p.58 #2 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
galenapass wrote:
Really amazing to think that kind of image quality can be packed into that size of camera.
Also usually packaging that much tech into a much smaller body would mean much higher prices, just look at ultrabooks and especially Sony ultrabooks, which used to be crazy expensive. Quite an impressive price indeed.
p.58 #3 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Also usually packaging that much tech into a much smaller body would mean much higher prices, just look at ultrabooks and especially Sony ultrabooks, which used to be crazy expensive. Quite an impressive price indeed.
Maybe I'm missing something, but what tech are they squeezing into the A7r that hasn't been done before? They took the OVF and mirror assembly out, making up most of the difference in size. They keep a small battery and one card slot. FF DSLRs are bigger than crop cameras because of the larger mirror and prism needed, not because of the size of the sensor.
p.58 #4 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
jctriguy wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something, but what tech are they squeezing into the A7r that hasn't been done before? They took the OVF and mirror assembly out, making up most of the difference in size. They keep a small battery and one card slot. FF DSLRs are bigger than crop cameras because of the larger mirror and prism needed, not because of the size of the sensor.
So you are not impressed they make a FF camera in a package as small as their competitors m4/3 cameras for example. It's as small and as light as my Olympus E-M5. Sure they aren't the only ones doing it, but in other field smaller usually means dearer, as it's harder to achieve thermal control, and packaging is more complex due to the lack of space.
p.58 #5 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Pixel Perfect wrote:
So you are not impressed they make a FF camera in a package as small as their competitors m4/3 cameras for example. It's as small and as light as my Olympus E-M5. Sure they aren't the only ones doing it, but in other field smaller usually means dearer, as it's harder to achieve thermal control, and packaging is more complex due to the lack of space.
No, I don't find it particularly ground breaking in terms of technical innovation. It is obviously 'ground breaking' in the context of combining the best sensor and most adaptable mount dimensions in one camera. And, if we are nit picking, the A7r is 10-15% bigger and heavier than the E-M5
Of course, none of that takes anything away from the IQ of the camera.
p.58 #6 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Of course I never used the words "ground breaking", they are your words. I just said I was impressed that the cost is so reasonable given how much tech is packaged into a small device.
p.58 #9 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
RobDickinson wrote:
Rightly so, it was near twice the price of the 24-105L and it really hasnt show its worth IMO.
It's down to $1000 now often enough (better than the 24-105L often had been new from Adorama and such) and IMO it's way better than the 24-105. The 24-105 just made me go yuck on the wide end on FF.
p.58 #10 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Whether or not it's optically better than the 24-105L, the price is just criminal for a slow ass 24-70. If it had launched at a reasonable $800 it might have gotten a lot more interest. The real worry is Canon will never update the 24-105L and eventually drop it altogether. Hopefully they are not that stupid.
I don't know it's so easy to make a 4x standard zoom for FF, look at the sigma, tons of exotic glass, weighs a ton, large diameter and it appears to not even come remotely close to what the 24-70 f/4 IS can deliver. I think maybe it was more Canon being that smart.
How could the 24-70 f/4 IS launch at $800 when the 24-105L, which is easily worse, was selling for more than that years after launch? (granted I did always think the 24-105L VERY over-priced, so if you also agree with that, then perhaps; I do agree the full list for it was too much, but $800 is too low to have been reasonable too, it can be found for $1000 often enough and that's not a bad price for it close to launch).
p.58 #11 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
chez wrote:
Naw. Genius is to make it pin sharp across the entire range. What you got is a compromise.
Or perhaps unrealistic? The thing is point to me a 24-70 type lens that is sharp edge to edge across the entire range. Find me one. Even the mythical 24-70 II tends to get a little soft near the edges right near 70mm so even that is not 100% sharp edge to edge on FF across the entire range (although it is probably the closest that exists).
That said maybe if they dropped the macro mode and made it a bit larger and bulkier they could've pulled it off? But whatever. I find 50mm semi-boring a lot of the time and it's not like it's an unusable 50mm or anything and you can get, for $90 off this site a 50mm 1.8 that will be crisp corner to corner on FF at f/2.8 if you need that badly and that plus the 24-70 f/4 IS I bet still weighs less than the 24-105 and that pair certainly weighs less than the sigma 24-105, plus this pair would also toss in f/1.8-2.5 at 50mm.
