Any Sony A7s Shooters in the House?

[Carduelis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The A7s was just fantastic with the 24-70, yes I would have liked the lens to have been a 2.8 but I shot wide open most of the time (f4) and found focusing etc even in low light to be very fast and accurate. the low light capabilities of this camera are just astounding knocking the leica way into the long grass.

 

It is interesting that you are finding the 24-70 lens fantastic as it has had quite a number of negative reviews about its performance particularly towards the edges at the focal length extremes of this lens (e.g. photozone). I have been researching this lens as part of trying to find a light weight and compact mirrorless version of my former Canon 5D with 24-105 mm lens which served me well giving me sharp and reliably focused full frame images when time was limited. Was thinking about the well regarded Tamron 24-70 f2.8 lens on the A7, but that is quite bulky, weighs 825 g and then there is the additional weight of the adapter.

[viramati]

It is interesting that you are finding the 24-70 lens fantastic as it has had quite a number of negative reviews about its performance particularly towards the edges at the focal length extremes of this lens (e.g. photozone). I have been researching this lens as part of trying to find a light weight and compact mirrorless version of my former Canon 5D with 24-105 mm lens which served me well giving me sharp and reliably focused full frame images when time was limited. Was thinking about the well regarded Tamron 24-70 f2.8 lens on the A7, but that is quite bulky, weighs 825 g and then there is the additional weight of the adapter.

 

I would agree with some of the reviews to some extent of this lens on the A7 where it can be let down in the extreme corners at 24mm and stopped down to 5.6 at the 70 it maybe marginally better. that said in real word photography it performs very well with lovely colours, contrast and a pretty nice bokeh at the tele end. I even use it for some landscape work but do find it's focusing characteristics a little strange and the wide end (I think there is some odd field curvature). It is nicely sized and weighted and has beautifully smooth zoom and focus ring and the OSS is very good. Yes I would have liked 2.8 but hey.

Now on the A7s this lens really seems to come alive it appears sharp with good detail and contrast across the zoom and aperture range. the F4 max aperture becomes less of an issue due to the S's high iso and it focuses remarkably well. For documentary and general work on the A7s for me it is a no brainer, on the A7 it maybe slightly less competent but it is still a good performer.

Al this being said I did have to change my first copy of the lens due to wide side of the frame being slightly soft compared to the other

 

Here are a couple of threads on the lens

A7S + FE 24-70 vs A7R ... WOW! - The GetDPI Photography Forums

Tim Ashley Photography | The Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* FE 24-70mm F4 ZA OSS: Hallelujah!

Tim's review can be especially useful giving some good tips for getting the best out of it

[colonel]

Thanks for these comments on the A7s.

 

I've saved for an M but can't bring myself to buy one when I know it will loose around 2.000 in value by the time the next M arrives, and that next M should be a little better in areas that interest me (or a cheaper M 60 style camera).

 

For that same loss in value I could get this Sony now ... and take some photos with my Leica lenses which currently sit on a shelf.

 

 

You loose just as much on Sony

Buy a second hand M

It's a good market now

You won't loose more then £1000 over 2-3 years. Not too bad

[Carduelis]

David, thanks for your response, much appreciated.

 

I have seen the Tim Ashley review before which is favourable towards the 24-70 mm lens. I had not however come across the other review which is very informative. I think the way to go is either the A7 or A7s with this lens, with the latter having less resolution being more favourably disposed to it. I could live with a 12 Megapixel sensor, after all my old Canon 5D was adequate enough for A3 sized prints allowing for some cropping. If the A7s could also deal favourably with my 24 Elmar and 35/50 mm ASPH Summilux lenses that could be the clincher.

[viramati]

David, thanks for your response, much appreciated.

 

I have seen the Tim Ashley review before which is favourable towards the 24-70 mm lens. I had not however come across the other review which is very informative. I think the way to go is either the A7 or A7s with this lens, with the latter having less resolution being more favourably disposed to it. I could live with a 12 Megapixel sensor, after all my old Canon 5D was adequate enough for A3 sized prints allowing for some cropping. If the A7s could also deal favourably with my 24 Elmar and 35/50 mm ASPH Summilux lenses that could be the clincher.

