p.9 #2 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Tariq Gibran wrote:
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?
Thanks! The ZM 21 2.8 has some field curvature, which on full frame results in soft corners until around f/5.6. On APS-C I think this is still somewhat a factor, but maybe only to f/4. I didn't really like the lens on the 5N, perhaps because mine might be slightly off, but feel it works better on the GXR. I don't think it's perfect, at least when it comes to planar subject at wide apertures if you want sharp corners. Stopped down a bit and it's very nice. It also has zero CA, something that can't be said for many Leica lenses I've used.
I also agree with Kit, that many of my CV lenses really shine on the GXR..
As for the size of the M9... I disagree somewhat. I find it's the correct height to allow me to keep all my fingers on the body. With the GXR my ring and pinky fingers slip off the grip and under the camera. The hold doesn't feel as comfortable to me. And I don't think my hands are large. I have had a couple chances to play with the NEX-7, and it seemed pretty good, but like the GXR, perhaps a bit too short for my liking.
p.9 #3 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
FlyPenFly wrote:
Why don't they make a full frame GXR? Maybe the supporting electronics can't support it?
I think it's because any FF sensor, that with high probability will be used with legacy rangefinder lenses, will have similar edge colour shift and vignetting issues as experienced by the M9. By sticking to APS-C, most of this is conveniently avoided and allows a reasonable consumer price point.
p.9 #4 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
FlyPenFly wrote:
Why don't they make a full frame GXR? Maybe the supporting electronics can't support it?
I think part of the issue is tailoring a modern sensor towards such a short flange distance (are Ricoh up for this?). But, hell, I wouldn't even mind if they took the M9 sensor and created a module from it (they're already using a mount that's big enough). But I think part of the problem is they need a modern sensor that's readily available and being fabricated versus an old one that's very specialized.
But even then I think every person that buys into such a FF module has to go in knowing that there will be corner issues unless there's a remedy out there for getting light to correctly hit the edges of the sensor (like Fuji's Organic tech). Right now Ricoh are using the fact that APS-C sensors have less sensor area to worry about to mitigate the steep light angle issue over FF.
p.9 #5 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
@Ron: I agree with you re. the height of the body being a bit shallow; one of the reasons I like my modified RRS bracket is that it adds a bit of depth in this dimension, and the bracket fitted backwards (to how the maker intended) moves the palm, and hence fingers, away from the RHS grip: result is perfect hand-holding. I have medium-sized hands.
@bluetsunami: agree with your points re. FF, too. The APS-H size sensor is a very nice compromise, I feel, in this regard.
p.9 #6 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
bluetsunami wrote:
I think part of the issue is tailoring a modern sensor towards such a short flange distance (are Ricoh up for this?). But, hell, I wouldn't even mind if they took the M9 sensor and created a module from it (they're already using a mount that's big enough). But I think part of the problem is they need a modern sensor that's readily available and being fabricated versus an old one that's very specialized.
But even then I think every person that buys into such a FF module has to go in knowing that there will be corner issues unless there's a remedy out there for getting light to correctly hit the edges of the sensor (like Fuji's Organic tech). Right now Ricoh are using the fact that APS-C sensors have less sensor area to worry about to mitigate the steep light angle issue over FF....Show more →
Definitely.
Another issue is that the GXR has no way to automatically identify the mounted lens and automatically apply the appropriate corner corrections. Yes, you can go into the menus and set this up manually, but that's too much of a pain for me. Already with the M9, if I must set a lens profile manually, it's virtually guaranteed I'll forget to change it back to auto when I mount a coded lens. So with the GXR I'm sure I'd be shooting with the wrong lens profile enabled half the time. If the M9 didn't have the auto coding function, I would be much, much less enthusiastic about it .
p.9 #8 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Tariq Gibran wrote:
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?
Actually, I have not come up with a wide angle lens that has issues on the GXR. True....this is a somewhat limited selection, but so far the CV15, ZM18, ZM21/2.8 and 24 Elmar have had the most minimal corner discoloration (virtually undetectable) and no corner distortion that I can discern.
