A7r - and why I'm not keeping it.

[cunim]

I am challenged by this camera. I really want to like it because the IQ180 has made me a pixel addict. 24 MP is just not enough any more and I can't carry the MF equipment or a D800 around in my briefcase. I need the pixel density and compact size that the A7r provides.

However, I am unlikely to keep the A7r for very long. The sensor is lovely and the camera handles fine, but I can't tolerate the corner artifacts. The problem is not primarily intensity vignetting, but the highly localized degradation in corner MTF. That E-mount hole just seems too small for FF with normal lenses. Chopping of corner rays is not correctable in post.

I don't need wide and my experience with specific lenses is limited. The Elmar 135 seems fine wide open but too long for a daily. The Summicron R 50 and the native 35 FE clean up enough by f5.6 or so, but that is a pretty serious limitation - or so it would seem. I say "seem" because many others are having much better success or are not as bothered by this particular problem. Point is, there is a real issue that some buyers may find critical.

I returned the 35 FE and am hoping the 55 will be better. Sadly, one preliminary review tells me to be prepared for vignetting so my hopes are not high. If I can find just one normal that does not show the mushy corners at f2, I will be happy with this camera.

Perhaps I am unrealistic in wanting reasonably clean corners in a compact FF, but the mount engineering challenge does not seem all that great. Make a bigger hole. I hope a solution (the lens I am looking for) is imminent, or a less finicky FF compact will appear over the next year. For the moment, the A7r is the only game in town and it stays.

 

[jonoslack]

However, I am unlikely to keep the A7r for very long. *The sensor is lovely and the camera handles fine, but I can't tolerate the corner artifacts. *The problem is not primarily intensity vignetting, but the highly localized degradation in corner MTF. *That E-mount hole just seems too small for FF with normal lenses. *Chopping of corner rays is not correctable in post.

I don't need wide and my experience with specific lenses is limited. The Elmar 135 seems fine wide open but too long for a daily. The Summicron R 50 and the native 35 FE clean up enough by f5.6 or so, but that is a pretty serious limitation - or so it would seem. I say "seem" because many others are having much better success or are not as bothered by this particular problem. Point is, there is a real issue that some buyers may find critical.

Well, that's what I found too - but of course it depends on what you're shooting - for street, sharp corners are rarely important - and that goes for candid and portrait photography and weddings too . . me? I shoot a lot of nature and landscape and there it DOES matter.

Personally the 24mp of the M is okay - so there's my FF compact, but if you need more, then the A7r really is the only game in town. . . . . I have to keep telling myself that if you can make a 30" print with 24mp . . .then that equates to a 37" print with 36mp - a difference, but not a huge difference.

 

[GrahamB]

That E-mount hole just seems too small for FF with normal lenses.

Nikon F mount = 44mm
Leica M mount = 44mm
Olympus OM = 46mm
Sony E mount = 46.1mm

Graham

 

[Vivek]

Nikon F mount = 44mm
Leica M mount = 44mm
Olympus OM = 46mm
Sony E mount = 46.1mm

Graham

Subtle posts are always lost.

http://www.getdpi.com/forum/552675-post768.html

 

[cunim]

Nikon F mount = 44mm
Leica M mount = 44mm
Olympus OM = 46mm
Sony E mount = 46.1mm

Graham

Graham, good point if a little simplistic. The size of the hole depends on the ray angles necessary to reach the sensor. Closer the mount to the sensor, larger the angles so it's relative.

No need to get techie, though. Just look in the mount. Makes me feel like taking a file to ream out the corners a bit. Course, I could be dead wrong and it is not the hole at all. It could be a fundamental property of such small pixel sites interacting with the very obtuse rays. So they would need both hole and lenses bigger. Beyond my pay grade but I want Sony to think about fixing it. Or zeiss might be able to do a better job of dealing with it. Maybe they have in the 55. Either way works for me.

Jono, I feel a bit less of a grinch after seeing your comment. I was worried it was just me being too demanding. There have been so many positive reviews, and it is a lovely package. Just this one thing....

 

[JonPB]

I am unlikely to keep the A7r for very long. ... I hope a solution (the lens I am looking for) is imminent, or a less finicky FF compact will appear over the next year. For the moment, the A7r is the only game in town and it stays.

I like your timeline--that replacing the camera "over the next year" isn't "very long." While I keep tabs on digital, which explains my attention to this thread, I jumped onto the Leica R system partly to avoid the mindset, encouraged by digital bodies, that a year is a long time.

The Summicron R 50 and the native 35 FE clean up enough by f5.6 or so, but that is a pretty serious limitation - or so it would seem. I say "seem" because many others are having much better success or are not as bothered by this particular problem.

