Jump to content

The Sony A7 thread [Merged]


dmclalla

Recommended Posts

x
  • Replies 4.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Brian is contributing to a dpreview thread where he discusses using his Leica 24 (no problem at all) and Zeiss 18 M mount which had some darkening in the corners which he found very easy to fix with a C1 preset.

 

Will add link when found again, iPhone limited at the mo.

 

Lest we forget that my 35 mm cron (hardly wide!) had massive colour issues on my M9.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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).

 

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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."

 

On the other hand it is reported that it can be used quite well with the Voigtlander M 12mm lens, which is also a challenging lens to the sensor, check this link:

 

Sony A7&A7R 值待買咩鏡玩? - 吹水區 Chit Chat Area - Hong Kong Leica Fan Club - Powered by Discuz!

 

Though the setting in which these images were taken are not really a typical way this lens should be used, but in any case it seems to work with the Sony FF sensor. Maybe the Biogon lens design it's a bit of far stretch for it. According to the preliminary reports there should be some M lenses in the WA range that can work flawlessly on this camera, and maybe some of them will be troublesome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Special edition lovers, check out the extravagant full frame $10K mirrorless: Hassy Solar!

 

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!

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brian is contributing to a dpreview thread where he discusses using his Leica 24 (no problem at all) and Zeiss 18 M mount which had some darkening in the corners which he found very easy to fix with a C1 preset.

 

Will add link when found again, iPhone limited at the mo.

 

Lest we forget that my 35 mm cron (hardly wide!) had massive colour issues on my M9.

 

 

Well, certainly the M9 had issues, the M as well.

So, I would expect the A7R to face some challenges as well.

I am most interested in the performance of the WATE 16-18-21 on the A7R.

The WATE certainly did quite well on the NEX-7.

Even better on the NEX-5N.

 

I recall that 21, 28, 35 mm lenses and even the WATE had some color cast problems on the NEX-7 after the last firmware update.

Before that update the WATE appeared to be fine on my NEX-7.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's about adapters. Your specialist subject! :D

 

The Online Photographer: Two Reasons...

 

 

Thanks. Yes, I read that.

Roger Cicala's paper on adapters was really very interesting.

Basically he found that more or less most adapters degrade IQ.

 

In my experience the Novoflex adapters are a grade above the others I have.

They are the only ones where I can focus the APO-R 280/4 with a NEX camera, then switch adapter and camera with the M9 and another Novoflex adapter, and the lens is still in focus.

None of my other adapters are good enough for that trick.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the explanation, Michael.

 

Surely, what you say is a dumb idea with the E mount surely applies to the M mount? They seem very similar sizes, relative to the sensor.

 

Isn't that the whole challenge of technology - the same challenges that brought us such wonderful, but complex lens designs. There were so many very good technical reasons why Leics could not produce a full frame sensor in the M body form.

 

Even now, Leica has red edge problems with some lenses. I was heartened by that Zeiss 18mm image. I will be interested to try my 15mm ZM lens on the A7r (it has some red edge on my M9, but not on my Monochrom :-)

 

Cheers

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

This Sony camera was no surprise. I don't think I will be investing in any more Leica cameras. There is simply no justification for the premium. I love my M9, but the M(240) and the X Vario killed it for me.

 

I will wait for the Hermes M(240) with interest, but I will take some convincing this company is worth investing in further. I will cherish my Leica lenses, and may buy more, but their camera strategy needs a very serious rethink.

 

Sorry.

 

Well and succinctly said.

 

And perhaps even more profoundly relevant for the Leica S $20,000 SLR, although that's supposedly a different product category (and forum).

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

In your previous mail you said (about Ming Thein): "I guess he's being paid by certain people to write certain things". That is not just an opinion, that is an accusation, and an unfounded one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the explanation, Michael.

 

Surely, what you say is a dumb idea with the E mount surely applies to the M mount? They seem very similar sizes, relative to the sensor.

 

Isn't that the whole challenge of technology - the same challenges that brought us such wonderful, but complex lens designs. There were so many very good technical reasons why Leics could not produce a full frame sensor in the M body form.

 

Even now, Leica has red edge problems with some lenses. I was heartened by that Zeiss 18mm image. I will be interested to try my 15mm ZM lens on the A7r (it has some red edge on my M9, but not on my Monochrom :-)

 

Cheers

John

 

 

Fuji might have learned from this when defining their X mount?

