For those with longer focal length lenses .. the AF in the a7RIV is “much” better for wildlife or fast action.. set the APS-C mode to a button and you can get 1.5x further reach when needed at 26 MPs.. I’m now selling my A7Riii.. neither will be particularly great hand held in low light.. and at ISOs above 1200.. that’s why I have a a7iii for very low light and higher ISOs .. high MP sensors will show much more noise at higher ISOs than will lower MP cameras at the same ISO values
Just got my A7R iii in Friday. Love it so far.......yes Im the guy who also wants the A7R iv for the extra pixals.....just imagine what the firmware updates will be like over the next 2 years on the A7R iv. That'a what Im looking at.
I want the a7rIV for multiple reasons , ergonomics, crop mode, better auxiliary features, better video, weather sealing etc. These alone are not with the upgrade ... but these features are not alone they are together and that’s before talking about the improved color science and extra megapixels. I currently have an a9 that has never left it’s box and I am currently strongly considering putting it’s up for sell and put that money towards the Sony a7rIV.
A7RIV does not equal the high ISO performance of the A7RIII. Yes it's not far behind but even when equalised in resolution the A7RIII is still better. If you never shoot high ISO you won't care, but it's worth noting.
Hello buddy, wanted to ask this question to soneone. How much high ISO is noiseless? Since NEX serries to a6500, I have seen videos showing "Look how image is so sharp and clean even at ISO 6400 and even usable at ISO 12800 just out of the camera". Each time I thought its real. But in reality, there turned out to be the horible noise even at ISO 200. Whats the actual truth? Am I missing something, or setting? Is it atleast somewhat real for the A7R III & IV?
One thing you forgot to mention - is the full stop lowlight performance penalty of the A7R IV, compared to the predecessor. That difference is crucial.
The LCD is the same resolution but the coating on the mark iv is less reflective and more resistant to fingerprints and nose grease. One of the many incremental improvements on the new camera.
I think the small upgrades over 2 years sony are having a laugh and ripping off the customer. give me a 42 megapixel against a 50 -60 m pixel and nothing much diference. theres nothing much chaneged over the last 2 years in camera but the lens does change and I go with the lens over the camera. AI editing today can turn a crap image into something special. So i say before the upgrade, look at the editing software because that improves image quality more than the camera... lets not be fooled...
@@Neil_Hasnat If it were me, I would. It's all the camera I want or need, and they've come down significantly in price. The only things I dislike about mine are the UHS-I slot 2, and the bluetooth and wireless API doesn't let you use tap to focus anymore, so a lot of mobile apps don't work with it 100% anymore. And if you buy used, ask them to take some F22 snapshots of a white wall or something. The first one I ended up buying I had to send back because of dead pixels. For 3k you could get the R3 and a sigma 24-70 2.8, like I did :)
Tbh, while 60mp is great, 42 is too. But ergonomics are what make a camera fun to use. As a nikon user, i was sceptical of Sony ergonomics. The A7RIV is a lot better then RIII if you come from nikon. Tbh A7RIV is the first sony that has good enough ergonomics for me to like it. That reason alone makes me not want the R3. In fact even though it will cost to much probably, i think the Sony A9II (36mp rumored), would be best solution, just sad it will cost 5000-6000 dollar.)
That 10-18mm apsc lens does work on full frame, if you shoot at 14-16 it will cover the full frame sensor. At the 10mm range it will badly vignette. I like using it on full frame cause it’s small and light
I love my a7rIII but really want to upgrade to the ar7vi to be able to shoot crop at 24mpg is super awesome especially when using primes like my 24 f/14 G master Can't wait to be able to do it but I'm hoping that sony will have a promotion this winter Great video...........Subbed best regards, rick
From the accounts I've come across and the sample images I've seen, the A7r III rendition of a stop or thereabouts cleaner, particularly at higher ISO.
