algrove Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1461 Posted October 23, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Like DWBELL I am new to understanding Sony terminology. It seems if you want to use the a7R FF only, then FE lenses are the way to go. What is a quality adapter for R lenses. Is it a NEX-R adapter? Is NEX E mount? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 23, 2013 Posted October 23, 2013 Hi algrove, Take a look here The Sony A7 thread [Merged]. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
colonel Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1462 Posted October 23, 2013 Alpha FF lenses should work fine with the sony adaptor. It gives a rich sony and Minolta current and past history to draw on Assuming they are up to the scrutiny of 36mp ...... Interesting that the 24mp M240 sensor has already revealed some flaws in some previously highly though of Leica lenses Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1463 Posted October 23, 2013 Its tests on Photozone don't come out very well. perhaps because its not so good at nearer distances? If it really is that good at 'landscape' distances it might suit me well, not so big and heavy as the f/2 Gerry That is correct. Photozone uses a standard resolution target, which with a 25mm lens, has to be shot really up close. Ironically, if you look at their mid and long distance sample shots, they all look very sharp in the corners. It's also interesting that at close range, the reason for the lens getting bad reviews on planar targets is its field curvature. This means that you can get perfectly sharp Images of your subject anywhere around the frame, but the field of sharpness is curved not flat, which actually helps in subject separation and gives a three dimensional rendering. The only gripe I had with it is the swirly bokeh wide open but some people actually like that (I believe many older cron lenses have this swirly bokeh). Btw, the 25/2 is optimized for medium and close range where it has a very flat field. However at landscape distances, it seems that the extreme corners never sharpen up completely even well stopped down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1464 Posted October 23, 2013 i just googled it and it is an F mount lense Thanks. I was referring to this lens: Sonnar T* E 1,8/24 ZA | ZEISS International At the beginning of the video clip, referred to by dwbell, I believe one can actually see both lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1465 Posted October 23, 2013 Availability......and more! http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2240799&postcount=147 Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglou Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1466 Posted October 23, 2013 " Alas, the decision makers at Leica are not smart enough to make such a camera " This commentary seems presomptuous, if only Leica was upgrading the evf quality and refresh rate of its m240, it would without any doubt be the camera i would have choosen instead of the Sony. I still hope they will do that without unreasonable delays. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
naturephoto1 Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1467 Posted October 23, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) " Alas, the decision makers at Leica are not smart enough to make such a camera " This commentary seems presomptuous, if only Leica was upgrading the evf quality and refresh rate of its m240, it would without any doubt be the camera i would have choosen instead of the Sony. I still hope they will do that without unreasonable delays. Unfortunately Leica did not have the foresight for the M240 to include the ability to scroll for the EVF focus points and has a limited longest shutter speed of up to only 60 seconds on some ISOs. Other ISOs considerably shorter. Leica tends to view the M cameras as a fast, nervous, handheld machine that is only seldom used on a tripod. Rich Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglou Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1468 Posted October 23, 2013 I think the ability to underline in red what is in focus anywhere in the field addresses your point, no ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1469 Posted October 23, 2013 Rich When will you be able to give any insights based on the next few days? Thanks. Lou Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
naturephoto1 Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1470 Posted October 23, 2013 Rich When will you be able to give any insights based on the next few days? Thanks. Lou Hi Lou, Will be going to PhotoPlus tomorrow. Show opens at 10:00AM. There will be a lot of walking for sure. I am not sure if I will stay till closing at 5:00PM. I will probably get home too late to check back in tomorrow, But, I expect to fill everyone in on Friday. If possible and I have been able to mount the lenses and insert a memory card I can also upload some images. I think the ability to underline in red what is in focus anywhere in the field addresses your point, no ? It is too late for me to try to underline in red since I can no longer update my post. But for me at least 2 major flaws in the M240 are not having the ability to adjust the focus point (with R cameras we could focus on the screen anywhere and the M240 requires the purchase of the EVF) and the inability to have exposures longer than 60 seconds are major obstacles. Having to use the EVF installed