Sony a7RIV vs a7RIII vs a9: Autofocus Clinic | 4K
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 сен 2024
- Sony a7RIV vs a7RIII vs a9: Autofocus Clinic | Photographer Dustin Abbott shares insights on the autofocus performance of three Sony options - the a7RIII, the a7RIV, and the now-discounted a9. Tracking, buffer depth, Eye AF, and more. | Visit the image gallery: bit.ly/a7RIVig | Purchase the Sony a7RIV @ B&H Photo bhpho.to/2nUgnno | Amazon amzn.to/2oGpVD1 | Amazon Canada amzn.to/2mY8UDW | Amazon UK amzn.to/2n9GWF3 | Amazon Germany amzn.to/2nXhene | Ebay bit.ly/a7RIVda
Want to support this channel? Use these affiliate links to shop at:
B&H Photo: bhpho.to/1TA0Xge
Amazon: www.amazon.com...
Ebay: bit.ly/DustineBay
Make a donation via Paypal: paypal.me/dustinTWI
Get a discount off all Skylum Editing Software (Luminar, Aurora HDR, AirMagic) by using code DUSTINHDR at checkout: bit.ly/LuminarDLA
Become a Patron: / dustinabbott | Check me out on: Personal Website: dustinabbott.net/ | Sign up for my Newsletter: bit.ly/1RHvUNp | Instagram: bit.ly/DLAinsta | Google+: bit.ly/24PjMzv | Facebook: on. 1nuUUeH | Twitter: bit.ly/1RyYxIH | Flickr: bit.ly/1UcnC0B | 500px: bit.ly/1Sy2Ngu
My filming setup: Sony a7R III: B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2D6ibNO or Amazon: amzn.to/2CNxOvH | or | Sony a9 @ B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2HyWIyt or Amazon: amzn.to/2s1vYE0
Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 RXD @B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2FA00la or Amazon amzn.to/2G2kaEr
Lights: Rotolight AEOS @B&H Photo bhpho.to/2IK7mqV | Genaray Contender @B&H Photo: bhpho.to/33HbGNM | and Aputure AL-MW: bhpho.to/2N3MtZV
DISCLAIMER: This video and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Keywords: Sony a7R IV, Sony a7riv, Sony a7r4, Sony a7RIV, Sony A7r IV Review, a7riv review, Sony, A7R IV, a7r 4, Review, 61MP, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Handling, Battery Life, Canon EOS R, Sony a7rIII, Video Test, Sigma 14-25mm F2.8 DN, Tamron 17-28mm F2.8, Sigma 35mm F1.2, Focus, Burst Rate, Tracking, Sports, Portraits, Resolution, High ISO, Image Quality, Sample Images, Photography, 201p, Ergonomics, Sigma MC-11, Metabones, Vello, Sony a9
So glad I opted for the a9 just recently at a killer price.
You also forgot to mention the v6.0 firmware update of the a9 over the a7riii and a7iii which gives me now red, white and grey focus frames.
Active tracking, no black out shooting, electronic shutter etc etc makes the a9 a bargain now.
You are correct re focus motor drive speed on the a9 as my a7riii is slower, especially when I use the MC-11.
The firmware V6 is great. I like using the Red box myself for higher visibility.
These are the things I really need to know and no one talks about, the real differences between the cameras, thank you for understanding the need for this
It does help for sure.
As always, Dustin, outstanding. I believe that choices are becoming way more complex as most people will unlikely be buying an a7R4 as their first Sony. Additionally, there the type of photos you want to use a body for. I have the a7R2 and it will continue to work well for portraits, pet portraits, landscape and day to day. However, the AF is weK for anything that moves quickly and inconsistently. I’ve recently started shooting BIF with a 200-600 and, at the same price can get either the a7R4 or a9.
This returns me to the complexity of choice. In my position, the more I read and watch, the more the A9 makes the most sense.
You’re a genuine gift to our community. Thank you.
I’m glad to help out, and I’m eager to get my hands on a 200-600.
You deserve many many more subscribers DA. The work you are doing is simply phenomenal. Regards
Thank you so much 😀
I own an A7R4 and use it exclusively for wildlife with my Sony 200 - 600mm and Sony 90mm macro lens. The AF is really very good, not quite as good as my A9 but I reckon it's better than my A7III. The 61MP provides far more detail when cropping, so much so I haven't bothered to use the APS-C mode or my SEL14TC yet. I used the Animal EyeAF for the first time yesterday to capture a fox. The incredible part for me was that the fox was 45 metres away in the first shot and 48 metres away in the second. In the second shot the fox was behind some foliage but the EyeAF still locked on immediately. I was so impressed I switched to manual focus and noted the distance in the EVF. The A7R4 is virtually the perfect camera for me.
That’s great feedback, and I think your application may be one of the best applications of the a7rIV.
I have the a7r3 and have debated between upgrading to a7r4 or a92 now that we know the a92 only has 24megs I'm back to thinking a7r4. How is the blackout on a7r4 vs. a9? I shoot mostly birds in flight. thanks for any input.
@@MarktrustingJesus. I shoot at 8fps with my A7R4 and have not identified a problem with blackout. I have taken several series of gulls, a peregrine falcon, buzzards being mobbed by crows, kestrels and jays, all in flight (and a dragonfly). It won't quite match the A9, but what does? Nevertheless, the A7R4 is a cracking bit of kit. I chose it because I find I crop quite a bit - especially birds and dragonflies in flight. It really is marvellous for cropping. It is also brilliant for macro images - especially with extension tubes on the 90mm macro lens. Mark Smith (RUclips) reckons it's better for BIF when used with the 100 - 400mm G Master. I sold mine (prior to the announcement of the A7R4) and bouight a 200 - 600mm. I will keep that lens, as it works beautifully with the A7R4, but I will purchase a secondhand 100 - 400mm next year for butterflies, dragonflies and swallows in flight, as they often fly all over the place like a mad man's kilt.
@@MarktrustingJesus I have shot Muscovy ducks and Pelicans in flight with the A7RIV and 200-600mm and the A7RIV blackout is not a big problem. It is no A9 with no blackout but it is very usable. If you want to know what to do think about what DPreview said in its conclusion of its A7RIV review where they gave it a Gold Award and 91% rating: ""The Sony a7R IV is among the most capable cameras we've tested. It makes a compelling case that the days of choosing between speed-oriented cameras and resolution-oriented cameras are coming to an end. It wouldn't be our top choice for sports and action purists (all those megapixels result in many megabytes of storage), but for those users that need this resolution on a regular basis and want to be able to photograph fast-moving subjects when necessary, the Sony a7R IV is the best option on the market right now."
@@klackon1 awesome. Thank you. I shoot with 100-400 and 1.4x tele. I'd love the 200-600 and a7r4 but can probably only buy 1. Thanks for info
Dustin your reviews are fantastic. Thank you for always being detailed and honest.
