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              104      
105
       106              152       153       end
  

A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
  
 
mcbroomf
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.105 #1 · p.105 #1 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


I know this thread is for RF lenses but can someone who has an A7 or an A7r slap a 21 distagon (C/Y., EF or ZF) on the camera and show us what it looks like in the corners from WO to F8 please? So far we've seen nothing wider than the 35mm FE that looks good WO (maybe the 17mm TSE but no crops yet).

The 21 distagon is a gold standard for UWA SLR lenses and I think it would be a good thing to make sure the sensors are behaving OK in the corners for UWA lenses with a distant exit pupil.

Thanks



Nov 20, 2013 at 12:40 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.105 #2 · p.105 #2 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


briantho wrote:
Grats on the new camera!

Those results look rather disapointing, and surprising (Minolta MD). Looking forward to more tests in the coming days/weeks.


Not really that surprising. The MD 28mm f/2.8 is an inexpensive and not very strong lens. That is about what I would expect from it on a high resolution sensor.



Nov 20, 2013 at 03:05 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.105 #3 · p.105 #3 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


snowboarder wrote:
I was quite shocked to see purple corners on NEX-7. But I guess I'll just wait a few days
and do my new fresh round of testing with the A7R...


I would make sure you have an excellent adapter. The R 28 v/2.8 v2 has a floating element and even on DSLRs was known to be finicky about adapters. I am eager to see how it performs on the new Sonys, but it may take some work to get the adapter right before we see its top performance.



Nov 20, 2013 at 03:11 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.105 #4 · p.105 #4 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


naturephoto1 wrote:
Presuming that is the same Minolta design as my Leica R 28mm f2.8 Elmarit, I will check mine on the A7r. I had expected that this lens would need to be replaced for usage with the camera. But, maybe... Also,I have the Leica R 28mm f2.8 Super Angulon PC (Schneider) which is heavy could at least for sometime (and also for PC control and stitching) could be used on A7r. The same for the Leica R 21mm f4 Super Angulon (but it is supposed to fall off for sharpness from the extreme sharpness in the center).

Rich


Rich,

If I am remembering right, which is always a gamble, I think it is the Minolta 24 f/2.8 and not the 28 f/2.8 that is the same design and the Leica R 24 f/2.8. The Leica R 28 f/2.8 comes in two version neither of which are similar to the Minolta 28 f/2.8, which again if I am remembering right is a cheap and less than stellar lens. The first version of the Leica R 28 f/2.8 is fairly mediocre, but it should still be a much stronger performer than the Minolta 28 f/2.8. The second version of the Leica R 28 f/2.8 should be exceptional if working well.



Nov 20, 2013 at 03:17 AM
naturephoto1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.105 #5 · p.105 #5 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


Steve Spencer wrote:
Rich,

If I am remembering right, which is always a gamble, I think it is the Minolta 24 f/2.8 and not the 28 f/2.8 that is the same design and the Leica R 24 f/2.8. The Leica R 28 f/2.8 comes in two version neither of which are similar to the Minolta 28 f/2.8, which again if I am remembering right is a cheap and less than stellar lens. The first version of the Leica R 28 f/2.8 is fairly mediocre, but it should still be a much stronger performer than the Minolta 28 f/2.8. The second version of the
...Show more

Steve,

I am in error, I have the 24mm f2.8 Elmarit. I purchased the lens new from my dealer; it is 3 cam and it was made in 1984. It could possibly use a lube to smooth the focus a tad but that may in part be due to the floating elements and it is probably in M- condition. My understanding is that these were Minolta or Minolta designed lenses that Leica had to put a tremendous amount of work into to make them perform the way that they wanted and they were supposed to legitimately be marked made in Germany. But, I will check it on the a7r just the same.

Rich



Nov 20, 2013 at 03:52 AM
philip_pj
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.105 #6 · p.105 #6 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


mc,

I have an LA-EA3 on order for my Leitax A mounted CY 21mm, which I use for around 20% of my work. Most of this is at f5.6/f8/f11. I figure the Sony adapter ought to be very good, it is made for this camera, I ordered the a7r and its ETA in Aust is late Nov/early Dec.

It is a known quality on the other Sonys I used it with - a900 and a99. It is a knockout lens with astounding depth/clarity and it would take something very special to displace it. I'll post something hopefully in (lets say) two weeks time. Maybe someone else will chime in with the ZEF vsn, would be good to see also.



