The Sony A7 thread [Merged]

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On my M240 I simply cannot, repeat can not operate the front button.

 

Possibly, if you were a little younger?

[Advertisement]

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

[dwbell]

Possibly, if you were a little younger?

 

You've dribbled Rick. Just a little breakfast on your cardigan there. Don't worry, I can wipe that up for you. Now, how about that mid morning nap? Hmm?

[Peter H]

Peter,

 

I have the A7r since last Friday night (Nov 23), got a flu over a mostly rainy weekend, but had some time for a very preliminary test with some of my M lenses:

 

………..

 

 

Thanks M for an extremely helpful and detailed response.

 

Thanks to John and others too.

 

I'm not sure I'm getting any closer to a decision though, not made any easier by the fact that even the A7 and the A7R have strongly competing claims for attention between themselves, if we are to believe that the A7 is the better suited to M lenses, which I think I am inclined to do.

 

This is more complicated than it ought to be!

[Stealth3kpl]

Link to the updated part of my article about functional RF UWA lenses on the A7R:

UPDATED: Ultra Wide Angle M-Mount Lenses THAT WORK On Sony A7R (Leica "WATE" Tri Elmar 16-18-21mm f/4 ASPH and Voigtlander Ultron 21mm f/1.8 ASPH)

 

Some samples from that article:

Voigtlander Ultron 21mm @ f/1.8:

 

 

(click on the images to see further sizes / resolutions)

 

These look impressive but, as a side-note, that background blur of the 21mm is odd. It seems sharper to the edges but blurred behind the subject. What's going on there? (I realise it's probably nothing to do with the Sony).

Pete

[dwbell]

Peter, don't you find it a little disingenuous that Sony touted that the camera was designed to work with Leica M lenses and it doesn't work well with most any of them with the possibility of 50mm+? If, Leica had made a statement that they supported E -lenses and they didn't work, certain members here would be all over Leica. Rather selective, huh?

 

To answer your question, sony.

 

Just to save KH asking this. Can you post a link to the "Sony M lens compatibility touting"?

[Rick]

I wasn't aware they'd actually presented it on that basis. But if that was the case, then yes, it just goes to prove what we probably all know anyway, that they're all as bad as each other when it comes down to it, and anyone who buys things like cameras on the basis of the words used to promote them is probably going to end up being disappointed at some stage!

 

Yes, they did claim it was designed to work with M lenses in the pre-announcements. They even sell an adapter of their own, contrary to what a member posted earlier. It is in the sony literature in the portion about ordering a free adapter along with a picture of it.

 

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!

 

I also take your point that there's a reasonably heavy anti-Leica bias evident in this forum, sometimes for logical reason given the amounts of money people have spent to become Leica customers, sometimes out of an apparent wish not to be one of the "gullible herd" despite having spent that money. I try not to take it seriously.

 

Yes, I agree, heavy anti-Leica bias. I do not attack the A7R, I'm actually looking forward to it. I am sure though that I understand why others here feel the need to do so. It is part of some people's human nature and falls into the category of "limited good," where the amount of "good" available is held to be finite, so every time one person profits, another must lose.

 

Also, there has been an illogical amount of conformational bias, textbook-like displays. One of the easiest biases to infect scientific testing.

 

Also, I would have suspected more antagonism directed towards sony for making statements that camera can be used with M lenses, then offering for sale an adaptor which supports the concept that it should work... then it doesn't... and a whole lot of time and energy and money has been spent here to determine sony has been deceitful. I'd have expected more ire from certain members that are so vocal about deceptive business practices.

 

Oh well.

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You've dribbled Rick. Just a little breakfast on your cardigan there. Don't worry, I can wipe that up for you. Now, how about that mid morning nap? Hmm?

 

Actually, I have no trouble with the dexterity (physically or mental) required to reach the front bottom. No dribble just fact.

