The Sony A7 thread [Merged]

[Jay B]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thomas,

In my case, the 21 / 2.8 asph is the main lens I'm concerned with, with the 35 / 2 asph a close second.

Thanks in advance!

[Advertisement]

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

[dwbell]

K.H, Okey, Kein Problem!

 

I'll post on Dropbox the RAW files of detailed corner for various Leica lenses at the wide open aperture.

 

You may show me from my collection which ones you will be most interested so that I make them as the priority.

 

M: WATE, 21/2.8 ASPH, 24/2.8 ASPH, 28/2.0 ASPH, 28/2.8, 28-35-50/4, 35/1.4 ASPH (not the FLE), 35/1.4 (pre ASPH), 35/2 ASPH, 50/1.4 (pre ASPH),50/2 (pre AA), 50/2.8 (the latest version), 75/1.4, 90/2 APO ASPH, 90/2.8, and 135/3.4 APO ASPH.

 

R: 21-35/3.5-4, 28/2.8, 35-70/4 (the latest version), 100/2.8 APO, and 180/3.4 APO.

 

Best Regards,

 

Thomas Chen

 

35/2 ASPH

[helged]

35/2 ASPH

 

+ WATE...

[gyoung]

Thomas,

In my case, the 21 / 2.8 asph is the main lens I'm concerned with, with the 35 / 2 asph a close second.

Thanks in advance!

 

Me too, those are my most used wide angle lenses and I would be like very much to use them

 

Gerry

[k-hawinkler]

K.H, Okey, Kein Problem!

 

I'll post on Dropbox the RAW files of detailed corner for various Leica lenses at the wide open aperture.

 

You may show me from my collection which ones you will be most interested so that I make them as the priority.

 

M: WATE, 21/2.8 ASPH, 24/2.8 ASPH, 28/2.0 ASPH, 28/2.8, 28-35-50/4, 35/1.4 ASPH (not the FLE), 35/1.4 (pre ASPH), 35/2 ASPH, 50/1.4 (pre ASPH),50/2 (pre AA), 50/2.8 (the latest version), 75/1.4, 90/2 APO ASPH, 90/2.8, and 135/3.4 APO ASPH.

 

R: 21-35/3.5-4, 28/2.8, 35-70/4 (the latest version), 100/2.8 APO, and 180/3.4 APO.

 

Best Regards,

 

Thomas Chen

 

 

Thanks Thomas, much apprecisted. You have an exquisite lens collection.

I would like to suggest you start with M lenses, widest lens first, that's the WATE, then systemstically work your way up as you have listed them.

Same with the R lenses.

f/5.6 or f/8 on tripod, base ISO would be terrific, correct exposure, maybe a little ETTR.

One would be particularly interested, aside from center performance, whether there is smearing in the corners or a color cast.

I also would like to suggest to make the unprocessed raw files available as you get them, once you have looked at them and found them properly done.

Then depending on your results as they develop one could focus more carefully on specific lenses.

 

Well you asked for a suggestion, but I don't want to burden you.

I also hope that other folks with a different lens collection will make such raw files available.

I expect my A7R to arrive in early December.

So, you are way ahead of me.

 

Good luck und vielen Dank.

[Thomas Chen]

WATE, 21/2.8 ASPH, and 35/2 ASPH. Okey!

[Thomas Chen]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

but I don't want to burden you.

I also hope that other folks with a different lens collection will make such raw files available.

I expect my A7R to arrive in early December.

So, you are way ahead of me.

 

Good luck und vielen Dank.

 

Vielen Dank feur die Antwort.

Alles Klar!

[k-hawinkler]

WATE, 21/2.8 ASPH, and 35/2 ASPH. Okey!

 

Perfect!

[Peter H]

I'd like to know your opinion on what seems to be a major flaw in the A7/7R that may prevent me from buying one.

 

I own an M, so the reasons why the A7R might be interesting are simply these:

 

1 - Higher resolution may be an advantage in a few situations.

 

2- A very effective autofocus system may be helpful in a some situations.

 

3- It is nice to think that there's a relatively low-cost way to have a second M-lens-compatible digital body that will perform as well as my M whilst also being lighter to carry.

 

This is the problem though: it seems that Sony have not been able to combine their most effective AF system with their highest resolution sensor, so the first two and the most important features on my list are incompatible, leaving me thinking, as we often have done with Leica releases, that this camera is a stepping-stone to one model that will offer a combination of the best features already in existence.

 

Is this a reasonable conclusion?

[Thomas Chen]

that this camera is a stepping-stone to one model that will offer a combination of the best features already in existence.

 

Is this a reasonable conclusion?

 

Peter, I agree with you. In fact, I prefer a 36 MP camera with phase detection focus and focus confirmation function (for manual focus), something like what a Pentax K5-IIs features.However,

 

1. the M240 I ordered is not yet delivered, maybe come in half a year later before the order be cancelled.

2. I only pay 1/4 of the price of M240 (price here is more expensive) to have a A7R including built-in EVF and hand grip.

3. The IQ of RAW and JPEG of A7R is no any inferior to that of M240, in my own eye.

4.I need a FF camera for my Leica lenses, only for Leica lenses although needed to be justified.

 

Therefore, I can afford running the risk of buying a A7R, and if not satified, wait for its successor.

[Peter H]

Thanks for the reply Thomas. I think what you say makes perfect sense for someone in your situation, and if I were still waiting for my M, I may well do the same as you.

