Jump to content

The Sony A7 thread [Merged]


dmclalla

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Has anybody tried their M 90mm Macro Elmar on the A7R? This is one lens that I am amazed with on the A7R. It is small and seems to be very easy to hand hold and focus.

 

....... Works fine ..... But if you take photos of a uniform background it rather oddly vignettes a fair bit ....:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Author claims the Hyperprime is much sharper than the Noctilux and provides a single comparison picture. The Noctilux is back focussed on the black leather background rather than the camera. :rolleyes:

 

I didn't even bother to read the rest.

 

I shot both several times in comparison on NEX-7 and GH2 which both have a pixel pitch that would be about 60 MP on a full frame sensor. The lenses were focused through EVF magnification so there was no doubt about miscalibration. In both cases the HyperPrime CINE resolved at least as good as the Noctilux 50/0.95 ASPH but with less aberration (e.g. purple fringing). Similar result from other testers.

 

I guess it is interesting to know that there exists a "hyperprime" that has surveyed this long in one piece, must have used "hyperloctite"!

 

Deja vu...

But even in a Leica forum, the truth can not be ignored. By the way, my HyperPrimes still work fantastic without any flaw. You find them (besides samples from the Summilux, so there should be enough Leica reference) here:

 

Bokeh Dreams from 21mm to 135mm with Sony A7 & A7R

 

These were the candidates:

11273597705_ee34aabb30_b.jpg

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hand holding this camera without shake needs 1/2xfocal length ...... As against 1/halfxfocal length with a Leica M in my hands......

 

A7R with...

85mm focal length, hand held at 1/50s: Flammenspuk - Sony A7R + Contax/Zeiss Planar T* 85mm f/1.4 @ F1.4 - DSC08603 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

85mm focal length, hand held at 1/80s: Goblins - Carl Zeiss / Contax Planar T* 85mm f/1.4 @ F1.4 on Sony A7R - DSC09126 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

55mm focal length, hand held at 1/60s: Zeiss FE Sonnar T* 55mm f/1.8 @ F1.8 on Sony A7R - DSC09313 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

The hit and miss rate with my A7R is (resolution equated) quite like the same as with my meanwhile gone M 240 and D800E. But nevertheless I would still recommend 1/(2xFL) or shorter with ANY camera providing more than 16MP.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen to the video. They state that the sensor is top of the top with conventional lenses and Rf lenses.

 

Rick, it is you who should listen to the video again :)

 

Transcript: "The top of the top for picture quality on conventional lenses; but also, if you are adapting rangefinder lenses, it's an outstanding option."

 

Outstanding option == A better options than other similar options

 

And indeed it is. You just happen not to like that adapting option. Others do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oddly, one friend of mine reports that the Metabones and Fotodiox adapter are better for Leica M lenses than the Novoflex one. He says the opening in the Novoflex adapter is too small and causes corner smearing issues with his 28mm Summicron that he does not get with the other adapters. He says the vignetting is similar...due to the lens.

 

I don't know if this is true or if he really did a scientific test. But he is testing various lens adapters. I am only reporting what he said. Maybe some people here have a different opinion but it might be worth testing.

Edited by AlanG
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rick, it is you who should listen to the video again :)

 

Transcript: "The top of the top for picture quality on conventional lenses; but also, if you are adapting rangefinder lenses, it's an outstanding option."

 

Outstanding option == A better options than other similar options

 

And indeed it is. You just happen not to like that adapting option. Others do.

 

Ok, now you are going to tell me what I happen not to like? :rolleyes: I like the camera. This camera is going to be killer for a lot of people, including me... I just can't afford to keep it for just R-lenses which, I am not that good at yet and don't gravitate toward photography of subjects that my Tele lenses lend themselves to.

 

For the rest of my M lenses (I own) this camera is not going to be "outstanding" like Sony stated, by any stretch of the definition... no matter how many commas and semicolons you want to put into the Sony reps' mouth.:rolleyes:

 

I feel very fortunate to have what I have. If, I didn't have a M240 I'd keep would have kept the Sony A7R. If, I had the M9 I would be tempted to keep the A7R or the A7 and wait for the next M.

