Those who asserted that the Sony A7R is not suited to be used in combination with Leica wide angle M lenses propably arrived at a too vague conclusion. In fact it depends on the particular lens design. Lenses with an extremely compact and symmetric design may produce problems with color shift and edge smearing even on the sensor of the A7R with shifted microlenses whereas lenses with a more telecentric design like the Leica WATE perform perfectly fine without color shift and without edge smearing on the A7R.
There will be additional comparison tests soon with other lenses like the Voigtlander Ultron 21mm f/1.8 ASPH, the Leica Super Elmar 18mm f/3.8 and 21mm f/3.4, so please stay tuned!
If the first results convinced you already and you started craving for used samples, let me add, that you do not need the additional 16-18-21mm finder ("Frankenfinder") when you put this lens on the Sony A7 / A7R. But even then you may be shocked by the prices of this lens. Perhaps it helps to put into perspective that this lens covers the whole range from 16mm to 21mm with a quality perfect like the best wide angle primes from Leica when stopped down to f/8 and even at f/4 almost on par with them. Compared to the price of a Leica M 240 or Monochrom body, you'll get the WATE almost for free on top of the A7R... ;-)
There may be left some used copies at reasonably prices at the moment but I expect rising prices... ...Show more →
I have the WATE and love it.
Works fine on NEX-5N, used to work great on NEX-7 until I updated the firmware.
I managed to observe a faint color cast that wasn't there before under a similar test.
If I am not mistaken there now seems to be another update for the NEX-7 firmware.
Will update again and find out whether it works fine again.
Indeed that reference about A7R and WATE is very good news.
I hope it gets confirmed through more in depth testing.
k-h.a.w wrote:
I have the WATE and love it.
Works fine on NEX-5N, used to work great on NEX-7 until I updated the firmware.
If I am not mistaken there now seems to be another update for the NEX-7 firmware.
Will update again and find out whether it works fine again.
Indeed that reference about A7R and WATE is very good news.
I hope it gets confirmed through more in depth testing.
Karl,
I just posted the link to the article on L-Camera-Forum.
Jman13 wrote:
Oh give me a break. Huff may not be to everyone's liking (he tends to be overly enthusiastic at times), but jumping to your accusations just sounds like utter fanboy talk. I see it all the time on tech websites. Apple gets a good review, Android fanboys rage that they must be paid by Apple...not that, you know, the product might actually be good. Vice versa the Apple fanboys come out, same thing.
fanboy of what? Leica? Sony? You totally lost me here...
Do you not notice that in this preview, on multiple occasions he remarks how the A7 and A7r aren't as good as the Olympus E-M1 in certain areas....AF nowhere near as fast as E-M1 in low light, build quality not as good as E-M1, doesn't feels as good in the hand as the E-M1. That doesn't sound like someone who's a paid Sony shill. If you read his site a lot, you know if anything he's a Leica fanboy. Why didn't he go full into M lenses? Don't know....
Completely not true, he just completed a full 180 and started bashing Leica and it's all about Sony now.
Pretty obvious he gets financial motivation, there is no doubt in my mind. I like Sony too, but his site hasn't
brought any valuable info in a very long time, his reviews are full of selfies and everything is "awesome".
The guy has access to a hot camera and doesn't check what everyone is waiting for... Or he does
and he's afraid of releasing the results for some reason. Either way - useless.
He wrote five paragraphs on performance with Leica M lenses. What more do you want from a guy shooting with a camera for two days. And it's not what everyone wants...it's what a select group of photographers want to know about. How is explaining that these cameras don't work very well with M mount wide angles shilling for Sony or not telling you what you want to know? He specifically says 35mm and up is just fine, some wides work fine on the A7, but most don't on the A7r, and if you're going to shoot ultra-wide with M mount you should probably be shooting black and white.
You have some serious blinders on. I can't stand the reaction when people disagree with a review or someone didn't look at something they way they want it to...it's immediately: "They're being paid to say this."
Whether you like his reviews or not is not the point...I understand if you don't like his reviews (He's a little over the top for me, but I can read between the hyperbole and discern what he really means most of the time), but I see nothing in his reviews that suggest he's being paid for his opinion whatsoever.
honestly, it's starting to look kinda sketchy to me too. it's obvious he's under a barrage of requests from people to show the corners on rangefinder wides at infinity and what does he do? he takes some large aperture pictures focused at 1 meter that show nothing of infinity or corners. my guess is he's trying to drag out things as much as possible to keep traffic going to his site. the last 5 posts contain almost zero useful information. it used to be you could at least glean some info from a short hands on by him.
I think when you put yourself up as a public figure like Steve Huff has, receiving critique is expected. No different than talking about the merits of a magazine article or televisions piece.
Steve makes money from web traffic, sponsors, referrals. Whether or not the product is a POS. A negative review could turn off one segment of his readers or a sponsor. So, take his reviews with a big grain of salt, he isn't going to take a dump on anyone who could be a potential sponsor. In fact, for those who remember, a few years ago, when SLR magic became a sponsor, Steve actively promoted them on his website and workshop until build quality and warranty issues started cropping up and he quietly distanced himself.
No one has given the guy more shit than me. I tweet him directly.
I agree the shots we want are easy, and I don't know why he is such a pain about it. But I stop at reading his mind.
