The Online Photographer

I'd get the Sony FE 35mm ƒ/1.8 lens with it instead of
the one shown, but you choose

So how come we've never talked about this before? We talk about handy, easy to carry, high-image-quality cameras with premium-level build quality, but have somehow skipped over the full-frame Sony A7Cr. Two people, Mike Fewster and psu (Pete Su), mentioned it in the Comments the other day. Who's leading the discussion here? He's been negligent.

The Sony A7Cr has Sony Semiconductor Solutions' formidable high-speed, low-noise, ultra-high-performance 61-megapixel back-illuminated CMOS image sensor. That's quite a draw. (The 24-MP A7C and 33-MP A7C II are still available too.) It adopts that and the BIONZ XR image processor from the A7R IV (which you shouldn't buy now because the A7 V and A7R VI are on the way, probably in 2025 and early 2026 respectively). Yet it's the same size, almost the same weight, and almost but not quite the same design as the more affordable APS-C A6700. I owned the A6600 (still available, for a bargain price and with a free extended warranty) briefly a year or two ago, and it was one of the few cameras I've seen or held in the last decade that felt truly premium in its solid, deluxe-feeling build quality. I have to imagine that the more than twice as expensive full-frame version would be equally satisfying in quality. I appreciated the A6600's big, powerful NP-FZ100 battery, too, and the same battery is used in the A7Cr. Another plus, but maybe just for me: I can remember its alphanumerical jumble.

My only problem with the crop-sensor version I had was that I couldn't quite work out the lens situation to my satisfaction. I liked the image quality of the Sigma 30mm I settled on quite a lot (so much so that it led me to my current Sigma lens), but it didn't seem to work as well on my A6600 as the native Sony lenses. Eye-focus only worked part of the time on mine. Too bad*; otherwise the two would have made a nice pairing.

The lens situation is better for the full-frame version.

Exudes, I say!
Historically I've had a certain problem I struggle with, which has worked its way into my camera investigations a few times—I give up on things too quickly. The A7Cr makes me think that maybe I should have pursued the Sony rangefinder-style cameras more doggedly. Instead of just bailing on the A6600 when I didn't immediately find "the" lens for it (I'm very picky, perhaps irrationally so), maybe I should have considered sidestepping over to the FF versions. (I didn't. Consider it, I mean.) There are more and better lens solutions in FF. I think I'd personally choose the FE 35mm ƒ/1.8 despite its high price and despite the existence of the 40mm ƒ/2.5. If you like 50mm there's the new GM one in the picture above, which is getting lots of buzz. (It appeared in stores two years ago right now.) In any event, there are choices in whatever focal length range you like. 

It's not like I like all Sony cameras. I tried an A7II when it was current, and didn't care for it. It wasn't bad at all; actually, quite good. But for me, it seemed designed to look good rather than feel good and work well. A little unfriendly to the hand, not very ergonomic in layout, and I didn't even care for the "touch" of its surfaces. It wasn't so bad until the Nikon full-frame mirrorless cameras came along and schooled Sony as to how it ought to be done. In fairness, Sony has modified the body design of its FF SLR-style cameras now and is in the process of migrating the new style into the various models. While the A7II just didn't invite me to pick it up for some reason, the A6600 was the opposite. It's beautifully solid and exudes a strong impression of premium quality. Nice. And inviting. And tickled the endorphins, every time I picked it up.

We should talk about the A7Cr sometime. I wonder if I should review it? It would enlarge my horizons, no pun intended—I've never tried a 50-MP+ sensor in any camera. It's probably past time to do that.

Mike

*I wonder what the ideal APS-C camera is to use the Sigma 3omm on? (It's too long for me with Micro 4/3.) That would be interesting to investigate.

Original contents copyright 2025 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. (To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below or on the title of this post.)

Featured Comments from:

Bob Rosinsky: "I think the A7Cr's big drawback is its low-rez EVF."

Jeff Kott: "I’ve always been drawn to high quality but small photo gear, which is why I shifted from Nikon to Pentax to the Sony system starting with adapted M mount lenses on Sony NEX cameras. For me, the A7CR is the best camera I’ve ever owned. The only thing I would change is the EVF, which is OK to use, but there is clearly room for significant improvement."

Mike: "Actually the 30mm Sigma on Micro 4/3 is really great, especially since as a 35mm shooter I really enjoyed 60mm lenses on my Leica R and Contax system bodies. Paired with a 24mm ƒ/28 and a 135mm, it’s a very versatile kit. The 60 is a very good portrait length, even for tight headshots."

Mike replies: I'll go add the words "for me" to that sentence. As you say, if you like 60mm then that's a different story.

Christer Almqvist: "If you are to get the A7Cr, reconsider the 40mm ƒ/2.5 Sony G lens. I have three of the four Sony lenses you mentioned (not the 35mm ƒ/1.8 though). The small size of the 40mm makes it a very good fit for the A7Cr. I use it a lot on my A7R V especially for making pictures of people where I do not wish to hide behind a huge lens. Only ƒ/2.5? Yes, but with stunning sharpness wide open. Sony lenses, at least the G and GM, have excellent build quality. Buy a secondhand one. All mine are."

Steve Rosenblum: "The A7Cr is a very compelling camera. Put a 28mm or 40mm lens on it and you basically have a Leica Q3 or Q3 43 at half the price, with the advantage of being able to change lenses. I rented one to see for myself. Technically it has the sensor and the basic form factor of the Leica, but: 1. The Sony EVF is not nearly as nice, it has lower magnification and less resolution; 2. It has a flip out screen instead of one that tilts up and down (and I like waist level shooting), and 3. The menus, controls and general haptics are not nearly as intuitive and useful as the Leica Q3. On the other hand, it's $3,000 less."

DB: "My most-used travel camera."

Andy F: "My partner wants to get into wildlife photography, so we went to a trade show last Autumn, and we were both blown away by the handling of the A7Cr. When the body grip was attached, we found it superior to the A7r V. It's basically the A7r V, but with a low-res EVF and only one card slot. You should hire one with a GM lens and do a review."