uhoh7
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 First Sighting: A7rii Thin filter in action | |
Sam; Thank You!!
Tmuussoni wrote:
Right now I have 21 SEM, 28 Cron version #2, 50 Lux ASPH, 75 LUX and Apo-90. Out of these lenses 21SEM and 50 LUX ASPH are the lenses which could degrade a little bit with stock A7r II. I am sure my Cron 28 #2 will handle A7r II just fine as evidence by Lux 28 as both of these are designed for digital. )
Great lenses. I think it just depends on how you feel about the edges, and if you shoot landscapes. The performance of your 21, 28, and 50 will not be great on any stock Sony, and the closer to infinity you are, the worse. Centers are sharp with everything. Each of the Sonys have a slightly different filter stack and this does effect longer lenses. Charles K sold his 75 lux, which he'd been using on A7s and other versions, once he used it on the A7rii. He loved it on the A7r.
There has always been alot of confusion about M performance on Sony, since the "smearing" is really FC, so if details are closer on the edge, they can be sharp.
I shot many M lenses on stock Sony cameras and I have lots of samples. The 50 cron and 90 Summarit I found usable, but still nicer on the M9. I basically stopped using the Sony for about a year until a fellow M user, Michael, approached Kolari and asked they see if a thin filter might be possible. He wanted to get the CV 21/4 working.
On thing all the A7 cameras have in common is a thick filter stack, though it varies in composition. So a thin filter will improve nearly all M lenses wider than 50mm by alot. Kasson shows how dramatic this difference is in a series of comparisons which are mentioned in the thread. The outliers are limited: CV 21/1.8 ZM35/1.4 CV 35/1.2. Those actually are usable, and in the case of the ZM 35/1.4, quite good on stock cameras. I know of no others, including v2 corn, or 28 Lux: but if somebody has good tests at infinity to show they are, I'd love to see them.
So there is a choice. If you love a native lens, like the 21/2.8, a very good UWA, the mod will hurt performance on that lens. Kasson also documents this. If I shot native lenses seriously, I would not get a thin-filter mod. The whole reason people buy the natives is because they are so much better with the thick filter stack. The stock A7 cameras cannot be used seriously for landscape without them below 35mm FL.
Now, there is a big thread about adding external filters to address this, tuned to specific lenses. You see real improvement that way also.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1453834
You will note however that much of the latest work to get there renders those lenses useless on M bodies.
Leica M and Sony A7 are natural siblings for M lenses is many many ways. But Sony has a glass barrier in the way. Deal with that and you can shoot M lenses well on both bodies. So, you have Fred who does not have any interest in an M digital body, and mods his lens in way that it cannot be used on one. You have Gary, who buys two completely different lens sets, one for M, his main body, and one for Sony which he shoot landscapes with at times. You have me: I use one set of M lenses on my M9 and A7. Often I cannot tell which camera made the image. 
It's no rocket science. Many techs have been changing filter stacks and coverglass on all sorts of digital cameras for years. Tons of sonys are used in astro-photography right now, with part of the stack removed. Perfect native lens performance is of no consequence for them. They don't use native lenses.
Me neither
Apparition by unoh7,SEM 21 A7/mod
|
