The Sony A7 thread [Merged]

[3D-Kraft.com]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Have you seen this? Read to the end.

 

Ultra Wide Angle M-Mount Lenses THAT WORK On Sony A7R

Interesting findings on the WATE... Hum... But me, as owner of a 21 2,8 asph and a cv 15 have little doubt about the alternative of buying a wate and buying a A7r or buying a M240 and enjoy my glass.

 

Buying the A7R + used WATE is cheaper than plain M240 body. Afterwards you can think about selling the CV 15 and the 21mm 2.8 ASPH and have some additional change for further new lenses outside the 16-21mm range (that is finally covered by the WATE). Just a thought...

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[dierk]

I made a test with my new WATE Tri-Elmar 16-18-21 on the NEX-6

As I had lots of color edges with CV12, Super-Elmar18 and 21 this looks very promising.

LR5 default settings, no other PP

click for larger image

 

dierk

[algrove]

Sure like the images shot with the a7r +28/2 on these sites.

 

A7R同M240有得鍊嗎？全港首個A/B test!(新增VM15圖比較紅閘問題) - 第4頁 - 討論區 - M-Classic - Powered by Discuz!

 

and

 

Comparison of Leica M240 & Sony A7 & Sony A7R - a set on Flickr

[NJH]

Doesn't look too bad does it. Despite the type of test being a bit ad-hoc the cameras output there are near enough to each other such that the A7R is not obviously any worse with either of those lenses. Might even be a bit better .

 

Still though after all these posts and test shots done by various people I for one still don't know 1) which is better with M lenses A7 or A7R 2) Is either good enough for a non M240 owner to go the Sony route rather than saving up for another digital M body. My money is staying firmly in my pocket for now.

[k-hawinkler]

Sure like the images shot with the a7r +28/2 on these sites.

 

A7R同M240有得鍊嗎？全港首個A/B test!(新增VM15圖比較紅閘問題) - 第4頁 - 討論區 - M-Classic - Powered by Discuz!

 

and

 

Comparison of Leica M240 & Sony A7 & Sony A7R - a set on Flickr

 

 

Thanks Lou. Forgetting about color for now to me the A7R images look sharper.

What do you think? I wonder if they focused the M240 correctly though.

I believe my Summicron 28/2 is sharper at f/2.

[woorob]

I agree that the Sony image looks sharper (on these JPEGs) but it doesn't appear to me that the Leica picture was properly focused, either.

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It's often like that, i wonder why. Difficult to believe pics like that. To what extent have they been tweaked in PP? They are often under/over sharpened and how is it that i saw a lot of vignetting on a Summicron 35/2 asph image, the link to it being curiously broken now, and just a little vignetting out of a Summicron 28/2 i spite of its worst light fall-off performance, both at f/2? Can't wait to read a review from trusty people like Sean Reid and others.

[naturephoto1]

The A7 may have offset microlenses:

 

Sony A7 has “sort of” offset microlenses. | sonyalpharumors

 

Debunking a misconception: Sony A7 microlenses ARE offset

 

Rich

[algrove]

Thanks Lou. Forgetting about color for now to me the A7R images look sharper.

What do you think? I wonder if they focused the M240 correctly though.

I believe my Summicron 28/2 is sharper at f/2.

 

The eye brow sections definitely give my nod to the Sony, but like a few have said who knows what was done with the files and how well focused the images. When I get mine I will know without outside influence and not with jpeg, but RAW if LR has a profile in December. I do not know Sony that well, but perhaps its in-camera jpeg sharpening took over here.

[steveclem]

So, at the risk of admitting my laziness regarding the 100+ pages for this thread, would the A7 be better than the A7r for 35mm SLR lenses in your opinion gentlemen?

I'm currently using an Epson for M mount 50mm and under but have a fair few other,longer manual focus slr lenses waiting for the day of digital resurrection to arrive.

I read the blurb but most of it goes over my head, I'm a sort of look and see what the result is kind of opinion maker.

I wanted to like the Nikon but the disparity in prices burst my bubble and it just looks so cluttered. So much for simplicity though to be fair, it wasn't touted as such,but I digress...

[naturephoto1]

So, at the risk of admitting my laziness regarding the 100+ pages for this thread, would the A7 be better than the A7r for 35mm SLR lenses in your opinion gentlemen?

I'm currently using an Epson for M mount 50mm and under but have a fair few other,longer manual focus slr lenses waiting for the day of digital resurrection to arrive.

I read the blurb but most of it goes over my head, I'm a sort of look and see what the result is kind of opinion maker.

I wanted to like the Nikon but the disparity in prices burst my bubble and it just looks so cluttered. So much for simplicity though to be fair, it wasn't touted as such,but I digress...

 

Though we are still waiting for more tests, at this point it is beginning to look like the A7 will play nicely (or nicer) with more WA RF Leica and other M mount lenses than the A7r. That includes more 35mm WA RF Leica lenses.

