Canon R3 vs Sony A7S II

The Canon EOS R3 and the Sony Alpha 7S II are two professional cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in September 2021 and September 2015. Both the R3 and the A7S II are mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras that are equipped with a full frame sensor. The Canon has a resolution of 24 megapixels, whereas the Sony provides 12 MP.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications

Canon R3		Sony A7S II
Mirrorless system camera		Mirrorless system camera
Canon RF mount lenses		Sony E mount lenses
24 MP – Full Frame sensor		12 MP – Full Frame sensor
6K/60p Video		4K/30p Video
ISO 100-51,200 (50 - 204,800)		ISO 100-102,400 (50 - 409,600)
Electronic viewfinder (5760k dots)		Electronic viewfinder (2400k dots)
3.2" LCD – 4150k dots		3.0" LCD – 1229k dots
Swivel touchscreen		Tilting screen (no touchscreen)
12 shutter flaps per second		5 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		In-body stabilization
Weathersealed body		Weathersealed body
760 shots per battery charge		370 shots per battery charge
150 x 143 x 87 mm, 1015 g		127 x 96 x 60 mm, 627 g

Check R3 price at
amazon.com
Check A7S II offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Canon EOS R3 and the Sony Alpha 7S II? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison

An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Canon R3 and the Sony A7S II is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Sony A7S II is considerably smaller (43 percent) than the Canon R3. Moreover, the A7S II is substantially lighter (38 percent) than the R3. In this context, it is worth noting that both cameras are splash and dust-proof and can, hence, be used in inclement weather conditions or harsh environments.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. Hence, you might want to study and compare the specifications of available lenses in order to get the full picture of the size and weight of the two camera systems.

Concerning battery life, the R3 gets 760 shots out of its Canon LP-E19 battery, while the A7S II can take 370 images on a single charge of its Sony NP-FW50 power pack. As can be seen in the images above, the R3 has a battery grip built in. This facilitates image-taking in portrait orientation and gives it additional battery power. In order to provide similar functionality for the A7S II, Sony provides the VG-C2EM vertical grip as an optional accessory (see here on ebay). The battery packs of both cameras can be charged via USB, which can be very convenient when travelling.

The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you would like to visualize and compare a different camera combination, you can navigate to the CAM-parator app and make your selection from a broad list of cameras there.

Body Specifications

		Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life	Weather Sealing	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Canon R3	150 mm	143 mm	87 mm	1015 g	760	Y	Sep 2021	5,999	amazon.com
2.		Sony A7S II	127 mm	96 mm	60 mm	627 g	370	Y	Sep 2015	2,999	ebay.com
3.		Canon 1D X Mark III	158 mm	168 mm	83 mm	1440 g	2850	Y	Jan 2020	6,499	amazon.com
4.		Canon R5	138 mm	98 mm	88 mm	738 g	320	Y	Jul 2020	3,899	amazon.com
5.		Canon R6	138 mm	98 mm	88 mm	680 g	360	Y	Jul 2020	2,499	amazon.com
6.		Canon R6 Mark II	138 mm	98 mm	88 mm	670 g	450	Y	Nov 2022	2,499	amazon.com
7.		Fujifilm GFX 100S	150 mm	104 mm	87 mm	900 g	460	Y	Jan 2021	5,999	amazon.com
8.		Leica SL2-S	146 mm	107 mm	83 mm	931 g	510	Y	Dec 2020	4,895	amazon.com
9.		Nikon Z6 II	134 mm	101 mm	70 mm	705 g	410	Y	Oct 2020	1,999	amazon.com
10.		Panasonic S5	133 mm	98 mm	82 mm	714 g	440	Y	Sep 2020	1,999	amazon.com
11.		Sony A1	129 mm	97 mm	81 mm	737 g	530	Y	Jan 2021	6,499	amazon.com
12.		Sony A7 II	127 mm	96 mm	60 mm	599 g	350	Y	Nov 2014	1,999	ebay.com
13.		Sony A7C	124 mm	71 mm	60 mm	509 g	740	Y	Sep 2020	1,799	amazon.com
14.		Sony A7R II	127 mm	96 mm	60 mm	625 g	290	Y	Jun 2015	3,199	ebay.com
15.		Sony A7R III	127 mm	96 mm	74 mm	650 g	650	Y	Oct 2017	3,199	ebay.com
16.		Sony A7S	127 mm	94 mm	48 mm	489 g	380	Y	Apr 2014	2,499	ebay.com
17.		Sony A7S III	127 mm	97 mm	81 mm	699 g	600	Y	Jul 2020	3,499	amazon.com
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.
Convert to Imperial

Any camera decision will naturally be influenced heavily by the price. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The A7S II was launched at a markedly lower price (by 50 percent) than the R3, which puts it into a different market segment. Normally, street prices remain initially close to the MSRP, but after a couple of months, the first discounts appear. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down.

