[c.a.m]

buying a Sony A7RV...

It's important to be certain of your use cases and photographic goals.

Otherwise, be wary of barkers and snake oil salesmen.

- Craig

[jgnfld]

No one system at any price point is optimized for each and every individual and their usage. If you think the Sony system is better optimized for you and your needs and can afford to switch systems including a new lens line up, go for it. Personally my KP and my medium to long primes plus 16-85 and 55-300 PLM (plus a Sigma 10-20) covers any usage I have in an ergonomically-for-me almost perfect package. As well, since most of my usage is hiking or sailing in a small sailboat, the KP toughness is a real plus. So I won't be switching. If I got into fashion or sports photos I'd almost certainly switch. Even street photography, maybe...though the KP w/ a 40mm Ltd. mounted works pretty good there as well.

[btnapa]

The rest of my photography is the same.

You made a lot of excellent points. I agree that system switch has to have a reason or an advantage. I would have considered Nikon but the 45MP vs. K1's 36 was not a significant difference. Aside from the fact Z-mount f2.8 lenses are much more expensive than the Tamrons I got. I prefer Nikon colors to Sony anyway but the overall cost of the system stirred me away from Nikon. I shot Nikon film for almost 18 years and love the brand for the tanks they make both in bodies and lenses. K1 is still the best bang for the buck value in the FF world. I just needed more resolution than 36MP and more zoom lens variety in a lighter package.

[vector]

45MP vs. K1's 36 was not a significant difference

It really is an insignificant difference. You are also right about the lens prices. After 15 years with my Pentax gear and buying a lot of glass to play with I had a really good idea of what I actually use. For what I wanted Nikon was a really good price to quality fit. I have what I actually use now and will be keeping my lens collection small.

[zagaya]

I would say that If you’re thinking about jumping ship after 45 years (sounds a bit extreme), that suggests you feel restrained by or uncomfortable with the Pentax brand/system. In that case, if you can afford it, why not jump ASAP? If you wait too long it means you would have less time to hone your skills using new tools that might turn out to be exactly what you’ve been looking for all these years. Truth is, as we get older, we have less time to dither and speculate about what might be or could've been. So I say go for it – or forget it!

[luftfluss]

I wouldn't do that, unless I used the new system long enough to be knowing exactly what I get into. Lesson learned with the K1 system, I fell in love with the K1 and immediately purchased the whole DFA lens lineup, much later realized that the Pentax FF primes offering is not what I'm looking for.
Rent or get a camera body with one or two lenses to test the water, learn about the system, then decide for a full system switch or not. The problem with internet reviews, specifications and a touch & try in a camera shop is that you only see the tip of the iceberg, you are being sold, so they show you what works well with the system, then you'll later find things that you had in your previous system but lost with the new system.

I'm not suggesting the OP sells off all of his Pentax gear to go Sony... depending on his financial flexibility, he could buy some used gear to audition, and either return it for a refund or re-sell it. Minimum financial risk that way.

If you are not satisfied with your Pentax gear, why not sell it and move to whatever satisfies your requirements? Personally, I would rather take a financial loss than be unhappy.

[Rondec]

Looking at the OP's gear list (assuming it is up to date), it includes a K-3 II, DA 12-24, 16-45, and 55-300. I don't see any nice primes in his list -- or newer lenses with better focus mechanisms (like a 16-85 or even an 18-135).

Of course, it could be that that list is out of date -- I would assume so, because it would be quite the jump going from a K-3 II to an A7r IV.

Regardless, my focus would be on glass and not on camera bodies. Buy a K-1 and mount a 70 dollar Sigma 70-300 zoom on it and you aren't going to be satisfied with the results. Top end glass does cost money in any system. Buying a trio of f2.8 Sony zooms (16-35, 24-70, and 70-200) will run around 7000 dollars. Buy similar f2.8 lenses for a K-1 (15-30, 24-70, and 70-200) will run around 4100 -- B and H pricing.

Anyway, to me, the glass is more important and if you are going with another brand you need to figure out your lens lineup for that mount.

[biz-engineer]

If you are not satisfied with your Pentax gear, why not sell it and move to whatever satisfies your requirements? Personally, I would rather take a financial loss than be unhappy.

I'm not interested in video. Most new offering are expensive and packed with video features that I will never use. Then there is medium format for still, but long lenses are lacking, so I would need to keep my Pentax for long lenses and use MF for up to about ~160mm FF equ. But the Pentax system is not best for sport and long lenses. I would have to buy both a new MILC + long lens for the sport+wildlife photography and MF kit for landscape, so that would cost a ton of money. If I keep using my Pentax kit, it's not the best, except for night sky shots / and pixel shift, easy UI, but if I accept that some shots are out of focus, and that I have to stitch and spend more time post processing , using the Pentax kit costs me nothing. To move forward with camera gear, I would need to specialize, narrow down to either medium format or FF with long lenses, because prices now are such that I can't afford to own two systems. The best thing that could happen is if Ricoh release a new FF camera , oriented stills , but with higher res sensor , better AF and faster processing+memory cards, then it would fix the limitations of the K1 II and I could keep using my Pentax lenses for many more years without spending too much. Now, if Ricoh doesn't do it, I'll keep using the K1s until I figure out how I want to specialize, e.g if I am comfortable enough to drop long lens photography completely I'll go medium format. It's important to know what we want to do and accept to make some compromises, because changing system due to changing our mind is costly, not only costly in $, but also time to learn the new system.

