Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 66 of 66

Thread: M or A7r

  1. #51
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M or A7r

    Quote Originally Posted by algrove View Post
    Ok, but for landscape an SWC +P45+, 39MP CCD costs maybe half the price of an S body alone. I have been side by side with S2 cameras using the venerable APO 120 while shooting 7 focus stacked images with me using the M+APO50 and many told me my single shot looked better than the S2 shots.
    Something must have been wrong in this comparison. he S2/S is clearly ahead of the M in regards of IQ even at pixel level (at least at lower ISOs), even without taking into consideration of 36 vs 24MP.
    By the way I just saw a S2+70mm on ebay for under 10k…thats less than a used M+50 APO
    of course both are very different cameras for different purpose

  2. #52
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M or A7r

    Even being a pixel peeper myself I believe USER INTERFACE is the key question in this discussion.
    If you need to focus fast and have this kind of subjects a EM1 might deliver better IQ than a D800 with a Leica lens because the first hits focus and the second not.
    If you like 35 and 50mm FOV the rangefinder of the M works great,
    if you like to use 135mm or longer focal length the rangefinder is not so great.
    If you like zooms the A7 might make more sense, if you like fast primes the M might make more sense.
    If you like many buttons and menus - Sony, if you like a more simple and classical approach - Leica.
    and so on.
    Sometimes using a system for a couple of months might be the only way to find out if it works for someone or not.

  3. #53
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M or A7r

    Maybe I could clear up a few misperceptions about the Leica S system ? I am in a pretty good position to evaluate the differences in the systems as my kit includes :

    1. The Leica S2 and most of the prime lenses . (owned three years ).

    2. The new Leica M ...just finished my 2nd trip ..so I have maybe 3-4000 images .

    3. The D800E and 6 Leica R lenses converted to Nikon mount . about 10K to 15K images .

    It was my intention that the files from these systems would be sorted in collections by subject ...say Paris for example ..so I spent plenty of time on developing profiles and presets for LR . This of course required that I actually inspect at a detail level hundreds of files from each system under all types of lighting conditions . (as an aside I hated that Leica went to a CMOS sensor with the M ..my m8/m9 files were almost a perfect color match to the S files ).

    Each system is superb and substantially better than anything I ve had previously . I select the system based on my shooting requirements and yes..there is some heavy overlap . Yet nothing I have used beats the M for street and travel shooting .....so if I am packing a bag ...I will usually be taking the M s . When I need speed,high ISO ,telephoto etc ..I taking the Nikon s ....but when I want the very best image quality ...its always the S system.

    There is not even a small chance that comparing a file from an S to either an M or the D800E ..side by side ..where I would prefer the M or D800E file to the S file . The differences are apparent in the subtle tone separation . This is what adds life to the image and differentiates it from those produced by smaller sensors .
    Roger Dunham
    http://rogerdunham.com/
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #54
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M or A7r

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratom View Post
    Even being a pixel peeper myself I believe USER INTERFACE is the key question in this discussion.
    If you need to focus fast and have this kind of subjects a EM1 might deliver better IQ than a D800 with a Leica lens because the first hits focus and the second not.
    If you like 35 and 50mm FOV the rangefinder of the M works great,
    if you like to use 135mm or longer focal length the rangefinder is not so great.
    If you like zooms the A7 might make more sense, if you like fast primes the M might make more sense.
    If you like many buttons and menus - Sony, if you like a more simple and classical approach - Leica.
    and so on.
    Sometimes using a system for a couple of months might be the only way to find out if it works for someone or not.
    Agree 100% with these observations . Speed and responsiveness is very important in "capturing the moment ". The number one complaint about the M9 from my PJ friends ....its too slow ...we miss captures because the buffer fills and the camera doesn t fire . (pretty much corrected with the new M...but rarely discussed when evaluating equipment ).

    AF precision and responsiveness (tracking?) is quite important ..when I shoot a wedding or an important event ...I use the Nikon AF primes or the 24-70/2.8AF zoom ...image quality means nothing if you can t capture the moment and get sharp in focus captures .

    I enjoy shooting professional tennis and each year I try to shoot at the US Open ....I ve worked with the M8,M9,D3x , new M and the S2 . This is as much about a terrific event as the tennis action but I shoot both . Its a great place to test equipment and improve my technique. If my focus is the crowd ..the best kit is the M ..if its the action ...the Nikon with AF zooms . The point being that you can shoot the same subject matter with many systems ....but you can get better results if your kit matches the requirements .

  5. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,051
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: M or A7r

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    Maybe I could clear up a few misperceptions about the Leica S system ? I am in a pretty good position to evaluate the differences in the systems as my kit includes :

    1. The Leica S2 and most of the prime lenses . (owned three years ).

    2. The new Leica M ...just finished my 2nd trip ..so I have maybe 3-4000 images .

    3. The D800E and 6 Leica R lenses converted to Nikon mount . about 10K to 15K images .

    It was my intention that the files from these systems would be sorted in collections by subject ...say Paris for example ..so I spent plenty of time on developing profiles and presets for LR . This of course required that I actually inspect at a detail level hundreds of files from each system under all types of lighting conditions . (as an aside I hated that Leica went to a CMOS sensor with the M ..my m8/m9 files were almost a perfect color match to the S files ).

