Focus peaking compared to the A7R?

[rafikiphoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Are there any here who also use a Sony A7R? How does the Sony focus peaking compare to that of your M240?

Edited July 21, 2015 by rafikiphoto

[dbdecker]

I have an A7R and used it a lot with a Voigtlander 35 F1.2 and the peeking was completely usable.

I am using a 35 lux on the M240 so i tested it, its not great imo (compared to above) but I use the M for the Rangefinder 99.9% of the time anyway. (the .1% is for showing people something in LV)

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[AlanJW]

I had Sony A7r and have Leica M.  As far as I am concerned the Sony peaking on anything 50mm or wider was unusable except wide open because too much was "in focus".  I had to focus wide open and then stop down to taking aperture. It was better on long lenses.  I find the Leica EVF easier to use because the peaking was slightly more precise and less diffuse, but it too is not a very good solution for wide angles.  I found myself using the EVF for framing but focusing with the RF.   Both EVFs were also useful for seeing actual exposure and making adjustments accordingly and also seeing the effect of a polarizing filter.   In other words I am not thrilled with any EVF as a better solution for manual focusing than a RF.   So far the Leica Q EVF is the best I have used, better than both Leica M EVF and Sony. 

[uhoh7]

Focus peaking is usable if you practice alot, then you find the right settings and get used to the slight variations which mean you point is in focus. There is also a Mag box which can zoom to any part of the screen, many use that.

 

Compared to the M240 optical RF?

 

A joke. Less accurate,slower, and the peaking is very distracting to the subject in general. It's like sex at the doctors office LOL

Edited July 21, 2015 by uhoh7

[LocalHero1953]

I have the OMD EM5-ii, and find the focus peaking over the top and unusable because the markings cover too much detail. I find focus peaking on the M240 at the other end of the spectrum: usually too faint or invisible except in bright contrast conditions. As focus peaking (in whatever camera) is usually most needed but least effective in low light/contrast conditions, I have it switched off for both cameras. I find focus magnification much more useful. I have seen it on other cameras (not the A7R) and I'm waiting to be convinced that it is a useful technology rather than just an unnecessary novelty.

Edited July 21, 2015 by LocalHero1953

[indergaard]

I had Sony A7r and have Leica M.  As far as I am concerned the Sony peaking on anything 50mm or wider was unusable except wide open because too much was "in focus".  I had to focus wide open and then stop down to taking aperture. It was better on long lenses.  I find the Leica EVF easier to use because the peaking was slightly more precise and less diffuse, but it too is not a very good solution for wide angles.  I found myself using the EVF for framing but focusing with the RF.   Both EVFs were also useful for seeing actual exposure and making adjustments accordingly and also seeing the effect of a polarizing filter.   In other words I am not thrilled with any EVF as a better solution for manual focusing than a RF.   So far the Leica Q EVF is the best I have used, better than both Leica M EVF and Sony. 

 

This is my experience also. Not with the 7R however, but the 7S, which should have identical peaking performance. It simply showed too much in focus all the time, which made it difficult use focusing peaking to get precise focus. Magnification was always a better option. The M240's peaking is less sensitive and appears more accurate from mye experience, but I still have to use 5x magnification to get precise focus.

Edited July 21, 2015 by indergaard

[dbdecker]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

i turned the sony peeking down to the lowest setting.  

i cant stand the visioflex (took it back for an exchange) on the M

hoping a future M gets the Q evf or better

[LocalHero1953]

We should distinguish between the Visoflex/EVF quality and focus peaking quality. Although I do not find focus peaking to be a useful function (or well implemented on the cameras I've seen), the OMD EM5-ii EVF is the best I've seen (clarity, responsiveness, short blackout), and is an excellent substitute for an OVF; OTOH, the EVF for the M and the T were seriously unconvincing. I understand the Q EVF is better than the OMD, so there is hope for the future.

 

The OVF has advantages the EVF is unlikely ever to match (view outside the frame, clarity throughout scene depth), and vice versa (focus magnification, exact framing, exposure simulation, DoF preview etc): let's hope we continue to have a choice.

[Mornnb]

Focus peaking is quite useless for fast primes, it works for f4 zooms.

One needs to use magnification.

[Rick]

Focus peaking on my A7r with Leica lenses was unusable.  Too much was glowing to determine where the plane of focus resided.  Much better on the M.  Having said that, I find focus peaking a poor way to achieve critical focus.  

[jaapv]

On the Sony implementation at high ISO even the sensor noise produces peaking...

There is a tradeoff: Thicker peaking contours are less precise. Personally I find the Leica compromise superior. Peaking as such I find only useful for long lenses and Macro.

[Rick]

On the Sony implementation at high ISO even the sensor noise produces peaking...

There is a tradeoff: Thicker peaking contours are less precise. Personally I find the Leica compromise superior. Peaking as such I find only useful for long lenses and Macro.

 

I had no luck with focus peaking and the 280/1.4 APO with the Sony A7r.  It was so deep that it wasn't possible to determine the plane of focus.  The M was much better.  As far as macro goes, you are wrong.  Macro needs to be too precise for FP to work at all.  That is why the old 90 Macro Elmar with goggles out performs the new version that relies on FP.  You need the precision of the RF to really use Macro Elmar.  

[jaapv]

Actually the best combo for macro on the M is  : Visoflex III, Bellows, Lenshead Tele-Elmar.

[AlanJW]

 As far as macro goes, you are wrong.  Macro needs to be too precise for FP to work at all.  That is why the old 90 Macro Elmar with goggles out performs the new version that relies on FP.  You need the precision of the RF to really use Macro Elmar.  

The new Macro Elmar (without goggles and with EVF) works beautifully with focus magnification as the tool rather than focus peaking.

[ayewing]

I have found the subtle focus peaking of the M240 preferable to most other makes. In some ways the version I liked best was the option 2 focus peaking in my old Ricoh GXR.  This provided a monochrome image in which there was little detail but instead images of objects appeared as outlines. The drawback is that the EVF is somewhat primitive by current standards but I think the metod had some promise.

[Rick]

The new Macro Elmar (without goggles and with EVF) works beautifully with focus magnification as the tool rather than focus peaking.

 

I agree.  But, the old version can use magnification as well as the RF for macro.  

 

Can you flip the version 180 degrees on the mount and utilize the goggles?  Does the cam work on the goggles?

[AlanJW]

I agree.  But, the old version can use magnification as well as the RF for macro.  

 

Can you flip the version 180 degrees on the mount and utilize the goggles?  Does the cam work on the goggles?

I dunno.   I no longer have goggles.  You're right about focus mag.  It will work on both.   The reason I prefer the new one is that I can leave the lens on the adapter and go all the way from very macro to infinity without fussing with mounting goggles andremounting and/or unmounting.   But that's not a focus issue.