Sony a7RIV vs a7RIII: Sensor Wars | 4K

Sony a7RIV vs a7RIII: Sensor Wars | Photographer Dustin Abbott shares both a summary and a detailed deep dive of a comparison between the sensors of the a7RIII vs the new a7RIV. Dynamic range, ISO performance, resolution, color science, 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/shop/dustinabbott
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

[@skipsteel8553]

I like the new 'executive summary' up front. Thanks.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It was mostly because I knew this was going to be a long video.

[@Ava-wu4qp]

@@DustinAbbottTWI I greatly appreciated it, too. Ended up watching the summary in a short break I had earlier and came back to finish the video just now.

[@bobsykes]

Awesome. You have become the most useful reviewer for me. The summary up front is a plus for me, too.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It seems like that was something appreciated by people.

[@YourTechGuide.]

*was about to return my R3 to get the R4 but after watching this video, i decided to just keep the R3. thanks for the video!*

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If it helped you make an informed decision, I'm happy.

[@laynelane9080]

a tip : watch series on flixzone. Me and my gf have been using it for watching all kinds of movies during the lockdown.

[@joshuaowen6822]

@Layne Lane Yup, been using Flixzone for since november myself :D

[@rickytyson8778]

@Layne Lane Yup, I've been using Flixzone for months myself :)

[@Xetenor]

Thanks Dustin! What an incredible detailed comparison. I was pretty impressed by the riii performance and glad I got it!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The takeaway by many is that...they like the RIII's peformance.

[@johnbbrose486]

Nice, thorough review. I liked the quick summary at the beginning and liked your choice of books in your studio scene.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Why thank you! It's a subtle way for me to share the things that really matter to me.

[@jan-hendrikbussmann4644]

This is a great review. Thank you for all the work that went into this video!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're welcome.

[@luisfilipelopes2900]

Excellent review and comparison. Very informative. I love the way you show that studio and real live isn't exactly the same and show a bit more capacity of the new sensor.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you

[@actionphotopassion5082]

Once again a very well rounded review sir. 👍👍 Thank you for the links, I'll have a look at this.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure.

[@bernardchang7210]

Love your analysis. This is as subjective as it gets, and your side-by-side comparison is a wonderful way of visualizing the differences.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks for the feedback.

[@trungtan1989]

Thanks for the super detailed comparison. Exactly what I'm looking for. Very helpful!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it was helpful!

[@GregAllen2]

Thanks for the overview Dustin. I know how much work goes into creating something like this so you have my gratitude. Last year I moved from the EM5 mkii to the X-T3. I really enjoy shooting macro and wildlife and wanted the extra resolution since I am ultimately cropping in during post. With that said, my X-T3 is back at Fuji getting the lens mount repaired. It was nothing I did since I baby my cameras. :-) However when attached, the lenses were a little loose which was causing electrical connection issues. I also had to return a macro lens that produced slightly soft images out of the box. Good thing I tested it. These issues have put me off a bit and this new Sony camera has me rethinking my position. For wildlife I can crop in with APSC mode providing the same resolution as I am currently shooting with (26mp) and extend the reach of the lenses in the process. Being able to crop in post will also be helpful for both macro and wildlife work. One more big plus for the Sony is the IBIS. I didn't think I would miss it, but boy do I.... The downside is that I will need to sell my current gear that's less than a year old in order to help fund in the new system. *Sigh* I was mostly thinking out loud here. Maybe my ramblings will help others with their decisions. Anyway, it would be great to see people using/testing this camera for both macro and wildlife. Cheers, Greg

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's a hard decision, Greg, and unfortunately you do take a hit when you sell gear to fund a change. That being said, however, I do think your thinking about using the crop mode for wildlife and also having access to the amazing resolution of the a7RIV is sound.

[@RScottNH]

Outstanding comparison Dustin. I have both the A7R IV and A7R III. And use the III for nightscapes, because of the more obvious noise in the IV.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Sounds fair.

[@PHUKU]

Love the executive summary at the beginning thank you

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There seems to be a consensus that people like that.

[@drthompson65]

Thanks Dustin, loved the exec summary! Wish more did that. I went with the r3 due to low light performance. I to shoot in low light (stage) and used the money save to buy a fast prime. .

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

From the feedback that people are giving, I think there is a market for Sony to release a mid-range R3 replacement with the new ergonomics and focus and perhaps priced $300-500 less.

[@educatetube]

Thanks Dustin for all your hard work. Keep it up.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You bet!

[@ju2705s]

This comparison is a lot of good hard work, thx a lot... Even when I am not own a Sony..

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're welcome.

[@minkim5804]

thank you Dustin, your video is really helpful

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad to help out!

[@tanertekin763]

Such great comparison, so much detail as usual 👍

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you!

[@philindeblanc]

Dustin at the top of his KZbin game!:-) great video...And interesting books! Have you read them? (I would just suggest a text overlay that clearly defines when there are 2 cameras and when its the same camera at different settings)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Yes I have read the books. The bottom one I've read through in its entirely nearly 40x :)

[@daynephoto9923]

Brilliant video. Thanks for the honesty

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure.

[@photographerjonathan]

As someone who owns an A7r lll, and thinks 42 mp is enough. and even to much for some situations. I think Sony should have stuck to 42mp but made a new sensor that outperformed the older sensor. I think Rlll users want the realtime tracking of the A9 and the ergonomics of the A7r4, but nobody was asking for more mp. if anything I think allot of rlll users are asking themselves if they even need 42mp, and some people are going back to 24mp for an easier work flow. personally I was hoping that the A9ll was going to go up in mp just slightly, and then it would've been the perfect camera. but maybe it's the perfect camera already at 24mp. for now I am going to keep my A7r lll, and down the road I might by an A9lll.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're thoughts pretty much echo mine. I too wasn't looking for more resolution, but I would have taken the better AF system and ergonomics and preferred Sony to focus on better architecture to reduce buffer times, improve the sensor's DR/ISO slightly, and perhaps give us 4K60 architecture.

