It is Ron Scheffler super well made 21mm test that convinced me to grab the [shoplink 21602 ebay]Voigtländer Ultron 21mm f/1,8 (here on eBay)[/shoplink]. But the question is…how good do M-mount lenses work on the new A7-A7r cameras? Well, Ron just published an impressive(!) list of image samples taken with a huge amount of Leica, Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses. You can read the article and download tons of image samples here: http://www.ronscheffler.com/techtalk/?p=224.
Important note: Ron tested the A7 and not the A7r. And it looks like it’s the A7r and not the A7(!) has has offset micro lenses that might do better with rangefinder lenses (Source: Sony.net A7r and Sonynet A7 and Sony Australia video at 17:30).
The conclusion is quite negative for the A7.
I’ll spill the beans now – none of the rangefinder lenses performed as well on the a7 as they do on the M9, specifically referring to image smearing into the edges/corners. Some are not so bad and are good enough when stopped down sufficiently, but some are outright horrible (ZM21, 28 Cron), to the point where one would think the lens was defective. Naturally there were some variable that couldn’t be tested, such as whether the Novoflex NEX-Leica M adapter I used was perfect.
and
My take on the results: I’m hoping these lenses will fare better on the a7R. Results on the a7 are for the most part disappointing. All I can surmise at the moment is that the toppings on the a7′s sensor work against achieving optimal (or in some cases, good enough) results with the rangefinder lenses I had available for this test.
I would wait before to draw any conclusions yet. The camera wasn’t final production, the adapter may be not perfect, there are still some uncertain factors that could have influenced negatively the test.
Specs and Preorders in US and Canada (Click on store name to see direct preorder page):
Dedicated Sony announcement page at Amazon US (Click here).
Sony A7r body at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Sony A7 body at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Sony A7 with 28-70mm kit lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Sony RX10 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Zeiss 24-70mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Zeiss 35mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Zeiss 55mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
70-200mm A-mount at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Sony A-Mount to E-Mount Lens Adapter at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
Sony A to E adapter with mirror at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
A7/A7r leather case at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
A7/A7r vertical grip at Amazon, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Sony W Series Battery Charger at Amazon, BHphoto.
Sony FA-CS1M Off-Camera Shoe at BHphoto.
Semi-Hard LCD Screen Protector for A7-A7r at Amazon, BHphoto.
Specs and Preorders in Europe:
Sony A7r body at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, FI, WexUK, WexDE.
Sony A7 body at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, FI, FR, WexUK, WexDE. Amazon DE, UK, FR.
Sony A7 with 28-70mm kit Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, FI, FR, WexUK, WexDE. Amazon DE, UK, FR.
Sony RX10 at Sony DE, WexUK, WexDE.
Zeiss 35mm at Sony DE.
Zeiss 55mm at Sony DE.
304 Responses
Only A7r has offset micro lenses (not A7) so A7r might do better with Leica lenses
See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfSrsqn3ESc&feature=share&t=17m31s
(17 minute 30 second into video)
You are right! Thanks for the link!
“The A7 doesn’t employ ‘Gapless on chip’ technology which is deployed in the A7R but the micro lens is optimally positioned.”
The above is Sony’s words in an email to me.
There are differences.
See:
A7: http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-us/products/uxc2/index.html#features
A7R: http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-us/products/o4j5/index.html#features
If those descriptions are accurate (I think they are), the A7R has offset microlenses which the A7’s sensor lacks.
The more pixel optics is used to compensate for the very short flange distance on the A7(R), the worse lenses designed for a longer flange distance will perform.
Legacy lenses are not likely to perform well on the presently configured A7 and A7R.
Put D800 pixel optics and lens mount on the A7(R) and you would have a sensational camera.
After early tests I can say that JPEG files from A7 with CV12 and CV15 and ZM21 looks horrible, some smearing and bad edges with color shift again. End of story. You must use new full frame lenses.
Ok Sony, i can wait one more year
You can always buy an A7 and Leica lens and crop images to the center, as if it was a m4/3 sensor. With Native FE lenses you might even be able to use the APS-C sized sensor. Why should anyone complain?
Center looks pretty ok to me.
Why buying a full frame instead of a much cheaper APS-C NEX when you’re only using the center?
Are you serious? Why buy a full frame camera to use it like an APS-C or M4/3…Why would anyone want to buy a camera to crop all the images? That is just silly
I guess I forgot to put some “sarcasm” warning.
Of course you are both right. It’s stupid to buy a FF camera where you can only use the center of the sensor because the borders are cellphone-like quality. I mean cellphone with half broken lenses, of course (before someone jumps at me saying that his iPhone images are much better than those!).
Well, leica m 240 it is then.
I agree this is very disappointing. Depending on how the A7r fairs I may cancel my order and go with the Leica.
If you can afford Leica – go for it! You won’t regret 🙂
Lloyd Chambers says it crashes. Maybe the last firmware update fixed it?
Also the viewfinder is subpar.
On the other hand, the Sony will break as soon as the guarantee expires,
the UI is still rather toy-like,
the hotshoe might have problems with standard manual flashes,
the battery charger and required numerous extra batteries will considerably raise the price,
and I am not sure if Sony wants extra cash for those “apps” – hint: this is not a mobile phone with the facebook key folks.
Nope, VF is brilliant, RF seems to be updated – what he complained about is that framelines are digital so you need to power up camera to see them and also there’s no way to preview framelines for different focal lengths since there’s no switch like on previous Ms.
good thing I bought an additional 1 year warranty from the sony store for an additional 0.01 cents.
making it a 3Y warranty.
I’ll sell it before that anyway.
The Leica will be worth enough that if you sell it used in two years you’ll be able to buy the current Sony FF without opening your wallet again.
Boom. If same for A7r I might cancel my order.
Actually looking at the A7’s pictures, they are worse than my own experience with the VG900 and the 35mm/50mm Summilux ASPH. This is perplexing, at the very least, why should the VG900, with its extra-thick AA filter, perform better?
However, Brian’s report with the 18mm Distagon was generally positive (a bit of red, fixable in cornerfix), and Zhang Qianli reported on Sina that the 21mm Biogon (worst of the bunch on the A7) is “more or less” usable on the A7r. Let’s hope that the A7r fairs much better in this regard. Sony must know that most early adapters are going to be using third-party glass…and hopefully what they did to the A7r will work.
I’d also like to point out that red corners are just going to show up for pretty much all short-register bodies. The M type 240 relies on built-in correction for most super-wide lenses. Without profiling there is also red and strong vigenetting in the corners.
What people should be concerned about, IMO besides the smearing, is that whether the color shift is TOO severed to be correctable without degrading IQ.
I highly doubt this for most lenses, though. I often work with the NEX7 and the 12mm heliar/ 18mm Distagon. Both have color shift, but one full lens profile can correct for the red tint, vigenetting AND distortion if done properly. There is about a stop of DR loss in the corners, but that is negligible if you don’t push files too hard. With the A7R’s D800-level dynamic range, there should be very little that is “unfixable”
Well, there is one – very, very obvious – a question:
how did the Novoflex E-mount adapter performed on any
(how many) other E-mount bodies?
what shoud be defective with the adapter?
The only possible defects are:
distance not correct: not the case here, focus in center is correct
lens tilted: focal plane would be tilted, not the case here
not close against light: no influence on sharpness
What could be wrong with adapters? Lots, if you believe this article here: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/09/there-is-no-free-lunch-episode-763-lens-adapters
but non of this problems would affect the image like in these samples… sharp in the middle and nowhere else!
With a defective adapter you would have eg. sharp in front left – middle – back right.
There are many different possible anomalies to the adapters, not just decentering. But yea – you are right that it’s cannot be the sole reason for such an enormous issues. Still though it most certainly can be one of the factors that add up to the equation.
The results from that blog are for a lens shot wide open and at infinity only where the corners are affected. If you step down the corners will be better and the tolerance of the length of the adapter will mean less.
“not close against light: no influence on sharpness” – actually it does affect sharpness. You loose contrast, what ends up with a drop of sharpness (perhaps not measured by software (or is it?), but sharpness perceived by human eye).
Ok, the A7r has a sensor shaker (no EFCS) and the A7 doesn’t work with rangefinder glass….
so no buy from me
A possible explanation is given in http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2013/10/two-reasons.html
In particular, it is possible that Leica is cheating and post-processing even the RAWs.
*facepalm*
You serious? Jeez… this trolling on Leica just goes over the board.
Leica cheats, magically transforming blurred images with color shift int brilliant, sharp shots. Oh, I wish Sony or anyone else would have software with such capacities!
How about some more logical explanation? One that makes sense if you apply physics into it? Think about microlenses, think about IR filter, thing about imperfections of adapters, think about sensor design dedicated to catching photons on more extreme angles, etc. etc.
And while having all of these at hand, you choose to believe that “Leica cheats” with software. WTF?!
The article is worth a close read. Refraction in the sensor layers, leads to spatial shift of non-orthogonal lighth rays such that they are dispersed across multiple photodiodes. That’s the physics argument and numbers are given – a 35 micron circle of confusion. This is pretty well accepted by everyone – and was the point Leica trying to eliminate the IR and AA filters in the M8 and subsequent models. The second part about trying to recover the signal using deconvolution filters is more speculative but it’s certainly not impossible.
That article is wrong. Leica used the Kyocera BS7 IR filter in the M8 and M9, which is apparently about the cheapest thing out there. The IR filters from the major manufacturers are already much better and twice as thin as even the m8’s IR filter, let alone the thicker filter in the M9.
