p.32 #1 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Forget about canon .vs. sony .vs. nikon bs, why not considering A7(r) in different view: It's a mini MF body with wider ISO range that takes any lenses at the bargain price. Just those alone...everyone deserves one for your own treat.
p.32 #2 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
mttran wrote:
Forget about canon .vs. sony .vs. nikon bs, why not considering A7(r) in different view: It's a mini MF body with wider ISO range that takes any lenses at the bargain price
Exactly. I used to shoot medium format film for my landscapes...the A7(r) will be the body which finally meets those specs.
p.32 #5 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
I'm getting quite tired of the rangefinder lens tests.
Why cant someone post some serious EF-glass test results with the metabones adapter? Bring on the TS-E lenses! Or Nikon lenses! And lets not forget Sigma 35 or the Zeiss 21.
p.32 #6 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Just proves what a great value the Sony is when the only thing the haters can talk about is the battery/charger
If you are really that cheap and can't afford a 3rd party charger/battery combo for less than $30 then perhaps you should take up a new hobby and figure out something else to hate on. Batteries are less than $15.
Not a very good diversion from the A7 sensor performance that Canon simply doesn't have, and won't have for this price.
Yes a very disappointing result. I have a couple of older rangfinder lenses so I was hoping for a much better result. But I belive the EF lenses will perform a lot better
p.32 #8 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
A7(r) will bring all the photography joys back from old time. Those old treasure film lenses now have chances to live again. That is how I look at it, now where is the full boxes of junk lenses Ad for $200 I saw the other day
p.32 #9 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
I can test the Sigma 35 and the Zeiss 21....all I need is the camera!
Rickuz wrote:
I'm getting quite tired of the rangefinder lens tests.
Why cant someone post some serious EF-glass test results with the metabones adapter? Bring on the TS-E lenses! Or Nikon lenses! And lets not forget Sigma 35 or the Zeiss 21.
p.32 #10 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Ron -- Thanks for the extensive tests.
Yes, I think any WA and UWA rangefinder glass is going to look really bad on these Sony FF bodies. Even the longer lenses like the famed Leica 50/1.4 are not going to be an advantage over say a Minolta 50/1.7, maybe worse.
Like Rick, I also want to see the "long throw" SLR/DSLR lenses mounted and tested. All the cool Canon TSE and Macros, the Leica R and Zeiss ZE. And those Minolta. . . so many options.
But the rangefinder glass looks like generally a lost cause. Glad I don't own any!
p.32 #11 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
jctriguy wrote:
So to put things in context, since it might be getting muddied here with so many different tangents going. This is the original point in a string of posts that I replied to:
In this context, AF speed, battery life and cost are all relevant factors. For the new Sony to cause a downward trend in the FF market, it needs to have mass market appeal. Right now, it appears to have a strong niche appeal. Cameras are so much more than sensors, they are tools that fit into a system. Sony has no system in place and even the positive reviews have raised serious reservations for certain groups of users.
If this A7r was $1000 I would jump on it immediately, as would countless other people. At nearly $2800, I won't even look twice. I'd rather wait for Canon to come with something even if it was 4k for a body....Show more →
For the record, I think it would be an exaggeration to claim the A7r is going to reshape the DSLR market overnight. But at the same time, it is true that for people who are looking to get into top of the line FF image quality, Sony has indeed lowered the market price. How that plays out in the long term will remain to be seen.
However, if the argument is about having "mass market" appeal, then I'd put forward the question of which is more common: a photographer who shoots 200 shots in a day or one who shoots 2000 shots? The "mass market" photographers are not the ones clamoring for 2000 shots per battery. The brunt of "downward pressure" the new Sony cameras will not be on the high end customers with exhausting demands that only a robust system can fulfill. Rather it will be at the amateur, enthusiast and hobbyist level, those looking for full frame image quality at a lower price. Sure, there are also hobbyists have higher demands on their gear, and a more robust Canon or Nikon DSLR system will be a better solutions for their needs. But as far as image quality, the new Sony cameras give people an option with image quality as good as it gets without going to medium format. There's little sense in trying to muddle the argument by saying the Sony sensor is "worse than the D800".