in the hot shoe of the camera precludes the usage of the camera for flash (unless you purchase the separate Multifunctional Grip which offers a 2nd hot shoe), Additionally, the M240 only offers a mechanical cable release unless you add the Multifunctional Grip which offers the capability of using an electronic release. And of course there is the inconvenience of removing the bottom cover of the camera in order to change batteries and memory cards. This really is an issue for a tripod mounted camera and could result in the photographer having to recompose their image. Rich Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1471 Posted October 23, 2013 Until she has black outs or there's so much lag it starts to feel unauthentic..... Note: That's why I wrote, "... most of the time.:rolleyes:" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1472 Posted October 23, 2013 Yes, I'm not sure what the problem with the lenses seems to be. The 35/F2.8 looks like it will be a superb lens. It's probably a superb lens, but a lot of lenses start to be superb at f2.8. I also understand that just because it isn't a f1.4 aperture doesn't mean it won't be superb. But, for me, I would never call a 2.8 spectacular, or a lens to dream about. I could name about 5 lenses in that focal length that would be in a class of their own. They would include Zeiss, Canon, and Leica. I'm just saying that this Zeiss 35/2.8 that is coming out with the A7R, for me, isn't that interesting. Also, for me, I've already got a 35 cron a 35 lux and a M240 body to shoot them on. As far as image quality, it doesn't get much better (or any better) and it does not get any better as far as color is concerned. I'm looking for a small high quality AF camera. I have that in the RX1 at 35mm focal length, so again, this 2.8 Zeiss is of no interest. I am looking for something that would give me AF in the rest of the focals, especially a zoom 24-70'ish at f2.8. I don't see that in the lenses for the A7R, yet. Your millage may vary. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwbell Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1473 Posted October 23, 2013 I was wondering if the 2.8 'strategy' was because things get dodgy, in the corners say, at larger apertures? The 80:20 rule in terms of R&D required to solve a certain barrier? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 23, 2013 Share #1474 Posted October 23, 2013 I have nothing against Zeiss but the A7R is relevant enough to fit our 35/1.4 and 35/2 Leica M lenses hopefully. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted October 24, 2013 Share #1475 Posted October 24, 2013 Here are some pictures from the A7R and that non-spectacular Zeiss 35/2.8. Also, there is an example of the A 70-200 f2.8 my first result with A7r - Dyxum forums - Page 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thompsonkirk Posted October 24, 2013 Share #1476 Posted October 24, 2013 But they're painfully over-sharpened JPGs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted October 24, 2013 Share #1477 Posted October 24, 2013 But they're painfully over-sharpened JPGs. So much that the model seems slightly bearded !? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevelap Posted October 24, 2013 Share #1478 Posted October 24, 2013 I was wondering if the 2.8 'strategy' was because things get dodgy, in the corners say, at larger apertures? The 80:20 rule in terms of R&D required to solve a certain barrier? I wonder if it might also have something to do with size? If they make their FE AF/Stabilised FF lenses fast (say f/2 or faster), particularly the zooms, they risk losing the weight/bulk gains promised by a small mirrorless FF system. For example, I'm looking at the new wave of CSC's as DSLR alternatives, rather than Rangefinder replacements, so overall system size/weight reduction is a prime driver (sensor differences aside, this is where micro four-thirds systems such as the OMD still score highly). Having said that, an a7R with the the Zeiss FE 35/f2.8 and 24-70/f4 is looking very, very tempting. But then do I need 36mpx and gapless micro lenses, or do I prefer on-chip phase detect AF and if so is 24mpx enough? And how important is (the lack of) IBIS? Decisions, decisions......... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted October 24, 2013 Share #1479 Posted October 24, 2013 Here are some pictures from the A7R and that non-spectacular Zeiss 35/2.8. Yes, I think it will be a fantastic lens and I guess it will be 'better' (more uniformly sharp and with much less distortion) than my 35 Summilux FLE. Frankly, the Sony A7r and this lens tempts me greatly as a replacement for my default camera kit (M9P or MM +35 FLE) – it makes obvious financial sense, it looks the perfect size body and I suspect the Sony+35 will provide superior colour results to what I'm used to – but I imagine that I will find the overall package less satisfactory to use than my Leica M system. I've used virtually no other camera system for the last ten years or so and I just know that I will positively hate using an EVF (however state-of-the-art it is) nor will I appreciate the lack of direct manual controls for shutter speed and aperture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted October 24, 2013 Share #1480 Posted October 24, 2013 But they're painfully over-sharpened JPGs. Apparently they are not sharpened There are certainly no artefacts. It looks like pure detail to me Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.