There are two separate issues with using m lenses: color shift and smearing (I guess you could say vignetting, too.) Color shift is fixable in software, just like Leica does. Smearing is the bigger issue, and we’ll have to see how the A7R responds.
The M8 doesn’t have an IR filter – you’re thinking of the M9. And yes the M9’s cut filter is rumored to be thicker than what’s available to manufacturers now. However that fact doesn’t invalidate the author’s argument (If anything it makes it stronger).
Don’t get excited. Sony A7R also will process the RAW files.
Read for yourself: http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-us/products/o4j5/index.html#features
+1
Leica has a almost perfect working QM in their whole development, production and Service range. And their design process will just then be finished when it meets the expectations, and so does the production process.
This is reason why no half-ready products from them hit the market.
Sure, the M8 was not a half-ready product. It was just plagued with the IR problem that Leica couldn’t fix. Sure the M9 “didn’t” have all the problems with SD write speed, lock up initially. Yes, the M240 has such a brilliant EVF that would only allow you to zoom in at the center. And yes, you need to send your camera for rangefinder calibration if you want to get consistent focus on a certain lens. I think I can dig more but these are the few things I still remember. The point is that every camera company has their own set of problem. No one is immune. At the moment, Leica still offers the smallest FF system with the highest IQ. If one can pay the admission ticket, by all means. But it’s not because Leica is such an exceptional company at making a competent camera.
+1 fully agree, shame that the new oly EVF doesn’t work on it and that ‘zoom to centre’ only is hopefully fixable by FW update. Still kudos to both Leica for trying to improve M and to Sony for pushing the envelope in technological advancements. Even though I’m not a fan of m43 world, in my mind E-M1 is the most advanced of the mirrorless lot
Dude, u cant turn smeared corners into sharp corners. What leica does in post is remove rlight fall off and colored corners… thats no cheating!
The Rx1r is looking better all the time….
wrong, A7r will be even worse
sorry, you right Rx1r is indeed looking better 😀
give me an rx1 in this body and I’ll pay $3500
Why would you use rangefinder lenses? There are only few of them, limited to the brands used by the tester. There are lots of retrofocal versions of WA-lenses, at relatively small prices, coming from very good brands, and expected to perform very well. Can somebody do a test with those?
OK, including adapter they’re a tad bigger, but for me that’s absolutely no deal-breaker. I am confident my Minolta 17 will perform very well.
So let’s try not to set the image ‘the A7 isn’t suitable for WA-lenses’. I bet that verdict is only partly correct.
You just didn’t get a point. Because one of main selling point of mirrorless design is reduction of size of high quality WA optics. You see, this doesn’t work with the A7 and, by the way, it compromises the whole system: sony lenses must work well on all bodies. That’s why their 35 is only f2.8, not f2.0 in this package, the f2.0 will be huge. Their kit zoom and 24-70 will be smaller too.
Personally, I didn’t have any intention to buy system optics. Now even buying their camera is questionable: I won’t do this until I’ll saw my lux 35 asph fle works well with a7r. It may be good thing: I really dislike their design: nor aesthetics, nor lack of touchscreen, Fixed VF in the middle instead of swivel one (may be in the same place, but tilting does make a great job in better stability), lack of electric first curtain which introduces another huge instability factor. So, that is it.
I don’t understand why you would want a touchscreen, also I really don’t understand how not having an electronic first curtain is a deal breaker. Apparently it’s impossible for sonyalpharumor readers to take sharp pictures? Bump up the ISO, this isn’t film, you’ll still get a great picture.
On another note, I had no idea so many people cared for such wide lenses. Not a single person commenting about 50mm focal length.
well, that’s because we all are quite spoiled nowadays….
Electronic first curtain: okay, I love that feature and would love a fully electronic fully silent shutter a lot more. And I love the EVF with zoom capabilities.
But I’ve here an ancient Exakta Varex SLR with a hooded reflex screen with fold-out magnifying glass. It was a very professional camera in the sixties and my first “real” camera. Still working but its ergonomics are (undescribable) and its sound is like a stroke of a gong compared to modern cameras… and try to focus on such a “view finder”…
And I also have a lot of slides taken at rock concerts in the eighties (on ISO 400 AGFAchrome pushed to 800 and 1600). Even some smartphones make photos with less noise in such lighting situations…
I think a lot of this hype for old glass is just hype because only today we can judge how good or bad those lenses really were…
Or take cars: an old Porsche 356 is a wonderful sportscar and it was a real winner in the fifties and early sixties – but today even a mini car like a Smart is accelerating faster, can go faster and at the same time much more secure than those Porsche…
And nobody would get the idea to put an old Porsche motor in a brand new chassis…
Stupid questions. Because there are many positions where you need to move into awkward positions, while there’s no problem with back screen. And once you are using back screen, it is much more comfortable to choose focus point, magnification center via touching your screen, not selecting via touching keys multiple times.
And, show me your photos.
Size is a deal-breaker for many, that is why people like to use rangefinder lenses. Also, rangefinder wide angles are generally great.
If size matters, why use spectacularly fast UWA’s like 1.8/21?
And I never bought the NEX because it was small like I never bought the Olympus OM-2 especially for that reason. A camera body shouldn’t be bigger than absolutely necessary, that’s all. I’d feel completely ridiculous with a big hump of plastic and metal in my hand, knowing all its functions fit in a small body. Just my two cents, I know a lot of people like the feel of a big camera actually (waving around their huge zooms like baseball bats). On the other hand, I could easily live with an inch extra for an adapter. In the end, it’s all about IQ, and if rangefinder lenses don’t work, it doesn’t mean the camera is crap, especially given the number of available UWA rangefinder lenses on the market and their excessive prices.
Because the 21 1.8 is both very fast and reasonably small for a lens this fast and wide.
RF wides can be perfect for street work when they are small and unobtrusive, but the very fast one are also light and compact compared to DSLR counterparts – try even find ing a DSLR 21 1.4 or 1.8.
I am not sure what we are arguing here. You asked why one would use rangefinder lenses and I answered that. Nobody is saying the camera is crap.
An inch extra adapter is hardly the whole issue. Just look at the size of the 12 and 15mm CVs. Nothing comparable in the DSLR world. They also cost 800 and 600USD, respectively, which do not strike me as excessive prices, given the performance and build quality. The Zeiss 18mm and the Zeiss ZM 18mm cost the same, but the ZM is better and lighter, and shorter, and will need a shorter adapter. It’s easy to see why someone would like these lenses to work on the A7/r.
Even less used, I paid for my Voigtlander 15 with external VF in mint condition £320
Hexxx, You wasted cash. That one is horrible even on the M cams. Not a prayer on the A7R. 🙁
@ Hendrick – works beautifully on my M6 and really really well on my X-Pro1 😉 I know what I buy and I rest everything. On all used gear I have 6 months warranty and can return it within 2 weeks. Beauty of brick and mortar specialized shops in used gear. Now abroad with Mamiya 6 and 50mm lens – walk around medium format combo
The cv 15mm is a great lens. I’ve used in on film and my Epson R-D1. Enjoy it!
Ummm thank you admin
This review is really interesting. I am thinking I should not pull the trigger for pre-order. More and more reviews keep coming.
@Kenneth
I wouldn’t pre-order any new camera system. Wait until there are some serious test reviews and at least a couple of months of feedback from early adopters. Let other people be the unpaid beta testers.
Now that is some good advice. I wouldn’t pre-order anything. Too many things can go wrong, just like the first generation Intel Macbook Pro/Macbooks. It is great to see Sony trying to offer some groundbreaking cameras, but if they images taken with them are only sharp in the centre, it would be pointless to buy them…
I would take the Ultron if you want to sell it now 😉
Looks like it was bad idea to put FF into “E” mount 🙁
Why ? Because you can’t use 50 years old lenses made for other cameras ?
+1
“Why ? Because you can’t use 50 years old lenses made for other cameras ?”
Well, I won’t be using any 50yr old lenses .However I would very much like to use some of my lenses amongst which are some of the best lenses ever made in their respective focal length and aperture. This new system is bereft of native mount lens choices , you have one slow 35mm, one overpriced 55 mm, a low grade kit zoom and a pair of F4 zooms { any results from them ?} hardly comprehensive.
This is not just incompatibility with old lenses. It is lack of room for FF sensor in E mount. And corners problem as result.
The corner problems have nothing to do with squeezing FF sensor into the E mount. It is strictly the well known problem of compact wide angle lenses projecting images onto the sensor at extreme angles. This works for film, and is problematic for digital sensors. This is what led Leica to say years ago that there would be no digital M cameras–though they subsequently made them anyway and tried to compensate for the problem. Sony has less motivation to tailor their cameras for other people’s lenses, since they neverafe compact wife angles themselves..
Because if you use it, 18mm flange on 44mm image circle causes angles of light to be too steep, which causes all kinds of problems – vignetting, color smearing, sharpness loss, minimal focus distance being too long… to compensate, you would have to add the distance lost in the mount to each lens over and over and over again, adding to the length, weight and cost of lenses. Sure, you may save on lens costs avoiding retrofocal design between 18 and 35-39mm compared to SLR lenses if you are willing to accept the compromises. And sure something like 28-70/3.5-5.6 ends up very cheap and relatively small.
Ahhh Cat….the voice of ignorance. Have you ever used a great lens like the Zeiss 25mm Biogon in Leica mount??? There is nothing out there from any DSLR manufacture that comes close to its performance let alone its small size. That is just one example of many great rangefinder lenses….and by the way they aren’t all 50years old.
