douglasf13 Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
sebboh wrote:
excellent! finally.
looks like his adapter has some alignment issues, upper left and lower right corners are always better than lower left and upper right. still lots of conclusions to draw:
on the a7r at infinity:
35 cron asph - bad till f/11 (kinda surprising)
50 lux asph - bad till f/5.6 (kinda surprising)
50 cron non-AA - good (no surprise)
cv 75/2.5 - good (no surprise)
cv 12/5.6 - bad (a little surprising)
cv 15/4.5 - bad (no surprise)
cv 21/4 - bad (no surprise)
cv 28/2 - bad till f/8 (no real surprise)
cv 35/1.2 - looks good (hard to tell if softness at large aperture is lens or smearing but clears up nicely)
cv 50/1.1 - looks good (no surprise)
zm 21/2.8 - bad till f/11 (no surprise)
zm 25/2.8 - bad till f/11 (somewhat surprising, extreme corners never fully there)
zm 50/2 - good (this one has the worst tilt, wonder if he was using a helicoid adapter and bumped it out a bit?)
still looking through the rest......Show more →
After reading your assessment of the images (I haven't looked at them yet,) I can't help but toot my own horn a bit and link to a post that I made from July, because I've been saying this for a while. link
"I think this camera will be good with native lenses, SLR legacy lenses, and some M standard and longer lenses, which would still give a lot of options. It seems optimistic to think that it will behave well with most M lenses wider than 50mm (and I'm not even sure that all 50mm lenses will be out of the woods.) Granted, it depends on what someone deems as acceptable performance.
I thought some of my NEX cameras were pretty good with M lenses, until I bought an M9, and realized how much more even across the frame the performance was, despite the larger sensor size."
|