Michiel Schierbeek
Well-known member
Thanks! I trew the 430mb of my computer.
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!
A7 or A7r
- Thread starter roanjoh
- Start date
Ario Arioldi
Member
The A7 is supposed to be faster in cAF and in operation, and will perform better at high ISO, both qualities I do not need, so my vote is for the A7r which sees to be better in every other aspects (let alone the price).
tashley
Subscriber Member
It very likely will perform better in ISO tests at the largely irrelevant pixel level but at 50% zoom or at print resolutions it will probably do about as well, for all practical purposes... treat it as a sampling device at low ISO and an oversampling device at higher ISO. Look at the DXO ISO scores of the D610 and the D800E and remember that no AA filter means less sharpening needed, which helps the appearance of higher ISO files...
Last edited:
Annna T
Active member
If the problematic color cast showing up in the corners of the Nex-7 with wide angle legacy lenses is due to the angle at which the light rays strike the sensor, then I fear that gape less micro lenses won't help a lot to solve the problem. Gape less micro lenses may just be the consequence of the higher pixels density resulting from the pixels increase.
I have a bunch of Zeiss Contax G lenses, including the 21mm and 28mm and would really like to use them on a FF body. The A7 and A7r sounds very interesting, but I will wait to hear more about them before making any choice. I don't care for lots of pixels, but rather for DR and clean noiseless sharp pictures at base ISO; this what I'd appreciate in a FF body. Too many pixels are just a hassle to handle and to store on disks.
Last edited:
V
Vivek
Guest
I have posted a link before (http://www.getdpi.com/forum/543064-post58.html): Sony Global - Sony Global - Digital Imaging - ?7R
It is not only the gapless microlenses but also angled ones. In addition, the image area is larger per active site. This is NOT the D800/D800E' sensor but a newer and better one.
A7r' s image sensor
Ben Rubinstein
Active member
I'm wondering if a larger megapixel sensor equals better tonality though for a given print size, specifically a print size not above the abilities of either megapixel count. Seems to me that it would. More pixels per area to describe changes in brightness and tones. Thoughts?
V
Vivek
Guest
Ben, Simple answer is NO.
For an stark example look at the 41MP phone vs any real camera images with a much lower pixel count.
For an stark example look at the 41MP phone vs any real camera images with a much lower pixel count.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Scientifically not sure but it makes perfect sense to me . More mpx per area equals more tighter color tone per area. Your throwing more pixel data in that area is how I look at it. MF backs this makes perfect sense as we have seen backs with smaller microns increase DR which also increases tonal range.
Ben Rubinstein
Active member
Not sure you can use that as an example. We have to assume in a comparison that each pixel is collecting a certain level of tonal value. I would not assume that for a phone camera with zillions of tiny and ineffectual pixels.
I remember taking photos using the CameraFusion adaptor I owned for a while with a 5Dc on the back of it. About 80 megapixels worth of final image. Now the old Caltar lens on the camera could not begin to give 80 megapixels worth but the smoothness and tonality of the file was to die for. Far better than anything I've ever seen since including rotational stitching and our Leaf back. When you are giving so many more pixels per inch of subject you just get far better transitions, there are far more pixels to describe those tonal transitions.
Now I don't think you can compare 25 shots flat stitched from a fat pixeled camera (the CameraFusion) to a single shot with a sensor rather over crammed with pixels (A7R) however we do know the image quality of that sensor, I know it's going to be at least as good as the D800e I use in the studio now. I think that once you have a given level of quality of pixel then the more pixels you can throw at an image, the better the tonality will be for a given print size. A bigger sensor with bigger pixels would be better but hey, I can't exactly afford that right now, neither does it fit my current usage
V
Vivek
Guest
Ben, This has been discussed to death before, has it?
Ulfric Douglas
New member
I voted A7, since that's going to be the one I'll have the most chance to get in two years' time ... assuming something horrible doesn't raise its ugly head during the first year of early-adopter use.
(Nikon shutter spray, X100 Sticky blades, and the like)
Everything depends on how the thing's going to operate with little MF lenses on it, well for me anyway.
Nothing wrong with a £15 lens on a £1200 body. :|
(Nikon shutter spray, X100 Sticky blades, and the like)
Everything depends on how the thing's going to operate with little MF lenses on it, well for me anyway.
Nothing wrong with a £15 lens on a £1200 body. :|
Ben Rubinstein
Active member
One thing is for certain, the prices of alt lenses, already high, is going to absolutely sky rocket!
V
Vivek
Guest
I am not sure about that, Ben.
It is actually the availability of the Canon EOS adapter (IS and to some extent AF- the lenses are plentiful) that makes the E mount attractive and would sell a lot of A7 and 7r. Of course there are others. The current crop of Nikon lenses are of limited use.
Ben Rubinstein
Active member
Well the NEX cameras and the 4/3 cameras have driven the prices of some even obscure lenses out of believability. Canon LTM 35mm 1.5 lens. Almost impossible to buy without haze, scratches or both. not a sharp or contrast lens with horrific coma wide open (I like it ). In 2005 selling for about $150 if you were lucky. Now sold under the ludicrous name of 'Japanese Summilux' (that name should be banned! Pretentious and not close to accurate) for close to or over $1K. That's just one example. There are some FD, Minolta, Pentax, etc lenses selling now for crazy prices, you couldn't give them away prior to the mirrorless invasion.
Point is, with that mount, you can mount pretty much every lens ever made for a 35mm camera. That's a big deal. The Canon adaptor with its glacial AF for only the most modern canon lenses is not going to make the biggest difference. You can use any lens, either designed for SLR or a rangefinder, as long as it has an aperture ring with the ability to get focus peaking and zoom in to focus right there in the viewfinder.
). In 2005 selling for about $150 if you were lucky. Now sold under the ludicrous name of 'Japanese Summilux' (that name should be banned! Pretentious and not close to accurate) for close to or over $1K. That's just one example. There are some FD, Minolta, Pentax, etc lenses selling now for crazy prices, you couldn't give them away prior to the mirrorless invasion.Point is, with that mount, you can mount pretty much every lens ever made for a 35mm camera. That's a big deal. The Canon adaptor with its glacial AF for only the most modern canon lenses is not going to make the biggest difference. You can use any lens, either designed for SLR or a rangefinder, as long as it has an aperture ring with the ability to get focus peaking and zoom in to focus right there in the viewfinder.
V
Vivek
Guest
Understood, Ben.
jonoslack
Active member
The A7R has an off-set micro-lenses array which should, in theory, offer some improvement.
Either way, based on these tests by Ron, I find the results quite promising. I am not overly concerned with the vignetting since it is easily address in post and, possibly, in camera. What I find very promising is that the images look sharp across the frame, which was my biggest grip with Leica wides on the NEX7.
Ario Arioldi
Member
I have checked the images tacken with the Summicron 28 and they are not sharp across the frame, not at all for what I can see.
May be the A7R will be a better performer in this regard, hopefully..
The 28 Summicron has significant field curvature and (even on the M9) needs to be stopped down to at least f5.6 before it is sharp across the frame.
Ario Arioldi
Member
Looking at the infinity shots I cannot find anything sharp in the corners/borders at any distance, I do not think it is a matter of field curvature.