Of course I think the A7r will be perfectly useable in certain professional applications as well...I anticipate that an A7r, a battery grip and my Canon TS-E lenses will give me a system that meets my needs on 90% of my work (architectural photography) and I am happy to be one of those niche markets the A7r will serve. But since we're talking about "niche markets" I would say photographers demanding 2000 shots off one battery are also a niche market.
p.32 #12 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
EB-1 wrote:
It looks like the grip adds a second of the undersized battery packs. That's not exactly much of an improvement, and it adds substantially to the bulk.
EBH
The grip actually gives you the option to have two additional batteries in the grip, in addition to the one in the camera.
Adds to the bulk? Sure. Almost brings it up to a size of a DSLR!
p.32 #13 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
artd wrote:
However, if the argument is about having "mass market" appeal, then I'd put forward the question of which is more common: a photographer who shoots 200 shots in a day or one who shoots 2000 shots?
It's already been said in the context of wilderness camping, but why this idea that a battery charge only has to last a day? I don't take a charger with me on minibreaks. But, more than that, it's best not to keep topping up lithium ion batteries to full charge, so one should not recharge after every session. If I shoot 80 frames per day (as I did today) I then have only 260 left in the battery if its capacity is 340. This means I now have to premeditate "I will have a photo session" rather than just remembering to chuck the battery on the charger every so often as I do with my Canons. I didn't premeditate today's - it was too windy for my planned activity, and the light looked good. As usual, I had at least one Canon battery good to go, with no great planning ahead needed.
Thank you very much, but I had 30 years of having to remember to thaw rolls of film. It was quite enough.
Peter Figen wrote:
And on that point, no one complained too much about the battery life of the original 1Ds, which was a real world 300-400 in normal temps and went down to completely anemic 50-100 at 20 deg. Fahrenheit.
That's because the people who needed good battery life didn't use it. In 2005 I was still using film cameras (including a mechanically timed shutter body) precisely because of the battery problem with DSLRs.
This is not to say the Sony is not a useful camera, but its battery requirements are a problem for some people.
p.32 #14 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Mirrorless cam has short battery life since the sensor is "ON" all the time to support VF ("ON") and LCD ("ON"). DSLR cam has the same battery life effect if we operate the cam in live view mode all the time. Nothing to get around this issue until we have better battery technology. Couple battery packs might take care the issue.
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.32 #15 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
They are testing the A7R at the Swedish Fotosidan.se. A similar site to Fred's here but in Swedish. This is what they wrote about the battery.
"Battery life is catastrophic. We run out of battery with about 150 exposures spread out over a few hours"
Many other things are of course very positive in the test
p.32 #17 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Lars Johnsson wrote:
"Battery life is catastrophic. We run out of battery with about 150 exposures spread out over a few hours"
Definitely looks like a power-hungry body with an under-capacity battery. 300 would be better, but 150 as you'd expect from real-world shooting - that's abysmal.
I am waiting for the adapter and 6-hour beltpack battery ex-Hong Kong.
p.32 #18 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Lars Johnsson wrote:
They are testing the A7R at the Swedish Fotosidan.se. A similar site to Fred's here but in Swedish. This is what they wrote about the battery.
"Battery life is catastrophic. We run out of battery with about 150 exposures spread out over a few hours"
Many other things are of course very positive in the test
p.32 #19 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Lars Johnsson wrote:
They are testing the A7R at the Swedish Fotosidan.se. A similar site to Fred's here but in Swedish. This is what they wrote about the battery.
"Battery life is catastrophic. We run out of battery with about 150 exposures spread out over a few hours"
Many other things are of course very positive in the test
jcolwell wrote:
I'll take five batteries.
I was figuring 6 batteries would be sufficient, but now that would be a dozen at least. The D800 normally goes all day and I only need one spare. Are the engineers at Sony mentally sound?
Or Nikon lenses! And lets not forget Sigma 35 or the Zeiss 21.
