Fred Miranda wrote:
I pre-ordered the 24-105/4 G. I'm sure it willl have compromises in terms of distortion, vignetting and rendering but I'm hopeful Sony was able to keep resolution high enough for most of the range. I see sharp jpeg samples available right now even for the long range.
I am very surprised by how well the 12-24/4 G performs and that's a good sign.
Are there RAWs available for download?
p.40 #2 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
charles.K wrote:
The other real strength for the FE 24-105/f4 G OSS length is videos. I have a number of friends that are shooting weddings and their clients love the 1920x1080 Slo Motion clips alongside their wedding portfolios. The 24-105 needs to have a smooth zoom ring and MF for videos.
I got to handle several at Photo plus and the zoom ring sadly seemed a little stiff but overall I was impressed. Wish it was a little shorter and $200-300 cheaper but seems like a great lens. Definitely my next purchase.
From the images I took it seems sharp on the A9 except in the very corners—not that the showroom floor makes a great place to test. The MF ring, while a tad too loose, seemed like a good implementation of focus by wire. It did NOT seem parfocal but not too far off.
p.40 #4 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Looking at the MTF's Sony published ay 24 and 105mm, it won't be a great performing zoom lens. The 24mm MTF looks a lot like the 28/2 wide open (f2 vs f4), and stopped down to F8. At 105 things are worse. For weddings and snapshots the lens has a nice range, but not enough IQ for my landscape stuff at 42MP. I can barely live with the performance of the FE 28/2 (third copy).
p.40 #5 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
glass half full thing here.
Im so out of the loop I only started shooting a r2 this spring.
I like the r2.....alot....and I hate the r2 alot.
I hate that r3 is so needy in so many ways. Very distracting for me to stay on top of all my settings, etc. They don't make it easy. Looks like r3 is better for sure. Incrementally though.
Does the screen flip out and face forward? Any fool would have added that long time ago.
Batteries....it's the 4k that really drains it. After shooting alot of 4K, for stills I think the old bat is fine .
But bottom line, it can do some very special things
But sony likes to wrap those in yesterday's newspaper
p.40 #6 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
glass half full thing here.
Im so out of the loop I only started shooting a r2 this spring.
I like the r2.....alot....and I hate the r2 alot.
I hate that r3 is so needy in so many ways. Very distracting for me to stay on top of all my settings, etc. They don't make it easy. Looks like r3 is better for sure. Incrementally though.
Does the screen flip out and face forward? Any fool would have added that long time ago.
Batteries....it's the 4k that really drains it. After shooting alot of 4K, for stills I think the old bat is fine .
But bottom line, it can do some very special things
But sony likes to wrap those in yesterday's newspaper
p.40 #7 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
pdmphoto wrote:
Looking at the MTF's Sony published ay 24 and 105mm, it won't be a great performing zoom lens. The 24mm MTF looks a lot like the 28/2 wide open (f2 vs f4), and stopped down to F8. At 105 things are worse. For weddings and snapshots the lens has a nice range, but not enough IQ for my landscape stuff at 42MP. I can barely live with the performance of the FE 28/2 (third copy).
I've been looking for the MTF --- can you post a link?
p.40 #8 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Steve Spencer wrote:
Phillipe, one thing that likely improved, perhaps a fair bit, is the jpeg processing in the new camera. I wouldn't be surprised if jpegs are much nicer. We will have to wait to compare RAWs, however, before we know if there is a real improvement in IQ.
Steve, who am I to argue with you and Fred that Sony didn't improve the JPEG engine?
That said, I am not put off by that possibility, because what I am seeing in the admittedly (very) few shots I am going by is something I can't get out of my II, RAW or not. And I don't expect that even an improved JPEG can be more subtle than a properly processed RAW. On this limited sample, had someone asked me what camera these pics came out of, I would have said: X1-D, a camera that renders tones, colors, transitions, subtle gradations really well IMHO, and quite a bit better than a II, even a II with superb glass. Another (equally gauche) way of putting it is that the III looks to me less "electronic" than the II. And I'll freely admit that I have a bee in my bonnet about this. Why else am I schlepping heavy lenses every day?
I'll wait a bit to see if this is real, in which case Sony will have done a great job in an un-flashy, unspectacular way, or if they did a Canon 5D III.
p.40 #9 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
philber wrote:
Steve, who am I to argue with you and Fred that Sony didn't improve the JPEG engine?
That said, I am not put off by that possibility, because what I am seeing in the admittedly (very) few shots I am going by is something I can't get out of my II, RAW or not. And I don't expect that even an improved JPEG can be more subtle than a properly processed RAW. On this limited sample, had someone asked me what camera these pics came out of, I would have said: X1-D, a camera that renders tones, colors, transitions, subtle gradations really well IMHO, and quite a bit better than a II, even a II with superb glass. Another (equally gauche) way of putting it is that the III looks to me less "electronic" than the II. And I'll freely admit that I have a bee in my bonnet about this. Why else am I schlepping heavy lenses every day?