My pleasure.
After watching a lot of your recent vids on the new Tamron, I finally decided to get an A7RIIIa over the A7III as the shutter is made for a lot more lifespan, the A7RIIIa has the new 2mpx LCD+USB-C and the EVF. Not sure I made the best choice but leaving Canon DSLR for the third party les options with Sony. I bought the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 from your advice. Should be good for my small studio model shoots.
You'll enjoy the lens and camera!
I've been waiting for this comparison. Thank you my friend.
I’m glad it helps.
So much clarity in your reviews, thanks for the enlightenment. You're doing good work in many areas.
Thank you. Glad to help out.
I bought the A7r4 for the high megapixels, esp the pixel shift 240mp mode. I create large art prints and upgrading this camera after using the 5dIV and manually doing my own “pixel shift” in photoshop has been an absolute game changer. In studio lighting the colors are better too.
It sound like you have an actual application for high resolution, which not everyone has.
Dustin Abbott yep. I’m glad they went with it. I think they are going to end up pulling a good number of people like me who were otherwise forced to save up for medium format just for large scale applications until this came around.
Especially useful on the A7rIV is also the "focus priority" mode, that uses an open aperture in AF-C mode, no matter which aperture has been set in the camera. This will cause a short additional shutter lag because the camera needs to wait until aperture is closed again before being able to take the picture. On the other hand this option will reduce the number of misfocused imaged to almost zero percent also when shooting in the studio with only weak modeling light. My A7r III (which does not have this option) has a tendency to misfocus roughly 5% percent of the images that I take in the studio at ISO 100, 1/125s. f8 with AF-C and face detection and weak modeling light. The reason for this is probably the very small amount of light that will reach the sensor, the low efficiency of the autofocus phase sensors under these circumstances and the not very strong effect of changing focus at f8 because of the larger depth of field. So for me the "focus priority mode" is one of the highlights of the A7r IV.
Interesting feedback. I can see the validity of what you’re saying.
Stefan, this is the best comment in the thread and "focus priority" is by far the most significant thing in R4. I wonder why nobody is talking about it, but most of the reviewers are too busy to talk about the 60+mp. For everything above 40mp I'd much prefer to use my MF system.
Focusing with the aperture stopped down in the Sony's previous models was really the dumbest thing one can "implement" in a camera for studio work. I had between 5 and 55% misfocused shots in the studio with the R3. Even the 30 years old SLRs will open up the aperture for focusing. No other brand is focusing with aperture stopped down - Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Leica, Olympus, Panasonic, none. Only Sony. What was even more frustrating is that R3, for instance, won't open the aperture for focusing with Sony's flagship lenses (such as 85GM, Planar 50/1.4 etc), but this issue is non-existing with adapter lenses. When one is shooting for example macro-beauty and even f/16 isn't enough to get desired DoF, using the Sony was nearly impossible and pure hazard without pointing a powerful projector in model's face to blind them well enough. Not only this, but 85GM and Planar 50/1.4 won't open *fully* the aperture even in AFS.
After few months with it, the A7R3 totally broke my nerves and I sold it and moved back to Canon. Now shooting the gorgeous RF lenses and couldn't be more happy. EOS-R is focusing down to the insane -6EV, which is way beyond the human vision. If you ask me - the only good Sony is the sold one. I've lost around €12k for being so naive to get the Sony. This brand is still too far away from the real and pleasing photography experience (software and firmware are their biggest struggle). I feel like the Alpha series was designed by engineers, who really hate photography.
Anyways, I grabbed the R4 for a 7days test and will see whether it will freak out like the R3 when used in the studio with Profoto Air Remote TTL-S.
However, in the typical Sony manner, they still didn't manage to come up with *lossless* raw as well as a "medium" and "small" raw. If this was my company - THIS camera won't be launched without these options to working perfectly. My first shots with the R4 ended up with raw files of about 135MB each, which is... ridiculous. Even the GFX100 is having smaller files.
"It's a Sony", I got nothing more to say. Maybe they will nail it with A7RXV, who knows... And then comes the problem with the chaos in their lens lineup, but this is a totally different story. As of now I'm "Thanks, but not, thanks." I've had enough from Sony.
P.S. I wonder does anybody knows to what EV is the AF system of A7R4 rated? The A7R3 was only to -3EV (The EOS-R is rated to -6EV).
@@alexanderivanoff I would see it differently. Imho Sony nailed it this time. I'm completely in love with my Sony A7rIV. The only thing it cannot do perfectly is low light shooting. The Canon mirrorless system is at the moment simply not mature. They've got great lenses, but there are by far not enough of them. And do we really have to talk about the R cameras? As long as they don't have sensor stabilization and a sensor comparable to at least the Sony A7r III (yes, three) the brand is not interesting for me.
@@stefan_becker well, as they say: to each - their own. To me the EOS-R is a great and very capable camera. The best and most reliable AF lives there, believe it or not. It is focusing without any hesitation in total darkness, where I can't see my shoes. I'm shooting fashion/portraits and IBIS never been a factor, as I'm tied to higher SS anyway. I can see the benefit of stabilization past 135mm, but I rarely shoot at these and even when I do, most of the 70-200 lenses are stabilized. The sensor is very capable, indeed, so nothing more to desire in this regard. I'm much more into lenses than the bodies. The lens is what really matters nowadays if you ask me. However, I'm surprised by your statement that Canon doesn't have enough lenses(?!) - this simply isn't true. For one year they dropped more native lenses than Sony had for 6 years and don't forget that all EF lenses can be used on the "R" absolutely natively. The RF-L lenses are right up there to Leica quality.
When I get the Sony in my hands, somehow, the desire to shoot diminishes... Anyways, I'll try the R4 and will see whether they finally came up with a capable tool. A great camera isn't only a sensor, it is a combination of ergonomy, software, firmware, capable sensor with suitable resolution, etc. To my liking Sony delivers the least shooting fun. The biggest fun factor when shooting belongs to Leica M10 if you ask me, then Canon "R" and Fuji. This is at least my ranking.
Just checked about the AF system in the A7R4 - it is still going to -3EV... just like the R3. Not good.
Every system has it's strengths and weaknesses and it is wrong to say "This is the best"... because the normal question is "The best for what"?
I for one am fan of the bigger, juicy pixels and won't go for any body above 40mp with full frame sensor. 50mp from medium format body looks way better than 50mp from 35mm sensor.
And yeah, you're right - this isn't the right place to talk about these things...Have a great week.
@@alexanderivanoff your lengthy, detailed input is appreciated. Thanks. User-experience-wise, M10-P is the Monarch/Emperor/King/Ruler. Then EOS-R, & then Fuji, and M43 Olympus Pen-F & just announced EM5iii as well. Well, out of reach for most - Hasselblad X1Dii + 80mm f/1.9 is classy, stylish, ergo-friendly, chic, best at handling & user interface. Panasonic G9 feels great in hands, due to its build & grip.
