The Sony A7 thread [Merged]

[thighslapper]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Another point not mentioned .......

 

Start up times from off and standby are very similar to the M .... about 2 seconds....

[Advertisement]

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

[}{B]

I'd be interested to hear how the A7/A7R EVF performs with an M fit lens stopped down to say F5.6 or F8.

 

Outdoors does the EVF darken to the point of making viewing difficult?

 

If image magnification is required for accurate focussing can that be used with the lens stopped down to F5.6 or F8? If not what appears to be the problem?

 

I'm considering the A7 for use with a 35mm Summicron MkIV and a 50mm Zeiss Planar. It appears that the Zeiss would be OK given its focal length but I may have to take a chance on the 35mm although a previous post had a link to images taken with this combination that didn't look too bad.

[thighslapper]

Would be pretty happy bout some more examples on wide angle lenses...

 

There are few Leica lenses that appear to perform adequately sub 50mm...... WATE, 21 & 35 luxes excepted ...... and the cheapest of these is $5.5k.

 

That's why there are so few pics....... I have WATE, 21/3.4, 24/2.8, 28/2, 35/2, MATE ...... and except the WATE & MATE the others are unusable ..... in the sense that performance compared to pairing with a Leica body is so degraded that it is pointless using them.

 

I may have to take a chance on the 35mm although a previous post had a link to images taken with this combination that didn't look too bad

 

......hmmmm...... depends what you mean by 'not too bad'.....

 

with most wides there appears to be gradual blurring/smearing which gets worse as you approach the edges ....... centrally things look fine....... Unlike vignetting and magenta edges this is uncorrectable.

 

..... and what is the point of a wide angle lens if the edges are not as crisp and clear as the middle ??? .... landscapes/architecture with only the centre ok strikes me as plain stupid..... and that's mainly what I use these lenses for anyway....

 

I'm hoping the FE 35/2.8 performs ok (arrives this am.), otherwise I have my doubts about the justification in keeping this as a second body/alternative system.

[naturephoto1]

The Leica C 40mm f2.0 Summicron and the Minolta 40mm f2 M-Rokkor lenses perform well with the A7r as we have seen at FM. They should perform as they do on film and with the M9 and M240.

 

Rich

[dwbell]

..... and what is the point of a wide angle lens if the edges are not as crisp and clear as the middle ??? .... landscapes/architecture with only the centre ok strikes me as plain stupid..... and that's mainly what I use these lenses for anyway....

 

Well, one could argue that landscape and architecture are generally both tripod mounted and up in the smaller apertures, where the differences in the corners are much much less significant, whereas the quality in the centre 70% is actually improved.

 

Hence my continuing confusion with the obsession that the corners must be sharp on a wide angle large aperture lens. As in, when do you shoot a perfectly flat subject, want it all in razor thin DoF sharpness across the entire frame? Ignoring even field of curvature issues? The number of shots I've seen that fit this criteria that aren't brick wall tests I can count on one thumb!

[Thomas Chen]

I'd be interested to hear how the A7/A7R EVF performs with an M fit lens stopped down to say F5.6 or F8.

 

Outdoors does the EVF darken to the point of making viewing difficult?

 

If image magnification is required for accurate focussing can that be used with the lens stopped down to F5.6 or F8? If not what appears to be the problem?

 

I'm considering the A7 for use with a 35mm Summicron MkIV and a 50mm Zeiss Planar. It appears that the Zeiss would be OK given its focal length but I may have to take a chance on the 35mm although a previous post had a link to images taken with this combination that didn't look too bad.

 

Howard,

 

You are smart for the intention buying an A7, hopefully it can be immune somewhat from the problem of vignetting, color shift and shutter vibration, if some reports in this thread is valid.

The latest version of 35 Summicron ASPH does have the issues in my test with A7R.

 

Based on my experience, using A7R with Leica M lenses is something like using a M6 plus an EVF! Many functions are futile because mounting a native Sony/Zeiss lense is the prerequisite. You will do almost every setting through the EVF or the rear LCD.

 

In the "Custome Setting" menu a "Finder/Monitor" item allows you to select among "Auto (default)/Viefinder/Monitor". Under "Auto" the EVF will turn on as soon as your eye comes close to the EVF, and reverts to LCD monitor when your eye keep a distance from EVF. Of course, you can opt for either viewfinder or monitor always "on".