I'll wait a bit to see if this is real, in which case Sony will have done a great job in an un-flashy, unspectacular way, or if they did a Canon 5D III. ...Show more →
Interesting observations, Philipe... I remember reading something about the changed data path and processing gives lower read noise in the A7r3. Maybe it won’t be measurable in DR, but in cleaner, smoother looking files? Just guess.
One thing that strikes me when loading up a Phase One file in Capture One Pro is how clean and smooth those files are. It is difficult to quantify for sure, but those smooth transitions and gradations are nice indeed!
p.40 #10 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
I have been waiting for a7xxx models and I am thrilled they launched this. I am going to buy one as soon as I can. Even an A7R2 was ok for my needs but I didn’t want to feel bad because I knew they will launch something as soon as I bought the old guy.
Looks like a great camera.
p.40 #11 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Question: I remember reading that A7R has a higher viewfinder zoom magnification (14.4) than A7RM2. Does anybody knows, what is this value for the Mark III?
p.40 #12 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Nice, this is one of the reviews I wanted to read about this lens... together with Guy bronco wall tests
Fred Miranda wrote:
I pre-ordered the 24-105/4 G. I'm sure it willl have compromises in terms of distortion, vignetting and rendering but I'm hopeful Sony was able to keep resolution high enough for most of the range. I see sharp jpeg samples available right now even for the long range.
I am very surprised by how well the 12-24/4 G performs and that's a good sign.
Are there RAWs available for download?
p.40 #13 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
I will look more at the future roadmap for Medium Format sensors from Sony, they announces for next year a 100MPx sensor for medium format size like the one in the Fuji GFX and they also announced a 150MPx one for complete full frame 645 sensor size... https://petapixel.com/2017/04/04/sony-plans-release-150mp-medium-format-sensor-2018/
If an A9r happens, it will share more blood with those sensors than with actual ones.
GMPhotography wrote:
Well Sony has a 50mpx CMOS already in Play for Medium format and I have not been paying attention but I think 100mpx as well. Now if you took the 100mpx and cut it to 24x35 not sure what that gives us but this is also different technology too so not sure they can take that and actually use it in 35mm. Problem or could be a problem is getting a 60mpx 35mm format with pixels wells that small. So maybe until that tech comes along we are in a holding pattern. But like to leave that really up to our engineers here to explain this far better than me. i know when to get off the bus and ask for directions. ...Show more →
p.40 #14 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
CalBoy87 wrote:
Question: I remember reading that A7R has a higher viewfinder zoom magnification (14.4) than A7RM2. Does anybody knows, what is this value for the Mark III?
I don't think it's been stated but I would expect it to be the same as A7RII. Along with the electronic shutter scan time, and probably the DR.
It looks like the sensor is largely the same as the A7RII, but the signal processing chain immediately behind the sensor has been beefed up to support higher data rate and some new functionality.
dgpfotografia wrote:
I will look more at the future roadmap for Medium Format sensors from Sony, they announces for next year a 100MPx sensor for medium format size like the one in the Fuji GFX
100MP and the Fuji GFX really starts to make sense (provided they don't go off the deep end with pricing). Interestingly pixel pitch would be the same as 60MP FF and 24MP APS-C.
p.40 #15 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
DavidBM wrote:
I've been looking for the MTF --- can you post a link?
I have found the MTF for the 24-105/4 in the Alpha Library app on my ipad. To me the MTF at 24mm seems to indicate less astigmatism than in the Zony 24-70/4. This is, if I read it correctly.
Even if cityscapes are not the most challenging subjects, it seems pretty good to me for a 42 Mpx sensor, at 24mm and wide open (or close) on a 24-105... No? I've never owned any 24-105, so I don't know really well what are considered as "good" or "bad" results for this kind of lens...
p.40 #19 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
The MTF's are always good to review, but the sample shots look excellent, particularly at 105mm.
Oct 28, 2017 at 06:29 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.40 #20 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
TakenWild wrote:
New 24-105mm details.. it’s not going to be a sharp as the GM 24-70 or a CY 35-70 @f8, but no surprises there.
Not good enough for a landscape lens for me, but could be a nice travel/family lens for some people.
Thanks for posting these MTFs, but I don't think they help us much as they are theoretical MTFs and they are quite high at f/8. They show what looks like corner weaknesses at 24mm, but at f/4 and not really at f/8. At 105 there is much the same story the corners look a bit weak at f/4, but quite as good but perhaps not as good as 24mm at f/8. The bottom line is that these MTFs, which I would take with a huge grain of salt, look very good to excellent when stopped down to f/8 and they show some corner weakness at f/4. I certainly would not rule it out as a landscape lens from these MTFs, in fact I think they look better stopped down than the 24-70 GM, but again it is very hard to tell anything from such MTFs.
.
