The Sony A7 thread [Merged]

[zlatkob]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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

 

But note that the 18mm shot looks cropped and may have significant post-production. It would be more convincing if uncropped and straight out of the camera.

[naturephoto1]

But note that the 18mm shot looks cropped and may have significant post-production. It would be more convincing if uncropped and straight out of the camera.

 

From over on Fredmiranda.com:

 

uhoh7 wrote:

I tweeted Brian Smith:

How are the corners on the ZM 18?

 

@briansmithphoto: @uhoh007 corners were sharp with a bit of darkening that's an easy fix in Lightroom or Capture One.

 

 

I have to assume if he even has possession of a ZM 18, he knows what sharp corner is :-)

 

Rich

[jaapv]

Back in the film days there were several excellent cheaper cameras that had the same "sensor" aka film that Leica had and took Leica lenses. I wonder why the cheap Bessa never sold in significant numbers....

[dwbell]

Back in the film days there were several excellent cheaper cameras that had the same "sensor" aka film that Leica had and took Leica lenses. I wonder why the cheap Bessa never sold in significant numbers....

 

Seriously?

 

[naturephoto1]

Back in the film days there were several excellent cheaper cameras that had the same "sensor" aka film that Leica had and took Leica lenses. I wonder why the cheap Bessa never sold in significant numbers....

 

I very much doubt that will be the case with the new Sony A7 and A7r cameras.

 

Rich

[rosuna]

Back in the film days there were several excellent cheaper cameras that had the same "sensor" aka film that Leica had and took Leica lenses. I wonder why the cheap Bessa never sold in significant numbers....

 

It is not the same.

 

The new Sonys are not "cheap" digital rangefinders...

[Paul J]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

True, but to be fair it was only the advent of digital that the omission of the advance lever occurred. So probably more a case of hindsight.

 

These are interesting points you raise about the EVF though. It seems such an after thought, this EVF. Looks like such a wart too.

[algrove]

So K-H that tells me an M is not in the picture for you at the moment.

 

Question about MR comment on LL that he uses a Metabones adapter for M glass. Anyone have an exact model in mind?

[Paul J]

D'ya know what Mitch. I find looking through an EVF like looking at ground glass. It "pre-flattens" for me, as glass did. TTL on my canon and RF on my Leica's now feel 'harder' to compose. It's too real, too 3D. Many say the upside down back to front nature of ground glass helps them compose as it (hopefully) abstracts the scene into balanced shapes and forms. I say the same is true of EVF. For me.

 

Further, many will (and do) scoff at the ability to "see" in B&W in an EVF. Feeling offended at the technological reduction of a craft they learnt the hard way - to see tone, not colour. Again, I don't care if you studied with Ansel Adams for 30 years at his side carrying his tripod - If tech can allow me to pre-visualise in B&W BECAUSE IT IS IN B&W - then I'll take that 30 year jump in education and move on with my part of the whole thing - the art, my art. Which people only see the end product of.

 

edit - it occurs to me that "upside down back to front" is perfectly achievable with software, in real time on the LCD or the EVF. The wonders of software! ;-)

 

Interesting and Well said. Ansel Adams and Pre-viz was more about getting the most out of the chemistry. Converting the ever changing real life tonality to the limited tonal space of film and wet processes.

[Paul J]

Back in the film days there were several excellent cheaper cameras that had the same "sensor" aka film that Leica had and took Leica lenses. I wonder why the cheap Bessa never sold in significant numbers....

 

True that. Though times have moved on now. Only time will tell, but it would be foolish for Leica to think that their survival in the past will mean their survival in the future for the same reasons. I wouldn't be willing to hedge my companies future on that, personally. I've learned particularly in the last couple years we seriously need to move with the times. They move so quickly and before you know it, it's too late.

[Paul J]

No need to feel sorry. The points he had raised are still valid. Like him I think it was a bad idea to shoehorn a full-frame sensor into something that is basically an APS-C system – understandable from a marketing perspective as Sony evidently wants to streamline their portfolio into a single system with a single mount, but a harebrained decision from a technical viewpoint.

 

Judging by the early samples I don't think it was a bad idea at all. If a camera only needs to be that small then why should it be any bigger?

[AlanG]

Leica makes great but expensive lenses. Now that cameras are so high res other manufacturers realize that people will spend that much for better lenses and there is getting to be competition in the higher end lens market too. These new Sony lenses are fairly expensive, Nikon just announced a $1700 58 f1.4 and Zeiss has a new $4000 55 1.4.

 

After using Canon's 24 and 17 TSE lenses for several years, I have no doubt that Canon, and perhaps others, can make any kind of lens they want (within reason) as long as they can charge enough for it. So Leica will be getting squeezed on the lens side also.

