Not impressed by the A7/A7r

[scho]

Interesting ! Especially where he writes :
"In regards to Leica M Mount lenses using adapters…The A7r has issues with the 12, 15 and 21mm focal length, even 28mm to some extent. The A7 had some slight vignetting with the 15 and 21 but no real color shift. Not nearly as much as the A7r. So if you are one who was planning on using WIDE ANGLE Leica M mount glass, go for the A7."

More or less what I feared it would be : the lower resolution Nex like the Nex-6 were already doing better than the Nex-7 with RF lenses. Apparently those specially arranged photosites only serve to compensate for the disadvantage due to the higher resolution but aren't able to fix the problems of the WA RF lenses.

I'm not sure that I've found a back for my Zeiss Contax G 21mm F2.8, because the first samples I have seen showing WA RF lenses on the A7 had a lot of smeared corners, not only vignetting or magenta shift :-(

Neither have I found a suitable digital back for the 21. Only camera I have that works well with the Contax G 21 is the Contax G2.

 

[jagsiva]

I was initially looking at the RX1R as a single portable camera I can take along on my weekly trips. Something smaller than my D800 or Phase/Arca kits. I run into so many opportunities where a camera would be great, but don't always want the hassles of lugging gear through NA/European/Asian customs.

The RX1R looked great, though I wanted a 50ish FL as well.

When the A7R popped up, I thought great. I and still do. BUT, I think these cameras will be best with their native lenses.

The complexity of sensor/lens/RAW converter and their intricate dependencies are only trending upwards. Add to this the unofficial "cooking" of RAWs in-camera before we even get our hands on them. All of this means that the image-chain is highly optimized for a specific platform.

I went through Leica on 4/3rds, Sonys etc. but it was always a pain. Even the gazillion $$$ Arca/IQ180/Rodie kit I have is a pain when it comes to this kind of seamless integration, and this is with Phase openly supporting such use on their platform via LCC's etc.

The beauty of the RX1/R is this closed loop and the luxury it affords the manufacturer to optimize the chain end-to-end.

So for me, if I go this route will be with the native Zeiss for Sony FE lenses, and at a stretch native lenses for FE announced by Sigma and Zeiss. If Zeiss can modify the ZM line and address some of the issues, it would be great. This would also mean software makers like Phase and Adobe can anticipate and invest in camera/lens profiles in a practical way, not to mention camera manufacturers can "cook" RAWs, right or wrong, more optimally.

To this end, looking at full-res samples of the Zeiss 55 and 35 FE lenses, the samples are quite impressive. I downloaded some RAWs and converted using the Sony converter into TIFF (dialled all the camera settings to "0"), then played with the files in C1. Look pretty awesome.

Besides 4K for a body and two lenses seems like a deal after some recent tech lens purchases

 

[jonoslack]

So for me, if I go this route will be with the native Zeiss for Sony FE lenses, and at a stretch native lenses for FE announced by Sigma and Zeiss. If Zeiss can modify the ZM line and address some of the issues, it would be great. This would also mean software makers like Phase and Adobe can anticipate and invest in camera/lens profiles in a practical way.

To this end, looking at full-res samples of the Zeiss 55 and 35 FE lenses are quite impressive.

Besides 4K for a body and two lenses seems like a deal after some recent tech lens purchases

I'm right with you - I think the excitement here is the possibility of a new system of excellence . . . with Sony/Zeiss lenses

 

[jagsiva]

I'm right with you - I think the excitement here is the possibility of a new system of excellence . . . with Sony/Zeiss lenses

Absolutely, and a major concern appears to be Sony's flip-flopping on mounts and standards, making it difficult for folks, especially hobbyists, to build a long term plan and arsenal of lenses.

But the cynic in me says, after spending significant amounts of free time and listening to all the crazies (you know who you are, and I include myself in this group) in the MF board on this forum, this is chump change, treat it like a disposable camera that will last you 2-3 years, and you could still get 20% on resale. Also, repeatedly reminding the banker that I don't have a motorcycle, a gambling habit or a girlfriend, goes a long way in building a strong business case

 

[Michiel Schierbeek]

I think the title attests to the fact that this IS the disruptive camera as intended by Sony. Lots of interest with a healthy dose of skepticism (at least that sums up my take on this camera).

(After a day on the road)
Nothing wrong with a healthy dose of skepticism

Notwithstanding the signs in favour of the A7 with (certain) wide angle lenses, I still go for the A7r if not alone for bigger printing possibilitys. If I don't have any satisfactionary wide angles in my arsenal, which I doubt, I'll wait for a native lens to come or buy the Zeiss zoom.

I never regretted the NEX-7 either especially now that I am making some big prints for exhibitions of some of these files. Besides it is working quiet well with my Zeiss Biogon 25 and other wide angles.

 

[lambert]

I'm right with you - I think the excitement here is the possibility of a new system of excellence . . . with Sony/Zeiss lenses

Here's further food for thought from Steve Huff in relation to M mount glass on the new Sony's:

"The Voigtlander 35 1.2 II is doing mighty fine on the A7 or A7r and I prefer using it on these cameras over using it on the Leica M. It is easy to focus using the EVF and Focus Peaking and I can MF faster than I can on my M."

"I had the little Zeiss 21 2.8 ZM on the A7 and there is slight vignetting but as you will see below in a color shot, no real issues. On my M this lens had some slight color shifts."

View attachment 78500

 

[Chris C]

…. Steve Huff..."The Voigtlander 35 1.2 II is doing mighty fine on the A7 or A7r and I prefer using it on these cameras over using it on the Leica M. It is easy to focus using the EVF and Focus Peaking and I can MF faster than I can on my M."…..

Yes, I'm following those posts as well, but with salty caveats. The ease of focus he reports is very interesting, but he habitually shoots wide open and with centrally placed subjects. I'm really waiting to see how the [M fit] ease of focus is at f8 in daylight, with subjects across the whole frame. But, so far it's encouraging.

…………. Chris

 

[mmbma]

Yeah, I take his reviews with a grain fo salt. Certain great reads, but not so much on technicals. ALthough the ease of focus is TRUE. the focus assisit plus peaking makes is so easy, you probalby won't even need to turn on focus peaking if you got good eye sight

 

[Vivek]

Yeah, I take his reviews with a grain fo salt. Certain great reads, but not so much on technicals. ALthough the ease of focus is TRUE. the focus assisit plus peaking makes is so easy, you probalby won't even need to turn on focus peaking if you got good eye sight

Actually, I am beginning to like what he says. It is just some who read what they want to read (for example, the A7/7R would substitute the M and the like) who draw erroneous conclusions.

 

[Vivek]

FWIW (Guy was asking about the DR earlier):

Sony Alpha 7R review: Highest ever full-frame image quality? - DxOMark

D800 sensor in a tiny package.

 

[charlesphoto]

Imo one of the ugliest of the new crop of cameras. Never thought the Canon F1 was an appealing design myself.... (that's what it reminds me of).