steveclem Posted January 19, 2014 Share #4161 Posted January 19, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have owned the A7R (have you?) and liked it. Did you really? I got the wrong impression then.Did you not send it back? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 19, 2014 Posted January 19, 2014 Hi steveclem, Take a look here The Sony A7 thread [Merged]. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Rick Posted January 19, 2014 Share #4162 Posted January 19, 2014 Like I said, it is like a troll lightning rod, isn't it? Never ceases to amaze. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 19, 2014 Share #4163 Posted January 19, 2014 Hey RickLeica/Sony/Canon: Why do you like the M240 over the a7R so much. If you had kept the a7R longer maybe you would be calling yourself RickSony by now! Fun days aren't they. Regards, LouLeica LouSony LouCanon LouPhaseOne LouHasselblad V Used to be LouNikon, LouRicoh, LouPanasonic Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
imants Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4164 Posted January 20, 2014 Hi my name is R Leica and I am a Sony shooter, err Nikon .... no Leica err now how do I remove that tattoo I just completed presenting a workshop " The white rabbit becomes a thylacine" and there were a few of the sonys floating around with a lot of leica lenses. No great grumbles sure the usual touch of nit picking but professionalism shone through with great results Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4165 Posted January 20, 2014 Look at Sein Reid's site. He has ISO shots that show banding as low as 4000. (I suppose it could be the curtain? But, the luminance noise is horrible). Not as bad as the M240 and not as good as the A7R. Or, Check the A7R out for a weekend and become an expert. As far as M240 shutter vibration goes, I agree Lloyd reached a new level of "anal-ization." I repeated Digilloyd's experiment and found the opposite. I had less blur with LV. Even if there is shutter blur with the M240 it is almost impossible to detect (look at Lloyds test) compared to the terrible and completely unusable blur caused in some instances by the A7R's shutter. Also, with the M240 you have the option to shoot without LV and eliminate the shutter vibration if you are concerned about a possible, but not proven, issue. While there are issues with the A7R (like every camera), high ISO banding and noise isn't one of them. I subscribe to Reid's reviews, and recalled he favorably touted the high ISO performance of the A7R … so I went back a reread his review … perhaps you should do the same? BTW, I do not need to check out the A7R for "a weekend" as I own one and have already shot a number of jobs with it … including a 3 day shoot last week in Miami, in ambient lighting conditions where ISO 12,800 with a Noctilux only got me to 1/30 and 1/50 shutter. No banding. What was quite impressive is the DR and relative color retention of the Sony sensor where skin tones looked human even at 6400 and 12,800. I won't get into comparing it to the M240 which I had possession of for 2 weeks of steady shooting before returning. A rangefinder is a rangefinder, and never the twain shall meet. I get my rangefinder on with a M Monochrome, and will leave it at that. - Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4166 Posted January 20, 2014 Ok Mark, the A7R has the best high ISO, ever. Troll lightening rod for sure... You guys all come out. I still like the M240, sorry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
imants Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4167 Posted January 20, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Not about the camera it is the users that need to lift their game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4168 Posted January 20, 2014 Not about the camera it is the users that need to lift their game. Can we please get off of the personal attacks and get back to the inherent issues with the A7R and be a little more unbiased about the Sony A7R love fest? Sorry, if I report the problems with this camera and the unfortunate way Sony portrayed this camera as usable with RF lenses. I admit, I sure bought into the Sony misdirection of the fact that they had almost no system lenses of their own when it was launched, but RF lenses would work (see my posts of the Sony rep at the launch). This camera is not a professional camera no matter what the wedding photographers and others here want to tell you... sorry. I would never take this camera to a wedding or professional job and risk someone's most important day with a camera that has trouble with auto focus and has no real system lenses. Not to mention that the camera's shutter is so bad as to risk even 50mm lens blur. Why would you do this? Let's be real about this camera, ok? