k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Sony A7R + Novoflex NEX/LER + Novoflex LEA-R + Leitz 560/6.8 (wrongly labeled 560/5.6) with Novoflex Slow Focusing Tube
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
A7r - and why I'm keeping it ...
- Thread starter k-hawinkler
- Start date
Sony A7R + Novoflex NEX/LER + Novoflex LEA-R + Leitz 560/6.8 (wrongly labeled 560/5.6) with Novoflex Slow Focusing Tube
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Sony A7R + Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 2.8/35 ZA T*
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Sony A7R + Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 2.8/35 ZA T*
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Image at 16%, Sony A7R + Novoflex NEX/LER with ASTAT-NEX + Leica Vario-Elmarit-R 1:2.8-4.5/28-90 ASPH. E67 on Gitzo GT1541T + RRS BH-30 Pro.
Focus was on the facilities building at the next mesa, ISO 100, f/11, 1/20 s, focal length 90 mm, shot with 2 s delay.
Image at 25% http://winklers.smugmug.com/photos/i-WR3NRWJ/0/O/i-WR3NRWJ.jpg
Image at 50% http://winklers.smugmug.com/photos/i-MHrg7DH/0/O/i-MHrg7DH.jpg
Image at 100% http://winklers.smugmug.com/photos/i-G3N5RCV/0/O/i-G3N5RCV.jpg
__________________
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
100% crop.
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Here are some quick measurements I just did.
Leica M to Sony E Adapter: Inner Diameter Measurements
Phigment ............ 30.87 mm
Hawk's Factory .. 36.01 mm
Fotodiox ............. 41.54 mm
Novoflex ............. 41.66 mm
Fotodiox Pro ...... 41.74 mm
Metabones black 41.83 mm
Metabones red ... 41.84 mm
The inner diameters are not uniform. They vary a little bit.
I measured the largest diameter of each adapter I could find.
Based on these measurements my Phigment and Hawk's Factory adapter are too small for FF.
I have found major vignetting for 90 and 135 mm focal length for the Phigment but not the Novoflex adapter.
Phigment LM-NEX: Electronic Leica -> NEX Adapter - FM Forums
The lasted Hawk's Factory adapter inner diameter is now reportedly 40.00 mm.
The diameters of the other adapters seem fairly close to each other.
Leica M to Sony E Adapter: Inner Diameter Measurements
Phigment ............ 30.87 mm
Hawk's Factory .. 36.01 mm
Fotodiox ............. 41.54 mm
Novoflex ............. 41.66 mm
Fotodiox Pro ...... 41.74 mm
Metabones black 41.83 mm
Metabones red ... 41.84 mm
The inner diameters are not uniform. They vary a little bit.
I measured the largest diameter of each adapter I could find.
Based on these measurements my Phigment and Hawk's Factory adapter are too small for FF.
I have found major vignetting for 90 and 135 mm focal length for the Phigment but not the Novoflex adapter.
Phigment LM-NEX: Electronic Leica -> NEX Adapter - FM Forums
The lasted Hawk's Factory adapter inner diameter is now reportedly 40.00 mm.
The diameters of the other adapters seem fairly close to each other.
Ron Pfister
Member
Thanks for posting these measurements, Karl-Heinz. Might be worth while posting this in the adapter thread, too.
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Thanks. I agree, together with Paul Habsch's explanations of phigmenttech.ca that he posted here.
Leica User Forum - Einzelnen Beitrag anzeigen - The Sony A7 thread [Merged]
Somebody else also posted measurements for the Voigtländer adapter here.
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/2580450-post3682.html
Again, as with the Phigment adapter, the plastic circuit board has a narrower inside diameter as the wider metal part.
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
This evening I had time to shoot the Sony A7R with the Leica Vario-Elmar-R 1:4.2/105-280 wide open and an Novoflex adapter on a tripod.
Facing away from the Sun within a matter of just a few minutes colors changed
from this
to this
. The last
image was taken in the same light with the Universal Lens Calibrator from Capture One Complete.
These images are OOC JPGs and only reduces in size, no further processing. AWB was used.
Facing away from the Sun within a matter of just a few minutes colors changed
from this
image was taken in the same light with the Universal Lens Calibrator from Capture One Complete.
These images are OOC JPGs and only reduces in size, no further processing. AWB was used.
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Facing towards the Sun I captured these spectacles.
Again, OOC JPGs, no further processing. AWB was used.