Mr Abbott I think you know I am your biggest fan, but just a little perplexed you spent so much time on 3rd party lens performance? I currently have on rental the R4 and 200-600 and I was hoping to have you give your opinion on the a9 vs A7R4 with 100-400 or 200-600 Sony lenses. If you don't have access to the 200-600 as one of your patreons I would be willing to cover the rental cost for you to test. Godspeed and keep up the wonderful information you provide 💖
It is because so many of us don't have Sony lenses and the adapters out there are so good. We want to know how AF works with adapted lenses because a 500F4 Canon lens can be less than $3k while Sony doesn't even have one. A 400 2.8 Canon can be had for $2500 while the Sony is what, $12k? We NEED to adapt Canon lenses.
@@mikezupancic2182 Well i would say that by now at least 50% of owners shoot native lenses so i agree with Longrider only showing adapted lenses is simply not providing a full picture.
While I personally shoot almost all adapted glass and I value that comparisons quite a lot, I think it would be worthwhile to test the long native glass-- especially with your eager fan willing to cover the rental.
My challenge has been that getting Sony loaners if very difficult at this point. Sony sometimes restricts B&H shipping loaners to Canada, and the Sony distributor in Canada to this point has not had loaners available to them. This seems to be changing, and I have a list of loaner requests already registered with the 200-600 at the top of the list. I only have so much money, and my investment in my personal long glass has been on the Canon front in the past.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Well this might be a weird answer from my side. Saying your review is not complete is not a 100% negative thing we are in the lucky state there are many reviewers out there and by watching a few and feedback from users anyone these days should be able to get a good view of all a camera can do. Reviewers almost by design are not like longtime users anyway (again not a attack) so its us the people watching these videos to mix and match and ask if needed. But that all states it does mean that your AF testing part provide some cool info but in one area is lacking so we need to watch some more reviews and thats not bad.
thanks for the great review. It's great you do all this work and put it out there. Appreciate it!
You’re welcome!
So the A7RIV AF is noticeably better than the A7RIII, but not quite as good as the A9. Like what the A7RIII and A9 enjoyed the last couple of years, I wonder if in the next couple of years Sony will give us firmware updates that will improve the A7RIV's AF performance even more, maybe even just short of eclipsing the current A9 performance? Or are there hardware (sensor/processor) constraints? Great series of reviews Dustin, thank you.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see further firmware improvements. That was very much the case with the RIII. The a9 will always have more points and greater coverage, but focus algorithms and focus technology can be added via software.
I have 3 days with the A7R4. I do a a lot of night photography and I have been testing the camera with high ISOs. The increase in the amount of noise is very strong if you compare it with the previous version. At this point I will say that I don’t recommend it for night photography, but I still need to test it a little bit more to have a final word. The files are too big also and the edit process slows down, so consider that ad well.
Those are fair criticisms. I think that Sony overestimated the appetite for resolution this high. Many people aren't aware of the sacrifices involved with getting resolution that high on a 35mm sensor.
I sold my A7iii and A7riii and picked up the a7riv because I believe it is a great hybrid camera and I get the functionality I need for video like I did in the A7iii and the great resolution for landscapes and portraits I got from the A7riii. The A7riv does both exceptionally well and I couldn't be happier. While I didn't specifically make the change for the agronomic features, WOW, they make a huge difference in how the camera operates. Your videos helped me make the decision to jump in.
Thank You!
I’m glad they’ve helped.
Thanks for The info
I've gone with a combination of A7RIII for general purposes and A9 for sport and wildlife. Couldn't be happier to be honest. The a7R4 and A9ii are fantastic machines but the improvements are too incremental to justify an upgrade from the previous models.
That's my current combo today.
Hi Dustin,
Nice review. I have the A9 + A73 and looking to sell my A73 for A7R3/R4. I shoot mostly sports, wildlife, landscape, portrait, food, and street. Which one would you recommend me? Or wait a month for A74 announcement?
A7r2 AF is still good enough for street shooting during vacations ..... perhaps should use a timer to see fast af locks on for different cameras
You're right - it's fine for mild situations, but not for serious tracking of action.
Thank you DA. I liked when you repeated the words of people "A7R3 AF system is garbage". This is very representative of the world we live in. And I'm pretty sure those people saying this didn't even use A7Rm2, the AF on this one killed me literally but the sensor sold me in 😉
Your portraits being human or animals are very good when the models don't overplay it 👍👌thank you for sharing.
It's true. There is so little balance and objectivity in reporting on almost any topic these days. Nuance is lost.
Awesome review as always Dustin. I love the depth you go into on the finer details. Where I'm a portrait photographer I'm also an avid bird photographer and I shoot the A7iii. I have no problem with my portrait work but often have to crop quite a bit even using the 200-600 shooting birds. I go back and forth whether I should get a high resolution camera so I can crop in and still have enough pixels or get one of the Sony crop cameras like an a6400 or similar for much less money. Getting the crop body would allow me to keep the A7iii so I'd have two bodies to work with. I feel sure I'd have to sell it to get an R line body. The 60+ MP scares me in filling up my storage as well. I sure wish it let you shoot in a 35mp mode to save space if you didn't need all the other pixels. What is your thoughts on which way is the best for a bird and portrait photographer like me with a current A7iii? (Oh yeah, I'm also worried that if I got an Riii I'd lose out on good auto focus that I have now.)
Hi Dennis. It is a little tough. If I were in your situation with your shooting needs, though, I would personally choose the a7RIV. It makes more sense to me than shooting with two cameras, and the AF is excellent.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks Dustin. Sometimes people dance around giving an opinion. I'm glad you offered one as you have before for me. Are you running into any file size issues in your testing period such as tranfer speed or trouble with editing software handling such large files?
A true pro. So much in depth analysis. Looong videos. But that’s cause there’s so much tech here and trust me these lengths also aren’t enough. Keep it up
Glad you like them!
With your positive review on the A7RIV, it sounds like an A7IV could be a perfect camera with the tweaked af, body update and a resolution bump. The question is when does it come out?
It’s already out, actually
I think you misread the post. As far as I can tell the A7IV is not out yet. I think you read it as the A7rIV
Michael DiLeo Correct. Sorry for the confusion.
Thank you very much Dustin this was very useful; esp. your insights on adapted glass. Looking forward to the next instalments.
I’m glad to help out.
Great footage in the rain amazing combo just checking out the new a9 II
I'm looking forward to playing with it.
You have a 100-400mm shadow on your chest
Another great video
Thanks!
Thanks for the comparison.
You’re welcome.
Looking at getting an A7R4 when the price drops next year thanks for the review
Enjoy!
