p.84 #5 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
AGeoJO wrote:
FYI, the FM Alternative Board has tons, literally tons of images taken with the Sony A7/A7r with a huge variety of lenses from vintage rangefinder to modern lenses, vintage SLR lenses to modern DSLR lenses, including Canon EF lenses. I am sure you know that, but just in case...
Yes, I am familiar with the alt thread for the A7R. II find the inconsistency of the results there quite bewildering. Obviously some combinations work and others do not.
There is never a comparison of the Sony A7R with metabones adaptor using a STOA Nikon or Canon Lens Vs the identical lens & image on a FF Nikon/Canon body. If I were doing that comparison I would post on the Nikon or Canon board, not alt.
Mike K
p.84 #6 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
retrofocus wrote:
....and losing market share more and more in the FF market against Nikon and now also Sony.
It is very likely that the only reason they are losing market share is because Sony and Nikon have increased the number of FF products for sale. That of course will immediately dilute their share unless none of those new products sell at all. Doesn't have any real meaning as to the failure or success of Canon vs Nikon (or Sony ).
p.84 #7 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Tony B wrote:
Too many chasing rainbows. I hope that those complaining about the poor quality of images from Canon cameras will refund their clients for all the sub standard work they have produced. Maybe it's not pros who are complaining- or their clients.
With all due respect, I'm not sure you understand the utility of more dyanmic range.
When people talk about less dynamic range, they're not talking about poor image quality. They're talking about a limitation. A Canon sensor delivers good image quality but only up to a certain limit. The Sony sensor exceeds that limit. And in some circumstances that is very useul.
I don't give my clients substandard work because I know how to deliver the image when the scene exceeds the dynamic range of my Canon sensor. I do however spend a lot of extra time compensating for those limitations (e.g. packing, transporting, and setting up extra lighting gear to fill in shadows, or bracketing multiple exposures and blending those manually in post production.) My clients are interested in the final product. The technicality of how I get the image isn't important to them. But, it is important to me in terms of the level of time and effort I have to expend.
So, I'm quite pleased that I now have the option of a sensor that will save me time and reduce the burden of my work in these types of scenarios.
p.84 #8 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
The fact that this Sony camera is compressing all the RAW files to 37MB when we know the D800E can produce 60MB + files is enough to keep me from jumping in to this system for the time being. The fact that the A7r is showing a lot of problem with vibrations at slower shutter speeds is my other main issue with this new camera.
This camera is only useful for shooting low ISO, tripod mounted landscapes where you actually get more DR than a typical 5D3 sensor and would be nice as a travel, hiking, more portable camera with smaller prime lenses. However, if you can't get a sharp shot even on a tripod because your low ISO that you need for good DR is causing a low SS that in turn causes vibration and ruins the sharpness then this camera is next to useless in my shooting. I'll wait till round two on this one and see what they can improve upon. In the meantime I picked up a Fuji XE-2 to use for my travel, hiking, portable camera and I will keep waiting on my high DR camera or maybe just go and get a D800E with 14-24 and call it a day
p.84 #9 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
arbitrage wrote:
The fact that this Sony camera is compressing all the RAW files to 37MB when we know the D800E can produce 60MB + files is enough to keep me from jumping in to this system for the time being. The fact that the A7r is showing a lot of problem with vibrations at slower shutter speeds is my other main issue with this new camera.
This camera is only useful for shooting low ISO, tripod mounted landscapes where you actually get more DR than a typical 5D3 sensor and would be nice as a travel, hiking, more portable camera with smaller prime lenses. However, if you can't get a sharp shot even on a tripod because your low ISO that you need for good DR is causing a low SS that in turn causes vibration and ruins the sharpness then this camera is next to useless in my shooting. I'll wait till round two on this one and see what they can improve upon. In the meantime I picked up a Fuji XE-2 to use for my travel, hiking, portable camera and I will keep waiting on my high DR camera or maybe just go and get a D800E with 14-24 and call it a day...Show more →
I've performed a few shutter vibration tests with the A7R and haven't seen any evidence of an issue. The only problem I've found is blur when using a Canon lens with IS enabled. As for the 37MB, is that compared to the Nikon lossy compressed NEF equivalent or uncompressed?
p.84 #10 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
snapsy wrote:
I've performed a few shutter vibration tests with the A7R and haven't seen any evidence of an issue. The only problem I've found is blur when using a Canon lens with IS enabled. As for the 37MB, is that compared to the Nikon lossy compressed NEF equivalent or uncompressed?
As far as I understand things, you can not get a Sony Raw file larger than 37.4MB but on the Nikon D800E that uses the same sensor you will get images 60MB and above and I believe that would be the uncompressed files but I also understand that the lossy compressed are also much larger than 37MB. I'm getting my info from Lloyd Chambers and his ongoing testing. Arguably he is the definition of the term "pixel peeper" but I still value his testing as he does a thorough and reputable job at it.
p.84 #11 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
arbitrage wrote:
As far as I understand things, you can not get a Sony Raw file larger than 37.4MB but on the Nikon D800E that uses the same sensor you will get images 60MB and above and I believe that would be the uncompressed files but I also understand that the lossy compressed are also much larger than 37MB. I'm getting my info from Lloyd Chambers and his ongoing testing. Arguably he is the definition of the term "pixel peeper" but I still value his testing as he does a thorough and reputable job at it.
