Ricoh GR vs Sony A7R IV

The Ricoh GR and the Sony Alpha A7R IV are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in April 2013 and July 2019. The GR is a fixed lens compact, while the A7R IV is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on an APS-C (GR) and a full frame (A7R IV) sensor. The Ricoh has a resolution of 16.1 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

Ricoh GR		Sony A7R IV
Fixed lens compact camera		Mirrorless system camera
28mm f/2.8		Sony E mount lenses
16.1 MP – APS-C sensor		60.2 MP – Full Frame sensor
1080/30p Video		4K/30p Video
ISO 100-25,600		ISO 100-32,000 (50 - 102,400)
Viewfinder optional		Electronic viewfinder (5760k dots)
3.0" LCD – 1230k dots		3.0" LCD – 1440k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Tilting touchscreen
4 shutter flaps per second		10 shutter flaps per second
no shake reduction		In-body stabilization
not weather sealed		Weathersealed body
290 shots per battery charge		670 shots per battery charge
117 x 61 x 35 mm, 245 g		129 x 96 x 78 mm, 665 g

Check GR 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 Ricoh GR 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 Ricoh GR and the Sony A7R IV. 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 A7R IV is considerably larger (74 percent) than the Ricoh GR. It is noteworthy in this context that the A7R IV is splash and dust-proof, while the GR does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the GR 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.

Concerning battery life, the GR gets 290 shots out of its Ricoh DB-65 battery, while the A7R IV can take 670 images on a single charge of its Sony NP-FZ100 power pack. The battery packs of both cameras can be charged via USB, 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. 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.		Ricoh GR	117 mm	61 mm	35 mm	245 g	290	n	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
2.		Sony A7R IV	129 mm	96 mm	78 mm	665 g	670	Y	Jul 2019	3,499	ebay.com
3.		Canon G7 X	103 mm	60 mm	40 mm	304 g	210	n	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
4.		Nikon Coolpix A	111 mm	64 mm	40 mm	299 g	230	n	Mar 2013	1,099	ebay.com
5.		Panasonic FZ1000	137 mm	99 mm	131 mm	831 g	360	n	Jun 2014	899	ebay.com
6.		Panasonic GM5	99 mm	60 mm	36 mm	211 g	220	n	Sep 2014	749	ebay.com
7.		Panasonic GM1	99 mm	55 mm	30 mm	204 g	230	n	Oct 2013	749	ebay.com
8.		Ricoh GR II	117 mm	63 mm	35 mm	251 g	320	n	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
9.		Sony A7R IVA	129 mm	96 mm	78 mm	665 g	670	Y	Apr 2021	3,499	amazon.com
10.		Sony A7S III	127 mm	97 mm	81 mm	699 g	600	Y	Jul 2020	3,499	amazon.com
11.		Sony A9 II	129 mm	96 mm	76 mm	678 g	690	Y	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
12.		Sony A7 III	127 mm	96 mm	74 mm	650 g	610	Y	Feb 2018	1,999	amazon.com
13.		Sony A7R III	127 mm	96 mm	74 mm	650 g	650	Y	Oct 2017	3,199	ebay.com
14.		Sony RX100 III	102 mm	58 mm	41 mm	290 g	320	n	May 2014	799	ebay.com
15.		Sony NEX-5T	111 mm	59 mm	39 mm	276 g	330	n	Aug 2013	699	ebay.com
16.		Sony RX100 II	102 mm	58 mm	38 mm	281 g	350	n	Jun 2013	749	ebay.com
17.		Sony NEX-5R	111 mm	59 mm	39 mm	276 g	330	n	Aug 2012	749	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 obviously take relative prices into account. The manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The GR 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. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.

Sensor comparison

The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant of image quality. A large sensor will tend to have larger individual pixels that provide better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixel-units 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.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Ricoh GR features an APS-C sensor and the Sony A7R IV a full frame sensor. The sensor area in the A7R IV is 130 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.5 and 1.0. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.