Sensor comparison

The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Both cameras under consideration feature a full frame sensor, but their sensors differ slightly in size. The sensor area in the A7S II is 2 percent smaller. They nevertheless have the same format factor of 1.0. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.

With 24MP, the R3 offers a higher resolution than the A7S II (12MP), but the R3 has smaller individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.00μm versus 8.40μm for the A7S II). However, the R3 is a much more recent model (by 6 years) than the A7S II, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels.

The resolution advantage of the Canon R3 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the R3 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 30 x 20 inches or 76.2 x 50.8 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 24 x 16 inches or 61 x 40.6 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 20 x 13.3 inches or 50.8 x 33.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Sony A7S II are 21.2 x 14.2 inches or 53.8 x 36 cm for good quality, 17 x 11.3 inches or 43.1 x 28.8 cm for very good quality, and 14.1 x 9.4 inches or 35.9 x 24 cm for excellent quality prints.

The R3 has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.

The Canon EOS R3 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 51200, which can be extended to ISO 50-204800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Sony Alpha 7S II are ISO 100 to ISO 102400, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 50-409600.

In terms of underlying technology, the R3 is build around a Stacked BSI-CMOS sensor, while the A7S II uses a CMOS imager. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.

Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. This service determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). Of the two cameras under review, the R3 provides substantially higher image quality than the A7S II, with an overall score that is 11 points higher. This advantage is based on 1.4 bits higher color depth, 1.4 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.4 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.

Sensor Characteristics

		Camera Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Canon R3	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	6K/60p	25.0	14.7	4086	96
2.		Sony A7S II	Full Frame	12.0	4240	2832	4K/30p	23.6	13.3	2993	85
3.		Canon 1D X Mark III	Full Frame	20.0	5472	3648	4K/60p	24.2	14.5	3248	91
4.		Canon R5	Full Frame	44.8	8192	5464	8K/30p	25.3	14.6	3042	95
5.		Canon R6	Full Frame	20.0	5472	3648	4k/60p	24.2	14.3	3394	90
6.		Canon R6 Mark II	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4k/60p	25.4	14.6	3154	96
7.		Fujifilm GFX 100S	Medium Format	101.8	11648	8736	4K/30p	25.8	14.7	3391	100
8.		Leica SL2-S	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/60p	25.2	14.1	3504	95
9.		Nikon Z6 II	Full Frame	24.3	6048	4024	4K/60p	25.0	14.4	3303	94
10.		Panasonic S5	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/60p	25.1	14.5	2697	94
11.		Sony A1	Full Frame	49.8	8640	5760	8k/30p	25.9	14.5	3163	98
12.		Sony A7 II	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.9	13.6	2449	90
13.		Sony A7C	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.7	3407	95
14.		Sony A7R II	Full Frame	42.2	7952	5304	4K/30p	26.0	13.9	3434	98
15.		Sony A7R III	Full Frame	42.2	7952	5304	4K/30p	26.0	14.7	3523	100
16.		Sony A7S	Full Frame	12.0	4240	2832	1080/60p	23.9	13.2	3702	87
17.		Sony A7S III	Full Frame	12.0	4240	2832	4K/120p	23.7	13.9	2520	86
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the R3 provides a higher video resolution than the A7S II. It can shoot video footage at 6K/60p, while the Sony is limited to 4K/30p.

Feature comparison

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The two cameras under consideration are similar with respect to both having an electronic viewfinder. However, the one in the R3 offers a substantially higher resolution than the one in the A7S II (5760k vs 2400k dots). The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Canon R3, the Sony A7S II, and comparable cameras.

