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 | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              7      
8
       9       10       end
  

Archive 2013 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion
  
 
AhamB
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #1 · p.8 #1 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


carstenw wrote:
Surpringly, the performance wasn't half bad. I thought this lens was meant to be a bit of rubbish.


Huh? Phillip Reeve did a review on it, showing that it isn't bad at all, IMO.



Dec 06, 2013 at 11:52 PM
Phillip Reeve
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #2 · p.8 #2 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


AhamB wrote:
Huh? Phillip Reeve did a review on it, showing that it isn't bad at all, IMO.

it isn't great either but for the 240 I paid I am happy: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1255761



Dec 06, 2013 at 11:58 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #3 · p.8 #3 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


That is a different lens though, the FE 28-70. I was talking about the Zeiss 16-70/4 for NEX.


Dec 07, 2013 at 12:02 AM
Taylor Sherman
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #4 · p.8 #4 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


Vern Dewit wrote:
I agree. Brian Smith got me to buy it with his positive comments but for my uses it's not worth it. Not when OM and FD glass works so much better on it...


Sigh. Yep. His picture was clearly a crop (not 3:2), and it looked slightly pink near the edges, and he made no comment about it, in fact saying whatever about it working "perfectly" or "great" or something like that. Drives me nuts!




Dec 07, 2013 at 12:12 AM
Phillip Reeve
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #5 · p.8 #5 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


carstenw wrote:
That is a different lens though, the FE 28-70. I was talking about the Zeiss 16-70/4 for NEX.

hehe, sorry.

I really liked it. The only flaw were the not that sahrrp corners and the lousy quality control. I hope Sony will get the 24-70/4 right.



Dec 07, 2013 at 12:13 AM
engel001
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.8 #6 · p.8 #6 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


My hopes for the 24-70mm f/4 are not too high. When I compare with the new Canon f/4 with IS it has a a 67mm front filter vs. 77mm for the Canon. Vignetting, corner performance

Edited on Dec 07, 2013 at 12:55 AM · View previous versions



Dec 07, 2013 at 12:19 AM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #7 · p.8 #7 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


With the shorter mount, the lens can be more compact. I hope that is all that it is.


Dec 07, 2013 at 12:24 AM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #8 · p.8 #8 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


Phillip Reeve wrote:
hehe, sorry.

I really liked it. The only flaw were the not that sahrrp corners and the lousy quality control. I hope Sony will get the 24-70/4 right.


Okay, I am lost Do you mean the 28-70 now, or the 16-70?



Dec 07, 2013 at 12:24 AM
sebboh
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #9 · p.8 #9 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


Vern Dewit wrote:
I doubt it will. I'm selling mine after a disappointing outing. Here's a before and after shot just to show you what to expect...

http://verndewit.com/img/s5/v131/p359794414.jpg

http://verndewit.com/img/s5/v122/p7793557.jpg


what's it like smearing wise? the color vignetting doesn't look too difficult to correct (and should be less on the a7), but if it still shows smearing at f/8-11 i'd definitely say it wasn't worth the cost on these cameras.




Dec 07, 2013 at 12:28 AM
naturephoto1
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.8 #10 · p.8 #10 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


Taylor Sherman wrote:
Sigh. Yep. His picture was clearly a crop (not 3:2), and it looked slightly pink near the edges, and he made no comment about it, in fact saying whatever about it working "perfectly" or "great" or something like that. Drives me nuts!



Unfortunately, not enough people seemed to read or believe my posting on October 25 the day after I attended PhotoPlus and did not read what Richard Schleuning, National Sales Manager for Zeiss had to say. Richard had indicated that Zeiss already knew about the outcome of WA RF lenses used on the Sony A7 and A7r cameras and regardless of the new Sony 36MP sensor along with the gapless microlenses there were going to be problems with the WA RF lenses. He indicated there there were going to be problems with their own existing RF WA lenses with the A7 and A7r cameras and sensors. He indicated that this was due to the steepness in the angle for the light rays to reach the sensor.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1247673/37#11887760

Rich



Dec 07, 2013 at 12:30 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Vern Dewit
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #11 · p.8 #11 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


sebboh wrote:
what's it like smearing wise? the color vignetting doesn't look too difficult to correct (and should be less on the a7), but if it still shows smearing at f/8-11 i'd definitely say it wasn't worth the cost on these cameras.



At f/8 there's smearing - way worse than my Canon FD 24mm that's for sure! I would advise against the Zeiss 18 ZM on the A7r based on my (limited) testing.



Dec 07, 2013 at 01:15 AM
Vern Dewit
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #12 · p.8 #12 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


engel001 wrote:
My hopes for the 24-70mm f/4 are not too high. When I compare with the new Canon f/4 with IS it has a a 67mm front filter vs. 77mm for the Canon. Vignetting, corner performance


I agree. I was in line to order this lens but am probably going to stick to OM and FD primes for now. Even the FE35mm has some color shift and vignette issues in some situations (snow and grey clouds for example).