I have the lux 50 asph and have tried it on the A7s and it seems to perform very well though I prefer using the FE55/1.8 because of the auto-focus. Don't know about the other lenses though you may find someone who has tried them here

http://www.getdpi.com/forum/sony/51391-fun-a7s.html

[3D-Kraft.com]

Not being able to view images and the menu on the LCD without manually switching between the LCD and EVF kinda made me crazy (I always had to turn it to "Viewfinder only" cause I didn't want the LCD to be on all the time).

 

The camera switches automatically between LCD and EVF based on the eye proximity. I see no reason to completely switch of the display as the power consumption of the LCD backlight is comparatively low. On the A7R I could record between 1,5 and 2 hours of video with one battery (and the display is on all the time). Did'nt check how long it will run without recording on the A7S but such a test simply makes no sense, as the LCD seems to consume far less than the sensor and the CPU.

 

No automatic magnification when using adapted manual focus lenses also kinda sucks, as I'm used to that with the Leica EVF even.

 

It is not a limitation of the camera, it is a limitation of your adapter not translating the mechanical movement to an electronic signal. I read somewhere about an adapter that is able to do that with M-mount RF lenses.

 

As there are meanwhile lots of better and more affordable lens options for A7 series, you should think about using these, if automatic magnification is so important for you.

 

And don't get me started about the poor auto-iso implementation with a default and unconfigurable minimum shutter speed setting of 1/60.

 

Of course this is a shortcoming but the M 240 has other drawbacks in the same area. By the way: With some lenses like the FE 70-200 the A7 series adjust the lower shutter speed to values shorter 1/60 but I would like to have more configuration options here as well.

 

Also the focus peaking wasn't really reliable on it.

 

Not perfect but better and more configurable than on the M 240.

 

I found that the silent shutter mode wasn't really usable when I needed it the most: during late night photography in quiet places where there are lots of artifical lights... With the silent shutter on this creates very visible uneven illumination of the captured photograph. Much like a rolling shutter effect, but with light, which makes sense since it's an electronic shutter.

 

Do you have examples? I could not see any difference. The only difference I could see so far is, that you can not use the long exposure noise reduction through shooting a dark frame after the image.

 

Does Leica provide any better option here?

 

There were many things I loved about it too, but all in all, after owning it for two weeks, it actually made me rediscover my M240 and how much I actually love shooting with it. The simplicity of it, the feel of the solid brass body, the optical rangefinder and the very nice shutter sound. Leica has managed to keep things simple, yet very effective, in a small package.

 

Your list of drawbacks does not convince me that returning and keeping the M 240 was the better option. It has so many even more frustrating limitations (e.g. the unmovable magnification area).

 

 

I understand what you're saying, but sadly, it doesn't make sense. A Sony A7S (which is not a cheap camera) will for sure loose more value in percentage in a year or two, when it's been replaced by 1-3 new models. So in that sense, you will probably end up loosing more on that Sony down the line than a M240.

 

The M 240 is sold on eBay about 2000 EUR below the "new" price, which is about 1/3 loss. That's not much less relative loss you have on the A7 series within that time frame. The absolute loss is far bigger on the M 240.

 

Also, the EVF won't show you the realtime exposure, so you won't see that your capture is over-exposed before you actually review the image.

 

You can switch between a realtime exposure preview and constantly bright EVF (e.g. to be used when you work in the studio with triggered flash lights).

[viramati]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Quote:

Originally Posted by indergaard View Post

I found that the silent shutter mode wasn't really usable when I needed it the most: during late night photography in quiet places where there are lots of artifical lights... With the silent shutter on this creates very visible uneven illumination of the captured photograph. Much like a rolling shutter effect, but with light, which makes sense since it's an electronic shutter.

Do you have examples? I could not see any difference. The only difference I could see so far is, that you can not use the long exposure noise reduction through shooting a dark frame after the image.