Leica R lenses to the rescue. I use 4 on the d800e and they are wonderful.
They’re pretty affordable! Hmm.
The prices of some Leica R lenses may start to climb
And not only Leica R 🙂
They already did, at least here in the UK – after introduction of M240. Stupid me that I didn’t buy at least the basic set when everybody was crying about the lack of Leica’s commitment to R system and lenses were cheap.
Incredible how bad a $7000 lens can be on a $7000 camera. Look at the sample downloads. Unsharp corners, CA, you name it. It’s all just a hype.
Ummm…first of all that is a $1600 camera. Also, The corners are likely bad as much because they are almost OOF as the sensor itself. No such issue are reported with the 21mm Summilux on the M type 240, as it is a modern design made to accommodate digital sensors.
What really surprised me was not that the range finder lenses didn’t do great, but that the Canon EF lenses had so much vignetting at wide apertures. The files being large, I only downloaded a few, but if all fast lenses had problems at large apertures, I kinda understand why the new FE lenses aren’t that fast, and why the 55mm f/1.8 is so expensive (if they had to make it really complicated to perform well anyway).
those are not canon EF
Oops, you’re totally right! Thanks, that gives me some hope!
So maybe I go better with Samyang 14 2.8 instead of CV12 5.6 with my a7.
But last question is about the CV21 1.8…
I too like CV 21/1.8 very much, but why oh why didn’t they make its hood removable? Mostly I love shooting seascape/landscape and look for a rangefinder wide prime lens for my set of Lee filters.
1.) Great expectations…
2.) Native UWA zoom is coming.
3.) Zuiko, MD and Hexanon shooters would be just fine with A7.
Have been waiting for a review like this. The A7 looks no worse than the NEX-7 but I think everyone was expecting results like the 5N. Hopefully we see the same tests for the A7R soon. If its better than this will sway me to get the A7R.
As days go by I’m more and more skeptical about this cameras. First the shutter sound seems to make it useless for works in theaters. Then I told myself: ok, I’ll go on in theaters in my old way, and use it for fun in streets (wrong again, camera shake due to the loud shutter looks like an issue). I’ll use it for landscaping then, and here we are with another fail.. Only portraits remain, but at this point I think I’ll pass, at least if a7r turns out to be a completely different camera.
In one word:disappointing.
Thanks Andrea for the links, let’s hope in the near future we’ll have better news!
Exactly the same thought as you. Very openminded to make concessions, but in the end, the sum of too many concessions makes a lot to accept. Perhaps cheapness is still too expansive.
Did SLR users complain so loudly that they could not shoot street photography because of mirror slap? Of course not. And no, not everyone used mirror lockup on every shot. These things are so magnified and blown out of proportion into hysteria.
SLR shooters will not complain much because the mirror slap (noise) is much more subdued. Marco only said that the shutter shock might cause blur (due to hand shake). It is real problem and only understood by people with some experience.
Everybody welcomed with massive praises the 5DIII’s silent shutter option. So there must be a pretty strong interest in quieter shutters, even among SLR users.
A lot of the street shooters were using Leica’s before.
I am in the same situation. A7r is too loud for weddings, my favorite look is wide open nocti-a7r won’t give me this. It will not have fast AF with my canon L zooms. I don’t want the unattractive, bulky LAEA4 and overpriced A mount 70-200 and I do not want to sell my 645D to fund both a M240 or MM and the a7r+lenses.
The only plus is that I could use it with my 3 FD L lenses 24/85/135 but this still does not cover my needs for street photography-only my 35Lux and Nocti can do that.
I am getting tired of renting a Leica for special occasions, settling for less and having 3 different camera systems that still don’t cover all of my needs.
Poor you. Obviously, there is something wrong here. It might be the photographer (gasp). I know of many photographers that can certainly make better pictures than you, and none of them needs three different systems to just barely make it. Yes, the only “real” street photographers are using the Lux 35 FLE and Noct. The rest are posers….
Bully alert
I didn’t ask for your critique and do not appreciate being stalked and bullied.
LOL, since when stating the truth is an act of bullying? And you’re so full of yourself to think that I would spend my energy to stalk you. I just try to keep things in perspective since there are so many unreasonable whiners here. Please if you think you have a valid point, I’m all ears.
This isn’t going to stop me with my A7 order. I have no use for more than 24MP, I want on-sensor PDAF and I almost never shoot wide-angle, only 50mm+ (people). The only manual lens I hope to be able to use is the Samyang 85mm F1.4 and I don’t expect any problems with that … hopefully … mine has a Nikon mount and I have a Nikon-NEX adapter, I’m sure it will be fine 🙂
Listen up team, this is a group effort. Answer me this – Does anyone know for sure exactly what the file size/MP will be of a photo shot with APS-C e-mount NEX lenses@16×9 and when you shoot video do you loose quality at all? Please consider your answers, I don’t want an opinion but thee actuality. I have my own opinions and can do without them, facts are facts.
So, this guy had the camera for an hour and a half and he managed to test 19 lenses in 3 different scenarios and several aperture settings! Well, hats off!
Although I highly appreciate the work of Ron Sheffler, this test is not very meaningful to me. The conditions were not good (low contrast) and for the infinity wide angle test you see either sky or leaves very close to the lens in the edges which do not really allow to judge the edge performance.
If you look at the samples wider open than f/8, you mainly see flaws of the lenses but not of the sensor anyway.
If someone wants to judge how it compares to results from the M9, he also must show comparable examples taken in the same situation and settings and scaled to the same resolution.
Sorry, but this test is not helpful.
If these lenses would be as bad as in these samples with other cams they would know as worst lenses ever. But the oposite is true.
On most samples you can judge the edeges, they are horrible. No way to talk around that, that has nothing to do with contrast, adapter or what so ever.
The A7 (at this stage) is no use for wideangle rangefinder lenses. Thats the dissapointing truth. The usable area is samler than the aps-c area of the 5n.
I wait for the A7n or perhaps fuji or pana is faster with a useable ff.
I’ve found on the NEX 7 the Voigtlander SLR lenses were generally better than the range finder one, they are very small compared to normal DSLR lenses, but there is a very limited selection.
Good news, if people do not buy the a7 price will come down quick 😉
I use Canon macro lenses so A7 is going to be just fine, no EFSC is a non go for the A7r.
I will probably will buy a kit with the 28-70; Ok, it is a slow lens but it is weather sealed and as light as a FF zoom can be; I would preffer a 24-50 f4 though
Bammmm! So much for living in the past … It is time to wake up now. I agree it may be a bummer for people with much “old” stuff lying around, but I am sure Sony wants to sell its own native lenses, too.
That’s excellent could you point me to the native fast wide angle lenses the fast 35mm, a fast 50mm { reasonable size and price would be a bonus }, a macro, fast standard zoom fast tele zoom ,TSE lens etc.Oops there do not seem to be any, a huge potential market for these camera is from people with FF glass looking for smaller bodies, or in the case of Canon shooters access to a 36mp sensor.
Well, the thing was released not even a week ago.
I know Vlad, obviously its going to take time to build a system.The problem is that anyone wanting to use any of the options I mentioned has no choice but to consider adapted lens.
I am only looking for a 28mmF1.8, a 50mm F1.4 and an 85mm F1.4 that work on this ,obviously if I could get high quality native mount lenses that would be my first choice.Sony does not have the lens system in situ to attract users of other systems so they need to entice people in with the bodies and gradually generate a market for the lenses to come.
Agreed. It’s just that Sony obviously doesn’t have an interest in providing support for other brands’ lenses and more specifically RF ones. They won’t be able to sell any of theirs otherwise.
I will probably be going for Contax, some Canon and a couple of native lenses, in the end. It would’ve been awesome to be able to use those wide CVs though.
oh come on, they would be able to sell them anyway. these rangefinder lenses are often quite expensive and lack AF and weather sealing.
if sony will provide native wide angles of good quality with af and weather sealing, I bet even people who already have a rf lens of the corresponding fl will buy them.
it’s just nice to be able to use old lenses on a new cam
The Voigtlanders aren’t that expensive, actually. Yes, they can put AF, OSS and weather sealing, which will make the lenses bigger and costlier. Look at the price of that 55mm.
I am not saying Sony won’t be able to sell any lens, but developing a sensor that works with RF lenses, just so people can access the system earlier and potentially losing future lens sales? Not a clearcut decision.
actually, hasn’t been released yet 😉
I agree in so far as it is always frustrating that new systems start out with a rather meager collection of lenses (eg m43). But regarding every discussion concerning new systems people seem to think that manufacturers just have to produce bodies that work with each individual collection everybody possesses, especially old film lenses. So, why not just buy a M9 or M240 then?
When you are waiting for lenses to develop, and then buy those, you often get ridiculed at (too expensive, too large etc). As was the case with “huge” 43 lenses, that where/are incredibly good wide-open. It took CaNikon many years to get their old film designs up to scratch. And before anzbody labels me as a 43 troll, I am here because I am mightily intested in the A7(r) & 24-70 combo.
Regards
Just canceled my preorder of the A7R.
Will wait some more months and see what further tests will say… .
Smart decision. Never, ever pre-order the camera before reviews are released. Each time before you click a “preorder” button – think about Nikon D600.
For most people with a problem D600 a sensor clean fixed it. With every report we hear every photo we see from the A7/a7r my faith in them gets lower and lower.I do not feel that is is simply bad photographers,or any other of the mountain of excuses getting posted here, I am beginning to think that there is some intrinsic design flaw.
