charles.K wrote:
Shots this afternoon at Rainbow Bay. A7r and 24 Lux Asph.
Hi Charles Very nice , that looks like the south end of Kerra Beach
Very encouraging shots ,i just received my A7r cant wait to give it ago , Cheers Frank
I like your pictures, but I don't think that MD 24-35 zoom is good enough for you! The chromatic aberrations really detract from the photos, IMO. It shows up a lot for instance on the edges of the roof tops of those buildings in the first picture.
Sorry for the criticism / gear-eliticism
This can also be due to the fact I used a new, not so good, downsize/sharpening action for this photo!
But I think you're right, this lens, is not so good on the A7r as on the NEX-7.
This has been downsized differently. i think it is a little better.
Some snapshots with the A7r and the Sony 35 mm f/1.8 OSS (The APS-C lens) slightly cropped (about 1,2 X to ~40-45 mm equiv.) JPG OOC
I like the bokeh from this lens.
edwardkaraa wrote:
Charles, I can see no smearing in the corners of the 24 lux. Seems to work very well.
I can see loss of sharpness in the corners compared to rest of frame. Not a lot but still noticeable to me.
wayne seltzer wrote:
I can see loss of sharpness in the corners compared to rest of frame. Not a lot but still noticeable to me.
Wayne, you are correct. There is a marginal drop off, but is the due to the f/5.6, and maybe lack of DOF now becoming more visible with A7r. I will be out again soon, but this time with the M240 and 24 Lux, and see how it performs. My first choice with M240 has been the 21SEM, as it is so light and portable, so for now I do not have any comparisons with the M240.
I know the 24 Lux with the M9, has about the same corner sharpness at f/5.6 but on the plane of focus it is sharp.
Also to note, there is some minor magenta edges, but these are easily corrected. Probably no different that on the M9's prior to latest firmware updates.
Shot this afternoon with 50 Nocti f/1.0 @f1.0 and A7r
Charlie this ^ is lens porn pure and simple. I'll assume you met some light rain rather than my first thought... you primped the camera and lens with a spritz for glam!
I always wanted the 180ED. Should I hunt down a copy? Longest I have is the Nikkor 135/2 Ai-S, decently compact, ignoring the adapter that is.
Charlie this ^ is lens porn pure and simple. I'll assume you met some light rain rather than my first thought... you primped the camera and lens with a spritz for glam!
I always wanted the 180ED. Should I hunt down a copy? Longest I have is the Nikkor 135/2 Ai-S, decently compact, ignoring the adapter that is.
Well at Keh a bgn is around 300. Big, fast and Sharp. Generally considered one of the top 3 or four Nikon MF achievements.
I think the true competition is at least double the price, although the steal once again is the nFD 200/2.8, which is cheaper and reputably excellent.
Another shot from yesterday with the 24 Lux and A7r. This shot is at f/5.6 with a mid range focal plane. From this image there is no edge blurring here... fortunately
All images were shot with the Sony A7, and a variety of rangefinder (Canon ltm 35/2, Canon ltm 50/1.2, CZ Sonnar 50/1.5, CV 21/4) and SLR (Contax Zeiss 28/2.8, Contax Zeiss 35-70mm f3.4) lenses. You can identify which lens was used by the file name. Some of the rangefinder lens shot were made using a Kipon adapter ring with built in helicoid to allow for closer focusing.
Some quick thoughts on the Sony A7: Solid build quality, and it balances very well with rangefinder lenses. I love the customizability of this camera. You can set it up just the way you like it. The default setting to have ISO selected by scrolling the back control dial was not working for me as it kept getting scrolled by accident, however It was an easy fix to reassign that function to a different button.
The image quality at higher ISOs is very good. You can pretty much set it for auto ISO and not think about it.
The shutter release is quiet soft/sensitive. It does not have a noticeable half-press/focus feedback resistance like the M9. Took a little getting used to at first, but its transparent to me now.
The battery life is noticeably worse than the NEX series of cameras. I needed two batteries to get me through a day of shooting, though I never fully discharged the second battery.
The widest lens I used on this trip was the CV 21mm f4. The magenta edge issue was apparent in some images, but not all. Corner smearing was an issue with the CV 21mm f4.
The Canon 50mm f1.2 performs very nicely, with better results that I sued to get with an M9. Similarly, the Canon ltm 35mm f2 is a superb performer.
The Zeiss Sonnar 50mm f1.5 is also a very good performer on the A7. Tons of bokeh wide open, yet still sharp and contrasty in the center. Stopped down to f8 and it is clinically sharp across the frame.
Contax/Zeiss SLR lenses, while quite large on this camera, perform extremely well. The 35-70mm f3.4 is better than the 28mm f2.8, but not by too wide of a margin.
uhoh7 wrote:
I think the true competition is at least double the price, although the steal once again is the nFD 200/2.8, which is cheaper and reputably excellent.
It's a very famous rock concert lens
From what I have read the nFD 2.8/200 shows quite a lot of CA, how does the ED 180 compare here?
