenses? Don’t you demand that Canon explain exactly what is going on?
I’d love you to link to those posts doing so champ.
All the noise is being made by the usual suspects while all the reasonable posts are being made by everyone else including MOST Sony users. So the only real question why are those usual suspects attacking everyone on such an basic issue? If you don't care about the LCD you can buy the older version while if you prefer the new one, Sony gives you the option to upgrade.
Yet the usual suspects have cooked up all kind of unproven reason as to why Sony has done this and why you should just use the EVF and do as they Tell You to do. Strange indeed.
Hahaha so all the ‘cooked up’ reasons by Sony haters are... reasonable. But reasons ‘cooked up’ by a few ‘Sony fans’ (that’s you’ve decided) are... absurd.
This lack of logic just boggles the mind. Nobody here knows why. We’re all just speculating. It’s mostly paid Sony trolls that are posting a million times over. I personal care very little about the brand or this particular move. I can’t stand the discussion around it.
Everything you are stating on this issue boggles everyone's mind. It's not Sony haters and or Lovers that are the problem. It is YOU that is the problem.
The fact that folks have to waste their time dealing with your endless posts(Group) on this issue is another problem. I don't find you to be funny.
Yes I know you just desperately want to have a nice circle of like-minded little trolls who stand around together and have some ‘quiet contemplation’ about how much you hate Sony and love your Nikon.
This is very simple. Sony is now offering better-quality rear LCD panels on cheaper cameras while offering worse-quality panels on their most expensive cameras. If I had, for instance, just ordered an A1, I would cancel that order, and wait to see what happens.
True, that's exactly the targeted audience for the A1: People cancelling the order of the best sport cam before Summer Olympic Games because of the screen resolution ... hmm ... oh wait! :-D
So basically you want to tell me a BIF-shooter can't make excellent BIF pictures with the A1 and the outstanding bird eye AF because of the "missing" screen resolution ... hhmmm .... oh wait :-D
Ah no. It's normally my attempt to bring something to light that might get lost in an endless thread where it might not be seen. But sure, you go ahead and project your own Bjive. However concerning Elisam, his endless banter was too long and I simply wanted to address that one issue. Posting directly to him would have solved nothing. Posting it to the general group, that could address that issue far better.
"Just more twisted tactics." You must be looking in the mirror.
“ However concerning Elisam, his endless banter was too long and I simply wanted to address that one issue. Posting directly to him would have solved nothing. Posting it to the general group, that could address that issue far better.”
Err what?! What an absolute cop-out. My post is like three under yours. You don’t think other ‘general users’ can read that far down? And what are these ‘general users’ that you need to converse with that needs to exclude the person you are talking about... oh wait... that’s admitting exactly what I said is true, but pretending like it wasn’t.
Because sometimes I am just lazy in that regard. But most times, it because of maybe folks like, just maybe you. I can't keep up with all those whom behave as such. I don't keep a list like some folks apparently do. I don't really care who you are.
I care about Photography, not brands nor bloated egos on some posting board. Also, I have ZERO reason to show folks that have proven that that they are devious, any real respect. So if you or anyone else falls into that camp, that will be the result. I normally quote/name those I respect. Not those whom clearly have an hidden agenda.
So why comment on what they say at all? You’re full of lies. Like posting above under yourself thinking you’re logged in to one of your other accounts to agree with yourself. You’re ridiculous.
A few things to keep in mind before all the mindless bashing. Existing 3.2” 2.1m dot LCDs won’t fit in Sony cameras. They are also 3:2 aspect ratio displays, which would require UI changes and doesn’t match the display properties of their EVFs. This requires more processing overheads and other UI issues switching between EVF and LCD. Yes I’m aware that other brands do this, but it does cause inconsistencies between the two displays.
Furthermore Sony seem to be using resolutions that are equal to common EVFs, 1.44m dots and now 2.36MP dots. This may be influential to the above and for live view read out modes better supporting these resolutions.
Third is that nobody is used THIS screen before. This likely means it was not available before now and may still be in somewhat limited quantities. It may make sense to make these available in lower volume cameras otherwise it may cause supply constraints they don’t want in new models.
Does Sony want their latest A1 constrained because of an LCD panel? Unlikely. These panels are wholly untested, except for resolution NOBODY who is commenting here knows anything about it. There is much more to the properties and usability of an LCD than just its resolution. Brightness is a huge part of it, having larger pixels means more light passing through. Transflectivity is also important. This is not taking into account things like refresh and update rates.
But the specs chasers always think they know best and proudly beat their chest over it. Look what happened with Olympus and the E-M1X. They used a much faster but lower res TFT EVF on their flagship camera for the speed benefits, but every spec chaser claimed it was a disaster. Well that EVF itself is actually excellent, however it almost never takes advantage of it due to lower live view feed resolution. Which would in no way be fixed with a higher resolution panel.
In other words: there can be intelligent, well thought through engineering decisions for such, but your average spec chaser can’t see that. Moar is best, always, for the average specbator.
@Elisam: how do you know that these panels are "wholly untested?"
I would expect that Sony tested these panels rather extensively before putting them into two of their cameras. I would certainly hope so.
And these are LCD panels...not exactly the most cutting edge tech these days. You make it sound as if they dropped in an entirely new image sensor or processor.