Nov 20, 2013 at 03:53 AM
JimBuchanan
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.105 #7 · p.105 #7 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


Steve, you are correct. There are few lenses that has the IQ of the R28 II, from wide open on. The C/Y 28/2.8 needs at least 2 stops, if not 3 to bring the corners up to R28 standard. Leica contracted with Minolta for a 24mm solution, and hardly a threat to the R28 II.

naturephoto1 wrote:
Steve,

I am in error, I have the 24mm f2.8 Elmarit. I purchased the lens new from my dealer; it is 3 cam and it was made in 1984. It could possibly use a lube to smooth the focus a tad but that may in part be due to the floating elements and it is probably in M- condition. My understanding is that these were Minolta or Minolta designed lenses that Leica had to put a tremendous amount of work into to make them perform the way that they wanted and they were supposed to legitimately be marked made in Germany.
...Show more



Nov 20, 2013 at 04:53 AM
Ron Pfister
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.105 #8 · p.105 #8 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


snowboarder wrote:
I was quite shocked to see purple corners on NEX-7. But I guess I'll just wait a few days
and do my new fresh round of testing with the A7R...


I was puzzled by your response, to be honest. An SLR-design like the R28 E55 should not produce purple corners, particularly on APS-C. I had never used this lens on the NEX-7, so I made some test images, focused at 0.3m and infinity, both at f/2.8 and f/8.0. I then examined the RGB-values in the top corners (a uniform grey sky): not the faintest trace of a purple cast in any of the images. NB: I used a Voigtländer F Adapter to adapt the lens.

I suspect something's seriously wrong with your copy of the lens, your adapter or your NEX-7.

Edit: I've Leitaxed my copy of the R28 E55 with a Nikon F mount


Edited on Nov 20, 2013 at 12:08 PM · View previous versions



Nov 20, 2013 at 10:48 AM
artur5
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.105 #9 · p.105 #9 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


I have already two lenses covering the 35mm. focal. One is the Super Takumar 35/3.5. Very small ( for a SLR lens) but slow and just O.K. -nothing to write home about,
The other is the C/Y Vario Sonnar 35-70/3.4. Great lens but, of course heavy, bulky and slow. Not the lightest companion for a A7r.
I want something fast, small, affordable and good enough, not necessary a sharpness champion.. Do you think I'm mad if I get a CV Nokton 35/1.4 for the A7r ?. I know that this lens has received very mixed reviews. The main complaint seems to be focus shift, but this is not an issue in liveview. For what I've read, full open it's fairly soft and the corners aren't usable until f/2.8-f/4.
I saw yesterday in this thread a couple of shots of this lens with the A7r and I liked them. No apparent smearing in the corners which are in focus. The aperture seemed to be f/4.




Nov 20, 2013 at 11:07 AM
alundeb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.105 #10 · p.105 #10 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


From what I have read, the CV Nokton 40/1.4 classic is a bit sharper than the 35/1.4. Because of that I got the 40/1.4 for my NEX-5N and it is very small for the amount of light it gets in. It is sharp enough wide open, but with a magenta veiling haze. On FF it seems to get smeared edges, but I will try it out when I get my A7r.

It seems that 40 mm is easier on the A7(r) sensor than 35 mm, so if you can live with a somewhat narrower FOV, 40 mm seems the way to go for fast-ish slight WA lenses.



Nov 20, 2013 at 11:20 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Ron Pfister
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.105 #11 · p.105 #11 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


Another aspect to consider regarding the CV Nokton 40/1.4 classic is that it has a rather busy bokeh that some might find unattractive.

Edit: I have read that this is due to polymer optical elements used in its construction, but I'm not sure if that's indeed the case (i.e. if it even contains polymer elements).



Nov 20, 2013 at 11:25 AM
artur5
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.105 #12 · p.105 #12 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


Thanks Alundeb and Ron.
Fact is that I can get right now a CV 35/1,4 MC for a great price and, as I have already a 50mm lens, the 40/1.4 would te too close
Below one of the pictures with the CV 35/1.4 and the A7r.


A7r_7 by Mehmet KODALAK, on Flickr


Edited on Nov 20, 2013 at 11:56 AM · View previous versions



Nov 20, 2013 at 11:27 AM
eightfold
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.105 #13 · p.105 #13 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


artur5 wrote:
Thanks Alundeb.
Fact is that I can get righht now a CV 35/1,4 MC for a great price and, as I have already a 50mm lens, the 40/1.4 would te too close
Below one of the pictures with the CV 35/1.4 and the A7r.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7393/10922817473_a58319073a.jpg
A7r_7 by Mehmet KODALAK, on Flickr


If you ever get around trying out the CV35/1.4, I'm very interested to see the results. I'm thinking about buying it for my (future) A7. As I mentioned earlier in this thread I have found a couple of kind-of-promising sample pictures.