 

 

But in my position I'm thinking: take a chance on an interim A7R or go for a good M6 for about half the price. That really is a tough one!

[wattsy]

I'm thinking: take a chance on an interim A7R or go for a good M6 for about half the price.

 

I'm not sure I understand the dilemma, Peter (assuming you are being serious). Presumably you have a photographic objective in mind (in which case I would have thought it was obvious whether an M6 or A7R was more appropriate) rather than you just want to spend some money on a camera of some sort?

[Peter H]

I'm not sure I understand the dilemma, Peter (assuming you are being serious). Presumably you have a photographic objective in mind (in which case I would have thought it was obvious whether an M6 or A7R was more appropriate) rather than you just want to spend some money on a camera of some sort?

 

 

 

I'm gratified that you rarely know whether I'm being serious.

 

Often these type of posts of mine are simply allowing thoughts that have arrived unbidden a little air while I consider them. The reactions are almost always more interesting than the original thoughts, so thank you for being so clear-thinking.

[wattsy]

so thank you for being so clear-thinking.

 

I wasn't trying to score points, Peter. Just thought the choice was a bit odd.

[Peter H]

The M6 part of it isn't an entirely serious decision. It's a separate idea for a different purpose but my wholly serious deliberations about the "relatively low-cost" A7R brought back to mind the relative virtues, both economic and creatively, of film and digital bodies, which I am still thinking about regularly.

[wattsy]

The M6 part of it isn't an entirely serious decision. It's a separate idea for a different purpose

 

The original M6 must be the most utilitarian (in the sense of being useful) and least pretentious of all Leica bodies (which is probably why I've never owned one).

[AlanG]

This is the problem though: it seems that Sony have not been able to combine their most effective AF system with their highest resolution sensor,...

 

It is possible for you to resolve this. Wait until the cameras are in stock at a local dealer and compare focus speed for yourself. The difference between the two may not be significant enough to you. I can't say I noticed any difference when handling the cameras next to each other at the photo show, but the A7 had the 28-70 and the A7r had the 35 and 55. You may find that for some of your photography that demands the fastest focus, especially with longer lenses, you are better off buying the EA-4 phase detect adapter and a couple of Alpha lenses. This will work the same on the A7 as it will on the A7r.

 

There are no longish FE lenses coming out until the 70-200. So if that is one that interests you, wait for it and try it on both cameras.

 

If you are trying to get an idea of what the PD sensors delivers, you could test out a Nex 6 with a 55-210 and try it with the PD turned on and then turned off. While the A7 and A7r both have faster AF processing than the Nex 6, maybe this will give you an idea of the performance difference that the PD sensor give.

[dwbell]

, you are better off buying the EA-4 phase detect adapter and a couple of Alpha lenses. This will work the same on the A7 as it will on the A7r.

 

Worth repeating in the A7 or A7R question. You can get the PDAF on the A7R, you can't get the 36mp Rez on the A7

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[dwbell]

Thanks Thomas, much apprecisted. You have an exquisite lens collection.

I would like to suggest you start with M lenses, widest lens first, that's the WATE, then systemstically work your way up as you have listed them.

Same with the R lenses.

f/5.6 or f/8 on tripod, base ISO would be terrific, correct exposure, maybe a little ETTR.

One would be particularly interested, aside from center performance, whether there is smearing in the corners or a color cast.

I also would like to suggest to make the unprocessed raw files available as you get them, once you have looked at them and found them properly done.

Then depending on your results as they develop one could focus more carefully on specific lenses.

 

Well you asked for a suggestion, but I don't want to burden you.

I also hope that other folks with a different lens collection will make such raw files available.

I expect my A7R to arrive in early December.

So, you are way ahead of me.

 

Good luck und vielen Dank.

 

Should he then make you a coffee?

[Jaybob]

As a adapted Leica lens on a Sony NEX user since 2010, I cant tell you how happy I am that this new one is full frame. I wont bore you with the wonders of peaking or MF assist or pretty amazing IQ. Without having an A7 my hands, my dilemma is I honestly think that I am going to prefer the offset viewfinder of the NEX 6 at the top left of the back of the camera. I think I still want my nose around the edge of the camera, especially a camera that small.

 

On the NEX 6, the "Finder/LCD Setting" can either be

 

"AUTO" (the screen on the back shuts off when your eye socket is over the accessory eye cup, on my face, it's sketchy when I use the camera vertically, the screen turns on for review and is on when it senses you don't have the camera to your face)

or "VIEWFINDER" (the monitor stays off)

or "LCD MONITOR". (the viewfinder stays off)

 

I shoot with mine exclusively MF, held up to my eye, and, surprise, review on the screen, so I keep it set on AUTO. However, if my right eyebrow doesn't cover the eye cup, or my eye backs away from the finder, the camera "senses" that I'm not using the finder and will switch it off and turn on the screen until I readjust my "face angle", something that usually happens at the most inopportune moment. With the A7's new form factor, your face is going to be at an angle leaning into it, (as opposed to being around the side of the camera), and UNLESS your nose is completely smooshed into your screen, (it needs to be, to focus...) this automatic switching may present even more of a problem. Again theory, because I haven't held one.

 

On the other hand, I'm looking forward to relearning all of my focal lengths. I had really gotten used to my Summicron 75, and Elmarit 135 and the Rokkor 42. Especially the Summicron.

 

PLUS there doesn't seem to be ANY excitement over it at all. I should be able to order one and have it right away.