Sony put these LCD panels into the cameras for a reason; but they need to explain this rather odd unexpected update. They owe that to their customers.
Why is Sony essentially silent on this? Normally Sony is a king of marketing and would play this up. And of course, what everyone wants to know is why didn't they put these in their new a1 and FX3 models, which would have made the most sense.
“ I would expect that Sony tested these panels rather extensively before putting them into two of their cameras. I would certainly hope so.”
Oh it’s the spindoctor. Of course SONY have tested them. The point is none of the negative detractors here have tested them. Not one commentator on here has tested them. Before we assume they are instantly ‘better’, perhaps someone should test them?
“And these are LCD panels...not exactly the most cutting edge tech these days. You make it sound as if they dropped in an entirely new image sensor or processor.”
Yes, because all we need is the resolution spec. I’ve heard you. We’ve all heard you. Because you literally never stop talking.
“Sony put these LCD panels into the cameras for a reason; but they need to explain this rather odd unexpected update. They owe that to their customers.”
Sorry, but no they don’t. They changed the specs of a product and made it known that it was changed. That’s pretty common. Besides, you aren’t their customer.
“ Why is Sony essentially silent on this? Normally Sony is a king of marketing and would play this up. And of course, what everyone wants to know is why didn't they put these in their new a1 and FX3 models, which would have made the most sense.”
Pretty sure I explained this (or at least provided a plausible explaination, unlike your constant hyperbole) above. Assuming this is a new panel (please point to me another device using it, it may be constrained at this time. As such, at least initially, it may make the most sense to go into slower moving products that have been on the market a little while (but still sell) rather than constraining a whole new product range because of a lack of LCD supplies. How is that not explaining why they haven’t put it in their latest and greatest?
@Elisam: Sony does owe some explanation to their customers as a point of good customer service. If you are going to buy an a7RIV, wouldn't you want to know when this new improved model will hit the market, or if it will cost more?
If you are buying an a1, wouldn't you want to know if this new screen will soon come to that model? Many would. One Sony fan here, @RubberDials, has assured people that this new LCD panel is coming to other models like the a1. If true, then that changes the buying calculus for some.
And it is not normal to change the hardware on existing models that have been out 2 and 4 years. Give me other examples.
To me this is an interesting mystery and business case study. It will be fascinating to see it play out.
@RubberDials: "I did not assure people of anything" Here is what you wrote in an earlier comment: "I'm pretty sure Sony will update the A1 screen as well."
Also you wrote "I would expect the A7SIII, FX3 and A1 to also get updated screens. Why wouldn't they? Sony isn't going to announce it - users need to check."
Now sure, that's your opinion...but you are one of the most vocal promoters of Sony, and so maybe you do know something.
I would say that you are a user and a fan. Certainly you promote and defend Sony every chance you get. You criticize other competing brands. To me that makes you a pretty big fan of Sony.
But these are quibbles over semantics. On to solving the mystery of the updated LCD screens!
Canon M50 II. Canon M200. Canon 200D II. Canon 850D (if memory serves, or it may have been 750D... or 800D... or, well you get the point). Sony RX100Va. There have been countless ‘silent’ upgrades to pretty much anything technology wise. When you buy a Samsung phone you often have no idea which screen, processor, LTE chip, camera or whatever your particular device in your region will ship with. Apple use different brands of SSDs. Same as LCDs. Same as whatever. Sometimes companies bring in a silent update to align hardware or to streamline production or quantities buying through suppliers.
The only not-normal thing about this is all the non-Sony users demanding that Sony come clean ‘for the Sony users’. I haven’t seen a single Sony user stamping their feet in here demanding they know what’s going on.
@Elisam: none of those cameras had any external hardware component quietly upgraded. In fact when Canon did a minor update to the M50 they gave it a new designation, the M50 II, and marketed it as such. That's usually how it's done.
What you talk about are internal components that do not change the nature of the device or its specs. When Samsung might change its internal LTE chip, it doesn't change the fundamentals of the device. What we see here would be akin to Samsung deciding to update the screen on one if its 2 year old models that it still sells at a discount, and in fact making that screen higher quality than the current flagship model....But then saying nothing about it or why, just quietly doing it. That would get a lot of questions.
And there have been quite a few Sony users asking questions on this forum...you just don't want to admit it.
“ none of those cameras had any external hardware component quietly upgraded. In fact when Canon did a minor update to the M50 they gave it a new designation, the M50 II, and marketed it as such. That's usually how it's done.”
Oh brother 🤦🏻♂️ YES and these cameras are now called A7R IIIa and A7R IVa. How is that ANY different? Other than your spin? Those camera were all marked as being actually new cameras, which is WAY worse. But yes, this is an evil Sony plot by evil Sony... because you say it is.
“ What you talk about are internal components that do not change the nature of the device or its specs. When Samsung might change its internal LTE chip, it doesn't change the fundamentals of the device.”
Erm, in different regions a Samsung Swhatever has been known to have different processors, some having completely different numbers of cores etc.
“What we see here would be akin to Samsung deciding to update the screen on one if its 2 year old models that it still sells at a discount, and in fact making that screen higher quality than the current flagship model....But then saying nothing about it or why, just quietly doing it. That would get a lot of questions.”
Bahahaha... so the only way for something to be ‘akin’ to some other situation is for it to be EXACTLY THE SAME? Right. Not much going on in the ol’ intelligence dept is there?
