One of the tricks to watch for on Sony Ambassadors is follow their Instagram feed and see what camera they usually use. Not saying this is true of Marlon, but two other photographers who do official promo pieces for Sony rave about the latest A7 or R series camera, then every single one of their Instagram shots (when identified) are with the A1
Marlon: Knowing your affinity for the Sony A1 for wildlife shooting (which I share), do you find the trade-offs of the A7RV make it the superior choice for stills and video? I am struggling with this issue for upcoming Pantanal trip, and vacillate daily on the many A1 advantages vs. the superior AF & better IBIS of the A7RV... if you wanted top results for Pantanal Jaguars with the Sony 600/4, 400/2.8, & 200-600 for stills & video, which body would you prefer to use? (OK to say both if you feel the A1 still wins for stills but A7RV would be your choice for video.) Many thanks!
The A1 is superior in terms of video. It should be more than effective for the Jaguars. The stabilization on the A7R5 is better though as well as the af. It sounds like you can afford both. So why not put a shorter lens on one and a long telephoto on the other. The Pantanal sounds like an awesome trip. Enjoy
It looks incredible, but if your lenses are only resolving 20-25mp why have a 61mp sensor, you are just amplifying the fact that your images will be soft? I think the most expensive glass available only reaches 30mp, I have what I thought would be a great lens, Canon 73-300mm DO, DXO say it resolves 10mp, I hate to think what that would look like on the A7Rv.
10fps was the deal breaker for me...its way to slow for wildlife especially for BIF. A stacked sensor, 20fps and eliminate the rolling shutter would have made this camera a game changer. It's a great camera for portraits though but even then they royally screwed up but not using the A1's shutter and the ability to sync at 1/400th.
This Statement of you is not serious, isnt it?: "Built like a tank". Man such a Nonsense. I own so many Sony Fullframe Bodies and they definitly not build rugged like a tank. Sony is not Canon or Nikon. No war photographer would choose a sony to go out in the field. Also this camera is ok for wildlife but nothing to match the speed of an A1 or A9. I got my hands on one and the birds AF is ok but not far as good as the one from the Canon R3, R5 or Sony A1 and A9. I don't understand why you try to sell this camera to wildlife enthusiasts ? 10FPS and lots of RS isn't that interesting for Wildlife.
smallest than canon and nikon? Yes (that the main reason of mirrorles cameras) It’s build like canon or nikon? Yes of corse, the size doesn’t mean can’t be used for the real war outdoor, a LOT of photographer (real outdoors photographers, mountain photographers, North Pole photographers and more are using Sony body’s without problems, btw I’m agree with you, the rv can not be compared for wildlife with the a1 or the a9 series
I use the A7R IV for wildlife no problems. Bird eye AF if a feature I wouldn't use even if I had an A1, the expanded flexible spot is reliable then zone for flight shots. I might upgrade to this camera body if it allows me to take stable handheld video at 600mm and I would want to auto focus to be slightly faster.
@@fouuladvand48 It's a good idea, I would go the A9 iii if it was 45 or 50mp. I know megapixels aren't the be all end all, but having 61mp for 2 years I don't think I could go much lower than 45mp. I wouldn't say I shoot fast moving targets, but I have managed to take sharp bird in flight shots with the A7R IV but it is still slow, the R5 is ideal for me but im sticking with Sony, hopefully the A9 iii competes with the R5 and goes high resolution.
@@KurtisPape I don't think so. The A9III will compete with the 24Mp Canon R3. So Sony will only give it the 33Mp from the A7IV with a stacked sensor to make it shoot 50 FPS. The R3 can shoot now 195 FPS with Firmware 2.0. That's why Sony has to do something. The 50MP will be reserved for the A1 II. I use the 42MP RIII a lot along with my SIII. Is it really that hard to go back to smaller sensor size with less MP? Do you crop a lot or print big? I print big and I make a lot of composings and pixel peep to retouch the photos. So the A9 III will not be worth to wait for me. I get the RV and have to deal with this slow Mechanical shutter and all the crippled video specs until the A1 II comes out.
Does the A7RV do well in low light for wildlife photography?
This Camera Is AMAZING!
Is this a commercial or a review?
What’s the bad think about it?
How is it compared to the a9II ?
These are serious questions to you.
I agree with you. This felt like a Sony ad, and not a "first thoughts". Guessing he's a Sony ambassador.
