The Sony A7 thread [Merged]

[Borbarad]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well thanks for the kind words (and I didn't know that Leica used my shots at Photokina )

 

Oh ....interestingly.

 

They had box with a selection of A3 Monochrom Prints which included your name at bottom.... and of course the M Monochrom with the 50mm APO for test shots (bad idea to test one...)

 

B

[naturephoto1]

Hi Rich

I don't think anyone could possibly disagree with this (I certainly don't). The A7r is clearly going to be an excellent solution for R lenses (better than the M240). The only sad thing to my mind is the failure to include Image Stabilisation. Not just R lenses, but all the excellent Contax / Zeiss lenses, and the manual focus Zeiss lenses too. Just not convinced about M lenses.

 

We seem to be back on topic, sorry for my part in the diversion

 

Hi Jono,

 

Thank you. I appreciate about the lack of image stabilization. I have to decide if I go forward with the Pre-order purchase of the A7r or wait for the larger and more "professional" camera that is anticipated to include IBIS. But, as it is the A7 and A7r cameras are probably about as small as the digital FF cameras with interchangeable lenses can be built at this time. I do not believe that IBIS could be made to fit into a camera of this size. The IBIS included in the Sony A99 would suggest this, it is huge. Also for myself, I probably use a tripod for over 90% of my work due to consistency of composition and bracketing, etc so I am not so sure how much I would lose without IBIS. But, I come from a multi-format background of Leica R, Medium Format (primarily Mamiya 7II), and 4" X 5" cameras.

 

But there may be an announcement from Sony as early as January for a model with IBIS but then the questions of size, weight, time to release, and cost come into play.

 

Rich

[georg]

Let's see how the A7r handles shorter WA-designs (M-lenses <<50mm), we are not talking coloration but loss of detail - impossible to fix in post. I had the very same issues with the smaller NEX-7.

 

Regarding noise: because people tend to rely on DXO-based reports, here is a simple 3200ASA 100%-crop with similar exposure, color temperature and the very same processing in LR5.2 without NR.

 

Upper half, lower half - which one is M240, which one D600 (same as A7)?

 

CMOSIS/STmicro does not use some outdated 1st gen technology - regarding semiconductor production technology, quite the opposite is true. Sensor performance is not the reason to switch to Sony. But I'm glad that FF-Evil finally becomes true, it might just not be the ideal solution for everyone!

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!

[Peter H]

Hi Rich

......... The A7r is clearly going to be an excellent solution for R lenses (better than the M240). .........

 

But not always.

 

I only have two R lenses which I use far less often than my M lenses, but when I do need them, nothing else I own will do. With Novoflex adapters attached, they are completely interchangeable with my M lenses, meaning that I only have to carry one body with the advantage not only of weight and room in the bag, but also that all settings, the way I'm working and so on all remain completely unaffected by a simple change of lens, M to R and back again.

 

So, if you are predominantly an M-camera user who wants to use R lenses as though they were M lenses, the Sony is not much of a solution. If, however, you want another non-rangefinder but up-to-date digital camera to replace your R body, the A7/7R may well be the optimum solution.

[k-hawinkler]

A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses - FM Forums

 

Page 20 and 21 offer some real insights!

It's becoming much clearer how lens design and sensor structure interact, especially for RF lenses.

Fascinating.

[k-hawinkler]

A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses - FM Forums, Quote:

 

"Removal of the AA filter will likely have a greater effect on image smearing than color shift.

Here's the link to the Zeiss paper Michael mentioned. See page 12, points 2 and 3.

 

http://blogs.zeiss.com/photo/en/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/en_CLB41_Nasse_LensNames_Distagon.pdf"

[dwbell]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And at the same time the designed for A7 lenses look like they're not just 'cheap primes' after all. This thought brings about the unmentionable. So I won't mention it.

 

Edit - fascinating how in other parts of the internet people are getting prickly about 'their' SLRs being challenged!

[Lightwrangler]

I'm sorry, I must have been asleep under a rock somewhere - where was the A7r predicted to be worse, by whom, and based on what? […] I'm still waiting to see a single image taken with a Leica wide (21 Summilux or 28 Summicron would be great) with the A7r. If I've missed it, can someone point me in the right direction?

