p.104 #1 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I suspect it's not due to sample variation though if you follow his link and download the full size test images, they are plenty sharp overall. It's not like they are obviously terrible. Some of the things he is pointing out are fairly subtle (and he is comparing to the RX1 and very expensive Leica glass). I'm not sure if others have actually looked at them. What I see in his test images and the important questions he raises are:
1) The borders seem to loose detail stopped down at F5.6 and F8 but are sharper at F2.8 and F4. The center is sharp in all. That seems rather odd. Is it possible that field curvature increases as one stops down?
2) Obvious color vignetting wide open and stopped down even which is not fully corrected in camera.
3) The actual focal length of the lens.
4) As the first prime FE lens released, is this what we can expect from the system (due to inherent limitations of cramming a FF sensor into the E-Mount)?
This last one is obviously just an inquiry but the first three are objective results form his lens. I think if one actually looks at his images, the first two are obvious - perhaps minor non-issues for some - but the focal length question is a pretty big deal for folks expecting a 35mm lens. ...Show more →
Now the E mount is not good enough for FF?!?!? Where does this stuff come from?
p.104 #2 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
nandadevieast wrote:
Hi
Those who are using Nikkors...do you have to buy seperate Novaflexes for G and AFD lenses (earlier lenses with the aperture ring)?
Thanks
No, the one with the aperture stopdown ring works for both. Just set it to closed down to use it with lenses with aperture ring.
p.104 #3 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
One odd comment from Steve Huff was the A7(R) felt slower than the RX1. I find that hard to believe as I consider the RX1 extremely slow (especially in low light). It's a great camera but you have to work within its limitations. Hard to believe that something would be slower than it.
p.104 #4 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
wkhc168 wrote:
Which button are you referring to? I tried the AF/MF button but neither the focus box nor the magnified view shows up. Only focus peaking is working. MF Assist is set to on, Mag, Focus Mag Time set to 5 sec.
Sorry, that was misleading. You have to set up the AF/MF button and AEL button separately, although they are the same button. Set the one you prefer to Focus Magnification. The default behaviour of the feature is then as I described.
p.104 #5 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
davewolfs wrote:
One odd comment from Steve Huff was the A7(R) felt slower than the RX1. I find that hard to believe as I consider the RX1 extremely slow (especially in low light). It's a great camera but you have to work within its limitations. Hard to believe that something would be slower than it.
I don't have the RX1, but the A7 hesitates very slightly on some operations, including startup. It isn't an issue, but if you are used to a fast camera, like a high-end DSLR, you might notice.
p.104 #6 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
wkhc168 wrote:
Which button are you referring to? I tried the AF/MF button but neither the focus box nor the magnified view shows up. Only focus peaking is working. MF Assist is set to on, Mag, Focus Mag Time set to 5 sec.
p.104 #7 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Not a very encouraging review from someone who knows what they are talking about on many counts.
Apparently, this is really closer to a 40mm lens according to Tim.
This is something I noticed about the FE35 when I did the RF lens shootout on the a7. It's very similar, though slightly longer, in focal length to the ZM35/2.8, which itself is slightly longer than other 35mm lenses I have, such as the CV35/1.2 II and the Canon 35/2 LTM (which is slightly wider than the CV). That said, calling the FE35 a 40mm lens is an over exaggeration. It's nowhere near close to the CV40's narrower angle of view I also tested. I suppose it's possible the CV40 is slightly longer than 40mm... but have no way to measure/confirm this.
FE35 vignetting and corner color shift is pretty obvious, even at f/5.6, with the in-camera lens corrections turned off. It's worse than the ZM352.8, which is worse than the other RF 35s I tried... And at least the copy I tried, was softer on the right side than the left, where it was sharp from wide open and stopping down doesn't really change performance. However, on the right side, stopping down definitely improved through f/8. But it was a preproduction lens, so who knows if it's representative of what is shipping now?
p.104 #8 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Tried both DF and A7 today, I have to say I am disappointed for both. DF is very light feel very plastic and A7 has really so so build and look. I don't feel EVF is much better than NEX7 in store. Build is feel a step down than RX1 for sure. There is no A7R in store yet, but i will not hold my breath.
Thanks for sony manage make another innovation make digital camera really disposable. I guess IQ will be more than enough justify its hotness. But I will say I am not impressed for its build.
I also handled F2 and F3 in the same store, by holding them along with DF, you will realize there is no passion and pride anymore in modern digital camera.
p.104 #9 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
BTW, typical gadget feel with sony and typical manual with hundreds of item. But I quickly managed all the wheel, and have to agree it is very handy and usable, now I can understand why FMer's claim change setting with eyes in EVF, I might do the same.
The lens I tried is kit lens, hence EVF might struggled indoor with lots artificial noise and line pattern. Another interesting phenomenon is within 20 mins in store, only me and another guy interested in this camera, it might not as hot as we alt gear head member thought.
He is concerned about 35mm fe vignetting and color shift also. He has a comparison of A7+35mm fe to Nex 7+24mm.