Amazing test. Thanks for sharing all this useful info! I have a question about the A7 3 and A9 when using Canon lenses. Does AF-C only work on low speed drive?
No. All of the shots shown in the video were shot in high+, and autofocus is working. It just can’t handle fast focus changes (like the sprinter moving towards the camera)
Thank you very much Dustin for your truely in-depth comparison between the 3 cameras. I am leaning towards A7RIV
You're welcome. Enjoy!
Thank you for the very informative video. This is the only review that compares those 3 cameras to each other, I really appreciated it. Only one question: you mentioned that the number of JPEG pictures required to fill-in the buffer of a7R4 is higher when shooting in APS-C mode. Does the number increases (with the same proportion) also when shooting RAW and APS-C? From your table, it seems that APS-C mode does not affect the buffering capabilities of RAWs, but this is not what I expected. Thanks!
Hi Allessandro - I hadn't heard, so I tested that after releasing that review and discovered that it does apply to RAW files also. I have an updated chart in the final review.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Great! Thank you!
Excellent video, thank you
You're welcome.
What a treat! Thank you for doing this video!
You're welcome!
Thinking of trading in my Sony A9 for AR3 or 4, as I am expanding from Bird photography to landscape and street. The higher resolution and high res mode appeals to me. No easy decision!
If you make that move, you might as well go to the a7RIV so that you are getting more similar AF performance and better ergonomics.
very comprehensive comparison, love it, thanks Sir!
My pleasure!
I have the A7R4 & A9 and its great to have the pair. Good info thanks again Dustin
And what are you autofocus observations?
@@DustinAbbottTWI A9 autofocus is a bit snappier to me but the A7R4 has great autofocus also. Both are great cameras so i use different cameras for different things but the newest line of Sony cameras are more about refinements to me, making a good camera better. Keep up the great work Dustin
Michael Mystro Pierce May I ask what makes you swap between the two? I have an A9.
@@town3 what do you use them for?
@@GapeGang wedding, real estate, product everything. I bought a A7S3 and FX6 as well now for video.
I shoot 50% landscape and 50% wildlife (mammals) and I can't decide between a7RIII and a9... I find these two camerad used at the same price, any suggests?
Another question: which one is best for video?
This photographer is great.
Thanks
The high resolution is great for pros who have clients that may want to crop the image you've composed in camera. It is also great -- of course -- for extreme enlargements but I've also made 2x3 foot prints from my old Canon EOS 1DsII and that was only 16.7 mp. If you don't have a strong computer and able storage you may want to wait for the A74. Also, the noise is more pleasant in my opinion; it looks more like fine film grain that the blotchy noise you get with smaller sensors.
There are certainly applications for high resolutions, though few people actually need 61Mpx.
The R4 has a new processor coupled with the new sensor so the AF performance shows this. I have had the R4 for a couple of wks & there is a perceptible increase in what the new sensor does. I did not find this when I went up from R to R2 but R4 on the level of the eye is a paradigm shift. Its not just cropping- its the possibilities of reframing with different angles so that the lens one uses goes far beyond its focal range. I took an image (jpg) of a house with 4 floors with ornamental grills & gardens on different floors with a sigma 105 macro. I got 8 different frames from it & even saw small sculpture in detail on the highest floor for which I would have required atleast a 300mm zoom. The same with macro & with the sony 90 the af is more accurate as is resolving of fine detail - hence better precision AF. The other is that combining AF/DMF & MF is much easier for precision work given the extra resolution in the EVF. The a9 is a specialized sports camera so it has a different emphasis. And for event photography there would be no need for a high resolution sensor whether R2/3/4. Basically what sony has been doing is improving its base technology with every new version/sensor(size). This is then put in different variations according to different kinds of image specialization. The lower models on the other hand provide excellent value so more differentiated choice.
Sounds like a good application of the R4
Nice review, thanks. I shoot with the A6600+Tam 150-500 and like this a lot but ever since recently trying the Canon R5+100-500 I want a high mix FF body. So have been looking at the A7R4 ... firmware 1.2 gives it 11fps, the same as the A6600 I believe. My question would be how the AF performance of the R4 does against the A6600 which I find lacking but not bad. The A9 certainly fills what I ideally want but at 24mpx it limits crop ability especially on those longer shots.
I would say that the R4 would be fairly close to the a6600 is autofocus performance.
I have both the R3 and R4. I kinda want to sell the R3 and pickup the A9.
If you have need for what the a9 brings, that’s the way to go, I think
@Zakna am in the same boat as you doing wedding photography am thinking of getting the A9 and using it with my 135mm GM & my A7RIV + 24mm GM. the A7RIV is impressive i feel it the perfect camera for me as a wedding shooter and the A9 is there to be use for moment where i dont want to you flash as much and can't miss a moment due to the no blackout EVF and 20Fps Slient shooting mode.
As usual, outstanding in-depth review and I’m not a mirrorless shooter either yet. Which leads to my questions - as one who shoots 90% of the time on an airfield at fast planes, both military and stunt/aerobatic - sounds like for me “stick to DSLR like my Canon 5DMk4, possibly move up to a 1DX series” because only an a9 series here would do?. I’m talking flight speeds pushing Mach .9 to .98.
And on that DSLR comment, will you be reviewing the new Canon 90D? Thanks as always. (Wish all all other YT reviews were this in depth and solid).
I do hope to cover the 90D at some point in the near future. As for your first question: I think even my a7RIII tracks as well or better than the 5DIV, and the a7RIV definitely does. MUCH better coverage of AF points and great tracking abilities. And yes, the a9 is fantastic.
I might try sony one day, i’m a nikon guy but i want it more water resistant and bit more improvements with the egornomics. The camera can do with accepting faster cards.
There are still areas to improve, but Sony is maturing nicely.
This is my first R4 review. Did they not go Express?
Why is this AF test done with non-native lenses? There's so many things, IMHO, that affect the result that I am wondering whether this actually comparing camera AF performance or a comparison of a certain line-up.
I used multiple lenses here, including some native mount lenses.
I'm waiting for mine to arrive next week :) haven't ordered 24 1.4 gm yet looking for best deal still
Enjoy!
Hi Dustin i was hugely dissapointed with this video.I am about to buy a7riv+200-600 for wildlife photography and was eagerly waiting for your review and thought you would compare af of these cameras on native lenses like 200-600g or 100-400 gm but you decided to do it on non native lenses.With adapted lenses you would never get the true performance of these camera bodies,what should have been a small part of af comparison test was sadly made a full comparison test.Not every body has to adapt old lenses to Sony system,many are buying new camera and lenses and many are replacing their lenses too with cameras.You could have rented native Sony lenses to do this comparison test.I absolutely love your detailed reviews of camera gear,they are the most comprehensive ones out there,but sadly i am dissapointed for the first time.