I'm curious: if the Summicron R 50 doesn't have corners that meet your expectations, then I don't see how the lens mount is to blame. Perhaps the sensor package, sensel wells, or the lens, but not the mount. Using my NEX (which is admittedly a poor analog), I would need to look from a quite wide angle before seeing where the corner of the 135-format sensor would be.

BTW, feel free to get techie. I'm writing an article on MTF curves, as such things interest me, and always love to learn more. And as far as being demanding goes--well, I shoot 35mm film, so that says enough about me, but that's not relevant to the theory that nonetheless interests me.

Cheers,
Jon

 

[philip_pj]

The shutter vid is fun, but see how loud his voice is as background 'noise'? 65-70dB often. Sony clearly decided they did not mind the camera sounding like a DSLR, and I rather prefer its lazy delivery to the frantic report of the Canon DSLR.

Nothing beats a leaf shutter for quietness, so it's good marketing to clearly differentiate the a7/r from the RX1, plus weight difference. Few RX1 owners will be selling, the lens is a gem and very good to the very corners.

And 'library' sound levels:

Comparative Examples of Noise Levels | Real World Examples and Decibel Levels |Industrial Noise Control

Sony also knew a lot of photographers they wanted to attract have and love using super fast lenses. That 1/8000s is a stop shorter than the Nikon FX's 1/4000s...users of that Nikon will top out often with an f1.4 lens mounted, just as the RX1 does with its 1/2000 and f2 aperture. Same base ISO of 100, can expand to 50.

What would be the satisfaction level of all the f1 or f1.2 lens owners if Sony fronted up with a 1/4000s max shutter speed camera in the a7 series? Even if it was a little quieter?

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

Sigma proved with their DPxM series, particularly the DP2M, that essentially perfect corners are possible at an affordable price. The 35mm FE is not in the same league despite costing more than a DP2M. It's pretty good, but not to the corners. One has to ask why Zeiss cannot achieve what Sigma have, despite the price differential.

I am challenged by this camera. I really want to like it because the IQ180 has made me a pixel addict. 24 MP is just not enough any more and I can't carry the MF equipment or a D800 around in my briefcase. I need the pixel density and compact size that the A7r provides.

However, I am unlikely to keep the A7r for very long. The sensor is lovely and the camera handles fine, but I can't tolerate the corner artifacts. The problem is not primarily intensity vignetting, but the highly localized degradation in corner MTF. That E-mount hole just seems too small for FF with normal lenses. Chopping of corner rays is not correctable in post.

I don't need wide and my experience with specific lenses is limited. The Elmar 135 seems fine wide open but too long for a daily. The Summicron R 50 and the native 35 FE clean up enough by f5.6 or so, but that is a pretty serious limitation - or so it would seem. I say "seem" because many others are having much better success or are not as bothered by this particular problem. Point is, there is a real issue that some buyers may find critical.

I returned the 35 FE and am hoping the 55 will be better. Sadly, one preliminary review tells me to be prepared for vignetting so my hopes are not high. If I can find just one normal that does not show the mushy corners at f2, I will be happy with this camera.

Perhaps I am unrealistic in wanting reasonably clean corners in a compact FF, but the mount engineering challenge does not seem all that great. Make a bigger hole. I hope a solution (the lens I am looking for) is imminent, or a less finicky FF compact will appear over the next year. For the moment, the A7r is the only game in town and it stays.

 

[Vivek]

Graham, good point if a little simplistic. The size of the hole depends on the ray angles necessary to reach the sensor. Closer the mount to the sensor, larger the angles so it's relative.

No need to get techie, though.

It will be good to get technical about it. Regardless of the camera registry, it is the exit pupil of the lens that matters.

What happens with a MF digi back and short back focal length lenses? Can I mount a super angulon 21mm or a 2.8cm Hektor on any Leica digital cam and expect uniform illumination? Same answers. There are hundreds of old lenses that are not compatible with the Leica M digital cameras when analyzed carefully even though they can be mounted and used.

 

[Michiel Schierbeek]

Sigma proved with their DPxM series, particularly the DP2M, that essentially perfect corners are possible at an affordable price. The 35mm FE is not in the same league despite costing more than a DP2M. It's pretty good, but not to the corners. One has to ask why Zeiss cannot achieve what Sigma have, despite the price differential.

The only difference is; this is full frame.

Still waiting for Sigma to produce a FF Foveon camera

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

The only difference is; this is full frame.

Still waiting for Sigma to produce a FF Foveon camera

I don't think the phrase "full frame" has any significant meaning anymore, other than as shorthand for former 35mm film frame size. The A7r has a larger sensor, but relative edge sharpness does not automatically deteriorate as sensor size increases.

But as an avowed DP2M enthusiast, despite its limitations, I would be first in line if Sigma were to release a "full frame" version of the DPxM series of 25mp or up, or a similarly specified DSLR, using their Foveon sensor technology.:thumbup:

 

[cunim]

It will be good to get technical about it. Regardless of the camera registry, it is the exit pupil of the lens that matters.