[@KruiserIV]

I agree. An updated Riii with 42MP would probably sell like hotcakes. They won't completely match the a9's AF, which is fine, but if it's even half as good, I'd buy it. I think 24MP is ideal for the a9ii and it's intended audience. I know people want everything in one nice little package, but that's not going to happen.

[@philindeblanc]

I also hear an echo...I do want the A9 in a 40-50mpixel. I dont have use for 61, although its fine if the quality was there AND the option to reduce. SO between the A7R4 and the A7R3 and now the R5.....all we have to do is wait for the A9x :-) Well, it maybe more reasonable to get a A7R3 for the price it will be....But I only have 1 Sony lens, rest are Canon, and I plan to use adapter. I have a A&R2. The mount is sloppy. the electronics are not so good, the card reader often has errors, the canon to FE Matabones4 adapter is OK at best in focus and such, the battery is horrible, but that has surely changed, I dont like the lens release button, nor do I like the menu system. But the files it makes I do like. Anyone else notice a sloppy mount on the Sony? Maybe its just the A7R2 I have?

[@alexmartins4013]

Great analysis. Welldone and thanks from Paris

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure.

[@primemover285]

love your channel!! you probably have the best reviews out there backed by scientific and real world data/examples!! BTW: based on your review, i'm keeping the 7R3. :-)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks for the great feedback.

[@ianbrown704]

Yet again another excellent detailed review - Thank You. To be honest I bought the IV because of a few things other than sensor size, crop mode was a factor allowing me to still get 26mp for bird photography which even with the new Sony 200-600 still doesn't always fill the frame. Also the better grip and EVF are useful but to be honest you can get the MKIII for $1500 less in the UK so for many its difficult to justify. One other observation is that certainly at anything above 400mm you need to use a faster shutter speed or you may get unsharp images, but thats user dependent I guess. For Landscapes I always use a tripod so ISO is normally at base, as always with most things it life its a compromise. Thanks Dustin for a great review, I look forward to your vlog on testing lenses on the MKIV.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It sounds like you chose it for the right reasons.

[@minusinfinity6974]

Love your work Dustin, so detailed. Given the RIV was a thrid stop more sensitive should you not have underexposed the RIV 1/3rd stop when comparing or used 1/3rd stop lower ISO and kept exposure the same?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Biasing it in one direction creates a liability in the other direction. I've done the test a second time to include the a9 in the comparison, and the results turned out the same, so I think my results here are accurate.

[@surrogatemarker]

Thanks Dustin the high ISO results are exactly as I have experienced comparing my Riii with my new RIV.. I purchased the RIV due to its better overall focus speed, focus tracking accuracy and for its 26 MP APS-C mode as I do a fair amount of action sports and wildlife photography which does require a significant amount of cropping on many occasions.. the A7RIV does not match my A9 for overall focus speed and frame rate but I have many more pixels to work with for composition cropping without much loss of image detail.. but as you have shown, the A7riv’s enhanced sensor resolution only shines when you have good light and fast glass. it’s additional mega pixels lose much of their additional value at dusk or in twilight lighting situations ..

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That seems fair. I now have an a9, so I'll do an AF comparison across all three models for the next segment.

[@kostaskonstantinidis7318]

Excellent sensor review Dustin!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you.

[@rustamhaydarov5403]

Thanks a lot, very helpfull!!!!!!!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure.

[@spinthma]

Thanks! Was quite interesting!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm glad you found it interesting!

[@saintmovies7735]

Excellent Comparison. I upgraded to the IV, had the RIII for a couple of weeks when the IV was announced and was able to return it. No complaints with the RIII - was quite happy with it’s performance for the time I had it...

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I've long liked the RIII, and while the RIV does a number of things better, the RIII is still a nice balance for many people.

[@saintmovies7735]

Dustin Abbott Agreed. It was a tough decision to spend an extra k for the upgraded model....i rarely if ever buy at the beginning of a model’s cycle....but took the risk nonetheless. So far i’ve not been disappointed

[@edwardcaruso8451]

I just discovered your reviews - really well done. Thank you for this resource. I have an R3 and I was wondering about long exposure at ISO 100 vs the R4. Shooting architecture up to say 6s exposures can be common and I'm wondering if the R4 will be noticeably noisier?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I don't think that it would.

[@robwasnj]

Very much appreciated, so far the best comparisons of these sensors I've seen to date. Happy with my A7Riii, next body will be A9 or A9ii. Would love to see a low light comparison of he A7iii, A7Riii and the A9 like this.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I did compare the R3 and a73 in a previous episode!

[@robwasnj]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Yes, I saw that but was interested in how those two compare to the A9 more specifically in regards to shadow recovery and even dynamic range. I'm considering an A9 for events where I have to use existing light and it's often dimly lit, currently I've been using an A7Riii. Thanks for this great comparison once again.

[@Thumpr110]

Love your videos, Dustin. I would love to see a comparison of the a7riv in APS-C mode (with APS-C lenses) vs any of the a6xxx line. I’m curious if the a7riv is the best APS-C camera out right now.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I’ll put that in the final review, as I think it is a major feature of the camera.

[@suzesiviter6083]

The A6000 is no match for the A7Riii in APS-C mode, auto white balance far more intelligent, focus much faster, dynamic range and so on. I have compared both images.

