The Sony A7 thread [Merged]

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes - that is exactly what evrybody is saying in this thread. Thanks for the outside confirmation.

[Advertisement]

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

[Photoskeptic]

After owning an NEX-7, I'm in no hurry to own ANY Sony products again. I surmised it might be an inexpensive way to use my Leica glass with more mp. When I was able to nail the focus I got some pretty good images, but my hit rate was less than 60%. OTOH, hit rate with my M8.2 is around 95% - 100%. I'll take a rangefinder any day over an EVF.

[mjh]

You assume that Sony launched a new mount without thinking about the obvious evolution to FF.

Indeed the mount looks like it wasn’t designed with FF in mind. There is no obvious evolution from APS-C to FF, just as there is no obvious evolution from FF to medium format.

 

The only reason there are SLR system with APS-C and FF options is that these systems were originally designed for 35 mm film. Putting APS-C sensors into these cameras was supposed to be a make-shift solution until FF sensors became available, but once they did it had turned out that APS-C DSLRs offered advantages of their own (smaller size of the body, smaller lenses for the same angle of view, lower price), so APS-C continued to be an option. However, all the newer systems were designed for APS-C, not FF.

[IkarusJohn]

However, all the newer systems were designed for APS-C, not FF.

 

I thought the Nikons just continued with the F mount. Didn't Canon effectively do the same thing? I don't know so much about Canon.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[mjh]

There is an army of enthusiast photographers who eagerly await affordable full frame alternative to Leica M camera.

That would be a rather small army. The Vatican’s Swiss Guard comes to mind.

 

This line of reasoning would make a lot of sense if Leica’s M lenses were rather affordable, the only barrier to entry being the high price of M cameras. Only M lenses are quite expensive, too.

 

Popularity of NEX, Fuji-X, Micro three-four and few others is testament to that.

The vast majority of people buying mirrorless system cameras never use M lenses on their cameras since they prefer the AF lenses of the respective system vendors. These systems are popular for what they offer, not because they let you use M lenses.

[mjh]

I thought the Nikons just continued with the F mount. Didn't Canon effectively do the same thing? I don't know so much about Canon.

I referred to the newer systems, not the established SLR systems that all date back to 35 mm film.

 

After 1987 (when Canon introduced the EOS system), all new cameras systems were either based on APS-C, FourThirds, or medium format.

[k-hawinkler]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi Photoskeptic,

 

I agree with you on the RF advantage for manual focus with near normal lenses.

 

Well, let's consider now long teles.

That's where the NEX-7 really shines, on a tripod of course.

The OMD has a crop factor of 2 and the NEX of 1.5, the NEX has of course a wider angle of view.

However, as it also has 50% more pixels, its linear sensor resolution is only about 5% lower than that of the OMD.

Very nice. I have had no problems with either camera and lLeica lenses from 50 - 560 mm on a tripod.

Heck, with using several APO-Extenders-R I have gotten to me acceptable images taken with a virtual focal length of almost 10 meters.

 

What I can't do with these cameras are BIF, unless the birds are at infinity, practically speaking.

Even using AF with tracking and a brand new 75-300 mm lens on the OMD,

the system isn't quite accurate and fast enough,

for example, to focus and track hummingbirds in flight.

 

However, the OMD with AF, in body image stabilization and a 600 mm virtual reach,

is an absolute pleasure to use handheld on frequently changing, but for brief moments of time stationary subjects.

 

So for BIF, I will try next my D800E - now that the left autofocus issue seems to have been successfully repaired by Nikon - with the new 80-400 mm Nikkor lens. I'll see how that goes.

 

For hand held manual focus of teles my favorite system is NEX-7 with Leica 80-200 mm,

giving me a virtual reach of 300 mm.

[macjonny1]

That would be a rather small army. The Vatican’s Swiss Guard comes to mind.

 

This line of reasoning would make a lot of sense if Leica’s M lenses were rather affordable, the only barrier to entry being the high price of M cameras. Only M lenses are quite expensive, too.

 

Your reasoning would make a lot of sense if *NEW* Leica M lenses were the only M-mount lenses. Fortunately there are other options from Zeiss, CV, legacy glass, that are quite popular and much less expensive, and many of which have their own unique character that is not available on a modern lens.

