p.58 #1 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Also, to use good technique in supporting the camera as much and as often as possible. Try to take shots between pulse beats and not when you exhale or inhale.
Rich
Both are very valid points but still I wonder if in questionable light if good hand held results are going to be tough when we can't or don't want to increase shutter speed because of the ISO we are already at? Always we make compromises of course. But will this amazing resolution make the 36mp version a more "specialized" camera verse the lower resolution sibling? I know with compromised light and ISO equal I would often prefer the results from the 16mp D4 vs the hand held results I would obtain with the 36mp D800. I am asking myself which new Sony would make the best "do it all" body? I think if standing in front of the Golden Gate Bridge with a tripod, my choice would be easy. However, if on the run touring the Bay Area on a dark day I am not convinced which camera would be best when focusing at infinity and wanting the lowest ISO possible while hand holding.
The fun things to ponder :-))
Regards to all,
Greg
I normally carry a tripod with me and probably use it for 90%+ of my work. I come from a background of using a 4" X 5" camera for much of my work. But, you may still want to consider carrying a small tripod, monopod, or a shoulder stock.
p.58 #2 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
rxgolf wrote:
I know with compromised light and ISO equal I would often prefer the results from the 16mp D4 vs the hand held results I would obtain with the 36mp D800. I am asking myself which new Sony would make the best "do it all" body?
Regards to all,
Greg
it depends on how much better the high iso is on the 16mp and 24mp sensors versus the 36mp sensor. i doubt if you do a controlled test shooting both handheld at the same settings that you would really prefer the 16mp D4 results to the 16mp d800 results (downsizing the d800 results to 16mp without ever looking at them at 36mp) except at the very highest iso values.
btw, for traveling light a bean bag makes a great tripod substitute.
p.58 #3 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
The 24MP NEX-7 is higher resolution (pixel per area) than the 36MP on the a7r. So am I wrong in thinking if you can hand-hold, say, a 50mm lens on the NEX-7 at a certain shutter speed without issues, the same (or better, since your 75mm FOV will actually be 50mm) will hold true for either of the Alphas? I feel like there may be a flaw in that logic, but I'm not seeing it.
p.58 #4 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
freaklikeme wrote:
The 24MP NEX-7 is higher resolution (pixel per area) than the 36MP on the a7r. So am I wrong in thinking if you can hand-hold, say, a 50mm lens on the NEX-7 at a certain shutter speed without issues, the same (or better, since your 75mm FOV will actually be 50mm) will hold true for either of the Alphas? I feel like there may be a flaw in that logic, but I'm not seeing it.
The D800/E would need slightly over 57 MP to match the resolution of the 24 MP NEX-7.
One way to deal with high resolution sensor cameras when shooting handheld is a faster shutter speed like 1/(3*FL) s.
p.58 #5 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
freaklikeme wrote:
The 24MP NEX-7 is higher resolution (pixel per area) than the 36MP on the a7r. So am I wrong in thinking if you can hand-hold, say, a 50mm lens on the NEX-7 at a certain shutter speed without issues, the same (or better, since your 75mm FOV will actually be 50mm) will hold true for either of the Alphas? I feel like there may be a flaw in that logic, but I'm not seeing it.
nope, with the same lens and the same shutter speed you should be fine unless there are more ergonomic issues with pressing shutter on one over the other. the important equivalency is angle of view per pixel – assuming ergonomic equivalency you should be able to use the same shutter speed to get a sharp image on any camera lens for a given ratio of pixel count to angle of view.
p.58 #6 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
sebboh wrote:
nope, with the same lens and the same shutter speed you should be fine unless there are more ergonomic issues with pressing shutter on one over the other. the important equivalency is angle of view per pixel – assuming ergonomic equivalency you should be able to use the same shutter speed to get a sharp image on any camera lens for a given ratio of pixel count to angle of view.
Thanks for the confirmation. Here's hoping the top-plate shutter release doesn't screw me up.
p.58 #7 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
This afternoon I had a chance to use few of my lenses (Leica Elmarit-R 28 E55, Minolta Rokkor-PG 58/1.2 and pictured below Voigtlander Nokton 50/1.5 ASPH LM) on A7R.
