Jump to content

The Sony A7 thread [Merged]

dmclalla

By dmclalla
in Digital Forum

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
AlanG

AlanG

Posted
Posted
AlanG

 

Do you know what lens or lenses were used on which camera? Mostly interested in the a7r files. Thanks.

 

It doesn't say on the FM site or on the link below where the image is posted.

 

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9092/49690153.3b/0_a9ebc_ec08520a_orig

 

The Exif says it is a 35mm lens at F5.6 but also says it is an A7r file when it is a combination of two images. I think since we don't have raw files all we can see is that both cameras do a good job. But since the A7r is scaled down, we don't know what was lost by doing that and by assuming that no other lens will get more out of the camera.

 

I think we can conclude that the A7 is not being limited by this lens since the A7r gets a bit more out of it even with the scaled image.

 

Update. I see I have the A7r raw file and will download the A7 raw one too and take a look. (I am kind of busy right now.) I didn't realize the two sets of links were for the same images. Unfortunately, I'll have to use Sony's software with which I am unfamiliar. It looks kind of crude to me. I also want to compare similar size bricks to images shot with a 5DIII and 24 TSE.

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites
AlanG

AlanG

Posted
Posted
Oh boy, another 3-6 months of looking at pictures of 100% crops of the corners of boring brick buildings. Shoot me now. :eek: Tell you what, I'm going to go lie down in the back seat and sleep. Wake me when we get there, ok?

 

I understand the sentiment but I for one am interested in seeing the difference between these two cameras and in particular if it will be worth getting an A7r for use with my Canon TSE lenses. Since we are talking small differences, careful tests and methodology are required. I would think that people who often care enough to spend $3000+ on a lens would also want to decide if it does a significantly better job than a $900 lens or a $100 lens. Maybe a careful test using the 27-70 kit zoom would show that lens to be acceptable for most uses.

 

Please understand that my work involves a lot of photos of brick buildings. I don't think I need a 36MP camera and the best lenses and technique to shoot general photography. I find the Nex 6 more than adequate for many other projects. And I'm sure some like the Steve Huff method of just casually shooting away on any subject and lighting and then saying if he likes something or doesn't. I bet we could all get some nice shots from any camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites
k-hawinkler

k-hawinkler

Posted
Posted
It doesn't say on the FM site or on the link below where the image is posted.

 

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9092/49690153.3b/0_a9ebc_ec08520a_orig

 

The Exif says it is a 35mm lens at F5.6 but also says it is an A7r file when it is a combination of two images. I think since we don't have raw files all we can see is that both cameras do a good job. But since the A7r is scaled down, we don't know what was lost by doing that and by assuming that no other lens will get more out of the camera.

 

I think we can conclude that the A7 is not being limited by this lens since the A7r gets a bit more out of it even with the scaled image.

 

Update. I see I have the A7r raw file and will download the A7 raw one too and take a look. (I am kind of busy right now.) I didn't realize the two sets of links were for the same images. Unfortunately, I'll have to use Sony's software with which I am unfamiliar. It looks kind of crude to me. I also want to compare similar size bricks to images shot with a 5DIII and 24 TSE.

 

There are raw files .ARW.

 

Sony A7 Review: Hands-On Preview - Gallery

Sony A7R Review: Hands-On Preview - Gallery

Link to post
Share on other sites
pico

pico

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sony probably has no worries whatsoever regarding Leica's bodies or lenses. Sony's typical consumer has not even heard of this group and could not care less of its opinions.

 

When a Sony buyer is informed that a Leica lens is available at three to five times the price of the camera their eyes will glaze over and Leica becomes a word meaning Insane, and for the vast majority the price is insane.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rick

Rick

Posted
Posted
Hey Rick, wake up, there's now RAW files.

 

No, wake me up when we have RAW files, in LR side by side with the M240, and the same M lens.

 

I've been through this with the D800e and when the dust settled the D800e couldn't find a lens that would allow it to take advantage of that wonderful sensor at 35mm fov. So, the M240 + 35FLE still produced a better resolution file and many people liked the color better from the M.

 

If, these Sony cameras can't produce a better image than the M240 with all of the incredible M-lens optics, then Sony is going to be another amazing camera looking for a lens.

 

Wake me up when somebody has done a good job with the above comparisons... or when the UPS delivery person rings my doorbell.

Link to post
Share on other sites
NJH

NJH

Posted
Posted

Sorry if its already been posted, I have lost track of what has been said after so many posts.

