AF speed w/ 35mm 2.8 is a little faster then nex-6 & Fuji EX1 updated firmware, but not m43 af speeds. Also:
Both in good light and in darker conditions, the absence of a phase-detection AF system isn’t really a problem, as the A7R focuses quickly.
One raw+jpg combo is around 45MB: The ISO test results are just amazing. Hats off to Sony! Image quality is close to perfection with the A7R. Shots are incredibly sharp, finely detailed and mouth-watering to look at.
Negatives are no charger, slow start-up time (a little slower then RX1), same nex battery.
One problem w/ 35mm 2.8 lens: This lens is very sharp at full aperture, with quality peaking at f/8 in terms of detail and consistency over the frame. Although it’s mostly irreproachable, between f/4 and f/5.6 a ring of blur is clearly visible about two thirds of the way from the edge of the frame. And that’s even more noticeable since the edges of the frame are actually clear and sharp. Strange.
p.52 #5 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Thanks for the link serhan, interesting comment about the FE35/2.8. I doubt I'll be able to test for that when I get to check out the cameras tomorrow, but if there is enough time I'll certainly try.
Nov 06, 2013 at 10:18 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.52 #6 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
serhan_ wrote:
One problem w/ 35mm 2.8 lens:
Interesting that this is considered strange. That would just be the zone B dip in sharpness that many lenses (particularly a number of Leica lenses) show. It is usually pretty easy to identify from the mtf charts, but the mtf charts for this lens seem to just suggest gradual fall off in sharpness as you reach the corners and edges, so I wonder if this problem will actually be consistent with this lens or just something with the particular one that was tested.
p.52 #7 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Steve Spencer wrote:
...but the mtf charts for this lens seem to just suggest gradual fall off in sharpness as you reach the corners and edges, so I wonder if this problem will actually be consistent with this lens or just something with the particular one that was tested.
That's what I found interesting; my assumption on looking at the calculated MTF (f/8) that there would not be such an identifiable dip. One off problem? Haven't noticed the issue in any sample images presented so far.
p.52 #8 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
michaelwatkins wrote:
That's what I found interesting; my assumption on looking at the calculated MTF (f/8) that there would not be such an identifiable dip. One off problem? Haven't noticed the issue in any sample images presented so far.
He saw those dip at f/4 and f/5.6, and I think the MTF is calculated at infinity (closer distance, FC would be more apparent).
p.52 #9 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
adamdewilde wrote:
Awesome, I took a look. That's very neat, wish that you could get casings that looked sexy (think ZM style without the silver top ring )
thanks! I do wish I could've found a narrower body, but I like the focus ring and build on these rokkors a lot better than on the zm lenses. the wider diameter might look more attractive on the dslr shaped a7 too, sometimes the narrow rangefinder lenses look a bit funny on mirrorless cameras.
p.52 #10 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
35mm seems almost to be the hardest to design...maybe some curvature here? Ron Scheffler noticed a slight drop in the RX1 Sonnar at f4, Tim Ashley also, maybe aperture specific?
The energetic fellows at the Sony rumours site are reporting a three second start-up time. That's it, canceling my order, more than 0.2 seconds is unconscionable ;-)
looking forward to the RAW+jpeg option, and 45Mb is not much more than the a900's RAW only file size of 36Mp...now that Sony has apparently worked some sharpening magic into their jpeg engine. Still get loads of images into a 32Gb card.
p.52 #11 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I put a note in the resource thread about another review and one of the nits reported was boot up time. I do wish it was shorter as I remember boot up time lag being uncomfortable with the X100 and a little less so on NEX and GXR.Those cameras turned me into a battery miser such that I kept shutting off my D800 by force of habit even though there simply isn't a need to.
I can easily tolerate fewer shots per pack (compared to other cameras) as long as battery life isn't unduly shortened by leaving the camera on.
That all said, I ordered three spare Sony packs (shipped) and a Sony charger (new model, pre-ordered). Maybe I should have ordered five or six and a Batman(tm) belt pack to carry them in?
p.52 #12 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Hmmm... the FE35/2.8 is 36.5mm L x 61.5mm Dia. I measured my Voigtlander 40/2 SL at 29.5-35mm L (Inf. - MFD) x 63.5mm Dia. So the FE35/2.8, and by extension A7/r, is smaller than I thought from the photos (now I'm worried about holding one with my large hands).
Still seems a bit large for a 2.8 prime though. And I stand by the FE55/1.8's 70.5mm L x 64.5mm Dia being absurd.
p.52 #13 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
You have to add the thickness of the adapter, Lee, to get a fair comparison of how large adapted lenses are, mounted on the camera, it's a big reason against DSLR lenses over time. The grip apparently works pretty well, going by reviewers waving the camera around only holding onto it.
Time will tell, but it's still light overall with even a 400-500 gram lens and many cameras lack a grip at all. Some people hate them. No doubt there will be a large number of cases so you can suit yourself. Inside a leather half case the RX1 feels good to me, I take XL gloves. a7r is a little larger overall.
Might be a forlorn hope, but maybe Voigtlander and others might make lenses to suit the a7 series, a la Zeiss. 55m might be absurd size but also absurdly good by the look of it so far. They are softening us up..
p.52 #14 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Lee Saxon wrote:
And I stand by the FE55/1.8's 70.5mm L x 64.5mm Dia being absurd.
Hmnn, Sony reports on their store site 68L x 62D; I see B+H has Lee's figures. Neither lists weight. Another site lists 71 x 64 so let's use Lee's numbers; they also list the weight as 281g.
Wonder where the definitive measurements may be found? Tangent, does it come with a hood? Does it need one?
ZM C Sonnar (no AF) is 63L x 56D (250g), but not sure if we are comparing same dimensions. Zeiss on their site measures cap on. Rock Huffwell measures from flange out. What does Sony measure and report?
In any case, as Philip notes, we need to add a M adapter so there's another 9.5mm to add any M lens length. Suddenly the FE's 68 or 70.5 isn't looking too bad against ZM+adapter = 72.5mm long.
Based on the foregoing it looks like the FE55 will feel in hand much like a ZM50/2 or Sonnar 50/1.5 and will have similar heft, so I'm thinking the camera/lens combo will feel quite similar to a GXR+M lens which I find to be well balanced and controllable. I'll find out tomorrow, going to a Sony event to check the cameras out.
p.52 #15 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
3 seconds start-up and inconsistent as well, that is not good. I will certainly run into situations when I will miss the shot. Wonder if it can be improved in firmware, or if it is better from stand-by.
A personal note, I am happy that they use the old battery and provide no charger in the package. Not only can I use the 4 batteries and two cahrgers I already have (saving some pennies). The battery can also be charged internally via USB (5V), leaving more flexibility for different power sources, including portable solar cell systems like the PowerMonkey.
I've owned both ZM50s and still own the planar. The planar with adapter is about the same length as what Sony is claiming for the FE55. The Csonnar is a bit shorter than the ZM50 planar.
)