But what does this mean in real life detailed photos printed to 30x40... That is the only real test. The rest is just measurbation.
p.84 #14 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Mike K wrote:
There is never a comparison of the Sony A7R with metabones adaptor using a STOA Nikon or Canon Lens Vs the identical lens & image on a FF Nikon/Canon body. If I were doing that comparison I would post on the Nikon or Canon board, not alt.
Mike K
One reason you won't see a Sony vs Canon comparo is that most of the alt gear guys determined many years ago Canon was crap and those that used Canon cameras were doing so under sufferance, only because the mount was flexible enough to allow them to avoid Canon's mostly useless glass and use their favourite Leica's, Zeiss', Voightlander's etc with their remarkable 3D rendering.
Now mirrorless mount is far more flexible there's no reason at all to use Canon.
p.84 #15 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
chez wrote:
But what does this mean in real life detailed photos printed to 30x40... That is the only real test. The rest is just measurbation.
Yes that is the ultimate question because unless you are printing big then you probably don't require all the MPs but we could all use the DR even if we aren't printing big or at all. However, the vibration issue that Lloyd has demonstrated so far is likely the bigger deal in how well the print will look. Sony has been using lossy compression on all of its cameras in recent history so nothing new there. Hopefully you will get one soon and let us know
p.84 #16 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
arbitrage wrote:
Yes that is the ultimate question because unless you are printing big then you probably don't require all the MPs but we could all use the DR even if we aren't printing big or at all. However, the vibration issue that Lloyd has demonstrated so far is likely the bigger deal in how well the print will look. Sony has been using lossy compression on all of its cameras in recent history so nothing new there. Hopefully you will get one soon and let us know
I am under the impression that all of this pixel peeping moaning and whining about photos not being sharp at slower shutter speeds is a load of garbage. A buddy of mine has both the a7r and a7 and hasn't seen trouble with sharpness at 100% with either. Zooming in to 1000% isn't something I ever plan on doing, but hey - if an image at 1000% being a bit fuzzy turns you off to a camera than by all means, don't buy one. I have never had a problem shooting slower than 1/FL on my 5D2 and so I highly doubt I will run into any problems with the A7 I just picked up.
I am mostly worried about the very real difference in shutter lag between my 5D2 and the a7 that is measurably 2x as slow. Which is, in fact, a problem for taking rapid candid photos.
p.84 #17 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
artd wrote:
With all due respect, I'm not sure you understand the utility of more dyanmic range.
When people talk about less dynamic range, they're not talking about poor image quality. They're talking about a limitation. A Canon sensor delivers good image quality but only up to a certain limit. The Sony sensor exceeds that limit. And in some circumstances that is very useul.
I don't give my clients substandard work because I know how to deliver the image when the scene exceeds the dynamic range of my Canon sensor. I do however spend a lot of extra time compensating for those limitations (e.g. packing, transporting, and setting up extra lighting gear to fill in shadows, or bracketing multiple exposures and blending those manually in post production.) My clients are interested in the final product. The technicality of how I get the image isn't important to them. But, it is important to me in terms of the level of time and effort I have to expend.
So, I'm quite pleased that I now have the option of a sensor that will save me time and reduce the burden of my work in these types of scenarios.
...Show more →
Unfortunately you picked out the tongue in cheek portion of my post neglecting the "excellent image quality at a reasonable price" statement.
You also wrongly assume I am not familiar with DR which is not as important as fast focussing for my preferred subjects.
It is good the Sony is the tool for you.
p.84 #19 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
arbitrage wrote:
The fact that this Sony camera is compressing all the RAW files to 37MB when we know the D800E can produce 60MB + files is enough to keep me from jumping in to this system for the time being. The fact that the A7r is showing a lot of problem with vibrations at slower shutter speeds is my other main issue with this new camera.
This camera is only useful for shooting low ISO, tripod mounted landscapes where you actually get more DR than a typical 5D3 sensor and would be nice as a travel, hiking, more portable camera with smaller prime lenses. However, if you can't get a sharp shot even on a tripod because your low ISO that you need for good DR is causing a low SS that in turn causes vibration and ruins the sharpness then this camera is next to useless in my shooting....Show more →
It's possible Sony might be using lossless compression, or near lossless by using some kind of clever algorithms. Either way, it doesn't seem to have made a negative impact to the actual images. And geez, wasn't one of the big arguments against the D800 'Oh the raw files are too big!' Is anyone really going to be distraught that Sony seems to have figured out a practical solution to make raw files smaller To me, this looks like another nice benefit over the D800.
As far as "the A7r is showing a lot of problem with vibrations at slower shutter speeds " ... it is? Where are the samples showing lots of problems? Do you really think that "you can't get a sharp shot" with this camera? Maybe we've been looking at different images, but I've seen quite a few of those....
p.84 #20 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
We all use lossless compressions everyday, zip, rar, tiff lzw, tga rle, png, etc etc
easy example :
00001110101111100011111 -> 4031010513051 : lossless compression ! This is just a simple example (run-length algo, aka rle).
On the other hand, jpeg, even at 100% quality, is lossy !
).
To me, this looks like another nice benefit over the D800.