 

What He is probably see in is colour cast as explained in this link

Do fluorescent lighting and shutter speed create a problem with color cast? - Photography Stack Exchange

I was on a photo shoot for a charity last week and nearly all locations had fluorescent lighting which caused this problem with all shutter speeds above 1/160sec but seemed to be worse when I turned on the the electronic shutter (silent mode) and meant I gad to keep the shutter speed at 1/125sec or less. Basically a problem with focal plane shutters. I find the problem is the same with the A7 and A7s. Under all other artificial light situations both cameras work very well with good AWB

Will have to test the M as I would rarely have ever gone above these shutter speeds when using the camera in flourescent lit situations

[zlatkob]

Quote:

What He is probably see in is colour cast as explained in this link

Do fluorescent lighting and shutter speed create a problem with color cast? - Photography Stack Exchange

I was on a photo shoot for a charity last week and nearly all locations had fluorescent lighting which caused this problem with all shutter speeds above 1/160sec but seemed to be worse when I turned on the the electronic shutter (silent mode) and meant I gad to keep the shutter speed at 1/125sec or less. Basically a problem with focal plane shutters. I find the problem is the same with the A7 and A7s. Under all other artificial light situations both cameras work very well with good AWB

Will have to test the M as I would rarely have ever gone above these shutter speeds when using the camera in flourescent lit situations

 

The new Canon 7D Mark II actually has a unique anti-flicker feature to deal with this:

Canon DLC: Article Print: First ever anti-flicker technology launches in an EOS DSLR

[indergaard]

Quote:

Originally Posted by indergaard View Post

I found that the silent shutter mode wasn't really usable when I needed it the most: during late night photography in quiet places where there are lots of artifical lights... With the silent shutter on this creates very visible uneven illumination of the captured photograph. Much like a rolling shutter effect, but with light, which makes sense since it's an electronic shutter.

Do you have examples? I could not see any difference. The only difference I could see so far is, that you can not use the long exposure noise reduction through shooting a dark frame after the image.

 

What He is probably see in is colour cast as explained in this link

Do fluorescent lighting and shutter speed create a problem with color cast? - Photography Stack Exchange

I was on a photo shoot for a charity last week and nearly all locations had fluorescent lighting which caused this problem with all shutter speeds above 1/160sec but seemed to be worse when I turned on the the electronic shutter (silent mode) and meant I gad to keep the shutter speed at 1/125sec or less. Basically a problem with focal plane shutters. I find the problem is the same with the A7 and A7s. Under all other artificial light situations both cameras work very well with good AWB

Will have to test the M as I would rarely have ever gone above these shutter speeds when using the camera in flourescent lit situations

 

Yes, that's what I was experiencing. And late night shooting in a city tends to expose the camera to mostly only artificial light, which made silent mode unusable... When I wanted it the most. It's not a biggie, but it's something that people should be aware of, as it is the drawback of a fully electronic shutter (just as rolling shutter).

[indergaard]

The camera switches automatically between LCD and EVF based on the eye proximity. I see no reason to completely switch of the display as the power consumption of the LCD backlight is comparatively low. On the A7R I could record between 1,5 and 2 hours of video with one battery (and the display is on all the time). Did'nt check how long it will run without recording on the A7S but such a test simply makes no sense, as the LCD seems to consume far less than the sensor and the CPU.

 

I wanted to get the A7S to use it at night, doing street stuff in a city. Running around with a camera with an illuminated LCD is the last thing I want to do. I want to be able to turn it completely off, while at the same time engage the menu and view images when I want without having to go through a menu inside the viewfinder to switch the LCD on. This feature is based on how I've shot for many years, and it works this way on Leica's, Fuji's, and other cameras that I have used.

 

It is not a limitation of the camera, it is a limitation of your adapter not translating the mechanical movement to an electronic signal. I read somewhere about an adapter that is able to do that with M-mount RF lenses.

 

As there are meanwhile lots of better and more affordable lens options for A7 series, you should think about using these, if automatic magnification is so important for you.

Like what? The only ones that comes to mind is the Zeiss Loxia's, which aren't out yet, and has not been reviewed. All the other one's are AF lenses with manual focus by wire, which is horrible (although the FE 55mm has one of the best focus by wire implementations that I have tried).

 

Not perfect but better and more configurable than on the M 240.

I find the focus peaking on the M240 to be more accurate than the A7S. The A7S focus peaking in my experience simply showed too much in focus all the time, even at mid and low settings. If I set my M240 in B&W mode and enable blue focus peaking I find it to me more accurate. Yes it'll show less peaking color, but that's simply because it is more accurate in showing what's actually IN focus, whereas the focus peaking on the A7S showed subjects in focus that was not in fact in focus!

