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!

Not impressed by the A7/A7r

Michiel Schierbeek

Well-known member
Cant wait for the Full frame Pentax to come out. How about a full frame Sigma Foveon? That would be the day. The technology is ready. The only thing holding these companies back was because everyone wanted to milk some more out of the current line ups.
That would be awesome a FF Foveon with better high ISO performance. I hope that Sony stirred things up enough to put Sigma in a faster gear to produce such a camera.
Probably they start to make some lenses for the A7's first if they are not working on them already. That is good as well :)
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
Did a shoot today, impromptu, 4 stop difference between highlights and shadows, my 5D3 couldn't hold both when exposed for highlights. Handheld with moving people. Lost for anything other than web use. Does make you rather long for those sony sensors...
 

jonoslack

Active member
Cant wait for the Full frame Pentax to come out. How about a full frame Sigma Foveon? That would be the day. The technology is ready. The only thing holding these companies back was because everyone wanted to milk some more out of the current line ups.
I'm sorry - You're talking of some kind of holy grail - Pentax limited lenses are nice. . but not many of them would be good on full frame digital . . .fovean sensors are lovely . . . but how can Sigma make a full frame camera which uses other than (the excellent) Simga lenses.

What's holding these companies back is that it's easy to make a camera with a great sensor (well, at least, some people can - mostly Sony), but it's not so easy to make the cameras work with great lenses.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I'm banking on this Sony. I am just waiting to try it out at the local drug dealers shop here in town.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I'm sorry - You're talking of some kind of holy grail - Pentax limited lenses are nice. . but not many of them would be good on full frame digital . . .fovean sensors are lovely . . . but how can Sigma make a full frame camera which uses other than (the excellent) Simga lenses.

What's holding these companies back is that it's easy to make a camera with a great sensor (well, at least, some people can - mostly Sony), but it's not so easy to make the cameras work with great lenses.
I'll add to this its easy to make a smaller sensor but tougher to make one Full Frame with glass to go with it. Thats where the rubber hits the floor board.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Im not buying anything unless it is a 36mpx sensor. I can always shoot down but can't shoot up.
That's a bi-product of working with MFD. ;)

Did a family portrait session on Friday ... with a 6 month old and 2 year old.

(What can I say ... I'm a "masochists for money" :ROTFL:)

It was one heck of a trick to get them both looking good in the same frame with the parents ... but I was also able to crop the living crap out of the cull S2 files to isolate a single head shot of the baby with a priceless expression on her face ... and then pull a 8X10 print.

- Marc
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yup Im a slut bigger is always better. LOL

Always better to have more than less. Im quoting someone I'm sure of it. LOL
 

mmbma

Active member
Surely sigma can do a mated lens/body combo like they did with the DP123Ms. Just with full frame sensors this time. (Sony started with RX1, when they didn't master the interchangeable). I cannot imagine this to be impossible for Sigma. Throw in an updated chip to make things faster, price each at around $2000.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
It's a clever strategy for those who want to use alternative lenses, but I doubt it will fulfill Sony's own strategy: Maximum profitability from system sales.

I wonder if they have sold enough cameras and lenses to make their now semi-defunct full frame DSLR system profitable, considering all investments involved.
I think this is coming from a narrow band of application thinking, and doesn't really take into account the functional differences between this A7 and Sony's full frame A99 for certain uses.

In no way do I see this camera replacing my A99 DSLR. What would replace/supplement the A99 would be a 36 meg (or more) version of the same camera. In my work, I rely on the A99's dual card capture, and image stabilization with ALL the A mount lenses of ALL focal lengths. The A7/A7R has neither.

Sony continues to provide new lenses in the A mount, I just added the Zeiss ZA50/1.4 Planar with super swift SSM AF.

My 2¢

- Marc
 

jonoslack

Active member
Surely sigma can do a mated lens/body combo like they did with the DP123Ms. Just with full frame sensors this time. (Sony started with RX1, when they didn't master the interchangeable). I cannot imagine this to be impossible for Sigma. Throw in an updated chip to make things faster, price each at around $2000.
But photography is about taking pictures, and the DP cameras weren't about taking pictures, they were just about a certain type of Image Quality.

We seem to be heading towards some kind of perfect image, without any interest in how one can get a good photo with it.

I know it's great to have 36mp . . . I know that it's great to be able to crop . . I know it's great to have lots of dynamic range . . . I know, I know . . BUT I also know that some of the best shots I've seen on the internet where taken with a crappy 2mp Kodak point and shoot. . . . .

Hey - If I shoot a wedding I want a safety net . . . If I shoot a landscape I want detail in the corners . . . I love lenses which give a recognisable look . . . I'm a victim too.

But in the final analysis - if I take a decent snap, it's because the camera is not in my way - I'm sure the Sony will do that with good Sony Zeiss lenses - but I'm not very convinced it'll do it with M lenses. More to the point, I don't think it's what it was designed for, if you want to shoot with M lenses . . . . might I suggest a Leica M . . . if you want to shoot with a Sony A7r (and I think I do) may I suggest Sony Zeiss lenses?
 

Paratom

Well-known member
The difference between Leica and Sony, is that one is a small company that struggles to keep up with demand, the other is an international conglomerate that can afford to release products that they don't even know will sell yet.

