If you are going to be an A7r owner then you absolutely have click over to Siammirrorless.com (Click here).
1) [shoplink 22592 ebay]Voigtlander 12mm f5.6 (here on eBay)[/shoplink].
From a pure esthetic point of view the camera lens combination looks superb. But the image quality isn’t really good if you look at the corners. Smearing, vignetting color shift…everything is there 🙂
2) [shoplink 22593 ebay]Carl Zeiss Distagon 18mm f4 ZM (here on eBay)[/shoplink].
Has the same issues as the Voigtlander 12mm
3) Canon EF 16-35mm f2.8L (at Amazon) with Metabones EF to E-mount smart adapter:
Perfect results!
4) [shoplink 22595 ebay]Olympus OM 50mm f1.4 (here on eBay)[/shoplink].
Great quality and great bokeh!
5) [shoplink 22597 ebay]Canon new FD 20mm f2.8 (here on eBay)[/shoplink].
Corners show the usual issues
6) [shoplink 22598 ebay]Canon FD 28mm f2.8 (here on eBay)[/shoplink].
Much better performance than the 20mm. Definitely useable!
7) [shoplink 22599 ebay]canon fd 85mm f1.2L (here on eBay)[/shoplink].
Superb results and bokeh.
8) [shoplink 22600 ebay]Voigtlander Nokton Classic 35mm f1.4 (here on eBay)[/shoplink].
A little suprise for me. I expected the lens to perform bad but it’s rather good! This may be one of my favorite lenses. Very compact and cheap and also fast.
9) [shoplink 22601 ebay]Nikon ais 135mm f2.0 (here on eBay)[/shoplink].
Great quality
10) [shoplink 22603 ebay]Leica Summicron 35mm f2 (here on eBay)[/shoplink].
Shows some heavy vignetting but otherwise a very good image quality and no smearing.
11) [shoplink 22604 ebay]Carl Zeiss C/Y 85mm f1.4 made in Germany (here on eBay)[/shoplink].
Absolutely great lens
12) canon EF 24-70mm f2.8 L (here at Amazon) with Metabones EF to E-mount smart adapter
Great!
13) Canon EF 200mm f2.8 L I (here at Amazon) with Metabones EF to E-mount smart adapter
Also great!
—
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. TheCameraStore Canada.
Sony A7 body at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS. TheCameraStore Canada.
Sony A7 with 28-70mm kit lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS. TheCameraStore Canada.
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, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT, WexUK, WexDE.
Sony A7 body at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT, WexUK, WexDE, Amazon UK, Amazon DE, Amazon FR.
Sony A7 with 28-70mm kit Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT, WexUK, WexDE, Amazon UK, Amazon DE, Amazon FR.
Sony RX10 at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT, WexUK, WexDE.
Zeiss 35mm at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT,
Zeiss 55mm at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT
Zeiss 24-70mm at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, SE, PT
Asia:
A7r at Digitalrev.
A7 at Digitalrev, Amazon Cina.
A7 with 28-70mm lens at Digitalrev.
90 Responses
is there any test with the summicron-C 40mm f2?
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1247673/59#11910718
I’ll be testing the optically identical Minolta m-rokkor 40mm f2 this weekend on the a7r and let you know how it goes!
In the Fred Miranda post that guy has a typical E mount problem where you forget what lens and what f stop you used.
Anyone know if there adapters for using medium format lenses on E mount?
Sure. The easiest route to go is get one that adapts from the medium format lens to Nikon or Canon mount, then that mount to E. Gives you more flexibility to use other lenses/combinations and usually costs less.
Or mf to canon + speed booster
Yes, but has Metabones got plans to release a speedbooster that will take the image circle that’s projected by a medium format lens and give it an equivalent field of view on a full frame mirrorless camera (plus an extra stop of light!)… As far as I know the current EF to E-Mount speedbooster only produces an image circle that covers APS-C…
One thing that would make me seriously consider buying an A7 would be if there was a way to adapt the Carl Zeiss 80mm f/2.0 Planar for the Contax 645AF system to SONY’s FE-Mount and retain something close to a standard 50mm field of view while also making it a f/1.4 lens and while also retaining autofocus!