 

Rick

 

 

 

Here is my low light wet-dream. 280mm/2.8 APO (I should have kept this camera) :p

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by RickLeica
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My apologies for coming across this way. I was only trying to state I don't have any normal focal length R-lens so, I couldn't recommend one and that for the M lenses, as a whole, I can't endorse the camera. Sorry it came across the way it did.

 

Rick

 

No problem at all, I think we are in full agreement. If I were not willing to pick up a couple of R lenses (or maybe C/Y) mine would be heading back too. This not a flexible option for M lenses.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, shutter speed was 1/50. Taking pictures like that takes some doing ...

 

My keep/discard ratio is around 1/20 ...

 

I wanted to show what a SONY a7 can also do.

 

With my Leica M9 I could not take a picture like that.

 

I do not know where my R-to-M adapter is ... and do not care ...

 

I feel better now. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

..... Bit late on a reply .......

 

I think if you are after better high ISO performance you may be disappointed.......

 

Hand holding this camera without shake needs 1/2xfocal length ...... As against 1/halfxfocal length with a Leica M in my hands......

 

I find myself using much higher ISO than on the M which would completely negate (and more) the gain over M9 ISO performance allegedly offered by the sony.

 

To my eye the the actual noise is more noticeable than the M and takes more getting rid of in LR.

 

If are intending to jump from M9 to A7r for this reason alone you may have problems.......

 

It all depends what you shoot. The vast majority of my photos involve people and I don't shoot below 1/60s. At this speed, the 50 LUX ASPH is razor sharp on my A7R (more so than on my M9). And the benefit at high ISO is considerable.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oddly, one friend of mine reports that the Metabones and Fotodiox adapter are better for Leica M lenses than the Novoflex one. He says the opening in the Novoflex adapter is too small and causes corner smearing issues with his 28mm Summicron that he does not get with the other adapters. He says the vignetting is similar...due to the lens.

 

I don't know if this is true or if he really did a scientific test. But he is testing various lens adapters. I am only reporting what he said. Maybe some people here have a different opinion but it might be worth testing.

 

The Hawk's adapter Ver.2.5 features a 36mm diameter in the minimal opening, while the ver. 3.0 is of 40mm. The latter makes bit of brighter corner than the former.

 

Perhaps somebody may measure the inner opening of Novoflex, Metabones, or Fotodiox and others, contributing to a rule of thumb how to select adapter using Leica lenses on the A7/A7R.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oddly, one friend of mine reports that the Metabones and Fotodiox adapter are better for Leica M lenses than the Novoflex one. He says the opening in the Novoflex adapter is too small and causes corner smearing issues with his 28mm Summicron that he does not get with the other adapters. He says the vignetting is similar...due to the lens.

 

I don't know if this is true or if he really did a scientific test. But he is testing various lens adapters. I am only reporting what he said. Maybe some people here have a different opinion but it might be worth testing.

 

Here are some quick measurements I just did.

 

Leica M to Sony E Adapter: Inner Diameter Measurements

Phigment ............ 30.87 mm

Hawk's Factory .. 36.01 mm

 

Fotodiox ............. 41.54 mm

Novoflex ............. 41.66 mm

Fotodiox Pro ...... 41.74 mm

Metabones black 41.83 mm

Metabones red ... 41.84 mm

 

The inner diameters are not uniform. They vary a little bit.

I measured the largest diameter of each adapter I could find.

 

Based on these measurements my Phigment and Hawk's Factory adapter are too small for FF.

I have found major vignetting for 90 and 135 mm focal length for the Phigment but not the Novoflex adapter.

Phigment LM-NEX: Electronic Leica -> NEX Adapter - FM Forums

 

The diameters of the other adapters seem fairly close to each other.