Link to post
Share on other sites

RX1 and M240 RF Shooter's Perspective:

 

Plenty of discussion about this new Sony gizmo with more MPs and better whatnots. All interesting, of course, but for me it more than equally involves lenses. Specifically, there already exists such a fantastic collection of Leica M-lenses that are designed to perform optimally with the M's RF, haptic of the body, and design of the sensor that I'm not convinced if, I switch to the A7 as my primary camera I will be better off.

 

I know M-lenses will not work functionally anywhere near as well on the Sony A7 as they do on the M240. I suspect that M lenses may also perform optically better on the M240 as well, because of better edge color and sharpness. And, realistically there won't be much, if any, difference between the M240 and the A7 in print... and probably, little difference even with the A7R.

 

I've been down this Sony road earlier this year when I started shooting the wonderful Sony RX1. Many of you remember that I reported the RX1 as better than the M240, at first, anyway. As it turns out, after many months and thousands of comparison photos in LR (shot side by side of the same thing), they both produce great images. But, I still prefer the M240 color after all. It is just easier to work with in PP and the skin tones seem more natural, from my perspective. But, for the most part, toss a coin on image quality between these two.

 

But that is where the closeness of performance of these two cameras starts to diverge. They become such different functionally-specific cameras beyond their near indistinguishable image quality.

 

I understand that the new Sony A7 is a little different from the RX1, but they are very similar for this discussion. Both have about the same sensor and EVF. Both the A7 and the RX1 are ergonomically the same. Outside of the interchangeable lens feature on the A7, the RX1 is the closest camera in the wild to compare to.

 

Having used the RX1 with its Zeiss lens, I can attest to the problems that the RX1 has in manual focus. The Zeiss lens isn't designed to manually focus easily, and it isn't just a matter of having a nice big focus ring to easily grab. The focus by wire is somehow disconnected, vague and not designed well as a human-to-mechanical interface. Therefore, I would not choose these Sony cameras to focus lenses (Sony Zeiss) that were not designed initially as manual focus lenses, like the M series lenses are. Which is fine, by the way, because the RX1 and its Zeiss lens actually works well in AF mode, much to the contrary of what a lot of reviewers nitpick about. I assume the A7 will be even better. But, I would not use the A7 with Sony lenses in MF mode.

 

As far as all the interest in placing M-series lenses on the A7 goes, they are going to be somewhat difficult to focus. The only way to focus will be to use the EVF and focus peaking. Experience from the M240 and EVF shows us that this isn't going to work as well as the RF method except in very low light. The A7's superior EVF will help, but it won't overcome the inherent problem that the EVF has no other aid to focus except highlighting edge contrast and the visual confirmation of TTL DOF, which doesn't work well when stopped down.

 

Which brings us back to the M240 and its wonderful sensor and best in class lenses that work so well with the improved M RF. The clunky old M240 with a trove of M-system lenses, that will not be completely matched by Sony, in this decade anyway:), leaves us with a viable alternative in the M-system, still very much alive and competitive for those willing to spend the money.

 

In the end, what I discovered with my experience with the wonderful RX1 is that, given the choice, I always wanted to take the M240 along with me to shoot and not the RX1. It really wouldn't matter if I could have used my M lenses on the RX1, I still would want to shoot the M240, mainly because of the lenses and how well they work on the M.

 

It would be a very difficult choice for me to give up the M and all of the lenses to shoot a technically "better" A7 body with not so good Sony lens choices. Even if I used the A7 with the M lenses, I would still choose the M240 for the reasons mentioned above.

 

For me, the A7 is just an RX1 that would enable me replace the 35mm lens with other AF Zeiss lens. But, most of us have DSLRs with excellent zooms and tele's that AF already. And, smaller DSLR bodies are no doubt coming from Canon and Nikon to utilize their stable of excellent lenses. So, why jump to a new cool small system that doesn't yet have the lenses?

 

I'd just be careful abandoning the M240 (or DSLR) before the new kid (A7) has enough good lenses that will meet your creative needs and optical expectations. And, I'm not sure how many will be satisfied squinting out pictures with manual M-lenses on the A7. I mean really, other than smaller, what does the A7 have going for it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well written, considered piece Rick. Thanks.

