Sony A7CR Initial Review | Yes, it's that Good...and yet 

I agree

Amen! And no loss of mp when you change from 28mm to 35mm etc like the Leica Qs. I'm in!

Nice! Yeah, it does sound like you fit this camera perfectly haha. Here is all the gear I used with it: kit.co/learningcameras/sony-a7cii-a7cr-gear

I agree with you...but the A7CII gives you that just at a lower resolution so you have to really want the higher megapixel count to get the CR instead. But again, if you want the A7CII but don't mind paying extra for more resolution, get the CR! It's a great camera

Don't get me wrong, I love this 61mp sensor! Glad it's working out...enjoy the camera!!!

@@learningcameras review was helpful especially for those who don't mind the bigger better costlier A7RV which is the path I would have taken if it were the only camera I shoot with.

Are you happy with the A7CR?? Cos. I'm thinking of buying it (My first camera) although i do have knowledge about cameras, and know how to operate them but never had my own camera. So do you think these camera is worth of buying?

That's the perfect reason to buy this camera!

Then consider the A7RV instead. It has much faster transfer speeds, a better screen, viewfinder, dual cards, better ergonomics, and less overheating so if you need the 61MP, I'd tend to lean towards the A7RV unless you NEED the smallest lightest option possible

Absolutely...can't argue with that. I just think at this price it's harder to justify for things like that compared to the A7CII. But if you can swing it and high MP makes a difference, which in macro it absolutely can, I'm all for it! Again, I'm a huge fan of this sensor

Typically most of the F2.8 zooms have better optics as well so it isn't just the wider aperture. The F4 versions are still very good quality but technically the F2.8 lenses will still be better in most areas

Love the FX30 for video. Full frame is not really a NEED for video (I think it's more important for photo), but full frame usually means better low light performance. The other issue with APSC is if you shoot wide angle often because to get a wide angle shot, you have to use APSC lenses because of the crop factor. Thankfully Sony has some decent APSC lenses but they are never quite as good quality as the full frame options

I wouldn't get the D850 unless you only shoot photos and are getting it used with used lenses. Spending new prices on tech that's 5+ years old is not worth it and there is a good chance you won't be able to sell it for much in a few years once Nikon builds out the Z line more. That said, the image quality on the D850 is still top of the line and the hardware is perfection. It's only the tech side such as video and autofocus that's really been making progress the last few years. But if you shoot video at all, want to invest in a future system, or can benefit from the latest AF tech, get the Z series

No, the only video benefit to the A7CR is that there is less of a crop in 4k60

Curious - I just watched the whole video, and didn't see any mention of a 'product shot' feature? What is that?

@@StudioNirin Its a focus priority mode that prioritizes products in the hand instead of locking onto the eye. I think it does have it but I would confirm elsewhere first.

You could be right. But I think there are a few reasons to believe it's hardware limited. Now, Sony could have used better hardware and probably should have especially in the A7CR version. But writing 61mp files to SD is going to be slow and I'm pretty sure they just have a small buffer and Sony decided not to allow CFexpress making it even slower. And when I saw the 1/4000 shutter speed, that signals to me Sony is using their cheaper shutter mechanism and not the new higher end one in the A7RV which would explain why it's limited to slower mechanical frame rates.

It's not that the A7CR isn't technically better... if someone gifted me a camera, I'd ask form the A7CR over the A7CII lol. But the A7CR just feels like the hardware isn't on par with a a $3k camera with things like a low resolution viewfinder, screen, not having CFexpress, and things like that where the A7CII feels a bit more justified

The display on the A7CR is the same as the A7CII. It's not the best and definitely doesn't help represent the quality of your images. You really need to step up to the A7RV for that better display if you want the 61MP

If you don't shoot LOG, 8 bit is OK but Sony's 8 bit codec is not the best so I feel like the shadows always struggled and pushing colors made video fall apart extremely quickly. 10bit gives you a bit more room to adjust colors in post. If you shoot LOG, 10bit is a must on Sony cameras because you have to push the file around just to get the image back to normal

I definitely think the 33MP on the A7IV is enough for photographing children but you are absolutely the use case that would justify the A7CR the most

@@learningcameras hi thanks for the reply but i think i was misunderstood… i take photographs of my children but of other things as well… and wasnt considering the a74 but the a7c 2. Why do you think i am a perfect case for a7cr? Thanks in advance

@@EyalKleinhendler Just because you put a massive emphasis on size and weight to the point you stopped using the 5D. It sounds like the smaller and lighter the camera, the more likely you are to actually use it and that's the main reason to buy these cameras over the Sony A7IV for example

Exactly. I sold my A7c because I couldn’t adjust to the tiny evf. If Sony had expanded it a bit I probably would be buying the CR

​@@BenSussmanproit is a bit bigger. 0.7x vs 0.59x But still the same resolution

@@_shreyash_anand Oh, well that’s like a 13% improvement…eh, maybe I’ll try it. Thanks!