 

Do you have examples? I could not see any difference. The only difference I could see so far is, that you can not use the long exposure noise reduction through shooting a dark frame after the image.

Yes, but as my previous posts states, it's really not necessary to provide examples. This is the downside of a fully electronic shutter and fluorescent/artificial lights, just like rolling shutter. Every review states the same.

 

Does Leica provide any better option here?

Yes and no. It does not offer an electronic shutter. But then again, the shutter is more dampened and silent in the first place, which doesn't make the camera require a silent shutter mode as much as the A7S does.

 

 

Your list of drawbacks does not convince me that returning and keeping the M 240 was the better option. It has so many even more frustrating limitations (e.g. the unmovable magnification area).

We all have different needs and wants. For me, that is the only (big) drawback of the M240. Everything else is perfecltly fine in my book (for my needs). But yes, a movable focus point in EVF/LV mode is something that I really want, and something that the M240 definitely should have had at launch, and something that should be implemented in a firmware update. I've ranted on and on about this in the M240 forum, as this is simply a firmware feature and not hardware related at all, and should be added ASAP.

[a.j.z]

Although this thread is of course mainly relating to the use of the A7s with Leica glass, I wonder if it is true that the AF is pretty slow in continuous shooting with the AF lenses designed for this camera?

 

I would want to use it mainly with my Leica lenses but occasionally also on sports events.

[3D-Kraft.com]

I wanted to get the A7S to use it at night, doing street stuff in a city. Running around with a camera with an illuminated LCD is the last thing I want to do. I want to be able to turn it completely off, while at the same time engage the menu and view images when I want without having to go through a menu inside the viewfinder to switch the LCD on.

 

In an earlier post you said that your problem was the power consumption due to the display only being "blacked" but the backlight not beeing switched off.

 

I checked that on my A7S: The display is completely switched of. In Auto-Mode as well as in "Monitor off" mode.

 

The rest of your expections about when the monitor is of or on is just subjective as well as the priority you give to such a menu option. I am sure there would be others that would complain about other behaviour of a different implementation.

 

Yes, but as my previous posts states, it's really not necessary to provide examples. This is the downside of a fully electronic shutter and fluorescent/artificial lights, just like rolling shutter. Every review states the same.

 

The example given above shows an effect with artificial light that is not dependent on the shutter beeing half or full electronic.

 

Again: As long as you provide no examples, it is not possible to evaluate the real reason. Please point us to a review that proves your statement.

 

But yes, a movable focus point in EVF/LV mode is something that I really want, and something that the M240 definitely should have had at launch, and something that should be implemented in a firmware update. I've ranted on and on about this in the M240 forum, as this is simply a firmware feature and not hardware related at all, and should be added ASAP.

 

You will not get an official statement from Leica, but all background information that was available so far indicates, that the hardware design of the sensor does not allow this feature.

[viramati]

I was at a wedding today and while taking some shot inside without any artificial lighting I was finding that I was getting the colour shading issue at various shutter speeds when using the electronic shutter. It didn't happen on every shot so I'm not sure why this occurs.

[Carduelis]

I have just recently acquired a Sony A7s camera with a used 24-70 mm f4 Sony/Zeiss lens in mint condition at a very reasonable price; also a Novoflex adaptor for my Leica M lenses. My initial findings are as follows for settings of f8 and lowish ISOs ranging from 100 to 400:

 

1. The 24-70 lens seems fine for a walk around lens and a full frame point/shoot which is what I was after. It performs best at the 35 and 50 mm focal lengths and images viewed at 1:1 in Lightroom are sharp from edge to edge. Towards the 70 mm focal length, sharpness drops off towards the left side of my lens, but the images at 1:2 in Lightroom appear sharp from edge to edge and so I believe that it will be possible to obtain a good sharp A3 sized print even with some cropping. This is more or less the same situation for advancement towards the 24 mm focal length though sharpness appears to drop off at 1:1 on both sides of the image. There is a relatively large amount of barrel distortion advancing towards the 24 mm focal length. I think that given that it is a zoom lens, you cannot be overly critical about its edge to edge sharpness and levels of distortion.

