Review: Sony A7R IV

Review: Sony A7R IV

Key Features

Connectivity

The A7R IV comes with an array of ports for connecting devices and accessories, including both Micro USB and USB-C ports for connecting to computers and for charging the battery in camera, a mini-HDMI output, 3.5mm microphone and headphone jacks and a PC Sync port for off-camera flashes.  While the ports are the same as those found on the A7R III, Sony has rearranged things a little, moving all ports except the sync port to the two flaps towards the rear of the camera and leaving the sync port to itself behind a door at the front of the camera.   This way, all the video related ports are behind one door, with computer connection/charging behind another and flash behind the third, creating better organization.  I’ve enjoyed having a sync port on the camera already, as during a shoot about a month ago, my 5-year-old radio triggers decided to die on me, leaving me to grab my sync cord to continue shooting. (I’ve since transitioned to Godox flashes and triggers, which I will likely cover in an upcoming article).

Like all recent Sony camera bodies, the A7R IV comes fully equipped with both Wi-Fi and Bluetooth on board.  This allows one to remotely connect to a smartphone or tablet for transferring images or for remote capture.  When the WiFi connections work, they work well, and the 5GHz WiFi option is dramatically faster than the 2.4 GHz connections that were present on earlier cameras.  However, the current state of Sony’s Imaging Edge mobile application is a disaster.  Frequently, I would connect only to have the camera disconnect mid-transfer, or take an exceptionally long time to recognize the camera and connect.  The most recent updates even have the infuriating step of requiring the user to select which camera to connect to….halfway through connecting to the camera you just told it to connect to.  That sentence is confusing because the steps required to connect are equally confusing.

WiFi – Remote connection with the camera off (left), and the resulting index of images to transfer (right)

Sony has introduced one new wireless feature that has the potential to be outstanding once the bugs are ironed out: you can now connect to the camera wirelessly when the camera is off, transfer images and turn the camera back off.  I love being able to simply pick up my phone, whether my camera bag is across the room or in the trunk of my car (while I’m parked), and snag a selection of photos from the day’s shooting.  I had serious issues when utilizing this feature on the 2.4GHz wireless, and contacted Sony about it who confirmed my findings and informed me it would be fixed in a future firmware update.  We’ll see about that, as this occurred about two months ago and I am still waiting. However, switching to 5GHz wireless has allowed me to connect to the camera and transfer up to around 10-12 images without issue.  Selecting a large group of images still has the potential to have the camera shut itself back down halfway through the transfer.  When this gets fully ironed out, it will be amazing.

One other item that bears mentioning: like previous Sony cameras, the camera can utilize remote shooting via a smartphone or tablet, but the app still lacks some basic functionality like the ability to select or move the focus point. How is this still missing, Sony?

Pixel Shift

If the 60 megapixel resolution of the A7R IV is simply too low for your needs, then you’re probably shooting with 100 megapixel or higher medium format cameras. However, if you’re not, and you have a scene that is perfectly still, the A7R IV has the capability to create up to 240 megapixel images with full RGB color information at each pixel by stitching 16 separate images that are shifted slightly via the in-body IS system.  The A7R III featured a version of this ability, which would stitch four images together shifted by single pixels to create native resolution true RGB files, but the A7R IV expands on that ability with the 16 image stitch at ultra-high resolution.  If you desire, the four image shift is also still available.

The process is performed by turning on the Pixel Shift mode in the camera menu, focusing and then shooting.  The camera will then take 16 consecutive images.  Unfortunately, unlike the more recent Olympus camera bodies that feature a very similar system, the A7R IV can’t stitch the images in-camera.  Instead, the images must be opened in Sony’s Imaging Edge program on the desktop.  Here, the images can be selected and then merged into a single 240 megapixel RAW file.

In practice, the pixel shift feature is limited to scenes that have absolutely zero motion.  Moving water or foliage moving in the wind will cause artifacts, as will any motion of the camera.  Also, due to the absolutely insane resolution, nothing but the absolute sharpest lenses will show any significant improvement.  As a result, the 240 megapixel mode is something that most photographers will try once or twice and then forget forever.  The 4 image shift mode is a bit more practical, and provides a little extra sharpness and elimination of essentially all moire, which can be quite nice in the right circumstances.  See below for what is likely a best case scenario for increased resolution, with the exceptionally sharp Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro.  The full image is shown first to get an idea of the overall frame.

The full image – Pixel Shift

This next shot shows a 100% crop from a single 60 megapixel frame on top with a 100% crop from the 240 megapixel pixel shift image below. The 240 megapixel image clearly has more detail, and it becomes even more apparent when upsizing the 60MP single image.  However, even with an exceptionally sharp lens, you can see we aren’t fully resolving all 240 megapixels here, despite there still being a tangible difference.