@@BenSussmanpro it's actually a 22.8% improvement.

@@willcram8350My calculation was off, but a 22.8% improvement would translate into a 72.5x viewfinder (unless you’re measuring on a different criteria). In any case, i did purchase this model after trying it out at a Sony event in NYC last month. I found the improvement noticeable.

I think hybrid is a weakness for Sony because when I shoot video, 4k60 is a must and none of their cameras do full frame 4k60. So I lean towards the A7CR just because it's the lowest crop or the A7IV as a 2nd choice and you might have to pair a wide angle APSC lens when you need 4k60 and a wider field of view. Sony right now almost requires 1 camera for video and another for photo to get my perfect features. I think the Canon R6II is a better single body hybrid camera until Sony drops something with full frame 4k60

Thanks Dan and purely for photography which one you prefer between A7CII and A74 ?@@learningcameras Canon always has better camera than Sony but the problem is no third party lenses. I heard Canon is gonna open their mount to third party lenses soon.

@@neethuandthomasphotography Both are great but the A7CII has some new features so if you can live without the hardware benefits of the A7IV (bigger viewfinder, dual cards, full size HDMI port), I'd say the A7CII is extremely tempting for the price. Personally, I need the hardware features of the A7IV so that's what I would buy

@@learningcameras I'm a fuji user from India also Fujifilm India Ambassador. I love these cameras generally. If I've a choice I would prefer A74 over A7CII. This new camera from Sony is ergonomically too small for me . They should have priced 1500 USD like Canon R8.

Appreciate that!!! Means a lot

This.

It's definitely slow all around. In general, that's the cost of high resolution but even with the V90 300mb/s cards I was using, it felt slower than it should. CFexpress with this resolution should have definitely been included.

Indeed. You feel no handling drawback (maybe some rolling shutter in video) with the R5. The buffer is almost unlimited in practice. Massive deal breaker imo for the a7cr@@learningcameras

@@personaltrainersg The R5 is a great camera and it has quite a few advantages because of the better hardware including the buffer and card transfer speeds with CFexpress. I'd say the A7CR gives up some of that to make it more compact but that might be worth it for some people

With the A7RV and A7IV (same sensors), the A7IV will yield better quality UNLESS you are using over 50MP of resolution. So in most cases, the A7CII is better in low light but if you printed a 6400 ISO image to a 20x30" or larger print where you could actually use all 61MP, the A7CR would look better

Awesome!!! Yeah, this is the perfect camera for someone like you

Definitely The R6 mark II as a hybrid camera if I was using it for content creation. Happy to sacrifice a few millimeters and add a few ounces to get full frame 4k60, faster frame rates, dual cards, and a better viewfinder/screen. If it was just a casual camera for fun, traveling, and taking pictures of my kids, probably the A7c II because of the small size and lens options. I personally use the R6II for my projects all the time but you'll never see me with the A7CII for that. Even the A7IV is missing enough that I rarely use it for video. But if I was grabbing a camera to shoot my kids birthday, I'd happily grab the A7CII. Hope that helps! That's just me personally.

The best 4 axis flip screen, higher resolution screen and viewfinder, better weather sealing, joystick, extra controls, dual card slots, CFexpress type, and some extra customization thanks to the additional buttons for starters. Mostly hardware stuff though but some of those things like the CFexpress cards changes the capabilities of the camera like frame rates/buffer

@@learningcameras I anm seriously considering the Alpha c7r or Alpha r v. I'm not sure which direction to take.What is holding me back is the reality if i need the 8k vid, and can i love with less hardware. Decisions decisions!

