Olympus XZ-1 vs Sony A7R IV

The Olympus XZ-1 and the Sony Alpha A7R IV are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in January 2011 and July 2019. The XZ-1 is a fixed lens compact, while the A7R IV is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on a 1/1.7-inch (XZ-1) and a full frame (A7R IV) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 10.1 megapixels, whereas the Sony provides 60.2 MP.

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

Headline Specifications

Olympus XZ-1		Sony A7R IV
Fixed lens compact camera		Mirrorless system camera
28-112mm f/1.8-2.5		Sony E mount lenses
10.1 MP – 1/1.7" sensor		60.2 MP – Full Frame sensor
720/30p Video		4K/30p Video
ISO 100-6,400		ISO 100-32,000 (50 - 102,400)
Viewfinder optional		Electronic viewfinder (5760k dots)
3.0" LCD – 614k dots		3.0" LCD – 1440k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Tilting touchscreen
2 shutter flaps per second		10 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		In-body stabilization
not weather sealed		Weathersealed body
320 shots per battery charge		670 shots per battery charge
111 x 65 x 42 mm, 275 g		129 x 96 x 78 mm, 665 g

Check XZ-1 offers at
ebay.com
Check A7R IV offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus XZ-1 and the Sony Alpha A7R IV? 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

The side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Olympus XZ-1 and the Sony A7R IV. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three successive views from the front, the top, and the rear are shown. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The XZ-1 can be obtained in two different colors (black, white), while the A7R IV is only available in black.

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Sony A7R IV is considerably larger (72 percent) than the Olympus XZ-1. It is noteworthy in this context that the A7R IV is splash and dust-proof, while the XZ-1 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the XZ-1 has a lens built in, whereas the A7R IV is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup. You can compare the optics available for the A7R IV and their specifications in the Sony FE Lens Catalog.

The power pack in the A7R IV can be charged via the USB port, which can be very convenient when travelling.

The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, you can use the CAM-parator app to select your camera combination among a large number of options.

Body Specifications

#		Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life	Weather Sealing	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Olympus XZ-1	111 mm	65 mm	42 mm	275 g	320	n	Jan 2011	499	ebay.com
2.		Sony A7R IV	129 mm	96 mm	78 mm	665 g	670	Y	Jul 2019	3,499	ebay.com
3.		Olympus TG-5	113 mm	66 mm	32 mm	250 g	340	Y	May 2017	449	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-PM2	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	269 g	360	n	Sep 2012	499	ebay.com
5.		Olympus XZ-2	113 mm	65 mm	48 mm	346 g	340	n	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL3	110 mm	64 mm	37 mm	313 g	300	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PM1	110 mm	64 mm	34 mm	265 g	330	n	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL1	115 mm	72 mm	42 mm	334 g	290	n	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
9.		Panasonic FZ200	125 mm	87 mm	110 mm	588 g	540	n	Jul 2012	599	ebay.com
10.		Panasonic LX7	111 mm	68 mm	46 mm	298 g	330	n	Jul 2012	499	ebay.com
11.		Panasonic FZ150	124 mm	82 mm	92 mm	528 g	410	n	Aug 2011	499	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic LX5	110 mm	65 mm	43 mm	271 g	400	n	Jul 2010	499	ebay.com
13.		Sony A7R IVA	129 mm	96 mm	78 mm	665 g	670	Y	Apr 2021	3,499	amazon.com
14.		Sony A7S III	127 mm	97 mm	81 mm	699 g	600	Y	Jul 2020	3,499	amazon.com
15.		Sony A9 II	129 mm	96 mm	76 mm	678 g	690	Y	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
16.		Sony A7 III	127 mm	96 mm	74 mm	650 g	610	Y	Feb 2018	1,999	amazon.com
17.		Sony A7R III	127 mm	96 mm	74 mm	650 g	650	Y	Oct 2017	3,199	ebay.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 XZ-1 was launched at a lower price than the A7R IV, despite having a lens built in. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. 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. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better 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.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus XZ-1 features a 1/1.7-inch sensor and the Sony A7R IV a full frame sensor. The sensor area in the A7R IV is 1748 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 4.4 and 1.0. The sensor in the XZ-1 has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the A7R IV offers a 3:2 aspect.

With 60.2MP, the A7R IV offers a higher resolution than the XZ-1 (10.1MP), but the A7R IV nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.76μm versus 2.13μm for the XZ-1) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the A7R IV is a much more recent model (by 8 years and 6 months) than the XZ-1, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the A7R IV has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Sony A7R IV implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the A7R IV for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 47.5 x 31.7 inches or 120.7 x 80.5 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 38 x 25.3 inches or 96.6 x 64.4 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 31.7 x 21.1 inches or 80.5 x 53.6 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus XZ-1 are 18.3 x 13.8 inches or 46.5 x 35 cm for good quality, 14.7 x 11 inches or 37.2 x 28 cm for very good quality, and 12.2 x 9.2 inches or 31 x 23.3 cm for excellent quality prints.

