The Sony A7 thread [Merged]

[onceuponatime]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I cannot find a picture taken with the Leica 24 mm on that page; the example with the Zeiss 18 mm does show some red on the left side although it is hard to judge a picture such as this. We will see. My points stand; Sony may have found a way to make their sensor more tolerant against large incident angles but so far there are no claims that they did.

 

 

We will have to await tests from reviewers, users.

 

Just for now ""I put my Zeiss ZM 21mm ƒ/2.8 on the A7r we have here [Luke works at Imaging-Resource —Ed.]. I'm sad to report that color shifts were severe and covered most of the frame. There was also severe darkening of the image away from the center, way too much to simply call vignetting. I chose this lens carefully, based on the experience of other users, to avoid this problem with my early NEX cameras."

 

Thus perhaps there are some issues with some wide angle lenses, we shall see.

Digital M also has issues with some wide angle lenses.

[jdlaing]

Bad new boys and girls.

 

Everything from 35mm down to 16mm in Leica lenses are ca ca on the Sony A7 bodies.

Exponentially worse the wider the FOV.

 

Color cast is everywhere.

Darkness multiplies outward from the center in a bad way. Worse than vignetting.

 

Good luck with it.

[Rick]

Structurally, all Leica really has to do is modernize the M body in a way so that the entire rangefinder/viewfinder mechanism can be swapped for a great compact EVF. And speed up live view shooting so that it is responsive. Perhaps the RF will have to be electronically driven to accomplish this. (By simply converting the movement of the focus tracking wheel into a signal.) Otherwise by the time you add on an EVF, the camera will be too large for some to consider now that smaller FF cameras may be the wave of the future.

 

Any changes to the size and ergonomics are optional and anything they can do to keep up with the electronics of their competitors will be important no matter what kind of cameras they make.

 

I agree with all of this and would be ready for this electronic rangefinder gizmo you suggest (with integral EVF). I'd even buy an AF/RF M-lens to add to my MF stable.

[onceuponatime]

RX1 and M240 RF Shooter's Perspective:

 

Plenty of discussion about this new Sony gizmo with more MPs and better whatnots.

 

 

35mm and above A7r may well be curretly the most versatile FF compact.

 

Does that mean it will be a camera with that certain spirit of photogrpahy or a techonological gizmo in a box.

Having bought Nex3, Nex5, tested RX1, I would say A7/r will be a technological gizmo in a box.

 

Why then would I purchase it ... simply because it is currently the only other FF compact and I am not enamoured with Digital M's. Analog M oh yes any day.

 

Fuji are rumored to bring a fixed lens FF compact next year. I may well wait for that.

[IkarusJohn]

I'd even buy an AF/RF M-lens to add to my MF stable.

 

Nah

[IkarusJohn]

Bad new boys and girls.

 

Everything from 35mm down to 16mm in Leica lenses are ca ca on the Sony A7 bodies.

Exponentially worse the wider the FOV.

 

Color cast is everywhere.

Darkness multiplies outward from the center in a bad way. Worse than vignetting.

 

Good luck with it.

 

Interesting - can you provide a source?

 

The reports to date suggest that there is vignetting, and some chromatic aberrations shot wide open, off centre, with some lenses (My Noctilux has spectacular CA on my M9) - and there's also the report from Brian Smith that the camera works very well with his Leica lenses - wasn't he the one who posted the Zeiss 16mm? Not much ca there.

 

Some further details would be very interesting.

[jdlaing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Interesting - can you provide a source?

 

The reports to date suggest that there is vignetting, and some chromatic aberrations shot wide open, off centre, with some lenses (My Noctilux has spectacular CA on my M9) - and there's also the report from Brian Smith that the camera works very well with his Leica lenses - wasn't he the one who posted the Zeiss 16mm? Not much ca there.

 

Some further details would be very interesting.

 

The Leica 35, 28, MATE and WATE were tested by me and another gentleman.

 

More information was found after we did it here after we went digging. Both of us decided to give it a pass after we saw the outcome.

 

We went digging and found this:

 

The Online Photographer: Two Reasons...

[The One Pixel Wonder]

Bad new boys and girls.

 

Everything from 35mm down to 16mm in Leica lenses are ca ca on the Sony A7 bodies.