Metabones… If you’re reading this… You should really consider producing a product like this. With the popularity on Pinterest and in major bridal magazines of medium format film-only wedding photographers like http://josevilla.com http://tecpetejaphoto.com and http://jonathancanlasphotography.com (who all shoot almost all of their work exclusively with that lens) an adaptor that allowed us to shoot with that look digitally (for less than the cost of a phase one digital back) would really give all the rest of us digital photographers a fighting chance at competing in today’s bokeh obsessed wedding market!
Not that there’s anything wrong with the obsession mind you. I’m a huge fan of the shallow depth of field look of that lens on a 645 film camera. But what bothers me is when the fact that these photographers shoot on film becomes the reason to hire them and the “film is better” myth keeps growing and growing in popular hipster culture. Anyone who’s worth their salt can make the colour palette of a properly exposed RAW file from a modern digital sensor look however they want (and that includes emulating film’s colour palette), tools like http://vsco.co have made that even easier for us in recent years.
Long live bokeh! Death to film!
+1
using MF lense would not make sense, the resolution is lower than you expect or what you are used from RF lenses
No. Because I speak three languages and not one of them is english.
… I think that was a response for Pepe “does anyone edit or proofread these posts? Its THEN not THAN in the first line”
Obviously, Siam photographers are not interested in the corners–can’t see much there.
Why wouldn’t FD 20 work well?!
It seems SAR has crashed the site.
Here is the cached version: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://siammirrorless.com/board/index.php?topic=1644
Seriously, I have many more legacy lenses than that…
I emailed Andrea once wondering if there would be an interest in testing my NEX-7 with Speed Booster with all of my lenses, I got no response so I didn’t do it. 😛
Hi! Sorry if I didn’t answer…and I actually don’t remember to have read such a request but It may be that the mail got lost or I simpky didn’t see it (I receive something like 60-80 mails per day). I would be very happy to publish an article with your test on SAR! 🙂
I am wondering whether this combination will work;
A7(in crop mode) + speed booster + DSLR MF lens
IF work without any vignetting, then you gain one light stop and retain the lens native FOV.
Any comments? Thx.
This is a stupid idea (putting a speed booster on an A7 in crop mode)
You might think you gain one stop, on the other hand you lose one stop in ISO sensitivity (APS-C is one stop noisier than full frame)
Also the perceived DOF will not change (after magnification to the same size)
You missed a point i guess.
In APS-C Mode, you are still using (the density of) the FF-sensor, but only the croped area…
Beside that you could use the booster with FF-Mode on A7(r), then crop manually in PP.
My Question is
So a Zeiss 15mm f/2.8 would become a 15mm f/2.0 (on crop)?
What would happen to a Zeiss 16-35mm f/2.8 on A7r with speedbooster?
@Admin
Could you bring some light in that topic/idea?
That would serve my need for a UWA fast lens
Nobody23
The Metabones Speed Booster makes a lens wider by a factor of 0.71x but also shortens the FL by .71x (100mm = 71mm w/SB). The Speed Booster was made for full frame lenses on NEX APS-C cameras so stick with full frame lenses on the A7,A7r and VG900 without .71x focal reducer adapters and use the full frame sensor instead of APS-C crop sensor mode.
The 15mm f/2.8 lens becomes a 11mm f/2.0 lens with speed booster, but the image circle goes from 43mm+ to 28mm+. The effective field of view of the lens in crop mode goes back to the same as original a 15mm (give or take a little, the boosters are not exactly 1:1). You do get a faster f/stop but it gets you neither a shallower DoF or less noise compared to the original lens on FF. It would allow for a better shutter speed to be used. The key would be what the image circle really ended up being, it should be at least 28mm to cover APS-C but it may be larger, if the image quality is not too bad in the expanded area and you can do a larger crop than APS-C you may come out a little ahead. The trade is cost and weight, the speed booster is more expensive and heavier than a normal adaptor. You should be able to use a MF lens on a FF speed booster and get a solid boost. Someone might build one of those someday.
@Bill
Thats what i want, having faster shutter.
Faster Shutter for Polarlights means, more “Details”.
I need a UWA between 14-18mm faster than f/2.8.
Only sacrifice is lose of resolution?
