Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              98      
99
       100              194       195       end
  

Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
  
 
briantho
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #1 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


Flawed according to you. I could argue that all previous fat FF cameraslike the D800E were flawed because of unnecessary weight and size.

For me, my A7R is the optimal camera. I use my existing adapters and batteries, and the only flaws my NEX-7 had, the awkward menu system, and the non-standard flash socket, have been fixed.

I see myself using this camera for a very long time. I can't really think of anything that's missing or bad. Lenses will come, but who cares? I can use an 85/1.2 today. I can even get auto focus for it if I want. If that isn't fantastic I don't know what is.

carstenw wrote:
I guess I need to make this clear one more time: I am not damning the camera, I am pointing out several things which could have been significantly better. Large difference. It is still a very cool thing, just unnecessarily flawed.




Nov 29, 2013 at 03:04 PM
douglasf13
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #2 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


carstenw wrote:
The NEX-5 argument is fair, but I am talking about the FF (FE?) E-mount. I don't see any major advantages to using the same mount as before. They could use the same protocol. They could make an adapter between both.

Really, it has been decades now that Canon's EF mount design has been trumpeted as ingenious. Why did Sony make such a small mount?

In the end, we will see. Maybe it won't be an impediment after all. Maybe the 50/12 and 85/1.2 lenses are just around the corner, and the 35/2 as well. 24/1.4, it is all coming down the pipeline.

Or
...Show more

Agreed. E-mount was apparently only designed for aps-c in the first place. Had Sony made a new, wider mount for the A7, it would have allowed faster and shorter lenses. I guess Sony didn't want to create even more mount confusion by introducing a third mount, and they wanted to leave the option of using aps-c lenses on the A7, unfortunately.



Nov 29, 2013 at 03:10 PM
naturephoto1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.99 #3 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


douglasf13 wrote:
Agreed. E-mount was apparently only designed for aps-c in the first place. Had Sony made a new, wider mount for the A7, it would have allowed faster and shorter lenses. I guess Sony didn't want to create even more mount confusion by introducing a third mount, and they wanted to leave the option of using aps-c lenses on the A7, unfortunately.


Douglas,

We still do not know if Sony did or did not have in the back of their minds that the e-mount could be used for FF or it was just by luck.

But by so doing it also allowed us the users to mount a tremendous number of lenses through the usage of adapters and not requiring us to Leitax many of them as in Leica R lenses which would have been required for the Sony A mount and quite possibly a third mount.

Rich



Nov 29, 2013 at 03:17 PM
kroyston
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #4 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


carstenw wrote:
"S. Auto Image Extract.
Sets whether to save all the images that were shot continuously in [Superior Auto].
(Auto/Off)".


Intelligent Auto, uses the best identified settings to get the best picture from a single image capture. Superior Auto starts with the same functionality but may take multiple images with a single shutter press. The objective is to reduce noise and blurring combining them into a single picture. Image extraction provides the option to record each donor image to the SD card.

Not sure I follow with the mount restriction though. If I can adapt and use a CV 50mm f1.1, what would prevent Sony, Zeiss or CV from producing a native equivalent?



Nov 29, 2013 at 03:22 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.99 #5 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


carstenw wrote:
I guess there is a specific preferences at work here. FMers overwhelmingly use lenses in the 28-85 range, especially 35-58, and focus more on specific rendering characteristics. There are some SWA users as well, and they will have trouble finding compact wides for their A7/A7R cameras. There is some limited hope for a few lenses, but putting together a small, yet complete and flexible kit with consistent rendering (read: system, as opposed to several individual character-lenses) remains a challenge for now.


Putting a complete kit together right now is a challenge, but it shouldn't be that hard in 6 months. It is even possible to put together an excellent and flexible kit right now, but it would cost mega bucks. It would look something like:

SWA: Leica M WATE (covers 16 to 21mm at f/4)
WA: Sony/Zeiss E-mount 35 f/2.8 for landscapes and small size, Voigtlander M 35 f/1.2 for speed; Leica M 35 f/1.4 FLE for all around performance
Normal: Sony/Zeiss E-mount 55 f/1.8 for landscapes and small size; Canon nFD 50L f/1.2 for speed; Leica M 50 f/2 AA for all around performance
Short Tele: Leica M 90 f/2.5 for landscapes and small size, Leica M 75 f/1.4 or Canon nFD 85L f/1.2 for speed, Leica M 90 f/2 AA for all around performance
Tele: at 135mm there is the Leica M 135 f/3.4 APO, at 180-200 there are many SLR lenses for this system probably the best would be Leica R 180 f/2.8 APO, but if you do most distance shooting the Leica R 180 f/3.4 APO would be great too, and if you want small size there is the Voigtlander 180 f/4 APO which is quite nice as well. At almost 300 there is the Leica R 280 f/4 APO and you don't get much better than that, and at 400 there is the Minolta Rokkor 400 f/5.6 APO which is excellent.

