Sony A7 V vs Sony A7 IV: 5 reasons to upgrade

An upgraded partially stacked 33MP sensor and new Bionz XR 2 processor deliver next level performance, while design tweaks further improve handling.

Cutting-edge at its 2021 launch, the A7 IV has a 33MP full-frame sensor and superb battery life, and it now costs much less.

However, before Sony fans feel disappointed, the A7 V has Sony’s latest processor and a new kind of sensor, which combined deliver a raft of performance improvements. There are several tweaks to the A7 V’s design too, which go some way to enhancing the user experience, as we found out during our product-testing period.

Without further ado, let’s dig in to the key differences between the Sony A7 V and Sony A7 IV, based on real world testing.

Sony A1 II has a next-level fully stacked sensor.

Both deliver 33MP stills, but the read out speed of the A7 V’s sensor is faster, which delivers several performance improvements, including a better handle on rolling shutter distortion, which the A7 IV is notoriously bad for.

On the flipside, partially stacked sensors historically reduce light sensitivity, which should impact low light image quality and compromise dynamic range. Sony states on the contrary, noting the improved 16EV dynamic range of the A7 V over the A7 IV.

We didn’t have the two cameras side by side for testing and making such comparisons, but it would seem from our A7 V testing that the new model’s dynamic range is certainly no worse than the A7 IV’s, even if 16EV seems ambitious.

Somehow, Sony has been able to deliver the performance improvements from the new sensor type, without image quality compromises.

2. Sony A7 V vs Sony A7 IV: autofocus and speed

The Sony A7 V camera — (Image credit: Future/ Peter Fenech)

The Sony A7 IV has a new Bionz XR 2 processor
It features an integrated AI processing unit and improved autofocus
Max shooting speed is bumped from 10fps to 30fps, and now includes pre-capture

In a first for Sony, the A7 V features a new Bionz XR2 processor, which integrates an AI processing unit. This unit is separate from the main processor in the A7R V and A1 II which therefore have two processors, but here it is combined into one and delivers the ‘AI’ performance improvements you’d hope for, such as improved subject detection autofocus and white balance accuracy.

Sony says AF performance is ‘dramatically’ enhanced, because human subject recognition now includes eye, face, head and body, there is a wider range of detected subjects, plus a useful auto subject recognition mode. The A7 IV’s autofocus, though highly competent, is much simpler.

Shooting speeds are also boosted, up from 10fps to 30fps using the electronic shutter. Those speeds can be maintained for 185 JPEGs or 95 RAWs, or for 1,000+ images at at 10fps. The A7 V’s mechanical shutter is capped at 10fps, which matches the top speed of the A7 IV, whichever shutter type used. Pre capture up to 30 frames (so one second) is also now possible – that’s new to the series.

In short, the A7 V can shoot at higher speeds for longer, with more versatile autofocus.

3. Sony A7 V vs Sony A7 IV: performance

The Sony Alpha 7 V camera — (Image credit: Future/ Peter Fenech)

The A7 V’s in-body image stabilzation is rated up to 7.5EV to the A7 IV’s 5.5EV
Battery life is up from 580 shots to 750
Video recording lasts longer in high heat

Other less glamorous but highly useful performance improvements include improved in-body image stabilization, battery life, and more durable video recording. For example, the A7 V’s in-body image stabilization is rated up to 7.5 stops in the center and 6.5 stops at the periphery, whereas the A7 IV’s is rated at 5.5 stops.

Canon and Nikon rivals.

Video record times are much the same, rated at 90 minutes in 25°C heat. However in particularly high 40°C heat, video recording is now up to 60 minutes versus just 10 minutes in A7 IV.

Performance winner: Sony A7 V

4. Sony A7 V vs Sony A7 IV: image and video quality

Image 1 of 3

Images captured in London with the Sony A7 V camera — Tricky scens, lifelke colors with the A7 V(Image credit: Future/ Peter Fenech)

Both shoot 33MP stills with similar dynamic range, 14-bit RAW in the A7 V
Video recording is improved, now 4K 60p (oversampled from 7K and no crop)
Auto white balance accuracy has been improved

If you’re mostly shooting landscape photography and easy static subjects, then you might not notice a huge difference in image quality between the A7 V and the A7 IV. For such photographers, the improved auto white balance accuracy will likely be the most notable upgrade. We found it the A7 V handled particularly trickily lit scenarios with ease, rendering lifelike and pleasing colors. Sadly, aggressive JPEG processing remains.

The image quality improvements for photographers are largely a fruit of the A7 V’s improved performance, such as better autofocus accuracy and versatility, the elimination of rolling shutter distortion, and faster shooting speeds.

4K video recording up to 60 frames per second is achieved with no crop and can be oversampled from 7K, while 4K at 120 frames per second has been added, albeit with a 1.5x crop.

One trick that the A7 V has is what Sony calls ‘high-res raw processing’, which is a mode that combines 16 images (using Sony’s Imaging Edge desktop app) into a single file for better noise reduction and more resolution. This mode is particularly useful for static subjects such as landscape photography.

Image quality winner: Sony A7 V

5. Sony A7 V vs Sony A7 IV: design

Image 1 of 4

3.2-inch LCD touchscreen is now a dual-axis vari-angle, versus single axis
The same EVF, but there’s no blackout in the A7 V’s
Improved ergonomics in the A7 V

At first, the A7 V and A7 IV are strikingly similar looking cameras. This means that if you are familiar with Sony cameras, the switch between these two will be straightforward.

After extended time with the new A7 V, however, we noticed a few useful and subtle improvements in how it handles over its predecessor. For one, the grip has been redesigned and is more comfortable to hold for longer periods.

In addition to the improved grip shape, the rear 3.2 inch LCD touchscreen is now a dual-axis vari-angle type, whereas the A7 IV’s is a single-axis vari-angle type. In practice, the dual-axis hinge can bring the screen away from the ports so the swivel of the screen is not impeded by any cabling that’s connected to the camera. It also enables clear viewing in both vertical and horizontal shooting at awkward angles. We get the same EVF in both cameras, however, the A7 V’s EVF has no blackout whatsoever – I know a few photographers who are taking note on this point.

As for ports, there are now two USB-C ports, one 3.2 and a 2.0. They can be used simultaneously to transfer data, connect to a gimbal and / or charge the camera. Sony says the internal mic quality has been improved too, especially in its ability to reduce background noise.

Sony A7 V vs Sony A7 IV: early verdict

Sony A7 V camera in front of graffiti (left), Sony A7 IV camera on a wooden bench — (Image credit: Future)

Somewhat unsurprisingly, it’s a clean sweep for the Sony A7 V, which is a better camera than the Sony A7 IV in just about every regard, even if the improvements feel evolutionary rather than revolutionary.

Still image quality is roughly the same, but the A7 V has next-level speed, which makes it a more versatile all-rounder. Also, its video quality has been improved, with a better handle on rolling shutter distortion, and no crop at 4K 60 frames per second recording. Auto focus performance has been improved, as has overall color rendition thanks to smarter subject detection skills.

I also prefer how the A7 V handles; its refined grip is more comfortable in the hand, while the dual-axis vari-angle screen is particularly helpful if you want to shoot in vertical and horizontal formats at awkward angles.

The only thing going for the Sony A7 IV in this battle is its price; because since it’s four years old, it now costs much less than it did at launch, and than the A7 V. You can pick it up for around $1,000 / £1,000 less at the time of writing. And if you generally shoot still subjects and don’t need the performance improvements, it could be the wiser choice of the two cameras.