The Sony A7 thread [Merged]

[onceuponatime]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think it was a bad idea to shoehorn a full-frame sensor into something that is basically an APS-C system –

 

What (non) science are you basing this on ?

 

Given that the RX1 RX1r were the predecessors, and all Sony have done is add EVF and next level RX1/r sensor and taken off the fixed Zeiss 35/2.

[peterv]

@ Peter D Lux 2, Peter D Lux 2, Ecaton, almoore, dwbell.

 

You might make good points on EVF and whatnot as well as your personal preferences possibly representing volumes of other photographers. My point was and still is on the lack of tactile interfaces. Humans are made in a certain way, and there are good and bad design in supporting how to interface in particular for such a specific tool as a camera. To bad consumers are fooled by marketing to believe that bad design are the one to blindly promote in Internet forum.

 

Personal preference, bias, an ax to grind with Sony, iStuff or whatever. I don't feel fooled by the modern UI of my S2 nor my NEX 7, both have soft keys/buttons, etc.

[onceuponatime]

Anyone else thinking abot this?

 

Digital M's including 240 have always had issues with skin tones, even with firmware updates.

For that reason alone i am considering A7r.

[Ozkar]

Digital M's including 240 have always had issues with skin tones, even with firmware updates.

For that reason alone i am considering A7r.

 

Oh boy! This will open a pandora's box.

[onceuponatime]

i m very curios about new sony 7R, really a monster of resolution in a very small package, coupled with some small leica & voigtlander primes it will be a very interesting tool

 

what do you think?

 

Well it wont have the LAF of Analog Ms that I like so much.

Digital M I was not really enamoured by.

Leica glass now that is a whole new ball park.

 

Monochrom, M9, M240 vs A7r :

I will save $4000 on a A7r FF body, use that to get me some M glass, a Rolleiflex 2.8F Planar, and travel.

(And without trying to sound too much of a saint give $1000 to good causes).

[Ozkar]

@ Peter D Lux 2, Peter D Lux 2, Ecaton, almoore, dwbell.

 

My point was and still is on the lack of tactile interfaces. Humans are made in a certain way, and there are good and bad design in supporting how to interface in particular for such a specific tool as a camera. To bad consumers are fooled by marketing to believe that bad design are the one to blindly promote in Internet forum.

 

I agree. Take the M240. This body is very poorly designed from an ergonomic point of view. It is heavy and shaped like a bar of soap and is very uncomfortable to hold for extended periods. But many fall head over heels over the design because it harks back to the design of M film cameras of old.

[k-hawinkler]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The EVF in the Sony A7 and A7r is supposed to be the same one as I understand it as the new Olympus EM1.

 

Rich

 

That's my understanding as well. Add to that the VF-4.

I have shot a lot with the VF-2 in the E-M5.

Also with the VF-4 mounted on the E-M5, and now in the E-M1.

 

I am looking forward to experience the same EVF in the A7R.

The VF-4 is a major advance. After having used it I couldn't go back to the VF-2.

[Weltraumpräsident]

Und eben weil Leica vorsichtig agieren muss, werden sie sich nicht auf Abenteuer mit ungewissem Ausgang einlassen.

 

hmm seltsam - da sieht man mal wie unterschiedlich die Sichtweisen sein können.

Für mich ist zb. die X-Vario genau das: ein Abenteuer mit ungewissem Ausgang.

 

Wo wäre eine EVIL ein solches Abenteuer gewesen?

[mjh]

Can you please expand on this Michael?

I think I already did, probably in this very thread. All modern camera systems (including NEX) feature large throat sizes relative to the image clrcle – about 150 to 200 percent of the image circle, compared to about 100 percent as was customary for analog SLR and rangefinder systems. In this context a full-frame sensor in an E-mount camera is a step backwards.

 

(Incidentally I will deal with this topic in the next issue of LFI, although in a different context.)

[mjh]

Given that the RX1 RX1r were the predecessors, and all Sony have done is add EVF and next level RX1/r sensor and taken off the fixed Zeiss 35/2.

That isn’t even remotely similar to what Sony has actually done. The optical design of the RX1 makes a lot of sense but the A7® is totally different.

[MarkP]

Hi again Michael,

 

I found your earlier post but I still don't understand why this is a problem.

As my expertise is not in camera and lens design would you mind take me through this step by step if you have the time?

 

Regards,

Mark

[rosuna]

Stick a red dot on it and the shutter sound won't be a problem for a good 3 years. Until the next A7 comes out and suddenly everyone will admit it was atrocious.

 

I don't do street stealth, my subjects know I'm taking a picture, so for me it's not an issue. I'm in love with the shutter sound on my M240 though.....

 

It sounds like the original M8 I own...

 

This camera also had/has a 1/8000 capable shutter...

[mjh]

I found your earlier post but I still don't understand why this is a problem.

As my expertise is not in camera and lens design would you mind take me through this step by step if you have the time?