The A7R IV has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.

Unlike the XZ-1, the A7R IV has the capacity to capture high quality composite images (241MP) by combining multiple shots after shifting its sensor by miniscule distances. This multi-shot, pixel-shift mode is most suitable for photography of stationary objects (landscapes, studio scenes).

The Olympus XZ-1 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 6400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Sony Alpha A7R IV are ISO 100 to ISO 32000, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 50-102400.

In terms of underlying technology, the XZ-1 is build around a CCD sensor, while the A7R IV uses a BSI-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.

Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. 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 consideration, the A7R IV offers substantially better image quality than the XZ-1 (overall score 65 points higher). The advantage is based on 7.2 bits higher color depth, 4.4 EV in additional dynamic range, and 4.8 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.		Olympus XZ-1	1/1.7	10.1	3664	2752	720/30p	18.8	10.4	117	34
2.		Sony A7R IV	Full Frame	60.2	9504	6336	4K/30p	26.0	14.8	3344	99
3.		Olympus TG-5	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	4K/30p	20.5	11.9	934	50
4.		Olympus E-PM2	Four Thirds	15.9	4608	3456	1080/30p	22.7	12.2	932	72
5.		Olympus XZ-2	1/1.7	11.8	3968	2976	1080/30p	20.4	11.3	216	49
6.		Olympus E-PL3	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	20.9	10.3	499	52
7.		Olympus E-PM1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	1080/60i	21.0	10.3	499	52
8.		Olympus E-PL1	Four Thirds	12.2	4032	3024	720/30p	21.5	10.1	487	54
9.		Panasonic FZ200	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60p	19.1	10.8	114	37
10.		Panasonic LX7	1/1.7	10.0	3648	2736	1080/60p	20.7	11.7	147	50
11.		Panasonic FZ150	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60p	19.4	10.9	132	40
12.		Panasonic LX5	1/1.7	10.0	3648	2736	720/60p	19.6	10.8	132	41
13.		Sony A7R IVA	Full Frame	60.2	9504	6336	4K/30p	26.0	14.8	3344	99
14.		Sony A7S III	Full Frame	12.0	4240	2832	4K/120p	23.7	13.9	2520	86
15.		Sony A9 II	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.0	3434	93
16.		Sony A7 III	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.7	3730	96
17.		Sony A7R III	Full Frame	42.2	7952	5304	4K/30p	26.0	14.7	3523	100
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 are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the A7R IV provides a better video resolution than the XZ-1. It can shoot movie footage at 4K/30p, while the Olympus is limited to 720/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the A7R IV has an electronic viewfinder (5760k dots), which can be very helpful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the XZ-1 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the XZ-1 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-2. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Olympus XZ-1, the Sony A7R IV, 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.		Olympus XZ-1	optional	n	3.0 / 614	fixed	n	1/2000s	2.0/s	Y	Y
2.		Sony A7R IV	5760	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
3.		Olympus TG-5	none	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/2000s	20.0/s	Y	Y
4.		Olympus E-PM2	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	n	Y
5.		Olympus XZ-2	optional	n	3.0 / 920	tilting	Y	1/2000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
6.		Olympus E-PL3	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
7.		Olympus E-PM1	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	Y
8.		Olympus E-PL1	optional	n	2.7 / 230	fixed	n	1/2000s	3.0/s	Y	Y
9.		Panasonic FZ200	1312	n	3.0 / 460	swivel	n	1/4000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
10.		Panasonic LX7	optional	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	11.0/s	Y	Y
11.		Panasonic FZ150	202	n	3.0 / 460	swivel	n	1/2000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
12.		Panasonic LX5	optional	n	3.0 / 460	fixed	n	1/4000s	2.5/s	Y	Y
13.		Sony A7R IVA	5760	n	3.0 / 2340	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
14.		Sony A7S III	9440	n	3.0 / 1440	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
15.		Sony A9 II	3686	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	Y
16.		Sony A7 III	2359	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
17.		Sony A7R III	3686	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

One difference between the cameras concerns the presence of an on-board flash. The XZ-1 has one, while the A7R IV does not. While the built-in flash of the XZ-1 is not very powerful, it can at times be useful as a fill-in light.

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, the A7R IV is one of those camera that have an additional 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 Olympus XZ-1 and the Sony A7R IV both have 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.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the XZ-1 and the A7R IV write their files to SDXC cards. The A7R IV features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the XZ-1 only has one slot. The A7R IV supports UHS-II cards (on both slots), while the XZ-1 cannot take advantage of Ultra High Speed SD cards.