 

Also in the "Custome Setting" menu a "Live View Display" itemallows you to choose between "Setting Effect On" and "Setting Effect Off".

 

"Setting Effect On" enables "What you see is what you get", thus, on your adjusting aperture, speed, or ISO you just witness the actual brighness change.

 

"Setting Effect Off" lets you have a simulated "optical viewfinder", you see a scene of constant brightness all the way. The default setting is Effect On.

 

On the right side of camera top plate there is a "c1" buttom, the custom buttom with default setting as "Focus Setting". By push it consectively you get a 1x. 7.2X, and 14.4x magnification of the focus zone. This helps out focusing task a lot.

 

Under Effect On, F5.6 or F8 is fine for accurate focusing, however, what you see may be bit of blurring that will not happen at large aperture opening. Thus, focus peaking function comes to help.

 

In the "Customer Settngs", "Peaking Level" allows selection among High/Mid/Low/Off and "Peaking Color" for Red/Yellow/White.

 

What I do in testing is focusing the letter on a CD 3ms away. For the M 21/2.8 ASPH setting at f16 I had hard time identify the edge of letters. Peaking level at "Mid", peaking color at "red" and 7.2x to ensure the accurate focusing, if checked on a 27" monitor. On 14.4x I see the edge more clear, but peaking effect doesn't show up.

 

On useing 90 Cron AA, peaking shows up only at 1x, not at 7.2x or 14.4x.

 

Hope this helps.

[naturephoto1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

According to Sony Alpha Rumors, Zeiss is working on 5 MF FE lenses (for A7 and A7r) for Launch for Photokina 2014:

 

(SR4) Zeiss working on five manual focusing FE lenses (launch Photokina 2014) | sonyalpharumors

 

This is in agreement with what Richard Schleuning, National Sales Manager for Zeiss told me at PhotoPlus on Octobr 24:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/2539016-post1543.html

 

When I asked Richard about the MF lenses that Zeiss was going to make, he indicated that Zeiss had just decided to go forward to make them several days ago and at this point they did not know what focal lengths or the number of lenses that they planned to make (at this time). Richard suggested that lenses would probably be available for show at Photokina next year (2014). He also indicated that the lenses would be coming from Zeiss and not from Sony. He indicated that Zeiss understood the problems of using adapters with lens (and RF lenses) and they were going to look at their existing designs to try to figure out what they would use including possibly Distagon or Sonnar (not Biogon I believe to issues) and that the lenses would have native mounts with the adapter (lengths?) built in and they would have all of the contacts and interaction with these new lenses and with the camera bodies themselves. That way there would be communication between the camera and these new lenses.

 

Rich

[Peter H]

.......

 

Hence my continuing confusion with the obsession that the corners must be sharp on a wide angle large aperture lens. As in, when do you shoot a perfectly flat subject, want it all in razor thin DoF sharpness across the entire frame? Ignoring even field of curvature issues? The number of shots I've seen that fit this criteria that aren't brick wall tests I can count on one thumb!

 

I agree I would very rarely need all corners to be equally razor sharp. But I very frequently want one of the corners to be as sharp as possible. I don't want to always have to place the main subjects centrally.

 

This to me is the main attraction of good corner-to-corner performance; compositional freedom.

[kdriceman]

It does like a tripod. Weird isn't it, I can handhold the M9 down to a fraction of the lens length but not the A7r. Is it just the resolution or shutter speed and body weight/design? I wonder.

 

Still it takes away a stop or two of high iso advantage and the sony likes to be above base iso in London where light is rationed very carefully throughout the winter months.

 

Downrez your A7r images to 18Mpix and see how they compare to the M9 images. It will help you determine how much of it is the resolution vs shutter. The 36M pixels will undoubtedly punish you harshly for camera shake.

[dwbell]

I agree I would very rarely need all corners to be equally razor sharp. But I very frequently want one of the corners to be as sharp as possible. I don't want to always have to place the main subjects centrally.

 

This to me is the main attraction of good corner-to-corner performance; compositional freedom.

 

Yup, agreed, but on my tests we're talking corner as in corner, a tiny triangle. We're not talking a common place to position something of visual importance. On my 17" Mac Book Pro for example, it represents a post it note folded diagonally in half and positioned in the corner of the screen. I would suggest a similar position to that of before - the last time I saw an image with a WA at large aperture with the central visual POI in that part of the frame....

