ido_scharf

<p>In all honesty, all three cameras will perform wonderfully for web-sized viewing, which is normally no more than ~5MP, though it's increasing to ~8MP now that Ultra HD is getting more popular. When downsampled in programs like Lightroom, most flaws should disappear and, assuming you apply output sharpening (can be done automatically in Lightroom), the images will be sharp and not "smeary" at all.<br>

Do you plan on setting the camera to save Raw files and then process them in a Raw converter, or do you want to use out of camera JPEG files? Go to Imaging Resource (or any other website that has downloadable sample images) and download some images at the file format you choose, then scale them down for the web and see which one you like best.</p>

<p>Seems to me like the a7 II is the best balance of all four a7-series cameras. For any photographer with no particular "niche", the a7 II is most likely the best choice. I see the a7R and a7S as more "specialist"-type cameras, the former offering near-Medium-Format quality in large prints (and requirements for that quality - you probably need a decent tripod to get the most out of it), and the latter offering mostly unrivaled low light capabilities (at least at its size, when combined with f/2.8-or-better lenses).</p>

<p>The camera has a WiFi feature, so I presume that, by connecting it to a smartphone, it can automatically geotag photos based on the phone's GPS.<br>

I would love to have built-in GPS on more cameras. I think it's very useful, though its significant power consumption makes it more usable in DSLRs, as they have optical viewfinders which consume little to no power at all (while mirrorless cameras like the a7 II have to feed a Live View image to a display as long as they are switched on).</p>