Initial impressions based on 10 minutes 'play time' are more than positive. I mainly wanted to compare focussing with manual lenses between A7R EVF and my D800E OVF. I can say that I can easily live with it and for my needs A7R's OVF feels better that NEX7, Leica M240 or 9 that I've tried few times.
Oh, the shutter sound; it's perfect!
Negatives? (no camera is perfect after all) The black colour of its body is too back.
Other than that I can't wait to receive my copy of A7R!
p.58 #9 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
This afternoon I also had the opportunity to shoot the a7 and a7r in Vancouver. I won’t repeat what was has been said before, but I must admit the cameras are the perfect size and handle well! With the exception of the shutter (too mushy), they are a joy to use and capable of producing amazing images when you attach good glass. I’ll post some shots taken with the amazing Zeiss 55 1.8 soon, but here’s a capture taken with the A7r + LA-EA4 + Zeiss 135 1.8 combination at f4. The shot was converted from raw to jpg in Lightroom 5.3rc. Apologies for the poor framing (not used to Sony focus point behavior) and slight underexposure. But given the texture visible on the left contact of the model you get the idea…
I was also able to test some of my alt+glass (Voigtlander 21 1.8, M-rokkor 40, etc.) on both cameras, but given the poor lighting environment wasn't able to conclude anything definitively. The Voigtlander shows some color cast, but it's unknown whether the actual edge detail will hold up in more robust testing.
p.58 #10 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I'm glad some folks from the local Vancouver arm of the Alt-Gear Continuum got some hands on time with the cameras today.
There was some talk about another session with perhaps fewer people; if I hear more will let you folks know... and hopefully you'll do the same in kind!
p.58 #13 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
michaelwatkins wrote:
I'm glad some folks from the local Vancouver arm of the Alt-Gear Continuum got some hands on time with the cameras today.
There was some talk about another session with perhaps fewer people; if I hear more will let you folks know... and hopefully you'll do the same in kind!
That would be great, Michael.
The venue was great for a presentation (thanks to Sony & Broadway Camera, BTW) but I am sure it was not meant for a photo tests; a bit too dark as frozenbc pointed out.
Well, the first shipments of A7/R cameras should arrive within 3 weeks so rumors and guessings will be dispelled then.
p.58 #14 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
tsdevine wrote:
The Merrills are fun to pixel peep, I take my DP1M and DP2M on most landscape outings and I often shake my head when I look at the output.
Wish the a7R would start shipping as it seems far closer in comparison then my 5D II.
Amazing performance by the A7r. I am still trying to figure out if the A7r was shot as a JPEG or RAW.
The notion that high Mp won't do anything for portraits - well, page 5 near the bottom. The ones shot with the 1939-52 Ernst Leitz Summitar, so let's say a 70 year old lens. I don't recall being so impressed overall. People will go nuts over this camera and its casual expertise.
a short video of a Canon 20mm AF and shutter sound -
It sounds not unlike the old Contax SLRs. All business, almost, dare I say, masculine..
Even after reading the whole thread, I don't know what we are looking at. If it is as supposed, that the 100% crops really are 100% crops, we are comparing two different images (very different FOV). As presented, the comparison is either worthless or misleading.
The notion that high Mp won't do anything for portraits - well, page 5 near the bottom. The ones shot with the 1939-52 Ernst Leitz Summitar, so let's say a 70 year old lens. I don't recall being so impressed overall. People will go nuts over this camera and its casual expertise.
Is it the lack of microcontrast or the nervous bokeh that impresses you? Clearly I am less enthusiastic.
By the way, is that greyish-blue rectangular grid structure in the iris a natural phenomenon?
p.58 #19 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Guys..here is a question...maybe one of you know this...
I know that alpha mount lenses will phase detect with A7r when mounted on LEA4 adapter. Will they CDAF as well? The reason i am asking this is that i find contrast detect to be way more accurate vis a vis PDAF..
Also, there is an eye detect focussing feature in A7r...does it work on adapted lenses...especially in A mount+LEA4 combination? Again though initially dissmissed as a gimmic, i was blown away by this feature in Oly OM-D. Eyes just pop when shooting a portrait.
I am thinking about Sigma 50 and 85 1.4s.
