This topic is in the 2015 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2015Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
p.5 #1Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
Duplicate post
Edited on Oct 05, 2015 at 10:47 AM · View previous versions
Edited on Oct 05, 2015 at 10:47 AM · View previous versions
Oct 04, 2015 at 01:33 PM
p.5 #2Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
For 28, the R works much better than the M
Oct 04, 2015 at 01:34 PM
p.5 #3Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
The Elmarit 28mm that I have (version 3) works really well on the Sony (having tried it on the A7s, A7II and A7rII). I'd even venture to say it works as well as it does on my M240.
Oct 05, 2015 at 09:40 AM
p.5 #4Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
Really, the M 28 2.8 works well? I was not aware. I had read issues about the M 28/2, but did not know the M 28 2.8 is okay. With the R version (version 2), the lens is sharp at infinity from wide open (not across the frame, of course). Is the M good at infinity from 2.8?
Oct 05, 2015 at 10:50 AM
p.5 #5Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
I briefly tried a Elmarit M 28 on a A7RII, and it was problematic, with significant smearing
Oct 05, 2015 at 10:58 AM
p.5 #6Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
Luvwine wrote:
Really, the M 28 2.8 works well? I was not aware. I had read issues about the M 28/2, but did not know the M 28 2.8 is okay. With the R version (version 2), the lens is sharp at infinity from wide open (not across the frame, of course). Is the M good at infinity from 2.8?
what is the definition of sharp at infinity but not across the frame? Does it mean you only look at 1/3 or 2/3 of the frame then the rest is inconsequential? Or does it mean that center and edge are reasonably sharp but you have some mid-frame resolution dip? Or does it mean that up to the edge it's sharp, but not the corners?
Really, the M 28 2.8 works well? I was not aware. I had read issues about the M 28/2, but did not know the M 28 2.8 is okay. With the R version (version 2), the lens is sharp at infinity from wide open (not across the frame, of course). Is the M good at infinity from 2.8?
what is the definition of sharp at infinity but not across the frame? Does it mean you only look at 1/3 or 2/3 of the frame then the rest is inconsequential? Or does it mean that center and edge are reasonably sharp but you have some mid-frame resolution dip? Or does it mean that up to the edge it's sharp, but not the corners?
Oct 05, 2015 at 11:51 AM
p.5 #7Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
The best two RF lenses I have seen on any version of A7(except mod) 35 or wider are the new CVs 15 and 35/1.7.
If one does not rely on native glass and has some extra funds, the Kolari Mod is a no brainer on any A7.
Then you can use many RF lenses with FE35/2.8 quality.
If one does not rely on native glass and has some extra funds, the Kolari Mod is a no brainer on any A7.
Then you can use many RF lenses with FE35/2.8 quality.
Oct 05, 2015 at 11:57 AM
p.5 #8Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
uhoh7 wrote:
The best two RF lenses I have seen on any version of A7(except mod) 35 or wider are the new CVs 15 and 35/1.7.
If one does not rely on native glass and has some extra funds, the Kolari Mod is a no brainer on any A7.
Then you can use many RF lenses with FE35/2.8 quality.
I agree, but the dilemna is that there are some fantastic lenses like the Batis 25/85 and FE 55/90. Not sure any RF or legacy glass can match the optical performance of those lenses.
The best two RF lenses I have seen on any version of A7(except mod) 35 or wider are the new CVs 15 and 35/1.7.
If one does not rely on native glass and has some extra funds, the Kolari Mod is a no brainer on any A7.
Then you can use many RF lenses with FE35/2.8 quality.
I agree, but the dilemna is that there are some fantastic lenses like the Batis 25/85 and FE 55/90. Not sure any RF or legacy glass can match the optical performance of those lenses.
Oct 05, 2015 at 12:29 PM
p.5 #9Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
hiepphotog wrote:
what is the definition of sharp at infinity but not across the frame? Does it mean you only look at 1/3 or 2/3 of the frame then the rest is inconsequential? Or does it mean that center and edge are reasonably sharp but you have some mid-frame resolution dip? Or does it mean that up to the edge it's sharp, but not the corners?