[Stealth3kpl]

 

These look impressive but, as a side-note, that background blur of the 21mm is odd. It seems sharper to the edges but blurred behind the subject. What's going on there? (I realise it's probably nothing to do with the Sony).

Pete

 

Now I've read the article, I know what's going on there.

Pete

[dwbell]

Yes, they did claim it was designed to work with M lenses in the pre-announcements. They even sell an adapter of their own, contrary to what a member posted earlier. It is in the sony literature in the portion about ordering a free adapter along with a picture of it.

 

[ATTACH]410361[/ATTACH]

 

 

 

Yes, I agree, heavy anti-Leica bias. I do not attack the A7R, I'm actually looking forward to it. I am sure though that I understand why others here feel the need to do so. It is part of some people's human nature and falls into the category of "limited good," where the amount of "good" available is held to be finite, so every time one person profits, another must lose.

 

Also, there has been an illogical amount of conformational bias, textbook-like displays. One of the easiest biases to infect scientific testing.

 

Also, I would have suspected more antagonism directed towards sony for making statements that camera can be used with M lenses, then offering for sale an adaptor which supports the concept that it should work... then it doesn't... and a whole lot of time and energy and money has been spent here to determine sony has been deceitful. I'd have expected more ire from certain members that are so vocal about deceptive business practices.

 

Oh well.

 

Well, I can only speak from my perspective but that flier you posted doesn't qualify as "touting" in my view. It is one of 4 adapters on offer and merely suggests you could try your existing lenses with the camera. Not too deceitful in my view.

 

However, I didn't even see that before I decided to purchase. And was interested in the FE lenses as they appeared to be, and have proven to be superior net system IQ.

 

As to behaviour. This whole process has been instructive for me. I realise now, more than ever, that Leica is not the company I want it to be. It's the company that it wants it to be. Those two views of what it should be are polar opposites apart. But it's all my fault, and I accept that.

[Stealth3kpl]

dwbell, are you using raw files? In what PP software? I'm just wondering if I'd need to update LR4 and CS4 (I think I know the answer )

Pete

[naturephoto1]

Yes, they did claim it was designed to work with M lenses in the pre-announcements. They even sell an adapter of their own, contrary to what a member posted earlier. It is in the sony literature in the portion about ordering a free adapter along with a picture of it.

 

[ATTACH]410361[/ATTACH]

 

 

 

Yes, I agree, heavy anti-Leica bias. I do not attack the A7R, I'm actually looking forward to it. I am sure though that I understand why others here feel the need to do so. It is part of some people's human nature and falls into the category of "limited good," where the amount of "good" available is held to be finite, so every time one person profits, another must lose.

 

Also, there has been an illogical amount of conformational bias, textbook-like displays. One of the easiest biases to infect scientific testing.

 

Also, I would have suspected more antagonism directed towards sony for making statements that camera can be used with M lenses, then offering for sale an adaptor which supports the concept that it should work... then it doesn't... and a whole lot of time and energy and money has been spent here to determine sony has been deceitful. I'd have expected more ire from certain members that are so vocal about deceptive business practices.

 

Oh well.

 

Rick,

 

That was/is a Sony Australia only offer. It was not made by Sony to the rest of the world.

 

Rich

[thighslapper]

This thread appears to have caused something of a split personality in Leica users ......

 

From my testing, very few Leica lenses are usable on this camera without some problems or image defects ...... even my 75/2 with a Novoflex adapter shows significant image blurring in the periphery .... and I suspect this is endemic in most of the modern M lens line-up ...... it's just that increasing the focal length shoves the issue further from the centre of the image so it is less noticeable. All wides show vignetting, most wides show colour casts. There is enough to do in PP without having to sort this out as well.

 

For some reason the A7+/-R proponents seem to be willing to either be blind to this, or find it completely acceptable because they deem the other qualities that the camera offers make it a reasonable trade-off..... but what is the point of a cutting edge camera that then produces sub-standard images because the lenses you use are unsuitable ?