Also, I am not so inclined to believe that a 16MP on the GXR sensor would be wonderful......look at the Sony 5N to 7 issues. Sometimes, a sensor is just perfect the way it is.
p.9 #9 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Rich M wrote:
Actually, I have not come up with a wide angle lens that has issues on the GXR. True....this is a somewhat limited selection, but so far the CV15, ZM18, ZM21/2.8 and 24 Elmar have had the most minimal corner discoloration (virtually undetectable) and no corner distortion that I can discern.
Also, I am not so inclined to believe that a 16MP on the GXR sensor would be wonderful......look at the Sony 5N to 7 issues. Sometimes, a sensor is just perfect the way it is.
R
I guess the one lens that might possibly cause an issue would be the Zeiss ZM 21 4.5 C Biogon.
Could be about the sensor though both the 5n and 7 use AA filters which could be the main culprit. Seems like I have also read that the GXR A12 M module sensor microlenses are also optimized for rangefinder lenses. Same is true with the Fuji X100 12MP sensor (which is likely the same sensor).
p.9 #11 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
ken.vs.ryu wrote:
this is not the gxr thread.
You mean the "Still no love for the Ricoh GXR" thread?
Where's the love?
True, it's not a NEX-7 or a 5DII but I would say it is more of a "walkabout" than the latter so it does seem to have a little connection to the discussion.
p.9 #12 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
bluetsunami wrote:
I think part of the issue is tailoring a modern sensor towards such a short flange distance (are Ricoh up for this?). But, hell, I wouldn't even mind if they took the M9 sensor and created a module from it (they're already using a mount that's big enough). But I think part of the problem is they need a modern sensor that's readily available and being fabricated versus an old one that's very specialized.
But even then I think every person that buys into such a FF module has to go in knowing that there will be corner issues unless there's a remedy out there for getting light to correctly hit the edges of the sensor (like Fuji's Organic tech). Right now Ricoh are using the fact that APS-C sensors have less sensor area to worry about to mitigate the steep light angle issue over FF....Show more →
Joakim has mentioned a few times that the M9's sensor doesn't have a particularly high fill factor at the edges compared to modern CMOS, and it's really just the lack of an AA filter and software fixes that allow it perform alright with M lenses. GXR, or Sony for that matter, should have no problem making a FF sensor that performs as well as the M9, assuming the implement the proper software.
p.9 #13 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
That is true and I'm patiently waiting on someones effort in this sector. Still need some rich dude to donate his NEX7 to science and get that AA filter removed. Surprised no one on DPReview has been curious enough.
Speaking of color shift and the GXR its interesting that Ricoh even implemented their in body solution to color shift. Its obvious at this point that even the worst causers of shifting aren't so bad as to need an in body profile for it. I guess its good for those that are truly bugged by this but, in my mind, this may point to Ricoh laying down tracks for a time they release a FF module.
As it is right now they have a body, mount, software (although as rscheffler stated the profile system could be more robust) and module system that would allow for a FF module that could take on the possible headaches of a FF sensor on a mirrorless body. And even if the shifting was particularly bad I get the feeling that lots of shooters wouldn't be opposed to adapting bulky SLR lenses and just use the system as a small sized sensor back for their lenses. Taking ones 21/2.8 Distagon out on a hike with a body with such a small footprint but with the full capabilities of a FF body sounds like a wonderful thing.
p.9 #16 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
bluetsunami wrote:
But even then I think every person that buys into such a FF module has to go in knowing that there will be corner issues unless there's a remedy out there for getting light to correctly hit the edges of the sensor (like Fuji's Organic tech).
I believe Sony are also working on an organic solution too.
The ZM 21 2.8 has some field curvature, which on full frame results in soft corners until around f/5.6. On APS-C I think this is still somewhat a factor, but maybe only to f/4. I didn't really like the lens on the 5N, perhaps because mine might be slightly off, but feel it works better on the GXR. I don't think it's perfect, at least when it comes to planar subject at wide apertures if you want sharp corners. Stopped down a bit and it's very nice. It also has zero CA, something that can't be said for many Leica lenses I've used.
