philber wrote:
A quick-and dirty test of a borrowed ZM 25 confirms what Jim writes, and the opposite of what I expected: performance on NEX 7 is sharp, with mild magenta, easily cured in Cornerfix. Hmmmm, strange...
But that means I don't have to buy the very expensive 24mm Elmar, which also gives a magenta cast, because the ZM 25 is not exactly a weak performer...
We discussed this some time ago and it's no surprise to me. On the original nex-5 I was also seeing the magenta cast, but sharpness was still good.
FlyPenFly wrote:
Sony really should have made the lens distance on these a bit more.
If you are referring to camera lens flange to sensor distance, that in itself will not improve RF lens performance on the sensor. In fact, if they had increased that distance by just 2 or 3 millimeters, RF lenses wouldn't be useable at all. Though the register difference is about 10mm, the bayonets are close in diameter and could not over lap within the M-NEX adapter.
FlyPenFly wrote:
Sony really should have made the lens distance on these a bit more.
That doesn't really matter, because they can make up the distance with lens size. They should've made sure the sensor design could handle oblique light rays.
Not outside of center. The edges and corners below f4 are as bad as any 50mm test I've ever seen on their site. The a-mount 50mm 1.8 test is much better. Same with the macro. It looks like the Nex-7's sensor issues extend to native lenses, which is a scary thing.
FlyPenFly wrote:
Hmm to be fair, it has OSS on board in the optical path. I would be curious to see a direct comparison between the 7 and 5N or C3 with the new lens.
Comparing the Contax G 45mm on the C3 to the NEX-7, there appears to be finer resolved detail and resolution on the 7 than the C3.
A lot of it purely from the resolution advantage but also in terms of just general sharpness, they appear to be the same in the corners.
It seems that the NEX-7's corner issues seem to be most obvious in the first few stops, and things get better around f5.6, in general (except for with slower lenses, like the f3.5 Macro.) If the Contax 45 performs similarly on the C3 and the NEX-7 in the corners, there must be a problem with the NEX-7.
The 30 Macro also tests so poorly at the edges on the NEX-7 that I don't think it's the OSS of the 50mm causing issues.
FlyPenFly wrote:
I just meant you don't see any more smudging than the c3 with that lens. Of course the mpx difference shows a lot more resolved details with the nex7
out of curiousity, is the per-pixel sharpness the same in the corners on the c3 versus 7 with the g 45 (they both look just as sharp at 100%)? because that would be pretty impressive.
There is finer resolved detail on the 5N than on the C3, and finer on the 7 than on the 5N. I have redone my comparison shots (I flubbed them the first time around), and shall post them shortly.
philber wrote:
There is finer resolved detail on the 5N than on the C3, and finer on the 7 than on the 5N. I have redone my comparison shots (I flubbed them the first time around), and shall post them shortly.
Cool, thanks! It'll be interesting to see f2, f2.8 and f4, as that seems to be where the issue may be with the NEX-7.
Thanks to everyone contributing to this thread, much appreciated. If anyone reading this have any experience with Olympus OM lenses on the Nex-7 and can give some input on corner performance and/or balance and handling with the Nex-7 body I'd be most grateful. Particularly the OM 21/3.5, 24/2 and 24/2.8 would interest me.
Very useful thread for someone looking for a wider solution on the NEX 7.
I've noticed with my ZM 85 f2 that with Settings Effects set to ON I can actually see the CA that the lens will show in the final image in the EVF prior to taking the shot. With the lenses that have colour shift problems, can you preview the effect in the EVF?
