'At f/2.8 it may not be as bright as some people might wish, but at a mere 120g and 3.6cms in length, it makes for a very portable full-frame package when mounted on the A7/A7R, delivering great image quality with the minimum of fuss, including some lovely bokeh effects when shooting wide-open.'
philber wrote:
I side with Vern. My ZM 18 is unuseable on the A7R.
I'm afraid I must concur
When I first shot this, I hoped it might be OK zm 18 by unoh7, on Flickr
but subsequent tests just made it clear Vern and Philber are right.
However, as others have also noted, nFD 20/2.8 is very good, and it's lighter including adapters, than the zm18, though foot print is bigger. Dirt cheap too.
I actually had a fully charged Sony battery last me ~ 2 days of on and off shooting on my A7 and the percentage reporting was spot on. Wasabi batteries are my backups and they seem to last possibly even longer than the Sony brand but the level reporting is way off. They will show full forever and then just go to zero haha.. not sure what that is all about but it's always been that way on my 5d2 and also A7 and NEX-6, etc. Off brands never report the level right but they seem to last long.
Also, I always carry a total of 6 batteries. One in each of my cameras and 4 backups They don't weigh much or take up much space so why not?
jojomon11 wrote:
So for you new owners of the A7, how is the battery life, esp. when using LV?
Do you carry a spare with you for daily jaunts?
I never listen to the mfg. info on battery life, it tends to be very very conservative
Thanks!
Phil
Hi Phil, the life of the batteries are very reasonable, for the size. Probably not too different from the RX1 or the M9. I usually have back up batteries, but I have not needed to use them yet, even after few hundred shots.
Today I picked up a canon FD 28/2.0, and it is awesome on the camera. The more I use FD lenses, the more I wonder why I am even looking at the Leica stuff.
jojomon11, I don't know about battery consumption on "room temperature". On cold 3 batteries will last as long as there is daylight. E.g. today it was -6C in morning and -8C when sun set, I was whole daylight time outdoors shooting and there is 30% remaining on the 3rd battery. If this is comparable to 5DmkII on my use (live view only), then I would estimate one needs as many spare batteries as with 5DmkII.
Regards battery readings; I think my "non-Sony" (brand "Patona") batteries show the capacity as well as Sony. Also capacity seems to be about same. For 44,90EUR two batteries, external charger and car adapter was quite ok deal. Only thing to complain is that the charger could be faster; camera charger battery faster with 2.5A iPod charger than the external charger. Link: http://www.amazon.de/dp/B00CEWUVRY/ref=pe_386171_38075861_TE_item
ISO1600 wrote:
Today I picked up a canon FD 28/2.0, and it is awesome on the camera. The more I use FD lenses, the more I wonder why I am even looking at the Leica stuff.
Well, I had some FD lenses, mainly the 85/1.8 and the 24/2.8, on the 5N and found them too prone to CA as far as concerned. Pretty much what I did not like at the EF 85/1.8, but other than that they are good lenses, and sure good value.
Both the 24/2.8 and 85/1.8 FD present less CA on the A7 than on the NEX5N IMO.Up untill now I found that A7 has more mercy upon all my alt lenses compared with NXes 5N/7.
I was about to buy the A7 with the kit lens. I came to the shop some 2 weeks ago and lifted the kit lens up and it was just plastic with no weight or feel. I had to skip it. Guess I have gotten too used to well-built metal lenses with real focus rings. I just bought the body.
Now I have a problem with 35mm. Currently I have two. The CV35/1.2II and the CY35/1.4. Both are superb. But theyre big. Actually the CV is kind of smallish, but it is still heavy. High density and good feel!
Now here's a problem. I did not buy the kit lens but there are some occasions where I'd like to have a lens for documentary purposes (with AF). The FE35/2.8 is an alternative. But that is yet another 35mm. And I am also, for the sake of size, very interested in getting the Contax G 35.
So right now I am trying to avoid the expense - and the ridiculousness - of having four (4!) 35mm lenses. In that quest I found this link comparing the CV35/1.2 and the FE35/2.8.
The kit lens is certainly very light and plastic. But I've found it's output very good if you stop down. Very much worth the costs (considering your only other native choice right now is the 35mm). No regrets getting the kit lens at all. I'll look at the 24-70 when it comes out, but that's not until February at least and I'll get a lot of useful pictures before then.
bcaslis wrote:
The kit lens is certainly very light and plastic. But I've found it's output very good if you stop down. Very much worth the costs (considering your only other native choice right now is the 35mm). No regrets getting the kit lens at all. I'll look at the 24-70 when it comes out, but that's not until February at least and I'll get a lot of useful pictures before then.
You're absolutely right, the kit performs well and I knew that already given samples here (Phillip Reeve of course). Just couldnt stand the feel, I know, it's quite ridiculous. I once had the Canon 24-70L (for a Canon 5D2) and while it is super-big it still has a very nice feel to it. Perhaps the coming Zeiss 24-70 will replicate that feel though I am somewhat doubtful.
I have noticed some very odd corner flare around lightsources with my A7 and the FE35, similar to what Samuli has seen. I thought it was the lens, but then I started seeing the same with my ZF.2 35/1.4 on the A7. I wonder if these cameras have relatively thick cover glass? It would make some sense, since I believe that the thinner stuff is more expensive, for the same effectiveness, and these cameras are so cheap.
wfrank wrote:
You're absolutely right, the kit performs well and I knew that already given samples here (Phillip Reeve of course). Just couldnt stand the feel, I know, it's quite ridiculous. I once had the Canon 24-70L (for a Canon 5D2) and while it is super-big it still has a very nice feel to it. Perhaps the coming Zeiss 24-70 will replicate that feel though I am somewhat doubtful.
I sold my FE 28-70 because it cost me 240€ and I could sell it for 340€ and because I am saving towards a Zeiss 24-70 which is 900€ because Sony Germany offers a 25% rebate for students on lenses.
If the Zeiss 24-70 will feel like the 4/16-70 it will feel like an expensive lens but not as tough as a Canon L.
They don't weigh much or take up much space so why not?