I'm also surprised given the results of the pentax 75 vs sony 55. I thought the 120 macro would clearly outperform anything I put on the A7R2. As per many reviews the 120 macro should be even sharper than the 75. Perhaps my copy of the 120 isn't quite up to snuff? Although it's pretty uniform across the image, I've never had a bad lens copy that behaved like that so idk. Maybe I'll try to get an AF version and see how that compares, even thought they should be identical.
For reference, the focus was on the center of the first electricity pole. The trees on the sides are just literally 1-2 ft. in front of the pole and I'm over 100ft away. So at F8 the pole and the trees should be in the same plane of focus.
I took several shots in live view zoom to be sure the focus was as accurate as possible. So if there is something off, it may be due to possible shutter shake? Perhaps wind?
Regardless on the other hand, man the Contax 100-300 is spectacular, I don't know why it isn't a more popular lens for the A7 cameras. In the 35mm world I've never had a telephoto lens of any kind that's as sharp as this, and now combined with IBIS it's even better.
Torger, I'm not convinced this result is attributable to the lenses used. Based on my experience with the Pentax lenses, the 120mm should be even better than the 75mm used in the first test. I don't know Sony lenses, but I would expect a 55mm prime to out perform the zoom used in the second test; so the results are opposite what I would expect based on the lenses used. I wonder if this is a focus issue. Looking at the Flicker images, the bushes in the lower right (closer to the camera I assume) are sharper in the Pentax shot, whereas the cars in the distance appear softer, perhaps indicating a closer focus with the Pentax.
Tom
PS Thanks for the profiles you've posted.