 

These are the most interesting A7R test shots I have seen yet, IMHO;

Wide Angle rangefinder lenses on a7R, part 2 - Dyxum forums

 

The shots with the CV lenses look good and seem to me to be predominantly just a case of heavy vignetting and colour shift, one always has to remember of course that your pixel peeping a 36 Mp JPEG.

 

Bit of mixed bag though, seems some lenses will be OK and others maybe not so regardless of whether they are wide angle or not. I hope it doesn't turn out quite like that though as it means months of picking through other peoples test shots trying to convince oneself the camera will be OK with your lenses. Joy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
AlanG

AlanG

Posted
Posted
Sony probably has no worries whatsoever regarding Leica's bodies or lenses. Sony's typical consumer has not even heard of this group and could not care less of its opinions.

 

When a Sony buyer is informed that a Leica lens is available at three to five times the price of the camera their eyes will glaze over and Leica becomes a word meaning Insane, and for the vast majority the price is insane.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I get your point but some folks buying these 36MP cameras will want to get the best lenses for it. They may not be the typical Sony consumer. Sony's price for a 55 f1.8 and a 35 2.8 are pretty high by comparison to similar offerings from Canon and Nikon. I know some pro photographers who are excited by the $4000 Zeiss Otus. Nikon has a new expensive 58mm lens coming out too.

 

There will be an infinite number of lens tests made with this camera since almost any lens ever made can be adapted to it. Metabones even makes an Alpa lens adapter. You don't see many Alpa lenses around do you?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rick

Rick

Posted
Posted
Sorry if its already been posted, I have lost track of what has been said after so many posts.

 

These are the most interesting A7R test shots I have seen yet, IMHO;

Wide Angle rangefinder lenses on a7R, part 2 - Dyxum forums

 

The shots with the CV lenses look good and seem to me to be predominantly just a case of heavy vignetting and colour shift, one always has to remember of course that your pixel peeping a 36 Mp JPEG.

 

Bit of mixed bag though, seems some lenses will be OK and others maybe not so regardless of whether they are wide angle or not. I hope it doesn't turn out quite like that though as it means months of picking through other peoples test shots trying to convince oneself the camera will be OK with your lenses. Joy.

 

NJH - Thanks for that set of pictures. I just went to the flickr site where those pictures reside and down loaded the full res shot with the 35 cron of the bridge and loaded it into LR... and it is absolutely horrible, completely forgettable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
iforum

iforum

Posted
Posted
Here is what is major cool?

 

Smartphone Attachable Lens-style Camera - DSCQX100/B Review | Sony Store U.S. - Sony US

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Yea saw that a while ago, great idea but most still prefer the iPhone naked , The question is .......... Is it as good as the much vaunted new Sony Alan 7R due in a few weeks

Link to post
Share on other sites
AlanG

AlanG

Posted
Posted
Sony probably has no worries whatsoever regarding Leica's bodies or lenses. Sony's typical consumer has not even heard of this group and could not care less of its opinions.

 

 

The flip side may be that some Leica M users buy the camera to use with M lenses and then buy some Sony glass.

Link to post
Share on other sites
IkarusJohn

IkarusJohn

Posted
Posted

One of these images is taken on my M9 (Truesense CCD) with Summilux 50/1.4 ASPH and the other on my D800E (36 MP CMOSIS) with Nikkor Micro AF-S 60/2.8. Both at f/2.8.

 

Without looking at the EXIF data, which is which, and which do you prefer?

 

The reason for this posting here is Rick's assertion that the IQ of the M(240) is the best IQ available at the moment. There are some (me included) who prefer the M9.

 

So, which is which, and why do you prefer one over the other.

 

Cheers

John

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites
IkarusJohn

IkarusJohn

Posted
Posted

Both focussed on the same spot - the central petals; one AF-S, the other rangefinder.

 

I guess the purpose of this is as a warm-up for when I get my hands on the A7R, and I can do the same thing with all three. Not sure when that will be, as it seems that there is still a bit of work for Sony to do with the firmware.

 

Looking at the test images linked above (with some pretty variable vignetting and colour cast, and what looks like an asymmetry between the right and left of the sensor - the left is universally much darker and has greater colour shift), I didn't think the detail with the 35 Summilux ASPH (FLE?) was too bad. I didn't download the raw files, so that may be optimistic thinking on my part.

Link to post
Share on other sites
IkarusJohn

IkarusJohn

Posted
Posted
I like the petal colors best in #1. Also some detail down in the bottom area comes out more to me.

 

You are asking us to tell which is best, but they must have been PP'd. No?

 

No PP. Both uploaded into LR, and the exposure lifted very slightly in the second image, nothing more.

 

Cheers

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...