The Sony A7 thread [Merged]

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Is there a link to this claim?

 

Link it yourself. I've wasted enough time on this.

 

 

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.

 

Fine, but Sony stated that they would offer adaptors for the M lenses. There it is in a picture. The inference is that they would work. I don't know how to make it any clearer. Do you think I am going to buy a $2,400 camera just so I can "try" my M-lenses on it?

[Advertisement]

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

[mben]

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!

 

Peter,

 

I bought the A7r after having "played" with both A7 & A7r for a couple of hours.

 

Main differences between them are very few and narrow.

 

First, shutter noise: the A7 sound like a "standard", albeit loud, mirrorless (think Nex6 with electronic first curtain), while the A7r has a "double action", like the M240 in live view or the Nex6 with mechanical first curtain - but just louder. On the spot the A7r sounds appallingly louder than the A7, in field usage they are both plain loud.

 

Second, AF speed. In very good light, the A7 is snappier than the A7r - like a half tenth of second. In less than very good light the A7r is faster, also given that it has a menu item that allows "silent pre-focus" even if shutter is not depressed.

 

Third, image quality. On the whole picture, they are "roughly" the same, the A7r having more available pixels on the subject - so being able to get "deeper" into details. Fine details are a different story, though, as while the A7r makes small elements (like fine writing) "readable", the A7 loses them into moiré.

 

Performance with M wides and semi-wides is absolutely the same: edge smearing depends on the thickness of the sensor glass cover, not on megapixel count. My Elmarit 28mm smears the same on both A7 and A7r.

 

Edge color aberration: I can't comment, as tonight I discovered a faint lateral magenta cast on the outdoor pictures I shot earlier today with the Elmarit 28mm, which was not apparent in the side-by-side photos I took last week with both cameras.

 

Overall, IQ-wise the A7r is better, whereas the A7 might offer better value, since the A7r price is 50% higher than the A7.

 

Best,

 

Mauro

[Peter H]

………….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.

 

This in itself confirms to me that I shouldn't be thinking of the Sony as an alternative to an M.

 

Disappointed.

Excited.

Disappointed.

Excited.

 

Where will the wheel stop?

[naturephoto1]

This in itself confirms to me that I shouldn't be thinking of the Sony as an alternative to an M.

 

Disappointed.

Excited.

Disappointed.

Excited.

 

Where will the wheel stop?

 

Peter,

 

The Sony A7 and the A7r cameras are more of a Leica R solution with the ability of accepting Leica M and M-mount lenses some of which will perform well.

 

Rich

[CaptZoom]

I want my car to be able to do 200mph. It absolutely must be able to do 200mph, though it's highly unlikely I'll ever do 100mph and will mostly be driving well below it.

 

I almost never do architectural photography (certainly never professionally) and I rarely do landscape photography (seldom professionally). I do a lot of product photography (professionally) and documentary/street shooting for myself with the occasional extravagant project (personally not professionally). It's nice to know some lenses I own are capable of delivering edge to edge sharpness, unfortunately edge to edge sharpness within the frame is rarely, if ever, significant for what I do. I suspect it is also the case for many (most?) photographers. How often are you guys shooting perfectly flat subjects square on? At some point this fetish for sharpness gets ridiculous almost comical. There isn't a digital camera available yet* that is perfect for all Leica lenses (not the M8, M9, M240, A7, A7r, X-pro 1...none). They're all compromised some how, and they all excel at certain things. I don't understand why it has to be always an "all or nothing" type scenario. For some of us maintaining multiple systems is not an option, in which case we accept the consequences. For others for whom, maintaining multiple systems is feasible (maybe even a necessity)- they can share with us the relative successes and failings of each system. Why in earth do we have to justify our choices at the expense of others is beyond me.

 

 

*Leica MM may be an exception; I dunno enough to say either way.

[thighslapper]

This little camera is potentially too good to cast aside just because of some M lens issues. I've pretty critical ......but not about the camera used as Sony intended it .......

 

There are just too many compromises of its functionality involved in using fully manual lenses for it to be a pleasure to use.......

 

I have pre-ordered a batch of FE lenses and will use this as an alternative autofocus system to complement my M equipment. A selection of little used Leica and my residual Nikon gear will be recycled via eBay to pay for them. I could do with an excuse for a clear-out.

 

At least I will then be using it to it's full potential

[jedi996sps]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This in itself confirms to me that I shouldn't be thinking of the Sony as an alternative to an M.

 

Disappointed.

Excited.

Disappointed.

Excited.

 

Where will the wheel stop?

 

How about 2/3rds excited, 1/3rd disappointed?.... i have 28cron, 50lux & 75cron. Only the 28cron does not work entirely to my satisfaction (vignetting unless stopped right down)

[MarkP]

Where will the wheel stop?

 

Well, seeing as you asked - when we stop thinking about buying it and go out and take some photos with the fantastic camera equipment we already have .

I think that we forget just how good this stuff really is.

 

I went out yesterday evening (summer and daylingh saving here) with the M240, 28-90 Vario-Elmarit-R and 50 Summilux-M (oh, and shot a bit with a CL with 50 C-Sonnar) and suffered terribly ......

 

not !

[MarkP]

Well, seeing as you asked - when we stop thinking about buying it and go out and take some photos with the fantastic camera equipment we already have .

I think that we forget just how good this stuff really is.

 

I went out yesterday evening (summer and daylingh saving here) with the M240, 28-90 Vario-Elmarit-R and 50 Summilux-M (oh, and shot a bit with a CL with 50 C-Sonnar) and suffered terribly ......