[BigMackCam]

It's important to know what we want to do and accept to make some compromises, because changing system due to changing our mind is costly, not only costly in $, but also time to learn the new system.

Well said, biz - I couldn't agree more... and here's the thing: if we do change systems, we are most likely swapping one set of compromises for another. It would either be a very lucky man, or one who is incredibly undemanding of their equipment, who could find a system that does everything they'll ever want extremely well at a budget they can afford. In fact, forget about the budget... There are compromises with every format and every system, regardless of cost. We just have to find the compromises that work best for each of us individually. Of course, manufacturers know this... and how difficult it must be for them, trying to figure out which set of compromises is acceptable by the majority, whilst knowing that a large number of users won't find them acceptable. It's quite impossible, really

[vector]

I spent just shy of $10k CAD to get into Nikon Z with 2 bodies and assorted lenses (some purchased used to reduce cost). So yeah, it's not cheap. That was about $6k CAD new photography money and $4k CAD from selling existing equipment. I might get $4k CAD selling off my K1 and remaining Pentax gear but it's hard to want to go down to a single system again when I have 2 now.

[btnapa]

After 15 years with my Pentax gear and buying a lot of glass to play with I had a really good idea of what I actually use. For what I wanted Nikon was a really good price to quality fit. I have what I actually use now and will be keeping my lens collection small.

Totally agree. I bought five Tamron lenses initially but I will most likely thin it down to the three most used lenses. I do some light backpacking to get my nature shots and every ounce of reduction in weight counts.
Although I had a total of eight AF primes and zooms and a bunch more manual lenses to use, the surprise Pentax lens that I used the most with my K1 was the 28-105.

[Adam]

I think others have covered the question of this specific camera fairly comprehensively, at least without additional context, so I'll refrain from adding more there.

What I will try to talk you out of is leaving the forum in case you leave Pentax. We're embracing that a lot of folks move on (adapting lenses here and there as needed, or simply adding a second system), so you'll be able get get the same great advice in sections dedicated to other brands, and of course you'll continue to be able to share photos as always, as we have no brand restrictions in most threads

[Wheatfield]

Just be sure EVFs don't give you headaches or make you queasy. Each time I've looked through an EVF it made me feel ill, the last being a Sony A7R IV a couple months ago. It only took a few seconds for me to feel nauseous.

I've been staying away from EVF cameras for the same reason. I picked up a Fuji -Pro1 when it came out and was good with the optical finder (in fact it is gorgeous), but the EVF was really, really ugly. When the X-T1 was released I picked one up and found that if the viewfinder was put into it's hyperactive mode I could look at it for half a minute at most, but the little battery in that camera drained really quickly.
I recently bought an X-T5 and have discovered, to my pleasure, that for me, the EVF is finally usable, at least the Fuji one is good.

Having said that, I don't take advantage of most of the supposed advantages of the EVF, I have as much of the clutter as possible turned off as it is a distraction. I can't speak to the Sony viewfinders as I have never looked through one (and probably never will), but at least Fuji seems to have taken the EVF seriously.

[ryanM]

If Sony does what you need it to do and you have the money to switch, by all means go for it. The company seems to be doing a good job with their camera offerings.

If I had the cash I would personally buy a Leica Q2 or the Q3...but I don't have that kind of cash. I had a Ricoh GRIII that I just ebayed off because I could not really get along well with the user interface and just found the controls too small. I wound up never really using it. Pentax does a good job of allowing me to use manual controls in their slrs and dslrs and their lenses (prime dx lenses) are small and totally useable as a walk around camera even though they are bigger than something like a Fuji whatever they got now or some other mirrorless stuff. I also do not really care for EVFs. I don't mind chimping on a good screen, but EVFs and I don't get along very well.

I have a butt load of pentax glass, mostly manual focus stuff from the film era, that is still pretty excellent on my K5iis too. I don't ever really want to be without a camera that can use those lenses easily.

[cpk]

Sony are a company which is oriented to mass-markets. They jumped on board the digital ILC market (by acquiring Minolta) back when it became a big thing. However, I would not trust them to remain interested in the small market that it has since become. Sony could switch their manufacturing facilities to something more profitable at the drop of a hat, to food mixers for example : being a household name Sony could sell food mixers like hot cakes so to speak, something that Pentax of Nikon could never do. The smaller camera companies will outlast Sony in the camera business.

Very good points. I was never happy about Sony acquiring Minolta (I wasn't happy either about the Konica-Minolta merger). After a Zeiss Ikon Nettar (120), my first 35mm camera was a Minolta A (1955 I think) which allowed me to cover two years of high school for the school annual quite successfully. After that I went to Nikon rangefinders and, some years later, Leica Ms and the Pentax LX and MX (after an initial K1000 - needed, wanted interchangeable focusing screens). Also used a Minolta scanner with good results. I have always had a soft spot for Minolta.

I bought a Sony laptop some years ago. The best laptop keyboard I ever used, but a total disaster as a laptop, very expensive with all sorts of Sony customizations to the operating system even (Windows). You'll notice that Sony is no longer in the laptop business. As a result I do not trust Sony as a company.

---------- Post added 2023-05-30 at 10:53 PM ----------

Even street photography, maybe...though the KP w/ a 40mm Ltd. mounted works pretty good there as well.

The same goes for the K-5 and K-5 II. The 40mm Ltd is my favourite street lens. My second choice is the 21mm Ltd.