For instance, you mentioned the Leica S before, but the only exciting thing that happened in S land recently is the 45mm. And the camera itself is getting long in the tooth, seeing as it's an update of 2008 technology. In terms of becoming a complete system, I'm not worried for Sony at all.

...
I think the difference between Leica and Sony is also between bringing a new system every 12 months to follow each actual trend vs building up systems long term with continuity. (We dont talk about limited edition schnick schnack)

If I look at the images (or through the viewfinder) the "update of 2008 technology" makes me more excited than most recent cameras.

IMO the best Sony so far has been the A900, and the RX1 (even if I dont own any of them any more, I believe both are great cameras).
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Not said by someone with a TS-E itching to be unleashed. Adapters are all about using awesome exotic glass you either can't or wouldn't expect the camera manufacture to make.
If I was into T/S I would just use a Canon or Nikon DSLR and one of the excellent Canon/Nikon T/S lenses available.
But yes, I can see how it is fun to use all kind of exotic glass on a camera via adapter.
I just found out that FOR ME in most cases the advantages of using lenses and camera from same brand/system has many handling advantages...and there are quite some systems brands which offer good lenses.
Thats why I use my M-lenses on a M body, and on m4/3 I use m4/3 lenses, and on Canon I use Canon lenses.
I tried Leica R on Canon and Nikon, Leica M on Nex and m4/3, Hassy/Zeiss on the S. But loosing the AF, disadvantages in metering and in handling allways brought me back to using the original lenses of the systems.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
But photography is about taking pictures, and the DP cameras weren't about taking pictures, they were just about a certain type of Image Quality.

We seem to be heading towards some kind of perfect image, without any interest in how one can get a good photo with it.

I know it's great to have 36mp . . . I know that it's great to be able to crop . . I know it's great to have lots of dynamic range . . . I know, I know . . BUT I also know that some of the best shots I've seen on the internet where taken with a crappy 2mp Kodak point and shoot. . . . .

Hey - If I shoot a wedding I want a safety net . . . If I shoot a landscape I want detail in the corners . . . I love lenses which give a recognisable look . . . I'm a victim too.

But in the final analysis - if I take a decent snap, it's because the camera is not in my way - I'm sure the Sony will do that with good Sony Zeiss lenses - but I'm not very convinced it'll do it with M lenses. More to the point, I don't think it's what it was designed for, if you want to shoot with M lenses . . . . might I suggest a Leica M . . . if you want to shoot with a Sony A7r (and I think I do) may I suggest Sony Zeiss lenses?
I think all that goes without saying Jono. People will gravitate to what interests them ... with some weighing content more than any specific IQ, and others may balance the two. Gear discussions tend to deal with the mechanics of photography, and each of us analyzes how it may fits with what we creatively do.

Not in a million years would I buy a M 50/0.95 to put on this camera, but I sure the heck will put the one I already own on it. 36 meg FF and high ISO performance with just that lens interests me enough to risk the money. That I already have a full range of ZA lenses makes it a no brainer.

IMO, my MM is irreplaceable, and is rangefinder photography personified ... and since I don't need a $7,000 M240 to take color snaps with, the A7R can fill that bill and then some.

I kind of see this the same way Guy does ... a versatile little high resolution camera more akin to a digital back that allows creative use of an assortment of lenses ... some of which may be Leica M, for sure some of my A mount ZAs, and eventually a few Zeiss FE mount optics.

I don't see it as restrictive just because this or that specific lens doesn't work ... I'll use my little ZA24/2 for the occasional W/A AF shot.

- Marc
 

jsf

Active member
Some of my friends are adding to their existing camera (Nikon) system with smaller and lighter NEX 7 or Fuji X1 Pro kits. The argument smaller, lighter etc. I have been thinking about this for a bit. I find that I am quite happy with the d800e and I have a known quantity inm my lenses that I have zero complaints with. So I was thinking what if they came out with a rangefinder, with 36Mp, decent IQ low light ISO capability easy to adapt lens interchangeability with my existing glass, would I purchase a rangefinder? I like RF for a lot of things and I like the idea of smaller and lighter. I would save a pound in the camera, figuring one pound body as opposed to two pounds. But then that is it. Most of my lenses are manual primes and I am not going to get better nor lighter. And the one thing that I really like is an ultrawide and that is a bear to get a good 20mm, I like what I have but no one would say it is a lightweight lens. So for me the one pound savings is not a compelling argument.

But, if their was a an RF, full frame, big MP, and smooth IQ AND a D3s like low light capability and it took my lenses, then I would seriously look at it.

But I cannot imagine that my wants would translate into a bigger market for any of these manufacturers and so we get what we get.

But it looks like big changes are coming in the market and so who knows? Joe
 

Chris C

Member
...... using lenses and camera from same brand/system has many handling advantages.......Thats why I use my M-lenses on a M body, and on m4/3 I use m4/3 lenses, and on Canon I use Canon lenses.
.....
Yes, but whilst it isn't THE point, it's a damned important one :

The accessible price point of the cameras, and access to a 36Mp sensor in a camera form unlike high Mp Canon, Nikon, Leica S, bricks. Price/sensor/form. It's that which is interesting, and possibly overexciting some of us. There is no way I'd carry around a Nikon D800E, but the A7r with two, maybe 3 extremely compact lenses becomes a very potent and discrete working possibility. Yes we'll wait and see if the lens/camera options work OK; that's stating the obvious.

............... Chris
 
Top