Exponentially worse the wider the FOV.

 

Color cast is everywhere.

Darkness multiplies outward from the center in a bad way. Worse than vignetting.

 

Good luck with it.

 

Care to back your claims up with anything substantial!?

[CalArts 99]

So think that looking through an EVF will eventually not feel like looking with a TV camera? Just a question — I have no idea.

 

If it helps at all think of the motion picture industry. Even before digital capture, video taps were used with film cameras. Only the camera operator looked through the viewfinder (and looking through the viewfinder of a 16mm or 35mm motion film camera is kind of like an EVF anyway.) Everyone else (e.g., the director) looked at the tap display. And with digital capture it's all EVF and display work. If film makers could get used to watching a display I think still photographers can, too (think also of ground glass viewing on large format.) And with display technology quite advanced these days, I think it's just a question of adapting to it and getting used to it like we end up doing with most all new technology. There are advantages to the EVF; it's a WYSIWYG kind of thing.

[jdlaing]

Care to back your claims up with anything substantial!?

 

Not for you.

[helged]

Digital M also has issues with some wide angle lenses.

 

Certainly, but the red edge effect from Zeiss ZM 21mm ƒ/2.8 on M9/M240 is confined to the edges (and is curable).

 

The usefulness of Leica lenses on the A7R is - at least from my perspective - strongly limited if this is the case:

color shifts were severe and covered most of the frame

(the lens mentioned is Zeiss 21/f2.8, source).

 

Other reports, for instance using the Leica 28mm F2.8 ASPH on A7R, appears more favourable, so it is hard to tell what the conclusion will be. Time will show, for sure.

[naturephoto1]

RX1 and M240 RF Shooter's Perspective:

 

Plenty of discussion about this new Sony gizmo with more MPs and better whatnots. All interesting, of course, but for me it more than equally involves lenses. Specifically, there already exists such a fantastic collection of Leica M-lenses that are designed to perform optimally with the M's RF, haptic of the body, and design of the sensor that I'm not convinced if, I switch to the A7 as my primary camera I will be better off.

 

I know M-lenses will not work functionally anywhere near as well on the Sony A7 as they do on the M240. I suspect that M lenses may also perform optically better on the M240 as well, because of better edge color and sharpness. And, realistically there won't be much, if any, difference between the M240 and the A7 in print... and probably, little difference even with the A7R.

 

I've been down this Sony road earlier this year when I started shooting the wonderful Sony RX1. Many of you remember that I reported the RX1 as better than the M240, at first, anyway. As it turns out, after many months and thousands of comparison photos in LR (shot side by side of the same thing), they both produce great images. But, I still prefer the M240 color after all. It is just easier to work with in PP and the skin tones seem more natural, from my perspective. But, for the most part, toss a coin on image quality between these two.

 

But that is where the closeness of performance of these two cameras starts to diverge. They become such different functionally-specific cameras beyond their near indistinguishable image quality.

 

I understand that the new Sony A7 is a little different from the RX1, but they are very similar for this discussion. Both have about the same sensor and EVF. Both the A7 and the RX1 are ergonomically the same. Outside of the interchangeable lens feature on the A7, the RX1 is the closest camera in the wild to compare to.

 

Having used the RX1 with its Zeiss lens, I can attest to the problems that the RX1 has in manual focus. The Zeiss lens isn't designed to manually focus easily, and it isn't just a matter of having a nice big focus ring to easily grab. The focus by wire is somehow disconnected, vague and not designed well as a human-to-mechanical interface. Therefore, I would not choose these Sony cameras to focus lenses (Sony Zeiss) that were not designed initially as manual focus lenses, like the M series lenses are. Which is fine, by the way, because the RX1 and its Zeiss lens actually works well in AF mode, much to the contrary of what a lot of reviewers nitpick about. I assume the A7 will be even better. But, I would not use the A7 with Sony lenses in MF mode.

 

As far as all the interest in placing M-series lenses on the A7 goes, they are going to be somewhat difficult to focus. The only way to focus will be to use the EVF and focus peaking. Experience from the M240 and EVF shows us that this isn't going to work as well as the RF method except in very low light. The A7's superior EVF will help, but it won't overcome the inherent problem that the EVF has no other aid to focus except highlighting edge contrast and the visual confirmation of TTL DOF, which doesn't work well when stopped down.