Another posibility would be Voightländer 21mm f/1.8, but 21 is a bit less WA…
If you get a A7r the loss of resolution is not real big. You go from 24 Mp on the NEX 7 to 16 MP crop on the A7r. You gain some speed. I’m not sure it is a trade I would make for just that situation as you could just go a head and get the NEX 7 with the speed booster for a lot less money and have higher resolution. The other point is that you can just use a normal adaptor, up the ISO one-stop and use the same shutter speed as with the speed booster with no increase in noise, if final mag is the same, and gain a lot of resolution and save money. The only time the speed booster is going to give you a net gain is if the image circle is usable at a size larger than the crop size, and that is low probability with a wide-angle lens.
like it was found SEL1018 can cover FF sensor when placed at 13mm,
some lens combination (probably where exit pupil is close to image plane) could almost cover FF image circle with SB made for crop cameras.
It will work but with and without the speedbooster plus crop your image will be almost identical. The only difference will be the extra crop the speedbooster has. It turns a 50mm lens into a 53mm equivalent. You won’t gain any extra light.
I thought gaining one light stop is the nature of the booster (by shrinking the image circle-hence more concentrated light per area) Why there is no light gain in these combo? Please enlighten me.
There is light gain, and that is why you will get one stop faster aperture and the depth if field will be the same. But you will loose resolution, due to the fact thst you will be using middle of the sensor which will be equivelent to an apsc size and this equate to about roughly 11mp instead of 24mp in a7 and 16mp in the case of a7r. Hope this answered your question
Will a 16mm stay a 16mm or does it get a 17mm or more?
Thanks for enlighten me.
@Safeen- thank you for your explanation below. Yes, I do not need the resolution. Just need the light gain ~ 2 stops gain relative to pure APS-C sensor. Thx.
But you make that very same light gain by using the fullframe sensor – it was really the light lost by the APS-C sensor taking a crop out of the middle and discarding the pixels from the edges and hence their light too.
So the speed booster won’t gain you any light over using the fullframe sensor,but could help with the pruple corners for wide angle lenses – but at the price of both reduced resolution and reduced quality for going through the extra glass in the adaptor. And you’d be no better off than you would have been using a NEX-5N (same sensor density as the a7R)
If I am not wrong, the image circle area output from SB is just enough to cover APS-C sensor area – hence no light loss from the cropped edge area.
Please correct me if I am wrong in this. Thx.
NEX, You are correct. One can mount an Ultra large format lens on the SB, it will still only cover APS-C.
@Nobody23, yes 16mm will be roughly 16mm, thd reason I say roughly is because speedbooster or any kind of adaptor are not exactly brig the focal length in line with the full frame sensor. But it will be close enough
What would happen to a Zeiss 16-35mm f/2.8 on A7r with speedbooster?
A f/2.0 ?
@Nobody23, 16-35mm f2.8 will become 16-35mm f2.0 thatis right. But since you use the middle of the sensor the depth of field will stay as it is when you use 16-35mm f2.8 directly on a so called ‘full frame’ sensor except in this case you will gain faster aperture by one stop and loose resolution instead
I think you are confusing the extra f stop gain and thinking more it’s along the lines of an extra T stop gain. In about 10 days go over to getdpi and Vivek should have his A7R by then and ask him if he will do the tests for you as he has a speedbooster.
It should work, You will gain one full f/stop. You will only get smaller Mpix count.
I’m very curious about the new CV 21mm f1.8, and the CV 35mm f1.2 V2, they seem to work well according to Steve Huff, but I wonder how well !
Huff’s sample shots with the 21/1.8 look really good. I’ll be picking this one up for sure, since many of the other wides don’t do so well.
Actually the retro design of these new a7 cameras looks very good with most the old lenses.
I wonder if Sony designers though of that, but the retro design blend very well with those legacy lenses.
Especially the Canon 85mm 1.2 or the old 85mm zeiss.
Yes, I notcied that too. The camera looks surprisingly great with these lenses.
That already applies to the NEX series. My 5N looks completely at home with a black Topcon macro lens (from around 1970). Good results, too.
