Hey All, I’ve been using Sony for awhile now as it was my full frame upgrade from Fujifilm and I simply have not enjoyed the shooting experience. I just simply don’t connect with the camera. The only thing going for Sony vs Canon though are the lenses. Sony has some excellent f1.4 lenses ... More on dpreview.com

I guess I don’t know your criteria entirely but as a fellow outdoorsman, I appreciate the weight savings of mirrorless without sacrificing image quality. I moved to Fujifilm several years ago and have not looked back. I would encourage you to see if the X-T3, X-T4, or X-H2 models fit your criteria. They are crop sensor but still pack a punch and I don’t miss full frame even for my portrait work. I definitely appreciate the size and weight savings when I’m packing my kit in and out of a more remote location.

More on reddit.com

I have the R6 II. A good friend of mine has the A7IV. It's been over a year since we bought our bodies. Over that time I've only become more convinced that the R6 II is the better body. The A7IV has a bit more resolution and slightly better noise, but the shutter system on the R6 II is VASTLY superior and much more useful. It's about the most well rounded full frame body out there. The AF is as good as it gets. The sensor is excellent. The ergonomics are excellent. It's reliable. It has no technical problems. And for me, it gets the most amazing shots I've ever gotten in my life. It's very difficult for me to imagine any advantage a more expensive body would offer. Nothing about the R5 would improve my pictures, and the R3 wouldn't add much to my capabilities either. More on reddit.com

I just made this switch actually lol. I switched because of other reasons though. Those being that the rolling shutter on the A7IV is real bad and the ibis is almost nonexistent. The Canon is more pleasurable to use, I could feel that right away. The ergonomics are unbelievably good on the Canon. As for video, well, the Canon has 4k60 without a crop which can be awesome for recording slow motion b-roll without worrying about trying to reframe a shot. So that’s nice. It also has 1080180. Which is unique. There are pros and cons to both but I feel the cons on the Sony are bigger than the Canon’s. For instance, the Canon only shoots in IPB. It doesn’t have all-i. Will you notice a difference? Probably not but if you zoom in to 200% and pixel peep, the Sony may have a slight edge in sharpness when using all-i over a compressed codec. The A7IV has a sensor readout speed of 27ms. That means any panning, tracking subjects, or shakiness will cause the static vertical lines in your shot to tilt or wobble. I experienced this recently on a shoot with my A7IV. An hour of footage with panning and tracking from a car was unusable. It ruined the project. This is something I consider to be a way bigger con over a tiny loss in sharpness in video. Same goes for ibis. The ibis doesn’t really do much on the Sony, and the active mode crops in a decent amount. But the canon combines its ibis with optical lens stabilization and creates a really steady looking video and sharper images at lower shutter speeds. So you can do a lot more handheld shots and leave the gimbal and tripod at home. Though this does come with a caveat at the current moment. Any lens wider than 24mm on the Canon will show wobbles in the corners of your video from the ibis. Some people don’t care as it isn’t overly noticeable, but it is there and you gotta take extra care to be as steady as possible to mitigate those odd looking wobbles. Canon could fix this with a firmware update and I hope they do, but that doesn’t apply to me because I never shoot under 24mm. It introduces too much distortion in your image, imo. The only way I would shoot wider than 24mm would be if I was filming action sports like skateboarding or snowboarding up close to the action. But if I were doing that I’d use a gimbal and turn the ibis off anyways. So basically, under 24mm you need a gimbal, above 24mm, you can do handheld just fine. Low light is definitely better on the canon since it has larger photosites. About 15% larger, so when you combine that with the good ibis, night shots and low light shots become amazing at both high and low shutter speeds. You can shoot at a lower iso in low light for sports, which is a huge plus. The A7IV has better dynamic range but it’s a VERY small margin in real world shooting. You wouldn’t see it right off the bat, but if you look at a picture for 10 seconds you would probably see it but not really care because it only brings back minor details in blown out areas. You can just dial it back in post on the canon and you see the same details in the highlights. For video it’s the same story, but I’ve found that even when bringing slog3 back to rec.709 the image still looks washed out like it’s got a layer filled with white overtop of it at 5-10% opacity. The Canon has more contrast in its video than the Sony. That usually means the shadows will be a bit more noisy but that can be easily fixed in post with some noise reduction and added sharpness. That’s personal preference though as many people prefer that slightly washed out look. I think the A7IV is a fantastic camera for studio work, and more static shots in both photo and video. But for movement and run and gun type of video shooting the canon is much better. The canon is also much better for photography with movement in it like sports, cars, subject tracking, wildlife, etc since you can get up to 1/16000 shutter speed. Can the Canon do studio work? Absolutely, like a beast. But the A7IV does have those slightly bigger images. Will clients notice? 99% of the time, no. Hell, you could shoot photos and videos with your phone and professional clients wouldn’t notice or care, as long as the end result looks good and is what they wanted. So in the end, the A7IV is probably better for studio work, anything on a tripod or without much movement. The Canon is better for sports, wildlife, really capturing any kind of movement. It’s a better camera for on-the-go shooting. More on reddit.com