Pixel shift comparison – 60MP image on top, 240MP pixel shift image below, 100% crops

Upsizing the 60MP image truly shows the increased detail, but I’m unsure of how much practical use this is, given the technical limitations on capturing the pixel shift image, as well as the needs for such extreme resolution, given that the 60 megapixel native files already provide tremendous detail and ability to make large prints.

Pixel shift comparison – 60MP original, upsized to 240MP (top) – 240MP pixel shift image (bottom)

Intervalometer

Sony’s intervalometer is effectively unchanged from the one introduced in the Mark III series of bodies with a firmware update late in the cycle. The Intervalometer is quite easy to set up.  You choose a start time delay, which can be as short as one second and as long as 99 minutes.  This is the delay after you press the shutter button that the camera will begin the sequence.

You can then set the interval between photos (between 1 second and 60 seconds), and finally the number of shots to capture (up to 9,999).  Taking those 10,000 shots with a 60 second interval will take 166 hours to complete, but you can do it if you have some sort of external power source attached.   The camera also does the math for you, telling you the total time to capture the sequence at the current settings.  You can set the camera to autofocus between frames if you like, with a sensitivity for AF changes.  It’s quite simple, and works the way you’d expect it to work.

Interval Shooting Menu

In-Body Image Stabilization

The in-body IS system in the A7R IV has been upgraded from previous models, and Sony claims 5.5 stops of image stabilization.  I have never found Sony’s claims particularly accurate, and I found the mark II and III versions of the A7 series to yield sharp shots around two stops slower than what would otherwise be usable handheld.  With the A7R IV, I do notice an improvement, and it’s in-line with their claims of an extra half stop over its predecessor.  However, in this case, for me, I get about 2.5 stops of extra handholdability with the A7R IV stabilizer.

Of course, the A7R IV’s extra dense sensor shows any shake more apparently than lower resolution bodies when viewing images at 100%. One of the other great benefits of stabilization is a stable viewfinder, and here, Sony’s stabilization does great, keeping the view nice and steady while shooting. Overall, it’s not game-changing stabilization like that of Olympus Micro 4/3 bodies, but it is certainly better than an unstabilized body.

Other Items of Note

  • Like all other recent Sony bodies, the A7R IV has a fully electronic shutter that allows you to shoot completely silently.  Also, like all Sony bodies save for the A9, the A7R IV’s sensor readout is fairly slow, so while it’s perfectly usable for silent shooting of relatively static scenes, it isn’t useful for sports or action shooting of any type, due to the presence of rolling shutter artifacts.
  • The A7R IV keeps the excellent Auto ISO feature from earlier bodies, which allows the user to set how fast the shutter speed will be at a minimum.  When set to Auto ISO (standard), the camera will shoot at a minimum shutter speed of (1 / focal length) down to 1/30s, which it keeps as a minimum, even if using ultra-wide angle lenses.  This is the standard hand holding rule for sharp shots that has been a rule of thumb for decades.  However, if you want to modify that, either because you are more or less steady than ‘average’, your lens has optical stabilization, or you need to stop motion, you can change the minimum shutter speed algorithm to be faster or slower, in one stop increments, over the standard rule.  If this isn’t enough flexibility, you can also manually set a minimum shutter speed between 30 seconds and 1/8000s.
  • The A7R IV uses the same NP-FZ100 battery used in the Mark III series bodies, which offers long battery life compared to the rest of the mirrorless industry.  The A7R IV is rated for between 530 and 670 shots, and you should get at least that.   It’s enough to get through a full day’s shooting for all but the most demanding photographers.
  • The shutter sound on the A7R IV is wonderful. A quick, short, and relatively quiet snick makes this the best sounding Sony full frame body I’ve used. A minor thing, but nice nonetheless.
  • Unlike the A7 III, the A7R IV includes an actual battery charger, rather than just a USB adapter and cable. This should be standard for ALL Sony cameras, but at least they do see fit to include it for the higher end bodies. Note that USB charging is still available through both the Micro USB and USB-C ports on the camera as well.

Continue: Image Quality

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Comments

13 responses to “Review: Sony A7R IV”

  1. Erwin Bodo Avatar
    Erwin Bodo

    Thank you for your work and this excellent review. Your findings echo mine. I very much enjoy reading your articles and love your carefully composed and edited photos.

    Best regards,

    Erwin Bodo

    1. Ludwig Heinrich Avatar
      Ludwig Heinrich

      Just what you said 🙂

  2. Eric Wojtkun Avatar
    Eric Wojtkun

    Wow. Some folks at the big box sites should take a lesson on what artwork should look like in a review article. Amazing images. I know it is too much camera and lens to haul around for me all the time, but it certainly can perform.

  3. Dave Van de Mark Avatar
    Dave Van de Mark

    Regarding sample images made with the Sony A7R-IV, I notice you have several sample shots made with the Sigma 14-24 but not yet a review. You also have sample shots using the Tamron 17-28 but your review only included using the A7 III. Of these two lenses, which did you generally find exploited the Sony’s 60MP the best?

