p.23 #3 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
mcbroomf wrote:
Sweet, thanks
Looks much better. I typically include foreground so I may be OK with this at ~F8.
Mike
Edit : Oooh, nasty sensor flare off that flagpole
What surprised me is that I don't think one needs to deal with colorshift PP at least at f/8. The lens is better on M9 and M240, but these look pretty decent to me. The flare of the pole...well sun was very very sharp against a very shiny pole. So bit unusual. Shooting landscapes into the sun, with sun visible in frame, I would check for sensor flare before leaving the site.
p.23 #6 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
naturephoto1 wrote:
Hi Nico and Charles,
Thanks for running the tests.
Nico,
Please do not forget to check the Minolta CLE 28mm f2.8 lens particularly on the modified A7r. I know that several of us are interested for both cameras including Derek and myself.
Charles,
Looking forward to any tests with the WATE as that is my only WA Leica M lens. I just received an M 90mm f2.5 Summarit as my only other Leica M lens, but I do not expect any or very little improvement for the Summarit.
Thanks in advance.
Rich
Hi Rich,
I still need to try the 35 Lux FLE and the WATE. I suspect there will be different degrees of improvements. There is a clarity to the files, not evident on the computer screen that I feel there is improvement overall with most lenses with the proviso lenses not specifically designed for the thicker filter glass.
Hi Ron,
The turnaround for the mod can be quite quick if you request specifically. In my case it was about 1 week. I was only using the A7r with the WATE, so having the A7rM it will be assigned to the WATE, 35 Lux FLE, 50 Lux Asph and 50 Cron DR will be great
p.23 #9 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
First of all, thanks for all these tests. Now, have any of you tried native lenses on your modified a7? It'd be nice to know how much it affects their performance before commiting (I've got only one A7).
Thanks!
p.23 #10 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
Some test shots this evening.
A7rM with the WATE and 35 Lux FLE
First two with the WATE (f/5.6 and f/4), third with the 35 Lux FLE f/4 and the last WATE f/5.6. More testing is needed but there is an improvement with both lenses.
p.23 #11 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
Shot this morning with A7rM and Loxia 35 at f/8.
I do notice with the Loxia 35, that even with f/5.6 or 8, that it is very important to find the correct focus point for landscape style shots. This is also valid for the A7II and A7s. If not, the focus at infinity is not nailed which I would assume with the DOF. Just an observation
Feb 26, 2015 at 08:16 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.23 #12 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
charles.K wrote:
Shot this morning with A7rM and Loxia 35 at f/8.
I do notice with the Loxia 35, that even with f/5.6 or 8, that it is very important to find the correct focus point for landscape style shots. This is also valid for the A7II and A7s. If not, the focus at infinity is not nailed which I would assume with the DOF. Just an observation
So, is the Loxia 35 a bit worse on the modified camera or is it hard to tell or as Charlie has predicted is it better? I can't tell much from your image, but it would be good to know.
p.23 #13 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
Hi Steve,
The Loxia 35 is about the same I feel. It is more how the Loxia 35 operates with focusing on the correct landscape feature. More testing would need to be done no doubt, but for now I am happy to use the lenses that work well.
I really love the 35 Lux FLE and 50 Lux Asph on the A7rM.
p.23 #14 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
Interestingly, Sean Reid just performed new tests on both the Loxia 35 and 50 at much longer, infinity type landscape distances. I'm happy to see he will begin doing these longer distance tests which are much more relevant for landscape type work.
The Loxia 50 did quite well corner to corner but, as expected, the Loxia 35 was really not that good at the borders and corners on the A7r (just as I found with the sample I tried). He speculated - like many around here - it must be due to the cover glass that Sony is using but, of course, as this lens is intended for the Sony's... Anyway, I'm surprised the performance would not be better on the A7x Mod.
p.23 #15 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
Lenses having their own field curvature is nothing new. If you were shooting that lens for landscapes you'd probably just want to pull back the focus a bit so that both the center and the edges are within the depth of field.
p.23 #16 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
Taylor Sherman wrote:
Lenses having their own field curvature is nothing new. If you were shooting that lens for landscapes you'd probably just want to pull back the focus a bit so that both the center and the edges are within the depth of field.
That's not going to solve the problem with this particular lens, at least based on what I saw from the one I tested.
