Ignoring the smearing for a moment. Anyone like to estimate how many stops separate the exposure on the guys face and the corners? Two stops exposure difference or more?
_julian_ wrote:
Ignoring the smearing for a moment. Anyone like to estimate how many stops separate the exposure on the guys face and the corners? Two stops exposure difference or more?
It looks like the A7 is better than the A7r so far as vignetting and light falloff is concerned?
Wow, the quality of the CV15 samples I've seen so far has varied drastically, from surprisingly decent to completely unusable. We really need some more formal testing.
alwang wrote:
Wow, the quality of the CV15 samples I've seen so far has varied drastically, from surprisingly decent to completely unusable. We really need some more formal testing.
True. I am torn. Samples that keep appearing are all over the place. I have seen great stuff from UWA RF , and really disappointing stuff.... we desperately need some real testing samples from A7R.
On a side note : i really do not believe that in-camera software correction (a la Leica) can be done in the A7/R for RF lenses.... do you?
alwang wrote:
Wow, the quality of the CV15 samples I've seen so far has varied drastically, from surprisingly decent to completely unusable. We really need some more formal testing.
You know it's always like this. Take the best you've seen, ignore the rest, and hope for better yet.
safcraft wrote:
True. I am torn. Samples that keep appearing are all over the place. I have seen great stuff from UWA RF , and really disappointing stuff.... we desperately need some real testing samples from A7R.
On a side note : i really do not believe that in-camera software correction (a la Leica) can be done in the A7/R for RF lenses.... do you?
This has already been brought up in this thread, but we do not know the extent of it at this time and under coming soon for the camera via Sony:
alwang wrote:
Wow, the quality of the CV15 samples I've seen so far has varied drastically, from surprisingly decent to completely unusable. We really need some more formal testing.
uhoh7 wrote:
You know it's always like this. Take the best you've seen, ignore the rest, and hope for better yet. ...
elroos wrote:
I tested the CV 12, 15 and 21 today on a pre-production a7R. Full size, SOOC JPEGs on my Flickr site: http://www.flickr.com/photos/leo_roos/
My first reaction: not so good, I had hoped for sth a bit better. It reminds me of my first NEX-5, a couple of years back. But Cornerfix cleaned those files up pretty well. So not all is lost.
elroos -- Thanks for the succession of shots with these UW lenses. No criticism of your effort, but, ouch!, those short flange lenses don't look like what I want to see in my photos. That vignetting is heavy and the magenta shift is crazy.
I haven't got any short rangefinder lenses, so for the new Sony would be a digital back for my Canon EF lenses and a few CZ and Leica R adapted lenses.
I don't see this body as being really appropriate for these other lenses, except for the "fun" aspect of trying stuff you already own.
BTW -- what does your expression "for sth a bit better" mean?
_julian_ wrote:
Ignoring the smearing for a moment. Anyone like to estimate how many stops separate the exposure on the guys face and the corners? Two stops exposure difference or more?
uhoh7 wrote:
You know it's always like this. Take the best you've seen, ignore the rest, and hope for better yet.
Until production units land in our hands we wont know for sure how things will turn out.
discrepancies in IQ could be because of build quality/tolerances in the preproduction units.
LightShow wrote:
Until production units land in our hands we wont know for sure how things will turn out.
discrepancies in IQ could be because of build quality/tolerances in the preproduction units.
Don't forget, I believe that Mike Bubolo, National Manager Photo Specialty for Sales at Sony indicated that Sony only had about 4 or 5 Production A7r cameras available in the US for testing at this time.
So, maybe not such good news for long term users of ultra wide CV lenses on a pre-production full frame camera with pre-release firmware who shoot jpegs. That will really hurt, them being a core constituency and all
I don't know what the difference would be. Judging from experience (µ4/3 and Nex 5) smeared details are smeared. A pre-release JPG engine producing smear doesn't sound right, does it?
The Distagon 35/1.4 is close to perfect, but... The size and weight just kills me and the urge to go out and shoot with it just isn't there.
An interesting fact is that the exit pupil distance-to-sensor of the Nokton is almost exactly the same as for the Summicron-C. So if one of them works on the a7(r), the other most likely also will.
Gunzorro wrote:
elroos -- Thanks for the succession of shots with these UW lenses. No criticism of your effort, but, ouch!, those short flange lenses don't look like what I want to see in my photos. That vignetting is heavy and the magenta shift is crazy.
I haven't got any short rangefinder lenses, so for the new Sony would be a digital back for my Canon EF lenses and a few CZ and Leica R adapted lenses.
I don't see this body as being really appropriate for these other lenses, except for the "fun" aspect of trying stuff you already own.
BTW -- what does your expression "for sth a bit better" mean?
It's not what I want to see either, but it's early days. I expect that with some careful PP of the RAW files and a little help from Cornerfix these photos will get a major 'upgrade'. Apart from that magenta shift (which can be corrected), the 12mm is not bad at all imho. It is an extreme wide angle but even @ 5.6 the detail is there at the edges. The same goes for the 21mm, though that needs stopping down a bit. The 15mm seems the most problematic.
And I don't think it's a problem of this body. UW RF lenses and sensors are not a match made in heaven. Leica cameras have the same problem but by applying in-camera corrections the files can be cleaned up.
The Distagon 35/1.4 is close to perfect, but... The size and weight just kills me and the urge to go out and shoot with it just isn't there.
An interesting fact is that the exit pupil distance-to-sensor of the Nokton is almost exactly the same as for the Summicron-C. So if one of them works on the a7(r), the other most likely also will.
How did you measure the exit pupil distance to the sensor?
Whichever lenses dont work well, hopefully i can pick up cheap on for use on my rangefinder in a few months FYI the Voigtlander 35/1.2's rear element gets closer to the sensor than the 50luxasph which isnt as wide. I think the safest small-ish 40mm to bet on right now is the voigtlander 40 ultron for canikon.
FYI the Voigtlander 35/1.2's rear element gets closer to the sensor than the 50luxasph which isnt as wide. I think the safest small-ish 40mm to bet on right now is the voigtlander 40 ultron for canikon.