 

I don't see a single reason why a 36MP sensor should cure corner smear - that is heavily present in those samples provided by Ron Scheffler - better then a 24MP sensor?

 

Please have a look at Ron's samples yourself. There are even some taken with a 21 Lux and 28 Cron.

 

Mike

[CaptZoom]

I don't see a single reason why a 36MP sensor should cure corner smear - that is heavily present in those samples provided by Ron Scheffler - better then a 24MP sensor?

 

Please have a look at Ron's samples yourself. There are even some taken with a 21 Lux and 28 Cron.

 

Mike

 

It's not the MP but rather the micro-lens setup on the 36MP sensor that has everyone's curiosity peaked.

[AlanG]

I don't see a single reason why a 36MP sensor should cure corner smear - that is heavily present in those samples provided by Ron Scheffler - better then a 24MP sensor?

 

Please have a look at Ron's samples yourself. There are even some taken with a 21 Lux and 28 Cron.

 

Mike

 

You may not see a reason. But since the A7R uses a different sensor that incorporates gapless angled micro lenses and does not have an AA filter, one can also say there might be a reason or two. We'll have to see.

[jonoslack]

 

So, if you are predominantly an M-camera user who wants to use R lenses as though they were M lenses, the Sony is not much of a solution. If, however, you want another non-rangefinder but up-to-date digital camera to replace your R body, the A7/7R may well be the optimum solution.

 

Hi Peter

Quite agree, and this is my situation. I use the 35-70 zoom and the 60 elmarit, and just occasionally the 80-200.

[Paul J]

[naturephoto1]

Regardless of outcome of using the Sony A7 and A7r cameras with WA M lenses, they have certainly stirred the pot and created a tremendous amount interest in Mirrorless cameras (particularly FF) all over the internet.

 

It will be interesting as many of us here and elsewhere are watching and waiting on the the actual performance of the A7r cameras with the RF WA lenses.

 

Rich

[k-hawinkler]

 

 

The uploader has not made this video available in your country.

 

Sorry about that.

[Lightwrangler]

You may not see a reason. But since the A7R uses a different sensor that incorporates gapless angled micro lenses and does not have an AA filter, one can also say there might be a reason or two. We'll have to see.

 

Until now it's just marketing yadda yadda. Leica taught me to not take this too seriously ;-)

 

But yes - we will see.

 

Mike

[k-hawinkler]

Until now it's just marketing yadda yadda. Leica taught me to not take this too seriously ;-)

 

But yes - we will see.

 

Mike

 

 

Well, why don't you have a look at the ZEISS paper?

[AlanG]

Until now it's just marketing yadda yadda. Leica taught me to not take this too seriously ;-)

 

But yes - we will see.

 

Mike

 

I don't know what you are getting at regarding marketing. Sony is merely saying that the A7R has no AA filter with a different kind of microlens to improve performance of some current and future E mount lenses. They didn't promise anyone it was ideal for M wide angle lenses as far as I know. But leaving the microlenses aside, my guess is that some corner smearing could be reduced by the elimination of an AA filter... as previously noted.

[Lightwrangler]

Well, why don't you have a look at the ZEISS paper?

 

I did, thanks for providing the link.

 

Still, from what I see in Ron's pictures the corner smearing seems to be way too severe to just be caused by thick filter plates over the sensor. I would be surprised a simple lack of lowpass filter would heal the corner weakness completely. But of course it's just deduction from my side. The truth will be in the pictures we hopefully will see soon.

 

As for the gapless microlenses I am sure it helps for increasing light yield, but as for helping with incident angles I am not so sure.

 

Mike

[Lightwrangler]

I don't know what you are getting at. Sony is merely saying that the A7R has no AA filter with a different kind of microlens to improve performance of some current and future E mount lenses. They didn't promise anyone it was ideal for M wide angle lenses as far as I know.

 

Of course they didn't, you're absolutely right.

 

It's just some people here seem to hope for the slightly different sensor design of the A7r to help with the severe problems the A7 is showing with third-party-lenses. And I doubt it for the reason you state: Sony does not care for lenses of other manufacturers.

 

Mike

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[CheshireCat]

My car does 160mph but my average speed since I bought it is 24mph

 

Makes sense, but a little "h" makes a big difference here.

"Hitting" a subject at 160 mp is only going to make it look better.