Sony's latest version of the A7r has been announced. Has a 240.8mp multi-shot mode (combining 16 images)? The basic 61mp seems a bit excessive to me. But you've got till August to save up the necessary £3500.
A couple of exta points... It appears to be priced at $3,500 in the States and £3,500 here. Has the pound fallen that far? According to the sonyalpharumours site, there will be another three cameras announced over the next couple of months, should you wish to take them without the usual pinch of salt...
US prices are usually without sales tax, European are usually with, so there is still a difference in price (cheaper in the US) but not as much as it appears.
Sony certainly seem determined to maintain their lead in the FF mirrorless marketplace. Having just read the full spec I don't think it's overpriced, either (just bloody expensive). One thing I can be sure of, however, is that wondrous machine that it may be, it would make no difference to my ability as a photographer.
FF mirrorless is an area well beyond my needs, thank heaven. Even a top range Fuji APS offers me more than I can use. But it is interesting that such thing are out there. Even if they are too big, heavy and expensive & offer qualities that I could never need.
So this means that every first-time buyer will now assume that anything with a lower specification is junk...and all the people who spent a fortune on Sony's latest model a few weeks ago will rush to part-exchange it? Probably yes to both. I wonder how quickly a PC running picture editing software will take to open a 240 megapixel RAW file, or process changes to it? Perhaps they'll all have to upgrade their PCs too.
From all manufacturers here have always been very expensive top of the range cameras. We didn't all rush out to buy them and were happy with our cheaper models. This is no different.
Note to self: my use of irony is too subtle. Must try the Trump technique next time ('Fake news! What's a camera?')
That is a major good point about processing speed. I just moved from 16 to 26 megapixels and the difference is noticeable. Heaven help a 240 megapixel. what ever you have for a computer. I would not want to try a 16 image stitch at that resolution.
Some of us can remember when 8K of RAM was bloody good and 64K was beyond the dreams of avarice. The technology moves on and soon enough no-one will buy a computer for graphics with less than a Petabyte of RAM.
Meanwhile, back at the 7R IV, there's full review on the *ph*t*z*n* site, with 61MP samples. The detail is quite impressive! Look at the hair/freckles on the ginger haired young lady. Good grief, the first picture of the guy with the ginger beard - you can count the tiny hairs in his nose! Celebrities with dodgy skin are going to avoid snappers who use this machine!
Jeez! I see what you mean. Mind you, the cost of lenses good enough to deliver that level of detail will be something of an eye opener.