@@21Virtues Honestly I almost never use 8k and I have a few cameras that shoot 8k. But in general I'm a huge fan of the A7RV for the ergonomics and hardware so unless you want something extremely compact on purpose, the A7RV is already smaller than the competition and packs much better hardware than the A7CR

You are correct. Lossless RAW slows down the frame rate to around 6fps so pretty slow! Even shooting in a lower MP doesn't help so this is not ideal for action

@learningcameras not just that, I wouldn't mind it as much as that after 2-4 seconds buffer is full. Shooting just lossless compressed raw(without +jpeg) is the most you could help. Still, there is also slow shutter of 1/4000 and truncated bokeh problem. Just too many problems. I ordered A7IV right now which is even 300 euro cheaper on these days. I like this c size a lot, but it's just too pricy for how it performs. It goes for 2400euro while I would pay 1800-2000euro at Most. But it's true that it got some uses like for vlog, where weight is important. I shoot photos mostly so it's a no from me. I also went from cheap hw to heavy hw and I care now more about performance than weight. Shame is I must pay for evf I don't use, but about 16 shots buffer vs 880 on A7IV is just too ridiculous.

@learningcameras I got my A7IV already, but even before, shooting on a5100 I didn't need more than 3 stills in burst shooting, just for the sake of eliminating blur or eye blinking. Shooting action is different, but I never needed this. 6fps is fast enough, even 3fps would do for me most of the time. 1. You can either shoot in jpeg for unlimited speed and quantity or, 2. You can use apsc mode, which should up the limit by quite a lot. I decided on A7IV not just because of this burst limitation. New c line got electronic first curtain making truncated bokeh, electronic shutter is slow similarly but mechanical one is too going just to 1/4000sec. C line can get heated up very fast and I'm not sure how hi end memory option can affect the speed, I know I got the best hw now. Most important is however something else - you get all these limits for 2k+ price which is weird, I bought A7IV in special offer for 300euro less. C line got 7stop IS, small light body, so it's not entirely useless. As for me right now it's not very interesting tho. Even going from 200g a5100 to 660g A7IV is a big difference, I surely don't want crippled device for this price. Price, burst limit and mechanical front curtain were the most important factors when I was making decision. Right now I don't need much burst memory, but I experienced the limit few times before, so as for getting it futureproof and having it worth the value of invested 2k euro, I definitely want equal lvl of performance. From my experience, performance comes at cost of weight and I'm not afraid to bear that weight now, after all getting output I want means a lot more. Having that performance in "c" line would be great, but limits were just ridiculous like - burst limits of 16 vs 880 pictures. So choose based on your needs.

I'm actually working on some content with the S5IIX right now. The G9II is interesting, I just feel like micro 4/3 especially for stills is a really small sensor with very few advantages when you can purchase some decent APSC or even full frame cameras for that price. With the exception of maybe wildlife since the crop factor and faster shooting speeds with small sensors come in handy. For video, I think m43 is more justifiable and that's where they actually have more advantages

Video quality is essentially the same. The A7CII actually has a few extra features but it does overheat faster and is missing some hardware features

Yep, in this price range, I think the hardware is important. The A7RV is already one of the smallest full frame pro cameras on the market

Just for the record, the flexible rear screen is on both

@@lindacruze7042 the rear screen on the A7RV has a more advanced movement design for more viewing options and angel. The A7Cr is a flip-out to the side screen only.

The Q3 has a fixed 28mm f/2 lens. For CONSIDERABLY less money, you could get the Sony a7cr, and Sigma's 20mm f/2, 35mm f/2, and 90mm f/2, and have money left over to go somewhere cool to shoot. Or if you prefer, you could swap the 90mm f/2 for Sony's 85mm f/1.8. And while it's not the perfect wildlife camera, it DOES have monster resolution, allowing deep cropping. Pair it with Sigma's new 500mm f/5.6 tele, and you've got a hand holdable wildlife rig that's less money than an Alpha 1 body, alone.

Yes but I'd recommend getting the A7RV because it has dual card slots which I highly recommend for weddings and a few extra controls and more rugged hardware overall

haha...awesome!!!

I'd say anywhere between $3300 and $3500 is a great deal on the A7RV. The A7RIV was at $3500 for a long time so if you find the RV less than that, that would be insane

It's a good idea. Obviously there is a quality difference in the APSC mode and the difference with these cameras is you can just change the lens if you want more reach so I assume that's the reason. On a phone your limited to the lenses on the camera so employing a crop makes more sense. Most of the time I need more reach, I'll change my lens before using the APSC crop mode so I don't use it often

nope, unfortunately

So Canon struggled big time with overheating issues on the Canon R5 and R6. They resolved most of it through firmware thankfully but no, Sony isn't the only one dealing with overheating. However, Sony is pushing small bodies and combine that with some of the best video tech and fastest processors and you get overheating. It's that combination that makes them more likely to overheat. And yes, this camera overheats as well pretty easily but same reason...small body + super powerful video performance = likely overheating

​@@learningcameras Thanks for your reply! Might pick one up one day if I can find one that reliably continues shooting.