[@sveneezy2059]

Your upload frequency is just phenomenal.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Sometimes I'm shocked myself that I'm maintaining this pace!

[@GastonShutters]

Killer comparison. I have as well both at this point and I just wished they couldn’t have upgraded everything and leave the sensor at 42 MP. I usually shoot raw on both cards and the buffering is quite noticeable and more annoying on the 7RIV. I’ll be publishing soon a comparison with both at the studio

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That seems to be a pretty common opinion. People DID want a sensor upgrade on the a9II and didn't necessarily want one here.

[@Celestialrob]

Excellent work, nice summary at the beginning. My debate is a9, a92 and a7r4

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm currently using an a9/R3 combo, and debating whether or not to swap the R3/a6500 for the R4.

[@Celestialrob]

I have the r2 so feel covered for portraits and landscapes. Its still an excellent camera in many situations. I recently purchased the 200-600 and want to photograph birds and wildlife. I’m very seduced by the r4 body shape, upgraded elf and knowing the af is not as good as the a9 but maybe 90%. However, the a9 has silent shooting, 1/32000 to help fast primes in bright light. With the lack of photo stores it’s so hard to actually use the camera before buying.

[@pietdv]

A very thorough video and beautifully presented. Thank you Dustin. Just one additional comment. The setting that you use to record yourself and the light placement does not IMHO reflect the quality of the your content. Are you not able to find a better location to set up? A white wall so close with that deep shadow behind.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

No, it wasn't the best.

[@wasee6694]

I am watching your videos from 2014, I became your fan due to your honest reviews. Not any person was talking about colour science most pro photographers said nikon produces best colours but after your review on canon colour science which you have done before some years ago. Now from that time , those pro photographers said canon has best colour science. it was the impact of your honest reviews. There are very few persons who are unbiased in their reviews. Thank you very much

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That’s interesting. Thanks for the feedback.

[@stefan_becker]

Thanks for the great comparison. Would be interesting to know, if both camera actually also meter exposure differently. That means if I meter a scene with the A7rIV and the A7rIII will I also get a 1/3 stop difference? If not, that would mean that one has to always dial in -1/3 exposure compensation on the A7rIV to to have "correct" exposure....? I do own an A7rIV and my impression is indeed that metering is off by maybe 1/3rd of a stop (on the bright side).

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It does meter differently, though you might want to play with different metering options to get one that works best for your typical situation. If I am shooting nature, I typically underexpose by 1/3 stop anyway. I like the extra contrast and it often gives you a little extra to play with in the highlights.

[@ImadogGarcia]

There‘s a lot of work behind your reviews. Great job!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There is that.

[@pracquet]

Hi Dustin, I'm really enjoying your in depth camera and lens reviews which are probably the best on KZbin, and I'm just wondering if you could answer a question that I have; Should a camera sensor look 'muddy' at very small apertures like f36 because I've checked both my Sony A7RIII and A7III, and they don't appear clear even after cleaning?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There's something called "diffraction" that affects image quality at very small apertures and reduces sharpness and contrast. It is increasingly noticeable with higher resolution sensors, so you'll probably see it affect image quality more obviously on your a7RIII than your a7III

[@TheKos__]

Many thanks!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You’re welcome

[@seanimal3]

Wow I'm actually super impressed that the sensitivity of the riv is higher that makes me really happy. I thought it would be the opposite

[@marcotschilar1531]

yeah, me too. Good review

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm wondering if the new sensor has a slightly different base ISO. ISO is a standard, and there is always a little variance in either direction.

[@nazukeoya]

Love the book collection!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks!

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

I like the exec summary ; interesting you didn't pick on the 'allegedly' superior EVF and AF of the IV. I appreciate this review focuses more on the sensor. Can't wait for the subsequent reviews covering the aforementioned aspects.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I covered the EVF in another episode, and I have a full autofocus episode coming.

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

Dustin Abbott excellent can’t wait for them.

[@mohamedmageed6504]

Awesome work..

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks

[@garysmith5838]

Thank you!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're welcome.

[@mblapsiwala]

Really wonderfully detailed description of the marginal differences between the two cameras. May I request you, if it's convenient to you, to compare a7riii/iv Vs Fuji GFX 50R? Both are not only competitive on the price bases but also around Megapixels and underlying sensor producing company. As I like your taste and detailing each points regarding the cameras, it would be really helpful and informative to many professionals. Thank you for your exhaustive efforts! May God bless you! All the best! Regards from Germany.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

While I would like to look at the GFX 50R at some point, it's not on my schedule at the moment.

[@mblapsiwala]

@@DustinAbbottTWI ok. Thanks for your quick response!

[@mblapsiwala]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Hello, not a fan of this vlog but I found this GFX vlog appreciably detailed and wished to share with you as it might help you, if you decide to compare between GFX and Sony a7riii... And ya, I wait eagerly for that detailed comparison coming from you, whenever time permits to you! Please look at it at your convenience... kzbin.info/www/bejne/bYHHon2qj5V-n9E

[@BenSussmanpro]

Nice Summary. Can you say which adapter you use for Canon lenses (on the 7R)? Thanks.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I mostly use the Sigma MC-11.

[@8spiro]

in you personal opinion considering the price, is better going for the r3 or r4? considering the lowlight and the autofocus more than the mpx resolution I want to upgrade from an r2

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If you are upgrading from the R2, both cameras will be a nice upgrade. The autofocus in the R4 is significantly better than the R3 (closer to the a9 performance).