Hmmm, so I should have personally spent several hundred dollars to satisfy your curiosity, and because I didn’t, I’m a disappointment? Entitled, a little?
PS. I’ve had a request in with Sony for a loaner for the 200-600 since it’s announcement, but thus far they have not gotten one in my hands.
@@DustinAbbottTWI sorry if i may have sounded a bit rude to you...just that i was super exited for this review of yours and i didnt get comparison test with native lenses so i was frustated a bit...but iam sure along with me many more would have wanted af test with native sony lenses.I absolutely adore your meticulously detailed style of reviewing...others hardly take so much effort...
@@DustinAbbottTWI sorry to hear that sony hasnt provided you a loaner 200-600gm...i think the loss is theirs...their are many youtube product reviewers out their but not all can be trusted to provide honest reviews...you are amongst the few who can be trusted to provide unbaised opinion...
Wondering how much better is tracking AF is the Mark IV than the III. You say III is good and the IV is better, do you have any objective examples? Went through your video and there’s no objective example with the same lens on both cameras using a similar tracking situation.
Would appreciate the comparison, for example with the FE 55 mm 1.8. Thanks.
The A7R III with firmware upgrade 3.0 has real time eye AF. Is it comparable to the Mark IV? How does the real time tracking on the mark IV compare to tracking on III?
There actually is such an example (the sprinter running towards the camera).
Brilliant! Been looking forward to this to see how the a7riv copes with adapting glass. Did you try dropping the frames to see if the tracking was better on the a7riv with adapted glass as I know this was an issue with the iii needing to be dropped to medium rather than high or high+
I haven’t experimented with tracking at lower frame rates. I didn’t find that to be true when I tested it on the a7RIII, but perhaps that’s now true with the a7RIV.
Really good reviews, many points I didn’t know. One thing I’m curious about, not mentioned, when doing your tests, basketball, running at camera, what focus modes were you using? Also what is best mode for video. I use continuous but hunts sometimes on an important shot. Thanks
Hi Jack. I used Mode 1 for tracking with a focus priority. As for video, what lens are you using? I rarely have the kind of issue you describe.
@@DustinAbbottTWI For video there are less modes that work. I usually use zone and like to keep that zone on someones face, so maybe the upper centre area for the selection area, but if people are dark in the face or distant from the camera it will hunt focus. I use very good lenses, 24mm Gmaster, 16-35mm Gmaster for this kind of work on a gimbal or handheld. I have a Sony A7M3 and A7RM3. The A7M3 is better for video full frame as the R camera does pixel binning full frame. And hey, thanks for the response. Appreciate.
Great review. Thanks. I have the riii and was hoping you would day the riv was not an improvement and no reason to upgrade. Darn..... Not to be.....
The RIV is definitely better at the extremes, but I have found the RIII to be very competent in most situations.
You take a tangent at AF comparison at 0:55. What I was expecting to learn is the following: my a7c AF tracking is much better than the AF tracking on my a7rIII. Is the AF continuous tracking of the A74 identical or better than the a7c. Thanks for your great videos.
Hmmm, it would have been hard to include the a7C since it didn't exist at the time of this review.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you Dustin.
Thanks for the review, I'm looking to upgrade my camera, I currently have an A7R, But it sucks in low light. I'm gonna need the best low light sony camera as I'm wanting to start shooting nightclub photography ideally without flash. Would you say go for the A7R III and invest the remaining money into better glass or just go for the A7R IV and use my current glass ( Samyang 35mm 2.8 and Sony Zeiss 55mm 1.8) Sorry for the long message!
Do you need higher resolution? If not, the a73 might be a great choice for you as it is actually Sony's best low light option.
Watching this.. how good or bad is the Image quality in the new body, as i noticed degraded ISO performance even at not so high ISO. While the ergonomics and features are attractive only doubt has been if the A7R4 actually be worse off quality wise Vs the A7R3. Would deeply appreciate any further light to assist
That depends on what metric you judge by. The a7RIV clearly has higher resolution and is rated at equal levels for DR (a bit better at, say ISO 200). It definitely shows more visible noise than the R3
I came here to watch this hoping this was a proper AF comparison between the A9 and the 7IV on Sony glass. This is a question that many sports photographers are wondering. As far as I know there is no still direct comparison videos online and as I have no interest in 3rd party glass this video told me nothing.
You apparently didn't watch deep enough, as there is comparison with an 85mm option later on (a native lens that bettered the GM version, Batis, and others in my direct comparison tests earlier). I don't have either the 100-400 or 200-600 on hand, but there is direct comparison with other lenses. I've also tested with the 50mm F1.4 Planar lens.
The lens shadow is distracting. You should have it on your left, camera right.
A little late for that ;)
I wish the Mark IV version still had 42 Mpix and would be faster. 60 Mpix is overkill - and loose S/N.
I don't disagree.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I have the Mark VI because I use the 200-600 with the 1,4x Converter for wildlife. The Mark 3 does no proper continuous AF here (I will keep it as B-Cam). The other features are welcome, but not the enormous computer power and storage to work with these huge RAW files. www.possi.eu
4:40 I hope, Sony will once upgrade the compressed raw to be lossless instead of lossy, what results in quite poor arw images. Specially on the a7R4, I want all of the 15 stops dynamic range. But I only get them on uncompressed raw, meaning 130 MB per file. If you convert them on computer to lossless dng you’ll get files about 60 to 65 MB, if you do the conversion by adding full size fast load preview it’s gonna be about 80 MB per file. You never can mention this often enough, because there are a lot of Sony shooters out there not aware of the lossy compressed ARW „issue“. - This comment is simply intended to be an additional supplying information, not complaining nor offending.
I've not heard anything actually suggesting such an upgrade via firmware other than people's hopes.
It seems that only Canon zoom lenses are affected with focus issue not fixes. I had this problem with EF24-70 2.8L II, EF70-200 2.8L IS II eiter with Sigma MC-11 or Metabones adapters on A7RIII. I also had the problem with zoom lenses when they refused to focus at all at the opposite focal end to the one you powered camera on. If I powered my camera with the lens set at 24mm and started shooting, it operated well up to 50mm. But when I changed it to more than 50mm up to 70mm the lense was just rolling focus full range without stopping at the right position, espessially when I tried to focus from long to short distance or vice versa.
It’s not my experience that Canon lenses exclusively are affected, but rather that Sigma lenses work best with the MC-11 adapter.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Unfortunately, I do not have zoom lenses from Sigma, but it is true, Sigma Art seres fixes work fine.
Thanks, lots of useful information here. I am not sure if you mentioned it directly, and maybe you have not had enough time with the A9 yet to answer, but I wonder if the autofocus of the A7r4 is better than the A9 when adapting lenses like the Canon 35/1.4 ii L, and if so, can it even best the performance on your 5Dmk4? (sitting here with some good old Canon L portrait lenses that needs a body with eye autofocus).