So that would cover 16 to 400 all with excellent lenses and I have seen enough that I believe all of these would work very well. There is a bit of a gap between 21 and 35 in which it is unclear what will work well, but it is clear that the Leica R 28 f/2.8 v2, although not fast nor small will work well with the camera. So a system (and actually several kinds of systems) now is quite possible, but very very expensive.

An affordable system will be possible in about 6 months when the Sony/Zeiss WA zoom and short tele is available.

It would look something like:

SWA: Sony/Zeiss 16-28 f/4 (my guess, it is announced but not the specifics)
WA: Sony/Zeiss 35 f/2.8
Normal: Sony/Zeiss 55 f/1.8
Short Tele: Sony/Zeiss 85 f/1.8 (it has been announced and I think the specifics as well)
Longer Tele: Voigtlander 180 f/4 APO

Supplement this with some fast glass like the VM 35 f/1.2, the Canon nFD 50L f/1.2, the Minolta Rokkor 58 f1/.2, the Canon nFD 85L f/1.2 and you could have a very good and reasonably affordable system.


Edited on Nov 29, 2013 at 03:26 PM · View previous versions



Nov 29, 2013 at 03:24 PM
briantho
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #6 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless



+1 I'm scratching my head at the mount restriction discussion...

kroyston wrote:
Intelligent Auto, uses the best identified settings to get the best picture from a single image capture. Superior Auto starts with the same functionality but may take multiple images with a single shutter press. The objective is to reduce noise and blurring combining them into a single picture. Image extraction provides the option to record each donor image to the SD card.

Not sure I follow with the mount restriction though. If I can adapt and use a CV 50mm f1.1, what would prevent Sony, Zeiss or CV from producing a native equivalent?




Nov 29, 2013 at 03:26 PM
turnstyle
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #7 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


Steve Spencer wrote:
Normal: Sony/Zeiss E-mount 55 f/1.8 for landscapes and small size; Canon nFD 50L f/1.2 for speed; Leica M 50 f/2 AA for all around performance


Is there a particular reason you classify FE 55 as for landscapes, and Cron as for all around?



Nov 29, 2013 at 03:57 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.99 #8 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


turnstyle wrote:
Is there a particular reason you classify FE 55 as for landscapes, and Cron as for all around?


Yeah, part is based on design. I am talking about the 50 cron AA the newest uber lens from Leica. It packs all or perhaps even a bit more of the Zeiss Otus into a 300g 46mm long package. It is a stop slower than the Otus but will probably equal or surpass it in every other respect except vignetting and maybe bokeh. So that lens is a wonder and to me the current height of an all around lens--small but phenomenally high performing (it is also almost double the price of the Otus, so you pay for that). More to the point, it has a floating element and the FE 55 does not. I haven't seen enough to know for sure, but I suspect the FE 55 will perform a lot like the Zeiss 50 f/1.7 or f/1.4 planar. These are great lenses, but not the best at close distances. In my use of the Zeiss planar 50 f/1.4 I loved it for landscapes and shots past 10m, but I had other lenses I picked closer than 10m. Without the floating element I am guessing I will feel the same way about the FE 55 f/1.8. Also I am quite confident that the new 50 cron AA will perform well in pretty much any circumstance, so that makes it the definition of an all-arounder. Of course, it isn't really fair to compare these lenses as one costs 7 times what the other one does.



Nov 29, 2013 at 04:08 PM
ken.vs.ryu
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #9 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


naturephoto1 wrote:
Douglas,

We still do not know if Sony did or did not have in the back of their minds that the e-mount could be used for FF or it was just by luck.

But by so doing it also allowed us the users to mount a tremendous number of lenses through the usage of adapters and not requiring us to Leitax many of them as in Leica R lenses which would have been required for the Sony A mount and quite possibly a third mount.

Rich


There are 2 e-mount full frame cameras, vg900 and fs700, before the a7s. I would not call it luck.