[@MagicTurtlex]

I currently have a Sony a7iii and have owned it for the past 1-2 years. I mainly do travel and portrait photography. I have been happy with it for the most part but I am interested in having a camera with more detail in my photos while keeping a good autofocus system and good low light performance. I am willing to upgrade to an a7r4, a7r3 or an a9 if it would achieve my requirements. I would also be open to new lenses with better detail. I currently have the sigma art 35 1.4 sigma 24-70 2.8 dn dg and sigma 135 1.8 art, which i rarely use. What would you do in my situation?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The RIV seems to check your boxes, and is probably the best route for you. I own the RIII and a9, and there are some areas where they are starting to feel a little "long in the tooth".

[@GeorgeRTurner]

great review :-)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you

[@Philson]

So which sensor in the A7/A9 series is the best you think?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Frankly they are all good sensors, but I do think Sony has made the a7rIV a more specialized camera. It definitely does lose a few steps in the high ISO arena, and not having an MRAW or SRAW option makes it a camera one might not want to use in high volume settings like weddings or events. The a9/a73 sensor is actually excellent, but people like landscape shooters may want more resolution. The a7RIII probably strikes the best middle ground, but you are currently giving up some autofocus performance compared to these other models. I think Sony needs to do some kind of replacement for the a7RIII that is more of the all-rounder option.

[@sethcashman1011]

This is the comparison review I've been waiting for (and yes, I watched all the way to the end)! The only other thing I'd like to have seen would have been some equivalent D850 images thrown into the mix (as I am still deciding between that camera body and one of the Sonys), but this gives me a pretty good idea as to what to expect. At ISO 3200 - 6400, would you say that there's about a half-stop difference in terms of noise? Overall, it looks like there's little reason to go with the IV for image quality. Kind of disappointing, but I guess I'm not surprised. Autofocus is apparently a different story, however...

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hi Seth, while I did cover the D850 through a viewer loaner a couple of years back, I don't actually cover Nikon so you won't see Nikon comparisons from me. Autofocus is definitely a different story. It is more a9 than R3 in performance.

[@sethcashman1011]

Thanks (belatedly), Dustin. So, while, there is a notable compromise at the top end (high iso image quality/noise, as compared to the a7rIII), there is no appreciable advantage at the bottom end (base iso dynamic range, detail, general image quality, etc.) to make up for the aforementioned top-end compromise?

[@Photo-ms1mo]

The Nikon D850 has the best technical image quality in general, which means its not the best at everything but strikes the best balance in DR, resolution etc. And I'm the Pentax shooter, so if you want near D850 IQ for about half the price go with Pentax K-1 mark One.. and if you do not care for resolution so much but maybe more for video Panasonic S1 & Sony A7 mark 3 are great low light and very good DR performance hybrid cameras...

[@stephen8385]

Are u going to return the a7riv after knowing what the result ? Im thinking to return the mk4 and might find a used mk3

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The R4 is just a loaner, so I'm debating whether or not to upgrade. My upgrade path would be to trade the R3 and my a6500 for an R4.

[@nicholassmith7723]

Do you have an RIII vs 7III comparison like this? I have the A7III and I'm considering the RIII or A6600 for a second body.

[@nicholassmith7723]

Nevermind. I found your series on it. Thanks

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad you found it already

[@thisis5123]

Great video Dustin. I think this is a matter of application, we in the photography industry as a whole will benefit I think from the “ no “perfect” camera” mantra entering the zeitgeist more. There are trade offs and none are better. But for my full frame work I feel I don’t want my sensor’s pixel pitch pushed to the max for large prints. In my opinion 35 mm format isn’t the ideal format for that job when displaying massive gallery prints to be viewed up close is the absolute number 1 priority. Of course it still will do a job that is surprisingly on par with medium format, and in more situations than not, there will actually be no discernible or significant difference to even the most trained eye I know I can come across as “ that guy “ but i feel this is similar to when Nokia released a 40 something megapixel phone camera in 2012 I think it was. It feels like a marketing technique and at the very least pushing boundaries “ for the sake of it”. I won’t bash someone’s will to innovate though. The physically larger photo sites eg. Larger pixels ( lower megapixel count) on cameras really does have legitimate benefits. Especially so when viewing at the same size image. Say you print 17x25 I feel the added dots of information serve no additional benefit, or at the very least, it’s a point of diminishing returns having higher megapixel sensors beyond a certain point as the signal to noise ratio becomes reduced. Not that it’s as extreme of an example but my 1DX Mark two has superior image quality than my 5D Mark four in nearly every situation even at base iso, of course I can crop more with the 5D but the 1DX Mark two still has an overall punch and pop to the image that so sought after. Don’t even get me started on lens fidelity and tonality/pop ( whatever you wanna call it haha). I consider some of the ultra modern high corrected lenses to be for reproduction work where they will be used in ideal studio lighting when tangible detail is the priority. But for most work I consider this not preferable. If I want more detail, I will shoot medium format digital or even better my 8x10 camera. Even saying “ I will use my 8x10 camera for best quality “ sounds almost pretentious or excessive at least, but after all, we as photographer in the digital age dedicate so much time to our enthusiast side researching camera gear and learning how to use it; spending money due to gear acquisition syndrome. I feel large format film gets overlooked because of an initial intimidation factor. But when you get past it in a few hours of reading online, it because just another tool for the job. With hybrid film/digital workflows it really is very very negligible the added work film gives. The darkroom enlargements is what took all the time. Now days we have a Paterson tank to fit all formats. Give it a quick dunk in a hot water bath to maintain temp and your done.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Interesting feedback. My feeling (and the anecdotal feedback I'm getting suggest I'm not alone in this) is that Sony didn't gauge the market quite right. I think the a9II needed a resolution boost while the a7RIV needed to get more refinement. Very few people actually need more than the 42MP that the a7RIII had, but improving the autofocus, ergonomics, getting the touchscreen right, improving sensor dust resistance, and finetuning performance instead might have been a better approach (but hard to market).