 

I'll put both in the bag, and the winner will, er, win. I found myself shooting with the M240 so much in EVF mode, surprisingly, and there it's shortcomings started to irritate. In RF mode it's just killer. The A7r will either replace the canon, the Leica, both, or neither. We'll see.

 

I would expect (and already see in samples) a significant increase in Rez on the A7r which I believe I'll be able to transfer into print detail though. Contrary to your view.

Link to post
Share on other sites

RX1 and M240 RF Shooters Perspective:

 

The clunky old M240 with a trove of M-system lenses, that will not be completely matched by Sony, in this decade anyway:), leaves us with a viable alternative in the M-system, still very much alive and competitive for those willing to spend the money.

 

 

Well, just as a Rollex watch is competitive in comparison to a 10 EUR no-name-brand watch, if you have tons of money and don't know what to spend it on. But I would not think that this is enough for real glory.

 

Although it's true that for those who are greatly attracted by the rangefinder system won't find a substitute in these Sony FF cameras, but those satisfied enough with an EVF will not fork out more than double of the cost for a Leica M. Of course we will have to see how M lenses perform on Sony, but preliminary reports suggest that apart from Biogon design lenses most lenses will work fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just be careful abandoning the M240 before the new kid (A7) has enough good lenses that will meet your creative needs and optical expectations. And, I'm not sure how many will be satisfied squinting out pictures with manual M-lenses on the A7. I mean really, other than smaller, what does the A7 have going for it?

 

No M(240) to abandon, and I won't be selling my M9P anytime soon. I don't see the enthusiasm for the A7 as meaning that I will give up my M cameras - it fills a gap, and brings some fun to the party.

 

I similarly won't be buying any Sony lenses. I do take on your comments about focusing using focus peaking. I didn't have so much of a problem with the peaking system on the NEX-5n, but with its smaller sensor, it had a greater depth of field.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, just as a Rollex watch is competitive in comparison to a 10 EUR no-name-brand watch, if you have tons of money and don't know what to spend it on. But I would not think that this is enough for real glory.

 

I guess I don't understand your Rolex analogy. Isn't the Rolex an inferior time piece when strictly comparing performance to a ten dollar watch?

 

At this point in time the M240 is one of the top five FF sensors available and paired with its own lenses it technically outperforms (image wise) any other system at most all focal lengths. And, if we can't agree on that at every focal length etc., I think you get my point. If, you want all of this performance in a small system with this depth of exceptional lens choices, unfortunately it is going to cost you more than a ten dollar watch.

 

But, in the long run, I'm not sure that my foray down the Leica path has been any more expensive than changing formats (m4/3, 4/3, APS-c, FF 35, etc.) and systems and manufacturers and all the lenses and accessories that come along with that, every time something new and shinier comes along.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, the A7 is just an RX1 that I would be able to replace other AF Zeiss lens on.

 

And I think people should be reminded that this is Sony's venture into building a FF mirrorless camera with interchangeable Zeiss branded AF lenses. It's not Sony's venture into building a camera that can use Leica M mount lenses for people who already own or might be in the market for the M240.

 

If you look at it as such (and not as something for your Leica M lenses or as a M240 replacement), it becomes a different animal altogether and can be better judged for what it really is. And yes, if it can also use Leica lenses effectively and effortlessly, then that's certainly an extra plus (and which of course could mean those who feel the current M240 might not offer what they desire, that this could be a potential way to use some of those lenses that they already own.)

 

In the meantime this is an interesting FF mirrorless system camera with some decent Zeiss branded AF lenses and more coming (more are planned over the coming year and maybe sooner if sales are good.) And yes, I'm getting the A7R. But primarily because I get a big discount (spouse is with Sony Music Entertainment :)) The secondary reason is that perhaps I could utilize some of my M lenses on digital. But I'm also still a film user and am content with my Leica film M cameras.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Structurally, all Leica really has to do is modernize the M body in a way so that the entire rangefinder/viewfinder mechanism can be swapped for a great compact EVF. And speed up live view shooting so that it is responsive. Perhaps the RF will have to be electronically driven to accomplish this. (By simply converting the movement of the focus tracking wheel into a signal.) Otherwise by the time you add on an EVF, the camera will be too large for some to consider now that smaller FF cameras may be the wave of the future.

 

Any changes to the size and ergonomics are optional and anything they can do to keep up with the electronics of their competitors will be important no matter what kind of cameras they make.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...