“ But then saying nothing about it or why, just quietly doing it. That would get a lot of questions.”
Oh and by the way, they’ve used completely different camera modules by completely different companies (not the same camera with the same specs manufactured by different companies), completely different sensors and optics. But because (according to you) didn’t fundamentally change the nature of the device, this was a-ok. Yet Sony releasing a small update with a small change, that they are telling customers about... Sony are evil.
First, Sony didn't give the a7R III or a7RIV a different name; it's the same. Check out their website. They only gave it a different internal model number. And without any usual marketing announcement or otherwise. Very quiet about it.
And imagine the field day you would have if they called these new models... they literally can’t win. But I’m sure you have all the answers why the M50 II is completely worthy of the MkII designation 🤦🏻♂️
You backed down pretty quickly over the other examples... so I guess you’ve got nothing to say?
Folks don't have to have an agenda to take either side of the debate of THEIR preference of using either the LCD panel as opposed to the EVF. People who claim otherwise have the agenda. Period. Everybody's different. There is no, well you got to do it this way.
@ BackToNature1: No one here say they will go for the lower resolution option when there is a new model with higher resolution, if the price is the same.
But is there any noticeable differences between these panels for real world work? What can you do with the new version that you could not do with the previous screen?
I mean we can probably shoot the same photos with the A7III EVF (2.3M dot) as with A7SIII EVF (9.44M dot). But which would you rather use? Yes the screen is not as much noticable, but still noticable. And not just that. Newer, higher res displays also tend to be higher quality as well (higher brightness, better contrast and viewing angles). Should just ignore everything that's bad in a Sony camera? Like their hypothetical IBIS?
The Panasonic S5 has 1,840,000 dots. The Nikon Z7 II has 2,100,000 dots. Maybe THAT's why Sony made the decision to upgrade their A7r III and A7r IV bodies with "better" rear screens.
pinnacle of innovations in mirrorless, bravo Sony! It seems like that they have a glut of of inventories of older models which are 1. unsellable 2. make newer models sell bad as well. The pinnacle of innovations in ML made a wise decision: change LCD in older models.
You are a troll. If they had a glut of older inventories why do you think they would be changing their manufacturing to use a new LCD screen? Without a marketing announcement highlighting the change? It makes zero sense.
"According to the update product specifications, both the a7R III (model: ILCE-7RM3A) and a7R IV (model: ILCE-7RM4A) have improved rear LCD panels, up to 2.36 million dots compared to the 1.44 million dots in the original models."
That sounds like a good thing to me for those who are still buying their current "in production" models.
Stuff like this happens all the time in lots of different industries for lots of different reasons. Sorry, I don't understand all the whining.
• A couple of things occur - Sony mirrorless cameras have always had the highest resolution screens - just not on the rear of the camera. If you shoot mirrorless you know that you view your shots in the EVF, not on the back screen - it's shaded from sunlight and has a much greater magnification and resolution - it's akin to using a light box and a loupe. DSLR users don't seem to be aware of this.
• Unless you've got an agenda, there is no issue here. Sony has not 'announced' this update, so they are not seeking to profit from it. It's either an anomaly caused by a parts shortage or they are replacing all their 1.44 mdot screens. If they were replacing the A7rIII/IV screens as some sort of incentive to buyers they would have announced it. Again though, thinking a rear screen is a buying incentive is very much a DSLR user's mindset where the rear screen is all you've got.
There are plenty of situations where one needs to use the back screen vs the EVF to frame a shot.
As for reviewing your shots, again, there are plenty of situations where you would prefer to use the back screen vs hold up the camera to your eye. Let's say you want to view the images with someone else; you need that back LCD.
Often times after shooting at one of my favorite spots, I go to a nearby coffee house and relax and view the images. It would be kind of odd and uncomfortable using the EVF to review images in such a situation.
Either the back LCD screen matters or it doesn't. If it doesn't then why did Sony update the LCD screens on these cameras? If it does then why didn't they put this better quality LCD in their by far most expensive flagship camera, or their FX3? For that matter why not put this in their $4500 a9II?
Hopefully they added the simple Firmware feature to close the shutter when changing optics!!! Always dust on the sensor is really the most annoying experience and time consuming in post production with Sony cameras. Not everybody can or want to invest in the 50mp A1 - only for that simple feature. Please Sony do it!
"explain why Sony offers that feature in A9II and A1 pro models.."
Because it's a marketing point. Why does Canon and Leica offer 20fps in their milcs when the sensor doesn't read out fast enough to make it viable for moving subjects? Because it looks good on the spec sheet and people don't generally know how fast sensors read out.
'Protecting' the sensor with the shutter is like protecting a Ming vase with a Picasso.
Presumably Sony offers it only in the A9II and A1 because they both have carbon shutter blades and are less fragile - but I still don't think it's a good idea.
The feature impresses people like you, (as it obviously has) not the buyers of the A1 or A9II - I can assure you no-one chose either camera because of that feature, which is a gimmick.
You used the word 'fool' not me - a good example of the exaggeration you always apply when paraphrasing someone. Sony is not trying to 'fool' anyone, but the feature - which originated from Canon - is of dubious value in my opinion.
@RubberDials: So you say that Sony put that shutter closure feature in the a1 and a9II as a "marketing point" but then say that "I can assure you no-one chose either camera because of that feature, which is a gimmick."
