freaklikeme wrote:
There are people shooting with R lenses on a99s and D800es (as well as every other FF camera) now. Are you expecting different results?
No. I am hoping for equal or better. However, going this route I do not need to Leitax everything, I can just use the Novoflex adapter and rotating collar and use the glass on Leica R as well as other camera systems that I have including the Fujifilm X-E1.
freaklikeme wrote:
There are people shooting with R lenses on a99s and D800es (as well as every other FF camera) now. Are you expecting different results?
Only if the A7R has a true "no AA filter" vs. the D800E @ 1/2 AA filter concept. Otherwise, same sensor + same optical projection = same image (sans variation @ Sony RAW algorithm). I passed on the D800E because I don't want 1/2 AA filter, I want no AA filter.
naturephoto1 wrote:
No. I am hoping for equal or better. However, going this route I do not need to Leitax everything, I can just use the Novoflex adapter and rotating collar and use the glass on Leica R as well as other camera systems that I have including the Fujifilm X-E1.
Rich
Yeah, I get that. It sounded like you had performance concerns. I'm fairly certain that, assuming you have a solid, centered adapter, the performance will be at least as good as it is with any other FF digital. Now, compared to your favorite film and an R9... that might be a different story.
RustyBug wrote:
Only if the A7R has a true "no AA filter" vs. the D800E @ 1/2 AA filter concept. Otherwise, same sensor + same optical projection = same image (sans variation @ Sony RAW algorithm). I passed on the D800E because I don't want 1/2 AA filter, I want no AA filter.
I hadn't heard much about the D800e "half AA" filter until people started talking about it in regards to the Sony. How was it determined that Nikon hadn't completely removed the filter?
freaklikeme wrote:
I hadn't heard much about the D800e "half AA" filter until people started talking about it in regards to the Sony. How was it determined that Nikon hadn't completely removed the filter?
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I don't believe though we have anything absolute about the A7r AA situation.
Nothing I know of confirmed yet. We are still in limbo between the marketing definition and what actual exists in the engineering of what A7R actually has or hasn't. Although the results speak for themselves in many regards ... either way @ none vs. single direction separate/reassemble (RF glass applicability notwithstanding). I'm just hoping for the true "no AA".
If we look at the designator for the D800E ... the illustration hints at the E standing for the "effects" of removing the OLPF. Makes me wonder if the R designator, as in the case of the RX1R means "removed" rather than "effects". If so, the A7R designator would yield hope of it actually being "removed". I don't recall if the RX1R is a true "removed" OLPF or not, though.
RustyBug wrote:
Nothing I know of confirmed yet. We are still in limbo between the marketing definition and what actual exists in the engineering of what A7R actually has or hasn't. Although the results speak for themselves in many regards ... either way @ none vs. single direction separate/reassemble (RF glass applicability notwithstanding). I'm just hoping for the true "no AA".
If we look at the designator for the D800E ... the illustration hints at the E standing for the "effects" of removing the OLPF. Makes me wonder if the R designator, as in the case of the RX1R means "removed" rather than "effects". If so, the A7R designator would yield hope of it actually being "removed". I don't recall if the RX1R is a true "removed" OLPF or not, though.
It has been claimed the "R" in RX1R simply stands for "Resolution". Sony marketing material seems to back this up. Interesting theory though.
"Product Description
The Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R is a variation of the RX1, which had the impressive distinction of being the first full frame fixed lens camera to enter the market. The variation of the RX1R (the R stands for "resolution"),..."
"Sony has removed the optical low-pass filter from the design, allowing for even greater clarity than was achieved from its predecessor, the RX1; the “R” appended to the new model’s number actually stands for “resolution.” http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/6/prweb10877097.htm
You can click on Karel's images for a close up view.
'The Minolta 24mm F2.8 also works beautifully on the Sony.' He has plenty of other casual shots with Minolta lenses, clearly undoctored and WYSIWYG. He used the smart adapter (LA-EA4) for them and so lost some light to the SLT.
There is a no smoking sign above the doorway in this one:
Interesting. Thanks, Tariq. Now I just have to figure out why this is cause for alarm. The RAW comparison shots between the D800 and D800e show a significant resolution advantage. Is there some concern that the OLPF system isn't providing results comparable to, say, a D800 that's had the OLPF removed by a 3rd party?
p.104 #12 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
freaklikeme wrote:
Interesting. Thanks, Tariq. Now I just have to figure out why this is cause for alarm. The RAW comparison shots between the D800 and D800e show a significant resolution advantage. Is there some concern that the OLPF system isn't providing results comparable to, say, a D800 that's had the OPLF removed by a 3rd party?
I think the concern for many is related to the effect that the extra filter stacks will have with wide angle rangefinder lenses. Speculation is that even if their effect was mostly nullified, just with them being present would cause astigmatism outside of the central part of the frame. That's my understanding anyway.
You can click on Karel's images for a close up view.
'The Minolta 24mm F2.8 also works beautifully on the Sony.' He has plenty of other casual shots with Minolta lenses, clearly undoctored and WYSIWYG. He used the smart adapter (LA-EA4) for them and so lost some light to the SLT.
There is a no smoking sign above the doorway in this one:
As for final IQ, remember lens quality x sensor quality equals final quality. Does Leica have a better sensor?