The A7r is super tempting but I will certainly not be pre-ordering and will wait on a raft of tests before even thinking about.Sony seem to have some wonderful ideas and technology the problem seems to be implementation.
For a long time the NEX 7 was being derided for its image quality. Once a lot of people started to use it that all disappeared and now it’s the most requested for a minor update. I think the same thing is happening here and we all have to wait for production models to get into everyone’s hands to see what they can do with the Raw’s. Just look at what Brian Smith did.
Most of those photos from Brian Smith had such extreme processing that you could not tell anything about the quality
Munroe： No, you can still see that is not much corner sharpness loss with the Distagon 18mm.
To me the NEX-7 still is an abomination! The NEX-6 is a much better camera (or sensor). I don’t understand why you would quote Smith as an example. He is so manipulative that he even put in an image from the ZM 18/4 with it corners chopped. Even 2 year olds can spot that none of it is real reflection of the camera’s capabilities.
Majority got it fixed? Since when? Nikonrumors survey disagrees: http://nikonrumors.com/2013/09/30/nikon-d600-sensor-dustoil-survey-results.aspx/
You cannot trust anonymous internet surveys about cameras no serial numbers taken no proof of ownership.There are way too many trolls and fanboys of other brands who will do anything and post anything to attack their rival brand. I am sure you know the type who posts all sorts of nonsense about other brands with zero sources and with no substantiation
The D600 has never been out of the top 20 selling DSLR,s it is still there even now
http://www.amazon.com/b/ref=browse_10pack_dslr_dslr?node=3017941&pf_rd_p=1633338602&pf_rd_s=merchandised-search-6&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_i=3017941&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0GRENR1X8Q67H9C8FM75
No one is saying there was not a problem with some D600 cameras but a “survey” that suggests 2 out of 3 were affected is ridiculous
Well, they did bring the D610 just one year later. Form me, they are fixing a problem. Unless they decided to do FF bodies every year.
Yeah I dont understand the pre-order things. Why do people buy something that even cannot be sure that it will be really good for big investment?
We have time and no need to hurry. Let’s wait for more reliable reviews.
To make sure I get one if the reviews turn out to be favorable. Imagine if Sony didn’t allow preorders for their most anticipated upcoming product, the Playstation 4! Everybody would be lining and/or climbing over each other to get one at launch. That’s just silly.
Also, it’s pretty easy to return an unopened box for a full refund. Absolutely no downside to pre-ordering.
Why so soon? I don’t get charged until iy is shipped. I going to wait for more reviews before cancelling.
So after days of saying it are we finally ready to accept it? the output on these cams are SOFT.
28mm summicron not much indeed…
this makes me believe 28mm elmarit will do not much either…
hope to see a7r tested with at least this much rangefinder glass soon!
I would love to see some samples from the Voigtlaender 21mm f4… But this review is certainly lowering my hopes 🙁
Not sure if (big if) A7r would be any better considering it’s 36mp – waste of the pixels in my mind. History is repeating again, Sony doesn’t have lenses sorted out.
I don’t know why Sony should have these sorted out, considering that these won’t be make revenue for Sony and Sony probably does not even have access to some of them, which have been out of production for some time.
It would make me very happy if the A7r were to play nicely with RF wides – but should it not I’m not going to blame Sony for not trying, just as I don’t blame Nikon for not taking my EF 50 1.4
The difference is Victor that Nikon users do not need to mount a Canon 50mm F1.4 as they have their own. The choices with this system are obviously due its newness are very restricted making it a poor choice. If native lenses are your plan though even here I cant say I have bee impressed with what I have seen so far
Sony is promising 15 lenses in 2015, which is not bad IMO.
Also, as I have pointed out in a post above, red corners are totally fixable, and the even the NEX7 controls smearing to a very reasonable degree for RF wides, espcially compared to the Fuji cameras.
The compact factor is simply not possible with any other combination, Sony’s own e-mount lenses are just as large and heavy as A-mount ones.
Well, by 2015 you will have at lest 2 more generations of cameras, many undoubtedly better (and cheaper) than A7/A7r now, so no point buying those today.
+1 for peevee
Victor, let’s be honest here, the system lenses, the choice of apertures and so on is crap. They’re expensive and slow. Sony should have taken lesson from Fuji when they introduced X-Pro1. Fuji provided tried and tested golden trio – wide, standard, portrait and all of them large aperture lenses. You could buy X-Pro1and all 3 lenses and call it a day. There’s nothing of interest to me from introduced lenses by Sony – sorry, it’s just reality. I was looking forward to these cams but now I don’t really care, will either save for M240 or will wait for FF Fuji
I think Fuji X-mount system is here way longer and it is smaller sensor- I know you know it, but this is apples to oranges (however understand your point about excellent Fuji lenses line-up)
Hezz that is hitting it on the nail. Basically there is no standard kit of lenses to cover you with. There are gaps in the system which if your only going to use this camera means lost shots. The kit lens is so poor and the Zeiss version does not come out to February which is a laughable situation to be in. So you are then left with the 35mm f2.8 and what do you do sell that when you get the zoom a couple of months later?
But they are very high quality primes, price not withstanding. The 55 1.8 seems only inferior to the new Leica 50mm primes, it looks a bit better than even the Zeiss planar ZM on paper. The 35 2.8 is amazingly sharp stopped down, although it really shouldn’t cost $800.
Anyways the vast majority of my investment is in Minolta and Leica, so I might be tempted to get an A7 or A7r even if the wides suck. And I believe Sony should go with some more exotic options to increase the appeal of the system – maybe a 35mm f1.2 and a 21mm f2.0 for the wide end.
The attractiveness of the launch offerings depends solely on the individual. Making a blanket statement that it is “crap” is, well crap.
Yeah, I wish the 35mm was faster but looking at my catalog of RX1 shots, most were at or above 2.8 because of the slow max shutter speed. The A7 takes care of that so I’m looking at it as an even swap with the benefit of much more flexibility.
People are forgetting how absolutely compact this little beast is.
Add to that the ability to use my C/Y Zeiss and Contax G lenses – likely with excellent results, and I’m looking at this in a very positive light. Throw in the LA-EA4 to use my A-mount lenses and this is starting to look like a dream.
For someone coming from Canon/Nikon or looking to use UWA rangefinder glass, maybe the A7 is not as attractive but for the price point, size, power and flexibility, I don’t think there will be a camera like it for quite some time.
But it is not flexible as key lenses are missing. One prime and a poor quality kit lens at launch is not good enough.
First big thanks to Ron for this test and Andrea for posting it. Although I never had high hopes for RF lenses to perform well on these bodies, I am surprised no one commented on the rather strong descentering issue of the newly released Zeiss 35mm f2.8 yet. Take a look at the “foliage brick wall”, notice the blur on the right side of the image, especially the top right corner-throughout the range from 2.8 to 5.6-only at f8 it starts to not be an issue. Field curvature? I don’t thinks so, since the left side looks so much better throughout the aperture range. Decentering issues are usually found in lenses of complex design, super wides and zooms, I am surprised to see it here on a fairly standard, newly released Zeiss lens /:
Yes, I think you are right. Otherwise, it looks like a good performer though.
quality control issues, shouldn’t happen on a Zeiss imho, agree, both the 35mm and 55mm are sharp already wide open, the 55mm looks like the better performer of the two
Mike, I thought you would know by now that these Zeiss Sony are not assembled by Zeiss. Sure they have a certificate with each lens. But I doubt that each lens is tested. It’s more likely one lens from a batch is tested for quality. Beside, decentering (left/right asymmetry) is not an uncommon issue. You just have to buy one, test it yourself and return if it doesn’t meet your expectation. With Samyang, you might have to do 4 or 5 times to get a good one. With Sony Zeiss, you might have to do it once (and the price does reflect that).
I stopped by the Sony store in my home town this evening – they one 7 and 2 7rs to try out in a corner of the store dedicated to promoting the 7/7r. When I asked if I can bring my 28 Chron and take a few shots, the Sony rep said no problem, but I would have to bring my own adapter (no surprise). I just hope they’ll let me use my own SD card. If they do, I’ll report back.
I do not think it is design flaw; so, a high reolution digital camera does not work well with 70 year old analog era short flange-back lenses?
I am sure future wide angles for the FE system will work well, as digital sensor limitations will be taken into account; digital sensors do not like step light angles
Of course you can also just buy a leica M so you can use all that RF glass
However if you are owner of some modern Canon glass you will be more than happy of using it with a D800E like sensor on a small package
For sure its a design flaw. Just look at the differnece between the nex 5 and 5n! same sensors-size and the 5n works better with 70 year old glas than the 5 – even with its higher resolution. So the design of the sonsor affects the degree how good it works with rf lenses. And the pixel density of the 5 and 5n is higher than the pixeldensity of the A7.
As a first impersion even the aps-c area of the A7 looks worse than some of the lenses with an digital aps-c cam. So the A7 sensors doesnt pair with that lenses. And many customers intended to use ff icle for that.
And yes, 5 and 5n are digital 😉
The NEX 5 and 5n are APS-C cameras – so you are cropping out the area that will have the most problems on a larger sensor.
what of “even the aps-c area of the A7 looks worse” needs further explanation?
I did croped a few of these samples to aps-c size, the edeges are still unacceptable.
Agreed …
Told you – using old lenses with adapter with $1,700 camera is foolish. None of film-era lenses are good enough for 24 mpix, yet alone 36 mpix, and adapters add their own problems (see the article from lensrentals). If you want the camera for image quality, prepare to pay “Zeiss-branded” outlandish prices and suffer from the lack of native lenses.