I wouldn’t say the performance is better than the a9, but I don’t think it is any worse. The 35L II works extremely well on it now via the MC-11. And yes, I would say that I prefer using the lens on the a7RIV than the 5DIV now because of Eye AF.
So, for absolute low light. Is it still the Sony A7S ii? Or have these new more crowded sensors caught up?
I would venture that the a73 and a9II are probably tops in the lineup, currently.
@@DustinAbbottTWI ok.. vs 12mp sensor even? Thanks
Hi I own the a6400 and im thinking of upgrading to a7riv for wildlife. Do you know how these 2 cameras compare with autofocus and iso quality?
Im happy with the autofocus on 6400 but the ISO is poor for my needs. thank you
I believe the a7RIV to be slightly better in ISO performance and the autofocus system is definitely superior.
Great review Dustin. How would you estimate the AF performance of the new A7R4 compared to the Canon 5D4 that you own (as I do) .
I can't answer for those two cameras, but I can tell you that between the 7dII and the A6400 there is no comparison. Tracking through the frame is much better on the Sony and misfocused shots are very rare. The 7DII's focus got distracted much easier. That's with the respective 100-400mm lenses. If that helps you.
This is about right for me, too. I feel like Sony focus in many situations has surpassed the 5DIV. More AF points covering a larger portion of the frame and with more equal sensitivity across those points.
Wow this guy goes in depth!
I've been accused of that before :)
@@DustinAbbottTWI Please keep it up, your content is great, and very helpful.
The shadow of that tele lens on your chest is a bit distracting :)
I agree. That’s the challenge of being in front of the camera rather than behind it. By the time I start editing the footage is already in the can.
It wasn't distracting me, until I read your comment, and now, I can't stop staring at it. Curse you! :)
@@anmarmansur1942 sorry!
@@instantesnet No worries. Uncurse you. :D
Morning breakfast n coffee and see Dustin's new video notification. Always a good day. Thank you for the great comparison. It was fun to learn the differences. :)
I’m glad it helps out.
Great and informative review as usually, thank you Dustin! Seems like for us, Canon shooters, the only way to get a high res camera with a good AF is to wait for the "supposedly" upcoming 80Mpx EOS R.
I do believe that a solid high-resolution mirrorless camera from Canon will come. They've actually done a good job of fixing some of the shortcomings in the R system already, and a lot of the lenses seem solid (I've only tested two).
@@DustinAbbottTWI Dustin, thank you for your reply. Out of curiosity I rented an A7r4 from LR two days ago. Interesting camera. Love the great IQ @ ISO 100 and IBIS. Tried a few lenses via the Metabones MK4 (in both green and adv mode) and the Sigma MC11 adapters. For some reason the camera always shows a tiny OSPDAF spot in the center with the MB4, and the normal size area with the Sigma. Overall the Sigma works better and much more reliable. I had no luck AFing my 200/2 via both adapters. The camera recognizes it as f/2.8 (but it could be working as f/2 anyway - not sure). A few things I didn't like so far:
1. The grip could be 0.5-1 cm bigger. No idea who designed it, but something is wrong with their hands imho. I know it will work fine with a vertical grip, but what if I don't want a vertical grip?
2. Zoom 1:1 in the chimping mode is terribly slow (SanDisk Extreme Pro UHC II card ). It's like 4 seconds for the uncompressed RAW and 3 seconds for the lossy compressed RAW. I don't remember it was that slow on my 5DsR. The zoom is kind of important, otherwise the chimping is pointless. Can't chimp while it's clearing the buffer. It would be nice to see the already dumped photos at least.
3. I got the camera with a Profoto remote and couldn't get it working. I used to shoot Sony cameras in the past (from the A99 to the A7r2) but I couldn't remember what trick it requires in order to work. Took about 10 minutes to find in the menu and enable "Wireless Flash". I never considered the Sony menu as bad, but now I agree - it is bad. Also I still cannot understand why the wireless flash should be explicitly enabled.
4. Touch screen and the focus selection are not great. They are acceptable at best, and the touch-focusing experience is awkward. No touch in the menu is a nonsense.
5. The low light AF is not good. I tried my old FE 35/2.8 ZA on the A7r4 vs the 40/2.8 pancake on the EOS R. Lighting conditions: 1/15s @ ISO 12800 wide open. The Sony is hunting while the Canon locks instantly. For some reason I thought they should be close, but apparently that's not the case. On the plus side - the Sony pic came out sharp (thanks to IBIS) but noisy, and the Canon pic had a motion blur (but less noisy :)
Going to play more over the weekend. I don't think I will buy it, but overall it's a decent machine that definitely needs more polishing. Well, maybe 5th generation?
from specs, the a9 recalculate AF 60x/second, the a7III and a7RIII (supposedly) 20x/second... do you know what the specs are with the a7RIV?
I don’t know that data. I haven’t seen it anywhere.
I've decided to get the A9 for my action of dogs and sports, coming from the 7d mike. All my lenses are sigma primarily the 105 art... 135 art and the 70-200 sport. with the MC-11 do you have any recent experience with these lenses on the a9?
They all work well on an a9, though for shooting sports I think you'll want to go with a native lens at some point. At the least you could trade your 70-200 Sport for the Tamron 70-180mm.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for the timely reply...
I have been up all night and have actually settled on a perfect setup. The 135 Gmaster and the 100-400 G master.
Reason is that I will gain a far more efficient useable focal range out of the 100-400 and with low light being far superior on the A9 compared to the 7D mkii. 400mm on FF of tight shot's will pretty much resemble 200mm 2.8 on my crop sensor anyways. The 135 will give me my stills subject isolation 'pop' aswell as fantastic tracking abilities of my 105 at the moment regardless.
Due to the loss of crop factor, my working distance will actually be similar, just a bit further extended with the 100-400. If my rational makes sense to you lol
For architecture, events, fashion what Sony would you recommend? A7III RIII RIV or 9's? I hate to use flash so I like the ISO in Sony. I currently have a Canon 70D and using APSC Lenses. Thanks!!
I would say that the RIII is the best lower priced option for you, with the RIV being the best choice if you want maximum resolution. I like the RIII better for ISO performance, and I think its AF would be enough for your purposes. I love the a9 for some applications, but it sounds like overkill for your work in terms of focus and perhaps not enough resolution in some situations.
@@DustinAbbottTWI many thanks!!!🙏😃 ;) All the best!
@Dustin, What do you think about the A7riii vs A7iii based on the reduction the riii price.... I would love the flexibility to crop in post, let me know what you think?
I still like the a7RIII better as the complete package.
Nice one!!
Glad it helped.
My YT search was for an A9 vs A7C comparison, but this was great to watch anyway!