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4169 Posted January 20, 2014 You're using an awful lot of bandwidth here, Lightning Rod! If people like their Sonys, and they're happy with their results, your M240 will still work okay, won't it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4170 Posted January 20, 2014 You're using an awful lot of bandwidth here, Lightning Rod! If people like their Sonys, and they're happy with their results, your M240 will still work okay, won't it? Ok, sure. But, why on the Leica Forum where we talk about all of the issues of the M240 (I'm often the first to be critical) and someone mentions the issues with the A7R... everyone comes unglued and plays the Leica fanboy card against anyone who wants to discuss the problems with this A7R and the way Sony portrayed their camera as usable with Leica lenses? I just don't get why the usual Sony fanaboys here play the "I'm a professional" card which gets nowhere with me. I get the whole BS about someone shooting some black fabric under strong tungsten studio lights for a weekend with the M and then claiming that the color is a problem. We knew that a year ago when we saw Jono's images. And, I get the technical reasons why Leica has compromised the UV contamination for better edge performance at the loss of skin tones (read my early reports). I'm good with that and understand the clear reality of the M240. No BS here. But, can you explain why a camera like this Sony A7R gets a pass for all of the problems it seems to have? Remember, I owned the camera and got sucked into the RF lens hype from Sony. Then, I reported the problems I had with even my R-lenses. So, don't anyone try and blow BS passed me. I soooo get this camera. My M240 has nothing to do with the A7R. My M will work as it will work with all of its issues and strengths. But, please don't complain about my bandwidth when I add my experience with my A7R. I just find it interesting that I get called out for being the fanboy. I'm one of the first that bought into the concept of the A7R and the RX1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4171 Posted January 20, 2014 I'm not a Sony fan boy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4172 Posted January 20, 2014 I think that Rick is getting an unnecessarily tough time here. He's no Leica 'fanboy' despite his nom de plume and is an RX1® convert. He was a very excited early adopter of the A7R with cautiously high, but probably not unrealistic, hopes for the camera. RickSony then carefully tested it and based on his experience it did not work with his Leica equipment. His disappointment reflects that of many others for whom the camera is unlikely to become a part of their Leica M (±R) systems. I note that that John is also unsure of what to do with the A7R, and a number of others have already bought it and sold it on. I thank him again for being my A7R meatshield , crash test dummy , or whatever and for wearing the financial bruises that I may have otherwise suffered . As I've posted earlier, I redirected the funds I'd put aside for the Sony towards a 75 Summilux and I'm so glad I did! The Sony was not designed for we Leica users in mind although it was not an unreasonable expectation that it would do the job - problems with corners using M lenses, shutter vibration problems in some situations with long lenses, and a limited range of (excellent) Sony/Zeiss prime lenses. It can nevertheless give outstanding results with a variety of lenses - native Sony/Zeiss x 2, some Leica, and others. That doesn't mean the A7R system is a dud, just that it too has it's limitations and still needs to mature. Each of us find the system that works best for us weighing up the pros and cons - for me the Leica system is still the best - warts and all. Have a nice evening all . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
imants Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4173 Posted January 20, 2014 This camera is not a professional camera... agree it probably doesn't even get paid the basic wage maybe the camera has applied for social security. Anyway people I know who slug out the photographic game day in and day out and use the Sony seem to create images of a very high standard. Their experiences are very positive so I don't believe what you are on about Mr R Leica too much fan boy mentality on your behalf. Sure not all leica lenses work well on the sony but then one can use other lenses no hassles there. ps I don't own a sony and probably will not in the near future Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4174 Posted January 20, 2014 ..... Rick .....count me in too...... An A7r is not a suitable option as a 2nd M240 body ...... there are just too many issues using Leica lenses and trying to take photos in my normal style of work....... I don't want two seperate systems with completely different modes of usage and lenses .... and it took me a couple of weeks to realise that the two could not happily co-exist in my camera bag. Then it comes down to an either/or decision .... and in my hands the M produces consistently better images with a higher percentage of keepers than the Sony. I don't care if all the experts tell me it produces technically better files and has features that are wonderful ...... If I don't enjoy using it and I don't like the photos then it is dead in the water. That's the bottom line as far as I'm concerned .... and like Rick and a few others.....it has been relegated to the 'interesting, but not for me file.' Like Rick, I can't see the point of filling a page here of things I found deficient only to end up in a shouting match with those who like this little camera ..... I tried to like it.... but failed..... that's it ...