The Sony A7 thread [Merged]

[CalArts 99]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The RX1 does one thing well. And, Canon and Nikon have entire systems with synced speed lights and fast AF lines of lenses etc. I think the A7 series will be a great pro-sumer camera for sure, but kept in context.

 

I personally wouldn't replace the RX1 with the A7, particularly if the 35mm focal length is something one is comfortable with using often (I am.) Nor would I replace a full Nikon/Canon system with the A7. Nor with a 4x5 view camera, or a Leica film M, etc.. The A7 would be an addition to the toolbox. Perhaps it will be a replacement or a single system for some (e.g., the 'pro-sumer' that you mention.) And lenses are one factor but not everything (also we might use certain lenses that may not have 'perfect' resolution but have other characteristics we find are important; even 'softness.') Everything has to be kept in context.

 

It's interesting that in the motion picture industry (where digital capture is very high end and expensive) they talk about "digital emulsions." Different sensors and different lens combinations are often tested before the start of expensive productions (e.g., here: Podcast on Selecting Cameras for Need for Speed | Hurlbut Visuals) Even with post processing and skillled colorists, there will be differences coming from each capture device. Still photographers have to think the same way, too. We did so in the past with different film choices and different film formats. And therefore we had lots of tools in the toolkit. It's no different today.

[Advertisement]

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

[CalArts 99]

We may like it or not, - the same happens in the world of photography.

 

Maybe Leica should enter into a joint venture with a partner in the electronics industry.

What about Sony?

 

Increasingly smaller, lighter and more powerful,

Without comparison otherwise:

 

Another good example is Raytheon ELCAN Optical Technologies. This is Leitz Canada purchased by Hughes Aircraft and later sold to Raytheon. They are also the same company that makes the Primo line of lens for Panavision, one of the most respected line of lenses in the industry. Leitz optical glass combined with state of the art research and manufacturing technologies. Raytheon ELCAN Optical Technologies: Our Company

 

"Panavision’s optical supplier at the time found the specifications and tolerances to be too tight and refused to even try. Panavision then approached Raytheon ELCAN with their vision for a new standard of visual experience through their new designs."

 

"Panavision’s challenge to Raytheon ELCAN Optical Technologies was to develop a series of lenses with exceptional sharpness & contrast, even field illumination and negligible veiling glare, ghosting or distortion and importantly, that were color-matched across the entire series.

Raytheon ELCAN started their solution by selecting a new high-performance glass material that was risky, but offered huge advantages. This new glass was critical for the novel optical design that Panavision wanted to try. Raytheon ELCAN then utilized a new multi-coating technique to control the color aberrations as well as increase the total transmitted light through the lenses. This combination of design and manufacturing innovation made it possible to shoot multiple angles and shots with multiple lenses without the need for filters or intensive post-production editing."

[dwbell]

Don't loose the scent or you may loose the path... lenses are the real path.

 

Gonna have to call you up on technicality Rick. Printed final image is the real path. I'll go one further, the connection between the viewer and the printed image is the real path. I could care less about the lenses to be honest, I exaggerate, but my X100s replaced my M9 and 35 cron. Why? Because it got so damn close and could fit in a pocket. The final image and viewer reaction can take place much more often if I have a capable enough camera on me at all times. So it's the system. I love Leica glass, of course I do, but I feel it's crippled by Leica bodies. I don't know if this A7r will work out for me but at present it looks like the electronic usability of my Fuji, with the D800 sensor and Leica glass - what a system!! Now if the Leica glass don't work, how far off is the Zeiss glass? Is the system still a better tool overall for me? That's the question I'll need to answer. The 55 Zeiss samples suggest perhaps it is. I shoot 35, 50, 75 and may need a 135 ish at times, though so far have not gone there. So Sony, for me, are only one lens away. For you they're lacking, for me they're already 2/3rds of the way there and it ain't even launched yet!

 

It's interesting that in the motion picture industry

 

Ah man, I LOVE Shane. Such a big fan. I so wish camera forums were like cinematography forums. They start with the vision, then retrospectively determine 'tools' based on that. So much healthier, so much more honest to their art.

[CalArts 99]

I so wish camera forums we're like cinematography forums. They start with the vision, then retrospectively determine 'tools' based on that. So much healthier, so much more honest to their art.

 

+1

[MarkP]

 

 

Ah man, I LOVE Shane. Such a big fan. I so wish camera forums were like cinematography forums. They start with the vision, then retrospectively determine 'tools' based on that. So much healthier, so much more honest to their art.