[@blueckaym]

I know it's a limited niche usage, but it would be nice to compare also the IV's pixel-shift in terms of details and noise (esp. after being scaled-down to lets say III's resolution) Otherwise very nice review! Thanks!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There are a lot of things that you can cover in these type reviews, but I've already given it about 90 minutes worth of on-screen review across the playlist.

[@drsuppan]

Thank you very much. I bought a rIV and found it to be very demanding for some of the lenses. As long as you can stay in the sweet spot with ISO 100 all is ok. If you try to do landscape or city handheld with larger dof and ISO 800 or 1600 the result can be so soft that my old rIII would outperform the rIV. They kindly gave me a second rIV for comparison, same result. I guess that will depend on the lens. I was testing the 35/1.8 and the 24-70GM. The 35 was only giving good results at 5.6 and ISO 100. The 24-70 was not as extreme but still showing the same softness.

[@drsuppan]

My text may be misleading. I did the tests on a very sturdy tripod with timer

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Interesting feedback. I don't know how familiar you are with very high resolution bodies, but expecting more sharpness at a pixel level is not how this works. There are more pixels to work with, but resolution at a pixel level doesn't really increase.

[@drsuppan]

Dustin Abbott I own a Fuji GFX100 and use it mainly for tripod work and landscapes. I bought into the Sony system some years ago for video (Studio and equestrian) and I still love it, but my preferred camera for video is the a7III. The a7rIV was intended for street photography with small primes like the 35/1.8. I am not an expert but the results are just muddy and don’t have that crispness of my a7riii. The experience with the GFX is completely different. The crispness and the level of detail is directly visible, but as you just mentioned I had to get used to the high resolution with a larger sensor. Depending on the lens you easily run into situations where you have to focus stack for a larger dof. The rIV behaves definitely different, if you hit the sweet spot it is great but if not it is not just a loss of sharpness it is muddy. I was wondering whether this may be a C1 or LR problem so I tested both, no difference. But may be there is a software glitch somewhere and a future release will solve this

[@69elchupacabra69]

Since the R4's sensor is more sensitive to light, does that mean I wouldn't have to crank the ISO up compared to say an AR3 or A7III? I want to convince myself to get the R4 but sensor wise it seems to bring more issues than benefits. It seems I need to be in a well lit setting for the camera to be usable which happens less often than I need to crop my photos to the point that an R3 isn't enough. If I were to get the R4, it would be for the better AF system and ergonomics. I'm just not sure they're worth the extra money and the worse low light performance.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I understand your hesitations. If they would just offer a MRAW setting, a lot of those hesitations go away. On the Canon 5DsR you even got better ISO performance at MRAW due to downsampling.

[@stoyanw]

Hello, Dustin, I found your Chanel researching about my upcoming Sony camera purchase . Your videos are very informative and helpful. I would like to ask you for a suggestion. Currently I own a6000 and I'm planning on moving to a full frame. I'm torn between 7RIII , 7RIV and 7III. Of course I have APS-C lenses and they will work better with higher resolution sensor, but considering the lense prices, it will take time to buy FE lenses. So, buying cheaper camera and couple of good lense is tempting. I will shoot portraits, engagements, landscapes. What would you do? Thank you

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Right now I'd choose the a7RIII in your shoes. It is a great camera, can be gotten for a more reasonable price, and will potentially leave you room to pick up a lens or two.

[@stoyanw]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you

[@agoodjoe6910]

how comparable is the detail of the a7RIII when shooting in pixel shift, to a single a7RIV raw file?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I believe that's covered in here.

[@RustamMaharramov]

Hi Dustin. Did you try Laowa 15mm f2 with Sony A7r4? Is lens qualuty enough for 61mp? Thanks

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I didn't (I don't have one right now), but I think it definitely is sharp enough when stopped down.

[@RustamMaharramov]

@@DustinAbbottTWI i have only budget for one camera. I love wild life and astro. a7r4 not good at noise but i wanted try laowa 15 f2 with a7r4. Thanks

[@MRPC5]

Can ISO performance be improved via firmware updates?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I’ve never known that to be the case. Firmware can only affect software, not hardware. At best, firmware might be able to tweak the way the data from the hardware is interpreted.

[@ItsPinecone_911]

Great video. I bought the A7R 3 on the 13th of last month and am saving up for a A7R 4......after watching your video I may just save for the A7 4 instead and wait for the A7R 5 to be release in 2-2 1/2 years or at lease wait for firmware updates on the A7R iv

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's obviously difficult to predict what form the a7IV will take, but that may be a solid decision. The a7RIII obviously remains an excellent camera.

[@ItsPinecone_911]

@@DustinAbbottTWI agreed. Im hoping the A7 IV will have the new 36mp sensor and with the new bigger grip body of the A7R IV. But I guess we will see

[@ItsPinecone_911]

@@DutchDiederik Ill still keep my A7R III. I just like having the best of the best or the like havimg the newest thing around.

[@ItsPinecone_911]

@@DutchDiederik yes it is but its what I enjoying doing. We all spend a ton of money of things we enjoy doing right?☻

[@Ava-wu4qp]

One little thing I wish you had done differently in this comparison: when recovering over/under exposed images, I wish you had compared them to a properly exposed image at the same ISO or an ISO that matched for the change in exposure. Comparing a recovered image alongside a greatly under/over exposed image fails to tell me much without a lot of extra work on my end, skipping back and forth to different parts of the video. Nonetheless, thank you very much for this clinical look at their sensor performance from a studio standpoint. I won't be buying this camera any time soon at least but i do wish I had those quality of life improvements on my current Sony camera (ergonomics, card slots, dials, etc)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's the problem. Many people seem interested in the focus and ergonomic improvements but not really in the increased resolution. Sony may not have judged the market quite right on this one.

