I understand and respect that only as a 'subjective preference'. I don't own anything but Sony at the present time. I have almost always found the lighter the camera/lens combo, the more comfortable it is for me, regardless of the grip size and shape. I generally prefer rangefinder form factor. In the Sony line, these are their A7c / APSC lines.
I used to own a Nikon DSLR and some Canon cameras in the past. Moreover, whenever I am in camera store and have a chance to try any of the other brand cameras, I'll do it. I have tried Nikon Z8, Z9 as well as some Canons. I find them something I have to get used to if I have no better choice. Unfortunately, the more recent Sony bodies are also getting bigger and heavier.
wind30 wrote:
…. I own both a7r5 and a z8. The z8 feels more comfortable with lens heavier than 1kg.
Outstanding wrote:
Z8 is amazing with any lens weighing over 700g, added weight helps with balancing.
If that were true, people would attach extra weights to their camera bodies.
Dec 03, 2025 at 08:52 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Daran wrote:
If that were true, people would attach extra weights to their camera bodies.
People do of course add grips to their cameras for better handling and that adds weight, but also more room to hold the camera. For some people this does improve their experience handling the camera and I am sure for some people having the bigger camera and heavier weight of the Z8 improves their experience handling the camera with larger lenses. Maybe it doesn't improve your experience, but I don't doubt it does for some.
zeitlos wrote:
Again, since someone asked for it. In a German review they say it should be about 12-14 millisecond readout time.
For me it's not important, but maybe some people care.
() => in German.
Been trying to pin this down also. Earlier search results in Google were showing 15.1ms. Best I can find now is that the V reads out up to 4.5x faster than the IV (66ms), which puts it at 14.67ms. Still too slow for my taste, albeit still impressive that it can crank out 14 bit files at the advertised rates.
I think it’ll still be an awesome body for many, but the specs put it into a limbo space for me, as I have the RV for high res, and then A9 and Canon R5ii bodies for when I need speed in ES.
Additional question: I wonder what this a7V release will do the used prices of the a9 or a9II? I guess those machines still have faster sensor read speeds?
patotts wrote:
Additional question: I wonder what this a7V release will do the used prices of the a9 or a9II? I guess those machines still have faster sensor read speeds?
Not sure. But the original A9 is still 2.5x faster than the A7V, so still a massive difference. The advantage the new body will have is being able to crank out 14 bit files at a decent speed.
summmers wrote:
I do when handholding for video. This has been common for as long as handheld shooting has been a thing.
Agree, the idea of the most minimal size/weight is not always best. For my hand size, the Sony 40mm f2.5 G just doesn't balance well; the 35mm f1.4 GM is much more balanced.
For this topic's sake, the new a7V looks great, the MP count is a nice balance. I'd be curious to see if the EVF is close enough to the a7RV.
JohnDizzo15 wrote:
Refresh rate max is the same. But the A7V has roughly 39% of the resolution of the A7RV EVF, so I doubt they will be comparable with regard to detail.
Can you say/see if it is the same as in the Sony A7IV?
JohnDizzo15 wrote:
Been trying to pin this down also. Earlier search results in Google were showing 15.1ms. Best I can find now is that the V reads out up to 4.5x faster than the IV (66ms), which puts it at 14.67ms. Still too slow for my taste, albeit still impressive that it can crank out 14 bit files at the advertised rates.
I think it’ll still be an awesome body for many, but the specs put it into a limbo space for me, as I have the RV for high res, and then A9 and Canon R5ii bodies for when I need speed in ES. ...Show more →
I got the 15.1ms from the written review on DPReview.
Either way it is in that borderline range for moving subjects. Some will be fine. Others not. Leaning lines guaranteed during a fast pan like a BIF with trees or grass in the background.
Btw. I've read several times now that the Sony A7V is essentially a smaller version of the A1II. What exactly is better about the A1II compared to the A7V? And does the A7V perhaps have any advantages over the A1II (besides being cheaper of course )?
arbitrage wrote:
I got the 15.1ms from the written review on DPReview.
Either way it is in that borderline range for moving subjects. Some will be fine. Others not. Leaning lines guaranteed during a fast pan like a BIF with trees or grass in the background.
Is my math correct thinking that is about 1/66 of a second, or about four times the time the A1 need for reading the 50MP sensor?
Dec 03, 2025 at 01:33 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
arbitrage wrote:
I got the 15.1ms from the written review on DPReview.
Either way it is in that borderline range for moving subjects. Some will be fine. Others not. Leaning lines guaranteed during a fast pan like a BIF with trees or grass in the background.
We should keep in mind that these numbers haven't been measured yet and they may be for video rather than stills and the numbers can be different. Let's wait until people get the camera in hand and measure the speed before we draw any firm conclusions.
zeitlos wrote:
Can you say/see if it is the same as in the Sony A7IV?
I don't understand the question. 3.7MP is 3.7MP. How could a different resolution even be possible?
zeitlos wrote:
Btw. I've read several times now that the Sony A7V is essentially a smaller version of the A1II. What exactly is better about the A1II compared to the A7V? And does the A7V perhaps have any advantages over the A1II (besides being cheaper of course )?
A1II has better:
* read-out speed (I occasionally got distorted photos of my kids on A7III, which is about 2x slower than A7V I think)
* resolution
* EVF (but resolution drops when focusing so it's bigger, but not really more detailed in action)
* body (as generally agreed )
* card slots (2x CF-e)
* buffer
* AF actuations (and probably better AF performance in general)
* video (probably, I don't remember the specs too well)
A7V has better:
* compressed RAW (new HQ format)
* better battery life?
)?