Sony's new a7R IV full-frame mirrorless camera packs a category-leading 61-megapixel sensor

Shawn Knight

TechSpot Staff
Staff member

Sony during a media event on Tuesday morning in New York City unveiled its latest full-frame mirrorless camera. The Sony a7R IV boasts a 61.0-megapixel full-frame CMOS sensor, 10 frames per second burst shooting with AF / AE tracking (the buffer can accommodate up to 68 images) and 15 stops of dynamic range in a compact form factor with familiar aesthetics.

The feature-filled a7R IV packs a 567-point phase-detection AF and 425-point contrast-detection AF system that is as snappy as the one on the a7R III despite handling much more data. You also get a five-axis image stabilization system, a 5.76-million-dot electronic viewfinder, dual UHS-II SD card slots, USB Type-C and Wi-Fi connectivity and enhanced weather sealing.

Sony’s Pixel Shift Multi Shooting mode allows shooters to compose a single ultra-high resolution photo from 16 pixel-shifted images using Sony’s Imaging Edge Desktop application. This mode works best with a tripod, a static subject and a remote shutter trigger but if pulled off correctly, results in a massive image with approximately 240.8 million pixels (19,008 x 12,672 resolution).

Sony’s new a7R IV is available to pre-order from writing priced at $3,498 (body only) and is scheduled to ship on September 18.

Permalink to story.

 

VitalyT

Russ-Puss
So it can take 18K regular still shots, but they position it as a 4K SteadyShot camera? Doesn't that seem like a let-down? I would expect the SteadyShot feature on such a camera to work up to 8K resolution.
 
Last edited:

J spot

TS Maniac
So it can take 18K regular still shots, but they position it as a 4K SteadyShot camera? Doesn't that seem like a let-down? I would expect the SteadyShot feature on such a camera to work up to 8K resolution.
Not sure if you're trolling, but things don't happen that simple.
 

VitalyT

Russ-Puss
Not sure if you're trolling, but things don't happen that simple.
More megapixels alone doesn't translate into better pictures, you need a proper image stabilization for that. And the higher the resolution, the more critical it becomes. And from the spec, Sony is back playing the old mega-pixel game. You can't take a decent 8K image with this camera without a tripod, and that's just crap, considering how expensive this camera is. And it's that simple.

So no, I'm not the one trolling here, Sony is.
 
Last edited:

yRaz

Nigerian Prince
Not sure if you're trolling, but things don't happen that simple.
More megapixels doesn't translate into better pictures, you need a proper image stabilization for that. And the higher the resolution, the more critical it becomes. And from the spec, Sony is back playing the old mega-pixel game. You can't take a decent 8K image with this camera without a tripod, and that's just crap, considering how expensive this camera is. And it's that simple.

So no, I'm not the one trolling here, Sony is.
Actually, I've found that it does. More pixels allows the image to average colors better and reduces noise. It also gives you more editing and cropping options in post
 

Kashim

TS Addict
Not sure if you're trolling, but things don't happen that simple.
More megapixels alone doesn't translate into better pictures, you need a proper image stabilization for that. And the higher the resolution, the more critical it becomes. And from the spec, Sony is back playing the old mega-pixel game. You can't take a decent 8K image with this camera without a tripod, and that's just crap, considering how expensive this camera is. And it's that simple.

So no, I'm not the one trolling here, Sony is.
This camera is not for you, because you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. My guess is that you're either a Canon or Nikon fanboy and you're upset that Sony has once again outdone them. :)
 

VitalyT

Russ-Puss
This camera is not for you, because you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. My guess is that you're either a Canon or Nikon fanboy and you're upset that Sony has once again outdone them. :)
Actually, I have a pretty good idea of what I'm talking about. And as far as guessing nonsense goes, you have outdone yourself.

Red had 8K 60fps stabilization on the market 3 years ago. Granted, it was uber-expensive, but the technology was there, and it could stabilize 8K at 60fps 3 years ago! Now fast forward into today, when Sony wants a lot of premium paid for a still-shot camera that cannot stabilize an 8K still shot.
 

wiyosaya

TS Evangelist
Not sure if you're trolling, but things don't happen that simple.
More megapixels alone doesn't translate into better pictures, you need a proper image stabilization for that. And the higher the resolution, the more critical it becomes. And from the spec, Sony is back playing the old mega-pixel game. You can't take a decent 8K image with this camera without a tripod, and that's just crap, considering how expensive this camera is. And it's that simple.

So no, I'm not the one trolling here, Sony is.
My understanding of the need for image stabilization/tripod is that it is needed in cases where exposure length does not meet the case of 1/LensFocalLength or less because that is where blurry pictures will result - especially as the lens focal length grows longer. So if you are using a 50mm lens, then the need for image stabilization would be almost non-existent except for, perhaps, extremely low light conditions with no flash, and in that case, a tripod would be required.

If I understand it correctly, what they are talking about in the article that needs a tripod sounds like the terrestrial equivalent of a stacked exposure of some deep-sky astronomical object. In that case, specifically for the terrestrial version, I can imagine the registration of each image becomes important, and the tripod aids that registration.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Godel

VitalyT

Russ-Puss
Yes, more or less. If I want a camera with decent 4K still shot stabilization, I do not need to pay that much money for it today. For crisake, the latest Go Pro can do a good job at 1/10 of the price. So If I'm paying that much more, and still cannot take a free-hand 8K still shot, that seems like a rip off.
 

edovt

TS Rookie
Yes, more or less. If I want a camera with decent 4K still shot stabilization, I do not need to pay that much money for it today. For crisake, the latest Go Pro can do a good job at 1/10 of the price. So If I'm paying that much more, and still cannot take a free-hand 8K still shot, that seems like a rip off.
You’re way off base. The stabilization they refer to is for the Pixel Shift feature which takes 16 images quickly and composes into a single 240MP image (way more than 16K for GoPro fans). For best results, you can’t handhold it. It’s a feature to get massive resolution, NOT a limitation.
If you want a 61MP image (better than 8k btw which is only ~33MP), handhold away unless it’s very low light. Same as Sony’s entire A7 line where you can handhold a full-res shot as it has good built-in stabilization in the camera body.

Also you can’t compare an image from this camera to a GoPro. There’s a reason it costs $3,000 more. GoPros are good for certain things, but that’s an apples and oranges comparison if I ever saw one!
 

H3llion

TechSpot Paladin
This is not a video camera, yes it takes video but no the A7iii is still better for video work due to better low light. This is camera for capturing images which require to be printed on large mediums like billboards.
 

Uncle Al

TS Evangelist
Sony has produced a lot of innovations but they are missing one critical one. If they want to attract users away from Canon and Nikon they need to make an affordable adapter that allows for 100% compatibility for the aforementioned brands lenses. No simple task but very doable and if they did that they would find a whole new crowd of buyers.
 

mailpup

TS Special Forces
Sony has produced a lot of innovations but they are missing one critical one. If they want to attract users away from Canon and Nikon they need to make an affordable adapter that allows for 100% compatibility for the aforementioned brands lenses. No simple task but very doable and if they did that they would find a whole new crowd of buyers.
I'm guessing that Canon and Nikon have patented their camera lens mounts and so Sony can't just copy it without paying them.
 

edovt

TS Rookie
Sony has produced a lot of innovations but they are missing one critical one. If they want to attract users away from Canon and Nikon they need to make an affordable adapter that allows for 100% compatibility for the aforementioned brands lenses. No simple task but very doable and if they did that they would find a whole new crowd of buyers.
Adapters exist... and nothing is 100%

https://briansmith.com/sony-a7-a7r-lens-mount-adapters/