@brendon1000, they are only serious in this class of camera when they shoot 8k video with another brand.

Yeah the plethora of 8k videos created today is staggering.

8k is so useless. I would rather have more bitdepth and dynamic range over resolution. That’s why even Hollywood still shoots mostly 1080p

Yes, but what methodology to you use to compile pros and cons? Hopefully it is something more systematic that the reviewer's own impressions. Yet as I re-read the cons of the Nikon D-850 it makes me wonder. A con for the D-850 was no pop-up flash. This camera does not have a pop-up flash either. Why is it not a con here? Should it even be a con for a pro level camera? Another D-850 con is the large file size makes calibrating lenses crucial. Yet this camera has even larger file sizes so calibrating the lens should be even more crucial yet it is not a con here. Not sure calibrating a lens for a high performing high MP camera should be listed as a con. DP Review will be better served when they come up with a process for all their camera reviewers to use for the pros and cons for every level of camera form point and shoot to pro. I've always taken these pros and cons with a huge grain of salt just for these reasons. They seem somewhat arbitrary and capricious.

Sony tough cards

Way better build quality vs San Disk junk.

Thicker materials, no cheap side lock, no cheap plastic ribbs, greater temperature resistance, less likely to produce hear when reading and writing.

@thematic. Well, so far I've never encountered any problems with Sandisk cards. Not in freezing cold and not in sweltering tropical heat. So, to me Sandisk has been perfect. No junk experiences here.

Flash memory cards are very widely pirated. Recommend you use a high quality, dedicated vendor such as B&H. Amazon and eBay sell a lot of pirated products; their supply chain is a patchwork of third-party vendors competing for the lowest sale price. Not saying Amazon is bad to buy from, but there are items which they are a poor choice for, and memory cards is one.

That said, I suppose its possible that a lens profile is automatically processed by the camera, which would avoid changing aperture regardless of the setting, if the lens exhibited focus shift. Just don't know. This is what I was trying to get at when I first asked this question. Was hoping the dpreview folks might have info on this.

Well, to each his own,... but for me, and I suspect for many others, I'd be an idiot to avoid using my Batis on the A7RIV. It's a great lens ! I'll just need to be careful to ensure I don't accidentaly get bit by focus shift. (And, it's not just me that thinks this is a great lens - check out the optical limits review of the Batis, for example.)

MattiD80: I had the 70-200 mm f:4 lens, a really nice one. But I skipped it for the GM 100-400 and have never looked back. I also added the 1.4x TC for even more reach. For action photo I mostly use ISO ranging from 800 to 6400 to get motion stopping shutter speed (exceptions for panning).

Of course you don’t..

@Viggo

Yes, it's quite incredible:- the better Sony's cameras get the more biased DPReview becomes...

It's been a problem since the invention of photography, but so few people of nowadays have gotten an up-close look at large format photography that they don't know what to look for.
If you need the acuity, the solution now is the same as the solution in the 1800s careful focusing with the screen on the back of the camera and a tripod. You don't need a dark cloth anymore, you can use something like a Hoodman loupe.

@verstovsky You wanna buy my A7RIII? Looks new, less than 1200 photos taken :D

I think it's better to buy a cheap FF camera that an expensive APSC one...

@mart1234

Although there is a lot of communication around the 61Mpx, the more I read review and first owners comments, the hink this *not* the main improvement.

It's more about usability and shooting experience: better AF system overall (still and video), faster performances, better EVF (120fps possible *or* very high res.), deeper and diffrently shaped grip, better weather sealing, revamped buttons, etc.

Thank you Turbo, what is relevant is that there is no crop nor touch up, with barely any Lightroom adjustments so the picture is a neutral and as it gets. Make sure to download the original resolution image to appreciate the details :-)

Wow thanks for posting, I wanna see more pictures full ress of A7RIV online. Phenomal image quality lenses like sigma 105mm art, certainly keep up with 62mp. Now i want samples of the 24-70mm GM (lens i bought, in preparation of buying A7RIV.)

Hi Matti,
here are 2 pictures with the 35/1.2
https://www.flickr.com/gp/neatpicture/K2RHZe
https://www.flickr.com/gp/neatpicture/58g311

Nice shot. The level of detail on her face is quite wonderful without looking weird or overly scientific. Thanks

@Dan Goldman

Not as rushed as your comment.

45% more res on the sensor should have had better processing power to handle that, but I guess they prioritised the res to kill the competition. I get that, I would have done the same, but do not expect better results than R3. If you throw another 3.5K on this baby it has to be for the AF. If you buy it for the sensor you lose on it, so better buy your wife a used Rolex and you will be rewarded for years to come :) Btw you can still shoot her with your old superior R3 (sorry no pun intended)

Yeah right, but you should explain why you picked up this + 6 EV lift.
That is not very common case anyway.
I mean sure there is limit that a 3,76 micron photo site can do in terms of dynamics.
But also the fact that Sony α7R IV is a super high-res camera, you see these artifacts more easily, it becomes more like emphasized.
Definitely Sony α7R IV is the sharpest of those.