Well, I was referring to the fact that the lens is not sharp into zones b and c until stopped down as that is the nature of the lens (and of most lenses). It is an amazing lens and I had a very difficult time deciding whether to keep it as I have the Zeiss Batis 25 and wanted to fund some other lens purchases and did not want to keep both. The R28 v. 2 is a great lens. The Batis 25 does have a couple of advantages: autofocus and it is sharp into the corners by F4, which is remarkable. At F8, the corners of the Leica R 28 v. 2 are good, but before F8, there is some softness into the extreme corners. The MTF bears this out. Notwithstanding this nitpick, the Leica is a highly resolving lens with beautiful colors, is easy to focus, and has first rate bokeh. There is not much not to like. I did a bit of a comparison here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1385378/0
Luvwine wrote
Really, the M 28 2.8 works well? I was not aware. I had read issues about the M 28/2, but did not know the M 28 2.8 is okay. With the R version (version 2), the lens is sharp at infinity from wide open (not across the frame, of course). Is the M good at infinity from 2.8?Well, I was referring to the fact that the lens is not sharp into zones b and c until stopped down as that is the nature of the lens (and of most lenses). It is an amazing lens and I had a very difficult time deciding whether to keep it as I have the Zeiss Batis 25 and wanted to fund some other lens purchases and did not want to keep both. The R28 v. 2 is a great lens. The Batis 25 does have a couple of advantages: autofocus and it is sharp into the corners by F4, which is remarkable. At F8, the corners of the Leica R 28 v. 2 are good, but before F8, there is some softness into the extreme corners. The MTF bears this out. Notwithstanding this nitpick, the Leica is a highly resolving lens with beautiful colors, is easy to focus, and has first rate bokeh. There is not much not to like. I did a bit of a comparison here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1385378/0
Oct 05, 2015 at 12:33 PM
p.5 #10Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
Luvwine wrote:
what is the definition of sharp at infinity but not across the frame? Does it mean you only look at 1/3 or 2/3 of the frame then the rest is inconsequential? Or does it mean that center and edge are reasonably sharp but you have some mid-frame resolution dip? Or does it mean that up to the edge it's sharp, but not the corners?Well, I was referring to the fact that the lens is not sharp into zones b and c until stopped down as that is the nature of the lens (and of most lenses). It is an amazing lens and I had a very difficult time deciding whether to keep it as I have the Zeiss Batis 25 and wanted to fund some other lens purchases and did not want to keep both. The R28 v. 2 is a great lens. The Batis 25 does have a couple of advantages: autofocus and it is sharp into the corners by F4, which...Show more →
At least you give me something to base on
. By your definition of sharpness (to me from those shots you have the R 28 is fully sharp across the frame WO at the distance you took), neither the Cron 28 nor the Elmarit 28 M would be able to meet your need even at f/8 on a stock Sony cam.
hiepphotog wrote
Luvwine wrote
Really, the M 28 2.8 works well? I was not aware. I had read issues about the M 28/2, but did not know the M 28 2.8 is okay. With the R version (version 2), the lens is sharp at infinity from wide open (not across the frame, of course). Is the M good at infinity from 2.8?At least you give me something to base on
. By your definition of sharpness (to me from those shots you have the R 28 is fully sharp across the frame WO at the distance you took), neither the Cron 28 nor the Elmarit 28 M would be able to meet your need even at f/8 on a stock Sony cam. Oct 05, 2015 at 12:48 PM
p.5 #11Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
Luvwine wrote:
Really, the M 28 2.8 works well? I was not aware. I had read issues about the M 28/2, but did not know the M 28 2.8 is okay. With the R version (version 2), the lens is sharp at infinity from wide open (not across the frame, of course). Is the M good at infinity from 2.8?
I am specifically referring to the VIII Elmarit. For whatever reason that one works well on A7 cameras without any smearing issues.
Really, the M 28 2.8 works well? I was not aware. I had read issues about the M 28/2, but did not know the M 28 2.8 is okay. With the R version (version 2), the lens is sharp at infinity from wide open (not across the frame, of course). Is the M good at infinity from 2.8?
I am specifically referring to the VIII Elmarit. For whatever reason that one works well on A7 cameras without any smearing issues.
Oct 05, 2015 at 01:44 PM
p.5 #12Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
hiepphotog wrote:
what is the definition of sharp at infinity but not across the frame? Does it mean you only look at 1/3 or 2/3 of the frame then the rest is inconsequential? Or does it mean that center and edge are reasonably sharp but you have some mid-frame resolution dip? Or does it mean that up to the edge it's sharp, but not the corners?Well, I was referring to the fact that the lens is not sharp into zones b and c until stopped down as that is the nature of the lens (and of most lenses). It is an amazing lens and I had a very difficult time deciding whether to keep it as I have the Zeiss Batis 25 and wanted to fund some other lens purchases and did not want to keep both. The R28 v. 2 is a great lens. The Batis 25 does have a couple of advantages: autofocus and it is sharp into the corners by F4, which is remarkable. At F8, the corners of the Leica R 28 v. 2 are good, but before F8, there is some softness into the extreme corners. The MTF bears this out. Notwithstanding this nitpick, the Leica is a highly resolving lens with beautiful colors, is easy to focus, and has first rate bokeh. There is not much not to like. I did a bit of a comparison here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1385378/0At least you give me something to base on . By your definition of sharpness (to me from those shots you have the R 28 is fully sharp across the frame WO at the distance you took), neither the Cron 28 nor the Elmarit 28 M would be able to meet your need even at f/8 on a stock Sony cam.