Unfortunately, even on the R

I think we'll be waiting a while on that... Sony is still milking that sensor big time haha

I should definitely do some comparisons to see if the A7CII at full resolution is actually better than the 26MP mode on the A7CR. In theory, they have the same sensor technology so the A7CII should be just as good unless you absolutely are utilizing the full resolution

Perfect use case for this!

@@learningcameras FWIW, I decided to return the A7CR and keep the A7CII to use as a travel camera.

@@PhotoTrekrcan you share why? Have A7Cii and tempted by R but concerned about ISO noise 3200+.

@@TCinSoCal I ordered the A7CR to try as a travel camera. But, since I had the A7RV cameras, I decided to return the A7CR and buy an A7CII. But, I liked the A7CR so much that I bought it again. Now, I'm seriously thinking about selling my A7RV cameras. If I was a pro I'd definitely stick with the A7RV cameras. But, since I'm not, the A7C cameras are fine for me. And I wouldn't shoot above 3200 unless I absolutely had to.

@@PhotoTrekr Thank you. Sounds like I should stick with the A7Cii. I think the 33 sensor is plenty for me and I need to be able to go to 6400.. maybe 8000 without significant noise.

Yeah, it took FOREVER to clear the buffer especially in uncompressed raw and lossless compressed and that was with a V90 card at 300MB/s

Dual card slots or internal storage would have been good. Imagine if the grip extension had space to slide a card or internal memory. Almost no extra weight for massive expansion possibilities.

If you just want the image quality, get the A7CR. But if you also need decent hardware so if you're shooting weddings, demanding fast paced shoots, or if you just want to show off, the A7RV has some massive upgrades and will probably hold value longer. And this is a great price on the A7RV: bhpho.to/3SSx8fl

@@learningcameras Thank you so much that really helps

Both is definitely an awesome setup!

Haha...dude, I'm so behind on that but it's on the way! I've shot tons of video and 1000's of images on it and it's probably the most torn I've ever been on a camera! But if you shoot Nikon already, it's amazing

@@learningcameras funny thing Dan the man I haven’t really pulled through trigger. Honestly I love your reviews as I consider my self a hybrid shooter, so I really do value your opinion. Torn between the Sony A7iv, cannon r6ii, canon R5, and now the Nikon z8. I have no brand loyalty. Just want something good with a good / reliable autofocus.

@@ecs2sy501 This has been my dilema, but I went to the A7iv it's small it might not have the full caveats of the R5 and Z8 but still worth my investment. And also the third party lens options is very plenty that alone is a good deciding factor. I like my camera small to compensate heavier and bigger lenses. It feels balanced than the R5 and Z8 on my end

@@learningcameras Dan, you must shed a little light more on what you mean by torn??

@@ecs2sy501 Here is my 2 cents.... I use the Canon R6II a lot. It's not flashy but it does everything well and really doesn't have any down sides, there just isn't anything super awesome about it but for the price, it's great. The Canon R5 in theory is better but has some weaknesses for video and we should see a R5II very soon. The A7IV doesn't have full frame 4k60 so for me, it doesn't work well as a video camera since that's a must have for me. I use it more as a photo camera and a backup video camera. The Z8 in theory does EVERYTHING next level with absolutely no weaknesses. In practice, the AF system isn't quite up to Canon/Sony yet though and then there is a lens issue...Nikon lenses are massive, crazy heavy, and there are a few missing ones that are kind of a big deal...enough that I'm not sure I recommend moving to Nikon to get the Z8 even though, it theoretically does just about everything I want.

I'm not missing the point, I'm saying probably just get the A7CII. For $800 more, your getting more resolution but that resolution also comes with downsides and in most cases unless you're doing retouching or large prints, doesn't mean better quality. And $3k for average hardware feels out of place while $2200 for the same exact hardware on the A7CII feels better. But if $800 isn't a big upgrade and you can pair that with V90 cards and a good amount of storage space, go for it! I love the camera, I just think the recipe works better on the A7c II for most people

I agree. The R version needed CF express or it just feels laggy with 61mp and a small buffer. And if you shoot lossless compressed which is what I shoot, it's only 5-6fps and even slower than compressed RAW

@@learningcameras how fast was the card in your testing?