What happens with a MF digi back and short back focal length lenses? Can I mount a super angulon 21mm or a 2.8cm Hektor on any Leica digital cam and expect uniform illumination? Same answers. There are hundreds of old lenses that are not compatible with the Leica M digital cameras when analyzed carefully even though they can be mounted and used.

Vivek and Jon, I agree it would be great to understand the technical bits. However, at this point I don't think we have enough info. Understanding (as opposed to complaining about) specific design flaws (corner mush in this case) requires we understand the design brief. Perhaps Sony/Zeiss will give us a white paper at some point and then we can chime in.

Every optical train is a set of compromises. With the design tools available today, the final package should not contain many technical surprises - but we can be surprised at what designers think is important. If a new lens mushes the corners it was probably allowed to in exchange for some other aspect of performance. That deserves some comment from us as end users.

I can imagine the marketing group saying "we need this MTF at 50% from center while allowing use of existing e-mount lenses". The camera designer says "OK, here's a package that can do it". The lens people say "this lens design will suit, but there will be some corner softness". What I am sure no one said is "wait a minute, this will be a problem for Leica wides". At some point in ringi, the compromises became accepted and everyone moved on to production. I would like to help Sony think more carefully about corner mush in their native lenses. That's probably what the microlenses are all about but they haven't worked out particularly well.

You are right. People are taking lens selection way beyond what Sony intended. I am sure Sony are shocked at the level of interest in the use of their proprietary camera with non-native lenses. For example, I would happily buy this thing a lovely and expensive Leica lens - and I am pretty cheap. That is what is potentially revolutionary about the A7 family. A small, high res camera that accepts lots of lenses would be a prayer answered for many advanced photographers.

As it is, that is not what Sony appears to have designed. Traditionally, a new Sony design should encourage people to use Sony lenses. If Sony get beyond that, they may develop a new set of compromises in the next iteration. This is particularly true because their own lenses seem to have the same needs as others. The only FE lens out there exhibits corner mush unless stopped down.

Ya know, the 55 may come out and be just fine. In that case, this is all a tempest in a teapot and life will be good.

 

[Vivek]

As it is, that is not what Sony appears to have designed.

Contrary to that, Peter, that is exactly what they are offering! Sony Australia actually gives out a free adapter of choice with the purchase of an A7R and my A7R came with a default "shoot without lens" option turned "ON".

The majority who are buying know what they are getting. Some may be disappointed.

There is no turning back the clock or putting the genie back in a lamp.

Do I have lenses that work with the A7R without corner mush and or color issues, yes I do and with more choices than I can ever have with any system.

The best part is that I do not have to register my name with some boutique shop to get a call 1 year later that my camera is available.

 

[Michiel Schierbeek]

Boutique shop :ROTFL:

 

[Vivek]

Boutique shop :ROTFL:

Yes!! In the Netherlands: Leica Boutique Lisse, powered by Foto Henny Hoogeveen

 

[fotografz]

Vivek and Jon, I agree it would be great to understand the technical bits. However, at this point I don't think we have enough info. Understanding (as opposed to complaining about) specific design flaws (corner mush in this case) requires we understand the design brief. Perhaps Sony/Zeiss will give us a white paper at some point and then we can chime in.

Every optical train is a set of compromises. With the design tools available today, the final package should not contain many technical surprises - but we can be surprised at what designers think is important. If a new lens mushes the corners it was probably allowed to in exchange for some other aspect of performance. That deserves some comment from us as end users.

I can imagine the marketing group saying "we need this MTF at 50% from center while allowing use of existing e-mount lenses". The camera designer says "OK, here's a package that can do it". The lens people say "this lens design will suit, but there will be some corner softness". What I am sure no one said is "wait a minute, this will be a problem for Leica wides". At some point in ringi, the compromises became accepted and everyone moved on to production. I would like to help Sony think more carefully about corner mush in their native lenses. That's probably what the microlenses are all about but they haven't worked out particularly well.

You are right. People are taking lens selection way beyond what Sony intended. I am sure Sony are shocked at the level of interest in the use of their proprietary camera with non-native lenses. For example, I would happily buy this thing a lovely and expensive Leica lens - and I am pretty cheap. That is what is potentially revolutionary about the A7 family. A small, high res camera that accepts lots of lenses would be a prayer answered for many advanced photographers.

As it is, that is not what Sony appears to have designed. Traditionally, a new Sony design should encourage people to use Sony lenses. If Sony get beyond that, they may develop a new set of compromises in the next iteration. This is particularly true because their own lenses seem to have the same needs as others. The only FE lens out there exhibits corner mush unless stopped down.