I never said that was my need. I like the lens a lot! I just was being careful not to overstate the merits of the lens. I would love to own that lens again some day. I just did not think I could justify keeping it given the makeup of the rest of my lens lineup.
Luvwine wrote
hiepphotog wrote
Luvwine wrote
Really, the M 28 2.8 works well? I was not aware. I had read issues about the M 28/2, but did not know the M 28 2.8 is okay. With the R version (version 2), the lens is sharp at infinity from wide open (not across the frame, of course). Is the M good at infinity from 2.8?https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1385378/0
. By your definition of sharpness (to me from those shots you have the R 28 is fully sharp across the frame WO at the distance you took), neither the Cron 28 nor the Elmarit 28 M would be able to meet your need even at f/8 on a stock Sony cam. I never said that was my need. I like the lens a lot! I just was being careful not to overstate the merits of the lens. I would love to own that lens again some day. I just did not think I could justify keeping it given the makeup of the rest of my lens lineup.
Oct 05, 2015 at 03:11 PM
p.5 #13Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
Zony_user wrote:
If one does not rely on native glass and has some extra funds, the Kolari Mod is a no brainer on any A7.
Then you can use many RF lenses with FE35/2.8 quality.I agree, but the dilemna is that there are some fantastic lenses like the Batis 25/85 and FE 55/90. Not sure any RF or legacy glass can match the optical performance of those lenses.
Are you kidding? You know better than that.
The 25 is easily excelled and the 90 is easily equalled, with a thin sensor stack, by many lenses, and many smaller lenses with great builds and nice MF.
The reason those lenses seem so spectacular is because there are literally no great alternatives without a mod.
When your sensor is right suddenly there are many many great options, and even the long lenses are better
uhoh7 wrote
The best two RF lenses I have seen on any version of A7(except mod) 35 or wider are the new CVs 15 and 35/1.7.If one does not rely on native glass and has some extra funds, the Kolari Mod is a no brainer on any A7.
Then you can use many RF lenses with FE35/2.8 quality.
Are you kidding? You know better than that.
The 25 is easily excelled and the 90 is easily equalled, with a thin sensor stack, by many lenses, and many smaller lenses with great builds and nice MF.
The reason those lenses seem so spectacular is because there are literally no great alternatives without a mod.
When your sensor is right suddenly there are many many great options, and even the long lenses are better
Oct 06, 2015 at 09:13 AM
p.5 #14Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
I am not so sure that the Batis 25 is easily equaled let alone "excelled". I don't know of any lens at that focal length that is as well corrected for modern sensors as the Batis 25. It is sharp almost corner to corner by F 2.8 and truly corner to corner by F4 with fine microcontrast. Combined with its advantage of autofocus, including eye AF, I am not sure what lenses can compare.
I agree that there is a lot of wonderful legacy glass at 85/90 that equals or is close enough to the performance of the new Sony lenses (about to post a query on that point regarding the macro particularly). As an owner of the Leica 90/2 AA, I have not been in a hurry to order the Batis 85. The Batis 85 does have the huge advantage of AF and eye AF, however.
Edited on Oct 06, 2015 at 11:47 AM · View previous versions
I agree that there is a lot of wonderful legacy glass at 85/90 that equals or is close enough to the performance of the new Sony lenses (about to post a query on that point regarding the macro particularly). As an owner of the Leica 90/2 AA, I have not been in a hurry to order the Batis 85. The Batis 85 does have the huge advantage of AF and eye AF, however.
Edited on Oct 06, 2015 at 11:47 AM · View previous versions
Oct 06, 2015 at 10:28 AM
p.5 #15Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
uhoh7 wrote:
Are you kidding? You know better than that.
The 25 is easily excelled and the 90 is easily equalled, with a thin sensor stack, by many lenses, and many smaller lenses with great builds and nice MF.
The reason those lenses seem so spectacular is because there are literally no great alternatives without a mod.
When your sensor is right suddenly there are many many great options, and even the long lenses are better
I've actually been wondering if my 90AA will perform any better with Kolari mod. Will it actually match the sharpness of the FE 90?
I also have the WATE, Batis 25, FE 55, and 135 Tele-Elmar-M. So that's two native lenses and three RF lenses. Will the mod be worth it for me?
Oct 06, 2015 at 11:33 AM
p.5 #16Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
Perhaps I have my head in the sand, but I wonder about how much a Kolari mod will help longer glass. I do still have both the A7r and the A7r2. I have been tempted to get the a7r modded, but the thing is that the A7r2 is actually the camera I prefer to use legacy glass on due to the IBIS and the ability to set shutter speeds combined with auto ISO. I guess I just need a second A7r2, do the mod, and then compare. Don't think that I am going there just yet, however....