I'm surprised fe 35 isn't sharper than so-so overpriced 24/1.8
And it also means fe 35 is crappy and extremely overpriced.
p.104 #13 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Emacs, even though I really like this review, the comparaison between the 24 and the 35 is the only comment I find issue with. To my eye, the 35 shot is much preferable.
Nov 30, 2013 at 06:01 AM
Emacs Offline • • [X]
p.104 #14 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
philber wrote:
Emacs, even though I really like this review, the comparaison between the 24 and the 35 is the only comment I find issue with. To my eye, the 35 shot is much preferable.
Ouch, he only put downsampled images with the factor that is clearly too large. He could also add RX100 in comparison and there will be no difference
I also doubt about his PP skills: images are clearly oversharpened with some inferior algorithm.
In other words: not valid.
He is concerned about 35mm fe vignetting and color shift also. He has a comparison of A7+35mm fe to Nex 7+24mm.
I would not be too concerned about the vignetting with the FE 35/2.8, as for most shots this will not be too visible. It took Leica about 3 firmware corrections to get it acceptable with the M9 with most of the M mount glass, and 1 firmware correction with the M240. So long as there is no smearing I do not have an issue, as this is easily corrected within Lr for now
p.104 #17 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I wonder how an adapted Canon 40mm STM pancake would perform against the 35 FE on an a7R. I imagine from what I can decipher from the MTFs of both lenses that it won't be as good, but I have both the 40mm and the Sigma 35mm. As a walkaround the Sigma will be huge, the adapted 40mm pancake should be similar in size to the Sony/Zeiss 35mm FE.
I keep telling myself the camera will ship next week, but I pre ordered about 5 days after the announcement. Really wish this thing would ship so I can kick the tires myself.
(Trying to talk myself out of buying another 35mm lens...)
-Tim
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I suspect it's not due to sample variation though if you follow his link and download the full size test images, they are plenty sharp overall. It's not like they are obviously terrible. Some of the things he is pointing out are fairly subtle (and he is comparing to the RX1 and very expensive Leica glass). I'm not sure if others have actually looked at them. What I see in his test images and the important questions he raises are:
1) The borders seem to loose detail stopped down at F5.6 and F8 but are sharper at F2.8 and F4. The center is sharp in all. That seems rather odd. Is it possible that field curvature increases as one stops down?
2) Obvious color vignetting wide open and stopped down even which is not fully corrected in camera.
3) The actual focal length of the lens.
4) As the first prime FE lens released, is this what we can expect from the system (due to inherent limitations of cramming a FF sensor into the E-Mount)?
This last one is obviously just an inquiry but the first three are objective results form his lens. I think if one actually looks at his images, the first two are obvious - perhaps minor non-issues for some - but the focal length question is a pretty big deal for folks expecting a 35mm lens. ...Show more →
p.104 #18 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I'm of the opinion that the FE 35 is also longer than 35mm,and maybe even close to 40mm. Fyi the CV40, at least compared directly to the M-Rokkor 40, looks like a 42-43mm lens.
When the weather clears up in Vancouver I will try to do some proper tests to determine the exact focal length of the FE 35.
rscheffler wrote:
This is something I noticed about the FE35 when I did the RF lens shootout on the a7. It's very similar, though slightly longer, in focal length to the ZM35/2.8, which itself is slightly longer than other 35mm lenses I have, such as the CV35/1.2 II and the Canon 35/2 LTM (which is slightly wider than the CV). That said, calling the FE35 a 40mm lens is an over exaggeration. It's nowhere near close to the CV40's narrower angle of view I also tested. I suppose it's possible the CV40 is slightly longer than 40mm... but have no way to measure/confirm this.
FE35 vignetting and corner color shift is pretty obvious, even at f/5.6, with the in-camera lens corrections turned off. It's worse than the ZM352.8, which is worse than the other RF 35s I tried... And at least the copy I tried, was softer on the right side than the left, where it was sharp from wide open and stopping down doesn't really change performance. However, on the right side, stopping down definitely improved through f/8. But it was a preproduction lens, so who knows if it's representative of what is shipping now? ...Show more →
p.104 #19 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
frozenbc wrote:
I'm of the opinion that the FE 35 is also longer than 35mm,and maybe even close to 40mm. Fyi the CV40, at least compared directly to the M-Rokkor 40, looks like a 42-43mm lens.
When the weather clears up in Vancouver I will try to do some proper tests to determine the exact focal length of the FE 35.
I'm very curious about the actual focal length of the FE 35, as I'm sure others are. Perhaps some other folks who own the FE 35 and as well as some SLR 35's could compare the images for angle of view....Carsten?
Nov 30, 2013 at 10:45 AM
Emacs Offline • • [X]
p.104 #20 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Got my A7.
And my opinion stays the same:
Tiltable EVF is a must
Touchscreen is a must
The body is too large
The handling is not particularly stable "thanks" to fixed EVF: don't argue please, if you didn't try tiltable.
Control flow is too cumbersome and ergonomics definitely wasn't designer's aim.
Don't like it and will swap for modern styled body once it will be available.