So by your reasoning it's not much of a marketing point...because it doesn't sell anyone on the camera.
You also call it a "gimmick"...so by your assertion, Sony has put a "gimmick" into their most expensive cameras to sell people. To me that sounds like you are saying that Sony is trying to "fool" its customers by trying to sell them on a "gimmick."
But then you assert that this doesn't sell anyone on the cameras...so I guess by your estimation it's a failed marketing technique...aka what you call a "gimmick."
Either way by your account it's not a good look for Sony.
This is just weird. There has to be some kind of internal supply chain reason or something for this. To re-release old cameras with a better rear screen and not put that same screen in the flagship $6500 body and instead use a lower end one makes so little sense something has to be going on that we're not aware of. Sony had to know they would be a laughing stock and burn a lot of good will with their customers by doing this. So to me the question is why did they? Poor planing, incompetence, some thing forced their hand we dont' know about?
People keep claiming here that sony is selling unsold old models so Sony is just trolling these people by showing that they are still selling these models well.
Some other brands sell "new" products with old sensors and mediocre performance, like medieval tracking AF performance. Sounds like some think this is more fair than selling previous generation models at a lower price (still very good cameras) and cutting edge tech at a higher price, since new technology will make them feel that their previous camera is bad ... well.
When we buy a camera, we know the specs. The camera is what it is. Why can't some accept such a simple fact?
@Magnar W with all due respect, but you are off the point here. 1. Sony's decision to continue selling previous generation models for long times is one thing. It is quite questionable to me from a marketing/business perspective, but if it works for them, fine. Yes, potential buyers can know the specs of the products, no prob.
2. Sony's decision to suddenly and silently equip a current (A7R4) and even a previous gen model (A7R3) with a better rear display while at the same time new models - even more expensive ones - like "flagship" A1, FX3 or A7S III not also with that (still far from state of the art) 1024x768 pixel (2.36 Mdots) display without any communication and information as to why - is extremely strange corporate behaviour, "even by japanese image makers standards".
3. If Sony in the (near) future also puts a better display into any or all of their current models A1, FX3, A7S III, A7 III, and A7C - and sells them at same price as earlier serial numbers - it would be an important spec unknown to potential buyers. Anyone not needing a camera today / ASAP woudl be very smart to hold of buying one of these models today and wait a bit if/what Sony does.
4. This is very different to "waiting" for the next generation model / significant (hardware) update. Bad enough, if you buy a camera today and tomorrow a better successor is launched. But at least mitigated by typically higher price for new model compared to previous one.
@ unoturbo: There might be reasons for Sony's decision that we don't know, like refresh rate, the need of professionals, etc. This might differ from amateur photographer heuristics and biases, which often is focused at specs without looking too much at what these specs mean for real world work.
From one side we have users that provide a well put argumentation in favour of the main point, which is that Sony should update the flagship models as well.
On the opposite side we have users that can't provide a single argument challenging that, yet they disagree. Meaning, they don't want Sony to update flagship cameras with better LCD, bit can't explain why.
there are specs and specs. Better (or in this case "less subpar") rear display or EVFs in digital cameras are a very important spec *for real work*.
Electronic displays are the primary user interface on cameras, smartphones, tablets, notebooks, PC/monitors - all the work we do on and with these tools is 100% dependant on what we see on the display and how well we see it. Considering touch screens, their functionality and implementation/integration into user interface is even more crucial.
It is quite astounding that Sony cameras have been lagging over many years now in this area (rear/touch displays, not EVFs - except A7C). Very hard to understand and even harder to accept from this large electronics company.
I don't mean this a "Sony bashing" - I find their products very advanced and interesting in many aspects.
@ Magnar W I remember you have defended Sony's use of lower quality LCD on high-end body several times in the comment section but you seem to ignore everyone who has pointed out your argument not making sense and keep repeating the same thing. At first you claim it might be due to battery consumption, and someone have pointed out that A7r3a/r4a's battery life is almost the same after the update.
Then you silently removed this point and start claiming professionals might 'need' a lower quality LCD, which is a jaw-dropping and even less realistic argument. Would you say professionals might need a lower battery life or lower dynamic range? It seems like you love Sony so much that whatever they do, you try to persuade yourself that it is a good decision without thinking logically.
@ evaeva0705: I'll rather look at what the tools can do, and what specs mean for real world work, than join the "specs for specs sake" talkers.
Higher fresh rate will need more power, so you can't compare the A1 directly with the A7rIII in this regard. And I don't have to repeat my claims in every tread, or else I am "silently removing this point", or what?
The resolution of the A1 screen is within the limit for resolution of the eye. What more do you need? With such a screen I can even place focus in or out of the focus plane to get aberrations where I want them. Good enough, I would say,
I have never claimed that professionals "need" lower screen resolution. They/we can do excellent work with such a "bad" screen, though. And we can do much professional work with 12 or 24 Mp cameras too, dependent on what we do, of cause.
The logics is that the camera is a tool, and the main point when making a buyer's decision is if the actual camera model fills your needs or not.
@ Magnar W, why you keep throwing out claims that are not better than pure conspiracy?