 

Which brings us back to the M240 and its wonderful sensor and best in class lenses that work so well with the improved M RF. The clunky old M240 with a trove of M-system lenses, that will not be completely matched by Sony, in this decade anyway:), leaves us with a viable alternative in the M-system, still very much alive and competitive for those willing to spend the money.

 

In the end, what I discovered with my experience with the wonderful RX1 is that, given the choice, I always wanted to take the M240 along with me to shoot and not the RX1. It really wouldn't matter if I could have used my M lenses on the RX1, I still would want to shoot the M240, mainly because of the lenses and how well they work on the M.

 

It would be a very difficult choice for me to give up the M and all of the lenses to shoot a technically "better" A7 body with not so good Sony lens choices. Even if I used the A7 with the M lenses, I would still choose the M240 for the reasons mentioned above.

 

For me, the A7 is just an RX1 that would enable me replace the 35mm lens with other AF Zeiss lens. But, most of us have DSLRs with excellent zooms and tele's that AF already. And, smaller DSLR bodies are no doubt coming from Canon and Nikon to utilize their stable of excellent lenses. So, why jump to a new cool small system that doesn't yet have the lenses?

 

I'd just be careful abandoning the M240 (or DSLR) before the new kid (A7) has enough good lenses that will meet your creative needs and optical expectations. And, I'm not sure how many will be satisfied squinting out pictures with manual M-lenses on the A7. I mean really, other than smaller, what does the A7 have going for it?

 

I think that the Sony A7 and the Sony A7R will prove to be a superior R answer and R solution for using the R series Leica lenses than the M240. This is something to consider for the abandoned and orphaned R shooter. It may not prove to be as elegant or perform as well for using the Wide angle M lenses in the sweet spot of between 28mm and 50mm or even possibly to 70mm or even to 90mm. But even with the RF focusing many find that the M series lenses beyond 50mm or 75mm, or 90mmm focus more easily and more consistently with an EVF. That leaves us with the very wide and UW M lenses in the 24mm and wider focal lengths which when used with an M camera need to be supplemented with an external viewfinder or must be focused with the add on EVF or rear LCD of an M240 or scale focused. Additionally, when using the Leica rangefinders and the M series lenses you do not have full confidence in your image framing or your DOF.

 

The biggest question and the biggest if is whether the new Sony A7 and the A7r cameras will play nicely with WA M lenses and to which focal lengths that these cameras will perform well.

 

The new Sony A7 and A7r cameras will perform better than an M240 camera for the usage of Leica R series lenses and for that matter other SLR lenses from other makers particularly in the macro (and high magnification photography), telephoto, and the zoom, shift, and Tilt and shift portions of photography. These same cameras for the time being will be the best performing jacks of all trades cameras ever offered being able to use if not all of the M series lenses or at least a large portion of these lenses (something no other FF digital camera outside of the M series cameras can do). Additionally, these cameras will be able to work with almost every other lens ever designed for usage for other SLR or DSLR FF, and 35mm interchangeable range finder lenses, as well as most/many medium format lenses including for shift and tilt and shift, and even many large format lenses mounted on a bellows. Additionally, the Sony A7 and A7r will work well with their own small (at present) and growing arsenal of autofocus lenses made and/or designed by Zeiss, Sony, and independent lens makers. These lenses may not have the same buttery feel for manual focus as our Leica M or Leica R lenses, but they will also offer that ability as well.

 

Rich

[The One Pixel Wonder]

Not for you.

 

How about for every one else reading your post?

[IkarusJohn]

Special edition lovers, check out the extravagant full frame $10K mirrorless: Hassy Solar!

 

[ATTACH]403639[/ATTACH]

 

 

This has to be a joke. Surely.

[IkarusJohn]

The Leica 35, 28, MATE and WATE were tested by me and another gentleman.

 

More information was found after we did it here after we went digging. Both of us decided to give it a pass after we saw the outcome.

 

We went digging and found this:

 

The Online Photographer: Two Reasons...

 

Yes, I read that article.

