[kevinWE]

The autofocus system provides 567 phase-detection AF points covering 74% of the image area in full-frame mode. In APS-C mode, 325 of those points cover almost the entire APS-C area, providing more than 100% AF coverage vertically and nearly 100% coverage horizontally.

Not too shabby. :-)

[biz-engineer]

I think the biggest advantage Sony has is that many of its customers believe strongly in the Sony propaganda -- somewhat similar to how Fuji users believe that X Trans sensors are intrinsically better than Bayer sensors.

Honestly, I am concerned about choices in the future. Personally, I like cameras easy to use and comfortable to hold, and well built and weather sealed over having the highest specifications. I've tried a Sony A7III and I didn't like it. So I'm a little upset when I think about that idea that one day I should be forced to use a camera such as the Sony A7III or any model with similar characteristics. I know that business forces can make some products win, evidence was when microsoft OS wasn't as stable as Mac OS but Microsoft had dominant market share thank to their superiority in retail / contracts. With Microsoft it was up to a point that the SEC / government had to fine them for anti-competitive practices. I fear like Sony's aggressive marketing approach is a but arrogant and unethical.

[DeadJohn]

oh comon man I've heard that so many times, this is not the case

There are fanatics and haters. You are in the Sony hater camp.

Pentax, Nikon, Canon, Sony, etc. have their unique strengths and limitations. They all make good cameras, with a few lemons (poor designs or unreliable manufacturing).

[iheiramo]

I thought mp race was over

Thought I have very good computer due to my work, I really don't want larger files to work with than what K1ii produce.

[biz-engineer]

They all make good cameras, with a few lemons (poor designs or unreliable manufacturing).

The thing is, if you ask anyone who's NOT involved in photography, how much cost a Sony A7 to build, they'll tell you something like between $50 and $150. Selling price is $3500 , so the price difference is the spec sheet. We aren't bank Rothschild, so when I buy something that cost $3500, I expect a high quality product, and no only a spec-sheet. Sony is the only brand that makes full frame camera at a price premium with the lowest quality bodies of all brands. Everybody knows that.

[RonHendriks1966]

The thing is, if you ask anyone who's NOT involved in photography, how much cost a Sony A7 to build, they'll tell you something like between $50 and $150. Selling price is $3500 , so the price difference is the spec sheet. We aren't bank Rothschild, so when I buy something that cost $3500, I expect a high quality product, and no only a spec-sheet. Sony is the only brand that makes full frame camera at a price premium with the lowest quality bodies of all brands. Everybody knows that.

I think the same was for say the K-5. Produced in a fairly large number. So once everything is settled. ....all r&d paid......how much are the cost for a next run of the same model to make? Much less then 200 $ I guess.

[Dan Rentea]

I think the same was for say the K-5. Produced in a fairly large number. So once everything is settled. ....all r&d paid......how much are the cost for a next run of the same model to make? Much less then 200 $ I guess.

Who knows?!

But given the fact that this topic is about Sony A7R IV, they used a brand new sensor. So it's not the same model as A7R III. The body is slightly different, the sensor is new, the viewfinder is completely new, the processor is also new in order to handle those large files, the pixel shift seems improved, etc.

[biz-engineer]

I think the same was for say the K-5. Produced in a fairly large number. So once everything is settled. ....all r&d paid......how much are the cost for a next run of the same model to make? Much less then 200 $ I guess.

Image sensor cost per mm2, not per pixel (more or less), so a 61Mp sensor cost about the same as a 42Mp sensor, about $80, then comes memory and processor, battery , power management chip. Cost of producing one unit, about $350, I'd say, gross margin 10 x on those models, then they have to pay reviewers to give positive reviews, they also have to ship stocks to retailers, all this cost money, but that not value going in customer's hands, it's just feeding the advertising & retail industry. Some people full time job is to run a YouTube channel and give positive reviews. I couldn't believe some camera reviewer has 2 or 3 employees... camera reviewing on YouTube must be paying really good! Some guys left their full time job to make camera reviews on Youtube, and they also get paid trip to some scenic places to show the pictures taken with new camera models.