This is a gear form, people come here because we care about spec. If you are interested in 'real world work', then sorry, every camera released maybe after 2015 have specs sufficient for real world work. So here, what you're doing is just bringing out this 'spec is not relevant to real world work' argument selectively/conveniently in scenarios where the brand you like have specs inferior to the competitors. I did't see you calling people praising A1's 9m EVF "specs for specs sake" talkers, which shows your biased standard clearly.
Also, you keep saying the 1.44m dot LCD has higher refresh rate without any proof. Now you even added "resolution of the A1 screen is within the limit for resolution of the eye", which you also provide no proof. The fact is, many people have reported that they can see the difference between 1.44m and 2.36m.
@ evaeva0705: So you want specs for specs' sake? Ok, but I simply don't share this perspective.
You did not even answer why you need more resolution than what the eye can split. Just accusing me for being a conspiracy theorist for not agreeing with you. This is NOT a factual argument. Well.
If you want to find the resolution angle for the unaided eye, there are plenty of information on the web. Then do your math. Have you tried a search for such info? Very helpful when discussing Mp and file/screen/paper resolution.
Many people report that they see a huge difference between 12 and 24 Mp from relative small prints too, but when doing well controlled and quality-assured blind tests, people can't pick the difference from 100 cm/42 inches wide prints, studied at a close distance. People are pretty easily biased. And what is wrong with trying to look behind this, to look for facts?
Funny that the Nikon users want to bring out ‘specs is specs and specs are important’, when talking about Sony. When people say ‘oh Nikon AF isn’t up to spec’ they always retort: ‘Nikon AF is good enough’. So is good enough not good enough when it’s Sony? Seems so.
@Elisam: when in doubt, bring up a "whataboutism" and try to change the subject.
The issue here is simple: why did Sony issue this seemingly very odd update? And you have to admit it is odd, because when have we seen this sort of hardware update to older models before? Without any real explanation or marketing, either? We don't even know if the new models will sell for the same or more money, or when they will hit the market.
Some customers need this info to make an intelligent buying decision.
We’ve seen it heaps before. It’s only your stamping that is the root of this ‘movement’ to know why. Only your kind will sit around and trump up conspiracies around this kind of non-issue. You would trump up any conspiracy on any choice Sony made about these new LCDs regardless of the outcome. Because that’s your sad, lonely little purpose.
"The resolution of the A1 screen is within the limit for resolution of the eye. What more do you need?"
You know that A1 has an EVF with 9.4M dots, right? Which is 6-7 times more than the 1.4 dots hat you advocate... (not pixels, divide this number by three for equivalent pixels, duh...)
Interesting discussion... I'm sure you will have the last argument here.
@Magnar W All smartphones with full hd screens today offer at least for 4 times better resolution than on Sony LCD, yet your eyes struggle to see the difference... Interesting... Time to get new glasses?
@ il_alexk: Well, once again you need to read you up on basic math: How much larger is a mobile phone screen than the A7rIII and A1 screen? Remember, resolution goes in two directions: with x height.
My glasses are just fine, and my vision is still 20/20 according to my optician.
Secretly beefed up the brittle IBIS mounts? No? Well, certainly they took the opportunity to add lossless compressed RAW considering the price and megapixel count of these top cameras.
Sony product planning meeting sometime last year: Engineer 1: good news...we finally will have higher quality LCD screens...we can build them into new models beginning of 2021. Engineer 2: That's fantastic! We happen to have our new $6500 flagship a1 coming out then, and that would fit that model perfectly. Also after that we have a new cinema cam, the FX3, which is the a7sIII with the EVF removed and a more video centered body. That new screen would fit that model very well too. Exec 1: Well, we weren't quite thinking in that direction. We want to use the new LCD's in a 2 yr old and a 4 yr old model, both of which cost less. Engineer 2: But why use new tech in old models while using old tech in new models? Engineer 1: Won't that confuse some customers and anger others? Exec 1: Don't worry about it...we will do it quietly so we hope no one notices. Engineer 1 and 2: So why do it in the first place??? Exec 1: ...silence...
Why are you wasting everyone's time with this imaginary story pulled straight out of your you know where ???
No need to answer, we already know the reason: Your insane hatred of the Sony corporation, expressed through not hundreds but literally thousands of anti-Sony posts (over 6,000 in just the past year!). You definitely really need help.
Do you even own any cameras or take pictures with them? How do you find the time to do so when you are on here posting thousands of comments 24/7 ?
Since you will claim I'm doing the same thing, here are my stats: Only 377 comments posted since the year 2003. And no, I don't hate any manufacturers. I own modern cameras made by Canon, Panasonic and Sony, along with a collection of older film cameras made by Minolta, Kodak, Polaroid, Bolex, Nizo and others.
@mikegt Everyone is questioning the reasoning behind this decision. Even if you have a well documented history of dislike against Sony, you are still allowed to express your opinions without being declared insane by online gatekeeping forum vigilantes.
Frankly I found your posting not only oddly personal but frankly very irrelevant to the topic and in general.
@thoughts - i like your nicely written (hypothetical) scenario! :-) @Michael Berg - agree 100%
for me it is also impossible to understand why Sony is doing this. But then, i also never understood why they kept making more units of previous generation/s of camera models, rather than just quickly selling off any remaining stock in warehouses and sales channels. Producing more A7R3 in 2021 makes zero sense to me, and putting newer/better rear displays into them makes less than zero sense to me, when at the same time new, high price models only get "same old" displays. really strange.
