Jump to content

The Sony A7 thread [Merged]


dmclalla

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For those of you wondering about the A7II, read Steve huff's review on the Amazon web site I was shocked to see him say that the IQ was even better than the Leica M240 as he has always been a Leica fan and in all of his comparisons I have read to date, has never said that before.

 

I can't compare to teh M240 from my own experience but I can tell you from my experience it is the best I have seen so far, easily besting the Leica T and XV I had and better than the Fuji XT-1 or the Sony A6000 which I also have.

 

 

The A7 is FF and is of course better then this cameras you quote which use a smaller sensor of a previous sony technology generation

 

That's a bit of an apples and oranges comparison

 

In terms of the M240 vs A7 it's down to the user experience and lenses. Comparing based on spec sheet does not give you the full picture. Both these cameras are so good that the use of the word "better" is rather childish IMHO

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
The A7 is FF and is of course better then this cameras you quote which use a smaller sensor of a previous sony technology generation

 

That's a bit of an apples and oranges comparison

 

In terms of the M240 vs A7 it's down to the user experience and lenses. Comparing based on spec sheet does not give you the full picture. Both these cameras are so good that the use of the word "better" is rather childish IMHO

 

I went out yesterday with my A7r and tripod and my M240. The A7r was used on the tripod as that was the money shot in the making and the M240 handheld, just because i like using the M240.

 

I much preferred the M240 shot albeit that technically the A7r one was "better" :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The A7 is FF and is of course better then this cameras you quote which use a smaller sensor of a previous sony technology generation

 

That's a bit of an apples and oranges comparison

 

In terms of the M240 vs A7 it's down to the user experience and lenses. Comparing based on spec sheet does not give you the full picture. Both these cameras are so good that the use of the word "better" is rather childish IMHO

 

"Really?" The same can be said for many lenses but you don't hesitate to say that Leica lenses are better and pay ridiculous prices for them. I guess we are all a bit childish. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

First, I'm not talking the A7r or A7 but the A7II. I owned the A7r and I own the A7II and I think the images look better on the A7II. I'm not alone in this. Guy on GetDPI and Steve H above seem to have reached the same conclusion. Further, I don't think anyone can accuse Steve of not being a Leica fan which is why his comment surprised me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those of you wondering about the A7II, read Steve huff's review on the Amazon web site I was shocked to see him say that the IQ was even better than the Leica M240 as he has always been a Leica fan and in all of his comparisons I have read to date, has never said that before.

 

I can't compare to teh M240 from my own experience but I can tell you from my experience it is the best I have seen so far, easily besting the Leica T and XV I had and better than the Fuji XT-1 or the Sony A6000 which I also have.

 

It wouldn't be Steve's first U-turn ;) nor his last...

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Really?" The same can be said for many lenses but you don't hesitate to say that Leica lenses are better and pay ridiculous prices for them. I guess we are all a bit childish. :D

 

 

Just to repeat

What I was saying is those APS-C cameras you compared to the A7 are not in the same league and therefore a useless comparison

 

I have no idea where you point about Leica lenses is coming from. I have Leica, Voigtlander, Zeiss, Sony and Canon lenses. On the whole bucket, Leica lenses are generally more likely to be superior in MTA, micro contrast and draw but that does not mean other lenses are not top notch, such as the Canon 75mm f1.2, the Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 ii, the Sony 55mm FE, etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It may seem bitingly sharp, but so far the m240 and the 50/ 1.4 has the highest edge sharpness I've seen tested between the M240 and the A7r which is 36MP against the 24MP M240. So, it is not a case of it being unproven. Would you like me to dig up some testing results?

 

Here is a comparison of the 50 'lux on the M240 with the 55 Zony on the a7:

 

Leica 50 ‘lux on the M240, Sony 55 FE on the Sony a7 | The Last Word

 

Both 24 MP cameras. The a7 has an AA filter, and the M240 does not.

 

Jim

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Jim. Very informative.

My impression, the Leica lens was designed for film (is that correct?) and the M240 sensor stack cannot quite handle the oblique rays optimally, whereas the Sony system (camera and lens) is from ground up designed for them.

Is this a correct assessment? TIA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim's test has the 50 Summilux on the M240 and the FE 55 on the Sony A7.

