V
Vivek
Guest
There must be something wrong with his tripod and such. I bet that the results will be even better (even lower shutter speeds- all leaves will freeze to pose, charts will stay put) on the M10.
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!
I said that with tongue in cheek.If you're referring to the M240, his findings were very similar to those with the A7R as far as Leica-R telephoto lenses are concerned. The tripod used is likely an RRS TVC-34 with an Arca Cube.
Fantastic! Thanks for making the effort! :thumbs:I have heard from Sony and they want sample files to send to engineering. This is at least a step forward.
Good news Victor load them up.I have heard from Sony and they want sample files to send to engineering. This is at least a step forward.
Victor
You might also suggest that the Sony engineers buy a subscription to Lloyd Chambers review site. It's only a guess, and a cynical one at that, but I suspect that the Sony engineers don't do the kind of field testing that Chambers does.Good news Victor load them up.
I doubt that Sony engineers will engage in testing every lens in every mount. The expectations from many in the various forums seems to be that this $2000 Sony camera should be able to replace DSLRs, the very-expensive M240, even more expensive MF kit and then some.You might also suggest that the Sony engineers buy a subscription to Lloyd Chambers review site. It's only a guess, and a cynical one at that, but I suspect that the Sony engineers don't do the kind of field testing that Chambers does.
That is a load of BS! :thumbdown:You might also suggest that the Sony engineers buy a subscription to Lloyd Chambers review site. It's only a guess, and a cynical one at that, but I suspect that the Sony engineers don't do the kind of field testing that Chambers does.
You assumed, inaccurately, that I was pointing to the tests on Lloyd Chambers' site assessing the performance of the A7R with Leica M lenses. Not so. I should have been clearer. I was referring to the tests on the effects of shutter vibration with longer lenses. Yes, those tests were done with non-native FE lenses, but the effects should still be demonstrable with any long lens. The issue is whether a particular range of shutter speeds degrades sharpness compared to faster shutter speeds. You aren't testing absolute performance of the lens, just relative performance where only the shutter speed changes. There are some other anomalies that Chambers picked up with the 35mm FE lens that may be fixable in firmware or software.I doubt that Sony engineers will engage in testing every lens in every mount. The expectations from many in the various forums seems to be that this $2000 Sony camera should be able to replace DSLRs, the very-expensive M240, even more expensive MF kit and then some.
I expect Sony would much prefer to see their native lens line succeed. So far, it seems the 35 and 55 are as good as it gets in the 35mm format.
And if they were to stumble across Lloyd Chamber's site they would feel very pleased with themselves to read comments like this:
"Now published in my review of the Sony FE 35mm f/2.8 Sonnar is a new Sony A7R ƒ/2.8 - ƒ/4 - ƒ/5.6 aperture series (Santa Claus Lights), which is mighty impressive. As in state of the art best available with any camera or lens at 35mm.
Which makes the Sony 35mm f/2.8 Sonnar ZA lens a steal at about $798.
Mated to the about $2298 Sony A7R, you get world-class rig for $2000 less than the cost of a Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux lens alone, and with superior results in several ways."
Yes.... This has nothing to do with the type of lens only the focal length. This is a shutter vibration issue that manifests itself at certain shutter speeds. The vibration disappears with exposures 1s and longer and 1/250 and shorter at least with my 90mm. Much longer lenses may require shorter exposures.The issue is whether a particular range of shutter speeds degrades sharpness compared to faster shutter speeds. You aren't testing absolute performance of the lens, just relative performance where only the shutter speed changes.
Mr. Lovisolo, You and I need a subscription. That is the problem. :ROTFL:Shooting handheld, I don't have experience of shutter vibration. (must admit I have relatively steady hands, despite age, lol)
This example is 1/20 iso 2000 summicron m 50 f2, see movement on chin as he was probably speaking
this one 1/50 with elmarit m 90
both are crops, and sharpening has been added by flickr without request....
I tried to duplicate the vibration issue with my old but sturdy Fatif tripod, with the 90, but I have been unsuccessful to obtain it, so i think that probably the problem is related to the camera-tripod combination.
You can't compare a Compur or Copal shutter with any reflex or focal plane shutter camera. There is nothing better than a leaf shutter/view camera for slow shutter speeds. Never ever had a vibration problem with a view camera.Yes...... I found out about the shutter shake with the DF very quickly. Couldn't use my 150 lens at all in the danger shutter speed zones and sent it back to Dave at CI. I don't use the DF at all... it sits on a shelf. I can use my Alpa on a flimsy Gitzo Traveler tripod and get tac sharp images at any shutter speed and/or focal length. There is nothing like a leaf shutter.
Victor