p.8 #1 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Thanks, Ron! Yes, i'd seen this, but unfortunately, I can't read much into that, shift-and-corner-mush-wise. I tend to shoot right into a blue sky, and that gives me a very easy read on any shift.
p.8 #2 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
rscheffler wrote:
Philippe, have you read this? http://blog.kasson.com/?p=1280 Seems the Elmar has purple shift but is fixable. From his crops, edges look to be sharp. Might be worth poking around his blog. I spent a bit of time reading some of his posts yesterday and my recollection is that the Elmar will work OK but will need Cornerfix.
Doesn't look too bad, but I can't help but think, shouldn't we hope the Leica's to be considerably better at the edges, considering the much larger image circle for those lenses compared to the made for aps-c Zeiss?
p.8 #4 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
douglasf13 wrote:
Doesn't look too bad, but I can't help but think, shouldn't we hope the Leica's to be considerably better at the edges, considering the much larger image circle for those lenses compared to the made for aps-c Zeiss?
I think this is more a result of the finicky sensor design of the NEX-7 in combination with the Leica's rather than some inherent deficiency with the Leica lenses.
p.8 #5 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Some Leica lenses also have, according to Leica's MTFs, dips in resolution around the 15mm mark, particularly in the 40lp/mm plots, and/or significant divergence of tangental and sagittal rays, which happens to fall at the edges of the APS-C sensor. Combine this with the potential degradation caused by the 7's sensor toppings when using certain rangefinder lenses, such as exaggerated astigmatism, and I don't think you can automatically expect Leica lenses to perform better across the board.
Philippe, if you read some of his other posts, such as this one: http://blog.kasson.com/?p=1246 and the two prior to it, you'll get some additional perspective. I think the take away from him is that the purple shift exists, is somewhat strong with the 24 Elmar, but can be resolved with Cornerfix, and detail at the frame edges is very good... at least that's my interpretation.
p.8 #6 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
rscheffler wrote:
Some Leica lenses also have, according to Leica's MTFs, dips in resolution around the 15mm mark, particularly in the 40lp/mm plots, and/or significant divergence of tangental and sagittal rays, which happens to fall at the edges of the APS-C sensor. Combine this with the potential degradation caused by the 7's sensor toppings when using certain rangefinder lenses, such as exaggerated astigmatism, and I don't think you can automatically expect Leica lenses to perform better across the board.
While that is true with many older, "classically" designed Leica's, it's less and less so with the newer aspherical lenses. The elmar in particular in this test is amazingly flat across it's MTF chart and the 40 cycle tangential and sagittal curves follow one another closely. The main issue with the performance of these particular lenses is the NEX-7 sensor design/ toppings incompatibility.
p.8 #7 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I think this is more a result of the finicky sensor design of the NEX-7 in combination with the Leica's rather than some inherent deficiency with the Leica lenses.
Yep, that's exactly my point. As alluring as the 7 is, I'm more interested in going the direction of GXR performance with these lenses.
p.8 #8 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
douglasf13 wrote:
Yep, that's exactly my point. As alluring as the 7 is, I'm more interested in going the direction of GXR performance with these lenses.
Yeah, the GXR is very alluring. I just wish it was at least 16MP, had a better or built in EVF and it's future was not in limbo due to the Ricoh/ Pentax deal. If the X-Pro 1 added a few manual lens features via firmware AND it's non-AA sensor proves as good with rangefinder lenses as the Ricoh, it may be the answer.
p.8 #9 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
The Fuji is tempting, but its size and EVF quality would be a step back, for me, even if Fuji does implement more focus aids. If I bought that camera, it would be for the native lenses. As it stands, I still think the 5N is the best overall compromise, for now, but I look forward to more and more 7 tests. After comparing GXR and 5N raws of the same scene and lens, the edge detail difference is subtle, but I'm not sure about the 7, yet.
p.8 #10 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Yes, the size of the Fuji could be a negative but given it is the only camera in existence to offer native OVF support for rangefinder lenses in conjunction with the quick changing EVF within the same finder, it is sort of alluring to me. After using the X100 in manual mode, I could see being able to push the magnified EVF button for quick manual focus and then jumping right back into the OVF mode to be a pretty cool feature.
p.8 #11 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Yes, the size of the Fuji could be a negative but given it is the only camera in existence to offer native OVF support for rangefinder lenses in conjunction with the quick changing EVF within the same finder, it is sort of alluring to me. After using the X100 in manual mode, I could see being able to push the magnified EVF button for quick manual focus and then jumping right back into the OVF mode to be a pretty cool feature.
Yeah, I don't really have any interest in using the OVF for manual lenses, so I'd be paying a lot for an unused feature. The OVF would be cool for the native lenses, but, for me, I'd only use the OVF for zone focusing, which I can already do with the 5N and Leica OVFs.
p.8 #12 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
IMHO, the best option is an M9 capable of LV with focus peaking and image magnification for tripod work (M10?). I love the OVF/RF of the Leica. The problem is that it costs 7K++++.
p.8 #13 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
edwardkaraa wrote:
IMHO, the best option is an M9 capable of LV with focus peaking and image magnification for tripod work (M10?). I love the OVF/RF of the Leica. The problem is that it costs 7K++++.
