p.92 #3 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Fast6 wrote:
Hey Fred, is this softness visible during Live View? Can you correct it with tilt? Think it could be shimmed away? Thanks!
Yes, it's visible in LV and tilting fixes it.
Even without taking the picture it's easy to magnify at 14x and see that if I focus on the upper left corner, the center gets soft and vice-versa. This doesn't happen with the 5D III, leaving me with the impression that I have 3 misaligned/tilted adapters or my A7R "mount" is not up to spec.
p.92 #4 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Like I said, I'm of the opinion many people will end up spending a ton more money than they anticipated when they start buying native mount glass rather than play the adapter lottery and find they'd like to do more than MF landscapes. In which case I'd probably rather get a D800E and very fast AF with native glass.
More than ever Canon need to pull their finger out on a new sensor.
It'll be race between Canon's sensor engineers and Sony/Zeiss's lens designers
p.92 #5 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
snapsy wrote:
It'll be race between Canon's sensor engineers and Sony/Zeiss's lens designers
Up until the last few years I would have had my money on Canon getting their rear into gear but more and more I get the impression that their sensor tech hit a dead end and that they have yet to find a viable mass-market replacement. Not good. Just the unedited dynamic range of these Sony sensors blows the 5D2 and 3 sensors out of the water. Noise at high ISO is significantly more random and lacks the ugly lines that are so characteristic of Canon's sensors.
Hopefully I will be surprised though. The A7 is a great backup camera to my 1D and will probably replace my 5D2 at this point though.
p.92 #6 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
kezeka wrote:
Up until the last few years I would have had my money on Canon getting their rear into gear but more and more I get the impression that their sensor tech hit a dead end and that they have yet to find a viable mass-market replacement. Not good.
This is what I fear as well.
I'm sure they feel a need / desire to improve their sensors, but what if they are simply unable to do it?
p.92 #7 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
It is not all bad in the Canon camp. As bad as the Canon sensors handle the deep shadows they are quite good at handling the highlights. I think they are the best at it. Highlights are a big part of photography! Does DXO test for that?
The Canon shadows clean up nicely in post. Up to a point obviously then the Nikon/Sony tech takes over and is clearly superior a stop or more deeper into the shadows.
Sad to hear about misalignments with the adapters for the Sony A7/A7R. I had the cart loaded up and ready to pounce on a kit. Started doing some more research online and now I'm right on the fence.
p.92 #8 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Like I said, I'm of the opinion many people will end up spending a ton more money than they anticipated when they start buying native mount glass rather than play the adapter lottery and find they'd like to do more than MF landscapes. In which case I'd probably rather get a D800E and very fast AF with native glass.
But then you have to have Nikon's crappy live view implementation! I'm happy to take the Sony for that alone
p.92 #9 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Rickuz wrote:
This is what I fear as well.
I'm sure they feel a need / desire to improve their sensors, but what if they are simply unable to do it?
I guess we'll find out next year.
I'm sure Canon has dissected the Sony sensor and knows exactly what is needed. They can get around any patents with a few design changes/improvements. At least this is what I want to believe and my patience will be rewarded in time, at some great expense to my wallet no doubt.
p.92 #10 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Fred Miranda wrote:
So far I have tested (2) Metabones III adapters and one RJC adapter with the TS-E 17mm and 24mm lenses.
The RJC adapter was the worse offender of the bunch.
With the TS-E 17mm, I'm getting soft/low contrast upper corners with one Metabones and not so much with the other. However, none of them even match the edges from the Canon 5D III with the same lens, especially when we start shifting. It seems to me, the wider we go, the more we'll see issues with adapter tolerance and alignment. The A7R higher resolution and shorter flange-to-sensor is also more likely to show any tilt.
I pretty much agree with Joshua's report. Lens adapter variability is definitely an issue and it could be tedious for Canon shooters to find a good match for each of their lenses.
I'm getting another Metabones this week and if anything changes, I will post an update. So far, I'm very impressed with the only native lens I have tried. The FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA is incredible wide-open and even more so at f/4.
Here are some crops showing the difference between the A7R+adapters and the Canon 5D III with the TS-E 17mm with an extreme shift (12mm) showing the upper left corner. Same exposure and aperture (f/11) used on samples:
Canon 5D mark III strong performance at the upper corner - 17mm unshifted.
I have more samples with further distances but they pretty much show the same corner issues. With the TS-E 24mm, corner softness is less pronounced but it's still apparent. I believe we would get better results with longer focal lenghts but have not tried that yet.
These samples are not conclusive of anything but it's unfortunate that none of my 3 adapters worked well with my Canon TS-E lenses.
I'm not quite sure what is causing this. Adapter or camera mount misalignment? Any ideas?
To make sure, I will try again with a new Metabones and report back if I see any improvement....Show more →
Perhaps it is due to the micro lens on the Sony sensor is optimized for short sensor to flange distance application
p.92 #12 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, it's visible in LV and tilting fixes it.
Even without taking the picture it's easy to magnify at 14x and see that if I focus on the upper left corner, the center gets soft and vice-versa. This doesn't happen with the 5D III, leaving me with the impression that I have 3 misaligned/tilted adapters or my A7R "mount" is not up to spec.
If the 3rd adapter doesn't work out where do you think you're at with sticking with the A7R?
p.92 #13 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Sneakyracer wrote:
It is not all bad in the Canon camp. As bad as the Canon sensors handle the deep shadows they are quite good at handling the highlights. I think they are the best at it. Highlights are a big part of photography! Does DXO test for that?