 

Reason (1), mechanical slop in the adapter, is a real issue. Adding an adapter introduces an opportunity for variability (Karl-Heinz has written a lot on this issue in this forum). However, if you buy a precision machined adapter like the Novoflex, it isn't an issue. I have one and have used it extensively on my NEX-5n. Steve Huff also made the same comment about cheap adapters.

 

Reason (2) struck me as a confusingly technical explanation of what Michael Hussmann describes better on this forum. The throat and register distance of the M mount was designed for film. Film is forgiving of high angles of incidence off centre, but digital sensors are not. The M9 & NEX-5n (granted, less of an issue with APS-C, but it was an issue with the NEX-7) had microlenses over the chip sites to deal with this issue, and they generally did a great job. The CMOSIS sensor has shallower buckets to obviate the need for such microlenses. The A7r, apparently has a different solution with offset chips and reduced gaps between chips. It will be very interesting to see if this works.

 

What surprises me is that colour shift and drop of in sharpness is not just a factor of focal length. Some Zeiss wides on the M9 had terrible colour shift, and wasn't the Elmarit 28 a problem? Yet others which were far wider had no such problems.

 

So, when you say:

Everything from 35mm down to 16mm in Leica lenses are ca ca on the Sony A7 bodies.

Exponentially worse the wider the FOV.

it naturally piques my interest, which I guess was the plan.

 

Everything from 35mm down?

 

It's great that you got the opportunity to actually take some shots onto an SD card and download them. I didn't think that was possible at the moment (Steve Huff wasn't allowed to when he played with the cameras). It would be fantastic if you could upload some of the images here, with the details of what lenses were used. Hopefully, if Sony is allowing images to be loaded, we will see lots more images we can look at in detail and make up our minds on an informed basis.

 

Cheers

John

[rosuna]

Reflex cameras have a possibility for staying ahead in the race: three layer sensors, like the Foveon.

 

The longer flange distance would allow an optimum performance of these thick sensors. Sigma already offers an APS-C Foveon sensor with 15MP, so a 24x36 sensor of 30MP (x3 layers) would be possible and would bring image quality to another territory.

[douglasf13]

Well this is a subjective thing.

Personally I find that once you attach a Thumbs Up! to an M body it is one of the most comfortable cameras to hold and manually focus on the market.

 

I actually can't stand the way that Thumbs Up! grips dig into my body when hanging on the strap, so I never used mine. Leica should use a "dummy" film lever that retracts just for the grip's sake.

[NJH]

The biggest question and the biggest if is whether the new Sony A7 and the A7r cameras will play nicely with WA M lenses and to which focal lengths that these cameras will perform well.

 

Rich

 

100%. I am in a different position to many on this thread in that I don't own any FF camera just an M8 and a small bunch of M mount lenses. The A7 or A7r is very compelling as it would cost much the same as upgrading from my M8 to an M9 but instead I could keep the M8 and use the A7/r to "shift" my existing focal lengths. The 28mm Elmarit on the M8 for example is currently my favourite but could be a real 28 when used on the A7 but I struggle with wider frame lines than the 37mm equivalent ones in the M8. Thus in essence the A7 would fulfil all the roles for me that the M8 doesn't give me for focal lengths wider than 35mm and longer than 90mm, or where close up focusing is required etc. etc. Within that mix its a dead duck if it doesn't perform with wide angle lenses, but at least one report on here so far has claimed it works well with the 28mm Elmarit. Fingers crossed.

[wattsy]

This has to be a joke. Surely.

 

I think it is a spoof (at least that's how I read the 'article') but it is being reposted around the internet as if it is official news.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[douglasf13]

It's all really pretty simple. If you must use a rangefinder, then the m240 is a no-brainer. If not, than the A7/r is a no-brainer.

 

For me, as someone who traded in my M9 for the RX1 and has shot all kinds of cameras over the years, from a Leicaflex, to Canon EF, to Hasselblads, to Sony, to Leica M, and back again, I rarely feel hindered by any viewing system, button layout, grip size, build quality or whatever. It's just a camera. If I needed anything more than a 35mm lens, I'd definitely look at the A7/r, but I'm sticking with the RX1, because the lens and leaf shutter would be hard to give up.

 

If I were to buy the A7/r, I'd definitely buy its native primes. That 55/1.8 looks like it could be a world-beater standard lens, at least under the $4K mark.