Jump to content

The Sony A7 thread [Merged]


dmclalla

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Not sure I understand this comment - if I sell, it will be a brand new camera at a discount ...

 

Edit - I see it is available on eBay for USD 5,000!

 

Well, it won't be a brand new camera;)

This simply is not Leica and camera's resale value might be considerably lower. I just wanted to point out it might not be as easy to sell it with a reasonable small loss.

 

The only way this guy will sell the camera for $5000 is if you and me make a $5000 bet, and you purchase the camera to get those $5000 back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest polygamer
Well, I will continue to speak only for myself! :cool:

Hi, the pictures I have seen so far with the A7/R and M mount glass are not very convincing, for me at least.

 

I am a little disappointed, because I wanted another SONY to accompany my M9 and my NEXen.

 

With the SONY NEX-7 and UWW/WW M glass, I went through all of this before. After great hype, and expectations the trough of disappointment.

 

So, what to do?

 

With SONY NEX, the thing to do was and is:

 

Wait for the next NEX.

 

And with the SONY Alpha7/R ?

 

Well, after alpha comes beta.

 

So, beta will be better (hopefully)!

 

P.S.: The next NEX after the NEX-7 was the NEX-6. I have one, it has lens corrections (for rare cases), and works perfectly with my 21 Leica M mount lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like it. Thanks.

 

[ATTACH]409597[/ATTACH]

 

BTW the reddish tint in images 09 - 12 is easily corrected by setting Temperature to 4000 and Tint to -30 or something in that neighborhood.

I used the Adobe Standard Profile.

 

Sorry guys. See my head cold caveat of yesterday!

Think the computer went to sleep (as did I), will upload the missing two soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it won't be a brand new camera;)

This simply is not Leica and camera's resale value might be considerably lower. I just wanted to point out it might not be as easy to sell it with a reasonable small loss.

 

The only way this guy will sell the camera for $5000 is if you and me make a $5000 bet, and you purchase the camera to get those $5000 back.

 

Or we have a race. See who buys it first!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, the pictures I have seen so far with the A7/R and M mount glass are not very convincing, for me at least.

 

I'm not an UWA guy, 35 - 50 -75, but so far the pictures I've MADE (not seen) with the A7R and my M lenses of those focal lengths are astonishing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

File list is complete on Dropbox and names now reflect the actual file. :rolleyes:

Apologies for the errors.

 

Any thoughts / discussions on the set appreciated.

 

(Not for nothing, but my findings are almost exactly mirroring Steve Huffs. Including the other press people's difficulty in MF lens focus. It's a breeze!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

File list is complete on Dropbox and names now reflect the actual file. :rolleyes:

Apologies for the errors.

 

Any thoughts / discussions on the set appreciated.

 

 

Can you kindly post the original ARW files onto the Dropbox?

 

I would like to see how well Sony' "Image Data Converter" treats its RAW file.

 

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you kindly post the original ARW files onto the Dropbox?

 

I would like to see how well Sony' "Image Data Converter" treats its RAW file.

 

Thanks!

 

Yes, sorry Thomas. I did it late and with a head cold and have basically made a bit of a mess with the files.

 

What I proposed this morning to KH, who asked the same via pm, was that I shoot some daylight comparisons throughout the day and post those in unaltered format this evening.

 

I can redo the table top test at any time this weekend if required. Only takes half an hour.

 

Watch this space.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what`s the bottom line now from the early adopters. Are the A7® good enough with M 35mm and longer optics. And are they noticeably better than the M(9). Or should the A7® be used best with the (non-) existing native lenses?

 

Yes it's good enough with 35mm+, I like it a lot with the Zeiss 50 1.5 which I found impossible to master on the M9 because of the focus shift. Noticeably better than the M9 at low light, great for indoors in the UK. I understand the M240 is good for low light too, it would be much harder to decide between those two. If I lived in a sunnier climate I might not be so interested in it.

 

So far it looks like a keeper for me. I'll probably use it to bridge the gap between the M9p and future M.

 

I don't like the in camera white balance, everything looks too cold to me. Build quality and looks are a fraction of the M9p like the price. Shooting on a tripod the detail is incredible. To me it's like a mini dslr as opposed to the simplicity of the M9.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shooting on a tripod the detail is incredible. To me it's like a mini dslr as opposed to the simplicity of the M9.

 

Yes! Exactly. And my framework is that I'm only at Leica because there was no mini DSLR at the time (M9).

 

If you want RF shoot Leica M. We're getting to the point where that's the only distinguishing feature. Not to belittle it, if it's important to someone's shooting style then that's none of my business.

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...