    1. Jordan Steele Avatar

      My review of the Sigma should be posted sometime in the next day or two. I have it 99% written…just cleaning things up. My Tamron review was written before I got the A7R IV. As a bit of a preview…let’s just say the review of the Sigma is, well, glowing.

  4. Chris Sinner Avatar
    Chris Sinner

    Hi Jordan, are you going to or have already switched to the A7r4 away from the A7 III? If so what were your key motives for doing so?
    Thanks for your review work, it is always a refreshing read!

    1. Jordan Steele Avatar

      I did. I switched back in December and sold my A7 III. Main motive was that I got a great deal on a new A7R IV and couldn’t pass it up, and the big motivation was the real-time Eye AF and tracking. After using it on my a6400, not having it on my A7 III felt like a huge step down in AF functionality. It’s not that the A7 III is bad at focusing…far from it, but the compositional freedom that the upgraded tracking system offers is just so nice to have.

      After using it for a while, the 60MP files are a bit intoxicating too. 🙂

  5. Chris Sinner Avatar
    Chris Sinner

    Thanks Jordan for your feedback. I thought Sony had updated the Eye-AF of the A73 to A6400 level?

    I am still debating whether to upgrade from my ailing single camera setup A6000 with A6400/6600 and the Sigma primes or go for the A7-III and the Tamron zooms. Price is not that different as weight is. However, I am not on your Pro level :-).
    Do you have any recommendations regarding that choice?

    1. Jordan Steele Avatar

      The AF updated on the A7 III brought improvements to EyeAF, including animal Eye AF, which is part of the a6400/a9 style focusing, but it did not bring the real-time Tracking AF, which makes all the difference. The A7 III still required you to have the focus point generally in the vicinity (though with Eye AF, you could use zone focusing and have it pick eyes out in general.) The tracking AF, combined with Eye AF is what is really revolutionary….it will follow your subject around the frame, and not lose them if they hide their face, but switch to tracking them as a whole, then re-acquire the eye once it reappears. It’s also super useful for other types of shooting that don’t require Eye AF.

      As to choosing between the crop bodies and the A7 III, it’s really a personal choice. The A7 III image quality is going to be better, with more dynamic range and better noise control, though only you can know if that really makes a tangible difference for your shooting. If you don’t shoot a lot of low light, or you don’t print very large, it’s unlikely you’ll see any real difference in output in day to day usage. The A7 III will show improvement when the sensor is stressed, such as wide dynamic range applications and the such, and has a bit smoother tonal rolloff. However, the overall improvement isn’t something that will likely jump out at you. The a6400/6600 are definitely much smaller, and consequently are lighter to carry around, especially as a kit with smaller lenses, though they also aren’t as comfortable to shoot with. Personally, I preferred my A7 III to to the a6400, but it really is a personal choice.

      The Full frame system certainly has a better overall lens selection, and while you can buy FE lenses for use on the a6400, they generally aren’t not well suited ergonomically, and sometimes may not be quite sharp enough for you, though that is dependent on each lens…the best lenses will be just fine on the denser a6400/6600 sensor. I will say I wouldn’t go for the Tamron zooms on the crop bodies. First of all, they make for very awkward focal lengths (26-42mm and 42-112mm), but they also aren’t going to be quite as good image quality wise as something like the new Sony 16-55mm f/2.8, which is what I’d get if I were investing in an APS-C only system as a standard zoom. That will cover most of the range of the two Tamron zooms and do so with a lens that is geared towards the smaller sensor.

      The Sigma f/1.4 primes are outstanding, though. I own the 30/1.4 and 56/1.4, and they’re great. The 56/1.4 is astonishingly good.

  6. Jose Albert Andrade Avatar
    Jose Albert Andrade

    Excellent review and astounding images Jordan….. I’ve really enjoyed your site and the real world reviews you have done…. Straight with no chaser…… I’m not quite there yet, just having finally upgrading from my A99 to A7Rii, I along with both Tamron’s 17-28 / 28-70, and the Batis 25. I’ve been chopping at the bit to get out and shoot once the NP’s open up again and after looking at your images just intensified those feelings.

  7. Jakub Avatar
    Jakub

    Thank you for review Jordan. How would you rate AF accuracy difference in lower light (indoor lights) with f/1.4 or f/1.8 primes between A7iii and A7Riv? For cases where placing AF point over subject is not a problem (so real time tracking advantage of A7Riv does not matter). Is it about same or is there a difference?

    1. Jordan Steele Avatar

      I don’t notice much of a difference, if there is any at all. Both focus very well.

      1. Jakub Avatar
        Jakub

        Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Search


Categories


Recent Posts


  1. I think it is near Hillsboro.

  2. This article got me thinking… Why does Canon make RF S lenses starting with 18mm when most full frame RF…

  3. Great review. I shoot Nikon and may try an old Nikon D200 and see how it compares with the new…