Peevee……dude…..the RF lenses aren’t the problem….the sensor is the problem. The lenses are world class….as anyone knows who has shot them on a camera with a sensor designed for them can tell you. Put these lenses on a M8/M9/M240 and then tell me how they suck.
Have you seen the shots with the native lenses? Theyre soft! It’s the sensors man, accept it. Its not just the kit, the 35mm even stopped down is super soft
Oh dear looks like Sony messed up here by downgrading the A7’s sensor without the micro lenses it’s killed it stone dead for rangefinder users.
Actually it won’t help Sony’s own native lenses either esp the wider ones when they turn up. Looks like Sony has shafted A7 users by cobbling the sensor
This is a deal breaker big time for a lot of folks.
Sony’s wide angle lenses for this system will be retrofocal designs – and you can bet there will also be some corrections happening in firmware for their own lenses.
The A7 has microlenses, just not the new gapless design.
Yes, digital sensor needs a microlens stack to focus the light into the each sensel. The 7R has off-set microlenses to enhance the light gathering capability under steep angle incident ray. Coupled with that, it has a gapless design to enhance the light gathering capability in general (obviously with light would not be gathered at the gap).
Here is a shocking headline. Look away if you have a weak stomach. Wide lenses designed for film will have corner problems on the A7 and A7r. It is fact. Inevitable.
Guess what? Same thing with the M240. (Less so with M9/ME.)
The big difference is YOU have to cook the RAW files.
The world, thankfully, has not come to an end. You will make wonderful images with either camera. Have faith. Be strong.
+1 lol
Well, you need to be more specific. Only WA with rear element very close to the sensor. SLR WA’s tends to be further since it has to clear the mirrorbox. So we don’t have problem there. People just want everything for cheap. Obviously, Leica custom-tuned their filter stack to play well with their lenses (well, otherwise they won’t have any sale). Why would Sony need to tune their stack to the same specifications when their lens design philosophy is different (cheap enough for consumers so there will be no incurred miniaturizing cost)? Look at the test, the Sonnar 55/1.8 can easily trade blow with the Lux 50 ASPH. And that Lux is a $3500 lens… The whiners don’t know enough to appreciate things in life…
Hah! Gotta love your post Bart. A hefty dose of reality. In capture one the lens corrections take all of maybe 3 seconds? Life is difficult.
Jared explain to me how you fix smeared corners…..and no, cropping is not a fix.
Some of these lenses are designed for digital sensors (well, redesigned) mainly be using an image telecentric design. But not all telecentric lenses are 100% telecentric. In fact, some only achieve it at moderate focus distances as a compromise. This is especially true in ultra fast lenses which are expected to be used to generate bokeh.
Sadly at this time all of this person’s files are locked out on Google Docs because Google Docs is a stupid way to share files. It’s not designed for mass distribution. Did anyone by chance mirror any of this or at least get a good look at the CV35 (Voigtlander 35/1.2) as it’s really the only lens out of all of these I both hoped would work and expected would work decently.
Also everyone griping about the FE 55/1.8, have you not noticed that so far this is practically a “perfect” lens? Most 50mm lenses are total trash. This lens is sharp across the frame wide open which is far more than can be said about most any 50mm lens costing less than $1000, regardless of the max aperture.
The fact is, these are launch lenses, there will be future lenses, if you don’t like what’s on offer now, just wait a year. Sony’s not going to abandon this camera line within at least 3 years, that’s just insane business.
As for me, this review simply points me in one of the two directions I had intended to head with manual glass. Instead of some RF glass I’ll stick to lovely small-SLR options. These lenses are often very small even with the 2-3cm adapters in place. And since the CAMERA is still drastically smaller than full frame SLRs (even smaller than a ridiculously overpriced Leica M), the whole package will still be much more compact and a more enjoyable shooting experience than a split prism.
Anyway, I suspect most people here were just looking for an excuse to cancel the order they never needed to make in the first place (and for those that decide not to pre-order, you were probably too late to get a camera this year anyway).
If the 35/1.2 doesn’t end up looking acceptable it just tells me to get the FE 35/2.8 which, other than not being super bright, is obviously a wonderful lens and is super small and light with weather sealing and autofocus and will be delivering images of excellent quality on a superior format to APS-C cameras regardless of lens. What’s not to like?
+1
“lso everyone griping about the FE 55/1.8, have you not noticed that so far this is practically a “perfect” lens? Most 50mm lenses are total trash. This lens is sharp across the frame wide open which is far more than can be said about most any 50mm lens costing less than $1000, regardless of the max aperture.”
have you bought, used, or tested it? or did you just read the paper spec?
lol
Perhaps he actually made the effort to download the files and look at them ?
+1
this lens seems to be a winner i just hope that the 35 ist at least as good as the canon offering the one with IS and F2. I dont care about the one stop more light i need it to be near perfect at f5,6.
This test and the australian test come to show that the choice A7 or A7r is going to be tough
A7 – better shutter 1/250 sync speed and electronic first curtain option; also has faster AF
A7r – better corrected sensor for wide lenses, stunning detail
So if one is to use the new crop of Zeiss lenses in AF mode A7 may be easier to use.
If one is after top Iq and will use other rangefinder lenses, well A7r would be the best bet.
I guess we need to wait for more reports to come out to make the list of differences complete and be able to do educated choice.
There is a big worry about A7r and corners. We will see how it goes.
1. Sure, it has no AA filter, shallower pixel ‘wells’ and optimized microlenses. These are good and improve corner performance
2. The sensor is 36MP and the photo site ‘buckets’ are significantly smaller… Making them much harder targets for photons coming in at an angle.
3. For perspective… The pixel pitch is kind of like a NEX5n, but the corners are a lot more distant from the rear element. A negative
We pray that the positives above can overcome the negatives. Time will tell.
I don’t use Leica rangefinder lenses on my full frame NEX-VG900 and there are some full frame 20mm lenses that are very small even with adapter like my SMC Pentax-M 20mm F4.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8182/7996707199_ef69cb77fd_k.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8338/8170745790_59300d69fc_k.jpg
http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-M-20mm-F4-Lens.html
http://www.northcoastphotographer.net/blog/files/eac31863b7c488eb210d48810fb4a74e-4.html
I am also temporarily blocked from downloading the images. I was wondering if anyone had a chance to view the images from the 28-70mm kit lens. How did they look?
not that good really
but acceptable for the price
Don’t care much. Native lenses will do for me.
Anyway, if you’re willing to shoot with old, unoptimized lenses then you should be prepared to do a lot of post-processing.
Extremely disappointing. Bad performance which I believe many were not expecting. NEX wasn’t that good either but the usability is out of question. The performance of A7R won’t be better. Seems Sony want to sell some lenses, not only cameras.
The full frame A7, A7r and VG900 work great with the 200 million DSLR lenses out there but not that well with high priced Leica rangefinder lenses so if all you use is DSLR lenses what is the problem ?
“The ability to use any full frame lens in the world means you’re never locked into a system and there are no image quality compromises. The low price means you can also spend some extra money on the many great full frame lenses available. If you have lenses for Canon EF, Pentax K, Leica R, Olympus OM, Nikon F, or Canon FD, the A7 & A7R are worthy of your consideration.”
https://www.thecamerastore.com/blog/2013/10/15/sony-a7-a7r-hands-field-test
I feel like I am 16 again when I couldn’t afford the fast 85L and had to settle for Canon’s 85/1.8 except Sony’s 55/2.8 is slower, has less bokeh and is more expensive.
Unfortunately, I am not able to invest into another camera system unless it will work with my Leica glass or replace one of my existing systems.
So, here is an idea. Sell all this “glorious” Leica glass … though I agree that the Zeiss you are talking about is too expensive, and other stuff does not exist (yet).
This link: http://forum.xitek.com/thread-1223675-1-1-1.html. In fact, not too bad.
Thanks! Is it possible to see the images in full size?
Nope, only large previews.
But those actually look fine…espcially the 35mm Summilux FLE and 90mm APO-summicron ones. None of the severe vignetting reported in ron’s test. And the 12mm really holds things together better than even on the NEX-7. I would expect as much vignetting from a 12mm but color shift is minimal.
And the 21mm 1.8 looks nearly perfect, but I don’t know what aperture those shots were made. The retrofocus design certainly helps, though.
more of a color shift test
doesnt tell much about smearing, which is not fixable in software
What about using a7/a7r on other old but not rangefinder lenses such as canon fd?
SLR lenses should be OK – but all but the best may reveal their defects.
In my experience Nikon’s 12mp full frame D700 worked very well with many F-mount SLR lenses ~ but put the same lenses on the 36mp D800 or D800E and most look weak.
There are some FD/F/K/A mount etc lenses that should (hopefully) perform very well on these sensors as the flange distance that these lenses were designed for is much further away.
This means that the light hitting the sensor is coming more from straight ahead so it works as it should. The rangefinder lenses sit very close to the sensor, so for the light to hit the corner pixels it has to travel at a steep angle, cutting across the pixels to the edge of the sensor which results in the sensor not being able to capture it as well and producing a smearing affect. This is why Sony have tries to angle the edge receptors so the light hits it straighter
Sony clearly want a-mount and other SLR mount lenses to be used on this whilst they build up their lens arsenal, most lenses with longer flange distance over 40mm will hopefully produce results more along the lines of what sony are anticipating
The test above hasn’t shown these lenses will work well but certainly hasn’t shown that they won’t either (as far as I can tell form the comments as I too can’t download the photos!). As mentioned above, some of the better FD glass will be needed, but here’s some great glass out there.