Does it make any sense to compare A9 vs A7C? I think so, because you can buy a new A7C for about the same price as a used A9.
Given the A7C is sort of an A7-3.5 with a somewhat debilitated IBIS, its difficult to place it...
I'm not sure that's a straight up comparison as the a9 is really a different kind of camera. More than twice the burst rate, not as good for video, much better physical controls.
@@DustinAbbottTWI there you did it!
In one sentence ^^
I like how snappy the A9 is and likely more durable, plus non-crippled IBIS. On the downside, its worse in low light.
But why is it worse in video? I thought it'd be better, with its crazy electronic shutter, don't you get less rolling shutter effects for video?
The video quality is good, but there is no SLOG, fewer video options, and, of course, there is the 29:59 recording limit.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you once again! That about completes the picture for me :)
Hi Dustin... thank you so much for your amazing show. Such concise and objective explanations. You're a true pleasure to watch and learn from. My concern, as i am leaning towards the A9, and it being somewhat of a one-trick pony. Wow my greatest passion it's in Wildlife photography I really love to capture landscape as well and and worried that the a9 will come up Short. ... does the camera have the capacity for a high quality landscape image? This is kind of a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for me to be able to afford such a premium camera and I really want to get it right. .. any of these cameras at your reviewing are night and day improvement over what I'm currently using and I'm not trying to be greedy, I think when it's said and done I just don't want to have any remorse for choosing the wrong one out of the three.. thank you again for your awesome content and wonderful show I've learned so much from you I can't thank you enough..
A1 quick caveat if it makes your advice different I'm playing on purchasing the 5.6 200 to 600 Sony lens as my main lens
I've gotten some amazing landscapes with the A9. Ultimately 24MPx is still plenty of resolution for many applications. What you don't have is the ability to deeply crop images in the way you can with the higher resolution bodies.
Wonderful video! Thanks for your time and efforts behind this! However, I have a question, what about the difference in AF performance for native Sony lenses between a7riii & a7riv?
I did speak about this later in the episode. Focus is more confident in general, though the a7RIII was already excellent in less challenging situations, so the difference is as obvious as when using it at the extremes.
Great video, thank you. You mentioned that the A9 is 5fps in mechanical shutter. I was under the impression that it was 10fps with adapted lenses. Was this done in a firmware update or is it really only 5fps?
It is really only 5fps mechanical. The new A9_2 solves this with 10fps mechanical.
Mechanical shutter is always 5 FPS. The new a9II has 10 FPS in mechanical shutter. Electronic shutter is the primary on that camera, and you get 20 FPS in mechanical.
@@DustinAbbottTWI You meant "Electronic shutter is primary on that camera and you get 20 FPS in electronic (shutter)", right?
That’s correct. I meant electronic.
A balanced review that reflects real world situations, e.g. Canon shoters converting to Sony. However you might want to look at your lighting Dustin. At times you kinda look like Boris Karloff.
Maybe that’s how I actually look ;)
@@DustinAbbottTWI 👍but not in other videos!
I’m testing some new lights for review at the moment and trying to learn how to use them to the best of their ability. They are a little too intense for indoor, lower light situations.
Hi Dustin, with my a6600, with any AF mode, I'm not able to catch for example clouds or mountains so far little contrasted.. Instead with dsrl like 5d4 or Nikon d500 this problem is almost non existent. Can you confirm this AF issue with sony?
Hmmm, I haven't really had that problem.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I tried many times with sony 200-600 and 70-350. They both can't catch clouds. And with 18-135, I was able only untill 70mm.
I suspect it depends on - 2 EV of the sony versus - 4 EV of dsrl like Nikon d500. ( a7r4 and a9 - 3EV)
But I'm not sure...
A7IV or A9 for wedding photography?!
That's a hard question, actually. I'm not sure I would want all of my ceremony shots at over 60MP. I wouldn't mind it for group shots or posed photos, though. I'd probably lean RIV, though, as I view the A9 more as an action camera. I own one and I often use it for events because the lower resolution is handy for those applications, but the RIV is probably better suited overall.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you Dustin!
Why would you use a non native lens to test autofocus?
I actually did some tests here with a native mount lens in this video, but I also tested how they performed with adapted lenses as this remains a very common application on Sony.
Lovey episode..
Thanks
Don't understand why you are spending so much time comparing AF performance using third party/adapted lenses on these top of the line cameras. Sony has the largest selection of lenses for any mirrorless FF system. Using a native lens would be much more relevant. Honestly, I wouldn't base a purchase decision on such an top camera based on how adapted lenses work. Also, the impression and performance of the R III would have been much better with native Sony lenses.
Short answer: I used what I had access to. I don't have unlimited resources, and, at the moment, I don't have good access to Sony loaners in Canada.
The best reviewer. 👍👍👍
Wow, thanks!
If you don’t want the resolution you’re looking in the wrong place tho. The R is for resolution. Why is that controversial?
You may be missing the point. R stood for resolution when that figure was 36MP, then 42MP, and now 61MP. The difference in scope for the 61MP even vs 42MP is significant. The problem is that you are gaining more resolution, but at some other costs (poorer ISO performance, for example), and without any way to moderate down massive resolution for situations when you don't need it. I don't think anyone is complaining about having access to higher resolution; my complaint is that I don't want or need that much resolution all the time. The 42MP of the a7RIII is more than enough for ALL my needs.
Dustin Abbott well if you’re priority isn’t resolution get the other lines of cameras they have. That’s the point of them having more than one line of camera.
Hmmm, the difference between 24MP and 61MP is pretty big, no? That's kind of the point.
It baffles me nobody has yet found the auto focus problems more precisely the focus breathing and constant jumps specially on very up close macro shots and specially in video mode, similar to what is still happening with the a6400 and even using sony glass like the 50mm macro or even the 90mm macro.
When I use the same glass on my a6500 or a7III I can get perfect macro moving or panning shots and the focus is worthy of being called phase detect, when I try the same shots on my a6400 or my a7R4, it's horrible, it almost looks like it's again a contrast detect camera again.
And no matter the AF setting, fast focus, slow focus, responsive, standard, it's horrible in up close macro shots, simply horrible.
I'm so disappointed with the newest sony cameras in that department, and I wished a camera reviewer like yourself would reproduce those problems and expose them, because sony isn't even listening to the less known professionals anymore.
Hmmm, I haven’t seen anything like that.
Focus breathing is a problem of the lens. The camera has nothing to do with this.
As for the AF, Sony does seems to struggle with macro. From my very limited experience with a native macro (downright unusable with my Canon 100mm 2.8 L adapted). This lens works well enough at portrait distances however but still far from perfect.
For macro work, I just manually focus everything now so ehhh.
@@Ava-wu4qp Ok, fair comment, so how would you explain the same macro shots with the AF working beautifully on older cameras like the a6500 or even the a73?