[Rondec]

Image sensor cost per mm2, not per pixel (more or less), so a 61Mp sensor cost about the same as a 42Mp sensor, about $80, then comes memory and processor, battery , power management chip. Cost of producing one unit, about $350, I'd say, gross margin 10 x on those models, then they have to pay reviewers to give positive reviews, they also have to ship stocks to retailers, all this cost money, but that not value going in customer's hands, it's just feeding the advertising & retail industry. Some people full time job is to run a YouTube channel and give positive reviews. I couldn't believe some camera reviewer has 2 or 3 employees... camera reviewing on YouTube must be paying really good! Some guys left their full time job to make camera reviews on Youtube, and they also get paid trip to some scenic places to show the pictures taken with new camera models.

I would have thought that at least initially, new sensors would have a higher cost as they add more PDAF points on the sensor and go to a smaller pixel. I suppose the question isn't what it costs for Sony to manufacture a new sensor, but what they are charging competitors to use it.

And isn't problematic to have more and more PDAF points on the sensor? I have seen the banding that this can produce and it isn't pretty.

[Dan Rentea]

I suppose the question isn't what it costs for Sony to manufacture a new sensor, but what they are charging competitors to use it..

We can have an idea of the prices of the new sensors based on the fact that K1 is using the previous generation of Sony sensor in order to maintain a very good price for what it delivers.

[Rondec]

We can have an idea of the prices of the new sensors based on the fact that K1 is using the previous generation of Sony sensor in order to maintain a very good price for what it delivers.

Yes. But even there, how much difference in price is there between an old 36 megapixel sensor, a somewhat newer 42 megapixel sensor and the newest 61 megapixel sensor -- both in terms of cost to produce and actual pricing to camera makers?

[Dan Rentea]

Yes. But even there, how much difference in price is there between an old 36 megapixel sensor, a somewhat newer 42 megapixel sensor and the newest 61 megapixel sensor -- both in terms of cost to produce and actual pricing to camera makers?

You have to add also the "heart" of the camera into equation which is the processor that has to handle 4k at 30, 60p and also the 61mp files and the overall price of the camera starts to get close to the ones of Canon, Nikon, Sony. If we talk about expensive sensors, then the one from Olympus E-M1X must be a premium one given the fact that is a micro 4/3 sensor and that camera costs 3000$.

[biz-engineer]

Camera makers used to be happy with selling cameras at $1000, now they need to sell them at $3500 to make money because the number of customer who can also spend $3500 is 3 times less. The ultimate high prices are for medium format, they must be looking after the eventual person who is enthusiastic enough to drop $18 000 on a X1D with a couple of lenses, I hope the pictures will be very good for that person, otherwise I'd be sad for him.

[surfar]

The heart isn't that great from $$$ony yet,only does 4k 30p.

The one in the Olympus is actually two!The sensor is same as the previous Olympus body.

Fuji uses same processor in Apsc and the 645models.Its a quad core and does ok!

---------- Post added 07-23-19 at 03:41 AM ----------

you have to add also the "heart" of the camera into equation which is the processor that has to handle 4k at 30, 60p and also the 61mp files and the overall price of the camera starts to get close to the ones of canon, nikon, sony. If we talk about expensive sensors, then the one from olympus e-m1x must be a premium one given the fact that is a micro 4/3 sensor and that camera costs 3000$. :d

.................

---------- Post added 07-23-19 at 03:48 AM ----------

$$$ony have said they are working on providing 4k 60p,it may be in A7Siii...if it ever comes.its 4 years since the 2 was released.

---------- Post added 07-23-19 at 03:51 AM ----------

Camera makers used to be happy with selling cameras at $1000, now they need to sell them at $3500 to make money because the number of customer who can also spend $3500 is 3 times less. The ultimate high prices are for medium format, they must be looking after the eventual person who is enthusiastic enough to drop $18 000 on a X1D with a couple of lenses, I hope the pictures will be very good for that person, otherwise I'd be sad for him.

Why would anybody buy THAT thing?

[Winder]

Yes. But even there, how much difference in price is there between an old 36 megapixel sensor, a somewhat newer 42 megapixel sensor and the newest 61 megapixel sensor -- both in terms of cost to produce and actual pricing to camera makers?

The 36MP sensor in the K-1 is a traditional CMOS sensor. The 42MP and 61MP sensors found in the last two generations of Sony cameras have been BSI sensors which are a good bit more expensive to produce. Several years ago I read that a BSI sensor costs around 20% more than a traditional CMOS sensor. A stacked BSI sensor like what is found in the A9 was almost 2x the price of a traditional CMOS sensor of the same resolution.