rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
GMPhotography wrote:
Ron do want to ask you as your very involved here . Are you a bit surprised how it is running on this A7r II body or something you expected. I have future thoughts which I have not mentioned. There certainly is another Sony camera going to hit the market soon and I kind of planned on this lens hopefully even working better on it. I try and think ahead although with Sony they are a bit wild in some decisions. Just not sure what they are doing next the price of the RXr1 II going up 600 dollars overnight spells get rid of this sensor we have another in production and new body. From everything I have read this lens in the corners was not even good at F4 on older bodies and yet it does look pretty acceptable on this body. Sure 6.3 is the optimum but from what I read folks where saying even F11. I think there is more to it than just sensor stack thickness. ...Show more →
Hi Guy, sorry I missed this due to a very busy past few days, including back to back weddings. 
Based on the tests by you and Fred, the ZM does seem a bit better than I expected and compared to the impressions I had of it on the a7R, based on photos by others. I haven't actually used the lens on Sony cameras (only Leica), so can't say from personal experience if there is much, if any difference between it on the a7R and a7RII. Initial reaction to it by Sony shooters was of some disappointment, IIRC, due to the field curvature and need to stop down for the edges. While this isn't anything new with RF adapted wides on Sony cameras, the early disappointment was likely due to the otherwise stellar technical performance of the lens shown early on Leicas. It could also be the usual 'internet amplification effect' whenever there is a discussion about equipment.
It's good that you and Fred have put the effort into exploring its capabilities again because you've shown that once the compromises are understood, it's possible to maximize results with the appropriate attention to shooting details.
Early in the a7/a7R releases when I tested a bunch of RF lenses at infinity on those cameras, and posted the rather disappointing results, the easy mistake to make was to assume those lenses were simply unusable at all. IIRC, I was careful to state that while results might not be ideal for some technical near-infinity applications, the lenses could still perform acceptable in other situations. But in the TLDR norm of today, that part of the message was probably easily lost.
I don't think you can rule out some slight differences in the sensor design resulting in better performance of adapted wides on the a7RII, but my understanding is sensor stack thickness is a primary reason for the degradation compared to results on Leica or modded cameras (or on film). My understanding again, is BSI and pixel well depth should primarily affect vignetting and color shift problems. The image edge degradation seen with many older lenses (ignoring vignetting and color shift) is caused by the optical problems resulting from the placement of additional 'glass' layer(s) between the lens and the image recording surface.
Tangentially, IMO, Sony really needs to release an a9-type camera that is about an inch taller in size so there is more space to comfortably fit all the buttons and dials needed to properly operate a camera... and the design desperately needs a way to directly move the AF box around the image... but I doubt they will do much, if anything in respect to sensor topping thickness since it would then mess with what they've already established for their native FE glass... You'd think those lenses are more retrofocus in design and therefore more tolerant of minor stack thickness changes, but I haven't yet seen exit pupil distance information published for FE lenses, so can't say if this is the case.
As for prices, my understanding is the RX1 cameras are very technically demanding to manufacture and require very skilled labor... and are certainly very low volume compared to other Sony cameras. Current JPY-USD rates are a likely additional reason. It could be this kind of price change won't be the case, or as considerable, for 'bread and butter' system cameras like the a7 series that Sony needs to sell in large volumes, but I also wouldn't expect a future 'a9' camera to be a bargain (probably in the $5K range). My expectation for future Sony system camera pricing is they'll continue to move towards a price premium vs. Canikon in the high end of the mirrorless market on account of likely technologically exclusive features (probably sensor related) now that they are strong in this segment. I doubt they'll return to the a7R price point which was probably a strategy to gain a reasonable market foothold, especially if future Canon 5D and Nikon D800 cameras remain in the ~$3500 range. I don't see Sony leaving any money on the table for altruistic reasons. This could change somewhat if Canikon finally release a FF mirrorless and price it aggressively... In some ways, the current Canons with DPAF are extremely close to being mirrorless - just remove the OVF and slightly improve the shot to shot readout lag and IMO they're all set. Canon's new sensors considerably narrow the dynamic range gap of the past... so assuming they release a FF mirrorless, what's really the advantage the shooting Sony? IMO Canikon UI is far superior to Sony's and the legacy systems seem to have a much smaller list of unpublished (in the spec sheet) real world compromises. That's possibly all that's needed to keep the many still shooting those systems brand loyal. It would work for me, since so far nothing Sony has made in respect to cameras has appealed to me once I actually used them. Actually, I'd really love to see Canon (since that's what I shoot) release a hybrid OVF/EVF camera. It could potentially be the best of both worlds with the compromise being somewhat larger size than current Sony cameras. Since I find those too small anyway, not a major concern for me.
I'm very familiar with your Leica history and don't really disagree with much of your comments about Leica camera technology. Until recently, all of their digital products have seemed to be a generation or three behind... but that too is changing considering what they've been able to do with the SL (not sure how much of that is Panasonic, or someone else, but does it matter?). Consider their digital offerings in ~2006 compared to the last couple years and without doubt they have progressed at a tremendous rate. It will be very interesting to see what they do for Photokina and over the next year or two. Obviously they know their market very well and for a certain range of shooters, their product seems to be a very good fit. Unfortunately it's very expensive. The major disappointment of Leica, IMO, is not the limitations of their products, which can often be worked around. Rather, their after sales support is horrid. 1-2 months turnaround for servicing is utterly unacceptable. Given the price point and the great pre-sales experience, you would think they'd place the same focus on post-sales support!
Anyway, rambling here...
TLDR: Yes, the ZM performs somewhat better at infinity on the a7RII than I expected, but doubt it's a huge difference from the a7R and doubt future Sony cameras will see any significant change in physical sensor design, unless their engineers figure out some kind of novel solution to shooting both native and adapted short exit pupil lenses on one camera....
|