 

If it was a Leica they were testing with these lenses, it would be roundly condemned as cr*p and dismissed out of hand. With Leica lenses you expect edge to edge sharpness and no edge colouring on the M & M9.... and there are plenty of moans when this is not the case.

 

This is a very fine little camera ...... if paired with the right lenses.... but I fear precious few will be from Leica...... and there is no point using it as an M substitute if that is the case.

 

It is designed for Sony Zeiss FE lenses and will no doubt be a super performer with these.

 

Do I want a second system with all the duplication that goes with it ? Am I willing to keep this camera just to use as a second body for a handful of Leica lenses ? Is the pretty marginal real-world increase in IQ worth ditching a pile of Leica gear for ? Do I need all those infuriating little buttons and more menu options than I will ever use in a lifetime ?

 

I've become quite attached to this little camera ........ but it hasn't lived up to expectations as an M substitute/back-up and I am still undecided about whether it is worth keeping....

[zlatkob]

Link to the updated part of my article about functional RF UWA lenses on the A7R:

UPDATED: Ultra Wide Angle M-Mount Lenses THAT WORK On Sony A7R (Leica "WATE" Tri Elmar 16-18-21mm f/4 ASPH and Voigtlander Ultron 21mm f/1.8 ASPH)

 

These samples look very good.

[Rick]

Rick,

 

That was/is a Sony Australia only offer. It was not made by Sony to the rest of the world.

 

Rich

 

You miss my point. I commented several pages back that sony claimed these cameras were designed for use with M lenses and Sony even sells an adaptor, but clearly they are not. A member posted back that he didn't read anything about sony claiming the camera worked with M lenses and that he wasn't aware sony made an adaptor.

 

My posted picture above just shows the Sony adaptor because, apparently the burden of proof fell back to me after he stated sony didn't make an adaptor. Kind of hard to refute a picture of the adaptor itself in Sony's own literature. My point being, Sony clearly is marketing this for use with M lenses... and these cameras don't seem to be designed for M-lenses.

 

I'm just hoping they will work with the R-lenses better than the the M. I believe that should be true. I would be very happy to use the M240 for wides and normal lenses and use the A7R for R-teles.

[dwbell]

dwbell, are you using raw files? In what PP software? I'm just wondering if I'd need to update LR4 and CS4 (I think I know the answer )

Pete

 

I've got Adobe Creative Cloud which is a subscription service that includes PS and LR latest versions. However, the camera raw developer from adobe that can handle the A7 files is still in Beta. Therefore, I'm using their Beta DNG converter to reverse translate them back to my level of ACR.

 

Best results are supposedly from Sony's own raw converter. But I've not done any testing as yet.

[AlanG]

 

...Also, I would have suspected more antagonism directed towards sony for making statements that camera can be used with M lenses, then offering for sale an adaptor which supports the concept that it should work... then it doesn't... and a whole lot of time and energy and money has been spent here to determine sony has been deceitful. I'd have expected more ire from certain members that are so vocal about deceptive business practices.

 

Oh well.

 

That says the camera has been designed to work perfectly with E mount lenses and you can use these adapters to try your lenses on the A7. That is pretty far from implying they will work well on it. I don't know if that was part of any promotion or only came in the box after you bought the camera. If you go to the Sony US A7 web site and click on "compatibility" you only get Sony and Sony/Zeiss lenses listed.

 

Separately, it was pretty clear to me that most people here knew that there could be issues with w/a M lenses on it before they bought the camera. And someone said that Sony (somewhere) offered a 30 day return policy if you are not happy. Isn't that long enough to see if your lenses will work on it, or read tests by others for lenses you are thinking of buying?

[Rick]

This thread appears to have caused something of a split personality in Leica users ......