The intensity and fidelity of the colors are truly amazing.
The following image was taken in the same light with the Universal Lens Calibrator from Capture One Complete.
Again, OOC JPGs, no further processing. AWB was used.
The intensity and fidelity of the colors are truly amazing.
The following image was taken in the same light with the Universal Lens Calibrator from Capture One Complete.
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Why not have some fun and start a competition shooting Christmas lights? :ROTFL:
Canon 5D Mk III vs. Sony A7 vs. LEICA M typ 240 Image*Quality*Comparison
:worthless:
Canon 5D Mk III vs. Sony A7 vs. LEICA M typ 240 Image*Quality*Comparison
:worthless:
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Here is a shot with my Sony A7R + Leica WATE 16-18-21/4 @ 21 mm, reflecting pretty well what I saw with my eyes. Image not cropped, but of course downsized.
Now let's make the image waaaaay too bright. Image still seems to be fairly well behaved though.
So far my Sony A7R + Leica WATE 16-18-21/4 seem to have passed all my tests with flying colors! :clap:
Now let's make the image waaaaay too bright. Image still seems to be fairly well behaved though.
So far my Sony A7R + Leica WATE 16-18-21/4 seem to have passed all my tests with flying colors! :clap:
Last edited:
V
Vivek
Guest
:ROTFL: :thumbs:
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Leica WATE - Universal Lens Calibrator • Observation
When I used the Universal Lens Calibrator ULC from CAPTURE ONE COMPLETE for the Leica Wide-Angle-Tri-Elmar WATE 16-18-21/4 lens on a Sony A7R camera I noticed the reference image was asymmetrical. Not good!
Hmm. CAPTURE ONE COMPLETE has ULC Tips for use. Simple use 1 tip states: "When taking a reference image, the board should be as close to the lens as possible. If possible, remove the lens hood." Hmm.
Well, the problem with the WATE is that the front lens element protrudes for 16 mm focal length if one removes the hood. Removing the hood makes it difficult to put the white plastic ULC board in front of the lens for accurate measurements. So I left the hood on.
Next observation is the lens hood has a triangular shaped hole only in the upper left hand corner so that the hood doesn't block the view too much when used with a rangefinder. Could it be that this hole in combination with the white plastic ULC board gives rise to the asymmetry in the resulting reference image?
Short answer: Yes, at least in part. Here is the proof for the wide open lens at 16 mm on A7R.
First, reference image for unmodified hood.
Second, reference image for modified hood, hole covered up with black electrician's tape.
Voilà, asymmetry partially explained. However, there still seems to be another smaller component, probably due to other factors like adapter and/or lens.
Next question, how should one use the hood in actual shooting, with or without hole?
Answer: Better with taped up hole in hood, reflecting the reference measurement situation.
But it probably doesn't make a significant difference. Reason being:
Without the white plastic ULC board in front of the lens, light entering from behind through the hole doesn't get reflected back towards the lens.
So, typical rangefinder use should be unproblematic. But when taking the reference image, the hole in the hood should be covered up with a non-reflecting material.
That would be my guess.
Here is an example, going back to the 16 mm image in post #57.
This image was shot with the hood, the triangular shaped hole not covered up.
Now we apply the first reference image that was generated with the triangular shaped hole not covered up.
Finally we apply to the original image the reference image that was created with the hole in the hood covered with tape.
In the last image the upper left corner is just a tad brighter, similar to the other 3 corners.
One can easily see the difference in brightness by loading these 3 images into Preview and flipping through them.
When I used the Universal Lens Calibrator ULC from CAPTURE ONE COMPLETE for the Leica Wide-Angle-Tri-Elmar WATE 16-18-21/4 lens on a Sony A7R camera I noticed the reference image was asymmetrical. Not good!
Hmm. CAPTURE ONE COMPLETE has ULC Tips for use. Simple use 1 tip states: "When taking a reference image, the board should be as close to the lens as possible. If possible, remove the lens hood." Hmm.
Well, the problem with the WATE is that the front lens element protrudes for 16 mm focal length if one removes the hood. Removing the hood makes it difficult to put the white plastic ULC board in front of the lens for accurate measurements. So I left the hood on.
Next observation is the lens hood has a triangular shaped hole only in the upper left hand corner so that the hood doesn't block the view too much when used with a rangefinder. Could it be that this hole in combination with the white plastic ULC board gives rise to the asymmetry in the resulting reference image?