At least he is sort of on the case. The event was full of photo people who gave us nothing. Compared to them the guy is hardly a "clueless moron" as our resident dean of humility suggests. Far as I know, that person does not shoot RF wides at all.
It's going to be up to us. Are we really surprised?
uhoh7 wrote:
It's going to be up to us. Are we really surprised?
Nope! It's always so.
Huff and *every other reviewer* are following the very same pattern witnessed at every single camera introduction I've followed over the past three years.
Any blame for a flawed introduction process should really be laid at the feet of Sony and every other maker. They could change all this by putting someone useful to the alt-glass and focus at infinity crowds in the review junket bus.
At least in the case of Sony the pre-release time frame is usually long enough for some better independent reviews to show up and allow for order cancellation if necessary. Maybe Reichmann will soon provide some useful info, as production cameras should soon be in sufficient supply that he (and others) will have them for a deeper look.
Jman13 wrote:
My guess is that he's saving more detailed writeup for his review when he has more than two days with the camera.
Of course, that's the only sensible thing to do. I also agree that Huff probably has seen enough bad results across various lenses that he doesn't want to write a blanket condemnation without looking at the issue deeper and that takes time he would not have had between dinner and midnight each day.
In defence of the alt-glass user community here, it has in the past taken pressure from alt-glass users of various types, especially those who do care about edge performance, to get reviewers like Huff to shoot tests that are meaningful to them. Dig back into the NEX-7 roll out for a particularly clear example of this... weeks before Huff finally shot his garage wall to show edge colouration.
As I said earlier, Sony could put all this to bed by including reviewers with different areas of interest, but they seem to include reviewers with established readership, unsurprisingly. Alt-glass landscape fans don't have many public champions outside of forums - Michael Reichmann comes to mind as one though, and he hasn't been participating in Sony junkets as he used to.
Ultimately its people in communities like this that figure it out for themselves. I'm in envy of those who have access to retailers that take anything back no questions asked. Order the world, review it, return it... if one has the time, skill, and inclination.
Damn, I thought had you some real samples for sec there.
Having seen many shots which appeared ok on my LCD and turned out to be not so great, I'm afraid it's still speculation. If anything works it would be the WATE---I think it was also OK on the Nex-7.
I just have little use for such bargin basement lenses
uhoh7 wrote:
Damn, I thought had you some real samples for sec there.
Having seen many shots which appeared ok on my LCD and turned out to be not so great, I'm afraid it's still speculation. If anything works it would be the WATE---I think it was also OK on the Nex-7.
I just have little use for such bargin basement lenses
naturephoto1 wrote:
It would be an option, though an expensive one.
Rich
Anyone for whom that is an option is unlikely to be wasting their time here. Instead they are out and about with an M9 on one shoulder, a 240 on the other, a nice M8 in the trunk, and a 110 lb sherpa girl in case things get too heavy.
Or at least I would be.
"Nyi-ma, darling, I believe this shot calls for the 75 summilux, be a dear and mount that up on the 240, OK?"
uhoh7 wrote:
Anyone for whom that is an option is unlikely to be wasting their time here. Instead they are out and about with an M9 on one shoulder, a 240 on the other, a nice M8 in the trunk, and a 110 lb sherpa girl in case things get too heavy.
Or at least I would be.
There are a number of people on L-Camera-Forum that already have the M240 or M9 cameras and the Tri Elmar Wide (16-18-24) and are either purchasing or considering the purchase of an A7r.
uhoh7 wrote:
Anyone for whom that is an option is unlikely to be wasting their time here. Instead they are out and about with an M9 on one shoulder, a 240 on the other, a nice M8 in the trunk, and a 110 LB sherpa girl in case things get to heavy.
Or at least I would be.
not me. shooting ultra wides seems like such a pain with a rangefinder (plus i don't like rangefinders). do you have to carry 3 separate viewfinders when you shoot with that lens or is there a tri-elmar viewfinder too?
sebboh wrote:
not me. shooting ultra wides seems like such a pain with a rangefinder (plus i don't like rangefinders). do you have to carry 3 separate viewfinders when you shoot with that lens or is there a tri-elmar viewfinder too?
There is a special "Frankenfinder" for the Tri-Elmar that can be purchased separately or with the lens to be used with the M9 and previous M series cameras. It costs about $900 for the finder, but it is not necessary for the M240 (if using the EVF or the LCD screen) or the Sony A7 or A7r.
By the way the Tri-Elmar is actually a zoom and you can zoom between the focal lengths and you do not have to set the lens to 16mm, 18mm, or 21mm.
naturephoto1 wrote:
By the way the Tri-Elmar is actually a zoom and you can zoom between the focal lengths and you do not have to set the lens to 16mm, 18mm, or 21mm.
Rich
intriguing, i did not know that. it looks like a pretty sweet lens, but i'd only use it at 21mm and not often at all, so my wallet can rest easy.
sebboh wrote:
not me. shooting ultra wides seems like such a pain with a rangefinder (plus i don't like rangefinders). do you have to carry 3 separate viewfinders when you shoot with that lens or is there a tri-elmar viewfinder too?
We know anything below 24 is not something to which you would subject either optic nerve, under any circumstances. Those distorted rays might throw off the cones...
fanboy of what? Leica? Sony? You totally lost me here...