@@rattoh No, but why would they be? As far as I'm concerned, comparisons should be conducted at 1:1 rendition, regardless of the resolution of the sensor.
Excellent comparison, sir! I have a question...I have zero experience with Sony, and have been a Fujifilm-X shooter for about 8 years, first with an X-Pro1. My main interest is obtaining the sharpest, most detail-rich images as possible, given the constraints of time and funds. As a landscape and product STILLS X-T3 shooter (no video), Lately I feel like I've gotten the most out of the APS-C format, hence I have been debating on selling my Fuji kit (reluctantly), and moving into FF, specifically the Sony a7Rlll and lenses like the Sony 16-35 f/2.8 GM, Sony FE 55 f/2.8, and the 90mm f/2.8 G Macro . Since I shoot 99% tripod-mounted, neither IBIS nor video interests me. So, my question is, for large print output (around 24"x 36" prints), how much of an improvement in terms of image sharpness, detail rendition, dynamic range, base ISO performance, etc., would I see over the already excellent X-T3 (combined with the ultra-sharp Fujinon XF80mm f/2.8 Macro lens), when using the a7Rlll and the Sony 90mm f/2.8 G Macro or Sony 16-35 f/4 tripod-mounted? Thank you!
Does anybody know if it is possible to tether via wifi on the A7rIV into Capture One somehow... And I imagine 61 mp's is still going to be slow via wifi or no? Thanks... I am about to buy one of these and the A7rIV would be a no-brainer if they would put medium raw option.... Cannot believe they did not offer that and do NOT think they will or they would have already...
Really great and sensible review! The R series wasn’t even a consideration for me until i saw the RIII drop in price to $2499. I opted for the RIII and picked it up about a month ago, since 42. megapixels was plenty for me and technically didn’t really even need that much however i wanted the better EVF and LCD than my A7III’s. Been really happy with it, as a companion with my A7III. The RIV’s autofocus tracking capabilities are really the only feature i really want from that camera but knowing that the A6400 has that feature already, i can only assume that any new full frame camera bodies coming out from now on will have it which means it’s only a matter of time where we’ll see it on a A7IV. So i think for those that really want the resolution or have been on the A7rIII for awhile and want an upgrade, then the RIV makes total sense. However the RIII presents a fantastic value with a very capable and modern camera!
Thank you for your great comparisons. Besides the technical upgrades I really appreciate the better weather sealing + ergonomics. As I do a lot of astrophotgraphy and I heard there is more noise at higher ISOs, I´m waiting for a comparison especially for nightshooting. For now I stay with my A7R III.
When I look at these cameras side by side on my advantages are the grip, A9 autofocus is now on the R IV. Which is great for sports and wildlife shootings. I am still wondering how is the low light photos will be because of the high megapixel rate. More details to capture with less time. If they upgraded the sensor then I would have considered the R IV. If you want a great camera & save $1k then go with the R3. For the extra $1k get a GM lens. Great video. Thank you!
Lyndon Jones I got the r2 I’m spending my money on lens and lights before I get another camera I have Godox ad600 Godox v1 35mm 1.4 85mm 1.8. I want to add another Godox ad600 and a 70-200mm lens and then I’ll get another camera to add to my gear
Nice comparison. Do you think that the A7RIV is suitable for bird and other wildlife photography (even with 10 fps)? How does it compete with the A9 Autofocus? I like detailed action in my pictures. Is this the camera to but then instead of the A9? Should I wait another couple of months for the A9 II? I'm in the process of buying another camera and Canon seems to run behind the latest innovations... I have a Canon 5D Mark III...
It is top for birds and wildlife. I use it on the Sony 400mm 2.8 GM. I also have the A9, I think they are both very close in terms of Autofocus performance. The crop capabilities of the A7R4 making this camera my preferred one for Wildlife and especially small birds. Imagine, with a 100% crop you get on a Sony 400mm 2.8 GM a FOV like on a 600mm lens but at f/2.8 and at 27MP. For me the A7R4 is a game changer.
