Sony Announces the Sony A7 V

[Richard CR]

Today, Sony announced the Sony A7 V, the latest in the long line of prosumer full-frame mirrorless cameras from Sony, going back to 2013 with the release of the A7. The Sensor and Stuff The Sony Alpha A7 V features a new 33 megapixel BSI sensor and a BIONZ XR2 processor. The sensor's ISO range […]

See full article...

 

[Maximilian]

... Comparing the older A7 IV to the newly released camera, and it’s not even close. This is a great upgrade for those Sony users who were looking with jealousy at the Canon and Nikon camps the last few years.

Welcome competition. Let's hope it will push the others even further - esp. Canon

 

[Canon Rumors]

Welcome competition. Let's hope it will push the others even further - esp. Canon

My hands are cramping just looking it at it.

 

[snapshot]

My hands are cramping just looking it at it.

looks like R63. same stuff, same price. a new comer will likely decide based on lenses.

 

[DhlcadR6]

looks like R63. same stuff, same price. a new comer will likely decide based on lenses.

Cheaper 3rd parties with 15fps handicap. I rather adapt EF or native RF with R6iii 40fps.

 

[Canon Rumors]

looks like R63. same stuff, same price. a new comer will likely decide based on lenses.

Lenses definitely matter. There can be 200 lenses available, how many are you actually buying? (some of us crazies around here aside). Some of the unique and niche ones will sway some customers for sure.

We live in a multi-crop video world. The lack of Open Gate will sway some. I wonder if cooling played a factor? Photography wise, I have no idea how anyone uses these things. I know ergonomics are a personal, but at a point... they're just bad.

 

[Etnaphele]

Lenses definitely matter. There can be 200 lenses available, how many are you actually buying? (some of us crazies around here aside). Some of the unique and niche ones will sway some customers for sure.

We live in a multi-crop video world. The lack of Open Gate will sway some. I wonder if cooling played a factor? Photography wise, I have no idea how anyone uses these things. I know ergonomics are a personal, but at a point... they're just bad.

Ignoring video and appreciating the well balanced photo specs of this A7V, the one major downside left is ergonomics: I tried one out (again) this weekend and I agree with you, I almost cannot use it. It is as if they design the grip without ever mounting a lens on the body... A1II/A9III got that almorst right! What's stopping Sony to bring that shape to the A7 line?

 

[Del Paso]

My hands are cramping just looking it at it.

Could it be that my carpal tunnel syndrome was caused by having owned a Sony A7* for 2 weeks?

 

[P-visie]

Could it be that my carpal tunnel syndrome was caused by having owned a Sony A7* for 2 weeks?

Sue them!

 

[Walrus]

Cheaper 3rd parties with 15fps handicap. I rather adapt EF or native RF with R6iii 40fps.

Many would just need 1fps; 15fps may already be overkill

Hopefully the A7IV's will start to flood the used market with some nice low prices

 

[Tomba]

looks like R63. same stuff, same price. a new comer will likely decide based on lenses.

Then I would start with R6III because of the RF 28-70mm f2.8 IS STM. And the RF 16-28mm f2.8 IS STM. And may be add RF 45mm f1.2 STM later.
I own none of these lenses but would start like this. No need for 3rd party.

 

[Del Paso]

Sue them!

I will!
(Unfortunately, surgery didn't cost me a cent.)
If only I lived in the USA, I could make a fortune with help by an "ambulance hunter", after having spent it on hospital costs...

 

[xlksii]

Then I would start with R6III because of the RF 28-70mm f2.8 IS STM. And the RF 16-28mm f2.8 IS STM. And may be add RF 45mm f1.2 STM later.
I own none of these lenses but would start like this. No need for 3rd party.

Besides budget there's sheer availability as another reason for 3rd party lenses. Think 35-150mm F/2-2.8, or 200mm F/2.

 

[Tomba]

Besides budget there's sheer availability as another reason for 3rd party lenses. Think 35-150mm F/2-2.8, or 200mm F/2.

Both are big and heavy. I would not start with them and have no use chase for both lenses. I see that they are valuable options but I would not buy them even offered by Canon. I need 24mm 2.8 or better (I use 24 VCM). And 200mm 2.8 is enough for me. I prefer 70-200 zoom lenses for 200mm.
But yes, Sony A7 V is also a good Camera. Especially if you need one ore both lenses.

 

[snapshot]

Then I would start with R6III because of the RF 28-70mm f2.8 IS STM. And the RF 16-28mm f2.8 IS STM. And may be add RF 45mm f1.2 STM later.
I own none of these lenses but would start like this. No need for 3rd party.

my first 2 lens purchases were ef 28-70 f/2.8 and ef 100-400 LIS (mounted to a rebel 2000), I upgraded cameras but stuck with those two lenses for a long time. i think you could make a budget friendly kit in rf now,

 

[xlksii]

Both are big and heavy. I would not start with them and have no use chase for both lenses.

I somehow overlooked that you guys were specifically talking about first photo gear purchases, so what you're saying is probably true in most cases.

 

[Tomba]

I somehow overlooked that you guys were specifically talking about first photo gear purchases, so what you're saying is probably true in most cases.

That’s what I’ve said: If I would start as new comer and will likely decide based on lenses. I would start with the lenses I mentioned and R6III.

 

[Walrus]

That’s what I’ve said: If I would start as new comer and will likely decide based on lenses. I would start with the lenses I mentioned and R6III.

Newcomers would start with R100 and 18-45 probably, or the Sony/Nikon equivalent, and build from that; certainly neither with R6III or A7V which are professional cameras costing two months of salary for the body only, and almost another month of salary for each of the two zoom lenses you suggested to start with.

 

[AlanF]

Newcomers would start with R100 and 18-45 probably, or the Sony/Nikon equivalent, and build from that; certainly neither with R6III or A7V which are professional cameras costing two months of salary for the body only, and almost another month of salary for each of the two zoom lenses you suggested to start with.

They are a month of UK take-home average salary. And pros will get them cheaper because of tax relief.

 

[Wushuliu]

As someone who is new to Canon (for bird photography), but has spent time using Sony I have to say that IMO they take an extremely cynical approach to their consumer cameras. When I got hold of the A7rV I was in shock at the cheap build, the poor quality feel for the almost $4K price tag. Uncomfortable grip, the chintzy buttons and dials. I tried to ignore it but returned it shortly after. I think the A7rII, which I owned for a time, was better built than the A7rV albeit not by much. Every brand I've owned/demo'd has felt more comfortable in the hand than Sony. I genuinely think they make their cameras as cheap as they can, including smaller size to save a few yen (and sell tons of battery grips). It's evident in the (literal) painful incremental increase in grip size a few mm's every couple of years. It's evident in the adding features to new cheaper models while leaving flagships stranded.

But boy, they got marketing clout to spare, especially the Youtubers.