"Everyone is questioning the reasoning behind this decision."
Could you guys stop talking for everyone here. I for one do not mind their decision.
I even did not mind when canon decided NOT to provide heating solution in R5 and released well done video camera (with proper heating) in 3 to 4 months later.
Some of us do not care what companies do. We see if their product makes sense then we buy it otherwise no cigar.
@unoturbo Another in long line of accounts to do what we are used to here by now.
"Some of us do not care what companies do. We see if their product makes sense then we buy it otherwise no cigar."
well, and many of us are smarter than that. We do observe what (potential) supplier companies of our tools and gear are doing. And we try as best as we can to buy the best possible tools at the best prices.Unless our current cameras were broken or inoperable, we are smart enough right now to wait a little while before buying any of the following Sony camera models: A7R3 or A7R4 to make sure we get one with the better display (and maybe other hidden improvements - eg fixed shutter blades?) or A1 (we might cancel our preorders), A7S3, FX3 - to see whether Sony will also equip those with (somewhat) better displays soon.
And we, the smart buyers of this world - look down a but on all those "who don't care about suppliers' product/system strategies" as not so smart, ignorant consumers or even worse, as blind(ed) brand fans.
If what we're hearing is true about some parts becoming hard to source, Sony may have been forced to use these higher res LCD's due to unavailability of the older ones. As they became harder to source, Sony may have prioritized the supply to their newer models, only to end up with a large stock of new models with old LCD's and production of older models delayed unless alternatives were found. Don't be surprised if the new models receive the upgrade as existing stocks are sold off. So if you're in the market for an A1, but don't need it ASAP, holding off might be a good idea.
"Even if you have a well documented history of dislike against Sony, you are still allowed to express your opinions without being declared insane by online gatekeeping forum vigilantes."
Mikegt did not declare Thoughts R Us insane. He said he had an 'insane hatred' of Sony. Not the same thing at all.
"Even if you have a well documented history of dislike against Sony,"
Lol. Thoughts R Us has made more posts about Sony than any other forum member - including Sony users. I would not describe it as a 'dislike' of Sony - unless I was being ironic.
He has THIRTY posts in this thread alone - far more than anyone else. 14 of those posts reference the A1 and the majority of them make the same point, just at different times of the day.
He has accused Sony of 'shafting' it's users, being 'disloyal', showing 'communication problems', needing to 'explain its actions' and acting unethically.
"Frankly I found your posting not only oddly personal but frankly very irrelevant to the topic and in general."
That's your prerogative. The vast majority of comments in this thread are irrelevant because they are talking about things other than the A7rIV and A7rIII screens.
And rather than play the prig here, why not just be grateful that you don't use a brand that is under constant attack from an army of trolls and astroturfers?
Michael Berg: No, not everyone is questioning the reasoning, just you and a few other anti-Sony trolls.
unoturbo: Sony is pro-consumer this way. Thanks to this policy I was able to buy a 42 megapixel still & 4K video camera (the Sony A7R II) during one of their periodic sales for only $1,298 brand new. I like their policy of keeping the old models in production - it allows them to sell high-spec models like the A7R II at prices no other manufacturer can match. Understandably the other makers are not happy with Sony's way of doing things, but that is competition for you.
cbphoto123: I went back and counted again, it turns out you are correct, it is 6,000 over two years. You are missing the point though that is still a crazy number of comments. If you took the time to read some of them you would know that he has been praising Canon to the heavens and bashing Sony since circa 2015.
I noticed in your recent history that you have been praising TRU's comments. Evidently you & he must be buddies, which explains why you are defending his crazy crusade against the Sony corporation. There is also the distinct and disturbing possibility that you and he are actually the same person...
Download the above picture, and use your preferred image processing software — e.g. Photoshop — to reduce its height to 800 pixels. Crop a 800x600-pixel section from the picture. Now, use your image processing software to upsize the 800x600 picture to a 1080x810 pixel size. Hopefully, it's clear that upsizing the picture won't add any more visual information, or /effective/ resolution, than existed in the original 800x600 version. We'll name that 1080x810 picture "144M", to indicate that it's equivalent to 1.44M dots.
../.. Now, start from the full-resolution original DPReview test picture again, and reduce its height to 1024 pixels. Crop a 1024x768-pixel section from the picture. Then, upsize the 1024x768 picture to a 1080x810 pixel size. We'll name that second 1080x810 picture "236M", to indicate that it's equivalent to 2.36M dots.
Paste the 144M and 236M pictures next to each other, and compare them visually. At what observation distance should that visual comparison take place ?
A 4:3 aspect ratio 3-inch (diagonal) LCD panel must be 2.4-inch wide.
Assume, for the sake of discussion, that the average observation distance of the rear LCD of a digital camera is, say, 45cm (or 18 inches)
The 144M and 236M pictures, which each have a 1080x810-pixel size, will have a combined size of 1080x1620 pixels when put next to each other.
Display that 1080x1620 pixel combo picture on, say, a full-HD (1920x1080) 50-inch TV. A 16:9 50-inch TV has a picture height of about 24.51 inches.
../.. The visual angle spanned by a 2.4"-wide LCD panel at a distance of 45cm is equivalent to observing the aforementioned combo test picture on a 50" TV at a distance of 4.59 meters, or about 15.08 feet.