 

However, unlike most of you looking to use all or most of your WA RF M lenses, I am looking for a better, more high resolving camera that I can use with my R lenses. At this point I only have the Minolta CLE MC 40mm f2 M-Rokkor lens as my only M mount lens. I have not made the investment into the WA M lenses that many of you have, but I am hoping to find some M lenses particularly in the 28mm and the 21mm focal lengths to work well with the A7r which is my camera choice.

 

Rich

[naturephoto1]

We can now work RAW files from the Sony A7 and A7r files in both LR and Photoshop;

 

There is now a LR5.3RC and a Camera Raw 8.3:

 

Adobe releases Camera Raw 8.3 and Lightroom 5.3 release candidates: Digital Photography Review

 

Lightroom 5.3 RC now available on Adobe Labs

 

Rich

[algrove]

Though we are still waiting for more tests, at this point it is beginning to look like the A7 will play nicely (or nicer) with more WA RF Leica and other M mount lenses than the A7r. That includes more 35mm WA RF Leica lenses.

 

However, unlike most of you looking to use all or most of your WA RF M lenses, I am looking for a better, more high resolving camera that I can use with my R lenses. At this point I only have the Minolta CLE MC 40mm f2 M-Rokkor lens as my only M mount lens. I have not made the investment into the WA M lenses that many of you have, but I am hoping to find some M lenses particularly in the 28mm and the 21mm focal lengths to work well with the A7r which is my camera choice.

 

Rich

 

I cannot agree with your statement that the a7 might behave better with WA RF lenses than the a7r.

 

The WATE looked OK in a test last week and the 28/2 looks pretty good in the posting as of today. See my post #2005 above.

[k-hawinkler]

I cannot agree with your statement that the a7 might behave better with WA RF lenses than the a7r.

 

The WATE looked OK in a test last week and the 28/2 looks pretty good in the posting as of today. See my post #2005 above.

 

 

Lou,

 

Thanks. I would agree.

An awful lot also depends on how one processes the raw files!

[steveclem]

This might help demonstrate the possibilities and potential issues.

[250swb]

I get the sense that most of us are hoping that the A7R will work OK generally with WA lenses, not just a WATE, and not just a particular lens, but generally, the lenses that most people use, not ultra wides, just wides. And as such there still isn't much to show if the A7 or A7R is the better camera for Leica RF lenses.

 

All testers so far have 'gone off on one' either promoting something they found to work (and that then gets interpolated into the idea we should all run out and buy a WATE ), or the testers have been particularly abstruse and just not covered the common lenses at all, or without any workflow pattern in evidence to show results can be trusted.

 

Steve Huff for instance has made all sorts of warnings about the A7R and M fit lenses, then goes and publishes pictures that contradict the warnings, so perhaps he is at least being careful and not letting his wishes get ahead of proper tests. Either way, until I see pictures I trust, and there are NONE so far, I'm holding back ordering one or other body as a replacement for my M9.

 

Steve

[dwbell]

I get the sense that most of us are hoping that the A7R will work OK generally with WA lenses, not just a WATE, and not just a particular lens, but generally, the lenses that most people use, not ultra wides, just wides. And as such there still isn't much to show if the A7 or A7R is the better camera for Leica RF lenses.

 

All testers so far have 'gone off on one' either promoting something they found to work (and that then gets interpolated into the idea we should all run out and buy a WATE ), or the testers have been particularly abstruse and just not covered the common lenses at all, or without any workflow pattern in evidence to show results can be trusted.

 

Steve Huff for instance has made all sorts of warnings about the A7R and M fit lenses, then goes and publishes pictures that contradict the warnings, so perhaps he is at least being careful and not letting his wishes get ahead of proper tests. Either way, until I see pictures I trust, and there are NONE so far, I'm holding back ordering one or other body as a replacement for my M9.

 

Steve

 

Agree, gotta shoot with it to qualify it for yourself. Nov 19 and counting. A7R 35 cron, 50 lux, 75 cron. And A7R + 35 FE. Interested to see how this 'cheap' lens matches up both against the cron on the A7R but also against the cron on the M240.

[Mr_Jones]

My delivery date from Sony has come and gone. Does anyone have a good idea when they are supposed to start shipping in the UK?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[naturephoto1]

I cannot agree with your statement that the a7 might behave better with WA RF lenses than the a7r.

 

The WATE looked OK in a test last week and the 28/2 looks pretty good in the posting as of today. See my post #2005 above.

 

Lou,

 

If you look at what I said, I indicated that the A7 may "play nicely (or nicer) with more WA RF Leica and other M mount lenses than the A7r".

Rich

[}{B]

My delivery date from Sony has come and gone. Does anyone have a good idea when they are supposed to start shipping in the UK?

 

I have no firm news but I was asking about the A7 in a Jessops store a couple of days ago and their computer system seemed to show that they expected them to be in stock on November 25th. However the salesman said that date was only provisional and I should phone them nearer the time before making the trip again.