alba63 wrote:
Well, man, you're on a mission really.
And: Good luck with your DSLRs.
Boards are full of these people who just cannot stand the fact we are really excited about A7r. It's ugly. It has humps. It's a Sony. It won't work.
Over at RFF, a guy started a thread "I have zero interest in A7, who's with me?" At one point Gandy chimed in, "I have zero interest in M240...till I can find one used for 2k"
At MF lenses it was; "oh, another luxury item (like m240) of no use to us."
My obssesion with A7r possibilities may be pathetic, but it's beyond pathetic to trash stuff knee jerk, no evidence, cause you don't like the "hype".
"HopeIsEternal wrote:
Which Olympus OM wides were you thinking of? The 24mm? That is not that wide right? same with FE 35mm. What I want to know is how do you shoot ultra-wide on a Sony A7/A7r? On the the APS-C NEX cameras you can use the SEL1018. or the 16mm f/2.8 with ad-on lens. What non-bulky lens would give you ultra-wide on A7/A7r without image quality issues?
the oly OM 18/3.5, 21/3.5, 24/2.8 are all very good and very small, though not as good as the ZF 21/2.8 or nikkor 14-24mm. there are relatively compact OM 21/2, 24/2, 28/2 lenses and a 24/3.5 pc lens.
for myself, I don't really shoot much wider than 28mm, so I'll just stick with my (quite small) rokkor 24/2.8.
I'm dying to try these on the a7r. The Voigtländer will surely work better than on any SLR, but the Summicron-C is so much smaller and nicer. Both are shown with NEX adapters, which shows the practical difference in size.
I liked the Summicron-C on the NEX-5N very much. It's a bit glowy wide open (in a good way), but dead sharp at f/2.8 and on. Funnily, it wasn't as exciting on the M8 for some reason.
There are plenty of small SLR lenses at the wide end. I don't think not being able to use RF wides is a deal breaker. Even then, I was surprised that the CV 15 wasn't worse on the A7
Oly's offerings, the Sigma Super wide, C/Y lenses, Nikons Ai and Ais lenses. There are plenty of options.
Makten wrote:
I'm dying to try these on the a7r. The Voigtländer will surely work better than on any SLR, but the Summicron-C is so much smaller and nicer. Both are shown with NEX adapters, which shows the practical difference in size.
...
I just bought the CV 40 f/2 off the buy/sell here for use on my pre-ordered A7 - can't wait to try it out. I'd love the Summicron, but its a bit more than I want to spend.
michael49 wrote:
I just bought the CV 40 f/2 off the buy/sell here for use on my pre-ordered A7 - can't wait to try it out. I'd love the Summicron, but its a bit more than I want to spend.
40mm is the perfect FL.
There is also the Minolta 40mm f2 Rokkor-M lenses in different versions, the latest the CLE MC version which are the later iterations of the Leica C 40mm f2 Summicron. I have the latest CLE MC version. The Minolta versions tend to be less expensive than the Leica C.
I will be bringing my Minolta CLE MC 40mm f2 Rokkor-M lens with me on Thursday, October 24 (this Thursday) to PhotoPlus to try on the Sony A7r. Unfortunately I have not been able to find anyone attending the show with any 21mm or 24mm Leica M lenses. I will also be bringing an assortment of Leica R lenses with me. Hopefully Sony will let me mount these lenses onto the camera.
Cant help thinking that the A7 with those offset microlenses would have been something. Given what we've seen. The increased pixeldensity in A7r wont help, rather equalize or ruin the potential advantage.
Just speculation of course.
Remember the protruding and enormously sized back element of the RX1? Compare it to a WA ZM or a Contax G21, G28 or so.
uhoh, I almost responded to the Hope person along the lines that there is a lot of angst in the air over - what, a consumer product? You could write a Psych PhD about it. I would be just as happy if this camera carried an engraved 'Nikon' or 'Canon' and just as interested in it, as it will take my lenses and has great lenses coming. FF E mount is a format with a strong future...
I do realise that other makers are concerned as you would expect of all competitors in a market economy, but as Niall Ferguson says: Innovation is the mainspring of industrial advancement.
If you want to stay with your tried and true products of yesteryear and can get users to buy them for whatever reason, all is well with the shareholders. But don't think that standing still is a corporate strategy with a future, not in the 21st century, not in electronic products at least.
