p.15 #1 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
philip_pj wrote:
'The RX1 is quieter, has a faster flash sync and is one stop faster
The A7R has a better EVF, is sharper and more versatile.
Choosing between RX1r and A7R would really be tough...'
One of the potential major "gotchas" I was concerned about on the A7(r) was the implementation of the finder optics (given how poor I found the NEX-7 EVF optics). The large "hump" and longer rear eye piece gave me hope and this confirms Sony has executed well here. Here is what Imaging-Resource says about the A7(r) EVF and optics:
"Its very high resolution is only part of the story of the Sony A7R's EVF, though. Possibly more important is the optics that Sony's put behind it. Viewfinder optics are often an afterthought in camera design, with optical artifacts like coma, blur, and chromatic aberration all too common. Since they're not being used to take a picture through, they often receive short shrift in the camera-design process.
Not so the EVF on the Sony 7R. It uses a three-lens optical system similar to that found in the flagship Sony A99 SLT camera, although with a slightly improved configuration. The dioptric adjustment range for eyeglass-wearers is an unusually broad -4 to +3 diopters, very welcome for far- or nearsighted people like myself. The net result is a very highly-corrected view of the OLED screen, that's sharp from corner to corner, with nary a sign of CA anywhere, and a nice, wide field of view (0.71x with a 50mm lens focused at infinity). The OLED screen itself has also been enhanced a good bit, with three times the contrast of the one used in the A99. The result is a remarkably clear view, with better than average dynamic range, although still not quite up to what my eye can see when looking through an optical viewfinder."
p.15 #4 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Ok, don't kill me for this observation, and Nikon shooters, feel free to set me straight on this, but it relates to the A7/A7R because it's presumably a similar sensor to the one in the Nikon D800.
I was perusing the thread for the insanely priced Nikon 58mm f/1.4G (Which, given that it's really not super sharp wide open, baffles me at the price), and there was a link to some sample photos. So I go in there.... http://www.flickr.com/photos/nikonfrance/10324649785/in/photostream/
And I look at the full size images. And, I don't know if it's a bad JPEG engine, or Nikon France (who made the images) severely underexposed many of them and brought them up in post, or what...but they look REALLY noisy to me. The D4 at ISO 800 looks about like what my X-E1 looks like at ISO 3200. The D800E shots at ISO 400 look to have a fair amount of blotchy noise as well. Is this what the sensors really are capable of? I have to imagine it's due to a poor JPEG engine, but I want to check since I'm somewhat in the market for these A7s (at least sometime in the next few months), but if the actual results are no better than what I'm seeing there, I'll have to reconsider.
p.15 #5 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Beni wrote:
True but then why not just stay with the A7? the A7r is going to be difficult to realise as an advantage with adaptors is it not and I wonder how much advantage the old lenses will have on the A7r chip compared to the A7?
I can't think of a reason except for slightly more center resolution and a lack of AF pixels. To me the lack of AF pixels is worth 500€, but thats mostly because I can't buy any lenses that I want with the savings (ok the samyangs are an option but rather silly for a small camera), therefore I'd prefer to throw more pixels at the problems of NR and software sharpening. If someone has interest in native AF lenses then I agree the A7 is simply the better choice to the A7R. I don't have any AF interest and like EVF cameras because they make it easier to MF.
p.15 #7 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
JMan I would imagine that's a compression / post problem or Nikon JPEG "thing". I came across some full resolution A7r shots and they looked outstanding, from flickr. Viewed at 1:1 at 2880x1800.
p.15 #8 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
SoulNibbler wrote:
I can't think of a reason except for slightly more center resolution and a lack of AF pixels. To me the lack of AF pixels is worth 500€, but thats mostly because I can't buy any lenses that I want with the savings (ok the samyangs are an option but rather silly for a small camera), therefore I'd prefer to throw more pixels at the problems of NR and software sharpening. If someone has interest in native AF lenses then I agree the A7 is simply the better choice to the A7R. I don't have any AF interest and like EVF cameras because they make it easier to MF. ...Show more →
How is lack of AF pixels a plus? It's such a small hit on total resolution, I'd bet the farm nobody could tell the difference between the a7r and one with AF pixels, viewing at 200%.
Instead, look at the down sampled a7r vs a7 shots. The a7r is noticeably better even at low ISO. THAT is reason enough to consider it, regardless of the lens (assuming the test wAs legit)
p.15 #13 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Not that it makes up the whole difference, but keep in mind that ISO 3200 on your Fuji is closer to ISO 2000 on most cameras. Also, you have to downsize the larger file to 16mp if you want to compare them equally.
Jman13 wrote:
Ok, don't kill me for this observation, and Nikon shooters, feel free to set me straight on this, but it relates to the A7/A7R because it's presumably a similar sensor to the one in the Nikon D800.
