p.38 #1 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
freaklikeme wrote:
That's not entirely true, as I understand and have experienced it. The a99 does compress RAW if you're in continuous shooting mode. Single shot is still uncompressed.
Ok. So in that specific a99 case, it's not a choice between RAW or compressed raw in the menu but the camera automatically chooses one based on drive speed? Apparently, with the RX1, it's always compressed raw and I highly suspect that will be the same case with these A7's. I wish Sony would go back to giving us control of compressed or uncompressed raws.
p.38 #2 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
sebboh wrote:
the helicoid in the lens is a much better and more solidly reinforced one. you can't fit a really well built helicoid in an adapter that small (well not cheaply). both my hawk's helicoid adapter and my cheaper helicoid adapter have some wobble in the helicoid. also, corners are noticeably assymetrical on the cheap one (haven't checked to closely on the hawks, but it looks better). ...
A fine, small focussing helical is going to cost, but we have the technology. Case in point are the various focussers for classic Leitz Visoflex which are beautifully-machined brass with chrome finish. Timeless functionality, and not cheap. The OUAGO focusser for 90mm Elmar head adds 15mm of extension.
p.38 #4 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Whew - RPP does a terrible job with noise. I downloaded a few and processed with C1 Express and they look a LOT better than the RPP conversions. The RPP converted ISO 3200 looks terrible - color noise out the wazoo...in C1 it looks very, very nice.
The C1 conversions of these RAWs are really really stunning, especially with the 55/1.8, which, despite still being too expensive for a 55/1.8, I have to admit is really stunning optically.
Damn you Sony...now you have my wheels turning again, even though I don't need this.
Here are just two samples converted from RAW with C1 7, but you can see how well C1 does with them (of course, C1 does a pretty good job with most stuff).
p.38 #5 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I was looking at the 55/1.8 samples, too. The night shots thoroughly trounce the new $$$ Nikon, IMO.
Nice, clean pinpoints of light instead of UFO's and three-cornered hats.
Oct 24, 2013 at 08:13 PM
Guest
Guest
p.38 #6 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
ebrandon wrote:
Thanks for doing this, these are the most interesting samples I've seen yet.
Does anyone else think the low ISO samples are insane? I've got a D600 and a 6D, so I'm used to looking at 24mpx FF, but these look really good.
The ISO 6400 image (the last image of the bicycle) shows a surprising amount of color noise, so not sure what to think about that.
Regardng noise this is standard for sony. If you open by native converter I guess you cant disable NR fully and it present anyway in some options as well as some kind of smoothing technology for "better" view. In RPP you can see all as is. But i like it, this is payment for good CFA and deep colours
This RAW samples really very good, almost all situations... Except people...
p.38 #7 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Jman13 wrote:
The C1 conversions of these RAWs are really really stunning, especially with the 55/1.8, which, despite still being too expensive for a 55/1.8, I have to admit is really stunning optically.
I consider the 55 f/1.8 an absolute bargain considering it's performance across the frame wide-open.
p.38 #8 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
snapsy wrote:
I consider the 55 f/1.8 an absolute bargain considering it's performance across the frame wide-open.
Yes, I think someone else in this thread is starting to realize that.
Oct 24, 2013 at 08:37 PM
Guest
Guest
p.38 #9 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Jman13 wrote:
Whew - RPP does a terrible job with noise. I downloaded a few and processed with C1 Express and they look a LOT better than the RPP conversions. The RPP converted ISO 3200 looks terrible - color noise out the wazoo...in C1 it looks very, very nice.
The C1 conversions of these RAWs are really really stunning, especially with the 55/1.8, which, despite still being too expensive for a 55/1.8, I have to admit is really stunning optically.
Damn you Sony...now you have my wheels turning again, even though I don't need this.
Here are just two samples converted from RAW with C1 7, but you can see how well C1 does with them (of course, C1 does a pretty good job with most stuff).
If you do not see the noise, it does not mean that it is not in RAW. Many converters have internal per-pixel anti-aliasing technology, you can't even turn them off in you want. In this case, the RPP has done honestly, but C1 - beautiful for eyes Of course without visible noise the pictute looks better for many people and for me too, so most converters doing what we like.
p.38 #10 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I'd much rather the RAW converters try and create the most detailed clean image that best represents the scene, than a converter that best represents the random pixel noise if the sensor circuitry.
p.38 #11 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I don't think it's a bargain...but I am seeing that it is not as over priced as I first thought. I still think $1K for an f/1.8 normal is a hard pill to swallow.