Core Features

		Camera Model	Viewfinder (Type or 000 dots)	Control Panel (yes/no)	LCD Specifications (inch/000 dots)	LCD Attach- ment	Touch Screen (yes/no)	Max Shutter Speed *	Max Shutter Flaps *	Built-in Flash (yes/no)	Built-in Image Stab
1.		Canon R3	5760	Y	3.2 / 4150	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0/s	n	Y
2.		Sony A7S II	2400	n	3.0 / 1229	tilting	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	n	Y
3.		Canon 1D X Mark III	optical	Y	3.2 / 2100	fixed	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	n
4.		Canon R5	5760	Y	3.2 / 2100	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0/s	n	Y
5.		Canon R6	3690	n	3.0 / 1620	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0/s	n	Y
6.		Canon R6 Mark II	3690	n	3.0 / 1620	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0/s	n	Y
7.		Fujifilm GFX 100S	3690	Y	3.2 / 2360	full-flex	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	n	Y
8.		Leica SL2-S	5760	Y	3.2 / 2100	fixed	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	Y
9.		Nikon Z6 II	3690	Y	3.2 / 2100	tilting	Y	1/8000s	14.0/s	n	Y
10.		Panasonic S5	2360	n	3.0 / 1840	swivel	Y	1/8000s	7.0/s	n	Y
11.		Sony A1	9437	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
12.		Sony A7 II	2400	n	3.0 / 1230	tilting	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	n	Y
13.		Sony A7C	2360	n	3.0 / 922	swivel	Y	1/4000s	10.0/s	n	Y
14.		Sony A7R II	2400	n	3.0 / 1229	tilting	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	n	Y
15.		Sony A7R III	3686	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
16.		Sony A7S	2400	n	3.0 / 921	tilting	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	n	n
17.		Sony A7S III	9440	n	3.0 / 1440	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

One feature that is present on the R3, but is missing on the A7S II is a top-level LCD. While being, of course, smaller than the rear screen, the control panel conveys some of the essential shooting information and can be convenient for quick and easy settings verification.

The reported shutter speed information refers to the use of the mechanical shutter. Yet, some cameras only have an electronic shutter, while others have an electronic shutter in addition to a mechanical one. In fact, both cameras under consideration feature an electronic shutter, which makes completely silent shooting possible. However, this mode is less suitable for photographing moving objects (risk of rolling shutter) or shooting under artificial light sources (risk of flickering).

The Canon R3 has an intervalometer built-in. This enables the photographer to capture time lapse sequences, such as flower blooming, a sunset or moon rise, without purchasing an external camera trigger and related software.

The R3 writes its imaging data to CFexpress (type B) or SDXC cards, while the A7S II uses SDXC or Memory Stick PRO Duo cards. The R3 features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the A7S II only has one slot. The R3 supports UHS-II cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 312 MB/s), while the A7S II can use UHS-I cards (up to 104 MB/s).

Connectivity comparison

For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Canon EOS R3 and Sony Alpha 7S II and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

Input-Output Connections

		Camera Model	Hotshoe Port	Internal Mic / Speaker	Microphone Port	Headphone Port	HDMI Port	USB Port	WiFi Support	NFC Support	Bluetooth Support
1.		Canon R3	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
2.		Sony A7S II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
3.		Canon 1D X Mark III	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	mini	3.1	Y	-	Y
4.		Canon R5	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
5.		Canon R6	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
6.		Canon R6 Mark II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
7.		Fujifilm GFX 100S	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
8.		Leica SL2-S	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	full	3.2	Y	-	Y
9.		Nikon Z6 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
10.		Panasonic S5	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
11.		Sony A1	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	full	3.2	Y	-	Y
12.		Sony A7 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
13.		Sony A7C	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	Y	Y
14.		Sony A7R II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
15.		Sony A7R III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
16.		Sony A7S	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
17.		Sony A7S III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	full	3.2	Y	-	Y

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Canon R3 (unlike the A7S II) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

The R3 is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Canon. In contrast, the A7S II has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the A7S II was succeeded by the Sony A7S III. Further information on the features and operation of the R3 and A7S II can be found, respectively, in the Canon R3 Manual (free pdf) or the online Sony A7S II Manual.

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Is there a clear favorite between the Canon R3 and the Sony A7S II? Which camera is better? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.