Hope, many people (99% is a good estimate) do not give a rat's rear about a small niche of older superwide angle lenses, let alone their compatibility with a new camera that is yet to appear. Maybe ask elsewhere.
In news, SAR reports a site with some delicious images from the FE 35/2.8, a tiny lens few had high expectations of.
naturephoto1 wrote:
.....There is also the Minolta 40mm f2 Rokkor-M lenses in different versions, the latest the CLE MC version which are the later iterations of the Leica C 40mm f2 Summicron. I have the latest CLE MC version. The Minolta versions tend to be less expensive than the Leica C.
Rich
If I end up really liking the A7 then the CLE 40mm f/2 is a lens that I would consider purchasing for it. I'll be interested to see your evaluation of it on the A7(r).
uhoh7 wrote:
Boards are full of these people who just cannot stand the fact we are really excited about A7r. It's ugly. It has humps. It's a Sony. It won't work
After months of stepping away from forums I made the mistake of checking in to DPR a couple of days ago to see what the folks there were saying about the A7, fully expecting the same nonsense as surrounded the RX1. The moaning and misinformation is spectacularly funny.
philip_pj wrote:
Hope, many people (99% is a good estimate) do not give a rat's rear about a small niche of older superwide angle lenses, let alone their compatibility with a new camera that is yet to appear.
In news, SAR reports a site with some delicious images from the FE 35/2.8, a tiny lens few had high expectations of.
I fully agree. This topic seems totally overblown to me.
BTW, compared to the eyes view (which corresponds pretty much to "true normal" of about 43,5mm focal length as far as it can be compared at all) I consider 35mm already as a wide angle lens and always did.
For Sony those RF lens users are the least interesting: I mean they build a camera to sell it with lenses, this is where money is made. Most people who will buy the A7(r) - and if Amazon rankings are at least half true, a LOT of people will buy those 2 cameras - with Sony glass made for the new cameras.
I currently will wait half a year and all the reviews and user experiences, but then could perfectly imagine to go with one lens first - probably the 55/1,8 and add maybe more lenses (read: one or two) later... I always liked the "classic trio" - 35 (or 28)/50/85
But I am happy with my Fuji X and could easily wait 1 full year also and get a second hand A7 then for a good price. But even if I do not get it at all in a forseeable future, it is fascinating to see that those 2 cameras are already about to create a sea change and a kind of "last chapter" feeling for DSLRs. WA RF legacy lens issues won't stop this.
michaelwatkins wrote:
After months of stepping away from forums I made the mistake of checking in to DPR a couple of days ago to see what the folks there were saying about the A7, fully expecting the same nonsense as surrounded the RX1. The moaning and misinformation is spectacularly funny.
A friend of mine is a Canon SLR user. Nice guy, not really that predjudiced. But somehow he learned that all the compact Sony cameras (like my Nex-7) don't have removable batteries. He was totally shocked when I popped the battery out of mine. Because this was obviously a deal-breaker for any serious photographer, to be stuck with just one charge during a day of shooting. I wondered what message board he learned this bit of misinformation on.
maybe someone who knows a bit about lens design can confirm my suspicion about what this rear element does? From the blueprint it looks like it takes the oblique light that comes from the second last element, and changes its angle to make it somewhat perpendicular to the sensor. If that's the case then this might be the lens design standard for WAs and big sensors going forward (at least for those cameras that dont necessarily need to retain compatibility with legacy M mount UWAs)
Makten wrote:
I liked the Summicron-C on the NEX-5N very much. It's a bit glowy wide open (in a good way), but dead sharp at f/2.8 and on.
I had the minolta version, who knows, maybe my copy was faulty or abused, but it had sort of exhausted my vocabulary on optical faults
It still all came together though somehow and made for an old school kind of image that I absolutely loved. In the end I agree with you, if this lens plays well and you can spare the cash it might be a reason on its own to get this camera, for a certain type of photography.