Dec 07, 2013 at 01:26 AM
michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #13 · p.8 #13 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


naturephoto1 wrote:
Unfortunately, not enough people seemed to read or believe my posting on October 25 the day after I attended PhotoPlus and did not read what Richard Schleuning, National Sales Manager for Zeiss had to say. He indicated there there were going to be problems with their own existing RF WA lenses with the A7 and A7r cameras and sensors.


Not me... I've been referencing that admission everywhere I go. To me it seemed incredibly important that Zeiss was willing to say in effect that their own ZM line had much less utility out in the wild than before. It wouldn't surprise me if they one day cancel the line, or at least let it drift off into obscurity while piling their energy into new lenses made for short back focal length digital cameras. Maybe they'll update the various problematic Biogons and Distagon ultrawides with new designs, i.e. take the E mount version and slap an M mount on it later. There's a turn around... E mount first.



Dec 07, 2013 at 02:43 AM
Samuli Vahonen
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #14 · p.8 #14 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


JaKo wrote:
I truly wish Sony would implement non-CPU lens coding in A7/R menu. Using handful of non-CPU lenses during one session/walk requires making notes or a great [photographic] memory.

Thanks for mentioning this. I was just about to order Leica-R, Contax, M42 etc. adapters, but started thinking that I might be better off with Metabones adapter because then it would record the EXIF-chip info to photo EXIF. I have dedicated EF-adapters for all my Contax, Leica (few I have Leitax mount change done with EXIF chip) and even some M42 stuff.

Before EXIF-chips it was real pain in the a## to write notebook time of each lens change, and then back at computer add the focal length and aperture values to custom fields in Apple Aperture (at the time I didn't know or understand exiftool possibilities). I later moved from notebook to MP3 dictating machine, from which file timestamps I could see when I had changed lenses and in actual dictation I stored what aperture was used etc. When this was combined to using folders in memory card this did work somehow. Latest step of evolution before EXIF-chips was to replace dictating machine by recording short movies and saying lenses&aperture to videos audio track.

Other technique I have used to figure out EXIF-info later is to shoot one exposure wide open and another at intended aperture value --> it's possible to calculate actual aperture used.




BTW. If someone wants to add lens info (focal length, max aperture, lens name) and shooting info (aperture used) to EXIF and rename RAWs according to shooting data here is how it can be done.
1. Get "exiftool" - link: http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/
2. Download images to computer, make sure you have backup in addition to files you modify
3. Arrange images to folders by lens used (unless you did that already in camera), e.g. name folder for Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 3.5/100 images to ContaxSonnar100 (I will use this as an example)
4. Add default data to all images (one could touch also MakerNotes fields LensSpec, LensMount, LensFormat, LensType2 but before knowing what they will exactly do in RAW-software I would not touch them). In order to save work on later steps I would use the most used aperture value for fields ApertureValue and FNumber:
samu@debianLean:/mnt/RAWtest$ exiftool -EXIF:FocalLength=100 -EXIF:MaxApertureValue=3.5 -EXIF:ApertureValue=5.6 -EXIF:FNumber=5.6 -EXIF:LensInfo='100/1 100/1 35/10 35/10' -EXIF:LensModel='Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 3.5/100 C/Y' ContaxSonnar100/*.ARW

5. Change individual images to reflect the aperture photo was shoot with e.g. If I would have used for DCS00112.ARW aperture f/4 I would mark it to EXIF like this:
samu@debianLean:/mnt/RAWtest$ exiftool -EXIF:ApertureValue=4.0 -EXIF:FNumber=4.0 ContaxSonnar100/DCS00112.ARW

6. Finally files can be renamed, I prefer format YYYYMMDD_HHMMSS_focal length_max aperture@aperture used for shooting_shutter speed_ISO, however shutter speed is in format "1/something" so unfortunately shutter speed can't be included to filename
samu@debianLean:/mnt/RAWtest$ ls ContaxSonnar100/*.ARW
DSC00112.ARW
samu@debianLean:/mnt/RAWtest$ exiftool '-Filename<${CreateDate}_${FocalLength}_f${MaxApertureValue}@f${ApertureValue}_ISO${ISO}.%e' -d %Y%m%d_%H%M%S%%-c ContaxSonnar100/*.ARW
1 image files updated
samu@debianLean:/mnt/RAWtest$ ls ContaxSonnar100/*.ARW
20131205_185541_100.0 mm_f3.5@f4.0_ISO100.ARW

7. Verify information
samu@debianLean:/mnt/RAWtest$ exiftool -EXIF:FocalLength -EXIF:MaxApertureValue -EXIF:ApertureValue -EXIF:FNumber -EXIF:LensInfo -EXIF:LensModel -s ContaxSonnar100/20131205_185541_100.0\ mm_f3.5@f4.0_ISO100.ARW 
FocalLength : 100.0 mm
MaxApertureValue : 3.5
ApertureValue : 4.0
FNumber : 4.0
LensInfo : 100mm f/3.5
LensModel : Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 3.5/100 C/Y


Notice! If you modify RAW-files make sure you always have backups, in case you skrew up permanently the EXIF-info. Even if you "lose" your only copy of RAW, there are ways to fix it: e.g. you can copy EXIF (and other headers) from different image, and then you can start modifying the data again...