Yep, Fuji and Leica should get together! I think if the M10 lacks live view, Leica would have missed a great opportunity to make the system more versatile and useful for an even larger market to consider it as an option.
p.8 #14 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
I just can't justify $7K for a rangefinder OVF, even if the camera also had live view. There are enough advantages of an EVF over an OVF (and vice-versa) that the conversation would be interesting at similar price points (like with the X-Pro1 and NEX-7,) but the M camera pricing makes it a non-starter, for me.
p.8 #15 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
The price is prohibitive to me too. It's too much money, even if the resale value on Leica stuff is pretty high. But if money isn't an issue, it does make the most sense. I agree with Tariq that Leica should get together with Fuji or perhaps Sony. Now that Kodak is deceased (RIP) chances are they will be forced to, whether they like it or not.
p.8 #16 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Well, I certainly can't afford it either. I do think if the Leica Mx was versatile enough to serve as a studio camera, a landscape camera AND a compact FF walkabout, someone who really wanted one might be able to rationalize it (since it might replace two or three bodies). It would need Live View as a minimum to do that (or at least come close).
p.8 #17 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Lotusm50 wrote:
I was ready to cancel my NEX-7 order based on its problems with rangefinder lenses. But then I got a noticed from Amazon that mine would be shipped next week, then minuted later they told me it was shipped. I'll get it Monday. Not sure if I'll keep it. Half the lenses I want to use on it are rangefinder lenses, the other half would probably be used with a tilt adapter. (which is the other capability you can get with SLR lenses if you accept their size). The samples shown here look fine here -- philber suggests the IQ is in favor of the NEX-7. Even without the file in hand, you can see they are comparable (colors a bit different, but that than can be pretty much fixed in conversion with a good profile if you prefer the 5D2 look). I'll probably just get a 5N and be done with it until Sony decides give us a NEX-7N. ...Show more →
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I'm curious to here what you end up doing. I have also come very close to ordering the NEX-7 but at the last minute, I keep changing my mind.
Well, my NEX-7 is due to arrive by the end of the day, and I just scored a NEX-5N (w/RRS L-bracket) on ebay, so we should see very soon. I suspect I'll wind up selling the NEX-7 for now in anticipation that they will improve it down the line.
p.8 #18 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
rscheffler wrote:
Some Leica lenses also have, according to Leica's MTFs, dips in resolution around the 15mm mark, particularly in the 40lp/mm plots, and/or significant divergence of tangental and sagittal rays, which happens to fall at the edges of the APS-C sensor. Combine this with the potential degradation caused by the 7's sensor toppings when using certain rangefinder lenses, such as exaggerated astigmatism, and I don't think you can automatically expect Leica lenses to perform better across the board.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
While that is true with many older, "classically" designed Leica's, it's less and less so with the newer aspherical lenses. The elmar in particular in this test is amazingly flat across it's MTF chart and the 40 cycle tangential and sagittal curves follow one another closely. The main issue with the performance of these particular lenses is the NEX-7 sensor design/ toppings incompatibility.
Yes, the Elmar and Super Elmars are outstanding and appear to translate well to APS-C. I was thinking more along the lines of many of the modern Summilux, some Summicrons... basically the faster 'legendary' Leica lenses that most seem to think of first. My point was more a response to Doug's earlier post: douglasf13 wrote:
Doesn't look too bad, but I can't help but think, shouldn't we hope the Leica's to be considerably better at the edges, considering the much larger image circle for those lenses compared to the made for aps-c Zeiss?
Just because a lens is from Leica, one can't assume it will be a no-brainer on APS-C simply because it has a larger image circle, regardless of what else might affect image quality, such as sensor toppings. I see it with my 21 Lux. This lens is optimized for wide open central resolution and full frame. While it gets sharper when stopped down, there is greater sagittal and tangental divergence that I think results in a bit of an unsettled feeling. And I can see its dip in resolution and then how it recovers towards the edges on full frame. It actually means some care is needed with off-center subject placement for ideal results in certain situations. The 50 Lux ASPH has some similar characteristics, and it's a lens I actually don't really like much on the GXR, but do on the M9.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Yep, Fuji and Leica should get together! I think if the M10 lacks live view, Leica would have missed a great opportunity to make the system more versatile and useful for an even larger market to consider it as an option.
My guess is the M10 will be fairly conservative and remain close to Leica's roots, but would happily be proven wrong. It's the non-FF camera Leica is supposedly releasing this year that I think is the wildcard. If they keep it AA-free (don't see why they wouldn't), plus incorporate an EVF with killer manual focus assist, it should be a viable, albeit certainly pricy option...
p.8 #19 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
I borrowed a friend's M8; and I was surprised at how bulky and heavy it is, even with my CV lenses on it. I agree with a number of people above, the M9/reputed M10 (for me, now) is non-starter.
Personally, SLR lenses on either the GXR or a 5N do not make sense, except in a T/S application.
I agree 100% with Tariq that the only way I'd buy and M9M10 is as an all-in-one platform—and LV would be essential for that.
Amazingly, the GXR is still the one for work, for me. I have a 5N + EVF coming, but only to try to make the ultimate go-anywhere lightweight combo (teaming it with the MS Optical Perer, or the CV 35/2.5 PII).
This might be heresy, but the Leica rangefinder lenses, though exemplary in many ways, are very solid/heavy pieces on the GXR, and I prefer the CV lenses on it (despite the slight hit, IQ-wise).
p.8 #20 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
rscheffler wrote:
My guess is the M10 will be fairly conservative and remain close to Leica's roots, but would happily be proven wrong. It's the non-FF camera Leica is supposedly releasing this year that I think is the wildcard. If they keep it AA-free (don't see why they wouldn't), plus incorporate an EVF with killer manual focus assist, it should be a viable, albeit certainly pricy option...
Probably as the rumored 24MP CCD sensor for the upcoming M10 apparently does not support Live View.
By the way, I believe it was some of your GXR + Zeiss ZM 21 2.8 shots in the Ricoh thread I saw recently which looked mighty impressive. Does that lens have any issues at all with the GXR or is it pretty much perfect?