The combo 1080x1620-pixel picture is available here:
Can you /actually/ tell, displaying it on your 50-inch full HD TV, and observed from a distance of 4.6 meters, which half of the picture is the 144M version, and which one is the 236M version ? If you can't, do you really think you would be able to /actually/ perceive the difference in resolution between a 1.44M and 2.36M 3-inch LCD panel observed from a distance of 45cm ?
"do you really think you would be able to /actually/ perceive the difference in resolution between a 1.44M and 2.36M 3-inch LCD panel observed from a distance of 45cm ?"
yes, i can. and i also can for a FullHD or 4k display in 3.2" diagonal - which should be standard today for any decent higher-end FF mirrorfree camera in 2021 (but is not, unfortunately).
Also my viewing distance when composing images or chimping them on rear display is more like 20cm - max. 25 cm.
also there seems to be some mistake in your image dimensions - shouldn't it read "image width" rather than "height"?
believe it or not, but i do view rear display onmy cameras from about 20-25cm distance. Especially when it only has a measly 800x600 pixels resolution - or in camera company marketing speak: 1.44 MEGAdots. Lol.
i consider it a shame to see any new, higher end, expensive camera in 2021 to still come with such poor rear displays - or even worse, subpar EVFs like the one in Sony A7C (which i would otherwise have been interested in). And to be sure: this applies to all brands, not only Sony.
"Normal people" don't read newspapers with arms fully stretched out to the max. Only farsighted folks do. :-)
Same for camera displays.
I use rear display all the time to compose images and review them (chimp) on my EOS M and M6 II - because (regrettably) they don't have a viewfinder. I don't hold camera with arms fully extended, but as close as possible to allow my elbows resting on sides of my ribcage to hold camera as steady as possible.
When camera is on tripod my eyes may be a bit further away from display - but even then, when i want to assess critical sharpness of shots before or after capture, using 5x or 10x magnifying mode on rear display - I move as close as possible to display. Simply to see as much detail as possible, especially on weak low-rez displays and/or under bright/difficult lighting.
Don't think I am "abnormal" in any way. Rather fully in line with most other "normal" photographers with a desire to create quality images using rear display.
. " i do view rear display onmy cameras from about 20-25cm distance [..] Normal people don't read newspapers with arms fully stretched out to the max [..] I use rear display all the time to compose images and review them (chimp) on my EOS M and M6 II - because (regrettably) they don't have a viewfinder [..] Don't think I am "abnormal" in any way."
I must confess it didn't occur to me that people who use a viewfinder-less camera like a [Canon] M6 would come here and posit that they must be using and holding their cameras in the same way as users of viewfinder-equipped Sony cameras do — e.g. that these Sony users would be using the rear display — instead of the viewfinder — "all the time to compose images".
My impression is that most photographers with viewfinder-equipped cameras use the rear display to "compose images" mainly when using the viewfinder isn't practical, comfortable or even possible — e.g when positioning the camera quite lower or higher than the photographer's face.
As to the credibility of the assertion that viewing a rear display from a 20cm distance is not "abnormal", people can easily test by themselves how "natural" or "comfortable" it would be to try accommodating / focusing on a newspaper that's at a 20cm / 8-inch distance from one's eyes...
If it’s true what fans are saying, “ the A7SIII, FX3 and A1 to also get updated screens. ”. And also updated USB, then it might be a good idea to hold off buying until we are sure. The updated cameras will be better obviously and have better resale value.
I'm curious to see if Sony will offer an upgrade program for existing owner. A bit in the form of "send you camera to get an updated LCD for a small fee"... I would be interested.
These Sony cameras reminds me of the Japanese art of origami, and of course the mid-1980s Japanese cars like the Toyota Celica, with plenty of sharp edges and straight lines. Whether they will give way to the jelly bean look remains to e seen.
I'm probably a biased Sony fan boy (and someone here will likely point this out for me) but I've always really liked how they look. Canon DSLRs in particularly just look a little too bubbly to me. But I also think ThinkPad laptops and boxy 80s cars are cool so that's just my style.
In this week's episode, Chris compares the Nikon Z7 II and Sony a7R IV for landscape photography, with a close look at their displays, image quality, lens lineups and more.
Which high resolution mirrorless camera is best for you? This week, we compare the Canon EOS R5, Sony a7R IV, Nikon Z7 II and Panasonic S1R to answer that question.
After two rounds of voting, DPReview readers have decided on their favorite product (and runners-up) of 2019. Find out which cameras and lenses topped the list!
For the past few weeks, our readers have been voting on their favorite photographic gear. Now that the first round of voting is over, it's time to pick the best overall product of 2019.
Canon's EOS R7 is a 33MP APS-C enthusiast mirrorless camera built around the RF mount. It brings advanced autofocus and in-body stabilization to the part of the market currently served by the EOS 90D.
The Canon EOS R10 is a 24MP APS-C mirrorless camera built around Canon's RF mount. It's released alongside a collapsible 18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM zoom to give a usefully compact, remarkably 'Rebel'-like camera.
Chris and Jordan took a trip to sweltering Florida to test out Canon's new RF-Mount APS-C cameras. Give it a watch to find out our initial impressions.