My Fuji 35/1.4 was $600 (well $300 for me with my X-E1), and it is extremely sharp stopped down as well, and while not as sharp as the FE 55 wide open, it's still very good. $750 for the 55 would be much more reasonable. Tariq Gibran wrote:
Yes, I think someone else in this thread is starting to realize that.
p.38 #13 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Jman13 wrote:
I don't think it's a bargain...but I am seeing that it is not as over priced as I first thought. I still think $1K for an f/1.8 normal is a hard pill to swallow.
My Fuji 35/1.4 was $600 (well $300 for me with my X-E1), and it is extremely sharp stopped down as well, and while not as sharp as the FE 55 wide open, it's still very good. $750 for the 55 would be much more reasonable.
Just multiply the Fuji price by 1.5 for FF and you get $900. Add another $100 for Zeiss branding and performance (a bargain really) and Bobs your uncle!
I owned that Fuji as well and, while it's very good, it's not up to the performance of this Zeiss FE 55. It's also built pretty lightly (whereas the Zeiss, from all accounts thus far, is in another league build wise).
p.38 #14 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Just multiply the Fuji price by 1.5 for FF and you get $900. Add another $100 for Zeiss branding and performance (a bargain really) and Bobs your uncle!
I owned that Fuji as well and, while it's very good, it's not up to the performance of this Zeiss FE 55. It's also built pretty lightly (whereas the Zeiss, from all accounts thus far, is in another league build wise).
hehe, it would actually be 2.25x, so $1350 Usually smaller lenses are more expensive per area because they have to be sharper but since the 55 matches (and exceeds) the smaller format equivalents it should actually command premium.
p.38 #15 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
snapsy wrote:
hehe, it would actually be 2.25x, so $1350 Usually smaller lenses are more expensive per area because they have to be sharper but since the 55 matches (and exceeds) the smaller format equivalents it should actually command premium.
p.38 #16 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
While we are multiplying, A7r users can take that nice 55 * ~1.5 = 82.5mm field of view on APS-C crop mode. The D800 puts out a 15.3MP file in DX mode, assume the Sony will do something similar.
To be honest i've never used DX mode on my D800 except while messing about early on, but I might well use the 55 as a ~85mm equivalent optic and save carrying, and buying, another lens. Or take any adapted "normal" and do the same. Sounds good in theory anyway.
p.38 #18 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
michaelwatkins wrote:
While we are multiplying, A7r users can take that nice 55 * ~1.5 = 82.5mm field of view on APS-C crop mode. The D800 puts out a 15.3MP file in DX mode, assume the Sony will do something similar.
To be honest i've never used DX mode on my D800 except while messing about early on, but I might well use the 55 as a ~85mm equivalent optic and save carrying, and buying, another lens. Or take any adapted "normal" and do the same. Sounds good in theory anyway.
I was thinking the same thing. For portraits, 16MP or so is fine. Thus with the FE 55, you can divide that price by 2 since you are really getting the functionality of two lenses. This lens just keeps getting cheaper and cheaper!...For those looking to rationalize the purchase anyway.
p.38 #19 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Now if only Sony-Zeiss would come out with a killer 24/1.8 and I could skip the 35.
No, I'd rather have more resolution at the wider end myself.
I don't use DX mode with my Nikkor 50mm because it's cheap and I don't love it. However I am wondering why I've never experimented with using DX crop with my 85/1.8 which is a pretty nice lens, especially for the price. Tomorrow's project.
p.38 #20 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Jman13 wrote:
I don't think it's a bargain...but I am seeing that it is not as over priced as I first thought. I still think $1K for an f/1.8 normal is a hard pill to swallow.
My Fuji 35/1.4 was $600 (well $300 for me with my X-E1), and it is extremely sharp stopped down as well, and while not as sharp as the FE 55 wide open, it's still very good. $750 for the 55 would be much more reasonable.
How can it not be a bargain, when the real competitor in performance is somewhere half-way between the Leica Summilux asph (3k?) and the Summicron AA (5k?)
As far as I can see it outperforms at least the summilux asph from F2.0 and onwards, by a comfortable margin.
Case in point are the various focussers for classic Leitz Visoflex which are beautifully-machined brass with chrome finish. Timeless functionality, and not cheap. The OUAGO focusser for 90mm Elmar head adds 15mm of extension.
So thanks a lot. 