 

I mean, if it's there, for sure I'll take it. But it doesn't have anywhere near the weighting of the other considerations I take into account. Maybe the Zeiss MF lenses to come will solve this problem?

[rosuna]

According to Sony Alpha Rumors, Zeiss is working on 5 MF FE lenses (for A7 and A7r) for Launch for Photokina 2014:

 

(SR4) Zeiss working on five manual focusing FE lenses (launch Photokina 2014) | sonyalpharumors

 

This is in agreement with what Richard Schleuning, National Sales Manager for Zeiss told me at PhotoPlus on Octobr 24:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/2539016-post1543.html

 

When I asked Richard about the MF lenses that Zeiss was going to make, he indicated that Zeiss had just decided to go forward to make them several days ago and at this point they did not know what focal lengths or the number of lenses that they planned to make (at this time). Richard suggested that lenses would probably be available for show at Photokina next year (2014). He also indicated that the lenses would be coming from Zeiss and not from Sony. He indicated that Zeiss understood the problems of using adapters with lens (and RF lenses) and they were going to look at their existing designs to try to figure out what they would use including possibly Distagon or Sonnar (not Biogon I believe to issues) and that the lenses would have native mounts with the adapter (lengths?) built in and they would have all of the contacts and interaction with these new lenses and with the camera bodies themselves. That way there would be communication between the camera and these new lenses.

 

Rich

 

 

Zeiss usually uses the same designs for different mounts (EOS, F, Alpha, etc.).

 

An interesting question is if these new lenses will have versions for M mount.

 

The problem to do this is complex because rangefinder coupling, but...

[gyoung]

snip..

 

What I do in testing is focusing the letter on a CD 3ms away. For the M 21/2.8 ASPH setting at f16 I had hard time identify the edge of letters. Peaking level at "Mid", peaking color at "red" and 7.2x to ensure the accurate focusing, if checked on a 27" monitor. On 14.4x I see the edge more clear, but peaking effect doesn't show up.

 

On useing 90 Cron AA, peaking shows up only at 1x, not at 7.2x or 14.4x.

 

Hope this helps.

 

I would be interested to hear how the 21/2.8 asph performs, I don't remember posting any pics from this lens. That and the 35/2 asph are my most used wideangles and if the A7 or A7r wont work with these or any other compact wide angles it would be a shame.

I sometimes wonder if people expect too much from these lenses, none of them are pin sharp in the corners at wide apertures even on film. Its important to me that for landscape/architecture that its pretty sharp in the corners at 5.6 or 8, where I need to be for DoF, are the M wides worse on the A7 for sharpness in the corners than on the M9 for instance, or on film?

If we can't get these lenses to work on a full frame sensor (short of an M9 or M240) and have to go for purpose designed lenses, then I hope they are not as bulky and heavy as the Zeiss ZF and ZE designs for DSLRs, that 21 takes 82mm filters for heavens sake, and they would rather negate (for me) the small size of the camera. Even the 55/1.8 seems very large (and expensive) for such a modest spec. If that is unavoidable then maybe APS-c is the way to go for a small hand camera, Fuji are doing it, with what looks like very good 14,23 and 35 lenses for the X Pro and XE.

 

Gerry

[thighslapper]

I agree I would very rarely need all corners to be equally razor sharp. But I very frequently want one of the corners to be as sharp as possible. I don't want to always have to place the main subjects centrally.

 

This to me is the main attraction of good corner-to-corner performance; compositional freedom.

 

yup ....... but the problem is that this is not just confined to the edges either ...... it is a gradual degradation of the image that becomes more noticeable as you go out from the centre ..... on my 35/2 it is evident in the 25% of the image each side of the central 50%..... we are not talking about just a strip down the sides.

 

Admittedly, you would have to print big for it to be an easily noticeable problem ..... and in 1024px forum images it would be hard to spot, but for architectural images and indoors it would probably be quite visible at larger sizes.......

 

I still come back to the point that people are willing to accept compromises with this camera that they would never contemplate if it was a Leica.....

[Thomas Chen]

I would be interested to hear how the 21/2.8 asph performs, I don't remember posting any pics from this lens. That and the 35/2 asph are my most used wideangles and if the A7 or A7r wont work with these or any other compact wide angles it would be a shame.

