p.106 #1 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
wayne seltzer wrote:
IQ wise, I don't see a A7 with non-dslr lens combo at 35mm FL which compares to my RX1.
I would be surprised if that wasn't the case, after all the lens on the RX1 is what makes that camera.
The FE f/2.8 / 35 is a decent, light lens, and not without flaws. However, it is surprisingly sharp over 80% of an image. Depending on the f stop, of course.
Comparing it to lenses that are twice the price, and more, is interesting but not very useful, unless you want to believe in Santa Clause
All of my glass, with the exception of this and one other, are in the $2k plus bracket and I'm used to seeing what good glass will do.
Your RX1 is a great camera, as a couple of my colleagues who own them have attested to.
Cheers
p.106 #2 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Tariq Gibran wrote:
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?
My guess is that there is some distortion correction going on, which in fact will crop parts of the frame, making the kens effectively look longer. Normally this correction will be only in jpgs but IDC will also replicate it, and I doubt that there is a way to turn it off. ACR as far as I know does not take these corrections in consideration. This may explain why some guys find the lens longer than 35 and others not. Just a guess though.
p.106 #4 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Apparently my perceptions regarding the true focal length of the FE 35 were wrong.
I did a quick test between the FE 35 and the Canon FD 35 TS (yes, really). Both of them are f2.8 lenses shot at 2.8, and both focused at ~5 feet. For what it's worth, each exhibits an almost identical FOV. Unfortunately I don't have any other 35s around to play with at the moment.
p.106 #5 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
frozenbc wrote:
Apparently my perceptions regarding the true focal length of the FE 35 were wrong.
I did a quick test between the FE 35 and the Canon FD 35 TS (yes, really). Both of them are f2.8 lenses shot at 2.8, and both focused at ~5 feet. For what it's worth, each exhibits an almost identical FOV. Unfortunately I don't have any other 35s around to play with at the moment.
Good data to know. I'm still very curious if the AOV with the FE 35 might change at greater distances compared to other 35's (perhaps due to it's unique design?). Infinity landscape type comparisons seem to indicate the FE 35 being on the long side for the 35mm focal length. Edward's explanation above could also be the culprit if a lot of distortion correction occurs with the FE35.
p.106 #6 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
And I managed to found some positives:
1) Strap holder position and whole distribution helps to keep a lens looking in front. That was naturally a pain when Summicron 90 or Super Elmar 18 beat me at a stomach mounted on NEX-5n
2) EVF is quite nice indeed
Another negatives:
1) EVF eyepiece protrudes too long so prevent comfortable stomach level shooting (blocks part of the back LCD)
2) Puting a body closer to stomach/chest/etc switch off the LCD (I guess this is EVF detection sensor)
3) I wonder about Sony: why no physical EVF/LCD switch button? I used one with NEX-5n and this was more handy than to rely on detection switcher.
4) Set C2 button to magnify an image while playback is so Sony: I couldn't see worse variant than that. C1 is equally uncomfortable to press too BTW. Any idea to remap this function to middle button? I didn't find one.
5) In the whole: buttons and wheels placement feels completely non-optimal. It is far cry from Pentax K-5 controls and the latter isn't much larger (if any) than this camera.
So, this is close to ergonomical nightmare. The most amazing thing it is not much better than NEX-5n. I didn't think this is possible.
p.106 #7 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Emacs wrote:
And I managed to found some positives:
1) Strap holder position and whole distribution helps to keep a lens looking in front. That was naturally a pain when Summicron 90 or Super Elmar 18 beat me at a stomach mounted on NEX-5n
I use a wrist strap most of the time and find the the strap holder position of the A7/A7R extremely irritating, as I always manage to interfere with the strap ring when pressing the shutter. No wait, that's not quite right. What I find annoying is the top placement of the shutter release button, as a more forward position (such as on the nex7) would have solved this and other ergonomic issues.
p.106 #8 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
douglasf13 wrote:
The mount is very close to the sensor, while being relatively small, which limits lens design due to mechanical interference. In other words, a wider mount would allow shorter native lens designs.
I have seen diagrams showing such limitations, based on NEX cameras and extrapolations.
What is strange, with my A7r in hand, I can measure a free circle inside the mount, allowing for a barrel, with a diameter of 43 mm. It doesn't look like the mount size and register distance prohibits lens designs with large rear elements close to the sensor. It is just the 0.5 mm extreme corners that will be cut off by perpendicular rays. In practice, we never get perpendicular rays in the corners, that would be from an infinitley long exit pupil distance, or from an exit pupil as large as the sensor.
If we think of the RX1 sonnar 35 lens, and a mount that would allow for such glass, it would require much more than just a slightly bigger mount or a longer register.
p.106 #9 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
turnstyle wrote:
Right now I'm trying to collect opinions on the CV 35 f/1.2 -- obviously RX1 wins for size and quietness (and AF if that's a priority) -- but CV 35 f/1.2 (from what I've been able to gather so far) seems to maintain respectable IQ, and f/1.2 would differentiate it from the RX1.