 

Fortunately for Leica, their financial model does not seem to be based on having to significantly increase volume. But falling behind technologically has got to hurt them long term. Jony Ives may be fiddling while Rome burns. But competing with Sony's technology may be impossible even if they want to. And I don't know how far the Leica mystique can carry them. The new and recent Sony offerings across the board put major pressure on every segment in Leica's lineup.

[AlanG]

I just looked at the rear element of my 17mm TSE and it is pretty small and placed quite far from the sensor.

[previlo]

Back in the film days there were several excellent cheaper cameras that had the same "sensor" aka film that Leica had and took Leica lenses. I wonder why the cheap Bessa never sold in significant numbers....

 

Well pretty simple, because other film alternatives (i.e.Leica) were not selling in significant numbers as well...the range finder concept was never ever a mass market phenomena compared to SLRs, or?

[rob_w]

For years it was almost a monthly ritual that somebody posted about Sony or Fuji releasing a Leica killer "soon" ...

 

I have been a Leica user for precisely 40 years as of last August. Predictions of doom have been a monthly occurence for all of those 40 years ... the same chorus of complaints over and over again. Nevertheless Leica has survived in various incarnations for nearly a 100 years. Only a handful of companies in the world can claim that longevity. Leica survived the transition to digital when giants failed. I don't think we need to worry too much about them doing the wrong thing.

 

Not so long ago the NEX 7 was going to be a Leica killer. It wasn't, and for reasons that will apply this time as well.

 

I am not knocking Sony and I too like the look of their latest products. My "imaginary camera bag" would have room for two or three of them. I'm just saying Leica have proved to be much more resilient, perhaps most of all because they grasp the essence of what photographers want and others get close but struggle to get it exactly right.

[mirekti]

I find looking through an EVF like looking at ground glass. It "pre-flattens" for me, as glass did. TTL on my canon and RF on my Leica's now feel 'harder' to compose. It's too real, too 3D. Many say the upside down back to front nature of ground glass helps them compose as it (hopefully) abstracts the scene into balanced shapes and forms. I say the same is true of EVF. For me.

 

Further, many will (and do) scoff at the ability to "see" in B&W in an EVF.

 

Which is why I really started to enjoy the rangefinder with the optical viewfinder.

I remember when I had Canicon I would have put a camera to my face and wondered around, looking at through the viewfinder to get some interesting shot.

Nowdays, I just look around, try to imagine what the scene would look like given the lens on my camera and only when I get the idea I bring the camera to my face.

I feel free!!!

...yet again, I'm pure hobbyist, so my opinion might not count.

[mjh]

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

I cannot find a picture taken with the Leica 24 mm on that page; the example with the Zeiss 18 mm does show some red on the left side although it is hard to judge a picture such as this. We will see. My points stand; Sony may have found a way to make their sensor more tolerant against large incident angles but so far there are no claims that they did.

[Photoskeptic]

For all those who think the new Sony is going to be good to go with M WA glass: (this is from The Online Photographer)

 

"I put my Zeiss ZM 21mm ƒ/2.8 on the A7r we have here [Luke works at Imaging-Resource —Ed.]. I'm sad to report that color shifts were severe and covered most of the frame. There was also severe darkening of the image away from the center, way too much to simply call vignetting. I chose this lens carefully, based on the experience of other users, to avoid this problem with my early NEX cameras. It worked well, with visible but very minor color shifts and vignetting. It stayed glued on my NEX-3 for years. Well, I just saved myself a couple grand."

[k-hawinkler]

For all those who think the new Sony is going to be good to go with M WA glass: (this is from The Online Photographer)

 

"I put my Zeiss ZM 21mm ƒ/2.8 on the A7r we have here [Luke works at Imaging-Resource —Ed.]. I'm sad to report that color shifts were severe and covered most of the frame. There was also severe darkening of the image away from the center, way too much to simply call vignetting. I chose this lens carefully, based on the experience of other users, to avoid this problem with my early NEX cameras. It worked well, with visible but very minor color shifts and vignetting. It stayed glued on my NEX-3 for years. Well, I just saved myself a couple grand."

 

 

Could you please provide a link to the source?

Thanks.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[AlanG]

I cannot find a picture taken with the Leica 24 mm on that page; the example with the Zeiss 18 mm does show some red on the left side although it is hard to judge a picture such as this. We will see. My points stand; Sony may have found a way to make their sensor more tolerant against large incident angles but so far there are no claims that they did.

 

I can't say if Sony is successful at making these lenses work but here is what they claim on their web site:

-------------------------------------

 

Gapless On-chip Lens Design

 

Every gapless on-chip lens (OCL) is designed and positioned to cover every pixel and eliminate the spaces between the micro-lenses to collect significantly more light. Moreover, each on-chip lens is optimally positioned depending on its location to accommodate the sharper angle of light entering the periphery, which is caused by larger sensor dimensions being teamed with the E-mount's short flange-back distance.

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!