    Each system is superb and substantially better than anything I ve had previously . I select the system based on my shooting requirements and yes..there is some heavy overlap . Yet nothing I have used beats the M for street and travel shooting .....so if I am packing a bag ...I will usually be taking the M s . When I need speed,high ISO ,telephoto etc ..I taking the Nikon s ....but when I want the very best image quality ...its always the S system.

    There is not even a small chance that comparing a file from an S to either an M or the D800E ..side by side ..where I would prefer the M or D800E file to the S file . The differences are apparent in the subtle tone separation . This is what adds life to the image and differentiates it from those produced by smaller sensors .
    Roger
    Take a look at David's focus stacked arches at Ft Jefferson and then look at mine. We took our shots less than a minute apart. David used the S2 with APO 120 and I used the M with APO50 with a single shot. Check these images on Dale's site carefully and tell me your opinion which I value. Thanks.

    Lou

  6. #56
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M or A7r

    Quote Originally Posted by algrove View Post
    Roger
    Take a look at David's focus stacked arches at Ft Jefferson and then look at mine. We took our shots less than a minute apart. David used the S2 with APO 120 and I used the M with APO50 with a single shot. Check these images on Dale's site carefully and tell me your opinion which I value. Thanks.

    Lou
    Lou

    I am sure you are right ..but I have no idea how focus stacking impacts the image . I do know from looking at literally thousands of files (in my effort to organize my work and to develop a common aesthetic ) that the S2 files are much better .

    I really have some directly comparable situations from Florida ...the Kite Boarders at Kite Beach for example ..you can see the difference in the sky and in the fabric of the kites . I ve used ever system I have owned there as well as seeing all David Kipper s work .

    When I get down to Florida after the first of the year ....we can hit the Juno Beach Pier and settle the bet !

    I do agree with the point that its hard to ignore a wonderful 36MP sensor for image quality ...but I am not sold on the A7R as having the professional attributes I want . The Rx1 had a level of build quality that was admirable ...but the expectations for the A7R are much higher ...I guess I will have to go back to another thread on the A7R to outline my reservations . But I expect the Sony tuning of the sensor to produce great color fidelity at lower ISO s compared to the D800E but fall behind as ISO goes over 400 . Neither of these will compare to the S2 for image quality below ISO800.

  7. #57
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M or A7r

    Lou

    I viewed the photographs you mentioned over at RedDot forum and I agree that the M with the APO appears sharper . It has a much more limited DOF than the focus stacking and the S2 composite might make a better print .

    I would tell you though that if David had focused on a piece of the wall ....you would see higher resolution than his composite shows . But in this example you are correct.
    Roger Dunham
    http://rogerdunham.com/
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  8. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,173
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M or A7r

    Either way, I think everyone agrees that we ought to give the A7rs a try. It comes with 30 day return... what's the loss?

  9. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,051
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: M or A7r

    Quote Originally Posted by mmbma View Post
    Either way, I think everyone agrees that we ought to give the A7rs a try. It comes with 30 day return... what's the loss?
    I will give a try as many others have also expressed the same. I plan to start with R lenses and then M wide lenses graduating up the line.

  10. #60
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M or A7r

    Quote Originally Posted by mmbma View Post
    Either way, I think everyone agrees that we ought to give the A7rs a try. It comes with 30 day return... what's the loss?
    I won't give it a try because I have no need for this kind of camera.
    I can understand though that it is a very interesting solution for some and if I would expect it to fulfill my needs I would give it a try for sure.
    I also think it is good for us Leica users because it means some competition (since the M is not the only ff in a relatively small package any more) for Leica which is alloys a good thing.

  11. #61
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    77
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M or A7r

    With respect to the focus stacked S2 vs. the M shot--

    I have the S2. I agree with the statements regarding the tonal range,
    what some call micro-contrast. The three dimensionality of the image
    and objects within the image, is remarkable.

    Sharpness should not be the only criteria and we are often led astray by
    our focus on this single attribute. Sharpness alone does not make an
    image speak, touchable, have impact, especially in a print.

    Daily, I have both pros and non-pros, comment on the prints I make from
    the S2 (and not as much from those rare ones from the D800E).

    I use focus stacking often (Zenfolio) to enhance the depth of field, or
    to allow focus on only some objects within the image. I suspect that it
    does impact "sharpness" as well perhaps as the very characteristics I
    mention above. But, when needed, there is no other way. So it may well
    be "unfair" to compare a composite focus stacked image to a single
    image (any more so to compare a HDR with a single image). This
    would be an interesting study if anyone has the time!

