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!
Hi Godfrey,Yesterday morning's walk in the park was almost summer-hot temperature-wise, but the light was very harsh at winter angles, difficult to work with. Long lenses work better for me in these circumstances, and I went monochrome and mostly square as well ...
Thanks for looking! Comments always appreciated.
Yesterday morning's walk in the park was almost summer-hot temperature-wise, but the light was very harsh at winter angles, difficult to work with. Long lenses work better for me in these circumstances, and I went monochrome and mostly square as well ...
Thanks for looking! Comments always appreciated.
And thanks Annna too!I like the mix of built environment and nature in these two. When one wants to show that kind of mix in our daily environment, composition often becomes a challenge, but these two work well in this respect.
That 75mm is great isn't it ? Why did you need to add an A7 ? I was tempted too, but didn't out of the fear that my lovely MFT outfit (and whealth of native lenses) would remain in a cupboard. Plus I already have a Canon 6D that would be more or less redundant with the A7.
Thanks Carlos!Nice shots Godfrey. Quick question: what is your recipe for B&W conversion? I noticed a slight tint to the shots, but I cannot put my finger on it.
Reading you, you got an A7 for the same reason i didn't get one : apparently my 21 & 28mmm Zeiss Contax G lenses won't perform very well on it. They will not only get magenta corners, but also smeared corners. I'm rather happy using the 45mm and 90mm on MFT bodies (the 90mm makes a great 180mm and the 45mm is stunning (much sharper than my 45mm F1.8 Olympus). But i would have liked to use the 21&28mm as the wide angle they are. The 21mm in particular was stunning on film. But the A7 clearly won't play well as a digital back for the Zeiss glass i have. Too bad for me, but better for my wallet..Thanks Doug!
And thanks Annna too!
The motivation behind acquiring the Sony A7 is simply that I have these lovely Leica R and Nikkor lenses ... While I use them adapted to the E-M1 occasionally, I find the native mFT and FT lenses are more suited to this camera. These lenses are too nice to go to waste, they need a 24x36mm format camera to get the most out of them IMO. Since there are no Leica R digital cameras, and I don't have any Nikon DSLRs to adapt the Leica lenses to, I figure the A7 body may work for both. And the larger format is better for pinhole/zone plate photography too.
I'm eager to see how it works out, but don't mistake it: the E-M1 is my primary camera now, and will get the most use.
Funny, that.Reading you, you got an A7 for the same reason i didn't get one : apparently my 21 & 28mmm Zeiss Contax G lenses won't perform very well on it. They will not only get magenta corners, but also smeared corners. I'm rather happy using the 45mm and 90mm on MFT bodies (the 90mm makes a great 180mm and the 45mm is stunning (much sharper than my 45mm F1.8 Olympus). But i would have liked to use the 21&28mm as the wide angle they are. The 21mm in particular was stunning on film. But the A7 clearly won't play well as a digital back for the Zeiss glass i have. Too bad for me, but better for my wallet..
The 45 and 90 are Zeiss? The 75/1.8 m.Zuiko is really awesome, the 45/1.8 m.Zuiko (rumored to be actually designed at Konika) is not as sharp, but looks very nice as well. How do yours compare? But I have not heard anyone happy with full frame support of 28, 24, 21 and 18(!!) lenses except those using the M9, M240 and that bizarre Ricoh unit that takes an M bayonet mount. And those (well, we) still grumble... I have an ancient Canon thread-mount 19/3.5 that no present digital platform can get a good picture from, yet it focuses on an M rangefinder so I would like to use it.Reading you, you got an A7 for the same reason i didn't get one : apparently my 21 & 28mmm Zeiss Contax G lenses won't perform very well on it. They will not only get magenta corners, but also smeared corners. I'm rather happy using the 45mm and 90mm on MFT bodies (the 90mm makes a great 180mm and the 45mm is stunning (much sharper than my 45mm F1.8 Olympus). But i would have liked to use the 21&28mm as the wide angle they are. The 21mm in particular was stunning on film. But the A7 clearly won't play well as a digital back for the Zeiss glass i have. Too bad for me, but better for my wallet..
Soon as the adapter gets here, I'll test the Ultron 28/2 on the A7. I've heard it does well. Similarly, I've got an Elmarit-R 24/2.8 on the way that I'll test on the A7 too.The 45 and 90 are Zeiss? The 75/1.8 m.Zuiko is really awesome, the 45/1.8 m.Zuiko (rumored to be actually designed at Konika) is not as sharp, but looks very nice as well. How do yours compare? But I have not heard anyone happy with full frame support of 28, 24, 21 and 18(!!) lenses except those using the M9, M240 and that bizarre Ricoh unit that takes an M bayonet mount. And those (well, we) still grumble... I have an ancient Canon thread-mount 19/3.5 that no present digital platform can get a good picture from, yet it focuses on an M rangefinder so I would like to use it.
scott