Connexion
I thought my camera was "modern." Not quite
 |
|
I've gotten used to this camera over the last six years, but I recently learned I'm missing out on some things. Photo: Abby Ferguson |
Cameras from the last handful of years are remarkably good. Most models can produce strong images, handle challenging lighting conditions and reliably get subjects in focus. Overall, they can make it simpler to get more images you like with less work. It's easy to look at what's available today and think: what's left to improve?
That said, my job puts me in an unusual position. I regularly get the opportunity to test new cameras, which means I'm constantly comparing them against my personal reference point: a Sony a7 III, a camera I've owned for six years, and that's now an eight-year-old model. Recently, I had a few weeks with the Sony a7 V, the a7 III's successor's successor, and used it the same way I use my own camera, photographing my pets, still life setups, a baseball game and a portrait session.
What I found is that the gap I'd assumed was negligible is, in certain areas, more significant than I expected. There are things about the latest generation I didn't want to give back. Certain aspects made me aware of what my eight-year-old model lacks compared to what more recent cameras bring to the table.
Image quality
 |
|
Image quality gains over the past few years are only really visible in extreme situations, such as high contrast scenes, when you look closely. Photo: Abby Ferguson |
Let's start with the most subtle and, therefore, most inconsequential change: image quality. While we may no longer be seeing giant leaps in image quality as we were at the beginning stages of digital photography, companies are still striving to bring improvements to the table. Often this takes the form of slight bumps in dynamic range, giving you a bit more flexibility when editing.
As expected, my most recent experience moving from an old mirrorless to a brand-new one wasn't a massive step up in image quality. In fact, it was very, very subtle. I had a few instances of photographing high-contrast and low-light situations where I saw a tiny bit more range, enabling me to get a little more from my files than I could have with my older device. But it was something I had to look closely for, not something that slapped me in the face with its obviousness. Will it matter in the day-to-day or for most shoots? Not really. But is it nice to have for certain situations? Sure.
Autofocus
 |
|
Autofocus is one area that shows the most drastic changes when moving from an old camera to a new one. The fact that I was able to get in-focus shots in this darkroom without much frustration was huge. Photo: Abby Ferguson |
The more substantial upgrade on modern cameras is the autofocus system. This was especially evident when moving from my DSLR to mirrorless, which uses an entirely different autofocus system. And while the jump isn't as drastic when going from a relatively old mirrorless camera, like my a7 III, to a more recent one, it still was a noticeable change that will make it a disappointment to go back to the older model.
Of course, the autofocus improvement you experience when upgrading is going to depend entirely on the model you upgrade from and to, and on what sorts of things you shoot. But broadly speaking, brands have made a handful of improvements in recent years that can make a noticeable difference in real-life situations.
First and foremost, I found the autofocus to be more reliable, especially in tricky situations. I still had misses, don't get me wrong. But I was able to use the camera in less-than-ideal conditions and still get usable shots. For example, I took photographs in a makeshift darkroom lit only with a red LED light, and still got some images in focus with relative ease. My eight-year-old personal camera likely would have struggled substantially with that, and would have at the very least been hunting for focus much more.
 |
|
Photo: Abby Ferguson |
Another area that made a difference for me was the added subject detection modes. In my case, I went from a measly two options (human and animal) to a healthy list that includes specific types of animals and vehicles. Even more appreciated, though, is the automatic subject detection setting.
I photograph a range of subjects, with frequent switching between human portraits, my pets and still life scenes. My personal camera requires I fiddle with autofocus settings a fair amount when switching subjects in order to get reliable results. That's far from the case on the new model I used, though, and I was able to just leave it set to automatic and not think about it again. Plus, the subject detection is generally more successful at finding a subject (even with my black pets) and of sticking on them even as they move. My a7 III consistently fails at keeping a subject in focus as they move, so this is a big win for me.
Ergonomics and UI
 |
|
I am going to miss the smoother exposure compensation dial greatly. Photo: Abby Ferguson |
I know some people who refuse to buy the first generation of any type of product. Their thought process is that the brand has too many kinks to work out, and the later generations will show advancements that make the product actually worth using.
Cameras aren't an exception to the rule, and as each model comes along, brands iterate on its design, attempting to make the ergonomics and user interface better each time. Ergonomics are inherently personal, so new designs won't always be a win for you in particular. But refinements in these areas are generally useful and can make the camera more pleasant to hold and use, especially for long periods of time.
In my case, it came down to simple things that I only noticed after living with the camera for a few days and then going back to my older model. For example, the a7 V's exposure compensation dial rotates with much less resistance than my a7 III, making it easier to use quickly in the middle of a shoot. Because of that, I used it far more often, helping me dial in my shots more in-camera than I did previously.
On the UI front, the menus were more logical. That meant I didn't avoid them nearly as much as I had in the past. Instead of just dealing with annoying things because I didn't want to find the setting in the menus, I confidently went and adjusted what I needed to when I needed to, even if it was in the middle of a portrait session. All-in-all, the camera got in my way less, so I could focus more on the shoot.
Rear display
 |
|
Being able to change the rear display position beyond tilt is hugely appreciated for my workflow. Photo: Mitchell Clark |
Camera technology involves many parts that are also used in other devices, so improvements in those parts over the past few years have naturally made their way into cameras. Electronic displays, which we see on the rear screens and in EVFs of our cameras, are a great example of this.
I never thought I had complaints about the quality of the rear display on my personal camera, but after using something newer, it's one of the things I realized I was missing out on. It features a higher resolution and has a bit more contrast, making it easier for me to judge details and focus on the back of the camera. It's also brighter, which means I could see those things more easily when at a session in bright, open sunlight. The colors also look a bit nicer.
Simply put, it makes my images look a little better on the back of the camera. While that doesn't change the actual files at all, it is a confidence builder while in the midst of a shoot, and that's never a bad thing in my book.
A bigger upgrade for me, though, is the updated rear display form factor. Many companies have switched to articulating and fully tilting screens, which provide greater flexibility. I shoot a lot of vertical images, and I also put myself in awkward positions for photos on a regular basis. On my older camera, the tilt-only screen was useful for low shots, but that's really it. The newer rear displays allow me to adjust in just about any way I need to, making it easier for me to get the shots I want without fully contorting my body.
A new "good enough"
All of this isn't to say that all new cameras are inherently better than old ones. Or that you can't produce anything good with old cameras (I'd like to think my work shows that you can, but maybe that's my ego talking). I'm not here to tell everyone using an old camera that they need to upgrade as soon as possible.
And yet... using a recent camera made me aware of the (now apparent) shortcomings of my older model. There are improvements that don't really affect me because of my way of working (video specs, burst shooting features, etc.), but there are some that will be genuinely hard to live without now that I know how good it can be.