 

2. My CV 15 mm f4.5 and 24 mm f3.8 Elmar lenses do not appear to show any colour casts. However at 1.1 viewing in Lightroom they lose sharpness particularly in the outer 10-15% vertical sections of the image. At 1.2 viewing in Lightroom, I believe that it may be possible to produce a good A3 edge to edge image for the 24 mm Elmar, but not for the CV 15 lens without attempting some cropping. Though with more distortion, the 24-70 zoom lens appears to produce a sharper edge to edge image than the 24 mm Elmar on the A7S. Taking a comparable image with the 24 mm Elmar on the Leica M240 produces the best results at this focal length with very good edge to edge sharpness when viewed at 1:1 on Lightroom. This finding I attribute more to the design of the sensor on the Leica rather than having double the pixel count. I did not feel that the 12 megapixel sensor was a limiting factor on the A7S when judging sharpness levels at 1:1 in Lightroom, even after carrying out some cropping.

 

3. My 35 Summilux ASPH (pre-FLE) and 90 mm Tele-Elmarit (thin) lenses work really well the A7S with wonderful rendering and detail for the former and amazing sharpness considering the size of the latter.

[colonel]

The 24-70 is not the sharpest tool in the box.

All the reports of M lenses, including the voigtlander 15mm are very positive.

The Sony Zeiss 35mm and 55mm are amazing.

[algrove]

All the reports of M lenses, including the voigtlander 15mm are very positive.

 

Since returning my a7r I have not kept up with a7s details, but is this truly the case that not one person has had problems with any M lens on the a7s? If so, then this is an entirely different animal from the a7/a7r series cvameras..

[colonel]

Since returning my a7r I have not kept up with a7s details, but is this truly the case that not one person has had problems with any M lens on the a7s? If so, then this is an entirely different animal from the a7/a7r series cvameras..

 

 

I have not read everything available but I have only read positive reports and quite a few ones on the 15mm which is a key test given the angle. My one is on order so I hope to test soon.

Interestingly I read an article recently by a professional photographer who said that the A7S is the most underrated stills camera at the moment. He reckoned it was one of the best available. It does seem to have solved most of the M lens issues.

 

http://rangefinderchronicles.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/the-sony-a7s-review-part-1-leica-m.html?m=1

 

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2014/07/15/the-sony-a7s-a-new-camera-for-leica-m-lenses-by-ashwin-rao/

[Carduelis]

I cannot help but feel that the A7S has been over-hyped particularly on accepting M mount wide angle lenses. I find this for my copy of the 15 CV, where despite there not being any colour casts, there is a very noticeable drop off of sharpness particularly towards the edges. Although the 24 mm f3.8 Elmar fares better on the A7S, it did not quite live up to my expectations. Currently, I would not advise any people who are into wide angle landscape photography to sell their Leica M240s for the Sony A7 series.

[Carduelis]

The 24-70 is not the sharpest tool in the box.

All the reports of M lenses, including the voigtlander 15mm are very positive.

The Sony Zeiss 35mm and 55mm are amazing.

 

I was well aware of the mixed reviews about the 24-70, though I feel it is worth having for the convenience of a useful zoom range, autofocus and image stabilisation for photography when time is limited. Although the 35 mm and 55 mm lenses are highly rated, the zoom performs well at these focal lengths when stopped down.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[colonel]

I cannot help but feel that the A7S has been over-hyped particularly on accepting M mount wide angle lenses. I find this for my copy of the 15 CV, where despite there not being any colour casts, there is a very noticeable drop off of sharpness particularly towards the edges. Although the 24 mm f3.8 Elmar fares better on the A7S, it did not quite live up to my expectations. Currently, I would not advise any people who are into wide angle landscape photography to sell their Leica M240s for the Sony A7 series.

 

 

Perhaps it's revealing that the 15 CV, or your copy, is not so great on the edges anyway.

 

I agree that the M240 is a much better tool for Leica lenses. I am not a big fan of putting lenses on systems they weren't intended for.

 

In terms of the A7S as a camera I don't think it has been hyped nearly enough. It's awesome ...