ISO1600 wrote:
Color cast of any sort is unacceptable for me, I need files that can work without any editing. I don't spend thousands of dollars on gear to get files that require fixing. I'd like to think that is fairly easy to agree with.
This is ridiculous. Sony doesn't own us a great performance with Leica wide lenses, Leica does and they
still can't deliver. We are getting an amazing Sony camera and as a bonus we can use other great glass.
I'm not sure why A7R wouldn't be good with wide lenses, 5N was very good and this time around
they are openly talking about taking this into consideration, rather than an unexpected random bonus as before.
I'm optimistic. My order is placed
And I think Sony deserves all the thank you notes, rather than "I pay so I demand".
Leica M buyers should use more of this, but for some reason they prefer to look for excuses
to defend this sorry a$$ camera. I really can't wait what kind of reasons they will give us now to explain
why A7R sucks comparing to M...
snowboarder, i'm not saying that the Sony A7(R) is unacceptable for me, i'm saying that getting color casts is. I'll still get the camera, I just won't use lenses with it that don't work 100%.
Yeah, MR is probably mostly talking about color shift.
When the first NEX cameras came out, it took a while to get a sense of how things performed in terms of color shift and smearing, and I expect the A7 to be no different. It'll need tons of tests.
If MR is correct, and LL's first take earlier today was more positive , Then A7R is already better than NEX7. Because it is clean with 35s, whereas no 24 RF was clean on the NEX 7.
philber wrote:
Yes, indeed. 28mm is my favorite WA, and using my G 28 without CornerFix on FF would be a dream come true. And my Elmar 24 as well, although I use that FL a lot less.
What about you?
I'm with you, if I were to select one single FL on FF it would be 28mm.
I do have some problems with the 35MP, filesizes will easily become several 100s MB with basic editing and surpass half a gig with a little bit more. And it is all dead-weight if you ask me.
wfrank wrote:
I'm with you, if I were to select one single FL on FF it would be 28mm.
I do have some problems with the 35MP, filesizes will easily become several 100s MB with basic editing and surpass half a gig with a little bit more. And it is all dead-weight if you ask me.
bah! some landscapes deserve to be 36" or more and you can definitely see the difference without sticking your nose up.
philber wrote:
If MR is correct, and LL's first take earlier today was more positive , Then A7R is already better than NEX7. Because it is clean with 35s, whereas no 24 RF was clean on the NEX 7.
I'm not sure I'd totally buy all 35s being clean on the A7R. I heard the same thing about the NEX-5N, only to find color shift with both the Zm 35/2 and Zm 35/2.8. Nex-7 was obviously much worse. Heck, even the ZM 50/1.5 shows some color shift on the NEX-5N, but no one talks about it.
My bet is that some 35s will be ok, some won't be, and everything wider (M lens wise) will have color shift issues. Even the 35 Summicron ASPH has color shift on Leica's own cameras, without the software correction.
Smearing is what I'm curious about, because that can't be fixed. I think that's where the new A7r sensor may shine.
The Phigment M to NEX adapters may be of aid in this and providing that Paul can get the adapter to recognize the FF camera as well as work properly on these cameras.
But, at this point, Paul is out of adapters and it will be several months before he has more available. The adapters do not have a CE certification though. Additionally, I am not quite sure at this point how the software for the different lenses works. Those more knowledgeable may want to take a look. I will have to try to work with this probably sometime in the future.
On a side note, I will also be looking very seriously at the Zeiss native mount options. If we believe Sony's MTF, both the 35/2.8 and 55/1.8 are stellar performers. I really love manual focusing on the M9 and I am sure it's not going to be as straightforward and fast on the 7r, but AF has gotten much better since my last AF camera (A900), and these gizmos now have face recognition, and even eye recognition and will AF on the closer eye automatically, so AF becomes a serious option.
douglasf13 wrote:
I'm not sure I'd totally buy all 35s being clean on the A7R. I heard the same thing about the NEX-5N, only to find color shift with both the Zm 35/2 and Zm 35/2.8. Nex-7 was obviously much worse. Heck, even the ZM 50/1.5 shows some color shift on the NEX-5N, but no one talks about it.
Douglas, I'm sure you're right about this, but I took hundreds of photos with my Nex 5N and ZM 35/2.8 (some blown up to 16x24) and never noticed any color shift with that combo. Now the Nex 7 plus 35/2.8 was a different story.
edwardkaraa wrote:
... but AF has gotten much better since my last AF camera (A900), and these gizmos now have face recognition, and even eye recognition and will AF on the closer eye automatically, so AF becomes a serious option.
I really agree with you here. I always assumed face recognition was a gimmick, then I tried using it with my Nex 7 and Sony 35/1.8 and Touit 32 and am sold, especially for maintaining focus while waiting for just the right moment.
I may end up selling my beloved ZM 35/2.8 for the new FE version because of AF.
Jeff Kott wrote:
Douglas, I'm sure you're right about this, but I took hundreds of photos with my Nex 5N and ZM 35/2.8 (some blown up to 16x24) and never noticed any color shift with that combo. Now the Nex 7 plus 35/2.8 was a different story.
That's normal. A long time ago, I posted comparison photos with the color shift cleaned up, and then it was more obvious to people only after seeing the difference. I just don't like it when concrete starts looking a little red towards the corner.
Agreed about face detection. I've started using it more and more, which surprises me.
snowboarder wrote:
This is ridiculous. Sony doesn't own us a great performance with Leica wide lenses, Leica does and they
still can't deliver. We are getting an amazing Sony camera and as a bonus we can use other great glass.
I'm not sure why A7R wouldn't be good with wide lenses, 5N was very good and this time around
they are openly talking about taking this into consideration, rather than an unexpected random bonus as before.
I'm optimistic. My order is placed
And I think Sony deserves all the thank you notes, rather than "I pay so I demand".
Leica M buyers should use more of this, but for some reason they prefer to look for excuses
to defend this sorry a$$ camera. I really can't wait what kind of reasons they will give us now to explain
why A7R sucks comparing to M......Show more →
Why always the bashing? My leica wides (18mm, 28mm and also with the 21mm and 24mm) perform great and like they should on the M9. Don't know why you think they don't deliver. Indeed some of the zeiss ZM lenses have problems, but leica doesn't own us a great performance with those. Just like sony doesn't for the leica's.
And the reason to go for the M9/ M instead of the A7 is obvious, the rangefinder.
Nevertheless the A7 looks great and I hope to add one in the future. It kinda remembers me to my old pentax ME.
douglasf13 wrote:
I think that's the point. It looks like they're using the wide asp-c zoom on FF, thus the vignetting.
Nope, he's saying one could use it as a 12-18 zoom with the cropping capabilities of a 24 mpix sensor.