Tried the 35/1.2 v2 i got on an a7r in store friday, at f/5.6 the edges were quite nice. Will most likely buy an a7r on monday, can post more samples then.
p.106 #10 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
sebboh wrote:
I believe he means responsiveness of controls versus the RX1, not talking about AF.
The A7 is slow compared to a 5D2 for some controls like image viewing/magnification/swapping. I bet the A7r is slower with its 36MP on those things. The immediate playback after shutter release is thankfully quicker, I guess it just freezes whats on the screen.
I am pleased with the camera after two days, the least likable thing so far actually being the somewhat lack of responsiveness. But compared to a NEX 5N it's fast and swift. And thank you Sony for real menus this time.
One of the fears I had is buried, the EVF/peeking makes it easy to nail focus with fast lenses - at least in the lights I tried it in so far (and the few lenses I've used so far).
p.106 #11 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
douglasf13 wrote:
The mount is very close to the sensor, while being relatively small, which limits lens design due to mechanical interference. In other words, a wider mount would allow shorter native lens designs.
How much smaller is the diameter compared to say a Leica? Do we have any lens designers here?
p.106 #13 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
The comments of the responsiveness compared to the RX1 have thrown me off a bit (RX1 responsiveness is piss poor compared to a DSLR and can't imagine something being slower). I've cancelled my A7R order so I'm back at the sidelines with my trusty RX1/D700.
p.106 #14 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Tariq Gibran wrote:
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?
The FE 35 ia a very tiny bit narrower than my ZF.2 35/1.4 on the A7 (both), maybe 1 degree? I could measure it all out, do the trig and try to figure it out...
p.106 #16 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Really? The body is too large? It's funny because I would be concerned of the opposite, particularly when using adapted lenses (about the only option right now).
The A7 feels great with the FE35. With most of my DSLR lenses (I tried Zeiss ZF.2 21/2.8, 28/2, 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4, 100/2, Nikkor 24-70, 70-200 VRII, 300/4 and the Leica 35/1.4 and 180/2), it was too small, and didnt give me enough leverage on the lens. The 50/1.4 was an exception, and this combo (with the Novoflex adapter) was acceptable, but not as comfortable as the FE35.
p.106 #17 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
miklar wrote:
There is another myth that is proven to be incorrect - the a7R's startup time is 1 second, not 3 to 4 seconds as has been stated by reviewers. In their defence, their measurements were based on pre-production models.
Cheers
Yes, although it depends highly on what your setup is. If you have a PAL camera, and it is set to NTSC, it takes longer, for example. With everything configured well, it comes up reasonably fast, but it isn't immediately on like my Nikons.
Nov 30, 2013 at 02:38 PM
Emacs Offline • • [X]
p.106 #18 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
frozenbc wrote:
What I find annoying is the top placement of the shutter release button, as a more forward position (such as on the nex7) would have solved this and other ergonomic issues.
This!
But I actually mentioned it when said the A7 is ergonomical nightmare. It is indeed. I wonder how much will it take to get into the flow. Some actions, some frequent actions are just torture to execute. Angular camera shape is highly unsuccessful. The controls placement is just lame, I cannot get how this could be even imagined. Somehow they implemented this. This is highly strange.
It's a Sony though: masters of spoiling things.
p.106 #19 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
edwardkaraa wrote:
My guess is that there is some distortion correction going on, which in fact will crop parts of the frame, making the kens effectively look longer. Normally this correction will be only in jpgs but IDC will also replicate it, and I doubt that there is a way to turn it off. ACR as far as I know does not take these corrections in consideration. This may explain why some guys find the lens longer than 35 and others not. Just a guess though.
The distortion correction is off by default, unlike the colour cast and vignetting corrections.
p.106 #20 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
turnstyle wrote:
Right now I'm trying to collect opinions on the CV 35 f/1.2 -- obviously RX1 wins for size and quietness (and AF if that's a priority) -- but CV 35 f/1.2 (from what I've been able to gather so far) seems to maintain respectable IQ, and f/1.2 would differentiate it from the RX1.
What do you want to know? I've had the camera (A7) for two days and the 35/1.2 II is more or less the only one I've used so far. I posted a couple of images two days ago in the A7 image thread and some others in the A7 RF image thread.
I think it's a great walk-around lens so far. And it's not that big so the combo cant exceed a RX1 that much. It's sharp-enough, it got some CA, some distortion and is not pixel-sharp wide open but who would have thought that. Stopped down it has respectable corners. Here's a ISO400 house form today, note: the house is fairly distorted itself so it's not just the lens :-)