Nov 20, 2013 at 11:35 AM
alundeb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.105 #14 · p.105 #14 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


These pictures of the Distagon 15 ZF.2 were taken with the CV 40 f/1.4 wide open, at MFD, with the NEX-5N.



Nov 20, 2013 at 11:37 AM
Ron Pfister
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.105 #15 · p.105 #15 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


waterden wrote:
I have spent (wasted?) hours going through the various a7(r) threads on this forum and have yet to see any good evidence (ie 50-100% crops) that the a7R produces sharper, crisper, clearer images in the real world than the a7. I also have seen no good evidence as to which copes better with sub 35mm RF lenses. I do wish we could cut to the chase here because it would save so much time. Of course, there may be no practical difference between the two bodies, in which case the choice is easy. Please someone tell me I am wrong
...Show more

Take a look at the IQ comparisons at Imaging Resource. I think the images speak for themselves. Granted, these are JPEG-comparisons, but the fact that the A7R clearly out-resolves the D800E is interesting at the very least...

http://www.imaging-resource.com/camera-reviews/sony/a7r/#IQC



Nov 20, 2013 at 01:32 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.105 #16 · p.105 #16 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


Ron Pfister wrote:
Take a look at the IQ comparisons at Imaging Resource. I think the images speak for themselves. Granted, these are JPEG-comparisons, but the fact that the A7R clearly out-resolves the D800E is interesting at the very least...

http://www.imaging-resource.com/camera-reviews/sony/a7r/#IQC


I posted a raw crop comparison a little earlier in the thread using Imaging-Resource studio files of the A7r vs A7 interpolated up to A7r size to show the visible difference in resolution between the two cameras.

I don't believe any conclusion can be made that the A7r clearly out-resolves the D800E simply based on the jpeg output from the two cameras based on what we know the A7r does with jpegs (it dramatically sharpens them using what appears to be some pretty sophisticated sharpening). This is more a comparison of jpeg engines (which probably means little to those using these two cameras).



Nov 20, 2013 at 01:41 PM
Ron Pfister
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.105 #17 · p.105 #17 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


I agree with you. However, my guess is that JPEG-engines of the A7 and A7R differ very little, if at all, and the difference in resolution is clearly noticeable...


Nov 20, 2013 at 01:49 PM
Phillip Reeve
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.105 #18 · p.105 #18 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


Do you think field curvature is somewhat affected by the sensor?
It is pretty obvious in these pictures, but i don't know how the Biogon would behave on a leica M9/M240


BiogonFieldCurvature by reevedata, on Flickr



Nov 20, 2013 at 01:51 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.105 #19 · p.105 #19 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


Ron Pfister wrote:
I agree with you. However, my guess is that JPEG-engines of the A7 and A7R differ very little, if at all, and the difference in resolution is clearly noticeable...


My point about the jpeg engine was for the A7r vs D800E comparison. I agree that the A7 and A7R likely use the same jpeg engine. I thought you were making the point the A7r shows a clear resolution advantage to the Nikon D800E.

I was curious about this so compared the Imaging-Resource raws from both. Unfortunately, there is still a major variable here at work which is the lens. The A7r is tested with the FE 55 and the D800E with the Sigma 70mm Macro. This results in a slightly different magnification between the two favoring the D800E slightly. Even still, the A7r looks as though it may have a tiny edge.

These are 100% crops with default ACR conversion. D800E on left, A7r on right.










Nov 20, 2013 at 02:06 PM
Ron Pfister
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.105 #20 · p.105 #20 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses


Tariq Gibran wrote:
I was curious about this so compared the Imaging-Resource raws from both. Unfortunately, there is still a major variable here at work which is the lens. The A7r is tested with the FE 55 and the D800E with the Sigma 70mm Macro. This results in a slightly different magnification between the two favoring the D800E slightly. Even still, the A7r looks as though it may have a tiny edge.

These are 100% crops with default ACR conversion. D800E on left, A7r on right.


Thanks - yes I saw these. I hope this perceived edge is indeed real. But as you say, making a valid comparison regarding sensor resolution is a difficult task, even if the lenses are the same. Where did you find the RAW files?



Nov 20, 2013 at 02:18 PM
1       2       3              104      
105
       106              152       153       end




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

1       2       3              104      
105
       106              152       153       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password