[IkarusJohn]

So for BIF, I will try next my D800E - now that the left autofocus issue seems to have been successfully repaired by Nikon - with the new 80-400 mm Nikkor lens. I'll see how that goes.

 

Can you keep us informed how this goes?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[k-hawinkler]

Can you keep us informed how this goes?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

 

Of course, no problem. Thanks for asking.

[k-hawinkler]

A friend of mine gets stunning Hummingbird BIF pictures with his D800 and the old Nikkor 80-400 lens.

So, I am hopeful...

[01af]

You assume that Sony launched a new mount without thinking about the obvious evolution to full-frame.

Definitely not.

 

Instead, I assume Sony launched a new mount (the E mount, that is) with the firm intention to keep the NEX series in the APS-C domain forever. The NEX VG900E camcorder is an exception, targeted at a very different group of customers. If—and that's a big 'IF' and clearly not a 'when'—so, if Sony eventually brings out a digital 35-mm-format full-frame mirrorless system camera then it will be like an RX-1 with interchangable lenses rather than a NEX with a full-frame sensor. Which basically means a new lens mount which will be neither E nor Alpha. So everybody who invested in the NEX system lately is going to buy into a whole new system again.

 

It's the same, by the way, with those Fujifilm X-yaddayadda 1 cameras—in this series of cameras, there also will never be a model with a 35-mm-format full-frame sensor. They are APS-C and they always will.

[IkarusJohn]

A friend of mine gets stunning Hummingbird BIF pictures with his D800 and the old Nikkor 80-400 lens.

So, I am hopeful...

 

We don't have hummingbirds, but we have fantails, tuis and other interesting birds I would like to photograph when (if) my D800E and 80-400 zoom arrive.

 

John

From the Kingdom of the Birds

[IkarusJohn]

Definitely not.

 

Instead, I assume Sony launched a new mount (the E mount, that is) with the firm intention to keep the NEX series in the APS-C domain forever. The NEX VG900E camcorder is an exception, targeted at a very different group of customers. If—and that's a big 'IF' and clearly not a 'when'—so, if Sony eventually brings out a digital 35-mm-format full-frame mirrorless system camera then it will be like an RX-1 with interchangable lenses rather than a NEX with a full-frame sensor. Which basically means a new lens mount which will be neither E nor Alpha. So everybody who invested in the NEX system lately is going to buy into a whole new system again.

 

It's the same, by the way, with those Fujifilm X-yaddayadda 1 cameras—in this series of cameras, there also will never be a model with a 35-mm-format full-frame sensor. They are APS-C and they always will.

 

This is my expectation as well.

 

Assuming they wish to maintain the small physical form, mirrorless approach as the RX-1, presumably that means a short register distance (much like the M cameras). What would be the limitation on the exit pupil? assuming they also want to keep the lenses a manageable size?

 

I guess the assumption is that the lenses would be AF, with aperture on the lens barrel like the RX-1.

 

You know this is leading to the next question - presumably someone (Novoflex) will make both M and R adapters. If Zeiss is involved in the lens development (a fair assumption, even if only premium lenses), then compatibility with ZM lenses has to be likely - this will, after all, be a premium product ...

[jaapv]

But not necessarily ZM lenses, Zeiss can easily build a dediccated series.

[mjh]

Your reasoning would make a lot of sense if *NEW* Leica M lenses were the only M-mount lenses. Fortunately there are other options from Zeiss, CV, legacy glass, that are quite popular and much less expensive, and many of which have their own unique character that is not available on a modern lens.

So once Sony or whoever introduces a FF EVIL camera suitable for using M mount lenses, photographers owning non-Leica M mount lenses could finally use their lenses on a non-Leica body … Would Leica care? I don’t think so. And why should genuine Leica customers care, i.e. those that actually buy new stuff every few years or so?

[douglasf13]

The problem with the RX1 is that it isn't really a design that can be scaled to an interchangeable system. The mount tolerances are small, and the rear element is a giant field flattening element that sits right above the sensor.