Spyro P. wrote:
maybe someone who knows a bit about lens design can confirm my suspicion about what this rear element does? From the blueprint it looks like it takes the oblique light that comes from the second last element, and changes its angle to make it somewhat perpendicular to the sensor. If that's the case then this might be the lens design standard for WAs and big sensors going forward (at least for those cameras that dont necessarily need to retain compatibility with legacy M mount UWAs)
You can't really take one element out of context like that - yes it's kind of doing that, but it doesn't mean that without the rear element the lens would work at all -- eg it's not just changing the angle of the rays as they hit the sensor, it's changing their angle. . .meaning it's making them hit the sensor in the right place, where they wouldn't without it. Same thing if you removed any other element, most likely).
The whole lens is designed around having that element back there, in other words.
"Hope, many people (99% is a good estimate) do not give a rat's rear about a small niche of older superwide angle lenses, let alone their compatibility with a new camera that is yet to appear."
"This topic seems totally overblown to me."
Still doesn't mean questions and discussion are unwarranted. I hope my 18SE would work wonders Maybe..
Yes, indeed, but we are seeing a lot of FUD around how poor these cameras are...pure obfuscation and not done in the pursuit of the facts and mostly with a lot of negativity.
Now, Steve Huff treads on thin ice:
'a full frame latest sensor tech compact IC camera for under $1700 that will give you Leica M quality (I think it may surpass it in color, detail and ISO capability) with everything but wide-angle Leica lenses.'
The Sony files are going to be very rich and lifelike from all indications, with wonderful colour...great news indeed courtesy of the BIONX Z processor, which we will hear plenty about soon enough. Hopefully Sony engineers will be on hand at the 24/10 show or do us a few videos.
Sony's processing took a step up. I have the impression that all lenses will look better on these cameras, time will tell.
Taylor Sherman wrote:
A friend of mine is a Canon SLR user. Nice guy, not really that predjudiced. But somehow he learned that all the compact Sony cameras (like my Nex-7) don't have removable batteries. He was totally shocked when I popped the battery out of mine. Because this was obviously a deal-breaker for any serious photographer, to be stuck with just one charge during a day of shooting. I wondered what message board he learned this bit of misinformation on.
yeah, every new release of a non-canikon camera (and some canikon cameras too) some crazy ideas get spread and believed. camera geeks are an anxious crazy group. when the original NEX came out there was long thread in this very forum suggesting that somehow the cameras were incapable of taking sharp pictures.
for the next couple months it'll be very difficult to separate useful information from crazy conjecture based on crappy web images or misprinted specs. then we'll start to get a flood of raw images with all kinds of lenses and the truth (whatever it may be) will be clear.
It's interesting to me you have no interest in a lens wider than 24. I was watching Andrei Rublev (the movie), and thinking to myself, he is so crazy The human eye, after all, is UWA.
Then it dawned on me (I'm dense at heart), all those superb stitches you do----maybe the UWAs just distort too much for him?
What's the story, bud? (while we wait for lens reality to come crashing in)
alundeb wrote:
The preliminary testing has shown that the A7 and A7r will behave quite differently, and that individual lenses will not behave in a predictable pattern on the A7r based on what you see on the Leica M or A7. There is very little data on the A7r yet.
Your premature conclusion also seems to be based on comparing uncorrected Sony images with software corrected Leica images.
I don't care if Leica is correcting the images coming off the sensor. What I want is sharp, smear free, color shading free RAW and JPG images straight from the camera. I don't care how it is achieved. Why would anyone want to spend a good amount of time in Photoshop correcting *every* single picture taken with range finder wide lenses on their new "state of the art" Sony A7 or A7r?
Also it is not as if Sony was not aware of the big demand for a compact camera that worked well with range finder wides. They've been aware of this demand and expectation for a very long time but then they go and just cheaply reuse existing sensors for DSLRs while claiming that they "fixed the wide-angle problem"?? Did they think that nobody was going to eventually conduct side-by-side tests with Leica Digital M?
The other paid Sony photographer, Brian Smith? was out there at Camera launch, showing off photoshopped and cropped images taken with some wide angle M-mount lenses and the Sony A7(r). Why do you think that was? Because Sony was trying to give the impression that this was the camera for range finder lovers and collectors of range finder lenses.
The drastic performance difference between A7 and A7r when shooting with wide/ultra-wide M-mount lenses show that lack of seriousness with which Sony engineers tackled this particular problem. They hope that the press gives a lot of attention to the more expensive A7r and it's "new range finder friendly sensor" while most people actually pay for the cheaper A7 which is a dog.