Sony really should bring a M-mount version for the largest part of vintage lenses around, or license the camera to Zeiss for a ZM-version of this camera. Zeiss seems to go another way by introducing modern ZE-manual focus lenses within a year, what also can be a good thing when the lens range finally is large enough. Until then, the A7r will be updated with its next generation of EVF, silent shutter and better battery life…
What will the point be of having an M mount Sony camera when E mount already accommodates M mount among others? Do you mean to say that Sony should bring a more optimised version of its sensor for legacy lens design?
Zeiss doesn’t need any “license” to make a camera of their own. They need the actual camera. Cosina were the manufacturers of their last Ikon camera. Sony could make a digital Ikon for Zeiss with their branding but I doubt there is any will or motivation to do that. At least now when the dust is hardly settled. Maybe just before Fuji brings their hypocritical FF camera (because X trans wasn’t as FF challenging as they thought, I guess) so they can say ‘Sony and Zeiss know that you want…you want retro but with modern guts. here’s the Digi-kon! Cooler than a Df cucumber and an X100’ or something like that.
I don’t trust adapters and I think there is a kind of barrier to mount e.g. expensive Leica glass to an adapter. But you are right from the producers viewpoint, that the adapter solution might be more reasonable. And since Zeiss will produce it’s own ZE-lens line, my wish will be obsolete if Zeiss will introduce good enough glass in a broad enough range in a near future.
About retro: I feel a bit bored about retro. I want a A7 kind workhorse camera. If functionality means retro, then let it be retro, but retro as a priority is not what I want. It seems as if the A7 layout is functional enough and moderate to my taste, no bling factor thankfully.
A digital Zeiss Ikon would be great. But if it comes, then it will be an E-mount Zeiss Ikon Digital, since Zeiss certainly won’t build up a ZE and ZM line of modern lenses. Just daydreaming and ready for a nice surprise.
“I don’t trust adapters”.
I’m not quite sure why that should be the case. An adapter for a purely manual lens isn’t much more than a glorified extension tube (to compensate for the difference in register difference). Provided it’s machined accurately (technically relatively straight forwards), there’s not much too go wrong. Such an adapter plays precisely zero part in image quality save placing the lens the right distance from the sensor.
Of course, there are more complex adapters which attempt to fill in some of the “gaps” in functionality for automatic lenses by providing electronic interfaces, but in general they don’t interfere with image quality as such (only adapters which place optical components in the optical path might do that – like Sony’s SLT or “speed boosting” adapters). However, for a straightforward M-Mount adapter, this is not relevant.
A camera optimised for M-mount (as the Leica’s clearly are) is a rather different thing as that also has sensors and firmware image compensation for the characteristics of typical M-Mount lenses. Such a camera would undoubtedly work better with M-Mount lenses, but would have a limited market, and be compromised for anything else.
I think the concern is more that it’s known that sometimes the lens mount to begin with isn’t perfect, and so the elements in the lens aren’t being placed in the proper position to get the image on the sensor. This is relatively well documented as a possible problem. Adding another interface and mount only compounds the issue, and there’s been more than one pretty accurate test showing that most any adapter doesn’t really mount the lens in the perfectly correct position in front of the sensor with no tip or tilt.
However, it’s also noted that with any realistic observation, you usually can’t tell..
Some people have a very narrow field of vision.
“Barrier” to mount leica on adapter? That thing exists only in your head, and its quite stupid.
People already mounted huge amount of lenses on APCS NEX (and other cameras), and its ok.
Expensive? Sigma 200-500/2.8 is expensive. And heavy. And comes with teleconverter – and that is “adapter” with lenses. And its ok.
And Sony, Nikon, Canon and others make brand teleconverters, and its ok to use them with corresponding brand expensive lenses. And Sony brand A to E converters are ok. Not like Zeiss 135/1.8 becoming worse when mounted through LA-EA on E-mount.
And there are extension tubes for macro – and its ok to use them with various lenses.
And about third-partiness – Sigma and Tamron lenses are third party lenses. Now look at that Sigma 50mm, or 18-35/1.8.
If third party lenses are ok, and there is much more to do wrong with them – like older Sigma lenses can show, then why there should be problems with adapter to E-mount, which is just two mounts screwed together on metal tube, that requires only so much mechanical precision?
You do forget that Sony sells lenses !
Selling the camera is only the first part of the job.