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 Olympus XZ-1 and Sony Alpha A7R IV 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.		Olympus XZ-1	Y	mono / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Sony A7R IV	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
3.		Olympus TG-5	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
4.		Olympus E-PM2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
5.		Olympus XZ-2	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Olympus E-PL3	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Olympus E-PM1	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
8.		Olympus E-PL1	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Panasonic FZ200	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Panasonic LX7	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
11.		Panasonic FZ150	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Panasonic LX5	Y	mono / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
13.		Sony A7R IVA	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	Y	Y
14.		Sony A7S III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	full	3.2	Y	-	Y
15.		Sony A9 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
16.		Sony A7 III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
17.		Sony A7R III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y

It is notable that the A7R IV offers wifi support, which can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location. In contrast, the XZ-1 does not provide wifi capability.

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Sony A7R IV (unlike the XZ-1) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Both the XZ-1 and the A7R IV have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The XZ-1 was replaced by the Olympus XZ-2, while the A7R IV was followed by the Sony A7R V. Further information on the features and operation of the XZ-1 and A7R IV can be found, respectively, in the Olympus XZ-1 Manual (free pdf) or the online Sony A7R IV Manual.

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Which of the two cameras – the Olympus XZ-1 or the Sony A7R IV – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Reasons to prefer the Olympus XZ-1:

• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Ready to shoot: Has a lens built-in, whereas the A7R IV requires a separate lens.
• More compact: Is smaller (111x65mm vs 129x96mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
• Less heavy: Is lighter even though it comes with a built-in lens (unlike the A7R IV).
• Easier fill-in: Is equipped with a small onboard flash to brighten deep shadow areas.
• More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
• More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in January 2011).

Arguments in favor of the Sony Alpha A7R IV:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (60.2 vs 10.1MP), which boosts linear resolution by 149%.
• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (65 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
• Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (7.2 bits more color depth).
• More dynamic range: Captures a broader range of light and dark details (4.4 EV of extra DR).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Can shoot in dim conditions (4.8 stops ISO advantage).
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 720/30p).
• Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
• Better sound control: Has a headphone port that enables audio monitoring while recording.
• Easier framing: Has an electronic viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1440k vs 614k dots).
• More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
• Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (10 vs 2 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Less disturbing: Has an electronic shutter option for completely silent shooting.
• More flexible: Takes interchangeable lenses and can thus be used with specialty optics.
• Longer lasting: Gets more shots (670 versus 320) out of a single battery charge.
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
• Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.1 vs 2.0).
• Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
• Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
• 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 Ultra High Speed (UHS-II) SDXC cards on both slots.
• More modern: Reflects 8 years and 6 months of technical progress since the XZ-1 launch.

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the A7R IV is the clear winner of the contest (30 : 7 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 Olympus XZ-1 and the Sony A7R IV place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Travel-Zoom Camera and Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the XZ-1 or the A7R IV. 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 table below provides a synthesis of the camera assessments of some of the best known photo-gear 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.		Olympus XZ-1	4/5	..	..	74/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2011	499	ebay.com
2.		Sony A7R IV	5/5	+	4.5/5	91/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jul 2019	3,499	ebay.com
3.		Olympus TG-5	..	+ +	4.5/5	..	4/5	4/5	May 2017	449	ebay.com
4.		Olympus E-PM2	3/5	..	..	77/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	499	ebay.com
5.		Olympus XZ-2	4/5	+	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	599	ebay.com
6.		Olympus E-PL3	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
7.		Olympus E-PM1	..	86/100	..	71/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2011	499	ebay.com
8.		Olympus E-PL1	..	86/100	..	69/100	4/5	4.5/5	Feb 2010	599	ebay.com
9.		Panasonic FZ200	3/5	+ +	..	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2012	599	ebay.com
10.		Panasonic LX7	3/5	+ +	..	75/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jul 2012	499	ebay.com
11.		Panasonic FZ150	3/5	+ +	..	76/100	4/5	4.5/5	Aug 2011	499	ebay.com
12.		Panasonic LX5	4/5	+	..	73/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2010	499	ebay.com
13.		Sony A7R IVA	5/5	+	4.5/5	91/100	4.5/5	5/5	Apr 2021	3,499	amazon.com
14.		Sony A7S III	4.5/5	+ +	5/5	91/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jul 2020	3,499	amazon.com
15.		Sony A9 II	..	..	5/5	90/100	5/5	5/5	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
16.		Sony A7 III	..	+ +	4.5/5	89/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2018	1,999	amazon.com
17.		Sony A7R III	..	+ +	4/5	90/100	4.5/5	5/5	Oct 2017	3,199	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.

Check XZ-1 offers at
ebay.com
Check A7R IV 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. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.

~

Check XZ-1 offers at
ebay.com
Check A7R IV 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.