p.27 #1 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I think the larger implication of smearing and how bad RF lenses work on the A7 implies that Sony's native lenses will be probably be bigger in size. The A7 sets the tone for Sony's lens designs for the next several years at least: FE mount lenses have to work well with both the A7 and A7r.
So far the FE lens look great but aren't as small or as fast as what I think at least half of us would like: I can live with a F2.8 or F1.8, doesnt mean i don't prefer to have the option of F1.4 or F1.2 I'm surprised there is no 24-70 F2.8, how many will choose/stay Canon or Nikon instead for that reason alone. AF is nice to have, not essential for my type of shooting. All that said, I caved and have joined the a7r preorder wait list.
p.27 #2 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Fred Miranda wrote:
For those who have not seeing these images yet...
Here is the weather-sealing diagram and magnesium alloy body skeletal:
Thanks Fred, I was looking for this set earlier.
Looking at the 'plate' structures of the front raises an interesting possibility.
With lens converters up to the 400$ range --- and the flexibility of CNC and robotics --- might it be practical for Sony to profitably sell the a7 / a7r in different native configurations?
Could we see the reverse of the third party lens marketing plan fitting one lens to different systems with Sony offering the a7 / a7r in various mounts?
p.27 #3 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Jabberwockt wrote:
I think the larger implication of smearing and how bad RF lenses work on the A7 implies that Sony's native lenses will be probably be bigger in size. The A7 sets the tone for Sony's lens designs for the next several years at least: FE mount lenses have to work well with both the A7 and A7r.
So far the FE lens look great but aren't as small or as fast as what I think at least half of us would like: I can live with a F2.8 or F1.8, doesnt mean i don't prefer to have the option of F1.4 or F1.2 I'm surprised there is no 24-70 F2.8, how many will choose/stay Canon or Nikon instead for that reason alone. AF is nice to have, not essential for my type of shooting. All that said, I caved and have joined the a7r preorder wait list. ...Show more →
p.27 #4 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I was hoping someone could clarify why these short registration distance cams may require more precisely made adapters to avoid substantial degradation of alt lens performance. Seems if the adapter is off planar by just a bit the plane of focus will be tilted but I just don't understand why it matters more than using say a Canon back. Thanks.
p.27 #6 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
ytwong wrote:
does anyone know if they A7/r has a better viewfinder compare to NEX-6/7? I think the NEX-6 LCD is fine but it deserve better optics around it.
I'm not familiar with the NEX-6 but we certainly know it's much better than the NEX-7. It has better corrected optics and, compared to the even later a99 EVF, is said to have three times the dynamic range.
p.27 #7 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Michael Gordon wrote:
I was hoping someone could clarify why these short registration distance cams may require more precisely made adapters to avoid substantial degradation of alt lens performance. Seems if the adapter is off planar by just a bit the plane of focus will be tilted but I just don't understand why it matters more than using say a Canon back. Thanks.
it's just the same as canon and nikon. as with them it'll matter more for wide angle lenses.
p.27 #8 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
a7/a7r have the best Sony EVFs at present - more contrast than the next best on a99/RX1.
Would not adapter planar error cause a worse result for DLSRs as the rays need to travel much further, thereby crossing more pixels than a short registration E mount setup? Any given error, say 0.2mm off at one side, could affect more pixels if it travels twice as far.
p.27 #9 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
JW, many and varied are the reasons for slower lenses, including light weight, smaller volume, simpler construction, easier QA, cheaper design costs, often an order of magnitude fewer aberrations, easier correction so better corners, often better stopped down performance. You can use plenty of fast lenses, they might have to be adapted DSLR one though.
Weight matters more than a few mms in lens length to most users, and these two (35/2.8 and 55/1.8) are close to Leica M counterparts in that aspect.
Has there ever been a FF 24-70/4 as light as the forthcoming FE? It weighs 430 grams and is a 12/10 design, five asph elements and an ED one too.
For comparison Canon's 24-105/4 weighs 665 grams and is 18/13...according to our Ken R it also features:
'one glass molded aspherical, two plastic-resin-on-glass (replica) asphericals and an element of Super-UD glass.'
And these two are within a few bucks of each in retail cost. Which one will work better? I recall reading that Zeiss were not keen on asph for some time, due to the poor quality of the pressings and the limited range of glass available for them.
It's good that the existence of the a7r means that lens performance will be better than it would be if only the a7 was released.
p.27 #10 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
philip_pj wrote:
a7/a7r have the best Sony EVFs at present - more contrast than the next best on a99/RX1.