It’s really quite funny to read some of your posts. I’m so mad at Sony and this original innovative camera. It’s in a class all it’s own but I’m going to compare it to everything that has ever existed. It’s like trying to explain a painting to a robot.
The a7/r is amazing but some people cannot afford to invest into another system that will not either replace or work well with their existing systems.
I don’t think that is the market for this camera. I think this camera is a great investment for someone that wants to get into full frame but never has. If you’re here to try and trade up brands from a canon full frame DSLR to this or even a entry full frame Nikon. Then you’re in the wrong place. Keep waiting another year or even longer, then Sony will have it’s ducks in a row to compete with that market as a whole. For now, Sony has done something no one else has for this kind of price and features. It’s in a class all its own and all the tools are there, welcome newcomers, keep to yourself clunky old equipment backpack carrying DSLR community. Yet, these cameras ARE going to work with the existing systems but not at a 3,000 dollar’s competitor camera. The Sony Motto is the 3-B’s: “Big Bang for the Buck” – the end
Good camera w/o good lenses is as good as a chick with a dick
What kind of dick? It all depends.
… unless there’s such a preference 😉 – to keep options open
Expecting a brand new camera to have limitless options the second it comes out is as good as some kid ranting on a forum about how innovation doesn’t meet expectation. It’s almost as bad as assuming that this persons sexuality is the norm and everyone would agree with that preferred statement. I’m still buying an Xbox One on day one but none of the good games come out until 2014. I also think technology is awesome and would never just expect and complain about such brilliance but also I’m not in my 20s.
you can always use the other mount
@ JUS7IAN – I prefer to use my gear not to cherish technical advancements achieved by them. Technically brilliant product that’s not fulfilling intended use is to me just a technical exercise, nothing else.
Don’t get me wrong, I really wish that to Sony, but I don’t see any point in buying this camera now if I need to wait for good lenses for another 2 years. In 2 years there might be another FF cameras on the market with better selection of lenses. I never buy a camera based only on tech specs. For me more important is system and wants available for it. As I said, Fuji nailed it with the lens lineup at the launch of X-Pro1 -> 18mm f/2 (27mm), 35mm f/1.4 (50mm), 60mm f/2.4 (90mm). That’s what you need if you want to launch new system, wide – standard – portrait.
My MF set ups contain exactly the same angles of view – this covers 95% of uses. Camera/lens manufacturers have known this for years, look at Mamyia 6 system, Leica M system, Hasselblad V system, Contax G system and list could go on.
We all know that the a7/r is amazing. I have said it more than once. Stating my disappointments and needs isn’t bad and does not infer that the a7/r is not amazing.
There is a market for everyone including me and my rangefinder lenses especially if you consider that Sony’s a7/r was fashioned after rangefinders, marketed to those who love them (and cannot afford Leica) yet now their first flagship FF E mount camera has aced out many of the people it was originally marketed towards.
As for Sony’s future lenses, fast primes have been coveted since before I started photography but Sony’s lens road map of 1 year doesn’t include fast primes (2.8 is a fast zoom not a fast prime). I am more than willing to purchase the 55/2.8 and f4 zooms but I need it to work with my Leica lenses too.
Heidi, I don’t believe it was Sony’s intent. I believe that they’d like to start a new system and attract dSLR shooters and give them option to use their existing lenses on a smaller body. Based on the shape of the camera, controls and so on I don’t think that RF users were the ones they wanted to get onboard.
Who knows, maybe cooperation between Sony and Zeiss will bring us digital Ikon – I would probably behave more erratically than die hard Apple fanboys and would build a tent in front of their store 🙂
I don’t see a rangefinder anywhere in any of the NEX…. The point was to design a small camera by removing the mirror box and shortening the flange distance. That is what Samsung saw it (and that’s why they failed) without pushing it further for other extra perks (short enough for the small lens system such as Leica M and C-mount). Wait until there is more test for the 7R before you express your disappointment. Not like you have any other choice. Learn to appreciate things in life….
Isn’t the 55 supposed to be f1.8?
The Xitek samples do not support the idea of using RF lens on A7. The result from 35lux and 50lux are not good enough compared to those on M9, which I use and know for two years. The productive thought, at least to me, is to buy A7 for those Zeiss FE lenses.
Really? You can judge that the A7 is “not as good as” the M9 from three grossly compressed shots, in a tiny online colorspace, all of which were close-ups wide open?
As far as I could tell (and yes, I have extensive experience with both lenses) the pictures look just fine. To tell if the A7 paired is better or worse than the M9 requires many more shots, especially pictures stopped down.
If you want to adapt wide angle lenses to these cameras I think you are much better off using retrofocal designs (mostly made for 35mm SLRs and DSLRs) than wide angle lenses designed for 35mm rangefinder cameras.
So, if you want to adapt Zeiss wide angle lenses, buy ZF (or ZE) lenses – not the ZM lenses.
Disappointing that the A7/r have no good lenses for the price and size. Do not see anypooint at the moment to get the sony A7. May go for canon 6d +40mm or Fuji XE2 with the superb lenses
Whats with the light fall off in the corners? Ah hell no! These pics just made me give a big pass to this camera. Now….freakin……way.
yeah you know, it’s called vignetting.
i’m sure an a3000 better suits your profile
A99, but thanks for the recommendations. I love these pics though, they’re up there with my IPAD’s camera.
What are the opinions in general on Samyang lenses? I have no experience with them and they are planning to release some glass for this new system.
photozone.de is your friend. you can look at samyang reviews for canon full frame cameras.
their e-mount lenses will be just as good. but they’re going to be large.
Quite good, although I have experience only with the wider ones. Surprising bang for the buck.
Samyang makes some awesome stuff. I wouldn’t hesitate to buy anything they make. What I have bought has given me excellent results.
@ all who replied – thank you!
Google is refusing me the downloads. Anyone care to share the pictures on a better suited channel ? Thx!
This is beginning to look like another epic sony fail. Pros look elsewhere, please.
Epic fail? Because it doesn’t play nice with RF lenses? Who gives a shit. You already have plenty of cameras to choose from to shoot those lenses. The new cameras are optimized for FE lenses.
I’m selling all my NEX junk and going back to Nikon or Canon…
Technically the NEX stuff would be junk to a Professional. Your statement is confusing, if you already had nikon and canon stuff and you chose to change over to NEX then you were never a professional photographer in the first place.
you never had any Nex junk, troll!
All my equipment is NEX over 2 grand worth.
harv is responding to WobbleWobble
I’m just a dog chasing cars.
GTFO
…unfortunately the links seem to be down due to excessive demand, but I wouldn’t consider the findings expressed in the brief review from Ron surprising. Color shift is related to the sensor layout and offset microlenses should definitely help and if they don’t that would indeed be disapointing. But corner smear is a direct consequence of the anti alias filter and neither the M9 nor the Type240 have one since it would make that + $5000 glass look like toy lenses, so it is only natural that the M9 fairs a lot better. You have to remember what an anti alias filter does: it blurs the light before it can hit the sensor. the shallower the angle of the beams of light when it hits the anti alias filter the greater the blur. The incident angle of the light beams coming from a symmetrically designed wide angle lens like the zeiss biogon for instance are indeed quite extreme so it is only normal that the detail gets heavily blurred at the corners. I am quite convinced that the results obtained with the A7R without an anti alias filter will be quite different. But it is good to be reminded of these things before making the choice between A7 and A7R so thanks Ron.
this.
sony specifically mentioning an optimized sensor with the A7R makes me hope that the results will be better in terms of smearing.
and soon software will take care of the color shift very easily (there’s even going to be a sony app for in-camera processing of color shift!)
so all we need is sharp corners.
I was wondering whether preordering the A7r was the wrong choice because maybe the reason the A7 didn’t have the optimizations was that it didn’t need them in the first place.
but it turns out that the A7 doesn’t really shine. so here’s hoping for the A7r.
and yet I can’t picture me canceling my preorder even if performance with rf lenses was so-so. there are plenty of old SLR vintage lenses out there: small, good performers, dirt cheap, and fun to use.
+1 Performance with RF lenses might not be great, but there are so many lenses out there, including modern ones, that it would still be a great buy.
Who told you that the A7 doesn’t need the optimization (gapless and off-set microlens) because it doesn’t need it in the first place? Such non-sense!
you know, lower pixel count, and all that jazz.
Lower pixel count argument would only come into play at very low MP, where each sensel is so big that cross-talking is not much of a problem. At 24MP, it’s no longer valid. Look at the M9 and M8. Both have lower MP count, yet all these problems were there. This has only to do with how they deal with steep angle incident ray. That would be the filter stack on top of the sensor and the sensor design itself. Unless they want to use curved sensor (not good for telephoto), optimized microlens design would be the best way to get better light gathering. Thickness of the stack would come to play, but I don’t think it would be as significant.
Thank you for your reply Bob. This is very encouraging.
A7R is even worse.
Someone has already tested it with Zeiss Biogon T G-Biogon 21 mm F/2.8
Flickr Link
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jas-photoland/10378055546/
After this bad review and Bob’s comment I canceled my a7 preorder. I’m still waiting for a7r reviews. Unfortunately, no matter how gorgeous the a7r’s images are selling or leaving my tiny, breathtaking Leica lenses at home isn’t an option. That would be a huge step backwards for me.
