Sony added that functionality to the a9ii so even that is not a differentiator.

At shutter speeds above 250 or so, the mechanical shutter becomes a traveling slit (which is to say the entire sensor isn't exposed to the light at the same time). As shutter speeds go up, the distance between the opening shutter curtain and the closing one gets closer together, but they still move at the same speed. Likewise, the electronic shutter doesn't read the sensor at one time. It is read row by row (or possibly groups of rows), regardless of the shutter speed. On the R5, the electronic shutter traverse speed is ~1/60 sec. This is fast enough for most action, but for really fast motion the object can move as the shutter progresses down the frame). I haven't found any reliable source for the R6 electronic shutter traverse speed, but I've seen things that suggest it's slower than the R5 (maybe ~1/30 sec). For information, the a9 and a9ii were the first full frame fast e-shutter cameras and traverse at ~1/160 sec and the current speed champion is the a1 at ~1/240 sec).

All this to say, I can't say with certainty if what you're seeing is shutter distortion or not, but it could be.

I've done quite a bit of reading about these two and the following represents a summary of what I've read (I owned the a9ii and now the a1, but have never owned the R5):
- AF performance - Both are amazing. Some say the a9ii has a slight advantage in BIF under certain, very specific conditions, but then the R5 has bird eye AF which the a9ii does not. At the end of the day both are amazing and I suspect it's splitting hairs to try to pick a clear winner.
- AF customization - Most suggest the a9ii has a bit of an advantage here as the options when the R5 is in 20 fps e-shutter are more limited. In the 12fps mechanical shutter I believe the R5's AF customization capabilities are more extensive.
- Dynamic Range - I believe R5 is slightly better with the mechanical shutter, but the a9ii is better in e-shutter. Both have plenty of dynamic range for all but the most extreme situations.
- Resolution - The R5 has the clear advantage as it has nearly twice the MPs.
- Ergonomics - To each his own. Many love Canon's ergos, but most admit that Sony's 4th gen bodies are very good also.
- Customization - Both are very customizable, but Sony seems to have an advantage in the level of customization allowed.
- Viewfinder - The R5 has a higher res screen, but the Sony is blackout free (this creates a different shooting experience). Also, my understanding is that tracking moving objects in e-shutter isn't too difficult on the R5 (it doesn't maintain a live feed like the a9ii) as long as you're shooting, but that it the transition into and out of shooting is less smooth (whereas on the Sony there is no transition).
- E-shutter travel speed - The R5 is ~1/60 sec and the a9ii is ~1/160 sec. Most of what I've seen is that 1/60 is fast enough for most situations. The largest area of complaint is when panning horizontally when vertical straight lines cease to be vertical.
- Mechanical Shutter - The R5 has a higher frame rate at 12fps (as long as the battery isn't drained below a certain point after which it slows down) than the a9ii's 10fps (the only two situations where you really need the mechanical shutter is when you're fighting flicker or using flash).
- Battery Life - The a9ii has better battery life, neither are great (by DSLR standards), both are plenty serviceable (batteries don't take long to change out).
- Video - The R5 has significantly more video options, though the a9ii does ok as long as log shooting and 4K 60p isn't terribly important (as it has neither).
- Cards - The R5 has to different card types, and one of the two is significantly faster than either of the a9ii's (the other is the same as the a9ii). The a9ii has two SD card slots rated at UHS-II (I never had a problem with buffer clearing).

Again, I don't want to imply any expertise on the R5, but those are the larger of the topics I've seen and read over the last year or so.

I shoot most of my landscape stuff on my 24-105. At landscape apertures it's plenty sharp. For chasing kids and family, the 24-105 is great for outdoors. For indoors I'd want something faster. The 85f1.8 is a great choice and I prefer a bit of a telephoto lens. The 55f1.8 is also a great lens that's decently priced (especially used). Many like 35mm indoors and the 35f1.8 is also a great lens. For more of a portrait style, my favorite focal length is 85mm.

Paul Buff Alien Bee B800 Strobe
Price: $140.00
Payment method: PayPal
Item condition: Shows signs of use, but very clean
Shipping instructions: USPS Priority Mail
B800 used little in good shape with reflector, power cord and cover. Includes paypal fees and shipping.

More pictures available upon request.

I switched from Lightroom back in 2016. I've always shot Sony digital cameras and in late 2016 I switched to the Sony version. It took a bit to get used to the differences from Lightroom, but a little diligence and a few tips from Martin Bailey Photography (he does podcasts and he switched himself back in 2016 or so) made the difference. Now when I go back to lightroom it feels odd and I'm far less efficient.

I purchased a iv for my wife and I've always been impressed with the AF and tracking on that camera. I never used a iii, but everything I read when doing research is that the iv is substantially better.

As others have said, the least expensive option is to get the lens fixed. Of course, if you want to switch to mirrorless, one excuse is as good as another so, if you can afford it, upgrade.

The line could be a sensor issue, but it could be a hair out something like that as well.

I don't have an a7riv, but I've been shooting Sony for a decade or so and have the a9ii now. The a7riv is a fine camera, but if you want maximum performance with your EF lenses along with great AF and high resolution the R5 is likely a better choice. If you're looking to evolve to Sony over time then the a7riv is a great choice.

If you only ever use 1 flash on camera, I doubt it'll make much difference. The magic in the Godox (or Flashpoint, same stuff) brand is that all of it can work together: off camera with an on camera trigger; on camera flash that can trigger off camera flashes as well, low cost flashes, low cost strobes, medium cost strobes, etc. It all works together.

The a99 is a great camera. It rendered better than any other DSLR I've ever owned.

I've got a black rapid sport strap and I've also got a peak design slide version 3. For heavier lenses I'm much prefer the black rapid sport.

When I shot DSLRs I checked my lenses. Many were close enough not to worry about, but there were a couple that benefited the fine tuning.

I used the 500mm mirror on my a99ii many times and always with excellent sharpness results. I was able to handhold at relatively slow shutter speeds (as slow as 1/500 consistently), but I realize everyone is somewhat different with respect to handholding capabilities. I suspect the a99ii provided a more substantial tool given its larger size, heavier weight and center viewfinder. I will offer one suggestion that isn't about sharpness, but can help the lens's performance: The stock lens hood is very short and the lens can suffer from a loss of contrast if any light skims across the front element. I purchased an alternate lens hood which screwed on after removing the stock one and got better results.