The EFCS imparts very strong vignetting in the lower-right corner of the frame (upper right in portrait orientation) at fast shutter speeds, same as it did on the Nex-7. Here's 1/5000:
Summicron-M 28/2
The 28 Cron isn't the sharpest lens at the edges wide open, but the effect here at the top of the frame is largely due to the sensor toppings.
28/2
OK, meanwhile for some pictures I like without any other commentary!
charles.K wrote:
Shots of business colleagues from Lebanon at a late lunch today. A7r and 50 Nocti f/1.0 @ f/1.0
The rendering in the second shot (I guess I never liked "flat" B&W digital images, like the first) is simply fantastic. Great capture of the moment as well.
----------------------
In the search for a smallish ”short normal” lens, I borrowed a Voigtänder 40/1.4 from a friend today. After only a few shots I know it's not what I want, but still a very, very good lens. Especially considering the price and tiny size. These are shot with the a7...
I haven't tried the Konica yet since I'm awaiting the adapter. But between the three rightmost lenses, I think the Voigtländer 40/2 Ultron is winning the race for versatility. It's sharp straight from f/2 and still small enough even though the Nikon adapter makes it protrude A LOT more from the camera than rangefinder lenses. For stopped down shooting, the Summicron-C is nicer though.
charles.K wrote:
Shots of business colleagues from Lebanon at a late lunch today. A7r and 50 Nocti f/1.0 @ f/1.0
those look great! it seems to me from the few shots you've posted that the noctilux looks sharper in the plane of focus with the a7r than with your m shots. do feel the same way or am i just imagining it? perhaps it's just due to shooting parameters or point of focus from the small number of images i've seen.
sebboh wrote:
those look great! it seems to me from the few shots you've posted that the noctilux looks sharper in the plane of focus with the a7r than with your m shots.
My guess is that it's just easier to nail focus on the A7/A7r than on an M camera.
I say this because I've played around a little with my Pentax 43/1.9 and it looks sharper in the center with my A7r than it ever did on my K10D/K5D which I attribute to finally being able to nail focus with that lens.
Makten wrote:
I haven't tried the Konica yet since I'm awaiting the adapter. But between the three rightmost lenses, I think the Voigtländer 40/2 Ultron is winning the race for versatility. It's sharp straight from f/2 and still small enough even though the Nikon adapter makes it protrude A LOT more from the camera than rangefinder lenses. For stopped down shooting, the Summicron-C is nicer though.
I'd be interested in seeing how the Konica performs on the A7. Keep us informed!
sebboh wrote:
those look great! it seems to me from the few shots you've posted that the noctilux looks sharper in the plane of focus with the a7r than with your m shots. do feel the same way or am i just imagining it? perhaps it's just due to shooting parameters or point of focus from the small number of images i've seen.
Thanks Martin and Sebboh
Martin, wonderful set of shots!
Sebboh, yes the 50 Nocti f/1.0 on the A7r is a better combo, than on the M9/M240 IMO. I find it marginally sharper, and yet maintains the Mandler characteristics. The colors I feel are better for low light/artificial lighting, as the M9/M240 tend to blow the red channels. So for now, I have the 50 Nocti f/1.0 attached to the A4 r now
Jeff, focusing with M240 with new RF is surprisingly very accurate! In fact it is faster than LV/EVF. At f/1.0 to f/2.0 it is very accurate, but from f/2.0 to f/4.0 there is marginal back focus, and just the nature of this lens, so LV/EVF is a must here, or you can compensate for this when using the RF.
I am still having issues with the EVF in brighter ambient lighting, and using the 50 Cron Rigid DR, set at f/5.6 and exposing for the highlights, it is almost impossible to view the details. The LV LCD is fine, as you just set it to bright sunny lighting.
I've only had the A7 for a couple of days now, with very limited shooting time, but so far I'm enjoying it. I can see that it will not replace my XE-1 (the A7 is too bulky and heavy), but it may replace my 6D. MF is a breeze with the stellar EVF and peaking....
charles.K wrote:
Jeff, focusing with M240 with new RF is surprisingly very accurate! In fact it is faster than LV/EVF. At f/1.0 to f/2.0 it is very accurate, but from f/2.0 to f/4.0 there is marginal back focus, and just the nature of this lens, so LV/EVF is a must here, or you can compensate for this when using the RF.
I am still having issues with the EVF in brighter ambient lighting, and using the 50 Cron Rigid DR, set at f/5.6 and exposing for the highlights, it is almost impossible to view the details. The LV LCD is fine, as you just set it to bright sunny lighting....Show more →
Charles, with all due respect to your experience, I am skeptical that focusing with the M rangefinder is as accurate as focusing with the Sony EVF. However, I can see how the RF could be faster than using the EVF.
BTW, I haven't experienced your problems viewing details with the EVF, but I often toggle back and forth between normal and magnified view. Are you using magnified view?
Michael49, wonderful shots. Great array of lenses.
Michael nice capture of a classic.
Jeff, I use both magnified and normal viewing and no issues here. It is just the low illumination level in the evf in brighter ambient light. Other than that the evf is great. The RF can be more accurate when both the M240 and l lens are accurately calibrated, as the focusing is faster and less likely for any movement with the fine DOF. Both are great systems.
