p.39 #1 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
michaelwatkins wrote:
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.
Not totally sure how its implemented on the D800, but it seems like crop mode would be a hassle with an OVF, where you'd have to guess the framing? But it seems like it would make a lot more sense with the A7.
p.39 #2 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
theSuede wrote:
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.
The Summilux 50 asph is looking positively awful, anywhere but the center on the A7R
I suspect it's the top sensor layers that are are responsible.
p.39 #3 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
alwang wrote:
Not totally sure how its implemented on the D800, but it seems like crop mode would be a hassle with an OVF, where you'd have to guess the framing? But it seems like it would make a lot more sense with the A7.
You don't have to guess. You can either have the finder show lines and framing for the various crops OR have the finder grey out the area outside of DX format.
p.39 #5 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
You're assuming I think that a Summicron is worth anywhere near $3K. I assure you I do not.
Leica glass is good, but it's practically an order of magnitude overpriced IMO.
theSuede wrote:
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.
p.39 #6 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I had chance to play with A7 today at the PhotoPlus Expo in NYC. The camera feels very nice in hands. Very solid build. Buttons and dials are well placed (I'm coming from Canon). Within few minutes I was shooting in manual mode without any problem. The AF was fast enough - I was accurate and quick. I don't dig EVF (in general), the quality and colors are not there. Can't focus manually well enough with it. But it's my personal opinion.
The biggest issue was camera's overall performance. At first camera was snappy, until I switched it to RAW format (originally it was set for Fine JPEG format). Then it lost it's responsiveness. Every time I took a photo I had to wait about 2 sec for the buffer to refresh. During that time camera is not reacting to shutter, nor EVF is being displayed. With my Canon 5Dm2 I could always shoot as often as I want until buffer is full. Here - no way :-(
So my final thoughts - get the camera if you want that retro feel (and it feels good) and don't shoot weddings or sports.
p.39 #7 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
_julian_ wrote:
The Summilux 50 asph is looking positively awful, anywhere but the center on the A7R
I suspect it's the top sensor layers that are are responsible.
You mean that shot looks awful. You are way early to conclude it cannot produce fine images on the camera, especially since the nocti looks great.
G-Gore wrote:
So my final thoughts - get the camera if you want that retro feel (and it feels good) and don't shoot weddings or sports.
another wildly pre-mature conclusion.
Oct 24, 2013 at 10:13 PM
Guest
Guest
p.39 #8 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
G-Gore wrote:
Every time I took a photo I had to wait about 2 sec for the buffer to refresh. During that time camera is not reacting to shutter, nor EVF is being displayed
How many RAW's going to buffer before waiting? Did you notice maybe?
p.39 #9 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
G-Gore wrote:
The biggest issue was camera's overall performance. At first camera was snappy, until I switched it to RAW format (originally it was set for Fine JPEG format). Then it lost it's responsiveness. Every time I took a photo I had to wait about 2 sec for the buffer to refresh. During that time camera is not reacting to shutter, nor EVF is being displayed.
That's surprising... I wouldn't expect that type of shot to shot lag from a current day camera, especially with a new processor inside. Perhaps pre-release firmware to blame, or specific settings not realized at the time?
p.39 #10 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
G-Gore wrote:
I had chance to play with A7 today at the PhotoPlus Expo in NYC. The camera feels very nice in hands. Very solid build. Buttons and dials are well placed (I'm coming from Canon). Within few minutes I was shooting in manual mode without any problem. The AF was fast enough - I was accurate and quick. I don't dig EVF (in general), the quality and colors are not there. Can't focus manually well enough with it. But it's my personal opinion.
The biggest issue was camera's overall performance. At first camera was snappy, until I switched it to RAW format (originally it was set for Fine JPEG format). Then it lost it's responsiveness. Every time I took a photo I had to wait about 2 sec for the buffer to refresh. During that time camera is not reacting to shutter, nor EVF is being displayed. With my Canon 5Dm2 I could always shoot as often as I want until buffer is full. Here - no way :-(
So my final thoughts - get the camera if you want that retro feel (and it feels good) and don't shoot weddings or sports....Show more →
that's very odd, none of sony's other evf based 24mp cameras do that. did you turn off image review or was it trying to show you each pic after you took it in the evf?
also, did it have a memory card in it? maybe it was some weird hang searching for a card...
p.39 #11 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Jman13 wrote:
You're assuming I think that a Summicron is worth anywhere near $3K. I assure you I do not.