Ya know, the 55 may come out and be just fine. In that case, this is all a tempest in a teapot and life will be good.

I've been a Sony user for some time now.

I'd be shocked if they did not grasp that their mirrorless cameras are being used with other optics. Other-wise why in the heck would you launch a game changing camera with no "real" native lens options? So, right of the bat, this camera is an option for Sony users ... a natural extension of what they already have ... which is probably why the new A adapters for this camera were available before the A7/A7R cameras or FE lenses. I've had mine for a month and still no camera.

Sony has one foot in the general consumer market, and the other in the advanced amateur/Pro market. Frankly, most consumers wouldn't know or care about hair-splitting corner smear if it was pointed out to them ... and frankly a lot of advanced/pros aren't overly concerned, depending on what they shoot.

It'd be nice if Zeiss adds high performance optics for this type of camera ... especially if they shoe-horn in 54 meg like the SR4 Sony Rumors indicate.

- Marc

 

[Michiel Schierbeek]

Yes!! In the Netherlands: Leica Boutique Lisse, powered by Foto Henny Hoogeveen

I did not know they called themselves Boutique. Funny!
Looks like a real jewelryshop!

A quote from their homepage text:

"" And also collectors know the route to the Chapel Street. Last time there was a guy in the store, who bought a Leica with lens and was absolutely not going to photograph with it. He touched the model with white gloves, left it as it is and had it packed as if it was The Nightwatch and told us that the acquisition gets a spot in the closet at home next to all the other captured M-models.
You have such fanatics. Beautiful isn't it.""

Very relaxed, you don't have to go out and shoot pictures all the time! :watch:

 

[Vivek]

I did not know they called themselves Boutique. Funny!
Looks like a real jewelryshop!

A quote from their homepage text:

"" And also collectors know the route to the Chapel Street. Last time there was a guy in the store, who bought a Leica with lens and was absolutely not going to photograph with it. He touched the model with white gloves, left it as it is and had it packed as if it was The Nightwatch and told us that the acquisition gets a spot in the closet at home next to all the other captured M-models.
You have such fanatics. Beautiful isn't it.""

Very relaxed, you don't have to go out and shoot pictures all the time! :watch:

All true! The sad part is that there are too many such fondlers around. Hard to believe but absolutely true!

FWIW, it was a decent shop. The place where I first saw the Bessa L and the Cosina 15/4.5, years ago!

 

[Ron Pfister]

It'd be nice if Zeiss adds high performance optics for this type of camera ... especially if they shoe-horn in 54 meg like the SR4 Sony Rumors indicate.

I expect Zeiss to do just that, but designing an optic that will hold up with future high-res sensors isn't done over night. I believe the Otus 1.4/55 was three years in the making.

 

[Chuck Jones]

Well, that's what I found too - but of course it depends on what you're shooting - for street, sharp corners are rarely important - and that goes for candid and portrait photography and weddings too . . me? I shoot a lot of nature and landscape and there it DOES matter.

Personally the 24mp of the M is okay - so there's my FF compact, but if you need more, then the A7r really is the only game in town. . . . . I have to keep telling myself that if you can make a 30" print with 24mp . . .then that equates to a 37" print with 36mp - a difference, but not a huge difference.

I think you nail the whole entire issue right here Jono. Well said.

I picked up my A7R yesterday. The first shipment into LA I was told. You lucky folks in the rest of the world have had them for a week already. And I see that has been plenty of time to get everyones feathers nicely ruffled

Me, I almost never shoot a landscape, though once in awhile I do shoot some wild critters when they show up and pose nicely. What I shoot primarily is people, musicians, portrait, lifestyle, event, documentary, the whole enchilada. I still do some tabletop work as well, but that has pretty well died off now days. I used to shoot mostly Leica rangefinders, for all the usual reasons.

Rarely are any of my edges sharp, save for the rejected frames where I accidentally stopped the lens down while focusing F/8 may be great for getting full depth of field consistently, but the realities of shooting in very low light are you never use f/8. I do use f2 - f5.6 most often. So edge smearing isn't something I am particularly concerned with for the most part, nor aware of since I almost never see sharp edges :loco:

What I am concerned with is having a camera body that gets out of my way and allows me to work the way I want to work - stealthy, small, ultra portable, intuitive uncomplicated operation, and with outstanding image quality. That for me has been traditionally Leica M bodies (film and digital), and Leica or Zeiss lenses. But the cost of Leica M has gone out of this professional photographers reach. They have increased in price almost every year of the past fifteen or twenty years, and they will go up again in January.

The Fuji X-E1 was a fine camera for this past year, but in some ways when compared to my old M9 it was lacking. I can't say for sure after just one evening testing, but this A7R feels good so it does look promising. I'll let you know if I find any issues with my lenses, but I'm pretty sure for my kinds of shooting that won't be a problem.