 

So nicely put.

[lct]

...It's clear that the M240 is not the perfect answer to a digital M. Otherwise a thread of this size would have never happened in the first place. Hopefully Leica is listening...

So a non-M body would be the adequate answer to a digital M? If i were Leica i would hear that some photographers are not interested in rangefinders any more and are ready to accept compromises to put their Leica glass on some $2K EVIL cameras even if Zeiss lenses give better results on the latters. Not sure that i would want to play at that level.

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I hear what you are saying, the print and how it translates to the viewer is the path. But, the lens is the optical projector of the image to the sensor. It may not be the path but, you have to agree it is the beginning of the path. If, it isn't the Panavision of the visual movie experience, creating the mood and feel and light and, well everything, it really doesn't matter what comes later. In that sense, the lens is the thing.

 

I'm just saying that Sony is just starting down the path with the cart being pushed by the horse. They need some really good lenses, some real work horses that will excite the creativity of photographers... they just aren't as for as Leica is down that path.

 

Sony, of course, knows this and are using a little misdirection in their campaign. They are marketing upfront the advantage of being able to use adapters and shoot practically any current lens made by other manufacturers. Using this as an advantage to cover an almost nonexistent lens line. Sony, gets it, it is about lenses, they teamed with Zeiss. But they don't have them yet.

 

And, unlike you, I feel the M240 is doing a great job recording the beautiful light from 60 years of amazing glass. As you know, I got a chance to compare the M240 (with the new firmware) to the SonyRX1 for a month of shooting every day. The M240 isn't old technology when it comes to the image quality of Sony. I can't imagine the A7R being to far ahead of the RX1 in image quality, the A7R certainly doesn't have the lens quality of the RX1.

[algrove]

My car does 160mph but my average speed since I bought it is 24mph

 

While going to Solms the next time may I suggest you do a couple of laps around the Nurburgring to bring that average speed into the faster lane. Or get a Smart.

[algrove]

John, the Zeiss 55/1.8 is actually well in Leica territory, and even beyond. For just 1000$, you get 50 AA performance. The Zeiss 35/2.8 is no slouch either, but it was primarily designed for size.

 

http://www.sony.jp/ichigan/products/SEL55F18Z/feature_1.html#L1_80

 

I am selling my APO50 tomorrow.

[biglou]

So a non-M body would be the adequate answer to a digital M? If i were Leica i would hear that some photographers are not interested in rangefinders any more and are ready to accept compromises to put their Leica glass on some $2K EVIL cameras even if Zeiss lenses give better results on the latters. Not sure that i would want to play at that level.

 

They could, maybe, do differently.

Quickly improve the electronics supporting the EVF, refresh rate and evf supported in order to accomodate the existing good ones.

Then call back already sold cameras for a free upgrade.

Happy customers and more sales to come.

[MarkP]

Thats a joke, right?

[AlanG]

 

I still don't see much in the Sony line up of lenses promised that is going to match Canon or Leica. Where is the 24-70/2.8? Long way off. Not to mention great Zeiss and Sigma lenses people already have in their bag for Leica, Canon and Nikon.

 

The Sony Alpha lenses work on the A7s and that includes a Zeiss 24-70 2.8, (2) 70-200 2.8 and other pro lenses. What is wrong with using these and the Sony straight or SLT adapter? They have a few high end long lenses but they don't contain IS as that is inside the Alpha bodies but not in the A7's body.

 

Being able to adapt numerous third party lenses is a big plus that is much more important in getting people to buy into the system than making them switch entirely. In the case of Leica, the A7, from the posts here, obviously is generating a lot of interest as an additional body for numerous reasons that have been outlined countless times. There is no convincing necessary. It is just a question of how useful this body will be to them, not whether lots of Leica owners will buy it. I don't think there is comparable enthusiasm among Nikon or Canon owners. But once they learn about it, some surely will add it to their systems too.

 

As I mentioned a few posts back, if the A7 provides more accurate focus in some situations, that may be more important than having ultimate lens quality. So comparing a camera/lens combo in various uses would be more informative than results from static lens testing. That is why you often have to spend some time with a camera system to understand if it will work for you.