[@Ava-wu4qp]

@@DustinAbbottTWI To be fair, I do have a P65+ for studio work, even if it is rather so slow to use.

[@MeijaJanis]

very good stuff.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks!

[@dans.8198]

Thanks for this comparison. I am surprised Sony does not provide a 15MP 4x oversampling mode for those of us who are still waiting for the next A7S. Marketing reasons ? It would be interesting to do that in post and compare the results to a A7S2.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

They didn't really advance the ball on the video side here.

[@morrisroos]

This is the first good visual evidence of the low light capabilities of the R4. Thanks much. When I take screenshots from your video of the various iso levels of the R4, it appears that it is essentially iso invariant through 1600, that 3200 would be usable, but not so much above that, as you said. This is highly useful, once my R4 is delivered, since I would set the maximal iso for action at 1600 [or maximally 3200] when using the auto iso min ss setting. It also means that for astro, I will not go above 3200 and that expensive f/1.4 GM lenses will be required to make up for the lack of a high iso ceiling [my iso invariance testing after the LonelySpeck method showed that the R3 is iso invariant through 12800]. Would you allow me to post this collage comparison on FB and Flickr, crediting the research to you? I will send it to you if you tell me how to contact you.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's fine. You can contact me through my Facebook page: facebook.com/ThousandWordImages/

[@VelvetBulldozer]

In a good Astro camera, which is more important, high megapixel or high iso performance?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hmmm, I don't know that either highly outweighs the other. You need solid performance up at to ISO 6400 (which many provide), but it's rare to need to shoot at higher ISOs than that for stars. High megapixels really depends on what your display medium is. If it is on a website, you are reducing the image to no more than 10MP or so...

[@VelvetBulldozer]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks Dustin. I guess I wanted to know if A7R4 would be good as an Astro cam. I wonder if 60MP is good for the stars or maybe 24MP would be better, as Earth is moving relative to the stars maybe more pixels is worse. Anyways thanks for the review, straight to the point, as usual.

[@hallamphoto]

@@VelvetBulldozer I've been shooting a fair amount of astro/milky way stuff the past few weeks with the A7RIV and I'm very pleased with it. You can see some examples on my IG page @hallamphoto as I don't have any samples on my website yet. I did find that because of the high resolution you can zoom in on the photo so far you will see more star streaking than from lower res cameras so I've increased my shutter speed speeds more than on any other camera I've had. At 17mm (Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8) I found 10 seconds to deliver the best results for eliminating star streaking. The camera does handle high ISO well considering the resolution however I am still stacking multiple images for the cleanest results. Practically noise free at ISO 6400, 10s, f/2.8 with 20 frames stacked. The built in intervalometer is easy to use and makes shooting sequences easy for stacking. In general the fewer megapixel on the largest sensor size is what makes a great astro camera among more technical things but to make a long story short I am very pleased with the A7RIV overall for astro and with stacking it's amazing!

[@VelvetBulldozer]

@@hallamphoto Thanks a lot.

[@wandererstraining]

The A7RIV is an interesting upgrade, but not my camera. I think 36--42MP is the sweet spot for me. I find 24MP could have more detail, but don't need 61MP either, and I'd rather have something in the ballpark of 40MP with the best possible image quality (good high ISO, good dynamic range and good colours). If Sony came up with an A7IV that had a 36MP sensor with improved sensor tech, improved AF, better viewfinder, faster processing, I'd be more compelled to upgrade bodies. Great review as always, Dustin!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

A 36mm sensor has been registered, so that will happen at some point.

[@wandererstraining]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Yes, I thought it probably would be on the A9II if the processor was also updated. Maybe on the A7IV then. But I hope Sony takes their time, I'm happy with my A7RIII.

[@L.Lyubomirov]

The exactly same thing i have noticed in comparing EOS R vs 5D markv IV,EOS R raw files always little bit brighter,if you download files from dpreview you will see little bit more noise in the EOS R,bit also the exposure is different same as your example,and then if you dial back the exposure the noise level is exactly the same...So is hard to compare because of the iso standart difference,and thats all...many many many people refuse and dont get this,actualythis is the most important aspect of comparing 2 cameras,and you are mentioning this in your video,Thank you !You cannot say...hey this camera has less noise,but also the exposure is darker...it is not fair comparison.Maybe the best way to compare different cameras with different iso standart it will probably be with shutter release cable,in bulb mode...

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's true. They changed the base sensitivity level a bit.

[@NSAwatchesME]

I still don't know what to get maybe z7 is only 2.2k but lack of lenses..

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm not really familiar with Nikon's offerings. From what I understand, however, neither the Z or Canon R cameras are flying off the shelves.

[@badmintonmedia-ny7zq]

Isn't it kind of premature to draw to big conclusion of raw files with only adobes implementation and not other raw-file processors????

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I have about six other RAW processors; I stand by my results.

[@manojpathiravasam852]

Outstanding and very informative comparison. Based on your observation, i think my A7r ii can stand favourably against a7riv

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That depends on the metric. The AF is garbage compared to the a7RIV.

