Alpha 7R IV

OM isn't 'the poorest system' for landscapes. That's a narrow mindset of the uninformed (usually FF shooters who've never used M43 and go by specs). It's extremely difficult to tell the difference between 11 or 12 stops in a print (for example). The difference is more in the operator than the gear.

Pro wedding shooter here. My weddings are on full frame Sony's (A7r4 and A9ii). My personal stuff I carry a Fuji x-e5. I've shot low light ceremonies where I cannot use flash on the Sony's and I've shot low light on the x-e5 such as Thanksgiving. With really bad light, both crop and full frame look

Inevitability the conversation will come around to (be dominated by) the eternally boring M43 vs FF sensor. This is the wrong path to go down for you, IMO. There are as many advantages to M43 as there are for FF and ditto disadvantages. Firstly I'm going to quote your specific genres that you shoot

Depends what the problem is that you’re seeing, they look pretty good to me from here but that’s with reddit compression. If you’re pixel peeping then yeah, most scans aren’t going to be sharp enough; I’ve had the same roll scanned with 4 different scanners/cameras and the sharpest result I had was

It depends on what you are going to be shooting. It is disappointing how many people show up to this discussion, though, and pretend that cropping doesn't exist or isn't useful. I shoot a Sony a7r4, which is 61 MP. Having all those MP has been a huge benefit to me on many occasions. - sometimes, my

I asked myself the same question. Eyesight issues forced me to stop shooting with my M9, after five decades shooting Leica I just cannot do the rangefinder thing any longer. I considered the M EV1 but figured the Sony A7Riv has the same sensor at a fraction of the price. So I am selling the M9 and f

Yep, leaving behind my Sony A7R4 and full kit for two weeks international travel later this summer in favor of my M7

I started shooting back in 1999, long before mirrorless was a thing. My roots were in Canon SLRs and later high-end DSLRs, and I shot pretty much everything over the years. Sports, landscapes, portraits, studio work. I was using serious bodies at the time like the Canon EOS 3 and later EOS-1D, 5D se

Because, from what I gather, the Sony is supposed to be more resolving. When comparing the original and II versions of the Nikkor 24-70 2.8 (according to reviews), the II version is overall sharper than the original, while the original is supposedly not far behind the II - and in the center the orig

Have had mine for years. Scuba and freediving. No leaks no issues. Sony a7rIv. As many people have said, keep it clean and check your seals etc and ive found them great. My only issue is they are decently buoyant without having strobes etc on there