One of the tricks to watch for on Sony Ambassadors is follow their Instagram feed and see what camera they usually use. Not saying this is true of Marlon, but two other photographers who do official promo pieces for Sony rave about the latest A7 or R series camera, then every single one of their Instagram shots (when identified) are with the A1
Marlon: Knowing your affinity for the Sony A1 for wildlife shooting (which I share), do you find the trade-offs of the A7RV make it the superior choice for stills and video? I am struggling with this issue for upcoming Pantanal trip, and vacillate daily on the many A1 advantages vs. the superior AF & better IBIS of the A7RV... if you wanted top results for Pantanal Jaguars with the Sony 600/4, 400/2.8, & 200-600 for stills & video, which body would you prefer to use? (OK to say both if you feel the A1 still wins for stills but A7RV would be your choice for video.) Many thanks!
The A1 is superior in terms of video. It should be more than effective for the Jaguars. The stabilization on the A7R5 is better though as well as the af. It sounds like you can afford both. So why not put a shorter lens on one and a long telephoto on the other. The Pantanal sounds like an awesome trip. Enjoy
Could you please let me know if I need CFExpress card to record 8k on this camera?
For 400Mbit/sec mode, yes. For 200Mbit/sec, no. This is with a class 10 SDXC card.
It looks incredible, but if your lenses are only resolving 20-25mp why have a 61mp sensor, you are just amplifying the fact that your images will be soft? I think the most expensive glass available only reaches 30mp, I have what I thought would be a great lens, Canon 73-300mm DO, DXO say it resolves 10mp, I hate to think what that would look like on the A7Rv.
LoL!
Laughing in Sony G Master ;-D
Even Sony G lenses, new Tamron lenses or Sigma lenses have no issues with that sensor…
😂
10fps was the deal breaker for me...its way to slow for wildlife especially for BIF. A stacked sensor, 20fps and eliminate the rolling shutter would have made this camera a game changer. It's a great camera for portraits though but even then they royally screwed up but not using the A1's shutter and the ability to sync at 1/400th.
10 fps is enough. If you want 30 fps just start filming and take a screen shot
@@Rvb_25 Correct! 😁
Compelling to upgrade from A7iv
1:04 i cannot believe shooting with the camera at that situation is of any joy. It is terrifying man.
And explain
This Statement of you is not serious, isnt it?: "Built like a tank". Man such a Nonsense. I own so many Sony Fullframe Bodies and they definitly not build rugged like a tank. Sony is not Canon or Nikon. No war photographer would choose a sony to go out in the field. Also this camera is ok for wildlife but nothing to match the speed of an A1 or A9. I got my hands on one and the birds AF is ok but not far as good as the one from the Canon R3, R5 or Sony A1 and A9. I don't understand why you try to sell this camera to wildlife enthusiasts ? 10FPS and lots of RS isn't that interesting for Wildlife.
smallest than canon and nikon? Yes (that the main reason of mirrorles cameras)
It’s build like canon or nikon? Yes of corse, the size doesn’t mean can’t be used for the real war outdoor, a LOT of photographer (real outdoors photographers, mountain photographers, North Pole photographers and more are using Sony body’s without problems, btw I’m agree with you, the rv can not be compared for wildlife with the a1 or the a9 series
I use the A7R IV for wildlife no problems. Bird eye AF if a feature I wouldn't use even if I had an A1, the expanded flexible spot is reliable then zone for flight shots. I might upgrade to this camera body if it allows me to take stable handheld video at 600mm and I would want to auto focus to be slightly faster.
@@KurtisPape Wait for the A9 III if you are into shooting fast action!
@@fouuladvand48 It's a good idea, I would go the A9 iii if it was 45 or 50mp. I know megapixels aren't the be all end all, but having 61mp for 2 years I don't think I could go much lower than 45mp.
I wouldn't say I shoot fast moving targets, but I have managed to take sharp bird in flight shots with the A7R IV but it is still slow, the R5 is ideal for me but im sticking with Sony, hopefully the A9 iii competes with the R5 and goes high resolution.
@@KurtisPape I don't think so. The A9III will compete with the 24Mp Canon R3. So Sony will only give it the 33Mp from the A7IV with a stacked sensor to make it shoot 50 FPS. The R3 can shoot now 195 FPS with Firmware 2.0. That's why Sony has to do something. The 50MP will be reserved for the A1 II. I use the 42MP RIII a lot along with my SIII. Is it really that hard to go back to smaller sensor size with less MP? Do you crop a lot or print big? I print big and I make a lot of composings and pixel peep to retouch the photos. So the A9 III will not be worth to wait for me. I get the RV and have to deal with this slow Mechanical shutter and all the crippled video specs until the A1 II comes out.