[IkarusJohn]

Please, excuse my rants against some of Leica's practises earlier in this thread. I should say that I simply love my M9/Monochrom, and a large part of the reason I didn't follow the upgrade path to the M(240) is that I am happy with what I have - I can't buy $10,000 cameras every year, particularly if they're just electronic devices with limited support life. I also cherish my Leica lenses, and apart from a couple of lenses for my D800E, I have no intention of departing from the Leica fold when it comes to lenses.

 

Similarly, my comment about "first generation sensor" has been misinterpreted. What I meant was that this is really the first generation of the Leica/CMOSIS sensor - it's relatively untested, and the initial teething problems with it are apparent. Or maybe, it's just Leica users getting used to a new colour pallette.

 

I really hope the CMOSIS sensor succeeds, and I think Leica has done the right thing developing this sensor in a way which protects their R&D. But, the best way to do that is to use it, and their fancy MAX processor in more products. The threads on a viewfinderless M mount Leica have gone on and on for years, yet Leica seems to tell us that no, that's not actually what we want. Hence the huge interest across the internet in the A7r - Leica would have heard it here first, had they listened.

 

I read and enjoyed the Zeiss paper on wide angle lenses with digital sensors. Here is paragraph 3:

 

Lenses with a very large beam tilt react in a much more sensitive manner to a change of refractive index in the image space caused by filter plates in front of the sensor (such as low pass and IR-blocking filters). If the filter plate is not considered in the design of the lens, the edge definition will suffer. The effect of the additional path through the glass grows exponentially with the beam inclination. A Distagon which never achieves more than 20° beam tilt in the corner of the image reacts more tolerantly than a symmetrical wide-angle lens, which might reach a 45° tilt. This is why filters in digital Leicas are very thin - to remain compatible with older optics.

 

Vignetting, I can live with, colour shift can be corrected with Cornerfix if I need to, smearing and ugly detail in the corners will be a problem if I use Sean Read's testing board or take to brick walls. Generally, it is the subject I want nice and crisp, and the subject is not often in the corners. This problem with Leica wide angles on digital sensors is not some smoke and mirrors artistry or an arcane skill. It's about sensor design (micro-lenses, bucket depths and offset for the shallow incidence angle), and the lack of a thick IR Anti-Aliasing filter on top of the sensor, screwing up the sides and corners of the sensor.

 

Let's wait and see what the A7r is like - I'd tend to believe the experts (Brian Smith I think was the first I read to say this). If the lens is retrofocus design, it should work. If it works with modern Zeiss & Canikon wides, surely there's a good chance it will work with Leicas.

 

It might also be interesting to see if Leica picks up the subtle requests here and elsewhere (showing demand, one might say) for a smaller, lighter, weather sealed camera with a full frame CMOSIS-2 sensor, Max-2 processor, top of the range built in EVF (with movable focal point), M-mount camera.

 

What? Really? Do you think some-one might like one? Gosh, who'd have thought! This 1200-odd post thread is on a Leica forum, after all.

 

Cheers

John

[Rick]

The Sony Alpha lenses work on the A7s and that includes a Zeiss 24-70 2.8, (2) 70-200 2.8 and other pro lenses. They have a few high end long lenses but they don't contain IS as that is inside the Alpha bodies but not in the A7's body. Canon lenses work on it with IS and somewhat slower AF I hear. But slow IS won't be a problem for the manual TSE lenses or any lenses used for static subjects. Nikon lenses can also work on it in manual mode.

 

As I mentioned a few posts back, if the A7 provides more accurate focus in some situations, that may be more important than having ultimate lens quality. So comparing a camera/lens combo in various uses would be more informative than results from static lens testing. That is why you often have to spend some time with a camera system to understand if it will work for you.

 

You are going to use the A lenses on the A7. Just another substitute. When you add the adapter and the A 24-70/2.8 you got a pretty big lens. Why not just shoot the 5DIII and new class leading 24-70/2.8?

[CalArts 99]

So a non-M body would be the adequate answer to a digital M? If i were Leica i would hear that some photographers are not interested in rangefinders any more and are ready to accept compromises to put their Leica glass on some $2K EVIL cameras even if Zeiss lenses give better results on the latters. Not sure that i would want to play at that level.

 

That's not what I meant. I didn't imply that a non-M body is what's desired. But by 'perfect' I did mean perfect. There seems to be some ambivalence towards the M240 for a variety of reasons as is evident in this thread. If it were the perfect rangefinder digital M, then I think that this thread wouldn't be active; i.e., there would be little reason to care about a "$2k EVIL camera."

 

And it also doesn't mean Leica should "play at that level." But maybe they should play just a little bit harder at the $7k+ level (which also includes quality control and normal delivery times.)