It says Olympus on the front, but the OM System OM-1 is about the future, not the past. It may still produce 20MP files, but a quad-pixel AF Stacked CMOS sensor, 50 fps shooting with full AF and genuine, IP rated, weather sealing show OM Digital Solutions' ambition. See what we thought.
What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.
What’s the best camera for around $2000? These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both speed and focus for capturing fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best.
Most modern cameras will shoot video to one degree or another, but these are the ones we’d look at if you plan to shoot some video alongside your photos. We’ve chosen cameras that can take great photos and make it easy to get great looking video, rather than being the ones you’d choose as a committed videographer.
Although a lot of people only upload images to Instagram from their smartphones, the app is much more than just a mobile photography platform. In this guide we've chosen a selection of cameras that make it easy to shoot compelling lifestyle images, ideal for sharing on social media.
The SmartSoft Box allows the degree of its diffusion to be controlled electronically and varied in 100 increments from clear to heavily frosted via the main control panel of the Rotolight AEOS 2 light. Changes in electrical charge alter the diffusion and the angle of coverage of the light
Camera accessory company Nine Volt now offers a camera body cap that includes a secret compartment designed to hold an Apple AirTag tracking device, giving victims of camera theft hope for recovering a lost camera.
The R7's 32.5 megapixel APS-C sensor is an interesting prospect for sports and wildlife shooters. Check out our shots from sunny (and scorching) Florida to see how it performs.
Canon just launched an entry level camera using the RF Mount! You should probably take a look at some photos it (and Chris Niccolls) captured in Florida.
Canon's EOS R7 is a 33MP APS-C enthusiast mirrorless camera built around the RF mount. It brings advanced autofocus and in-body stabilization to the part of the market currently served by the EOS 90D.
The Canon EOS R10 is a 24MP APS-C mirrorless camera built around Canon's RF mount. It's released alongside a collapsible 18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM zoom to give a usefully compact, remarkably 'Rebel'-like camera.
Chris and Jordan took a trip to sweltering Florida to test out Canon's new RF-Mount APS-C cameras. Give it a watch to find out our initial impressions.
The Canon EOS R7 brings a 32.5MP APS-C CMOS sensor to the RF mount. In addition to stills at up to 15 fps (30 fps with e-shutter), the camera offers IBIS and 4K/60p video.
While its lineage is clearly inspired by Canon's line of Rebel DSLRs, this 24MP APS-C mirrorless camera takes plenty of inspiration from Canon's more capable full-frame mirrorless cameras.
These two RF-mount lenses are designed to be paired with Canon's new APS-C mirrorless cameras, the EOS R7 and EOS R10. Both lenses offer seven stops of image stabilization and use Canon's stepping motor technology to drive their internal AF systems.
Late last week, DJI quietly released a firmware update for the Mini 3 Pro drone that adds, amongst other improvements, 10-bit video recording in the D-Cinelike video profile.
The patent explains how the auto-zoom feature could use a combination of digital and optical zoom to better frame subjects within a composition with little to no input from the camera operator.
360-degree action cam manufacturer Insta360 has shared a teaser video for a new product set to be announced tomorrow. And based on the visuals provided, it appears as though it might involve some kind of drone.
The Ricoh GR IIIx is a popular camera among photo enthusiasts thanks to its small size and 40mm (equivalent) F2.8 lens. Ricoh's GT-2 tele conversion lens is a 1.5X converter that extends this focal length, though it comes with some compromises. Learn more about it and check out our sample gallery shot with the GT-2 on the camera.
This 'Mark III' lens offers a few improvements over its predecessors to get even better image quality out of its ultra-fast design. The lens is available for Canon EOS R, Fujifilm X, Leica L, Micro Four Thirds, Nikon Z and Sony E-mount APS-C camera systems.
Chris and Jordan are out of the office this week, so we're taking a trip in the wayback machine to feature a classic episode of DPRTV: a review of the EOS R, Canon's first full-frame mirrorless camera.
Last week, we featured Markus Hofstätter's scanner rebuild, which saw him spend three months bringing back to life a massive scanner to better digitize his collection of large format photographs. This week, we're taking a look at the results, kicked off by a beautifully detailed 30cm x 40cm collodion wet plate portrait.
The lenses lack autofocus and image stabilization, but offer a fast maximum aperture in an all-metal body that provides a roughly 50mm full-frame equivalent focal length on Fujifilm and Sony APS-C cameras.
Apple has responded to an open letter published last month, wherein more than 100 individuals in the entertainment industry asked Apple to improve the development and promotion of Final Cut Pro.
Venus Optics has launched its Indiegogo campaign for its new Nanomorph lenses, revealing additional details about the world’s smallest anamorphic lenses.
Most smartphones these days offer great-looking video and make vlogging very easy, but there are always accessories that can help to make your footage, and you, look even better
The WG-80 remains largely unchanged from the WG-70, but it now has a front LED ring light that's twice as bright as its predecessor. Aside from that, the 16MP CMOS sensor and 28-140mm full-frame equivalent lens stays the same.
Astronaut Samantha Cristoforetti is aboard the International Space Station for a six-month mission. She and the other astronauts aboard the ISS witnessed the recent full lunar eclipse, and Cristoforetti captured amazing photos of the spectacular event.
Vivo has announced the global launch of its flagship X80 Pro device, which features an impressive quadruple-camera array on the rear, headlined by a main 50MP custom Samsung GNV sensor.
Comments