  12. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bakersfield, CA
    Posts
    304
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M or A7r

    All of the talk about the A7r has convinced me to add an M9/ME to comiment my M Monochrom. Justove the CCD color I'm seeing on this and other fora.
    "A fella, A quick fella, might have a weapon under there. I'd have to pin his head to the panel." The Gyro Captain
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #63
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: M or A7r

    I passed on the Leica M240 before the Sony A7/A7R was even a rumor.

    When I got the MM it filled the rangefinder niche perfectly for me. For me, rangefinder and B&W are synonymous. I literally stopped using my M9P, so I sold it.

    However, I do shoot other stuff in color ... but prefer a more complete system for that type of work. A larger focal length pool for one thing. Better lighting options and functionality for another.

    Those duties are shared between a S2 and a Sony 35mm DSLR kit.

    RE: Durability: When I swapped out Nikon for Sony, I waited a year to complete the move as I used the D3X next to the Sony A900 while shooting weddings/events/portraits. The main consideration was how robust the Sony would be (the Nikon was not in question). After a year, I sold the Nikon system, and used a pair of Sony A900s for 3 years, then sold one to get a A99.

    In case anyone wonders how robust a Sony can be, I've had zero issues with any of them. Weddings can be an acid test for any camera system ... 8 hours of flat out shooting almost non-stop, weekend after weekend after weekend ... with other stuff in-between. I have to spend more time with the A99, but so far it seems similar in build quality and reliability.

    I have an A7R on order. Not as a replacement for a M9 or M240. IMHO, if one prefers color rangefinder work, Leica M9/M is the only FF game in town.

    Longevity is less of an issue with the A7R for me. Even if it depreciates rapidly, who cares? Hell, I still use my antique A900 to good effect. Besides, at $2,300 I can afford to chuck it, get the A8R, chuck that and get the A9R after that ... and still not have spent $7,000.

    In the end, it is the "Mighty Mouse" allure of the A7R ... 36 meg in the palm of my hand. A few select lenses and higher res to compliment my A99 on certain shoots (like group shots at weddings), or as a companion to the Leica MM when I travel and want a few color shots with the M50/0.95 or a color portrait with the M75AA.

    BTW, the whole Sony interface menu aspect is overblown IMO. I rarely have to enter the LCD menu on the A99, and the A7R's interface is supposed to be more like the A99 than the NEX cameras (which I didn't particularly like). Once you use these cameras you find they are pretty simple to set to your liking and just leave it.

    IMO, the S2 is in a totally different league. Totally different IQ, totally different functionality when used to its' full potential. Horses for courses. Try to use it like a Pro Nikon and you'll be disappointed ... try to use the Nikon like the S2 and you'll be profoundly disappointed.

    - Marc
    Likes 12 Member(s) liked this post

  14. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,173
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M or A7r

    If the question is Can A7/A7R replace a Leica M/M9, to use your Leica glasses. Then no. I just looked at the Ron Schiller comparison files closely and there is a big difference in terms of IQ of the Leica Glasses on A7 vs. M9.

    If you have a M9/M already and a bunch of Leica glasses, you shouldn't switch. Because you were paying for quality when buying into the M system. No point in compromising IQ through a cheaper body.

    If you are like many of us who already have a MM and a M9, then this might be attractive because we are probably all going to keep our MMs, and don't shoot enough color. I am having trouble justifying a M9P alongside my MM.

    If you don't have Leica lenses, then A7r is the clearly choice to go. Buy the two primes, they are bound to be killer lenses. Add 1-2 legacy leica glasses for fun.

  15. #65
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    261
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M or A7r

    Quote Originally Posted by mmbma View Post
    If the question is Can A7/A7R replace a Leica M/M9, to use your Leica glasses. Then no. I just looked at the Ron Schiller comparison files closely and there is a big difference in terms of IQ of the Leica Glasses on A7 vs. M9.
    First up, the A7R was not tested. Only the A7 was tested. The M9 was shot at base ISO, the A7 was shot at ISO 400. The M9 was shot in bright, clear conditions while the A7 was shot in very overcast, hazy conditions. Finally, the M9 was shot in raw and the A7 in JPG. How can you possibly draw a meaningful conclusion?
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,173
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M or A7r

    Quote Originally Posted by lambert View Post
    First up, the A7R was not tested. Only the A7 was tested. The M9 was shot at base ISO, the A7 was shot at ISO 400. The M9 was shot in bright, clear conditions while the A7 was shot in very overcast, hazy conditions. Finally, the M9 was shot in raw and the A7 in JPG. How can you possibly draw a meaningful conclusion?
    If you read my post I precisely did not draw any conclusions. From evidence so far I'm not convince that Sony can completely replace the M9 in terms of IQ when using Leica Glasses. that's was my point. I am waiting for more conclusive evidence from users.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •