Best value 4K mirrorless camera under £1000, let's rank them

[Andrew Reid]

Firstly in no particular order...

Sony a7r III

That 42MP sensor is not the same as the a7r II which brought 4K to the masses, it had some sort of significant update. Low light is much cleaner, less moire, and they sorted the colour science too. The only reason the a7r III doesn't get more attention is the a7 III is even cheaper for under $800 second hand, and although I prefer the lovely wide dynamic range 42MP sensor for stills, the a7 III has the edge in 4K with the oversampling and no aliasing.

Panasonic S9

I am seeing this just nudge under 1000 quid used and I think that's a lot of camera you're getting. It may be in the form factor of tin of Spam but if you don't need an EVF, the best autofocus, or long record times, it'll give you a really nice image in 6K and has a fun factor too. Real-Time LUTs a great feature.

Canon... got to choose a Canon

You know what I think it's the EOS M6 Mark II. It's cheap and although it's a 'dead' mount I think it has something of a 'GH2' spirit about it and the 4K ain't terrible.

Full frame camera however, I don't really know if there is one... R6 is still comfortably above 1000 smackers. And it's heavily cripple hammered for video. The RP and R8 I just think are a bit naff.

If you think of one in the comments let me know. Full frame 4K, under 1000 USD.

Olympus OM-1

I picked up mine in mint condition for 950 euros. Definitely the cheapest way to get such a wide feature set and stacked sensor. It does more than some $6000 flagship cameras! Plus the ergonomics and overall speed are superb.

Sony a9

Again the cheapest way to get a stacked sensor, full frame this time. I have seen these go for just under £1000 which is crazy. For stills you're not lacking much even vs the a9 III. Autofocus speed and reliability is SUPERB. For video it has a very good image, but the lack of Picture Profiles / S-LOG cripple hammer to save the A7S II's neck (back in 2017) means it is a bit feature limited on the video side. The codec is actually quite good though, even though it's good old 8bit H.264 100Mbit.

Fujifilm X-T4

The best image on any APS-C camera for the price be it stills or video.

There's also the X-H1, but the X-T4 has a lot of big improvements... 10bit, faster, better RS, newer sensor, no crop in 4K, the list is quite long.

Nikon Z6

This isn't just under 1000 but under 700. And for that price it's a steal. It has aged well. BIG AND DETAILED EVF. No crop in 4K. An excellent sensor with fantastic high ISO performance. No 10bit N-LOG internal but the Nikon Flat profile grades well, there's also EOSHD Z-LOG 🙂

That's all off the top of my head, and if I were to rank them it would be:

1. a7r II - because of the resolution, and the fact that E-mount has the best lenses and best adapters.

2. a9 - it's easily the fastest full frame camera for the price

3. OM-1 - All the modern features for cheap

4. Nikon Z6 - It's better than an a7 III

5. Panasonic S9 - Maybe the best video quality of the whole bunch but the stills side is too limited with no mechanical shutter, EVF and a mediocre AF system.

6. X-T4 - Still the best bang for buck APS-C choice in 2025.

7. Canon EOS M6 Mark II - Fun camera, 32 megapixel stills, ok 4K, great colour science and under $700.

[ntblowz]

Canon R8 does cropless FF supersampled 4k60p which none of other model can do for the same price. No IBIS but luckily most RF lens have IS which compensate for that.

So for pure image quality R8 is really out there, just DR is not so hot vs other FF cameras.

[zerocool22]

What do you mean with best adapters? That you can mount the most lenses to it?

The thing about L-mount I like is that how great the autofocus behaves with adapted EF lenses, much better then any e-mount camera I have used though.

[Emanuel]

1 hour ago, zerocool22 said:

What do you mean with best adapters? That you can mount the most lenses to it?

The thing about L-mount I like is that how great the autofocus behaves with adapted EF lenses, much better then any e-mount camera I have used though.

Nice to know : ) EF to E-mount is actually a PITA... Thanks for the heads-up! Only manual here for now. What adapter exactly? Sigma, I guess? Not Viltrox?

[MrSMW]

If my budget is just 1k the per body, I'm going to pair an S9 for my video needs with an S1R for photo.

I don't think S1H's are sub 1k yet, not unless they are very high mileage, but S1R's definitely are.

For stills, sub 1k, I don't think you can really beat it.

For video, it's surprisingly good in 5k flat or HLG, but the S9 has 6k open gate so is a win for my needs.

Sub 1k from any other brand, it would need top be Fuji for for me, but I could be tempted for stills with an OM-1 badged OLYMPUS.

[zerocool22]

4 hours ago, Emanuel said:

Nice to know : ) EF to E-mount is actually a PITA... Thanks for the heads-up! Only manual here for now. What adapter exactly? Sigma, I guess? Not Viltrox?

Sigma indeed.

[newfoundmass]

I really don't think there's a better camera under $1,000 than the Lumix S5. 24mp for photos is enough for me most of the time, and the footage is really, really nice, some of the best I've ever worked with. It's capabilities are pretty much unmatched for the price. 

I'd also add the GH5 and G9 as really great values. You can get the GH5 for around $600 and if you know what you're doing you can still get great images from it. The GH6 is also under $1,000; that's a lot of pro features for a camera under $1000 and is only a few years old!

 

9 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

5. Panasonic S9 - Maybe the best video quality of the whole bunch but the stills side is too limited with no mechanical shutter, EVF and a mediocre AF system.

I've heard it's better than the S5ii X and I think the S5ii X's AF is very good.

[ND64]

For some reason, and for just few hours, Rakuten offered A7cii for $1000. Not living in Japan was one of my many strategical mistakes in my life.

 

[newfoundmass]

7 minutes ago, ND64 said:

For some reason, and for just few hours, Rakuten offered A7cii for $1000. Not living in Japan was one of my many strategical mistakes in my life.

 

Possible sign the A7C III is coming? 

[Andrew Reid]

7 hours ago, Emanuel said:

Nice to know : ) EF to E-mount is actually a PITA... Thanks for the heads-up! Only manual here for now. What adapter exactly? Sigma, I guess? Not Viltrox?

I would love to know how EF to L-mount is better than EF to E-mount for autofocus performance.

On all the contrast detect L-mount cameras Canon lenses are unusable even with the Sigma MC-21.

On the S5 Mark II I had numerous issues and poor performance in low light.

Tried the Commlite adapter and Sigma MC-21.

Also the Novoflex EF adapter for L mount which was so bad I ended up covering the pins with tape and using it for MF.

And once you try the Techart EA-9 for manual focus lenses you will never go back... it's so nice setting lens to infinity and using back-button for AF with something like a Canon FD lens or a small Leica M 35mm, especially for stills work and this is something you just don't have on L-mount, although there is a spin-off Fotodiox clone for Fuji X.

[Andrew Reid]

3 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

I really don't think there's a better camera under $1,000 than the Lumix S5. 24mp for photos is enough for me most of the time, and the footage is really, really nice, some of the best I've ever worked with. It's capabilities are pretty much unmatched for the price. 

I'd also add the GH5 and G9 as really great values. You can get the GH5 for around $600 and if you know what you're doing you can still get great images from it. The GH6 is also under $1,000; that's a lot of pro features for a camera under $1000 and is only a few years old!

 

I've heard it's better than the S5ii X and I think the S5ii X's AF is very good.

I agree the original S5, and S1 have a lovely image.

Both great for the price.

10bit codecs.

S1R with 4K/60p only a 1.1x crop.

They should be in my top 10 but I still don't think they suit as many people as an E-mount or Z-mount camera.

Sigma Fp OG should be in my list as well but again it's more of a niche tool.

The S5 and S1 practically have no autofocus to speak of.

The non-nerds I speak to regularly complain about it and want to switch to Sony.

The S5 also has a very pokey little EVF, which makes the S1 a better deal as they're both around 800 used.

But the S1 compared to a Sony a7r III or a7 III is clunky... heavy, too large, bad AF, wrong mount in most people's eyes, and doesn't play well with adapters.

Whereas the Z6 has the same sensor, very similar image quality, but much better ergonomics, is smaller, lighter, excellent AF, and I believe most people would pick the latter qualities over just having 10bit codecs.

[zerocool22]

12 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I would love to know how EF to L-mount is better than EF to E-mount for autofocus performance.

On all the contrast detect L-mount cameras Canon lenses are unusable even with the Sigma MC-21.

On the S5 Mark II I had numerous issues and poor performance in low light.

Tried the Commlite adapter and Sigma MC-21.

Also the Novoflex EF adapter for L mount which was so bad I ended up covering the pins with tape and using it for MF.

And once you try the Techart EA-9 for manual focus lenses you will never go back... it's so nice setting lens to infinity and using back-button for AF with something like a Canon FD lens or a small Leica M 35mm, especially for stills work and this is something you just don't have on L-mount, although there is a spin-off Fotodiox clone for Fuji X.

Just my personal experience, no side by side tests though. Metabones for example in the sony cameras was a huge mess. Slow + need to reconnect often. Havent had that issue once on a panasonic camera.

[Andrew Reid]

Depends which Sony camera. Which firmware of Metabones. Which mode. Which era. Which year. The Sigma MC-11 has been practically flawless since 2017. Metabones also evolved into a bullet proof experience.

The same is not true for the S5 II in my experience, with the Sigma MC-21. It's ok, good-ish, but not at same level as Sony.

Also using E-mount lenses on Z-mount with the Megadap adapter is like a native lens experience.

But you can't bring any E-mount lenses to L.

The flange distance is too long.

[newfoundmass]

6 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I agree the original S5, and S1 have a lovely image.

Both great for the price.

10bit codecs.

S1R with 4K/60p only a 1.1x crop.

They should be in my top 10 but I still don't think they suit as many people as an E-mount or Z-mount camera.

Sigma Fp OG should be in my list as well but again it's more of a niche tool.

The S5 and S1 practically have no autofocus to speak of.

The non-nerds I speak to regularly complain about it and want to switch to Sony.

The S5 also has a very pokey little EVF, which makes the S1 a better deal as they're both around 800 used.

But the S1 compared to a Sony a7r III or a7 III is clunky... heavy, too large, bad AF, wrong mount in most people's eyes, and doesn't play well with adapters.

Whereas the Z6 has the same sensor, very similar image quality, but much better ergonomics, is smaller, lighter, excellent AF, and I believe most people would pick the latter qualities over just having 10bit codecs.

The S5 auto focus isn't that bad, really. The biggest issue it has is when the subject is moving forward, which you would actually think was one of the easiest things for it to do. When in a scenario like that it can be quickly remedied with back button focus, but it's not a smooth transition obviously, but for my wrestling filming it really doesn't matter, people don't notice the quick pulsing to fix the focus. For other stuff, I do manually focus in those situations, though.

For me, why I'd choose the S5 over anything pre-A7III, is the image, the colors (Sony has come a long way since then, but I hate that era of Sony color science), no recording limits on 4K 30P (a big deal for event videographers), no overheating, the IBIS (again huge for event videographers), the video assist features, etc. Plus there are the things I've never actually even used, but could if I wanted, like adding an external recorder and recording RAW. That's a lot of bang for your buck for under $1000 and with it's only real weakness being the auto focus (and the crop in 4K 60, though that has never bothered me.)

The Z6 though is more of a closer battle, and Nikon entices me more than any other camera company right now as they've made huge leaps forward in their video offerings and, with the recent firmware update, are throwing everything but the kitchen sink at video users. Still, the Z6 had some quirks that just didn't make it an option when I jumped to full frame. If I was making the jump today though the Z8 would be very tempting, especially at the used prices. 

[Andrew Reid]

2 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

The S5 auto focus isn't that bad, really. The biggest issue it has is when the subject is moving forward, which you would actually think was one of the easiest things for it to do.

You mean it is good at focusing sideways then? 🙂

I would choose S5 over anything pre-A7 III as well as 2012 cameras aren't my bag.

Do you mean a7 IV?

I just think the a7 IV is superior to the S5 in so many ways.

And not in the small stuff but big...

The autofocus. The viewfinder. The mount. The resolution. The lens adapters. The ergonomics.

No-phase-detect-AF is a no-go for 2025.

I just don't know why you'd want to put yourself through the inconvenience especially for video. For stills with native Panasonic glass you can usually get away with DFD just fine though.

The Z6 is like $650 used now, probably one of the all-time great bargains as far as bang for image quality goes.

 

[MrSMW]

For outright static use image quality in video, the S5 probably has the edge over the S5 but as Andrew says, pretty much everywhere else, the A7iv does dump all over it.

S5ii however, now we are talking overall parity. The Sony probably edges it for stills, the Panny for video & IBIS and everywhere else, much of a muchness.

You can't get an S5ii though in normal circumstances sub 1k yet, though it won't be long.

[ita149]

23 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

I really don't think there's a better camera under $1,000 than the Lumix S5. 24mp for photos is enough for me most of the time, and the footage is really, really nice, some of the best I've ever worked with. It's capabilities are pretty much unmatched for the price. 

I'd also add the GH5 and G9 as really great values. You can get the GH5 for around $600 and if you know what you're doing you can still get great images from it. The GH6 is also under $1,000; that's a lot of pro features for a camera under $1000 and is only a few years old!

 

I've heard it's better than the S5ii X and I think the S5ii X's AF is very good.

I agree, the S5 and even more the S1 (with better IBIS, 6K and Open Gate) are fantastic value, I still have these camera along with the even older A7III.
For my use, I much prefer the S1 or S5 over the A7III, the video quality is much better, there is no annoying NR or detail smoothing at high ISO, the details are well maintened whereas the A7III looks quickly mushy, a bit like the S5II with rec 709 profiles. The IBIS is also much better on the S1 and S5. Only the AF is not as good as the A7III, but with the last firmwares and the last Sigma lenses like the 28-45mm, it is much faster than before. I don't have any issue if I don't shoot fast moving subjects. Some old lenses like 35mm Sigma F2 are almost unusable on these cameras though ...

Yes ! The GH5 is also a great value, even if I have most recent m43 cameras like the GH6 or G9II, the GH5 is still unbeatable for 4k/Open Gate quality and the Open Gate can be used at 60 fps !
The GH6 is special, lot of issues even with the AF, but the colors are the best I've seen on any Panasonic camera.