Nov 29, 2013 at 04:13 PM
sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #10 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless




alundeb wrote:
I guess we also need to make one thing clear one more time: What you call "unnecessarily flawed" (E-mount, battery compatibility, control wheels and button layout, etc) is actually a benefit for some other poeple, including me.
It is ok to have a discussion and disagree on requirements. I do understand that you want things different and respect your wish for that.



+1 every complaint carsten has mentioned is something I view as a positive.



Nov 29, 2013 at 04:21 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



AhamB
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.99 #11 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


Steve Spencer wrote:
It is a stop slower than the Otus but will probably equal or surpass it in every other respect except vignetting and maybe bokeh.

I suspect the FE 55 will perform a lot like the Zeiss 50 f/1.7 or f/1.4 planar. These are great lenses, but not the best at close distances.


The Otus actually has about twice better LoCA correction than the 50AA (see discussion in one of the Otus threads).

I'm not sure why you expect the FE 55/1.8 to perform like the Planar 50/1.7 or 1.4 -- the FE has a totally different design with 3 aspherical elements and a much shorter FFD.


Edited on Nov 29, 2013 at 05:36 PM · View previous versions



Nov 29, 2013 at 04:41 PM
michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #12 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


carstenw wrote:
Yes, the size of the camera is smaller than anyone needs. Especially thinner.


No doubt a few more mm here and there would be tolerated by most of us but whether that would have permitted Sony sufficient space for a battery pack of meaningfully more capacity? Arguable.

The Fujifilm X Pro1 is deeper; it's battery purports to offer an additional 120 - 180 mAh over the Sony pack. While the actual usable delta can't be determined simply by reading pack labels, whatever that gap may be, it isn't enough to provide a significant edge all on its own. I wonder what the power consumption delta between the APS-C and full frame sensors in each camera might be?

I seem to remember from my early X100 days that consumption wasn't great but that Fujifilm managed to improve conservation strategies through firmware. It'd be nice to see Sony doing the same, indeed, nice to see Sony invest in on-going firmware updates for the cameras, period. That alone would endear the company to many.

As for mount size and other physical limitations, retaining compatibility with the E mount must have been a serious discussion within the engineering and management teams. Surely they considered the alternative - coming out with a new mount - and what an interesting discussion that would have been to overhear.

Size wise we can thank whoever designed the first NEX for painting Sony into a corner. Whether those decisions prove to be a real barrier in the implementation of future FE class lens designs is yet to be seen.

Given the desire from owners/prospective buyers for faster lenses can't have been something they overlooked, I'm optimistic they thought that issue through before committing to making the cameras.



Nov 29, 2013 at 04:58 PM
Samuli Vahonen
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #13 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


carstenw wrote:
I use L-brackets when I go out. I doubt I can get at the battery with that placement.

I shoot >98% from tripod and >50% vertical shots utilising L-bracket's "vertical position" when taking into account panoramas without panorama head. My worry about L-bracket is different than Carstens; Metabones EF adapter has very nice Arca Swiss tripod foot, but only for horizontal shooting. It's pretty long time since I have had to tilt tripod head 90 degrees, my current one doesn't even do it... And to me it seems ridiculous option to even consider something like that after having L-bracket in every camera 10+ years.

Is it even feasible to use A7(R) w/ L-bracket + Metabones + >1kg lens (Otus 1.4/55, ZE/ZF 2/135 etc.)??

Or is the L-bracket supposed to be added to Metabones adapter? Does someone make suitable one, or does generic one need to be used?

Samuli



Nov 29, 2013 at 05:06 PM
naturephoto1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.99 #14 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


Samuli Vahonen wrote:
I shoot >98% from tripod and >50% vertical shots utilising L-bracket's "vertical position" when taking into account panoramas without panorama head. My worry about L-bracket is different than Carstens; Metabones EF adapter has very nice Arca Swiss tripod foot, but only for horizontal shooting. It's pretty long time since I have had to tilt tripod head 90 degrees, my current one doesn't even do it... And to me it seems ridiculous option to even consider something like that after having L-bracket in every camera 10+ years.

Is it even feasible to use A7(R) w/ L-bracket + Metabones + >1kg
...Show more

Samuli,

You may wish to look through this thread:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1255420/0

Rich



Nov 29, 2013 at 05:15 PM
Samuli Vahonen
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #15 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


naturephoto1 wrote:
Samuli,

You may wish to look through this thread:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1255420/0

Rich

Thanks, Rich. Read last 20 pages of this thread, but didn't notice completely new thread about topic had been added. Getting old or something...