Great review, but you missed mentioning one of the major improvements that I would appreciate in the R4 over my R3. That is the bigger and easier to get to back button for autofocus. As someone who uses back button autofocus all the time for wildlife photography, that small change is very important, especially in winter with gloves on.
@@VelvetBulldozer not really noticed any issues more pixels = finer smaller noise so its possibly less noticable in real world use. Obviously if you pixel peep but if you print a large image i doubt you would even see
![NOSFERATU - Official Trailer [HD] - Only In Theaters December 25](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nulvWqYUM8k/mqdefault.jpg)
A7RIII has had an in body intervalometer since firmware update 3.0 back in April. Otherwise great comparison!
Correct...I covered the update. Brain farts happen.
The a7iii is the best camera I’ve worked with and I will have it for maybe another 3 more years then I will get the a7VI
I'm really enjoying the more quiet shutter and better buttons and grip
Thanks for the detailed comparison man. Very helpful.
I think the a7riv is a great camera but I really like about it is that it's making buying the a7riii a real bargain :)
For those with longer focal length lenses .. the AF in the a7RIV is “much” better for wildlife or fast action.. set the APS-C mode to a button and you can get 1.5x further reach when needed at 26 MPs.. I’m now selling my A7Riii.. neither will be particularly great hand held in low light.. and at ISOs above 1200.. that’s why I have a a7iii for very low light and higher ISOs .. high MP sensors will show much more noise at higher ISOs than will lower MP cameras at the same ISO values
Just got my A7R iii in Friday. Love it so far.......yes Im the guy who also wants the A7R iv for the extra pixals.....just imagine what the firmware updates will be like over the next 2 years on the A7R iv. That'a what Im looking at.
I want the a7rIV for multiple reasons , ergonomics, crop mode, better auxiliary features, better video, weather sealing etc. These alone are not with the upgrade ... but these features are not alone they are together and that’s before talking about the improved color science and extra megapixels.
I currently have an a9 that has never left it’s box and I am currently strongly considering putting it’s up for sell and put that money towards the Sony a7rIV.
I completely understand...
A7 Mark R-3 is great camera, I love it, gives amazing colors, ....and I think A7-VI ...must be AWESOME ! I`m gonna have it. Nice revue Thank you !
Thank you for the comparison. I totally agree with the apsc crop factor.
A7RIV does not equal the high ISO performance of the A7RIII. Yes it's not far behind but even when equalised in resolution the A7RIII is still better. If you never shoot high ISO you won't care, but it's worth noting.
Hello buddy, wanted to ask this question to soneone.
How much high ISO is noiseless?
Since NEX serries to a6500, I have seen videos showing "Look how image is so sharp and clean even at ISO 6400 and even usable at ISO 12800 just out of the camera". Each time I thought its real. But in reality, there turned out to be the horible noise even at ISO 200.
Whats the actual truth? Am I missing something, or setting?
Is it atleast somewhat real for the A7R III & IV?
One thing you forgot to mention - is the full stop lowlight performance penalty of the A7R IV, compared to the predecessor. That difference is crucial.
The LCD is the same resolution but the coating on the mark iv is less reflective and more resistant to fingerprints and nose grease. One of the many incremental improvements on the new camera.
I think the small upgrades over 2 years sony are having a laugh and ripping off the customer. give me a 42 megapixel against a 50 -60 m pixel and nothing much diference. theres nothing much chaneged over the last 2 years in camera but the lens does change and I go with the lens over the camera. AI editing today can turn a crap image into something special. So i say before the upgrade, look at the editing software because that improves image quality more than the camera... lets not be fooled...
They added tracking and real time AF to the A7RIII a few months after he made this video, just fyi to anyone watching. Also has an intervalometer.
hey Shadda! Should I purchase R3 in 2021? I got budget but not more than 3000 usd.
