Jump to content

The Sony A7 thread [Merged]


dmclalla

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I suppose that the A7r should tempt more the owners of R lenses than M lenses (as well as owners of Contax and/or Olympus OM lenses or any other type of old SLR lens).

The vast majority of M lens users normally wants to shoot with a rangefinder camera, which clearly the A7r isn't. And a used M9 is only marginally more expensive than the A7r, so even new M lens shooters should be more tempted by a proven rangefinder solution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
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

 

He says he used only in-camera sharpening of +1. I don't see artefacts but I'm no expert, and these are small images. They look impressively detailed to me. I agree, too sharp for a flattering portrait.

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose that the A7r should tempt more the owners of R lenses than M lenses (as well as owners of Contax and/or Olympus OM lenses or any other type of old SLR lens).

The vast majority of M lens users normally wants to shoot with a rangefinder camera, which clearly the A7r isn't. And a used M9 is only marginally more expensive than the A7r, so even new M lens shooters should be more tempted by a proven rangefinder solution.

Aside from Elmarit 135, R lenses are significantly bulkier than their M counterparts though. Would be fun to carry an A7R with small Summicrons like 35/2 asph and 75/2 asph in a tiny case like the Leica Combi 14825...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some pictures from the A7R and that non-spectacular Zeiss 35/2.8. :o

 

Also, there is an example of the A 70-200 f2.8

 

my first result with A7r - Dyxum forums - Page 1

 

Wow, this looks interesting and promising. Unsure why Sony feels the need for so much sharpening on the jpgs. Perhaps the photographer didn't use Bicubic smoothing when resizing the pics.

 

I'm keen to see the RAW files without sharpening, I have a feeling they are going to look superb.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

Detail, yes. Just a quick look but I can't see much in the way of artefacts, a little, perhaps. But they are very, unnaturally, over sharpened. It's quite extreme and ugly really.

 

EDIT - there are some artefacts there which is not surprising given the level of sharpening.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, this looks interesting and promising. Unsure why Sony feels the need for so much sharpening on the jpgs. Perhaps the photographer didn't use Bicubic smoothing when resizing the pics.

 

I'm keen to see the RAW files without sharpening, I have a feeling they are going to look superb.

 

To find some RAW files and download the SONY "image data converter ver. 4" to open the RAWs:

 

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/page/4/

in the page of "A7/A7r Raw files shot with new Zeiss FE lenses" , October 19, 2013

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from Elmarit 135, R lenses are significantly bulkier than their M counterparts though. Would be fun to carry an A7R with small Summicrons like 35/2 asph and 75/2 asph in a tiny case like the Leica Combi 14825...

 

Are you talking yourself into getting one perhaps?

Link to post
Share on other sites

... artefacts?

Pete

 

As an example, this portion of the first portrait looks rather artificial, sterile and drawing-like for my eyes, with random, digital structures on the skin (upper, right corner) and on/near the cheek hairs. The ear has also a plastic appearance. So I agree, the jpgs have gone through too strong sharpening for my taste. [hopefully its not too criminal to post a portion of one of the photos being discussed...].

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

Are you talking yourself into getting one perhaps?

If it works fine with 28 or even 35 to 90mm M lenses yes why not. Won't be the digital CL of my dreams but a small beast like that is tempting indeed provided its shutter noise is not too loud though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some pictures from the A7R and that non-spectacular Zeiss 35/2.8. :o

 

Also, there is an example of the A 70-200 f2.8

 

my first result with A7r - Dyxum forums - Page 1

 

Well, it warrants a try based on what I see here. Too sharp-get real! One can always soften up portraits, but imagine landscapes.

 

Sure hope R lenses work and possibly M. Then I know what I will do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As an example, this portion of the first portrait looks rather artificial, sterile and drawing-like for my eyes, with random, digital structures on the skin (upper, right corner) and on/near the cheek hairs. The ear has also a plastic appearance. So I agree, the jpgs have gone through too strong sharpening for my taste. [hopefully its not too criminal to post a portion of one of the photos being discussed...].

 

I see. I thought she was just wearing too much makeup.

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

As an example, this portion of the first portrait looks rather artificial, sterile and drawing-like for my eyes, with random, digital structures on the skin (upper, right corner) and on/near the cheek hairs. The ear has also a plastic appearance. So I agree, the jpgs have gone through too strong sharpening for my taste. [hopefully its not too criminal to post a portion of one of the photos being discussed...].

 

I just see her skin to be honest

It looks very summilux ASPHish

Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to update your monitor perhaps? :cool:

 

I have a Dell U2713H (colour matched) which was an upgrade I purchased to replace my 27" Apple - a great monitor but not awesome like the Dell.

 

Perhaps the sharpening+1 in camera is perturbing you. I can assure you that adding sharping in an M9 and M240 makes a bigger mess from what I have seen.

This is extremely well controlled for in camera sharpening.

 

Its all nit picking, the results are superb

If we had gone on early M240 pictures then no one would have bought that camera!

 

Lets wait for Sean and others to give us the low down. Alternatively I might get one in my own hands to do my own testing. Who knows what'll happen first ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but those pics are among the worst examples of over sharpening i've ever seen out of sans AA filter cameras so far. I assume that the JPG format and the +1 sharpening are the culprits but my interest for the little Sonys would stop immediately if what we see here were representative of their normal IQ in any way. YMMV.

I have a Dell U2713H (colour matched) which was an upgrade I purchased to replace my 27" Apple - a great monitor but not awesome like the Dell.

 

Perhaps the sharpening+1 in camera is perturbing you. I can assure you that adding sharping in an M9 and M240 makes a bigger mess from what I have seen.

This is extremely well controlled for in camera sharpening.

 

Its all nit picking, the results are superb

If we had gone on early M240 pictures then no one would have bought that camera!

 

Lets wait for Sean and others to give us the low down. Alternatively I might get one in my own hands to do my own testing. Who knows what'll happen first ;)

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...