The fabled 70-200 f/4 IS tends to go a bit soft on the very widest end. And yet people call that lens genius.
p.58 #12 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Nothing boring about the 50mm FL or any other FL for that matter. It is what you make of it, be it 24mm, 50mm or 70mm. Anyway for the price the 24-70L IS costs with rebates and discounts, you can get the Sony Zeiss 24-70 f/4 OSS, so why not put a native lens on the Sony and get real AF and excellent IQ?
1. what about when you go back and shoot with your Canon stuff?
2. do we even know that sony lens performs better??
p.58 #13 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
skibum5 wrote:
1. what about when you go back and shoot with your Canon stuff?
2. do we even know that sony lens performs better??
Not yet, but it's reportedly going to be very good and it's also quite small for a FF zoom.
You disparage the 24-105L at the wide end, but it's only got high barrel distortion, which is easily corrected. IQ otherwise is good and it reduces in distortion quickly as you zoom.
The price of the 24-70 f/4 more reflects Canon's new absurd pricing strategy rather than any amazing IQ improvement. We've seen the 24/28 IS already drop a huge amount since release and by Canon's own admission the price was too high and sales were not great. 35 IS has also eased considerably and discounting is now common on the 24-70 f/4.
p.58 #14 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Not yet, but it's reportedly going to be very good and it's also quite small for a FF zoom.
Well, that doesn't sound any different than the 24-70 f/4 IS which is very good and very small for a FF zoom.
You disparage the 24-105L at the wide end, but it's only got high barrel distortion, which is easily corrected. IQ otherwise is good and it reduces in distortion quickly as you zoom.
No it's also got LoCA/PF for branches against clouds, lots of lateral CA and lots of mush in the edges and corners at 24mm, it way more than just barrel distortion going against the 24-105.
p.58 #16 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Lars Johnsson wrote:
I would be willing to pay a lot more if Sony released it with Canon mount Twice as much....
Yes.
But why wont they? Don't they realize how many more Canon-shooters that would throw themselves and their bank accounts on an A7R with EF-mount?
Is it some kind of pride thingy? Some kind of hope that their own lens mount will grow popular in time?
The A7R is an epic camera, but Sony is still an underdog in this fight. They should just take of their gloves off and steal as many canonites as possible, while Canon is still lacking in the sensor department.
p.58 #17 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Rickuz wrote:
Yes.
But why wont they? Don't they realize how many more canon shooters that would throw themselves and their bank accounts on an A7R with canon mount?
Is it some kind of pride thingy? Some kind of hope that their own lens mount will grow more popular?
EDIT: apparently the patents have expired and Sony could offer the EF mount. Can't think of a camera that uses another companies mount? Obviously happens with lenses, but never with camera bodies that I can think of.
The only option would be to have a Sony sensor in a Canon camera, but hasn't been any sign that Canon is even slightly interested in that option.
p.58 #18 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Yes.
But why wont they? Don't they realize how many more canon shooters that would throw themselves and their bank accounts on an A7R with canon mount?
Is it some kind of pride thingy? Some kind of hope that their own lens mount will grow more popular?
The EF mount patents expired a few years ago, so Sony could offer the mount license free, but what about AF? The A7R is a contrast detect only camera, and the Canon lenses are designed for PDAF, you will never get good AF. They'd work a lot better on the A7 I suspect, but early reports pen it's AF performance as worse than the A7R. Could just be an issue fixable by FW though.
p.58 #19 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Generally (other than 4/3rds and such) manufacturers want a proprietary mount. The want people to buy the camera and then buy their lenses. My guess is that if Sony would sell EF mount cameras, they wouldn't get any lens sales (unless they also started making EF mount lenses) as people would buy Canon, Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, Zeiss, etc EF mount lenses.
Kodak was the last company to make an EF mount stills camera AFAIK.
I would have considered an EF mount Sigma SD1 at one time....if they produced it in EF mount...but of course they have SA mount. The funny thing is it's extremely close in design (from what I understand) to the EF mount but you still can't mount an EF lens on it.
Twice as much....