@@Neil_Hasnat If it were me, I would. It's all the camera I want or need, and they've come down significantly in price. The only things I dislike about mine are the UHS-I slot 2, and the bluetooth and wireless API doesn't let you use tap to focus anymore, so a lot of mobile apps don't work with it 100% anymore. And if you buy used, ask them to take some F22 snapshots of a white wall or something. The first one I ended up buying I had to send back because of dead pixels. For 3k you could get the R3 and a sigma 24-70 2.8, like I did :)
@@shadda Thanks man
Tbh, while 60mp is great, 42 is too. But ergonomics are what make a camera fun to use. As a nikon user, i was sceptical of Sony ergonomics. The A7RIV is a lot better then RIII if you come from nikon. Tbh A7RIV is the first sony that has good enough ergonomics for me to like it. That reason alone makes me not want the R3. In fact even though it will cost to much probably, i think the Sony A9II (36mp rumored), would be best solution, just sad it will cost 5000-6000 dollar.)
Thanks for the great, thorough and described camera comparison!
That 10-18mm apsc lens does work on full frame, if you shoot at 14-16 it will cover the full frame sensor. At the 10mm range it will badly vignette. I like using it on full frame cause it’s small and light
I love my a7rIII but really want to upgrade to the ar7vi
to be able to shoot crop at 24mpg is super awesome
especially when using primes like my 24 f/14 G master
Can't wait to be able to do it but I'm hoping that sony will have a promotion this winter
Great video...........Subbed
best regards, rick
What the hell is a ar7vi? Who makes that?
The correct answer is both! a7Riii as a second body to the a7Riv
Great video review.
💰💰💰💰 apart from no 4K60 I would love to buy the R4
From the accounts I've come across and the sample images I've seen, the A7r III rendition of a stop or thereabouts cleaner, particularly at higher ISO.
Were the a7riv pictures downsampled to match the a7riii images?
@@rattoh No, but why would they be? As far as I'm concerned, comparisons should be conducted at 1:1 rendition, regardless of the resolution of the sensor.
Excellent comparison, sir! I have a question...I have zero experience with Sony, and have been a Fujifilm-X shooter for about 8 years, first with an X-Pro1. My main interest is obtaining the sharpest, most detail-rich images as possible, given the constraints of time and funds. As a landscape and product STILLS X-T3 shooter (no video), Lately I feel like I've gotten the most out of the APS-C format, hence I have been debating on selling my Fuji kit (reluctantly), and moving into FF, specifically the Sony a7Rlll and lenses like the Sony 16-35 f/2.8 GM, Sony FE 55 f/2.8, and the 90mm f/2.8 G Macro . Since I shoot 99% tripod-mounted, neither IBIS nor video interests me. So, my question is, for large print output (around 24"x 36" prints), how much of an improvement in terms of image sharpness, detail rendition, dynamic range, base ISO performance, etc., would I see over the already excellent X-T3 (combined with the ultra-sharp Fujinon XF80mm f/2.8 Macro lens), when using the a7Rlll and the Sony 90mm f/2.8 G Macro or Sony 16-35 f/4 tripod-mounted? Thank you!
R4 in no way maintain the same ISO as the R3. Reason I kept mine
Does anybody know if it is possible to tether via wifi on the A7rIV into Capture One somehow... And I imagine 61 mp's is still going to be slow via wifi or no? Thanks... I am about to buy one of these and the A7rIV would be a no-brainer if they would put medium raw option.... Cannot believe they did not offer that and do NOT think they will or they would have already...
sold my a7r3 last year .... now I want to buy it back ... but I found a good deal for M4 only 1k more in price
Each generation they make it a bit larger, it's almost the size of a 5d mk IV already.
Yeah but the weight isn’t even close
"the eye autofocus for both human animals and pet animals...