Presuming that is the same Minolta design as my Leica R 28mm f2.8 Elmarit, I will check mine on the A7r. I had expected that this lens would need to be replaced for usage with the camera. But, maybe... Also,I have the Leica R 28mm f2.8 Super Angulon PC (Schneider) which is heavy could at least for sometime (and also for PC control and stitching) could be used on A7r. The same for the Leica R 21mm f4 Super Angulon (but it is supposed to fall off for sharpness from the extreme sharpness in the center).
p.104 #14 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I think the concern for many is related to the effect that the extra filter stacks will have with wide angle rangefinder lenses. Speculation is that even if their effect was mostly nullified, just with them being present would cause astigmatism outside of the central part of the frame. That's my understanding anyway.
p.104 #15 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
snowboarder wrote:
I'm starting to worry my R28 v2 won't be great neither... It wasn't super great on NEX-7 and it seems to be parallel to how it is on A7R... Damn, I'm seriously thinking about canceling my order.
I wouldn't worry. The R28 E55 is stellar on the D800E, and I'm not expecting anything less on the A7R. What were your negative experiences with this lens on the NEX-7?
p.104 #16 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
Sorry for the massive list of quotes, but just catching up on the discussion and thought I'd put them all in one post...
naturephoto1 wrote:
I would like to see more results of the A7r with the Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2.0 which appeared to yield some promising results. Also, and I know it is not a WA RF lens, I would like to see results of the A7r with the Leica R 28mm f2.8 Elmarit V2.
Rich
From my experience with it on the M9, I would temper my expectations. It might be fine if you're going to shoot at f/8 or higher all the time. At wider apertures the edges just don't hold up. It's also faithful to mid/lower tier Voigtlander lenses with a tendency to purple fringe and CA is also there. Sure, fixable in post... as is it's lower contrast rendering.
Charlie, where did you find these and is there any more context from the photographer posted there, or elsewhere?
IMO, the SEM image is O...K... at f/8, but there is still some slight smearing in the outer 1/3 of the image. Sized down to 24 or 18MP it would be less of an issue, or at smaller print sizes. Again, will really depend on final use.
I had a look through his other images, and I was surprised how smeared the 75 Summicron's right edge looked at f/4... can't really judge the left side because it's nearer and in shade. Maybe an adapter issue? But wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't. The WATE (16-18-21) was actually pretty decent wide open considering it's not Leica's best performer in the outer zone...
RustyBug wrote:
I think to be a Leica killer, you have to have Leica killing glass, not just an awesome sensor ... what you project and what you capture/record are two pieces of the puzzle that can't escape one another.
If it's Otus-sized glass to achieve such results, then I think Leica will still be among the living.
snowboarder wrote:
I'm starting to worry my R28 v2 won't be great neither... It wasn't super great on NEX-7 and it seems
to be parallel to how it is on A7R... Damn, I'm seriously thinking about canceling my order. I have a couple of days
I guess as it's starting to ship here soon.
On the other hand it will probably be great with my CV125 APO and longer M glass. Still, I have no time
to deal with pink corners on most of my shots...
Take a look at the above links from Charlie (uhoh) and see what you think of the 75 Cron results...
As for the R28... What do you think of it vs. the 28 Cron? Leica's MTFs would lead me to believe the Cron is a better performer... But to realize that, you'd need an M240, of which I recall you're not a fan.
You can click on Karel's images for a close up view.
'The Minolta 24mm F2.8 also works beautifully on the Sony.' He has plenty of other casual shots with Minolta lenses, clearly undoctored and WYSIWYG. He used the smart adapter (LA-EA4) for them and so lost some light to the SLT.
As for final IQ, remember lens quality x sensor quality equals final quality. Does Leica have a better sensor?
IIRC, the 45/2 image was at f/8 and the other one was at f/11... Not many lenses look bad at those apertures.. But without doubt, the sensor does resolve very highly. Where Leica's sensor is better, as we're seeing, is with wider RF lenses at wider than f/8...
p.104 #17 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
Ron Pfister wrote:
I wouldn't worry. The R28 E55 is stellar on the D800E, and I'm not expecting anything less on the A7R. What were your negative experiences with this lens on the NEX-7?
I was quite shocked to see purple corners on NEX-7. But I guess I'll just wait a few days
and do my new fresh round of testing with the A7R...
p.104 #18 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
rscheffler wrote:
As for the R28... What do you think of it vs. the 28 Cron? Leica's MTFs would lead me to believe the Cron is a better performer... But to realize that, you'd need an M240, of which I recall you're not a fan.
From my experience the rendering is similar except the R28 v2 seems to shine with infinity,
while I prefer the closer shots with 28 Cron... R28 looks like large format, hard to explain... 28 Cron
is a bit more about the character...
With my new A7R I'll be able to shoot side by side and do an honest test.
p.104 #19 · A7/A7r - performance with WA RF lenses
Ron,
Thanks for the reply. From what we appear to be hearing at this point for the A7r with Legacy WA RF and very possibly SLR lenses used for landscapes we are going to need to use the lenses at f5.6, f8, or f11 to be sharp across the frame.
So, it is beginning to sound like any WA RF or SLR lens that can provide this performance is what we should consider. Then it will come down to just weight, size, and cost. But, then I guess we all knew that already.
I begged him for brighter tests @f/8, would not hurt to PM him also
The A7r does not seem to show diffraction as soon as any APS-C nex, so I don't have a problem with f/8 or f/16 for landscapes.
Frankly, that SLR canon 24/2.8, which that guy also up in his "ton of MF lenses", looked fantastic, and that lens goes for 135 mint at keh. nFD version.
I'm still hoping my zm18 will have edges at f/8, but not taking it for granted. If the 28 cron is bad I do have a v3 elmarit which may have better prospect. I will be surprised if the edges are smeared on the cron at f/8.
we'll just have to see.
It's a massacre 28 and below, but there may be some survivors, and frankly 35 and up looks to stomp all over the m240. I'm sure there are exceptions, but man, I'm shocked at how many 35s look great.
just grabbed one of these supposedly near perfect, 'c' version for my contax 3a, for a hun, should be sexy on the a7r, no? 135c by unoh7, on Flickr