And ask yourself, do you really need more detailed pimples in your shots? ;-)

Photoshop has a great set of tools designed just for the purpose of removing those pimples and blems....it has been around for quite some time too. Are you doing any post processing on your portraits? If not, maybe you should consider it.

It's actually an issue when you do (high volume) weddings, so i heard.

So shoot your weddings with a low res camera like a cell phone. Why bother with a good camera to start with? Just use a big DSLR as a prop so your client will think they're getting their moneys worth.

Actually, weddings and events are probably not the best use case for the high res part of this camera. You'd be much better off with a 24mp camera like the A9 or A7III, or you could use this camera in APS-C mode at 26mp.

All cameras are toys

@edn80: you realise that your comment is at best stupid if you haaven’t at least handled all these cameras?

@edn80: you realise that your comment is at best stupid if you haven’t at least handled all these cameras?

@Jay-A

No stupider than yours, I guess. Who's to say I haven't handled the other cameras? You're assuming. Stupidly.

@edn80 I don't think innovative must be a criteria to get a better score.... The best camera must get the best score...

@edn80: If you had handled all cameras then you wouldn't have made the statement. So I'm not assuming anything, you're an open page.

For this ample amount of resolution, no need to look further than the AF weave test samples and please tell us if this is not worthy of the gold award it deserves. Also tell us if the AF performance of the Panasonic's higher resolution FF and Fuji's MF GFX can even match that.

@armandino What is this? The Inquisition?

If you must know, I own the S1, I played with the S1H at an event with Matt Frazier and Brandon Cortez, I registered and handled the GFX 100 @ a the GFX FOTO CARE event on June 22nd in NYC, and handled the FP and A7RIV at B&H a few days ago.

Enough to be clear exactly about what products are being released here and I maintain-- out of the cameras mentioned, the A7RIV is the least impressive. It's just a retread of what we've seen many times before from Sony. Just a new iteration of the same with a few extra MPs for premium $$$.

Oh, and it's still no 4K60p and 8bit 4:2:0 in 2019, which alone makes it lesser than any of the cameras above, which an either do 10bit 4:2:2 or RAW.

@jay-A See above ^^^^ and oh, I don't care about upvotes. I have a life.

Yeah suuure, enough of a life to entertain this kind of silly internet discussion. Must be a full life indeed. Myself I'll leave it here.

Yes, I was thinking the same. GFX 100 is the camera to beat, which A7R IV already tried to and failed. GFX 100 is on a league of its own.

@Manzur Fahim
"GFX 100 is the camera to beat".
Ultimate IQ is generally speaking not the ultimate goal in photography and photographic tools. A camera should maximize your creative potential, and in that regard, sorry I disagree with both you and Greg. Do not get me wrong, the GFX is an amazing camera, I just wish Fuji invested in a larger sensor format rather than marginally larger than 35mm FF.

Fujifilm GFX 100 is a magnificent tool for studio, architecture, landscape or even portraits.
But, and this is a big but, that camera has no place in the wildlife and nature photography, where you really need fast auto focus and a very fast tracking speed.
Now I am not saying the 61 MP is enough for me. Because it isn't.
Printing large wall prints (paintings) is done better with more data in photos.
I did even consider GFX 100, for a tiny little while, but then I stopped being insane. It would mean giving up of all the closeups of those magnificent insects and all that "chasing" with my lens.

Harry, i agree with you. I doubt anyone will buy a GFX100 for BIF, wildlife or sports. And yes, you have to be nuts to buy one at ten grand anyway. I sure as Hell dont need it. But i did want it.
By the way, check out mads on the MF forum. He has posted some great wildlife shots w the GFX 100. But they are wider scenes.

I agree that the title of "camera to beat" is a bit silly, since every photographer is different and uses their camera in different ways. It's not the camera to beat for someone on a more limited budget, nor is it the camera to beat for ultimate IQ, nor the camera to beat for ultimate AF, it's not the ultimate camera for durability, it's not the ultimate camera for ergonomics, etc.

I get that it's a well rounded camera (at least for stills), but again that's assuming everyone uses all features equally. It's kind of like declaring one movie or one song the best, when you have to take into account genre and other factors.

BTW, re the Fuji GFX 100...someone mentioned macro shots...here is a nice writeup by someone who used it for incredible macro:
https://madsbjerke.com/2019/07/27/fujifilm-gfx-100-macro/

From what I have read and heard, the AF on the GFX 100 is pretty good for certain types of wildlife shots.