Leica glass is good, but it's practically an order of magnitude overpriced IMO.
the summicron AA is $7k, it's the summilux that is $3k. if you mean the old summicron isn't worth anywhere near $3k i certainly won't argue with you (but neither will leica).
p.39 #12 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
uhoh7 wrote:
You mean that shot looks awful. You are way early to conclude it cannot produce fine images on the camera, especially since the nocti looks great.
If you wanted to describe that image as 'encouraging' then it would be more misleading than my statement. We're 700 posts of speculation into this topic - so it's not unreasonable to begin to cite what our eyes can actually see in the few known-to-be-genuine images available to us.
And I agree that the shots from the Nocti look good. But the promise of the 50 'Lux asph is to hold reasonable sharpness out to the edges and it's not evident that the combination of camera and lens is succeeding at doing that.
p.39 #13 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I don't think that the "issues" with that Lux 50 shot have anything to do with the camera.
The 50 Lux is not known for across-the-board sharpness at wide apertures. So, assuming that there's some problem with the camera sensor toppings, or the specific combination of this lens plus the A7, from this picture would be a mistake.
p.39 #14 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
_julian_ wrote:
If you wanted to describe that image as 'encouraging' then it would be more misleading than my statement. We're 700 posts of speculation into this topic - so it's not unreasonable to begin to cite what our eyes can actually see in the few known-to-be-genuine images available to us.
And I agree that the shots from the Nocti look good. But the promise of the 50 'Lux asph is to hold reasonable sharpness out to the edges and it's not evident that the combination of camera and lens is succeeding at doing that.
Jumping to conclusions in pre-release based on single images is so lame, sorry. I've seen crappy images with M9 and Summilux. They mean nothing. That sample means nothing by itself. Where you are getting the idea the edges are not sharp is beyond me. Are you looking at the lower ooF edges? Look at the top edges.
There was all sort of ranting about the native 35 image quality a few days ago based on single images. Now it's the cat's meow.
I will bet you 20 bucks here and now: we will see very nice shots from A7r + summilux 50 asph by xmas. We can let sebboh be the judge, and he's friggin picky. We can settle up via paypal.
p.39 #16 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Summilux 50, the M lens? I hope no one is expecting great things of this one on an a7r in terms of corner resolution even if it played nicely. Its MTF argue otherwise. It's not great shakes even at f5.6. You are being kind, Taylor. The image is near to worthless except for corner colour assessment maybe. The blurry OOF leaf litter looks the same as elsewhere.
p.39 #18 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
philip_pj wrote:
Summilux 50, the M lens? I hope no one is expecting great things of this one on an a7r in terms of corner resolution even if it played nicely. Its MTF argue otherwise. It's not great shakes even at f5.6. You are being kind, Taylor. The image is near to worthless except for corner colour assessment maybe. The blurry OOF leaf litter looks the same as elsewhere.
Maybe I have the wrong one. Wide open it acts like a typical f1.4 lens, the kind that prompted Zeiss to make the mighty Otus.
I think you are thinking of older versions when saying it wide open acts like a typical f/1.4 lens. The current 50 Lux M is clearly different from a typical lens. That is wide open. When stopped down good typical f/1.4 lenses can be as good as long as we look at contrast and resolution only. The bokeh from the Lux is, in technical terms, neutral most of the time (meaning people often writes creamy and beautiful and smooth).
But, there is always a but, when I had the lens and used it with my Nex 5 the corners and borders weren't good. How the lens and the A7R will behave together seem to early to tell. A wait and see warning flag is at place.
p.39 #19 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
philip_pj wrote:
Summilux 50, the M lens? I hope no one is expecting great things of this one on an a7r in terms of corner resolution even if it played nicely. Its MTF argue otherwise. It's not great shakes even at f5.6. You are being kind, Taylor. The image is near to worthless except for corner colour assessment maybe. The blurry OOF leaf litter looks the same as elsewhere.
Maybe I have the wrong one. Wide open it acts like a typical f1.4 lens, the kind that prompted Zeiss to make the mighty Otus.
Is this a serious post? I've owned many a 1.4 lens, and the 50 lux asph is far from typical. How does one compare this to otus when that is 4 times larger and heavier.
p.39 #20 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Don't knock all 1.4's. Sigma 35/1.4 is sharp from the get go and only gets better.
On another topic... AUTOFOCUS:
PhotographyBay.com - Hands On Autofocus if fast and accurate; however, in my brief and informal tests with face detection AF turned on, I found it to be a little hit or miss. Single-point AF was just as fast as you would expect in a DSLR. I was surprised that the A7R focused as fast as it did. I expect a noticeable falloff in AF speed since it does not have the phase detection built into the pixels like the A7; however, I couldn’t tell much of a difference using the cameras back-to-back.