Samuli



Nov 29, 2013 at 05:23 PM
michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #16 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


Comic relief time: Kai is at it again, DigitalRev TV review of the Sony FE 35/2.8.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuxWkJ5KgeA

Lens hood "looks like a foreskin"

and then, later...

"Just makes you want to fiddle with it all day"

Edited on Nov 29, 2013 at 05:33 PM · View previous versions



Nov 29, 2013 at 05:31 PM
artur5
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #17 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


sebboh wrote:
+1 every complaint carsten has mentioned is something I view as a positive.


Carsten's ( not very kind ) views on some features of the the A7(r) are also well argued. For instance, the E mount: If you look at the back of a regular APS-C NEX lens and at one of the new FE lenses, it seems clear that the Full frame version was an afterthought.
Regular NEX lenses have a rectangular cut at the rear to allow for light rays to cover without trouble an APS-C sensor, even considering that the contacts located inside the mount throat, take considerable useful space all around the inner circle surrounding that aperture.
Now, the FE lenses have also a rectangular cut which stretches as far as possible, barely clearing the contacts from below and reaching in the corners the very metal frame of the lens throat. A radical solution for squeezing the last fraction of millimeter available for light rays going to the corners of the sensor,
There's no way that a proper Full frame mount made from scratch would have that over the top design. There's also a possible additional issue. We must assume that the current FE mount won't cause vigneting even with very telecentric lenses. The question is: what if Sony decides to install IBIS on the FE bodies ?. If the sensor moves up and down only a couple of millimetres, the throat of the FE mount mightn't allow the use of longer teles and other telecentric lenses, without vigneting. I'm not saying that IBIS is impossible for these cameras, because I wouldn't know for sure, of course. No doubt Sony engineers know all about it but, isn't a bit significant that they hadn't said nothing about future stabilized FF E-mount cameras ?.



Nov 29, 2013 at 05:32 PM
Luvwine
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.99 #18 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


I don't think the new Leica cron aa has that much on the lux asph based on the test shots I have seen--certainly not 3 or 4 thousand worth. I would rather use the 50 lux than the otus due to size. Agree that the 55 1.8 will make a great landscape lens--perhaps better than the lux, but doubt it's going to be any better than the lux for other uses except autofocus.


Nov 29, 2013 at 05:36 PM
sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #19 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless




artur5 wrote:
Carsten's ( not very kind ) views on some features of the the A7(r) are also well argued. For instance, the E mount: If you look at the back of a regular APS-C NEX lens and at one of the new FE lenses, it seems clear that the Full frame version was an afterthought.
Regular NEX lenses have a rectangular cut at the rear to allow for light rays to cover without trouble an APS-C sensor, even considering that the contacts located inside the mount throat, take considerable useful space all around the inner circle surrounding that aperture.
Now,
...Show more

from the samples I've seen with troublesome lenses
the a7 appears to have less physical vignetting than the ef, f, and a mount. I wouldn't read too much I to lack of statements about IBIS, there weren't any about the aps-c line either. I suspect because of the desire to keep things small.




Nov 29, 2013 at 06:03 PM
douglasf13
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.99 #20 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless


naturephoto1 wrote:
Douglas,

We still do not know if Sony did or did not have in the back of their minds that the e-mount could be used for FF or it was just by luck.

But by so doing it also allowed us the users to mount a tremendous number of lenses through the usage of adapters and not requiring us to Leitax many of them as in Leica R lenses which would have been required for the Sony A mount and quite possibly a third mount.

Rich


When NEX was new, there were several indications that NEX was originally intended as only a consumer level, lower end product, and there was even a Sony video presentation where the presenter stated that a FF sensor in e-mount wasn't going to happen.

When you look at the size of other mirrorless mounts, like m4/3, you'll notice that the mount seems large compared to the sensor size, and that allows a lot of room for lens design. The proportions of e-mount to an aps-c sensor falls in line with the other mirrorless mounts out there. As theSuede has mentioned several times, a mount with a larger diameter, but the same registration distance, would have allowed shorter lens designs, particularly with wide and fast lenses, and it still would have been just as adaptable with 3rd party manual lenses.

As it stands now, native wide lenses faster than f2.8 are apparently going to need to be about the size of current fast SLR wides + adapters.




Nov 29, 2013 at 06:15 PM
1       2       3              98      
99
       100              194       195       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              98      
99
       100              194       195       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password