Still Debating Keeping A7R4a or also getting A7R5

Is there ONE THING that should sway me to the dark side?

One thing I noticed on my A7RV after having an A7RIV previously, is that it boots up faster. I haven't checked it with a stopwatch but it seems you can take a picture in less than a second after turning it on, which seems much faster than I remember on the IV. I have not seen anybody mention this in reviews, perhaps someone who has both cameras should do a quantitative test and see if I am hallucinating.

First thing that comes to mind is what do you mainly take? I'm a bird shooter and you might be totally different, in which case I wouldn't know ;-) I use the A7RIV and the 200-600. I can't see any point in going to the A7RV with what I already get. It depends and if you need the features of the A7RV, then yes, if not, well no :-) All I really need is that sensor.

Danny.

Yeah, that's the thing. It bothers me that there is no increase in resolution, and the AF was pretty good in tracking on the R4A.

It totally depends on your use case(s).

For me, the dual-articulation mechanism of the screen, the more advanced AF and the extra stops of stabilization would tip the balance in favor of the a7Rv. Those things probably matter a bit more, in the scheme of things, than extra resolution would. For the things I do.

I guess you need to decide how much each of the differences will be likely to impact your shooting, if any. It really comes down to that...

Personally I find the 50MP from A1 is already straining the computing power, the 61MP is really pushing the limit. OTOH, the 30MP from A7M4 strikes the sweet spot.

No disrespect intended, but if 50MP files are "straining the computing power", it suggests you may be using a computer that's significantly underpowered or has other problems.

TBH, I mostly process a1 files on a 2012 mac pro without any difficulty, and when I'm travelling I generally use a 2013 laptop, which is also fine. Granted, both have a decent amount of memory installed.

Your comment leaves me wondering exactly what kind of computer would have problems with 50MP files and why (given the investment in cameras at the level of the a1 or the a7Riv/a7Riv) it wouldn't make sense to simply upgrade the computer hardware if what you've got isn't coping. You can get computers that can process 50MP files with ease much cheaper than the cost of the cameras that produce them. ; )

This seems like sound advice. I shoot with an A7Riii and do mostly landscapes and a bit of travel street photography. What I like about the A7RV over the RIV is :
- updated pixel shift mode which compensates for some motion blur
- better eye AF for street photography
- focus bracketing
- the flip screen which better enables portrait orientation landscape
- higher resolution EVF
- better IBIS
- being able to set shutter speed beyond 30 seconds.

These updates alone may get me to buy the RV at some point when it goes on sale.

I've watched a lot of reviews and am still perplexed as to why Sony has not upped the quality of the back screen.

Happy shooting !

Yes - that's a bit mysterious.

We can infer that they concluded that a majority of users were more interested in the quality and resolution of the EVF than in having a class-leading LCD.

Of course, the smarty-pants answer to that is "why not both". Which, perhaps would have made the camera marginally more expensive --- though I'm guessing not enough to be a deal breaker for most who are in the market for a camera at this level...

I think, higher res LCDs drain more current, as is evident if you compare the a7r3 and A7r3a, and a7r4 and A7r4a CIPA figures. I guess, SONY does not want to compromise further, as the A7r5 already drains more current for its updated processor.

Could be that that's their thinking. Though battery drain considerations also apply to the EVF, and it hasn't stopped them going for top spec'd resolution there.

Either way, I guess we have to accept that there are a lot of finely calibrated trade-offs in what gets included or excluded from each model...

If I was buying today I would go for the A7RV, but with what I get out of the A7RIV, I don't really see any benefits personally. I only own one AF lens, the 200-600mm, so probably totally different subjects. So I don't see it as an upgrade, but plenty do. Also quite happy here using MF tele lenses, so basically, there's no need.

The choice of course is yours, you know yours subjects better than I do. All I want is that sensor and it's a darn good one in both.

Danny.

What can't you do with your A7R4A that is holding back your photography?

For what it's worth I kept my a7r3 body and sold the r4 in favor of the r5. The factors that swayed me were focus stacking and the improved stabilization plus the r5 is on the "new" style firmware like the a7iv, so I figured it wouldn't be forgotten in terms of updates etc like the r4 was, especially considering the new mobile app. Keeping the r3 because I want to always have a backup body and it's smaller and more compact.

I’d agree. Both will have similar output while the design with the fully articulating screen and the improved EVF may be a nice addition. Trying the A7RV for a short bit, I really liked the EVF. One of the best out there.

The buffer is immensly improved over the R4. One of the main reasons my son and I traded up (he to RV me to the alpha 1 for focus speed as well). We were always waiting for the buffer to clear when shooting in a burst mode.

For single files, even Mac Air would be fine. It's when I need to cull & batch process 1000's RAW files.

My rig is 12th Gen i-9, 3.2Ghz CPU, 96Gb RAM with SSDs as both the main drive and scratch disk, RTX4080 GPU; I think I pretty much pushed everything.

Oliver

It's a tough call. One has to decide just what they are NOT getting in the first place. The A7RV's AI does make it a bit faster to acquire and stick on a subject. But not everyone is so demanding. The EVF is nice but not something everyone will get all excited about. But for a first time buyer of such a camera (like me) the RV made perfect sense.