Reasons to prefer the Canon EOS R3:

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (24 vs 12MP) with a 41% higher linear resolution.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (11 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• Richer colors: Generates images with noticeably better colors (1.4 bits more color depth).
• More dynamic range: Captures a larger spectrum of light and dark details (1.4 EV of extra DR).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (0.4 stops ISO advantage).
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (6K/60p vs 4K/30p).
• Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
• More detailed viewfinder: Has higher resolution electronic viewfinder (5760k vs 2400k dots).
• Easier setting verification: Features an LCD display on top to control shooting parameters.
• Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.2" vs 3.0") for image review and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (4150k vs 1229k dots).
• More flexible LCD: Has a swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
• Fewer buttons to press: Is equipped with a touch-sensitive rear screen to facilitate handling.
• More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (12 vs 5 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
• More portrait friendly: Features an integrated vertical grip for easier portrait shooting.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (760 versus 370) on a single battery charge.
• Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.2 vs 2.0).
• Easier wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
• Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
• Greater peace of mind: Features a second card slot as a backup in case of memory card failure.
• Faster buffer clearing: Supports a more advanced SD data transfer standard (UHS-II vs UHS-I).
• More modern: Reflects 6 years of technical progress since the A7S II launch.

Arguments in favor of the Sony Alpha 7S II:

• Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.78x vs 0.76x).
• More compact: Is smaller (127x96mm vs 150x143mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 388g or 38 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
• Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
• More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (50 percent cheaper at launch).
• More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in September 2015).

If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the R3 is the clear winner of the match-up (24 : 6 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points when reflecting and deciding on a new camera. A professional wildlife photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a family photog, and a person interested in architecture has distinct needs from a sports shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Canon R3 and the Sony A7S II place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listing whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the R3 or the A7S II perform in practice. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable.

Expert reviews

This is where reviews by experts come in. The adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular camera review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], digitalcameraworld [DCW], dpreview [DPR], ephotozine [EPZ], photographyblog [PB]). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.

Expert Camera Reviews

		Camera   Model	AP   score	CL   score	DCW   score	DPR   score	EPZ   score	PB   score	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Canon R3	5/5	o	4.5/5	..	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2021	5,999	amazon.com
2.		Sony A7S II	5/5	+	..	..	4.5/5	5/5	Sep 2015	2,999	ebay.com
3.		Canon 1D X Mark III	..	+ +	5/5	..	4.5/5	4/5	Jan 2020	6,499	amazon.com
4.		Canon R5	4.5/5	+	4/5	91/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2020	3,899	amazon.com
5.		Canon R6	5/5	+ +	4/5	90/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jul 2020	2,499	amazon.com
6.		Canon R6 Mark II	5/5	+ +	4.5/5	91/100	4.5/5	5/5	Nov 2022	2,499	amazon.com
7.		Fujifilm GFX 100S	5/5	+ +	5/5	90/100	5/5	5/5	Jan 2021	5,999	amazon.com
8.		Leica SL2-S	4/5	..	4/5	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Dec 2020	4,895	amazon.com
9.		Nikon Z6 II	4.5/5	..	4/5	89/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Oct 2020	1,999	amazon.com
10.		Panasonic S5	4.5/5	+ +	4.5/5	88/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2020	1,999	amazon.com
11.		Sony A1	5/5	o	4.5/5	93/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jan 2021	6,499	amazon.com
12.		Sony A7 II	5/5	+	4/5	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	Nov 2014	1,999	ebay.com
13.		Sony A7C	3.5/5	..	3.5/5	86/100	4/5	4/5	Sep 2020	1,799	amazon.com
14.		Sony A7R II	5/5	+ +	5/5	90/100	5/5	5/5	Jun 2015	3,199	ebay.com
15.		Sony A7R III	..	+ +	4/5	90/100	4.5/5	5/5	Oct 2017	3,199	ebay.com
16.		Sony A7S	4/5	..	..	86/100	4.5/5	5/5	Apr 2014	2,499	ebay.com
17.		Sony A7S III	4.5/5	+ +	5/5	91/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jul 2020	3,499	amazon.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time of the camera, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.

Check R3 price at
amazon.com
Check A7S II offers at
ebay.com

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make your choice using the following search menu. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.

~

Check R3 price at
amazon.com
Check A7S II offers at
ebay.com

Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.