 

From my testing, very few Leica lenses are usable on this camera without some problems or image defects ...... even my 75/2 with a Novoflex adapter shows significant image blurring in the periphery .... and I suspect this is endemic in most of the modern M lens line-up ...... it's just that increasing the focal length shoves the issue further from the centre of the image so it is less noticeable. All wides show vignetting, most wides show colour casts. There is enough to do in PP without having to sort this out as well.

 

For some reason the A7+/-R proponents seem to be willing to either be blind to this, or find it completely acceptable because they deem the other qualities that the camera offers make it a reasonable trade-off..... but what is the point of a cutting edge camera that then produces sub-standard images because the lenses you use are unsuitable ?

 

If it was a Leica they were testing with these lenses, it would be roundly condemned as cr*p and dismissed out of hand. With Leica lenses you expect edge to edge sharpness and no edge colouring on the M & M9.... and there are plenty of moans when this is not the case.

 

This is a very fine little camera ...... if paired with the right lenses.... but I fear precious few will be from Leica...... and there is no point using it as an M substitute if that is the case.

 

It is designed for Sony Zeiss E lenses and will no doubt be a super performer with these.

 

Do I want a second system with all the duplication that goes with it ? Am I willing to keep this camera just to use as a second body for a handful of Leica lenses ? Is the pretty marginal real-world increase in IQ worth ditching a pile of Leica gear for ? Do I need all those infuriating little buttons and more menu options than I will ever use in a lifetime ?

 

I've become quite attached to this little camera ........ but it hasn't lived up to expectations as an M substitute/back-up and I am still undecided about whether it is worth keeping....

 

Very well put. I'm right there with you, except I don't have the camera yet. Like you, I'll have to decide whether or not I want to keep it just to shoot Tele R-lenses and possible buy a zoom Zeiss AF lens which could be quite acceptable, except for the possible slow AF.

 

And, the next M may leapfrog the Sony and I could have just waited for a more refined M with possibly more MPs and whatnots if, I decide I want to play the upgrade game... which at this point in image quality is what this is all about.

[Rick]

That says the camera has been designed to work perfectly with E mount lenses and you can use these adapters to try your lenses on the A7. That is pretty far from implying they will work well on it. I don't know if that was part of any promotion or only came in the box after you bought the camera.

 

Separately, it was pretty clear to me that most people here knew that there could be issues with w/a M lenses on it before they bought the camera.

 

Ok, you go ahead and let Sony off the hook for claiming the camera was designed for use with M-lenses and providing an M-E adaptor for this purpose ... but, of course Sony only ever meant for their customers to "try" their M-lenses. Sony never stated they would work.

 

The wide angle lens problems that you claim people were anticipating had more to do with color shifts in the corners not the uncorrectable smearing that makes almost all of the M-lenses useless. I would bet Sony optical sensor engineers knew this would be the case at they moment the made the design choice to incorporate a thicker IR sensor filter.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[naturephoto1]

Here is a link to Flikr page of A7r and some Leica R lenses (small sampling of lenses thus far) that was posted by FM member Tober:

 

A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses - FM Forums

 

Sony A7R Test Shots - a set on Flickr

 

Rich

[magosak]

You miss my point. I commented several pages back that sony claimed these cameras were designed for use with M lenses and Sony even sells an adaptor, but clearly they are not. A member posted back that he didn't read anything about sony claiming the camera worked with M lenses and that he wasn't aware sony made an adaptor.

Is there a link to this claim?

 

My posted picture above just shows the Sony adaptor because, apparently the burden of proof fell back to me after he stated sony didn't make an adaptor. Kind of hard to refute a picture of the adaptor itself in Sony's own literature. My point being, Sony clearly is marketing this for use with M lenses... and these cameras don't seem to be designed for M-lenses.

In the picture you posted, only the first adapter is a Sony adaptor and the other three are Metabones adaptors offered by Sony Australia only. The writing also says you can "try" your other lenses, which does not necessarily guarantee that they will all work to one's satisfaction. If they did, the writing would have said "use" instead of try.