What would be interesting to see is a comparison between the ZM 35/2 Biogon and the Loxia 35 on a modded A7...and for kicks, maybe toss the ZM 35/1.4 into the mix.
p.23 #17 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
Tariq Gibran wrote:
That's not going to solve the problem with this particular lens, at least based on what I saw from the one I tested.
What would be interesting to see is a comparison between the ZM 35/2 Biogon and the Loxia 35 on a modded A7...and for kicks, maybe toss the ZM 35/1.4 into the mix.
That's kinda what i was thinking, too. The Loxia can't really be the same, but I appreciate the trouble when there is no good infinity stop: for me finding the best infinity focus on the A7 is truly a migraine inspiring PITA if you really want it perfect.
But I did a serious attempt with the ZM35/2 soon after I got the camera back: this is f/5.6 a7m_zm35-2_f56 (1 of 1) by unoh7, on Flickr
I also have the same view at f/2 and f/4 but the edges are not in. Anyway what I love to know is how does the shot above compare with a Loxia at f/5.6 on the stock A7 with similar distance and detail?
A close look at the shot above shows the Kaaragon pretty impressive to my eye, fully landscape capable at this aperture with the typical extreme corner drop off also seen on the M9, but otherwise......good
This lens is still great close in on the A7.mod, so where does the Loxia stand to this benchmark?
It sounds like the bet Steve and I have will take some time to settle
One more tidbit; the same scene, more light, and the M-Rokkor 40/2 at F/4 ! 40:2 f:4-001 by unoh7, on Flickr
You guys tell me which wins on the edges in those two samples (with both at f/8 the Rokkor has it I think).
I forgot how nice the little 40cron clone really is, I will have to take it out tomorrow.
Wait one last contender, the CV 35/1.4 at f/4 also!
p.23 #18 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
The biggest question for me remains how close a modded camera comes to matching native performance on a digital M? I guess I need to try one for myself, though the results here look great.
Some of the early samples of the 35/1.4 on stock a7 series cameras showed pretty bad edge degradation. If Nico is right and the modded a7R is about one stop behind a digital M in edge performance, the 35/1.4 should be pretty spectacular by f/4. On the M240 it's already amazing across the frame at f/2.8. The ZM35/2 was always touted as a great landscape lens for the M system, but does trail off a bit at the very edges, as Charlie has demonstrated. It seems the Loxia, based on MTF, doesn't really improve in this respect, though central performance looks really strong.
p.23 #19 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
rscheffler wrote:
The biggest question for me remains how close a modded camera comes to matching native performance on a digital M? I guess I need to try one for myself, though the results here look great.
Some of the early samples of the 35/1.4 on stock a7 series cameras showed pretty bad edge degradation. If Nico is right and the modded a7R is about one stop behind a digital M in edge performance, the 35/1.4 should be pretty spectacular by f/4. On the M240 it's already amazing across the frame at f/2.8. The ZM35/2 was always touted as a great landscape lens for the M system, but does trail off a bit at the very edges, as Charlie has demonstrated. It seems the Loxia, based on MTF, doesn't really improve in this respect, though central performance looks really strong.
I'm pretty confident the M240 is still noticeably better on the edges, having seen many of your images with it. For me it's not that the M standards have been reached, it's that the A7.mod reaches a stage where you no longer cringe in shots like these.
p.23 #20 · A thinner sensor stack may be possible after all!
uhoh7 wrote:
I'm pretty confident the M240 is still noticeably better on the edges, having seen many of your images with it. For me it's not that the M standards have been reached, it's that the A7.mod reaches a stage where you no longer cringe in shots like these.
Hi Charlie. Great work. I do not disagree about the A7M, but the A7rM I feel is excellent and as Nico suggested it is about 1 stop behind. With the increased resolution and DR, it is very hard to make direct comparisons. Is the 1 stop behind, because more detail is evident, or if we downsize the difference is marginal.
So far the A7rM is looking excellent with M lenses tested, WATE, 35 Lux Asph and 50 Lux Asph Yes it is more prone to dust, but no more than the M9 as we already expected. Quick test this morning with the FE 55 and it appears to work well as far as AF and operation. Close to mid distances seem fine, but I still need to test with landscapes distances.