 

This test at 3DKraft.de has both the 50 Summilux and the FE 55 on the A7R (along with other lenses): Most adorable 50s - UPDATED: Sigma Art 50/1.4 DG HSM Review - Charts / Sharpness

 

The FE 55 is pretty impressive! ... the "Otus light" as he calls it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Jim. Very informative.

My impression, the Leica lens was designed for film (is that correct?) and the M240 sensor stack cannot quite handle the oblique rays optimally, whereas the Sony system (camera and lens) is from ground up designed for them.

Is this a correct assessment? TIA.

 

 

Bingo. The way to think of the sensor stack is as a lens element. Modern digital lenses are designed for a particular sensor stack. Film lenses were designed for a zero-thickness sensor stack.

 

As the lenses get longer, slower, of lower quality, and of more retrofocal design, the stack thickness matters less.

 

Roger, did a nice study on his Lens Rentals blog.

 

LensRentals.com - Sensor Stack Thickness: When Does It Matter?

 

Jim

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bingo. The way to think of the sensor stack is as a lens element. Modern digital lenses are designed for a particular sensor stack. Film lenses were designed for a zero-thickness sensor stack.

 

As the lenses get longer, slower, of lower quality, and of more retrofocal design, the stack thickness matters less.

 

Roger, did a nice study on his Lens Rentals blog.

 

LensRentals.com - Sensor Stack Thickness: When Does It Matter?

 

Jim

 

 

Thanks again Jim.

The previous paper LensRentals.com - The Glass in the Path: Sensor Stacks and Adapted Lenses is also very interesting.

 

From my Leica-M WA lenses, the only one that works equally well on M9 and A7R is the WATE, supposedly due to its more tele-centric design with a long exit pupil distance.

 

The paper you reference lists the exit pupil distance in mm for a few of my Leica M lenses:

 

Leica-M 28mm f/2.8 ASPH Elmarit..........29.6

Leica-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH Summilux.....40.50

Leica-M 50mm f/2.0 Summicron..............49.93

 

In my experience worse discoloration and corner smearing are indeed correlated with shorter exit pupil distance when using these lenses on the Sony A7R.

 

These Leica exit pupil distances seem fairly short indeed as compared to a few Nikon lenses:

 

Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 AF G at 14mm......81

Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 AF G at 24mm......96.5

Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8 AF-S@17..............98.58

Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8 AF-S@35..............77

Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 AFG at 24mm............116

Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 AFG at 70mm.............92.5

Nikon 50mm f/1.2 AiS...........................103.4

Nikon 58mm f/1.2 AiS Noct.....................83

Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 AF-S VR (both).......146

 

It would be interesting to know the exit pupil distances for Leica R-lenses, for example for the Leica Vario-Elmarit-R ASPH 28-90/2.8-4.5.

Here is a shot with that lens on A7R at 28 mm IIRC.

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!

 

Inspecting the corners of this image at 100% or 200% resolution my eyes don't detect any discoloration or corner smearing.

So I assume the WATE and Vario-R 28-90 will work just fine with the A7 II or the expected A7R II, resp. the A9.

Similarly, the Vario-Elmar-R 80-200/4 and APO-Telyt-R 180/3.4 should work just fine.

Hopefully in the expected A7R II, resp. the A9 the shutter shock of the A7R for longer lenses has been taken care of so that the Vario-Elmar-R 105-280/4.2 and APO-Telyt-R 280/4 won't need extra care. Although I never owned the A7, I understand that camera didn't suffer the shutter shock of the A7R. I assume the A7 II behaves similarly to the A7 in this regard.

 

Based on my experience with IBIS in the E-M5 and E-M1 I am looking forward to a similar implementation in the A7 II, and hopefully in the A7R II, A9.

That feature should greatly contribute to better manual focusing also of Leica lenses as it eliminates the jerkiness of my shaky hands. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ii assume all the comments above relate to the aspheric 50 Summilux, has anyone any experience of the last pre aspheric version?

I have seen comments that the 50 Summicron does well on the A7, is the exit pupil distance longer for that I wonder.

 

Gerry

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a link on FM comparing reflections noted on the sensor of the new A7II versus the A7

 

a7ii vs a7 - Rangefinder Lens Performance - FM Forums

 

Rich

 

 

Rich, thanks for the encouraging news.

Flare behavior of the A7 II seems to have been improved.

I never noticed these kinds of flares on my A7R.

Maybe I should try to look for them! :eek:

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...