Sean Reid's M240 versus a7R-same lens

[algrove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I found the article interesting in how well the M performed against the a7R all the way up to and including ISO 3200. Good read and more to come with other lenses.

 

Glad I have the M.

[Advertisement]

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

[magosak]

I found the article interesting in how well the M performed against the a7R all the way up to and including ISO 3200. Good read and more to come with other lenses.

 

Glad I have the M.

 

Lou, Comparing $2300 (CAD) A7R with $7300 (CAD) Leica M, it should be more like "how well A7R performed against Leica M", no?

 

Anyway do you have the link?

[woorob]

My observation exactly, and you echo my sentiments exactly as well. It's really a fine product.

[Jeff S]

Anyway do you have the link?

 

Paid site… ReidReviews

 

Jeff

[Voigt]

It seems some of us are comparing a 24 mp camera to a 36 mp camera and some others are comparing the overall value of the two cameras.

[BerndReini]

I have used both cameras and the "apples and oranges" pictures confirmed my preference for the Leica color rendering. It is not even close to me. Of course, if we are considering price, the Sony is one hell of a camera.

[thighslapper]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I found the article interesting in how well the M performed against the a7R all the way up to and including ISO 3200. Good read and more to come with other lenses.

 

Glad I have the M.

 

..... and the advantage of better ISO above 3200 in the A7r is completely negated by the fact that you need consistently higher shutter speeds to achieve blur free photos hand held with the A7r ....... with the M I find myself using much lower ISO in low light

[Leonil]

..... and the advantage of better ISO above 3200 in the A7r is completely negated by the fact that you need consistently higher shutter speeds to achieve blur free photos hand held with the A7r ....... with the M I find myself using much lower ISO in low light

 

Im still critical of the Leica M system, but I had a side by side comparison with my M and an A7R with my same lens - I have to agree - because we are dealing with not very sensitive pixels on the A7R because the sensor is rather dense (and the size difference isn't that large) at High ISO, the processor in the Sony is really pushing the sensor, there is just far too much artifacts and also, I think that at comparable ISOs past 3200, the A7R needs slower shutter speeds to match the sharpness or surpass the sharpness in the M, because of how unsensitive the sensor is.

 

This all just my own comparable tests - so unscientific results, but I felt that at 3200 in a relatively dark room, I was pushing F2, 1/60 on my M to get decent exposure, and the A7 couldn't push higher than F2 1/45 - always pushing half a stop slower than my M and when I put it all on manual, the A7R always seemed under exposed.

 

Having said that - I still think the A7R, with Zeiss optics made for the Camera uses the 36MP resolution well and is at times, superior to the M in bright sunlight. I would never use the A7R for anything else other than Landscapes and studio - I think the A7R struggles like a baby in a well when it comes to higher ISO and movement that's faster than running.

[Voigt]

In conclusion, as I understand this most-enlightening web-wide discussion, the Sony, with its 36 mp sensor, can do some things better, but not significantly better, while the Leica, with its assortment of lenses, can do other things better, but not significantly better. All of which leads us to consider the COST of these machines, which seems important or unimportant to only those who either find it to be so or not to be so.

Well I'm now gratefully satisfied that we've finally gotten to the bottom of this.

[algrove]

For me. it was the side by side noise comparisons that IMHO was in favor of the M all the way up to and including ISO 3200.

 

Of course the a7R is good value. but for me it was NOT better value than the M. I print my own images up to 17x22 and have a club member print my "favorites" up 24x36 (M images) and rarely up to 36x48 (P45+ images) and that a7R noise bothers me from I saw in this review.

 

If you are screen oriented, then you could reach different conclusions.

 

I am tempted to get an a7 for true 24MP to 24MP comparisons.

[thighslapper]

 

I am tempted to get an a7 for true 24MP to 24MP comparisons.

 

..... so am I ........