[@AlfonsoSalgueiroLora]

Thank you very much for this detailed and fair comparison between the 7R4 & R3. Your insights reinforce my thoughts about keeping my 7R3 and not upgrading. I am a freelance professional photographer doing very different things. My main area of work is concert photography but I also do landscapes, architecture and events. For me the Sony a9 & A7R3 combo has worked really well and I am disappointed to see the new bodies don't fit into my workflow. The a9II doesn't bring anything important for the things I do and the price here in Europe is 5400€, which is a 900€ increase over the original a9 when it came out. The A7R IV has far too much resolution for concert & events, with no possibility to use smaller RAW files, it has slightly worse high ISO performance and it's price is also higher than its predecessor. I think Sony got carried away a little too much for my liking trying to please a small group of high end pros working for agencies and forgetting that the vast majority of photographers making a living out of it cover a variety of areas and need more polyvalent camera bodies. I hope Sony will think of us for the next upgrade and make the next generation more appealing to a majority of photographers.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I too am using an a9/a7RIII combo right now, and debating the R4 myself.

[@gladstoneh9170]

This may not be the right place to leave my comments: can you pls evaluate the new released canon R lenses?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm working on that. I don't own an EOS R body, so doing reviews of RF lenses is hard. I've reviewed two of them in conjunction with doing reviews of the EOS R and RP bodies, but that was only because I had a loaner camera body at the time for the camera review.

[@gladstoneh9170]

Dustin Abbott thanks！ very much look forward to your future reviews on such lenses. Just being honest, your reviews are the best on KZbin: all are must watch.

[@gosman949]

Wow great review. Now if you would only review the Olympus and Panasonic 4/3 cameras and compare them with a full frame Sony, your tests would finally put to bed the challenge that many pixels are better than less pixels.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hi Jay, I'm already producing 3 videos a week just trying to keep with Sony, Canon, and occasional Fuji projects. I certainly don't have time to add more.

[@BoredErica]

Overall based on your general feeling, do you think color of a7r4 look more or less accurate compared to a7r3? I vaguely remember you finding some green tinge on the a7r3 review.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I did feel that way, though now I've learned how to get better color out of the R3 (and Adobe is doing a better job, I think, with Sony color). I don't actually see a big color difference between the two. It seems like the R4 is brighter and slightly less saturation. Accuracy doesn't really seem much different.

[@meat_loves_wasabi]

Still using my 4yr old A7R2 for casual shooting during vacations

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The sensor is still great even if the focus system is not outdated.

[@jamesmorgan9039]

I'd be keen to see these results if your maintained a consistent shutter speed and reduced the amount of light each time.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a very difficult test to control (controlling light output vs controlling camera settings).

[@jamesmorgan9039]

@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks for replying. So true but we'll worth it. Maybe the most controlled way would be with ND filters.

[@robbie154]

Hear I am, still waiting, for sony to give me an S,M,L Raw option like my d810/850 did. I honestly don't know why it is so hard for them to do. If the Z7s fixes focus issues and what not I may just have to go back to nikon.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It is totally ridiculous, Robbie.

[@nooddles12]

Mr. Abbott: I commented earlier on your comments section. I’m trying to join the full frame game from my fuji x100s. Budget wise I’m leaning towards the 3 but am not opposed to going for the 4. Can the 3 replicate the cinematic wonder that I saw during the super bowl when both the a1 and the a7riv were used during the broadcast? I’m so torn at this decision and I’m just seeking professional guidance wherever. Maybe I should have written a better comment question to begin with. Great channel by the way.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't tested the A1 yet, but the video specs on the RIV are basically identical to the RIII. I'm not sure there's any significant difference between the two. I use an RIII and an a9 for my channel all the time.

[@nooddles12]

@@DustinAbbottTWI I just want to write this as a thank you for all of your videos regarding the Sony full frames. It was a tough one, but I finally decided that the A7RIV and the 85mm, 1.8 would be my first entry into the full frame world. The Fuji X100s got me some wonderful memories, but Sony's autofocus alone is worth the price of entry.

[@PT-re2gi]

Very nice comparison. It would be nice if Sony introduced an updated 42mp camera. A new processor and body would make it a wonderful camera. More megapixels was really not needed. The R4 in my opinion has to many shortcomings when compared to the R3. The R3 is much more versatile camera.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I proposed the exact same thing, as perhaps a mid-range camera slotted $300-500 underneath the a7RIV

[@Celestialrob]

I know that many (see threads on Fred Miranda) would value your thoughts on choosing between the r3,r4 and a9. A92 is not $1000 different for non pro sport shooters.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

For the moment, I'm using an a9/RIII combination. I'm going to be releasing a dedicated AF segment next week, but there's no question that the RIV is closer to the a9 in AF performance than it is to the RIII

[@Celestialrob]

@@DustinAbbottTWI I admire your thoughtful and honest approach to assessing different equipment, to the point here I watch videos on equipment that does not interest me, as I always learn something. Thank you. I look forward to your thoughts on AF!

[@kevindiossi]

Nice to see a video providing evidence of worse high ISO performance when people have been claiming it was better and had more dynamic range. It appears to not be the case. Just goes to show how incredible the A7R3 sensor truly is. Interestingly enough, the new 90D/M6 Mark II sensor performs better than the 80D/M6 at higher ISO by a pretty noticeable margin. So a massive jump in resolution, at least for Canon this go-around, didn't result in poor high ISO performance or a hit to dynamic range. Great video as always for us nerds. LOL

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'll definitely take a look at the 90D at some point.

[@lmallard3788]

Not enuf "real estate" on 35mm size sensor for more than 30 mp, and have those pixels large enough to capture more light.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I think the 42MP on the R2/R3 speak for themselves (as does the Nikon D850), but I think we may be hitting the ceiling for current technology.