Samuli



Dec 07, 2013 at 11:04 AM
joanlvh
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.8 #15 · p.8 #15 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


i purchased a canon EF lens from a FM member without reaizing that the adaptor needed for EF to Sony was more expensive than the lens (Metabones), MY MISTAKE, the seller will not allow me to return it. IS there an adaptor that
you know of that will allow me to used EF lenses on the A7 and is not so costly. thank you joanlvh



Dec 08, 2013 at 01:17 AM
Sneakyracer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.8 #16 · p.8 #16 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


Vern Dewit wrote:
I doubt it will. I'm selling mine after a disappointing outing. Here's a before and after shot just to show you what to expect...

http://verndewit.com/img/s5/v131/p359794414.jpg

http://verndewit.com/img/s5/v122/p7793557.jpg



The color cast (and vignetting) is VERY easy to fix. Just shoot a frame holding a white plexi in front of the lens (flush). Then open the files using Capture One pro (when it supports the A7/R) and make an LCC (lens cat correction) of the shot with the white plexi. Link all files to that LCC. Voila, all casts should be removed. You do have to make an image for LCC at each aperture setting you use since the cast will change with changes in aperture.



Dec 08, 2013 at 01:41 AM
rji2goleez
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.8 #17 · p.8 #17 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


Hmmm, maybe I should have posted here but I would love some feedback and thoughts regarding the results of the images shot with the 35/2.8FE and M Rokkor 40/2 CLE

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1247655/120#11986446



Dec 08, 2013 at 01:59 AM
glacierpete
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #18 · p.8 #18 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


naturephoto1 wrote:
Unfortunately, not enough people seemed to read or believe my posting on October 25 the day after I attended PhotoPlus and did not read what Richard Schleuning, National Sales Manager for Zeiss had to say. Richard had indicated that Zeiss already knew about the outcome of WA RF lenses used on the Sony A7 and A7r cameras and regardless of the new Sony 36MP sensor along with the gapless microlenses there were going to be problems with the WA RF lenses. He indicated there there were going to be problems with their own existing RF WA lenses with the A7
...Show more

Fuji's new organic sensor is supposed to support 60 degrees range of incident light, to address these issues. Big question is when will it be ready for the market.
http://www.fujirumors.com/first-organic-sensor-to-be-used-in-cameras-from-late-2014-early-2015/



Dec 08, 2013 at 03:42 AM
hrossm
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #19 · p.8 #19 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


Sneakyracer wrote:
The color cast (and vignetting) is VERY easy to fix. Just shoot a frame holding a white plexi in front of the lens (flush). Then open the files using Capture One pro (when it supports the A7/R) and make an LCC (lens cat correction) of the shot with the white plexi. Link all files to that LCC. Voila, all casts should be removed. You do have to make an image for LCC at each aperture setting you use since the cast will change with changes in aperture.


I have been shooting sunrise and sunset over the last couple of days with my C/Y primes on an A7r. The 18/4 was terrible - so much vignetting on some shots the Lightroom sliders could not go far enough to fix it. Less noticeable on 28/2.8 and 35/2.8 but still there and seems to vary with the direction of the bright area of sky as well as aperture so impossible to correct perfectly. The 35 is fine if you point it away from the light, haven't checked the others but there are good 18/4 shots on here so I think it's light, not lens, causing the problem.

This also shows up in shots from other people using the Zeiss FE 35/2.8 so it's not that my lenses are incompatible, there's something else going on. dearsusan is one example.

EDIT - It appears the reason my shots look so bad is down to the way my monitor renders them - the vignetting may just be the natural shading of the sky. They look much better in print with a smooth graduation compared to extreme blockiness on my (not cheap IPS panel) monitor.


Edited on Dec 09, 2013 at 11:51 AM · View previous versions



Dec 08, 2013 at 07:00 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.8 #20 · p.8 #20 · Sony A7 and A7r Images and Discussion


A7, ISO 5000, FE35 wide open:

http://throughthelensdarkly.com/forums/CW_20131208_SonyA7_0029.jpg



Dec 08, 2013 at 08:43 PM
1       2       3              7      
8
       9       10       end




FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              7      
8
       9       10       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password