With 60.2MP, the A7R IV offers a higher resolution than the GR (16.1MP), but the A7R IV has smaller individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.76μm versus 4.79μm for the GR). Yet, the A7R IV is a much more recent model (by 6 years and 2 months) than the GR, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that neither of the two cameras has an anti-alias filter installed, so they are able to capture all the detail the 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 Ricoh GR are 24.6 x 16.3 inches or 62.6 x 41.5 cm for good quality, 19.7 x 13.1 inches or 50.1 x 33.2 cm for very good quality, and 16.4 x 10.9 inches or 41.7 x 27.6 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 GR, 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 Ricoh GR has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 25600. 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 GR is build around a CMOS 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 GR (overall score 21 points higher). The advantage is based on 2.4 bits higher color depth, 1.3 EV in additional dynamic range, and 1.8 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.

Sensor Characteristics

#		Camera Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Ricoh GR	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.5	972	78
2.		Sony A7R IV	Full Frame	60.2	9504	6336	4K/30p	26.0	14.8	3344	99
3.		Canon G7 X	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	23.0	12.7	556	71
4.		Nikon Coolpix A	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.4	13.8	1164	80
5.		Panasonic FZ1000	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	22.1	11.7	517	64
6.		Panasonic GM5	Four Thirds	15.8	4592	3448	1080/60p	22.1	11.7	721	66
7.		Panasonic GM1	Four Thirds	15.8	4592	3448	1080/60i	22.3	11.7	660	66
8.		Ricoh GR II	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.7	1078	80
9.		Sony A7R IVA	Full Frame	60.2	9504	6336	4K/30p	26.0	14.8	3344	99
10.		Sony A7S III	Full Frame	12.0	4240	2832	4K/120p	23.7	13.9	2520	86
11.		Sony A9 II	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.0	3434	93
12.		Sony A7 III	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	25.0	14.7	3730	96
13.		Sony A7R III	Full Frame	42.2	7952	5304	4K/30p	26.0	14.7	3523	100
14.		Sony RX100 III	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	22.4	12.3	495	67
15.		Sony NEX-5T	APS-C	16.0	4912	3264	1080/60p	23.6	13.0	1015	78
16.		Sony RX100 II	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	22.5	12.4	483	67
17.		Sony NEX-5R	APS-C	16.0	4912	3264	1080/60i	23.7	13.1	910	78

Many modern cameras cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. 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 GR. It can shoot movie footage at 4K/30p, while the Ricoh is limited to 1080/30p.

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 GR relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the GR can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the GV-1. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Ricoh GR and Sony A7R IV along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

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.		Ricoh GR	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
2.		Sony A7R IV	5760	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
3.		Canon G7 X	none	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/2000s	6.5/s	Y	Y
4.		Nikon Coolpix A	optional	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	n	1/2000s	4.0/s	Y	n
5.		Panasonic FZ1000	2359	n	3.0 / 921	swivel	n	1/4000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
6.		Panasonic GM5	1166	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	Y	1/500s	5.8/s	n	n
7.		Panasonic GM1	none	n	3.0 / 1036	fixed	Y	1/500s	5.0/s	Y	n
8.		Ricoh GR II	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
9.		Sony A7R IVA	5760	n	3.0 / 2340	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
10.		Sony A7S III	9440	n	3.0 / 1440	swivel	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
11.		Sony A9 II	3686	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	Y
12.		Sony A7 III	2359	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
13.		Sony A7R III	3686	n	3.0 / 1440	tilting	Y	1/8000s	10.0/s	n	Y
14.		Sony RX100 III	1440	n	3.0 / 1229	tilting	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
15.		Sony NEX-5T	optional	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/4000s	10.0/s	n	n
16.		Sony RX100 II	optional	n	3.0 / 1229	tilting	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
17.		Sony NEX-5R	optional	n	3.0 / 920	tilting	Y	1/4000s	10.0/s	n	n
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 GR has one, while the A7R IV does not. While the built-in flash of the GR 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 Ricoh GR 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 GR 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 GR only has one slot. The A7R IV supports UHS-II cards (on both slots), while the GR can use UHS-I 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 Ricoh GR 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.		Ricoh GR	Y	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Sony A7R IV	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
3.		Canon G7 X	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
4.		Nikon Coolpix A	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	-	2.0	-	-	-
5.		Panasonic FZ1000	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
6.		Panasonic GM5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
7.		Panasonic GM1	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
8.		Ricoh GR II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
9.		Sony A7R IVA	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	Y	Y
10.		Sony A7S III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	full	3.2	Y	-	Y
11.		Sony A9 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
12.		Sony A7 III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
13.		Sony A7R III	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.1	Y	Y	Y
14.		Sony RX100 III	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
15.		Sony NEX-5T	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
16.		Sony RX100 II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
17.		Sony NEX-5R	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	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 GR does not provide wifi capability.