Short answer: Yes, at least in part. Here is the proof for the wide open lens at 16 mm on A7R.
First, reference image for unmodified hood.
Second, reference image for modified hood, hole covered up with black electrician's tape.
Voilà, asymmetry partially explained. However, there still seems to be another smaller component, probably due to other factors like adapter and/or lens.
Next question, how should one use the hood in actual shooting, with or without hole?
Answer: Better with taped up hole in hood, reflecting the reference measurement situation.
But it probably doesn't make a significant difference. Reason being:
Without the white plastic ULC board in front of the lens, light entering from behind through the hole doesn't get reflected back towards the lens.
So, typical rangefinder use should be unproblematic. But when taking the reference image, the hole in the hood should be covered up with a non-reflecting material.
That would be my guess.
Here is an example, going back to the 16 mm image in post #57.
This image was shot with the hood, the triangular shaped hole not covered up.
Now we apply the first reference image that was generated with the triangular shaped hole not covered up.
Finally we apply to the original image the reference image that was created with the hole in the hood covered with tape.
In the last image the upper left corner is just a tad brighter, similar to the other 3 corners.
One can easily see the difference in brightness by loading these 3 images into Preview and flipping through them.
Last edited:
tashley
Subscriber Member
I agree with all the above K-H… of course, best practice is always to shoot the reference frame exactly as you'll shoot the shot itself but the 'hole in the hood' scenario is an exception. The other thing these perspex sheets can do, and you have to really look out for it, is catch light from their own sides: if the sun is glancing strongly off one edge it can transmit through the sheet and change the result quite strongly. It's a real 'gotcha' and one of the reasons to use the smallest sheet you can correctly deploy and to make sure that it is properly shaded.
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Thanks Tim.
The sun from the side was the first thing I learned to avoid. That sure did mess up one of my first reference images. So, I now take these reference images in a place with an open sky and a building between me and the sun, or at a minimum i use my own shadow to avoid this issue.
I also would like to thank you for having expounded repeatedly on this method. That's how I learned about it. It's easy to do and very convenient.
Thank you.
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
A7R+Vario-Elmar-R 105-280/4.2 - Shutter Shock?
Similar to post #74 of http://www.getdpi.com/forum/554027-post74.html one can also try to stabilize a Sony A7R and a Leica Vario-Elmar-R 105-280/4.2 when used on a tripod.
The system then looks something like this, supporting the center of gravity..
In order to answer the question how this setup performs I took photographs of a kitchen scale like this.
Focus was near the top of the printed text.
To cover a wide parameter set for exposure times I then took 54 shots according to the following table.
The OOC JPGs from the A7R are available here: 2013-12-22 A7R Shutter Shock - winklers' Photos
Please let me know if you see any signs of shutter shock in these full size images, arranged by ISO and aperture. Thanks.
Similar to post #74 of http://www.getdpi.com/forum/554027-post74.html one can also try to stabilize a Sony A7R and a Leica Vario-Elmar-R 105-280/4.2 when used on a tripod.
The system then looks something like this, supporting the center of gravity..
In order to answer the question how this setup performs I took photographs of a kitchen scale like this.
Focus was near the top of the printed text.
To cover a wide parameter set for exposure times I then took 54 shots according to the following table.
The OOC JPGs from the A7R are available here: 2013-12-22 A7R Shutter Shock - winklers' Photos
Please let me know if you see any signs of shutter shock in these full size images, arranged by ISO and aperture. Thanks.
Re: A7R+Vario-Elmar-R 105-280/4.2 - Shutter Shock?
That is a very solid looking support. I was looking at the RRS site a couple of days ago looking for a way to join the camera body to a lens foot mount to eliminate vibration. I was figuring a rail arranement might be available but what you've got there looks very custom and optimized for that lens. Was it custom made?
Regards,
John
KH:Similar to post #74 of http://www.getdpi.com/forum/554027-post74.html one can also try to stabilize a Sony A7R and a Leica Vario-Elmar-R 105-280/4.2 when used on a tripod.
The system then looks something like this, supporting the center of gravity..
Please let me know if you see any signs of shutter shock in these full size images, arranged by ISO and aperture. Thanks.
That is a very solid looking support. I was looking at the RRS site a couple of days ago looking for a way to join the camera body to a lens foot mount to eliminate vibration. I was figuring a rail arranement might be available but what you've got there looks very custom and optimized for that lens. Was it custom made?
Regards,
John