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fotodiox ............. 41.54 mm

Novoflex ............. 41.66 mm

Fotodiox Pro ...... 41.74 mm

Metabones black 41.83 mm

Metabones red ... 41.84 mm

 

 

The inner diameters are not uniform. They vary a little bit.

I measured the largest diameter of each adapter I could find.

 

Appreciate K.H.'s diligence in this work.

 

Given Alan's friend's finding is correct and the triviality of opening difference among Novoflex, Metabones, and Fotodiox, maybe the relative distance between the position of minimal opening diameter and sensor also matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see KH says he measured the largest diameter. Now I don't have any of these adapters so I can't help any in understanding their configuration. But is the largest diameter also the same as the smallest diameter?

 

I'll try to get more info but I wonder if Novoflex might have made different versions of this because he specifically said that he could see it had a smaller opening than the Metabones one. Perhaps his is older and was made with just the Nex APS models in mind and the current one has a larger opening. I really have no idea but maybe owners of the Novoflex ones should measure the opening. I do have a hard time seeing how it would impinge on a 28mm lens.

Edited by AlanG
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll try to get more info but I wonder if Novoflex might have made different versions of this because he specifically said that he could see it had a smaller opening than the Metabones one. Perhaps it was made with just the Nex APS models in mind and the current one has a larger opening. I really have no idea.

 

Apparently whether an adapter works or not has a lot to do with the design of the lens in question.

Even the Phigment adapter doesn't cause any problems for the WATE.

However it causes major vignetting for 90 and 135 mm lenses.

75 mm is a borderline case as far as I can tell.

Go figure.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently whether an adapter works or not has a lot to do with the design of the lens in question.

Even the Phigment adapter doesn't cause any problems for the WATE.

However it causes major vignetting for 90 and 135 mm lenses.

75 mm is a borderline case as far as I can tell.

Go figure.

 

Thanks for doing these measurements. The reason vigentting is apparent on longer lenses is the placement of the narrowest part of the Phigmenttech adapter. The entire throat isn't narrow, it's only the part nearest to the lens bayonette. This can technically be fixed with a redesigned circuit board and plastic housing, but this option is too expensive for small production amounts.

 

Here are two diagrams. One is a cross section of my actual models, the other is a really rough drawing I made the other day trying to illustrate why wider lenses won't vignette while longer lenses will (really not to scale though).

 

As can be seen, many wider lenses actually have their exit pupil sitting below, or not very far recessed beyond the circuit board. This means there will be no physical obstruction.

 

http://www.phigmenttech.ca/lmnex/img/Adapter.JPG

 

http://www.phigmenttech.ca/lmnex/img/drawing.gif

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for doing these measurements. The reason vigentting is apparent on longer lenses is the placement of the narrowest part of the Phigmenttech adapter. The entire throat isn't narrow, it's only the part nearest to the lens bayonette. This can technically be fixed with a redesigned circuit board and plastic housing, but this option is too expensive for small production amounts.

 

Here are two diagrams. One is a cross section of my actual models, the other is a really rough drawing I made the other day trying to illustrate why wider lenses won't vignette while longer lenses will (really not to scale though).

 

As can be seen, many wider lenses actually have their exit pupil sitting below, or not very far recessed beyond the circuit board. This means there will be no physical obstruction.

 

http://www.phigmenttech.ca/lmnex/img/Adapter.JPG

 

http://www.phigmenttech.ca/lmnex/img/drawing.gif

 

 

Many thanks Paul for the illuminating explanations.

Indeed I measured the inside diameter of the narrower plastic circuit board inside the wider metal part of your adapter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some quick measurements I just did.

 

Leica M to Sony E Adapter: Inner Diameter Measurements

Phigment ............ 30.87 mm

Hawk's Factory .. 36.01 mm

 

Fotodiox ............. 41.54 mm

Novoflex ............. 41.66 mm

Fotodiox Pro ...... 41.74 mm

Metabones black 41.83 mm

Metabones red ... 41.84 mm

 

 

Just want to add:

 

Voigtlander ............ 41.68 mm ( 36.44 mm with metal "circuit board" inside)

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...