 

not !

 

 

 

 

 

but at this stage I'm happy to watch the market for a while to see what other offerings may come to light - I may still get something for my R 28-90 and 28-PC. I agree that the Sony may be the "R solution" people have been waiting for.

[mben]

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!

[MarkP]

[ATTACH]410388[/ATTACH]

 

I REFUSE to be tempted :D:D........for the moment.

 

and there's magenta casting along the sides of the photo.....

[jaapv]

[….]and there's magenta casting along the sides of the photo.....

Fairly minimal and acceptable I would say.

[mben]

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!

[MarkP]

Fairly minimal and acceptable I would say.

 

I thought my comment about temptation made it clear I was impressed.

[ModernMan]

On the Nex6 and now on the A7r I use a Voigtlander adapter, which I had to "calibrate" in order to have the infinity focus as close as possible to the lenses infinity tab stop (but not beyond). Only the adapters with screws on the camera side can be properly "calibrated".

 

From some friends, I understood that the Metabones adapter gives infinity focus exactly at the tab stop, but it is fairly expensive at about $180.

 

Most adapters, included the Voigtlander, set infinity focus well before the tab stop so that marked distances cannot be used as they are. In this case calibration is made by "thickening" the adapter - I used tape layers and got very close to the tab stop, but not exactly.

 

Another option is a "helicoid" adapter, like the Hawks, which can be adjusted to allow closer focus distances but also to precisely set tab stop infinity focus.

 

I will buy the Metabones as to replace the Voigtlander since precise tab stop infinity focus is very convenient in terms of focusing speed.

 

Best regards,

 

Mauro

 

 

Another reason to "calibrate" the adapter is to achieve parfocal zooming (otherwise focus shift may be observed while zooming).

 

I don't think it is correct that "Only the adapters with screws on the camera side can be properly "calibrated", since shims can be added on the lens side of the adapter. For example, Novoflex adapters often have the camera flange and adapter body machined from a single piece of aluminum, and the lens mount screwed in. They can be shimmed easily.

 

To "calibrate" adapters I would suggest avoiding materials such as the tape you mention, and instead use brass or stainless shim stock, since it will be dimensionally stable under load and as temperature and humidity vary.

[mben]

I thought my comment about temptation made it clear I was impressed.

 

Magenta cast can be (partially) removed by changing purple color hue (towards blue) and saturation.

 

Too bad file compression does not show the actual files sharpness. The M240 corresponding files are "overall" better (corner to corner consistency), but "locally" the A7r is way ahead.

 

Mauro

[MarkP]

Magenta cast can be (partially) removed by changing purple color hue (towards blue) and saturation.

 

Too bad file compression does not show the actual files sharpness. The M240 corresponding files are "overall" better (corner to corner consistency), but "locally" the A7r is way ahead.

 

Mauro

 

Thanks Mauro,

 

I'ts a very impressive file even in jpeg. I've often found that a quick brush to remove magenta/purple edges in PS works wonders for files such as these where the problem is fairly subtle. My old 4.5/21 C-Biogon on the M9 was far worse than this.In fact, sometimes just dropping magenta/purple does the job as this is an uncommon colour in most photographs and isn't missed.

 

The A7R for some will be an additional body to the M240 but for others a substitute. Can you explain a in a bit more detail how you perceive the difference between the M240 and A7R files?

[gpwhite]

Just curious....

 

How many M240 shooters, happy as we might be, have ordered a Sony å7R?

 

It seems Sony is already delivering the body in Asia and DownUnder, from a couple of posts you can read on Stuff Huff's blog. So, maybe there is a forum member who has already taken å7R images with Leica M glass?

 

You would have to imagine that ISO 100, 1/8000th speed and "TTL" focusing would be very useful for Noct, 90 f/2 and another fabulous lens on the M240-- Zeiss 135mm APO Sonnar f/2.

 

Peter

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[thighslapper]

Can you explain a in a bit more detail how you perceive the difference between the M240 and A7R files?

 

About $5000

 

To be honest I've not noticed anything that jumps out and says 'wow ... that's better than an M'. Pixel peeping shows a bit better resolution ..... but this is balanced by the defects in the peripheries with a lot of M lenses ...... and you can't really claim that one issue is fantastic when 'pixel peeping' and the other doesn't matter 'in real world use'

 

AWB seems spot on with almost no PP needed, High ISO handling seems similar to the M with a gradual creep of noise as you go up which is easily reduced in LR.

 

Colours are nice and very faithful to the originals .... although in LR you have a drop down menu of a good number of profiles that yield very different results ......

 

You could use this instead of an M and be very happy with the results..... although I would hesitate to say the IQ improvement is earth shattering ....

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!

[MarkP]

About $5000

 

To be honest I've not noticed anything that jumps out and says 'wow ... that's better than an M'. Pixel peeping shows a bit better resolution ..... but this is balanced by the defects in the peripheries with a lot of M lenses ...... and you can't really claim that one issue is fantastic when 'pixel peeping' and the other doesn't matter 'in real world use'

 

AWB seems spot on with almost no PP needed, High ISO handling seems similar to the M with a gradual creep of noise as you go up which is easily reduced in LR.

 

Colours are nice and very faithful to the originals .... although in LR you have a drop down menu of a good number of profiles that yield very different results ......

 

You could use this instead of an M and be very happy with the results..... although I would hesitate to say the IQ improvement is earth shattering ....

 

Thanks.

 

Re IQ that's not surprising for non-pixel peeping and probably enlargements up to A2 or so. What do you think of skin tones?