 

I think what we'll see is what essentially amounts to the VG-900, but in a still camera focused, smaller body. Sony will probably make a new LA-EA4 adapter that allows AF and auto-metering with a-mount lenses, e-mount lenses will auto-crop to aps-c when mounted to the e-mount (like the VG-900,) and we may even see some largish native lenses from the likes of Zeiss. I'd expect that M lenses will be iffy on the camera, and legacy SLR lenses will be fine.

 

BTW, here is a good interview that I ran into again from last fall from Sony's Mark Weir: Q&A with Sony’s Mark Weir: Will full-frame go mirrorless, and what’s the deal with Dual AF?

[photolandscape]

After owning an NEX-7, I'm in no hurry to own ANY Sony products again. I surmised it might be an inexpensive way to use my Leica glass with more mp. When I was able to nail the focus I got some pretty good images, but my hit rate was less than 60%. OTOH, hit rate with my M8.2 is around 95% - 100%. I'll take a rangefinder any day over an EVF.

 

I would tend to second what you are saying. I had unreasonably high hopes for using Leica glass on the NEX-7 evidently, though I bought it on the recommendation of several reviewers who practically portrayed it as the best thing since sliced bread.

 

With a 24mm Elmar ASPH, the red fringing was extreme, and it isn't much better with the 35mm 'Cron ASPH. Also, the AWB makes Leica's AWB look spectacular--everything non the NEX-7--or on mine at least--is ridiculously reddish/magenta--particularly neutrals. I have pretty much given up on it and offered it to my son. The 30mm Sigma, which I bought for $85 used, works reasonably well and is pretty sharp.

 

All in all, I expected too much and got too little.Wish I had kept my Fuji X100 instead.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[douglasf13]

I would tend to second what you are saying. I had unreasonably high hopes for using Leica glass on the NEX-7 evidently, though I bought it on the recommendation of several reviewers who practically portrayed it as the best thing since sliced bread.

 

With a 24mm Elmar ASPH, the red fringing was extreme, and it isn't much better with the 35mm 'Cron ASPH. Also, the AWB makes Leica's AWB look spectacular--everything non the NEX-7--or on mine at least--is ridiculously reddish/magenta--particularly neutrals. I have pretty much given up on it and offered it to my son. The 30mm Sigma, which I bought for $85 used, works reasonably well and is pretty sharp.

 

All in all, I expected too much and got too little.Wish I had kept my Fuji X100 instead.

 

Unfortunately, I'd say it was pretty common knowledge across most forums that the NEX-7 has issues with most M lenses wider than 50mm. The NEX-5N/R or NEX-6 is the one you wanted for that purpose (or a Ricoh GXR-M.)

[AlanG]

 

... If—and that's a big 'IF' and clearly not a 'when'—so, if Sony eventually brings out a digital 35-mm-format full-frame mirrorless system camera then it will be like an RX-1 with interchangable lenses rather than a NEX with a full-frame sensor. Which basically means a new lens mount which will be neither E nor Alpha. So everybody who invested in the NEX system lately is going to buy into a whole new system again....

 

There are several possibilities for a new Sony FF camera. It could be like a larger format version of the Nex 7 but with an Alpha lens mount close to the sensor as on the Nex cameras. This would not accept Nex lenses but would accept Alpha lenses via an adapter. The adapter could be left on the camera and only removed when other brands of lenses are mounted. This could have a semi-silvered PD AF adapter similar to the Nex to Alpha adapter. Eventually this could be changed to a non mirrored adapter should they get sensor based PD AF to work well. How well some M lenses would work on this can't be predicted since we have no idea what sensor would be used or what correction would be available.

 

Otherwise new full frame lenses would have to be produced in mounts that are longer than current versions (assuming the same optical design.) Having a bunch of bigger lenses defeats the purpose of having a smaller body. At some point Sony could also develop some special small lenses for this camera that don't require the adapter. Why this body would be more appealing than an SLT body would depend on how these new lenses are implemented.

 

The only reason to use a Nex mount on it would be to accept Nex lenses in some kind of cropped mode. And why would you buy this camera to do that when other Nex bodies are so inexpensive and small? This is not to say that Sony won't go this route.