@@user-cu4dm3ip3i sandisk V90 300mb/s which is the fastest available

Haha. You are the perfect use case for this camera then. Enjoy!!!

Got the A7CR and of course it behaves just as I expected. I’m a happy camper.

Have not noticed anything...and I shot quite a bit of yellow haha

@@learningcameras The footage looks great!

I did like the A7c II if you want a small portable camera with great quality. I'm actually recommending it over the A7CR for most people

Haha, yep! They were all imported

To each their own for sure. I mean the A7RV is already the smallest and lightest by far between the Canon R5 and Nikon Z8 and even smaller than the Fuji XH2 and Panasonic S5II so as someone who uses every camera around, the A7RV already felt small so I never felt the need for something smaller. Unless I was exclusively using it as a casual travel camera in which case, yeah, I guess smaller is usually better even if ergonomics are affected

Most places I've been that ban pro cameras look at the lens. Interchangeable lenses is the big issue at most sporting events or long lenses. The difference between this and an A7R has never been an issue I've encountered. But again, I have 0 issues with the camera, I just think the A7CII is a better formula for most people given the only difference is more megapixels and that also comes with a few negatives

If you want the small body, go for it. As long as you can live without some of the hardware benefits of the A7RV like dual card slots, better weather sealing, and the better viewfinder/screen for starters

@@learningcameras yeah, not doing commercial work anymore so dual slots unnecessary, won't be using the viewfinder on a tripod anyways, and the saved £900 was put towards a lens, happy days :)

Huh?

Why would you think that?

@@learningcameras everybody would think that if they cared to compare identical images side by side. A7Cii has skin color problems with orange yellowish tints. Some people skin in artificial light show even greenish shifts. Blues (sky) show cyan shifts. And AWB overall is hit and miss, mostly miss. A7Cr has none of those problems.

It was a joke. Although I have talked to the heads of Sony America several times and we meet the lead project engineers at most release events so I have had extended conversations with them about what I like and dislike many times over the years

I wish I got paid by Sony for this lol...but why if I was getting paid by Sony would I recommend getting a different camera than the one I was using??? This would be my last job for them. I disagree with you. In almost every case having 24mp with larger pixel sites will yield just as good images especially in low light when sampled below 24mp so unless you absolutely need the resolution such as large prints, pixel retouching, and stuff like that, the A7CII is great. Keep in mind that 60mp means the camera is slower, especially without a CFexpress card, has less detail with video because it can't oversample, and is much more expensive. Again, I love the sensor...I personally own the A7RV so I actually use this 60mp sensor but I need the resolution for lens tests, printing, and the RV had hardware advantages that the A7IV and A7CII/CR don't have like the improved screen/viewfinder, and dual CFexpress slots. Just because it's technically better and I personally use it doesn't mean I would recommend it for most people watching my videos and I think the A7CII is an easier to justify camera than the A7CR

I do talk to their engineers a few times per year. Props to Sony because when we get these cameras to test or when they do events to let us try out new gear, they always have a team of engineers from Japan on site to hear our feedback and take notes. How much of that goes into production...who knows but yeah, I do actually talk to the decision makers at Sony Japan and it used to happen extremely often pre-covid

Hahaha...I just use external SSD drives because I don't have that kind of $$$ but the M processor is the only reason I went mac

Good news is we have options with the A7RV. I just think this was a missed opportunity to get the formula right as much as I like the sensor

I'm using the lenses I own and love...why is that dumb? I'm perfectly fine with a slightly larger lens to get the image I want. If you're not, use small ones! And if you want the smallest body with the best sensor, buy the camera! I literally said that. Dude, ease up....but I think MOST people would be best served with the A7CII which uses identical sensor tech with more autofocus coverage and still has tons of resolution, or getting the A7RV which puts some extra features most people buying $3k cameras should have. But either way, I said this camera is amazing so not sure why you're worked up about it... The title literally says "yes, it's that good"

It's definitely not worth the money if one plans to use it as their main camera. It's probably not worth the money period. And the A7CII is a better value, yes. But there's no interchangeable lens camera in the market that matches its portability and resolution combo. Once you put a G-master on that body it loses its whole purpose for existing and judging it accordingly is irrelevant.

Means a lot!!!