As long as sensors lack the robustness to gracefully deal with large incident angles (which silver-halide film did – all you suffered from was some vignetting), you want to keep incident angles small throughout the image circle. Since the maximum incident angle depends on the position of the exit pupil you want the exit pupil to be as far from the sensor as possible – the farther away the exit pupil is, the smaller the incident angles. Now the exit pupil within the lens is like a lightbulb deep within some tubular lampshade – like the latter it will produce a tightly focused beam, illuminating only a small spot. If you need to illuminate a larger spot (read: a larger image circle / sensor) you need a wider tube. In terms of lens design this means you need a larger rear lens – and a larger throat size so the rear lens (or the light emanating from it) will fit.

 

That’s the argument for large throat sizes as originally put forward by Olympus. Olympus had calculated the optimal throat size to be twice the diameter of the image circle, which it is in case of the Micro-FourThirds system. Other vendors did not go quite as far but all the new mirrorless systems feature throat sizes larger (relative to the image circle) than even that of Canon’s EF mount, the largest mount of all the camera systems originally designed for silver-halide film. One could say that Canon was on to something when they designed that mount (the last of the pre-digital mounts).

[dwbell]

Yet it appears to work? Despite being 'non-traditional' thinking.

[Paul J]

I take issue with the inferences regarding Ming Thein's ethics. I read his blog on a fairly regular basis. He writes thoughtful articles about all aspects of photography. He is knowleadable about the mechanics of camera equipment and the aesthetics of photography. He has used a wide variety of equipment, but seems to stick with his equipment choices for more than a couple of months. And most tellingly, he responds thoughtfully to every comment posted to his blog and that can be well over a 100 for a given article. Sharpies don't do that. Most importantly, he is a damn good photographer who is in it because he loves it.

 

It is one thing to have respectful disagreements, it is something else to cast what appear to be unfounded aspersions on someone's integrity.

 

This may be the Internet, but that does not mean it is open season on character.

 

Cool your jets my friend, it's just an opinion. (and your imagination of it)

[k-hawinkler]

Yet it appears to work? Despite being 'non-traditional' thinking.

 

Their sensor design ought to play an important role in this, no?

[onceuponatime]

All modern camera systems (including NEX) feature large throat sizes relative to the image clrcle – about 150 to 200 percent of the image circle, compared to about 100 percent as was customary for analog SLR and rangefinder systems. In this context a full-frame sensor in an E-mount camera is a step backwards.

 

 

As long as sensors lack the robustness to gracefully deal with large incident angles (which silver-halide film did – all you suffered from was some vignetting), you want to keep incident angles small throughout the image circle. Since the maximum incident angle depends on the position of the exit pupil you want the exit pupil to be as far from the sensor as possible – the farther away the exit pupil is, the smaller the incident angles. Now the exit pupil within the lens is like a lightbulb deep within some tubular lampshade – like the latter it will produce a tightly focused beam, illuminating only a small spot. If you need to illuminate a larger spot (read: a larger image circle / sensor) you need a wider tube. In terms of lens design this means you need a larger rear lens – and a larger throat size so the rear lens (or the light emanating from it) will fit.

 

That’s the argument for large throat sizes as originally put forward by Olympus. Olympus had calculated the optimal throat size to be twice the diameter of the image circle, which it is in case of the Micro-FourThirds system. Other vendors did not go quite as far but all the new mirrorless systems feature throat sizes larger (relative to the image circle) than even that of Canon’s EF mount, the largest mount of all the camera systems originally designed for silver-halide film.

 

 

Images taken with M lenses (Leica 24 F2.8 and Zeiss 18 F4 M) on A7r show otherwise.

Field Test: Sony A7R l Brian Smith Pictures

[Guest borge]

I agree. Take the M240. This body is very poorly designed from an ergonomic point of view. It is heavy and shaped like a bar of soap and is very uncomfortable to hold for extended periods. But many fall head over heels over the design because it harks back to the design of M film cameras of old.

 

Well this is a subjective thing.

Personally I find that once you attach a Thumbs Up! to an M body it is one of the most comfortable cameras to hold and manually focus on the market.

[zlatkob]

Given that the RX1 RX1r were the predecessors, and all Sony have done is add EVF and next level RX1/r sensor and taken off the fixed Zeiss 35/2.

 

I think it's a great idea. Small interchangeable lens cameras with very high image quality and good handling are generally a good idea. As a first generation effort (or 2nd if you count the RX1) it is quite possible that they got some details wrong. But the concept of a smaller full-frame camera is very appealing. It won't save much size & weight when attached to a large telephoto or zoom, but it will when attached to a small prime. It looks quite compact when attached to a 35mm lens. If it works well in practice, it can serve as a model for future camera designs. For large telephotos or zooms, the M43rds system will offer a greater reduction in size & weight.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[dwbell]

It's subjective too, that a design that requires a significant third party ergonomic addition to become useable is a success, as a design.

 

FWIW, I used to find the M design fine, not perfect but good enough. However, when you stick the EVF on top, the whole carrying it around not shooting ergonomics are buggered. I needed the whole top plate to carry it in my left hand. The EVF ruins this for me.

 

Sorry to go OT.