I was perusing the thread for the insanely priced Nikon 58mm f/1.4G (Which, given that it's really not super sharp wide open, baffles me at the price), and there was a link to some sample photos. So I go in there.... http://www.flickr.com/photos/nikonfrance/10324649785/in/photostream/
And I look at the full size images. And, I don't know if it's a bad JPEG engine, or Nikon France (who made the images) severely underexposed many of them and brought them up in post, or what...but they look REALLY noisy to me. The D4 at ISO 800 looks about like what my X-E1 looks like at ISO 3200. The D800E shots at ISO 400 look to have a fair amount of blotchy noise as well. Is this what the sensors really are capable of? I have to imagine it's due to a poor JPEG engine, but I want to check since I'm somewhat in the market for these A7s (at least sometime in the next few months), but if the actual results are no better than what I'm seeing there, I'll have to reconsider. ...Show more →
p.15 #14 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
sebboh wrote:
how's this: i bet the 35mm and 50mm will easily outperform anything from any other mirrorless interchangeable lens camera with AF. those are two most used focal lengths in photography too. judging by the images from the zeiss 24-70/4 i bet it will easily outperform any other normal zoom for mirrorless as well as providing narrower dof if you want (i'm not fully willing to commit to this since i haven't seen many wide open shots with it yet).
that seems like having something, especially for line of lenses that didn't exist yesterday.
it's not much of a system yet, so if you need a system you definitely shouldn't go all in on it cause it doesn't exist....Show more →
What makes you think the 35mm and 50mm lenses will outperform its peers?
For a launch lineup, it's not bad. Certainly it's better than m4/3 at launch where they had no pro-grade lenses made available. I just wished Sony would release more details about its lens roadmap for next year rather than stating that it'll release 15 lenses by 2015. I really do hope that they'll release an ultra wide angle lens next year (16-35mm f/4 or something similar to that). I doubt most people would be patient enough to wait until 2015 for this lens!
p.15 #15 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
philip_pj wrote:
Add to that - very acceptable AF. Also, it has NO competition at all, it's a new niche.
BA, you are looking at the reason most enthusiasts should go with the a7r, Sony learnt a lot with the RX1 about tolerances and alignment. There is a reason for the nuggety weight, all that buttressing.
I also feel the CZ mid zoom will be a real surprise, it's so well specified. A lot of users will need nothing more...it has to be good to attract the other main users of such lenses - DSLR people.
more:
On the shutter - deemed 'loud' by the vid dude at SAR, here is David Kipatrick:
'Shutter sound is very solid, mechanical. A really nice sound. There is not a fully electronic shutter mode available, so no silent shooting, but it’s discrete enough.' good, the people who think it's loud have been using an RX1 and expected the same Db.
and
'The OLED screen itself has also been enhanced a good bit, with three times the contrast of the one used in the A99. it has arguably the best EVF we've ever seen on a camera.'
They also did some work on the Alpha menus, which are already very good IMO.
Sony cameras are evolving very fast these days. ...Show more →
From what I read, it is the Olympus E-M1 EVF that is to beat. IIRC, it even have a higher resolution.
p.15 #16 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Gyroscope wrote:
This is extremely tempting proposition. I have a lot of Canon glass so if this works well it might be the way to go for landscapes and general shooting. On the other hand maybe I should hang on a little longer and Canon may decide they need to compete and bring out an EF mount mirrorless then I would in like Flynn....
I doubt your adapted Canon lenses will AF on the A7. Of course if you don't mind MF then that won't be an issue.
If Canon releases a mirrorless FF format, it's going to launch new lenses too. They'll just release an adapter so that legacy users will be able to use their lenses on the new body.
p.15 #17 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
lsquare wrote:
I doubt your adapted Canon lenses will AF on the A7. Of course if you don't mind MF then that won't be an issue.
If Canon releases a mirrorless FF format, it's going to launch new lenses too. They'll just release an adapter so that legacy users will be able to use their lenses on the new body.
I thought there was a Metabones adapter that allowed focusing Canon lenses on a NEX.
p.15 #18 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
lsquare wrote:
I doubt your adapted Canon lenses will AF on the A7. Of course if you don't mind MF then that won't be an issue.
If Canon releases a mirrorless FF format, it's going to launch new lenses too. They'll just release an adapter so that legacy users will be able to use their lenses on the new body.
I'm sure that Metabones or someone else will come out with an AF adapter for EF lenses.
Oct 17, 2013 at 08:42 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.15 #19 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
lsquare wrote:
What makes you think the 35mm and 50mm lenses will outperform its peers?
The MTF charts and the samples that seem to back up those charts.
p.15 #20 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Jman13 wrote:
Ok, don't kill me for this observation, and Nikon shooters, feel free to set me straight on this, but it relates to the A7/A7R because it's presumably a similar sensor to the one in the Nikon D800.
The 24 MP aps sensor in my Sony a77 would equal a ~57MP full frame sensor. I find the a77's noise about one stop greater than my Sony a850 full frame, although I usually limit my ISO to 1600.
DXO's tests of the Nikon d800e produced the best scores of any sensor to date. One would expect the new Sony a7r sensor to better the older Nikon sensor.
Personally, I expect cleaner ISO 1600 from the a7r than what I have now. Anything additional is gravy.