Oct 06, 2015 at 11:43 AM
p.5 #17Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
Luvwine wrote:
Perhaps I have my head in the sand, but I wonder about how much a Kolari mod will help longer glass. I do still have both the A7r and the A7r2. I have been tempted to get the a7r modded, but the thing is that the A7r2 is actually the camera I prefer to use legacy glass on due to the IBIS and the ability to set shutter speeds combined with auto ISO. I guess I just need a second A7r2, do the mod, and then compare. Don't think that I am going there just yet, however....
While there might be some theoretical benefit with long glass (I'll define that as over 75mm), it's probably pretty marginal. Lloyd Chambers documented improvements with the 50mm APO-Summicron, so it's not strictly a WA thing, but the degree of improvement is certainly less as the exit pupil distance increases and aperture decreases.
Michael
Perhaps I have my head in the sand, but I wonder about how much a Kolari mod will help longer glass. I do still have both the A7r and the A7r2. I have been tempted to get the a7r modded, but the thing is that the A7r2 is actually the camera I prefer to use legacy glass on due to the IBIS and the ability to set shutter speeds combined with auto ISO. I guess I just need a second A7r2, do the mod, and then compare. Don't think that I am going there just yet, however....
While there might be some theoretical benefit with long glass (I'll define that as over 75mm), it's probably pretty marginal. Lloyd Chambers documented improvements with the 50mm APO-Summicron, so it's not strictly a WA thing, but the degree of improvement is certainly less as the exit pupil distance increases and aperture decreases.
Michael
Oct 06, 2015 at 04:01 PM
p.5 #18Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
Luvwine wrote:
Perhaps I have my head in the sand, but I wonder about how much a Kolari mod will help longer glass. I do still have both the A7r and the A7r2. I have been tempted to get the a7r modded, but the thing is that the A7r2 is actually the camera I prefer to use legacy glass on due to the IBIS and the ability to set shutter speeds combined with auto ISO. I guess I just need a second A7r2, do the mod, and then compare. Don't think that I am going there just yet, however....
My own comparison shows that the Contax G 90 (or even the Contax 85/1.2) benefits from the mod. It's not that substantial however.
Perhaps I have my head in the sand, but I wonder about how much a Kolari mod will help longer glass. I do still have both the A7r and the A7r2. I have been tempted to get the a7r modded, but the thing is that the A7r2 is actually the camera I prefer to use legacy glass on due to the IBIS and the ability to set shutter speeds combined with auto ISO. I guess I just need a second A7r2, do the mod, and then compare. Don't think that I am going there just yet, however....
My own comparison shows that the Contax G 90 (or even the Contax 85/1.2) benefits from the mod. It's not that substantial however.
Oct 06, 2015 at 05:57 PM
p.5 #19Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
mdemeyer wrote:
While there might be some theoretical benefit with long glass (I'll define that as over 75mm), it's probably pretty marginal. Lloyd Chambers documented improvements with the 50mm APO-Summicron, so it's not strictly a WA thing, but the degree of improvement is certainly less as the exit pupil distance increases and aperture decreases.
Michael
I'm also thinking about the mod. Do you know if it improves anything other than improving corner and edge sharpness?
Luvwine wrote
Perhaps I have my head in the sand, but I wonder about how much a Kolari mod will help longer glass. I do still have both the A7r and the A7r2. I have been tempted to get the a7r modded, but the thing is that the A7r2 is actually the camera I prefer to use legacy glass on due to the IBIS and the ability to set shutter speeds combined with auto ISO. I guess I just need a second A7r2, do the mod, and then compare. Don't think that I am going there just yet, however....Michael
I'm also thinking about the mod. Do you know if it improves anything other than improving corner and edge sharpness?
Oct 06, 2015 at 06:43 PM
p.5 #20Sony A7RII with leica standard M lenses?
tchirath wrote:
I'm also thinking about the mod. Do you know if it improves anything other than improving corner and edge sharpness?
Sharpness is what improves by reducing astigmatism as you move away from the center of the field or, for large aperture lenses, even in the center of the field. There can be changes to field curvature that some have noted. It will move closer to the design characteristics of the lens, if the lens is designed either for film or for a thin (i.e. Leica) sensor stack. Whether that's an improvement or not depends on whether you consider the design characteristic of the lens to be desirable in that regard.
Michael
I'm also thinking about the mod. Do you know if it improves anything other than improving corner and edge sharpness?
Sharpness is what improves by reducing astigmatism as you move away from the center of the field or, for large aperture lenses, even in the center of the field. There can be changes to field curvature that some have noted. It will move closer to the design characteristics of the lens, if the lens is designed either for film or for a thin (i.e. Leica) sensor stack. Whether that's an improvement or not depends on whether you consider the design characteristic of the lens to be desirable in that regard.
Michael
Oct 06, 2015 at 08:59 PM