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4175 Posted January 20, 2014 ...I thank him again for being my A7R meatshield , crash test dummy , or whatever and for wearing the financial bruises that I may have otherwise suffered... +1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piero Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4176 Posted January 20, 2014 ...But, can you explain why a camera like this Sony A7R gets a pass for all of the problems it seems to have? ... the dream of having a nice high tech package and a much lower price to pay... if I could get rid of the chunky and heavy Canon and get a nice tilt screen and a decent level with a bit more mpx I'd be glad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4177 Posted January 20, 2014 Ok, sure. But, why on the Leica Forum where we talk about all of the issues of the M240 (I'm often the first to be critical) and someone mentions the issues with the A7R... everyone comes unglued and plays the Leica fanboy card against anyone who wants to discuss the problems with this A7R and the way Sony portrayed their camera as usable with Leica lenses? I just don't get why the usual Sony fanaboys here play the "I'm a professional" card which gets nowhere with me. I get the whole BS about someone shooting some black fabric under strong tungsten studio lights for a weekend with the M and then claiming that the color is a problem. We knew that a year ago when we saw Jono's images. And, I get the technical reasons why Leica has compromised the UV contamination for better edge performance at the loss of skin tones (read my early reports). I'm good with that and understand the clear reality of the M240. No BS here. But, can you explain why a camera like this Sony A7R gets a pass for all of the problems it seems to have? Remember, I owned the camera and got sucked into the RF lens hype from Sony. Then, I reported the problems I had with even my R-lenses. So, don't anyone try and blow BS passed me. I soooo get this camera. My M240 has nothing to do with the A7R. My M will work as it will work with all of its issues and strengths. But, please don't complain about my bandwidth when I add my experience with my A7R. I just find it interesting that I get called out for being the fanboy. I'm one of the first that bought into the concept of the A7R and the RX1. Your exaggerations are fun at the very least, sort of the definition of a "Troll" … the term you like to bandy about so loosely. To my knowledge, Sony never officially promoted the notion of using another company's rangefinder or SLR lenses on their A7/A7R camera, and revealingly do not make any adapters to do so … like Leica does for the S2/S. They do make adapters for their own line of A mount lenses. Those A mount adapters were made available prior to the launch of the camera itself, obviously targeting other Sony owners with the A7/A7R. If a bunch of reviewers and photographers jumped to that adapted RF conclusion based on NEX experiences, then were disappointed, that isn't Sony's fault. Besides, enough M lenses work to help make it a viable secondary consideration … but I'd agree, not a primary one for a full range of M lens use. No, the A7R is not "The best high ISO camera. Ever.", but neither is it what you described at all, and then used Reid's Review as proof … when in fact, his review says the opposite. I guess that irritated you, but no amount of bluster changes that fact. It was YOU that badgered me into getting a demo M240 before I could have ANY credible say in discussing the M240 color, and now you discount that as not valid either. (BTW, I had the M240 for two weeks, not a weekend). I did shoot black bags with tungsten modeling lights in order to keep light levels consistent lens to lens, but used both Auto WB and Custom WB with a X-Rite Color Checker with the latest firmware … and the IR contamination was obviously there. So what if you already knew that? It simply confirmed it for me, and IR filters helped. A lot of people on that thread didn't know that, and considered using IR filters after that test. So it wasn't universal knowledge, or BS like you imply. If you want the Rangefinder way of shooting color images the Ms are the only real choice IMHO … and I've repeatedly said so. In fact, I'm no Sony fan boy (whatever the heck that means), I have way more invested in Leica gear than Sony stuff. So what if you don't care if someone mentions they've used a camera professionally? Like wise, who cares if you use yours as an amateur? If you get the results, that's all that counts in either case. If anything, it simply means someone trusts a piece of gear enough to shoot paying work with it … and whether you do or not is irrelevant to their decision. The A7R is flawed like any other camera, and I said so earlier. Good to know its limitations … and play to its strengths … just like any other camera. Yet, to say it does poorly at higher ISO like you did, was one thing worth challenging. So, I did … thus triggering your flood of Trollish vitriol. - Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevelap Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4178 Posted January 20, 2014 Come on guys, take it easy. 'Can't we all just get along?' as someone once said in a movie . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevelap Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4179 Posted January 20, 2014 BTW, has anyone got the Zeiss FE 24-70 f/4 zoom yet? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted January 20, 2014 Share #4180 Posted January 20, 2014 +1 I appreciate the input in this thread from the contributors who've bought and used the camera in good faith, with the intention of finding the best it can do with various lenses, rather than those who wanted to dislike it and find fault from the start. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.