[AlanG]

You are going to use the A lenses on the A7. Just another substitute. When you add the adapter and the A 24-70/2.8 you got a pretty big lens. Why not just shoot the 5DIII and new class leading 24-70/2.8?

 

Well I could shoot with that Canon lens on the A7 if I want too. This is all about choices but not necessarily about switching systems. The only reason I might consider the A7r is to use my TSE lenses on it. If I were a portrait shooter, the eye tracking might sell me.

 

It should also be pretty easy for Sony to make the same Alpha lenses with extended lens mounts to fit the A7 once the market is there. This will eliminate the possibility of using the SLT adapter however. Some will buy the A7, a few Alpha lenses and also maybe one of the SLT bodies. Who knows? They are providing a lot of options.

 

To tell you the truth, some of my solution for wide angle photography may be to use an 8mm Rokinon fisheye on my Nex, correct the fisheye and converging lines if necessary, crop as needed.... small, simple, and more than good enough for web photos. I just got the lens yesterday for $209 after the $50 DPReview Gearlist discount and my test shots look surprisingly good to me.

[Rick]

Well I could shoot with that Canon lens on the A7 if I want too. This is all about choices but not necessarily about switching systems. The only reason I might consider the A7r is to use my TSE lenses on it. If I were a portrait shooter, the eye tracking might sell me.

 

It should also be pretty easy for Sony to make the same Alpha lenses with extended lens mounts to fit the A7 once the market is there. This will eliminate the possibility of using the SLT adapter however. Some will buy the A7, a few Alpha lenses and also maybe one of the SLT bodies. Who knows? They are providing a lot of options.

 

Why not shoot the Canon 24-70/2.8 on the Canon? I'm just trying to make the point that the A7R is going to be great camera body, but it sure isn't flushed out by Sony lenses designed and optimized just for this body. And, it won't be for a while.

 

It is going to appeal to someone that wants to start a new system or format or someone that has a specific use for this camera, like R-lenses. I just don't know if buying it to use my R lenses is worth it. After all, I can always use the M240 for this.

[k-hawinkler]

It's worth it to me.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[mwilliamsphotography]

You are going to use the A lenses on the A7. Just another substitute. When you add the adapter and the A 24-70/2.8 you got a pretty big lens. Why not just shoot the 5DIII and new class leading 24-70/2.8?

 

Well, that depends on whether you like Canon rendering verses Zeiss ZA doesn't it? You may prefer it, I know I don't.

 

As to size, yes, it is true that a Sony DSLR A mount lens + adapter will make it all bigger ... but perhaps still a bit smaller than a Sony A99 or Canon 5D-III with the same focal length (such as a 24-70/2.8). BTW, lenses like the ZA24/2 are actually quite small.

 

Rendering aside, in a practical everyday sense, I'd take my A99 with ZA 24-70/2.8 over the Canon 5D-III with the new 24-70/2.8 even IF the Canon optic was slightly better... because the A99 stabilizes the Zeiss image, and the Canon doesn't. That is the sort of real world type effect on IQ that Allan seems to be referring to.

 

So, someone like me with an array of ZA lenses from 16mm to 135 can migrate to this type E mount camera at my own pace as FE lenses of interest come to market. That I may be able to also use some M lenses on an 36 meg full frame A7R just makes it all the more interesting.

 

Sony is not in competition with Leica ... they are after Canon and Nikon market-share, and have to change the game to succeed.

 

- Marc

[IkarusJohn]

I'm just trying to make the point that the A7R is going to be great camera body, but it sure isn't flushed out by Sony lenses designed and optimized just for this body. And, it won't be for a while.

 

Isn't that part of the reason the A7r is so clearly aimed at the owners of non-Sony lenses wanting a camera like this? It's the only one on the market, so (contrary to all those wise heads who said that Sony would not produce a camera for use with other people's lenses) Sony is offering owners of fine Canon, Nikon, Zeiss and Leica lenses a camera which has the latest iteration of the 36MP sensor used in the D800E, without an AA filter, presumably with a very thin IR filter, and micro lenses etc.

 

Sounds brilliant to me. I hope we all go through with our A7r orders, and we find that the camera behaves with most Leica wides, and all the other lenses we have kicking around. It won't replace your M(240), my M9/Monochrom or D800E, but it give another platform (smaller, more electronic etc) on which to use our lenses.

 

What's not to like (if it works).