I still have the original Sony a7
Really great and sensible review! The R series wasn’t even a consideration for me until i saw the RIII drop in price to $2499. I opted for the RIII and picked it up about a month ago, since 42. megapixels was plenty for me and technically didn’t really even need that much however i wanted the better EVF and LCD than my A7III’s. Been really happy with it, as a companion with my A7III. The RIV’s autofocus tracking capabilities are really the only feature i really want from that camera but knowing that the A6400 has that feature already, i can only assume that any new full frame camera bodies coming out from now on will have it which means it’s only a matter of time where we’ll see it on a A7IV. So i think for those that really want the resolution or have been on the A7rIII for awhile and want an upgrade, then the RIV makes total sense. However the RIII presents a fantastic value with a very capable and modern camera!
Peter Price which one is ur backup camera ??
Dang N Right now probably the A7III, however when I’m shooting low light or video then the A7rIII is the backup.
thank you for the video, now I'm clear which one I"ll get
Great comparison!!
Thank you for your great comparisons.
Besides the technical upgrades I really appreciate the better weather sealing + ergonomics.
As I do a lot of astrophotgraphy and I heard there is more noise at higher ISOs, I´m waiting for a comparison especially for nightshooting. For now I stay with my A7R III.
Tom Pohorski would love to see your work do you have a Instagram?
@@Zenither Of course, thank you.
instagram.com/tompohorski/
Nice explanation thanks for your insight..
When I look at these cameras side by side on my advantages are the grip, A9 autofocus is now on the R IV. Which is great for sports and wildlife shootings. I am still wondering how is the low light photos will be because of the high megapixel rate. More details to capture with less time. If they upgraded the sensor then I would have considered the R IV. If you want a great camera & save $1k then go with the R3. For the extra $1k get a GM lens. Great video. Thank you!
USB 3.1 was renamed to USB 3.2; both cameras use same USB data transfer rates.
Upgrade that’s whole point!
Very well said. Thank you.
A well presented comparison - Thank you
I have A7r2, So the 4 seems a must upgrade??? Now, if I knew how to use the full abilities of the 2, I could...........
Lyndon Jones I got the r2 I’m spending my money on lens and lights before I get another camera I have Godox ad600 Godox v1 35mm 1.4 85mm 1.8. I want to add another Godox ad600 and a 70-200mm lens and then I’ll get another camera to add to my gear
Nice comparison. Do you think that the A7RIV is suitable for bird and other wildlife photography (even with 10 fps)? How does it compete with the A9 Autofocus? I like detailed action in my pictures. Is this the camera to but then instead of the A9? Should I wait another couple of months for the A9 II? I'm in the process of buying another camera and Canon seems to run behind the latest innovations... I have a Canon 5D Mark III...
It is top for birds and wildlife. I use it on the Sony 400mm 2.8 GM. I also have the A9, I think they are both very close in terms of Autofocus performance. The crop capabilities of the A7R4 making this camera my preferred one for Wildlife and especially small birds. Imagine, with a 100% crop you get on a Sony 400mm 2.8 GM a FOV like on a 600mm lens but at f/2.8 and at 27MP. For me the A7R4 is a game changer.
I would wait A9II (at least announcement)
Great review, but you missed mentioning one of the major improvements that I would appreciate in the R4 over my R3. That is the bigger and easier to get to back button for autofocus. As someone who uses back button autofocus all the time for wildlife photography, that small change is very important, especially in winter with gloves on.
how about the upgrade from 7r2?
Own both and the a7r4 is worth every penny the a7r3 is still.a beast
How do you find the high ISO noise difference
@@VelvetBulldozer not really noticed any issues more pixels = finer smaller noise so its possibly less noticable in real world use. Obviously if you pixel peep but if you print a large image i doubt you would even see
How far down the road do you think an A7IV is?
3 yrs
I'm wondering if it's worth it to upgrade from the 7III to the 7R3 at this point?... Are there any major advantages besides the 42MP?
Stan Ef no the a7iii is newer