While thinking about macro lenses, I have been toying with the idea of going 'native'.
Might you, @dustinabbott be able to provide a recommendation between the 65mm lanthar and loawa 100mm macro?
I can't see myself needing more than 1:1 magnification often at all but there definitely are times that I use more than 50% of the lanthar- though cropping could be a viable solution, too. The lanthar seems far superior to focus though also seems like 65mm might not be a comfortable enough working distance compared to 100mm
DJLsb Vapes In a word.. firmware.. what you found may be that Sony made some compromises in the new AF firmware for the A7RIV, a6400 and a6600 regarding Macro focus distances .. for overall other uses .. I would say the AF is a vast improvement. Perhaps Sony will release a new firmware for either the body or the lenses that will address your focus breathing issues for Macro use.. or perhaps not. Time will tell
Great!!
Thanks
I wonder which would be best for birds in flight?
The a9 is still the best if you don’t need the higher resolution.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for the reply Dustin
Did Sony update the number of contrast AF points from 25 to 425 on the A9? I see 425 points stated on Sony website, but I remembered it only having 25.
On which camera? All three have 425 contrast AF points available
@@DustinAbbottTWI Sorry, I was referring to the A9. I was almost certain the A9 only has/had 25 contrast detection AF points, but now I have found it. On firmware 5.0: "Contrast AF Improved from 25 Points to 425 Points (New to a9)
Sony a9 Contrast AF has been upgraded from 25 to 425 Points - just like a7 III/a7R III".
I just edited the question so to avoid any confusion it would cause, as it was missing the reference to the Sony A9.
That’s correct. It’s actually amazing that they were able to do that via firmware.
Wow that's actually pretty amazing! The things we can do these days via firmware is incredible. One of the reasons why I like sony cameras so much.
Wanna switch to the a7R IV next year. This really helped me taking the cost down. I got a 24-70 f/2.8 for Canon, I know, it's "old" and not as perfect, as other lenses, but it'll get me starting out and let me bump the cost down, so I can purchase stuff down the line. If it's working fine (which is yet to be tested), it'll be my primary lens for quite some time. I mean, I do a lot of landscapes and stuff, less portrait, but it'll fit and I might even squeeze in a 16-35. Would be awesome. :D
Sound workable to me.
@@DustinAbbottTWI yeah. Especially for beginning and starting out with Sony.
Upgrading is always the case but having a reasonable baseline is something great! 💪🏼😊
Great！
Thanks
Love the black set. No distractions. Fully enjoy your approach.
thanks for the feedback.
1:30 and now Sony came with the a1 for that
Yes, though the A1 is priced so high that it is going to be a niche product
@@DustinAbbottTWI agree with you, I’m seeing people who are selling their body’s (like the Riv and the a9ii and some of their lenses) for just the a1 body, I know it’s a personal decision and it’s an amazing camera but in my opinion I prefer to have two body’s with to different types of lenses instead just one body and having to change lenses. Of course this is depends the type of photography / videography what does each one (and for the price of the a1 you can buy the Riv, a9ii and a7iii)
Dustin, I've always enjoyed (and relied on) your reviews. But, this one was a "flop!" Why in the world didn't you use Sony GM or Batis lenses? If someone is going to spend $3,500 for an RIV or $4,500 for an A9, why cut corners on "adapting" lenses or using third-party lenses that are so significantly inferior to Sony and Zeiss lenses. I respectfully suggest that you repeat your comparison using the best lenses available.
With all due respect, if you've watched some of my major comparisons, you will find (for example) that the Samyang AF 85mm F1.4 outperformed both the GM and Batis 85mm lenses in side to side comparison. I also used what lenses I had on hand. I'm not sure you understand the expense involved in bringing in lenses every time I do reviews. I paid over $250 in duties to bring in the GM and FE 85mm F1.8 for my comparison series on 85mm alone. I live in Canada; I don't have the same access as I would if I lived in the US.
Now, let's dream. Imagine a major firmware update for the A7RIV :) That will definitely come. What will that be? In dreams, everything is allowed
For me, top pick would be MRAW and SRAW. 4K60 would be nice. Enabling more functionality on the touchscreen would be a huge bonus.
@@DustinAbbottTWI considering the great advances for the latest firmwares, this should be a minimum, considering that the processor has significantly more power (it handles 50% more pixels in less time); I expect more to come; and what's nice with Sony: firmwares are for free; at least up to now. So, let's have a little bit of patience (at least for you; I am not the most patient guy :) )
why in the hell would you not do with native lens
I didn't have any native telephoto Sony lenses. I don't have an unlimited budget....
alphauniverse.com/prosupport/.
they have a lender program but I purchased all native glass when I stitched in 2015 even though the trinity was f4 at the time. It is frustrating when most reviews used adapted glass and I understand the loss of $$$ when dumping old glass ...
I am a Sony Pro member, but you get one loaner at a time and not repeats. I've reviewed a lot of the Sony teles now.
Auto focus is an obsession in the camera industry that’s a sales gimmick unnecessary in photography. Oh, by the way my 5 year old SL has 529 points, and all phase detect pixels are dead pixels in the image. Would you buy a sensor with hundreds of dead pixels. Not me.
Wow, that's a unique claim. Not one I support, personally.
“All phase detect pixels are dead pixels” ???
Y u using a canon lens lmaooooo
At the time I did this video, there was still relatively few telephoto options and a LOT of new Sony shooters were adapting Canon glass.
Misstatement A7R III AF coverage.
INCORRECT: 68%
CORRECT: 39% (60% horizontal; 65% vertical).
I checked it carefully.
Dustin, please don't mislead people.
Those figures are from Sony. If you think they are misleading, take it up with them.
@@DustinAbbottTWI 68% vs 39%. It's not a difference of a few percent. Just have a look at the graphics with AF points coverage to tell who is telling the truth. Don't cover yourself Sony. Don't be a devil's advocate. It is worth having your opinion on the matter. I wrote to Sony some time ago - they are silent on the matter. I hope you won't.
Misstatement A9 AF coverage.
INCORRECT: 93%
CORRECT: 85% (89% horizontal; 95% vertical).
I checked it carefully.
Dustin, please don't mislead people.
Those figures are from Sony. If you think they are misleading, take it up with them.
Misstatement A7 IV AF coverage.
INCORRECT: 87%
CORRECT: 64% (71% horizontal; 90% vertical).
I checked it carefully.
Dustin, please don't mislead people. Do not trust the manufacturer's data indefinitely. In this case, even the manufacturer's data is different from yours.
Those figures are from Sony. If you think they are misleading, take it up with them.
Pastor, do you have a channel where you preach God's word? I would like to subscribe to it.
I don't at this point. I do get periodic requests. We'll see for the future.
Why not place a cam at the back of the chapel & just record the sermons you preach in church & upload them on RUclips? :D