I meant how gorgeous the a7r+Sony lenses are.
it’s really difficult to judge by only looking at that picture.
forget the color vignettes for a moment (easily corrected in software, and even easier in the future). the problem is smearing. but that photo:
– has very thin depth of field, borders are oof anyway
– has camera shake
– only 1 lens tested
so, given that different lens designs produce different results, and that consequently we cannot expect to have excellent results with all lenses, this picture is completely inconclusive for the purposes of establishing whether the A7r is an improvement over the A7 or not.
There are several pictures.
but they only solve the camera shake problem.
they are still close-focused, with relatively wide aperture, and a single combo camera+lens.
Yes, but I just thought you missed them.
I actually did 😛 but then I realized that the other 2 pics didn’t really say anything more anyway, so I didnt add another comment
…I wouldn’t jump to conclusions based on the little information that is available at the moment, and certainly not based on one or two pictures alone. Again the Biogon design is by definition very challenging to any digital sensor including the Leica variants. Even on the M9 color shift would be terrible if Leica didn’t apply a color profile to each lens in camera to correct for it (you can check this review of the Zeiss 21mm 2.8 on the M9 by our dear friend Ken Rockwell here in case you have doubts: http://www.kenrockwell.com/zeiss/zm/21mm-f28.htm ).
The probably most important information to retain from Ken Rockwells review regarding the ZM 21mm is that while there is color shift, the sharpness performance in the corners is unaffected which again isn’t surprising given the absence of an anti alias filter. Color shift can easily be corrected in post, maybe somebody even wants to start a crowdfunding project to give Sandy (who developed CornerFix) the money to build an app for the A7R via the API that is available from Sony for developers.
Most recent Leica lenses are of an asymmetrical retrofocus design which also improves matters quite a bit for those fortunate enough to have the means to buy them. For everybody else, especially those with a limited budget some patience will be required until some actual camera/lens combinations have successfully been tested.
On a side note:
I can understand the excitement surrounding these cameras and I would just like all of those expressing quite overtly their frustrations over what they perceive as shortcomings of the design advise to some patience. What Sony is doing here and has been doing for a little while now is a surprisingly courageous thing to do. A high end camera in a small yet solid body at an extremely competitive price point is quite a difficult thing to pull off in a world increasingly run by accountants (not that we don’t need good accounting but it shouldn’t be so excessive that it hinders innovation).
By comparison, and without wanting to discredit other manufacturers, most other high end cameras follow a design which dates from the late eighties and has slowly been improved over the years. Bringing a completely new system to the market with just two available lenses to begin with is in my book admirable, while I can understand that to some others it is flat out crazy.
Then again I always had a weakness for some craziness, and Sony (among a few others) has always been good sport to deliver some of it.
If Hexx is right, the a7/r is marketed towards Canon/Nikon users wanting something smaller. Comments from people wanting different features, lenses or lens mount optimization will not hinder Sony’s innovation or sales. It will only notify them of other markets to be tapped if they so desire.
…well in fact I used to be a Canon 5D Mk2 and 7D user when the Nex-7 was announced and then sold all my Canon gear and pre-ordered the Nex-7. I knew that it was just a matter of time before Sony would come out with a FF version of the Nex-7 so I never invested into any APS-C lens offerings and instead bought more RF lenses whenever I needed one for a particular job.
I use my cameras professionally, albeit in controlled and slow moving conditions so ruggedness and AF never was of great importance to me. Traveling a lot however, compactness certainly was. I am extremely happy with the performance of the NEX-7 and have no doubts about the A7R performing equally well. So I did preorder without hesitation.
Look at the date those pictures were taken…Jan 3, 2013. I find that hard to believe that this particular camera is the final production with a finalized firmware…
FW defaults, probably 01/01/2013 – all my cams aren’t set properly 😉
Ignore the dates as they are wrong. There was some other photos and they had a similar date on January but there were leaves on the trees.
Camera shake. It seems to be a trademark for A7r.
Admin, new info on the upcoming Sony A5/A5r, APS-C replacements for the current NEX-6 / NEX-7. You’ve been beaten to the punch. 🙂
QUOTE
==========
“Sony has announced in Japan this morning that, following the enthusiastic response to its new full-frame A7, it will be advancing production of its A5 and A5r, APS-C versions of its A7/A7r full frame DSLR.
“The A5 will replace the NEX-6, using the new sensor employed in the company’s recently announced A3000. Delivery is expected in late February 2014.”
“The A5r will replace the NEX-7, and will have a new 36mp APS-C sensor. the most refined and advanced APS-C sensor ever produced, Sony said. It is expected to launch in late March 2014.
“The A5 and A5r represent our commitment to providing consumers with a choice of sensors and price points in a single, more consumer-accepted configuration,” Sony’s announcement said. “E mount lenses for both the A5 and A7 series will work on both full frame and APS-C sensors, with the APS-C versions providing smaller sensor coverage when used on the A7.
“The A5 will carry a body-only MSRP of $699, and the A5r will be priced at $999. Both will differ from the A7 series mostly in sensor size. All current E mount APS-C lenses will function normally on the A5 and A5r.”
=============
END QUOTE
+1
Interesting ~ a more affordable option, with the same body design and there are already lenses. APS-C is also plenty for most uses.
Clearly this anouncement is a deliberate dpreview hoax.
An official sony anouncement that is not real yet.
Even the wotding chosen was official sounding but inconsistent with anything sony would ever say.
Oh, your source seems to be http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52365230
which goes on to say:
“Not real yet – but not fantasy, either.
This is a far more likely scenario than Sony walking away from APS-C.
1. Sony has clearly invested heavily in a new camera body style – one that, for better or worse, is a blend of the rangefinder-type NEX configuration and a traditional DSLR form.
2. Dropping APS-C sensors into it makes a lot more sense than doubling down on the current NEX design that has been a sales disappointment. It would enable Sony great manufacturing and marketing efficiencies. The profits on an A5 and A5r would be vastly greater than trying to keep in production a different body type for the NEX-6 and an NEX-7 and an A7.
And so, those of you who have read the A7 chatter and feared Sony has abandoned you for richer customers, fear not. It would not have introduced the A3000 and a new 16-70 zoom if it was doing that.
Makes more sense than abandoning the APS-C market.”
🙁
Well, we’ll see. After all, this is a ‘rumor’ site any way and not a ‘facts’ site. 🙂 The concept does not seem too far fetched though.
For me a 36mp c would be a good choice while i am waiting for the next generation of new tech sensor.
An a mount version would be better suited to my needs as it would be more compatable with my current equipment.
I would be interested in such a camera.
A 36MP APS=C sensor is confusing. Show us a link you silly drunk.
I think the one WA RF will work. It’s the Leica TRI-ELMAR. From what I have read is that this lens performed flawlessly with the NEX7
The only problem is the cost. I think they run about $6000 new
That Tri-Elmar option is interesting , have had a loaner but as you said – the price – could buy used MF digital back for it 🙂 it’s apparently also performing really well on M240
Well, but what can you do with just a digital back? Competent medium format lens is not cheap, then you need a body. The Tri-Elmar is a 3 in 1. I would say the Tri-Elmar makes more sense, though no way in hell I would get that lens. I would rather go bulky and heavy than to pay that much for a lesser IQ.
I’ve got Hassy 501, 80 and 150 lenses – CFV-39 can be found for around £3000 if you’re lucky
…and you know, those are REAL Carl Zeiss lenses 😉
Hexx, if you already have those, then yes, it might make more sense. However, the 80 is hardly a WA on 645. Obviously, for someone who is building a system from scratch, going the medium format way is not as affordable as the A7 and Tri-Elmar. Old cropped MF back is not as good as these new sensors. Cheaper, old MF lenses will not be able to compete with these new mirrorless/RF lenses. They’re good enough, but hardly worth the money.
@ Roleiflex – I’ve had a loaner, there’s no comparison between what’s coming out of that back and current FF sensors, we’re talking 16-bit raw, incredible latitude if needed and it is CCD – I didn’t really have to do much with the files, it’s just different world.
16-bit RAW doesn’t mean it has that much latitude. Admittedly, I have not shot with one, but quick search showed this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuwahara/7082440523/. Sure, in the end, the MF back might have a bit (just a bit) more latitude in tonality, DR and resolution. But as a system, especially for flexibility, MF is not the way to go. I guess, let’s agree that this is an apple orange comparison.
I didn’t know we’re comparing something, nor I claimed that 16-bit is responsible (solely) for latitude, but it gives you more info to play with -> extra 2 bits and ETTR make difference. I just said that it’s different world and when it comes to flexibility I’m not sure what’s on your mind, there are lenses, finders and focusing screens for V system for everything I might ever need. Like all high resolution work, it requires tripod and mirror lock-up otherwise there’s no point to go for high res sensor at all but I guess I don’t need to stress that – so yes, it is slow and deliberate work and we’ll worth the trouble.
Well, I thought we’re talking about the merits of owning a medium format vs. a mirrorless FF system like the A7/R. Since you present your case, let’s put aside the target audience (I doubt anyone interested in the A7/R would go for a medium format). I read a little more, the 16-bit is only for color (tonality). This is a very subtle thing, especially when you compare between 16-bit and 14-bit at web size. I would say dynamic range difference is more readily noticeable. This CFV-39 has 12EV DR, while the D800 has 15EV (measured); the A7/R would have at least the same. You can take a 3-shot HDR to further widen the gap. The CFV-39 with its one shot can hardly do 3 shots in quick succession (vital for HDR). These FF cameras can do higher ISO for night street photographers. Much smaller form factor and lesser weight for street photographers as well as hikers, higher FPS and better AF for sport, etc. You get my point. Old MF back like the CFV-39 would shine the most in a controlled studio environment. Outside of that, it would have many disadvantages (less flexible) than a small FF system like the A7. Horses for courses of course. Personally, as a landscape photographer, only the current very high MP medium format back would make sense for me to switch from a normal FF with a lens like the Otus. Even then, I do a lot of multi-row HDR work (easily 100MP-200MP), and a MF system would be less flexible.