 

.... but I will still end up with the inescapable fact that I actually enjoy using my M's ...... in contrast to Sony's new offspring which was an exercise in irritation and frustration .....

 

...... and it will end up in the safe with my 'just in case' Nikons, Fuji X100.... and a selection of others that were half way decent cameras but were a chore rather than a pleasure to use .....

 

I have the luxury of not doing this for a living ...... so I can forgo technical perfection, esoteric functions and other deficiencies that have the pro's gnashing their teeth....

[AlanJW]

I have used both cameras and the "apples and oranges" pictures confirmed my preference for the Leica color rendering. It is not even close to me. Of course, if we are considering price, the Sony is one hell of a camera.

 

+1

[jdlaing]

+1

 

+1

 

I had one for three days before it was released. Used both cameras with the same lenses.

It is good but not the same.

[brusby]

On principle, I almost always support the "little guy" and avoid big conglomerates and chains.

 

It's the same reason we eat at mom-and-pop local restaurants and avoid the likes of McDonalds, Houstons, and Fridays. When I was a kid, there were small, local eateries on almost every corner, but after the appearance of the major national chains starting in about the mid 50's, most of the small independents have disappeared.

 

So, nothing against Sony, and kudos to them for developing a nice new product, but even if it would cost me more, I'd support the smaller, more independent company that produces the more unique product -- in this case, Leica -- which is exactly what I did.

[UliWer]

It seems some of us are comparing a 24 mp camera to a 36 mp camera and some others are comparing the overall value of the two cameras.

 

Well - wouldn't it be fair to downsample the 36mp of the A7r to the 24mp of the M to achieve a realistic comparison? Reid himself does mention this - though he does not show it. So the results which surprisingly show lower noise for the M even beginning at ISO 200 might be a little bit misleading.

 

What do others think of his color comaprison of both cameras? I think the bright red of the M was too obvious - often percieved on photos with the M. On the other hand i agree with Reid, that other colors (onions...) look more lively and natural with the M or more boring with the A7r

[Londonmember]

I preferred the M colours, especially the reds

 

As for noise. The M was much cleaner. Very happy with my choice...

[george +]

In conclusion, as I understand this most-enlightening web-wide discussion, the Sony, with its 36 mp sensor, can do some things better, but not significantly better, while the Leica, with its assortment of lenses, can do other things better, but not significantly better. All of which leads us to consider the COST of these machines, which seems important or unimportant to only those who either find it to be so or not to be so.

Well I'm now gratefully satisfied that we've finally gotten to the bottom of this.

 

You seem to have summed this up rather well. Thank you.

[colonel]

Its interesting the Sean says that many of the small differences between the files may actually be due to differences in Lightroom rendering.

 

Erwin Putts has pretty much withdrawn from reviewing. One of the last comments I read from him said that the top modern cameras are so good now its becoming pointless to spend time teasing out the IQ differences. I tend to agree.

 

Its more to do with handling, features, build, enjoyment and lens collection.

 

I prefer the M over the A7 (I don't have an A7R) for many reasons, examples are the RF, still supreme for focus for me, build, beauty, simplicity of operation and of course those tiny all metal lens. Like opening a bit of jewellery.

 

The lenses all happen to be outstanding.

 

However the Sony A7 series is a breakthrough for the price and can challenge any FF camera if it has the right photographer behind it. I wish Sony all the best (back in the black this year!).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Rick]

...its becoming pointless to spend time teasing out the IQ differences...

 

Its more to do with handling, features, build, enjoyment and lens collection.

 

I prefer the M over the A7 (I don't have an A7R) for many reasons, examples are the RF, still supreme for focus for me, build, beauty, simplicity of operation and of course those tiny all metal lens.

 

The lenses all happen to be outstanding.

 

Thank you. +1

[jip]

I've read the article by Reid, and I must say that even though the A7R's ISO above 3200 is better than Leica's Leica beats the A7R ISO wise from 200-3200!