p.85 #2 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
jj_glos wrote:
I'm not seeing anything miles better than the D800E, and Canon have been up against that more serious competitor for a while now.
The A7R is miles better than the D800E in the sense that it will focus to infinity with Canon EF lenses. The requirement to throw out your entire lens collection makes the D800E a weaker competitor...
p.85 #3 · 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.
It's a peace of mind thing. I would much rather just know that no data is discarded, rather than than have to conduct tests to see if the data that's being discarded actually makes a difference to a print. As far as I can tell there's no reason for Sony not to include a lossless option for people who desire it.
p.85 #4 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Matt Grum wrote:
The A7R is miles better than the D800E in the sense that it will focus to infinity with Canon EF lenses. The requirement to throw out your entire lens collection makes the D800E a weaker competitor...
Not to Canon as you're keeping their lenses and not leaving their system totally. That gives Canon time to bring out an answer, if they are capable of doing so that is.
p.85 #5 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
kezeka wrote:
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 didn't say anything about 1000% viewing. No need to turn this into an attacking comment against me. DPReview will welcome you back with open arms if that's how you behave on forums I've read many reports now in the online forums and testing done by Lloyd that there is a problem at normal %, not even 100%. To make a proper decision I'd have to purchase one and try it myself. I will add your friends data point to my consideration. I plan to wait a bit longer and see the next roadmap for lens releases before I buy and try. I'm also still not happy with the available lenses for this system, another reason I'm holding off for now.
p.85 #6 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
I've only had the a7R since late last week. But I'm able to get sharp images...both tripod and hand held. (Although more of my use has been tripod mounted.)
Coming from a 5D II, I don't have any image quality complaints.
Here's a fulls size shot...granted it's a longer exposure tripod mounted, but I'm very extremely with it.
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 →
p.85 #7 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
artd wrote:
It's possible Sony might be using lossless compression, or near lossless by using some kind of clever algorithms.
The space you save with a lossless compression scheme depends on the amount of information present in the original data. The point that the Sony RAWs are consistently not more than 37MB indicates a lossy scheme.
Being near lossless is a world apart from being lossless. I'd like my space suit to be airtight, not near airtight!
KiboOst wrote:
We all use lossless compressions everyday...This discussion on a7r raw size is useless ...
A7R compression is not lossless though, hence the the discussion is in my opinion not useless! Some people don't care, which is fair enough, but unless the compression is done in hardware there is the option for Sony to remove it in a firmware upgrade, which wont happen if people aren't aware of the issue.
p.85 #8 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
tsdevine wrote:
I've only had the a7R since late last week. But I'm able to get sharp images...both tripod and hand held. (Although more of my use has been tripod mounted.)
Coming from a 5D II, I don't have any image quality complaints.
Here's a fulls size shot...granted it's a longer exposure tripod mounted, but I'm very extremely with it.
p.85 #10 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Matt Grum wrote:
The space you save with a lossless compression scheme depends on the amount of information present in the original data. The point that the Sony RAWs are consistently not more than 37MB indicates a lossy scheme.
Being near lossless is a world apart from being lossless. I'd like my space suit to be airtight, not near airtight!
A rather a poor metaphor. Your suit is airtight, you're just worrying that it isn't pressurized with pure oxygen
But still, yes, I get that there's a concern about it. But I don't think that concern is founded in practical terms. To date the raw files we've seen have looked pretty good. And I would be pretty surprised if Sony's engineers decided to cripple their great new camera with a substandard raw format.
p.85 #11 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Does anyone have a7r, metabones and VG-C1EM ?
It seems that with the grip, the plate on the metabones foot, even with hejnar spacer, won't be low enough to prevent the vertical grip from touching the QR :/
I've contacted RRS and they aren't yet working on Lbracket for a7r+grip, not enough demand yet. And I guess plate on the adapter is better balanced than on the body.
Vertical grip isn't available yet in europe so let's see ...
p.85 #12 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
tsdevine wrote:
I've only had the a7R since late last week. But I'm able to get sharp images...both tripod and hand held. (Although more of my use has been tripod mounted.)
Coming from a 5D II, I don't have any image quality complaints.
Here's a fulls size shot...granted it's a longer exposure tripod mounted, but I'm very extremely with it.
p.85 #13 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Full disclosure...I was playing around with DxO and this conversion had their new "Prime" NR engine turned on. It would have still had NR turned on by default, but by default it uses its standard NR algorithm. I did tune down the Prime setting though.
With Prime turned on it does take a LONG time to do a conversion on my mid-2010 Macbook Pro.
mttran wrote:
+1, wow...best noise ratio I have ever seen in digital imaging. Thank you, Tim.
p.85 #14 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
tsdevine wrote:
Full disclosure...I was playing around with DxO and this conversion had their new "Prime" NR engine turned on. It would have still had NR turned on by default, but by default it uses its standard NR algorithm. I did tune down the Prime setting though.
With Prime turned on it does take a LONG time to do a conversion on my mid-2010 Macbook Pro.
I saw lot of unclean matter such as "dirt" but no visible "shadows noise" and that is a real magic from this A7r. So if not sharpness then what is
p.85 #15 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Yeah, I know it's a gear forum...but sometimes is better to shoot more and worry less.
mttran wrote:
I saw lot of unclean matter such as "dirt" but no visible "shadows noise" and that is a real magic from this A7r. So if not sharpness then what is
p.85 #17 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Update:
I just received the Hejnar spacer for the Metabones MKIII adapter and it fits great. Aside from raising the adapter and adding compatibility to all Canon lenses, the Hejnar spacer accepts 2 screws making it a very solid solution for my L-braket. (See images)
The L-bracket I'm using is the Desmond-DAL-1. It's only $39 and I highly recommend it coupled with the Hejnar spacer. That is so far the best solution I have tried for the Sony A7R and all Canon lenses when using an L-bracket on the adapter itself (instead of the camera body)
Desmond-DAL-1 L-bracket, Hejnar spacer and TS-E 90mm fully shifted
Desmond-DAL-1 L-bracket, Hejnar spacer and TS-E 90mm Portrait orientation
Desmond-DAL-1 L-bracket, Hejnar spacer and 85 f/1.2L
I've read many reports now in the online forums and testing done by Lloyd that there is a problem at normal %, not even 100%. To make a proper decision I'd have to purchase one and try it myself. I will add your friends data point to my consideration. I plan to wait a bit longer and see the next roadmap for lens releases before I buy and try. I'm also still not happy with the available lenses for this system, another reason I'm holding off for now. 