I sometimes wonder if people expect too much from these lenses, none of them are pin sharp in the corners at wide apertures even on film. Its important to me that for landscape/architecture that its pretty sharp in the corners at 5.6 or 8, where I need to be for DoF, are the M wides worse on the A7 for sharpness in the corners than on the M9 for instance, or on film?

If we can't get these lenses to work on a full frame sensor (short of an M9 or M240) and have to go for purpose designed lenses, then I hope they are not as bulky and heavy as the Zeiss ZF and ZE designs for DSLRs, that 21 takes 82mm filters for heavens sake, and they would rather negate (for me) the small size of the camera. Even the 55/1.8 seems very large (and expensive) for such a modest spec. If that is unavoidable then maybe APS-c is the way to go for a small hand camera, Fuji are doing it, with what looks like very good 14,23 and 35 lenses for the X Pro and XE.

 

Gerry

 

Gerry,

 

I posted some images including what you are interested at

link#2576, 2618, 2721, 2748, and 2775. They are only my cases and cannot be generalized to other cases.

 

You may find from this thread some posts that have relavance to your interest. They are by K.H., dwell, naturephoto1, and IkarusJohn.

 

As for 21mm and 35mm, you may try to seek for a second-hand R21-35/4.I t performs better than M21/2.8 and M35/2 ASPH.

 

Regards,

 

Thomas Chen

[thighslapper]

35/2

 

We have had no sun this week .... so this is a pretty rubbish photo with low contrast ...... here are crops going from left to centre. Some sharpening to the original. 100 iso. Can't recall the aperture but it's 1/90 sec so can't be wide open. This one shows surprisingly little vignetting and magenta ..... seems to vary a bit and I have yet to spot any obvious pattern.

 

Crap ?.... acceptable ?..... great ? ...... we all have our own criteria....

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!

[lct]

...I still come back to the point that people are willing to accept compromises with this camera that they would never contemplate if it was a Leica.....

There is no free lunch... Thanks for sharing anyway. Did you try your M wides in APS mode (if any)?

[magosak]

Gerry,

 

I posted some images including what you are interested at

link#2576, 2618, 2721, 2748, and 2775. They are only my cases and cannot be generalized to other cases.

 

You may find from this thread some posts that have relavance to your interest. They are by K.H., dwell, naturephoto1, and IkarusJohn.

 

As for 21mm and 35mm, you may try to seek for a second-hand R21-35/4.I t performs better than M21/2.8 and M35/2 ASPH.

 

Regards,

 

Thomas Chen

 

Majority of my lenses are R lenses: 21-35, 28-90, 80 and 100 macro. My only M lens is 50/1.4 ASPH. I should be ok with A7R then.

[gyoung]

Gerry,

 

I posted some images including what you are interested at

link#2576, 2618, 2721, 2748, and 2775. They are only my cases and cannot be generalized to other cases.

 

You may find from this thread some posts that have relavance to your interest. They are by K.H., dwell, naturephoto1, and IkarusJohn.

 

As for 21mm and 35mm, you may try to seek for a second-hand R21-35/4.I t performs better than M21/2.8 and M35/2 ASPH.

 

Regards,

 

Thomas Chen

 

Thanks Thomas, that is certainly very instructive, I don't know how I missed them but its a very long thread to keep on top of!

I can't see this camera being of interest to me, unless Zeiss comes up with something good, compact and that will work on my M film cameras too, fat chance of that!

 

Thanks for all your work

 

Gerry

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[gyoung]

35/2

 

We have had no sun this week .... so this is a pretty rubbish photo with low contrast ...... here are crops going from left to centre. Some sharpening to the original. 100 iso. Can't recall the aperture but it's 1/90 sec so can't be wide open. This one shows surprisingly little vignetting and magenta ..... seems to vary a bit and I have yet to spot any obvious pattern.

 

Crap ?.... acceptable ?..... great ? ...... we all have our own criteria....

 

Well, maybe 'acceptable' for a cheap wide angle, but certainly IMHO not up to the standards we have come to expect from a Summicron.

 

Thanks, Gerry

[dwbell]

I still come back to the point that people are willing to accept compromises with this camera that they would never contemplate if it was a Leica.....

 

I'm not sure I agree with that completely. I tested both and found the all Sony system to be far superior at 35mm. No compromise, just a clear winner. I can't test the FE glass on the Leica so there is no comparison to be made there.