Nope discussion started about the price of Tri-Elmar and your attempt to educate me that I can’t take photographs just with a digital back. I know, you seem to be bored and I do get it ( so am I – abroad, with crap weather and visits to dentist ). But you might keep those measurebations and lectures to yourself. I use different tools for different subjects/needs and no matter what you tell me will change it. I use them not read about them – as simple as that. I can’t imagine anyone normal to go to streets with 40mp cameras, shooting hand-held and at ISO1000000 and expecting great results, it kind of defies the purpose of those devices -nt-
It does look like Leica is responding:
http://photographicwanderings.com/2013/10/18/leica-to-announce-new-consumer-camera-during-ppe-new-york/
That might be interesting.
Probably another re-badged Panasonic 😉
Yep, probably 🙂
Oh wow, a rebadged m4/3 Lumix at twice the price. Pass.
All that Hasselbad innovation must have them quaking in their pants
hum .. sony a7r couple with a 90mm ts for table top photography – finally can have 36mp and avoid stitching for higher resolution.
I am sure none of us with M mount lenses anticipated that instead of making smaller E mount optimized lenses that work well with M mount Sony would make A mount optimized longer ones. No one can fault us for being disappointed when Sony is the only other option and is smaller, higher quality and much cheaper.
What are you trying to say? Sony E mount lenses do not work at all with M mount.
The photos so far show that M mount lenses with small apertures and some wide angles are subpar on the a7/r. More testing needs to be done on the a7r. I’m sure some M mount lenses will work fine.
+1
He probably meant E-mount sensors.
Do you think the Zeiss ZM 50mm 1.5 and the Voigtländer 35mm 1.4 works fine with the A7? This two lenses would do 90 % of my work. For architecture I would use a Minolta or Canon 24mm 2.8 with an adapter. Would this lenses exhibit Vignetting too, although they are not so close to the sensor?
tommy
So disappointing! If A7r reviews are not better I am going to stick with my 6D and X-E1. Already sold my NEX7 but I am not going to go back to NEX. Maybe Fuji Full Frame will be better.
Rolleiflex, please do not engage me further. You stalked my profile on fb, called me a bad photographer and then a poser because I love my Leica lenses and want to keep using them. You know nothing about my life. I have few moments of picture taking while pushing my Autistic son’s wheelchair or holding his hand. He is off his feeding pump less than 4 hours/day, requires constant monitoring and diaper changes meaning my time for taking pictures is extremely limited. I adore him and cherish every photo I take of him and my family along with the few pictures I catch while we are out together. I never claimed to be a great photographer and I certainly do not need a bully critiquing and bashing me. Keep your negative opinions and comments to yourself.
Heidi, take it easy. People who like to rip someone else’s life apart are usually those who have nothing interesting going on in theirs 😉
Wow, since when I stalked you on FB? And I have not stalked anyone around here. Why do you think I would stalk you? And while I have my deepest sympathy for you and your son, I just didn’t agree on your point and gave you some other perspectives. You took it in the wrong way (seriously, cyber bullying?) You said you can’t absolutely do your street photography without the 35 Lux and 50 Noct. I beg the differ since most have done fine with those. You could just tell me why you absolutely need those two (or even ignore me). Instead, you call me a bully… To be honest, even if I know you have an autistic son (that wouldn’t change the argument at hand), I would tell you the same thing. We all have difficult thing in life, and I don’t pretend I know what you have been through. But please, telling others that I am stalking and bullying you is low.
with*=without those…
Sonys magic seems to be working: http://nikonrumors.com/2013/10/20/breaking-new-nikon-full-frame-hybrid-mirrorless-camera-coming-soon.aspx/
If these specs are correct, that’s going to be one big and heavy camera.
Slimmed down D4. Still, should be within acceptable size.
That looks interesting, will wait for an announcement – if it ever happens
Total BS! Don’t even believe such a thing will happen in another 5+ years!
What matter is the moneygrubbers stop sitting on their pile and the floor is shaken.
Hendrick, this is a false alarm. This camera is just the same old dslr with a 16mp sensor and a more retro look. This is probably the D500.
This looks more interesting than I thought. It’s pretty much D4 in FM2 body, yes with proper manual controls and so on. Would be more interested in that than fake pentaprism camera 😉
I like what Ron did but i wouldn’t put too much though to his verdict, it wasn’t A7r and camera software wasn’t final, also i have questions about light condition. Just because A7 doesn’t performs well with some old WA RF lenses and has obvious problem with them doesn’t mean it’s a bad camera and world come to end.
I had some experience with D800 and 20\2.8 AI and result were great, it’s soft wide open but when stopped down to f5.6 it takes great sharp pictures and i can’t wait to test it on A7
+1, even Ron said that he would need to test the 7R to draw the final conclusion. Hopefully the 21 SEM would fare better.
I haven’t read through all this yet, but if the general sentiment is correct, then BRING ON THE A-MOUNT CAMERA!
1500eur camera with couple of thousand eur lens and the result is not good enough for you ?
simply Sony wants you to buy their new lenses!
Maybe, that sony wants us to buy their lenses. But that wont happen now many wont buy their camera either.
Do you really think, many say – oh my Leica and zeiss lenses dont work, no Problem buy sony…
First, no XAVC (even 8 bits). Now this. Hopes are minimal.
This does not look promising. I pre-ordered the camera based on that I’d be able to use it with M-mount lenses. The Flickr account does not have full res files yet, so I’m going to hold off with judgements.
rollei-You say you’ve seen my photos and I’m not a good photographer. I only post my photos on fb-not here so you’re following/stalking me. I never claimed to be a great or even good photographer and definitely do not want to be insulted. I said I cannot do my street photography without my 35/50 Leica lenses. This is because they are the only 35/50 lenses I own and I want to use them! How is that bad? Engaging me is not the answer-apologizing for insulting me for no reason is. If you have no desire to be nice then leave me alone please.
Please refrain from making false accusation. I said I know of many street photographers taking better pictures than you. I would say the same for most people here. It doesn’t mean I have seen their photos (disclaimer: not a street photographer myself). I’m a landscape photographer. If and when someone said they can’t do a certain type photography because they don’t such and such lens, and if it’s not true to me, I would call that b.s. and would happily provide my own example if it’s a landscape thing.
Now back to the next point, can you just tell me that you can’t shoot any other lens because those two are the only two you have? That would make things much simpler instead of accusing me of bullying you. I don’t mind admitting that I am wrong (not that I’m in this case). And I don’t need to apologize to you since I didn’t insult you. You certainly don’t need to bring your unfortunate situation here to win the argument. We are here to discuss. If you read into things too much, then I’ll leave you alone…
Hexx +1 Thank you. Ignoring unkind people is usually best.
You know guys, looking at the images from ron Scheffler with the 28-70 at 5.6 its seems to me that my samples from 2 days ago were ok after all… Its just the crap lens!
It seams that the CV12mm is a better performer on the A7 then the CV15mm, have a look for your self
http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=2&hl=en&ie=UTF8&prev=_t&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://forum.xitek.com/thread-1223675-3-1-1.html&usg=ALkJrhjiGSKq6Ffq8jOz05wY_XDUXEDhpw
I would still love to see it on the A7r before I decide which camera is right for me.
Maybe
According to test with Sample camera in Sony store here, rangefinder lens perform even worse on A7R than A7. Not sure why.
See the following blog:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/09/there-is-no-free-lunch-episode-763-lens-adapters
Conclusion is: All ! lens adapters are reducing the lens performance noticeable. You will loose lens performance, especially in the edges, due to lens adapters.
Conclusion: “What does it mean in the real world? Like a lot of laboratory testing, probably not a lot.”
I imagine it is an issue in some cases, but if you buy good quality adapters and test them, I doubt you’ll have much issues.
Real word is not pixelpeeping. But that has been done here
No offense, but you shoot to pixel peep? If you read the article closely, the test has a hard zero cutoff when it doesn’t meet a certain requirement. In reality, it’s not as severe as the graph suggested. Roger has made it plenty clear that it doesn’t mean that people should stop using adapters or teleconverters. It just means that for a lab test (lens reviewers), adapters should be used with care if you want to get a real assessment of the optical quality.
LOL. Kinda blackmagic thinking. Once adapter is perfectly straight and perfectly aligned to mount there just can’t be any issues other than sensor placement. And the latter can be real: my first NEX-5n (successfully broken) has wrongly placed one that leads to colorshift with SEM 18 at the right and bottom. Has no problem since that with my new copy of NEX-5n (I’m using novoflex M→E adapter).
I could find a grey field analysis for the Zeiss ZM 50mm 1.5 at the Leica M9 without lense profile correction activated:
http://lavidaleica.com/content/zeiss-c-sonnar-t-1550-zm
The M9 sensor exhibits vignetting as well at high apertures. Consequently the better results for the M9 is most likely due to the correction of the inner-camera software. Maybe there is hope that sony will have the same kind of software within the final product or within a fimware update during the next months.
Greetings,
tommy