[@kian8382]

The elephant in the room is that is it better than the current apsc sensor at pixel level? I know those who need 61MP won't care but it actually tells us what we can expect from perhaps the next gen crop bodies.

[@jakelindsay6251]

Such a great balanced review that I think really nailed it. As an owner of the A7Riii for the past 2 years, I haven't found myself once wishing I had more MP or resolution. I really think your point about a marketing war needs to be considered. I'm happy to skip this iteration and hope that by the time the A7R5 comes out, they'll have found some magic to clean up those higher ISO images. My 7R3 isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The a7RIV is a great camera, but I don't think it is the 61MP that necessarily make it so.

[@AllCarsUnited]

Purchased the a7r3 when it came out and still see myself holding on to it for a while. If the a7r4 had better video I would Def have jumped on it

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Fair enough. Sony obviously feels like they are still competitive where they are at.

[@JonniArmani]

I think I’m just gonna stick with the a7R2 ,) nice review

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If you have a camera you like, then just use it!

[@JonniArmani]

That’s what I always say! The technology is so ridiculous at this point people aren’t even taking photographs where is the talent left it’s like now they are stitching it together with deep fusion it’s ridiculous if you can’t take a photo and know how to work manual maybe you shouldn’t be in back of the camera.

[@bpalme]

Man.. I was really wanting the new things on the IV but I think it may just be too many pixels for me. That EV dial with no lock drives me insane on my A7C.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Is the new a7IV a better match for you in terms of resolution?

[@bpalme]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Possibly but I do some landscape and would like the resolution of the RIII and no AA filter. My little Olympus seems to do a better job than my A7C for landscape detail.

[@NSAwatchesME]

Im so disappointed they didn't do anything at all to upgrade the screen

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Agreed.

[@peek118]

Are you saying Sony is back to its recently corrected green tinge, a move backward in that regard?, thanks

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

No, I'm saying it is more like the a7III (the RIII had more of the tint).

[@Mphoto7]

I find your knowledge, your ability to convey information and your overall content to be very useful. I also like your relatively non-scripted, personable approach. The fact that you don't trot out a bunch of useless charts and graphs refreshing. What I don't understand is your approach to the production value of your videos. No, I'm not interested in a Hollywood production but the least you could do is shoot a video without a hideous, giant shadow on your background. It"s incredibly distracting. Yes, I realize this is about information being conveyed. Yet, if I am distracted by a production anomaly I won't hear everything you have to say. Please, add a backdrop light or use a ring light or even just shoot farther away from your backdrop so the shadow falls outside of the frame. Anything you do to improve your production value will allow professionals (mostly) to hear what you have to say without distraction. Isn't that your goal?!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks for your feedback. I was actually testing some new lights and no, I wasn't crazy with the results for this type of setting and cited that in my review of them. To be fair, however, I release more than 150 videos per year even though this isn't my "real job". Most of the time my production value is reportedly excellent, but there are a few times per year that I don't get it right.

[@Mphoto7]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Wasn't meaning to be critical. I could have refrained altogether and that might have been a better choice. After re-reading I can see the hyperbole. Not too flattering on me.

[@artmaltman]

People keep saying the A7R4 has better color science but the two cameras look very similar in image color here, at normal ISO's anyway. Surprised.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I think the biggest factor has been that software has gotten better at interpreting Sony color as they have moved more mainstream.

[@carterjohnson25]

""The Headline news is the 42mp III to the 61mp on the IV" I think most all disagree. The Form usability and focus upgrades are the only thing anybody I know care about. The 61mp is bla or even downgrade. Going to humbly disagree with your opening comment.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would say that this is my personal final analysis, too, but my point remains: from a marketing perspective and Sony - the 61MP is the headline upgrade

[@PK-ql5en]

I am not sure how many people would agree here with me but I personally think that from the pure image quality perspective it is better to buy Fuji GFX 50R over Sony A7RIV. It is only 50 megapixels but the upgrade in tonality and dr is significant. If anyone is looking for over 45 megapixel camera they are in the medium format territory really.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't yet used the GFX, though I think it is very possible to cede your point on image quality alone. The advantages of the a7RIV, however, come in the huge range of available lenses and greater flexibility of the focus system and system in general. For someone who is purely a portrait or location photographer, however, you could be right!

[@Photo-ms1mo]

Best DR (best shadow recovery) 3 cameras currently on the market are: Nikon D-850( not Z7 or Z6!), Pentax K-1(not mark 2!), Panasonic Lumix S1 (not S1R !) … Sony A7-mk3 is not far behind, but I wouldn't. recommend neither of the A7R series (mk2, 3, 4)!.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Interesting, as the a7RIII and a7III have essentially identical dynamic range ratings...as does the RIV.

[@Photo-ms1mo]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Yes, but level of "useful DR" varies depending on resolution, shutter speed, ISO being used, source of light, scene complexity etc Some of these cameras have dual gain sensor technology which may or may not be optimized at certain higher ISOs. Some are trading high ISO noise performance for DR , some are best at-2EV or up to -3-4EV , some are best at up to -5EV and some significantly better than the others at even -6EV.. Nikon has also lower native base ISO for example. Also Sony R series cameras present more artifacts and colour speckles in the image in general so to maintain the same "useful DR" you need to downsize the images much more.

[@indysbike3014]

You said the IV is 1/3 to 1/2 stop brighter, that means the ISO is not calibrated correctly on the A7RIII. This means the A7RIII is overrated for noise performance.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hmmm, I don't think that's the case, as it has compared accurately with not only cameras like the a73 but also Canon cameras I've compared it to. What's changed is the a7RIV, not the a7RIII

[@indysbike3014]

@@DustinAbbottTWI I see, good to know.