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

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

Review summary

So what is the bottom line? Is the Ricoh GR better than the Sony A7R IV or vice versa? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Advantages of the Ricoh GR:

• Ready to shoot: Has a lens built-in, whereas the A7R IV requires a separate lens.
• More compact: Is smaller (117x61mm 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 April 2013).

Arguments in favor of the Sony Alpha A7R IV:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (60.2 vs 16.1MP), which boosts linear resolution by 93%.
• High quality composites: Can combine several shots after pixel-shifting its sensor.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (21 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
• Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (2.4 bits more color depth).
• More dynamic range: Captures a broader range of light and dark details (1.3 EV of extra DR).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Can shoot in dim conditions (1.8 stops ISO advantage).
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/30p).
• 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 1230k 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 1/4000s) to freeze action.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (10 vs 4 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 290) out of a single battery charge.
• Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
• Sharper images: Has stabilization technology built-in to reduce the impact of hand-shake.
• 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 a more advanced SD data transfer standard (UHS-II vs UHS-I).
• More modern: Reflects 6 years and 2 months of technical progress since the GR launch.

If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the A7R IV is the clear winner of the contest (29 : 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 wedding photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a travel photog, and a person interested in cityscapes has distinct needs from a macro 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 Ricoh GR and the Sony A7R IV place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Prime Lens Compact Camera and Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listings 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 says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the GR and the A7R IV in practical situations. 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 why hands-on reviews by experts are important. 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.		Ricoh GR	5/5	..	..	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2013	799	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.		Canon G7 X	4/5	+ +	..	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
4.		Nikon Coolpix A	4/5	+	..	75/100	4/5	4/5	Mar 2013	1,099	ebay.com
5.		Panasonic FZ1000	4/5	+ +	..	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2014	899	ebay.com
6.		Panasonic GM5	3.5/5	+	..	77/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	749	ebay.com
7.		Panasonic GM1	3/5	+	..	78/100	5/5	4.5/5	Oct 2013	749	ebay.com
8.		Ricoh GR II	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
9.		Sony A7R IVA	5/5	+	4.5/5	91/100	4.5/5	5/5	Apr 2021	3,499	amazon.com
10.		Sony A7S III	4.5/5	+ +	5/5	91/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jul 2020	3,499	amazon.com
11.		Sony A9 II	..	..	5/5	90/100	5/5	5/5	Oct 2019	4,499	amazon.com
12.		Sony A7 III	..	+ +	4.5/5	89/100	5/5	5/5	Feb 2018	1,999	amazon.com
13.		Sony A7R III	..	+ +	4/5	90/100	4.5/5	5/5	Oct 2017	3,199	ebay.com
14.		Sony RX100 III	5/5	+ +	..	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2014	799	ebay.com
15.		Sony NEX-5T	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Aug 2013	699	ebay.com
16.		Sony RX100 II	5/5	+ +	..	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2013	749	ebay.com
17.		Sony NEX-5R	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Aug 2012	749	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. 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, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.

Check GR 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 would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just use the search menu below. 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 GR 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.