Man I love that Q2! I shot it almost every day on a 3 -week drive through Quebec and New England. I am doing post work on the DNG files now
and will post 100 Q2 images by this weekend. The Q2 is awesome. Love it love it love it. Lot of fun. Like shooting the X100F but 4 times more money plus OIS and weather sealing (oh, and the red dot). Love the fixed 28 (vs a 35). But like the GFX100 at 10 grand, you have to be a little nuts to spend 5 grand on that little fixed lens Leica beauty. But I'm nuts and really sort of borderline insane when it comes to high res camera gear these days. If I was sane I wouldn't have 25 grand in Fuji GFX and another 5 in the Q2 plus untold amount of Fuji APSC X gear. I would probably just have the alphasevenarefour and 5 lenses since I love peeping high res shots. But I sure do like that MF gear. Hey, it's all good stuff. This alpha looks incredible as an all-rounder and pretty small too.

You asked about IQ not files sizes therefore what Ed said.

The A9II will likely be better than the A7RIV image-quality wise, as the A7RIV is perhaps the noisiest A7 series camera to date. The A7RIV appears to have image quality akin to an A6500 at similar ISO levels. What's more, I believe the EVF on the A7RIV is worse than that of the A9/A7RIII, as it is laggy and looks more like a delayed TV screen image when looking through the viewfinder--at least that was my impression.

I can only speak of the R3 and A9, and the A9 is very good and forgiving. I cant find anything wrong with it, except lower resolution, but oh boy, it's quite a beast. In the most demanding scenarios, it's clear who the boss is, the A9 is a total sleeper, until you use it a bit. Feels like a video game at first, how can it be so fast AND accurate? You get the idea.

@TheOwl360 Your impression is wrong. A7R IV image quality is great, noise only visible when you are looking at 100% and the ISO level is over 800, but even then not as much, and comparable to A7R III which I also have. What you believe is wrong too, the EVF is of much higher quality, the resolution is now doubled and it looks very good. If you want completely blackout free EVF response then go for A9 or A9 II, but other than action shooting, the EVF is the best of all other A7 cameras.

I just got my A7RIV to workout the sidelines beside the A9 when the extra reach is needed. I hope the FE 200-600 will survive the 60MP endurance, because that will give me a 900mm equivalent (same resolution as A9). As long as there is decent light, which is often the case for outdoors college sports.

Exactly what Manzur Fahim wisely wrote.
This discussion would be a lot better without the trolls.
Theowl360's text is widely false and completely unnecessary.

With film I composed and took the shot and was done. When developed, the picture was perfect.

With current Canon, I compose and take the shot. The image file does not need post color processing and can be printed immediately.

For those who dwell deep in the technology world and enjoy pixel peeping, and spending hours at the PC, Sony is a good fit.

For someone like me who enjoys taking photo's, then downloading and producing great looking prints with zero post processing, my "old" technology Canon" is a great tool.

RoyGun, Ok if you say so.
However, I don't know how you take photos in the morning, on a bright sunny midday, at the evening sunset, near the ocean - if you don't adjust color temperature. Do you adjust white balance manually each time. Is that really simple?
Pro photographers that do nature photographing tend to take photos in variety of color temperatures, and we always must do some post editing.

However, it is not so cumbersome. The photos must be edited anyway.
You simply never manage to frame a photo perfectly when you chase moving butterfly's in the wind, never.
I always have to reframe the shot, make a lot of adjustments according to my liking.
For me the editing is the start point of creating art from the raw material, which is the RAW photos taken in the field.
And believe me, that is fun, it is satisfying. The art is what I'm looking for and what I need.
Sony α7R IV + FE 100-400 G Master are the tools to collect the raw material that has a great potential to do what I want.

@RoyGun,

No offense intended, but if you're not doing any post processing, your work cannot be anywhere near it's true potential. And that's coming from a Canon 5DmIII camera user, and 20 plus years of using canon gear. I think you're just settling for whatever the camera or film is giving you.

then I guess I was right in my first response. A 10 years old sensor is more than enough for such use. Why did you even bother buying a new camera? A 5DII would have done just fine for you for less than half the money.

And I wrote that page, so I'm also embarrassed. Thank you for pointing it out to us.

You are doing something wrong Ed if half the images are out of focus. I shoot both 75mm and 90mm on Leica M, and my hit rate is waaaaaaay higher than 50%, and I’m sure many other Leica photographer would agree. Just takes practice.

Rangefinder is more thought out process and timing, the A7 is a brute force type device, take a pick

Cerr,
Sometimes you don't know what is really best until you try it. Might I suggest you give an EVF a try? I felt as you did 7 years ago.

why you are even here?

@Mr_Win "Rangefinder is more thought out process and timing, the A7 is a brute force type device, take a pick"

M9 and A7r are two completely different cameras, and most likely you will have a different shooting experience. However, I think your description, "thought out" vs "brute force" is not about the camera but the photographer. You can certainly think through your process with an A7 camera and time your shots, etc. You can also brutishly use an M9. Like I said, I don't think it's the camera, it's the one using it.