Would not adapter planar error cause a worse result for DLSRs as the rays need to travel much further, thereby crossing more pixels than a short registration E mount setup? Any given error, say 0.2mm off at one side, could affect more pixels if it travels twice as far.
that really depends on the particular lens design. that idea sounds feasible if we're talking about two lenses of the same focal length where one has an exit pupil much closer to the sensor than the other. i wouldn't generalize that to draw a slr lens to rangefinder lens dichotomy.
the reason wide angles are more susceptible to mount irregularities is because a smaller displacement causes a greater change of in focus distance – the same reason wide angles have a shorter focus through to go from say 1m – infinity.
p.27 #11 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I only used the a7/r in a well lit show room and did not try to track anything moving. But it appears noticably larger than the one in my NEX 6... And they've managed to squeeze into view even more useful info.
ytwong wrote:
does anyone know if they A7/r has a better viewfinder compare to NEX-6/7? I think the NEX-6 LCD is fine but it deserve better optics around it.
p.27 #12 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I'm not familiar with the NEX-6 but we certainly know it's much better than the NEX-7. It has better corrected optics and, compared to the even later a99 EVF, is said to have three times the dynamic range.
The NEX-6 and 7 EVF are rather similar, I slightly prefer that on the 6. The VF on NEX-6 has tones of CA, I really wouldn't want to see those for a ~$2300 camera.
The is their VF spec:
A7/R
Viewfinder coverage 100%
Viewfinder magnification 0.71×
p.27 #13 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
ytwong wrote:
The NEX-6 and 7 EVF are rather similar, I slightly prefer that on the 6. The VF on NEX-6 has tones of CA, I really wouldn't want to see those for a ~$2300 camera.
The is their VF spec:
A7/R
Viewfinder coverage 100%
Viewfinder magnification 0.71×
Also, I noticed that Minimum shutter speed is 30 sec, not sure if they have a bulb mode.
You have to keep in mind that the NEX-6 is APS-C and A7/r is full-frame, so 1.09x refers to magnification from the 1.5x crop, while 0.71x refers to magnification from the 36x24mm sensor. 1.09x converted to FF equiv. is 0.72x, or just marginally bigger. Safe to say it's the same size.
Bulb mode is activated through Manual, set the shutter speed below 30s and you get Bulb.
p.27 #15 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
theophilus wrote:
I am struggling to find quality adapters for this that aren't speedbooster (metabones) and don't have a silly built in tripod mount (fotodiox).
p.27 #16 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Edit, this has been covered.
I don't really agree with either of your points. What is it that's better than the rx1? The af speed?
And to the mid zoom, afaik most don't bother making 24-70 f4 lenses preferring more zoom range or faster aperture, this loses 150g over the former.
I'm a huge sony fan, but the zoom would not be on my list, not for that price, for those specs. Maybe prime like performance wide open at all fl would sway me...but it's till a general walk around good light lens, and sony still need to go faster and do better with lighting. philip_pj wrote:
The 55mm is already looming as a star lens, a great performer on a high Mp sensor with no AA. Even if users did nothing other than buy this lens they will have a fabulous camera.
The 55mm MTF indicate it might head into the very top rank, lines are virtually parallel even wide open, with a steady fall-off, and all of frame high performance stopped down. Three asph elements, nine blade aperture, moisture sealed, IF. At 281 grams that makes the body/lens/battery around 740 grams all up.Pretty good AF, better than RX1.
Fingers crossed on the 24-70 zoom, seven blade aperture but 'circular' and loads of asph surfaces, still no MTF I can find. But with 5 asph surfaces, an ED element and OSS it is specced like a prime, so it's hard to see it being other than very good. What other FF mid zoom weighs 425 grams? ...Show more →
p.27 #17 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I asked Sony about the microlenses and here's what came back: "The A7 doesn’t employ ‘Gapless on chip’ technology which is deployed in the A7R but the micro lens is optimally positioned."
JohnJ wrote:
Thanks. I'm not really convinced TBH. I think I saw a table very early on that described both cameras as having the OCL but only the A7r as having the Gapless design, but I've not been able to find the link since.
p.27 #18 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Atlasman2 wrote:
I asked Sony about the microlenses and here's what came back: "The A7 doesn’t employ ‘Gapless on chip’ technology which is deployed in the A7R but the micro lens is optimally positioned."
I'm surprised there is no 24-70 F2.8, how many will choose/stay Canon or Nikon instead for that reason alone. AF is nice to have, not essential for my type of shooting. All that said, I caved and have joined the a7r preorder wait list.