The Canon shadows clean up nicely in post. Up to a point obviously then the Nikon/Sony tech takes over and is clearly superior a stop or more deeper into the shadows.
Sad to hear about misalignments with the adapters for the Sony A7/A7R. I had the cart loaded up and ready to pounce on a kit. Started doing some more research online and now I'm right on the fence. ...Show more →
p.92 #14 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
galenapass wrote:
Shadows clean up nicely!? What are you shooting?
Hah I was about to post the same. On my 5d2, when I boost shadows in high iso situation, I want to throw up. First time I pushed shadows on nex-7 it was a revelation.
p.92 #15 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
secondclaw wrote:
Hah I was about to post the same. On my 5d2, when I boost shadows in high iso situation, I want to throw up. First time I pushed shadows on nex-7 it was a revelation.
I almost always shoot at iso100 and iso 160 when on a tripod. I do lift shadows slightly, not a whole lot and try to expose a bit more to the right. That is ok since the highlights are handled nicely in the Canon. In the Nikon D800E they are a bit harsher. of course on the Nikon (and I assume the Sony also) one can underexpose 1 to 2 stops further and protect the highlights.
At high iso all bets are off, images are noisy regardless and yes, underexpose a bit when using high iso and lift shadows and it is nasty.
Yes, at 100% the Canon shadows look somewhat nasty at times but in print they don't really show much at all unless you print very large and do not lift them too high from to low. Most of my work ends up in Magazines (yes, I get paid for my photography) and by now I have a pretty good eye for what will really show and what won't.
For very large prints I use a PhaseOne IQ160 with Rodenstock HR lenses anyway, which of course wipes the floor silly with the Nikon D800E in large prints. Yes I tested it, it's not close, no matter what some reviews lead you to believe.
But back on topic, would be nice to have someone make some nice and precise Ef to Sony FE adapters that do not cause misalignment issues. I would pay good money for it.
p.92 #16 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Rickuz wrote:
There is a ridiculous amount of Canon-extremists on CR!.. It's not even funny.
Some of them (like "Neuroanatomist") is there to defend Canon 24 hours a day.. Literally.
I have been thrown out of Canon Rumors after disputed Neuro and Jrista knowledge
They are the Canon master voices and discuss facts can not be done, physical facts as FWC and read out noise = DR is crap as long Canon not are the leader. A bunch of religious canon fanatic people who wish the old time back when Canon was also the master in SLR sensors, 10 years back.
The sad thing is that there are no indications that Canon has invested in new sensor lines, so the future will tell what happens, maybe we who have Canon SLR and lot of lenses also will see a Sony made sensor soon with great DR
p.92 #17 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Mikael Risedal wrote:
The sad thing is that there are no indications that Canon has invested in new sensor lines, so the future will tell what happens, maybe we who have Canon SLR and lot of lenses also will see a Sony made sensor soon with great DR
Don't know how you can say this given numerous reports of high res 1D in field tests on both CR and Canon Watch.
p.92 #18 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
If the A7(r)'s adapted lens corner issues turn out to be insurmountable then this will be pretty bad news for Canon owners, first for those who were planning to use an A7(r) with their Canon lenses and second because it takes out a potential camera-body competitor to Canon, for both business and face-saving reasons. The business reasons are obvious but it would have been pretty embarrassing for Canon to have their fine lenses producing better images on a competitor's body; pride alone might have compelled them into action.
p.92 #19 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
snapsy wrote:
If the A7(r)'s adapted lens corner issues turn out to be insurmountable then this will be pretty bad news for Canon owners, first for those who were planning to use an A7(r) with their Canon lenses and second because it takes out a potential camera-body competitor to Canon, for both business and face-saving reasons. The business reasons are obvious but it would have been pretty embarrassing for Canon to have their fine lenses producing better images on a competitor's body; pride alone might have compelled them into action.
I think what we're going to find is the corner issue is going to be a little more nuanced. I just read an interesting article Roger Cicala wrote about where we was testing some adapted lenses to an A7r. ( http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/12/sony-a7r-a-rising-tide-lifts-all-the-boats ) All the ones he tried showed better MTF numbers in the center than the native mount. And with the corners, the MTF numbers did show a drop, but the MTF numbers were not worse than what they were on the native mount. Now, I don't believe he tested anything wider than 35mmm yet, and it's quite possible that the wider you go the worse corner performance will get (as we've seen from Fred's 17mm test).
When I was doing my testing with the 24TSEII, it looked kind of like what Roger was saying...my corners looked soft, but if the images between the A7r and 5DII were equalized the A7r showed more resolution in the center and the corners looked about the same. I didn't get a chance to test extensively or with my 17TSE, since I ran into the issue of mechanical vignetting with my copy of the RJ adapter. But once I get a new adapter I'll be looking at this.
I think the bottom line is that the issue isn't really going to be answered in a black-or-white "yes it's great" or "no it's insurmountable." I think it's going to be a lot of shades of gray, and will depend on which lenses you shoot and how you shoot them.
p.92 #20 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
RobDickinson wrote:
I'm looking at a stopgap 6d my 5d2 is getting old
Thats exactly why I got a 6D and converted my 5D2 to IR. I envisioned the 6D as an affordable interim body that I could eventually turn over without too much hassle. I see complaints about comparing the Sony/Nikon noise performance to the 5D2, which is quite outdated now in the Canon lineup as well. FF Canons no longer have significant banding noise.
Mike K