Good point! Can easily be forgotten when looking at the current lens line. 🙂
ZEISS have already said they will produce the same lenses in M-mount. Likely, they also will be cheaper than in M-mount due to lack of rangefinder coupling.
If you really believe that the market for a company like Sony to accommodate an M mount design in which they’d have no new lenses to sell, unless they start a 3rd line of lenses…I just don’t know what to say to you, probably that you know nothing about business.
Ask Leica to make something to fit M mount that doesn’t cost more then 3,000 dollars… it’d be more beneficial for them.
http://www.joshsouzaphotos.com/2013/11/dear-m-mount-wa-rf-users.html
A third mount can not be introduced. An M mount with AF is the missed chance. Then nobody would ‘bitch’ how you call it, Sony still had a unique and still versatile feature and you would not need to give the potential m mount customers who want to go with Sony the finger. Latter does not look like a promising business concept either.
With your website and it’s great pictures you show that there is substance behind your words. Just in comparison to other posters with an apodictic meaning for its own sake. Given that posters on Sonyalpharumors show some kind of admiration to the A7 concept and want to bring it further or just want to understand the concept behind it I often ask myself what motivation stands behind personal attacks and insults concerning an issue that is not vital but should be fun and entertaining, at least for the most of us who have a life.
My point is that this camera is designed for E-Mount, they design an A mount adapter with AF because these two lines are owned by them, Sony.
The camera’s design allows for lenses to be adapted to it, and focus peaking makes it an ease to work with, these things are a great bonus.
..but what their engineers did not worry about was making sure the small handful of WA RF lens users were taken care of in their design, because Sony’s only benefit is a few hundred, maybe a few thousand more sales? … of only their body. Because those M mount users are likely not going to move from their M-Mount lenses into the expensive Zeiss line, otherwise they’d already be buying those lenses rather then adapting old lenses.
So hearing someone complain that Sony isn’t making their camera design work with lenses they and products they don’t themselves make is silly, it’s like me being upset with Leica for not making an A mount camera so I can use my A mount Zeiss lenses on their cameras.
Does anybody know how well the A7R works with the 35 and 50 Summilux Asph Fle from Leica? I have both and also ordered sonys 35/2.8 to compare it to the Leicas but I habe to wait until the 21st of November.
If you make that comparison, some shots shared via this site would be very much appreciated. I’m tempted to get the 35 and 50 Summilux’s with the A7 or A7r, depending on performance. The Cron 35 has far too much vignetting unfortunately.
These tests would have been better if the subject shots had remained the same.
Well, then add me on facebook. I already have some analog leica Album with my 35 and 50 online and I surley will post some comparations, made also with a tripod, on Facebook first: facebook.com/alexhibition
I also have shots with my leica lenses on the old nex f3 in my nex album.
When obsessive 36MP pixel peepers start discussing vintage lenses it is suddenly quite alright with some amount of smeared corners, color distortions and vingetting. Why is that so?
because it’s mirrorless. why else?
Nonsense. This review goes to show smeared corners etc. are NOT alright. Nevertheless, it’s very interesting which lenses are and which aren’t good enough for this glorious little cam.
Good times ahead, good, good times. On Mondays I’ll shoot Nikkor, on Tuesdays Canon, Wednesday’s Olympus day, Thursday Pentax of course, Friday will be reserved for the bunch of nice Hexanons I have, on Saturday I’ll be using old Russians, and on Sunday I’ll be experimenting with other old stuff (Schneider, Rodenstock, Will, Leitz, Exacta, Agfa, Miranda, Topcor, you name it).
(Chuckle)
Who said it is alright? These tests are precisely to see if the lens works or not. And there are old lenses that will work just fine.
Btw, 36MP is not only about pixel peeping.
So, what would actually happen if you used the SB with a medium format lens on the a7r? Shouldn’t it work at least in theory?
I think the SB would have to use a larger glass element for that to work, since the regular SB is only designed to squeeze a 35mm image circle down to APS-C.
Oh yeah, forgot about that. But you should still end up with a lower crop factor than with a dumb tube.
Well maybe, some day someone’s gonna manufacture such an adapter but I guess the market for it would be way smaller than the market for the 35mm SB.
It will be somewhere between “it doesn’t work” and “it does work”. Still, you might find situations where it will be useful.
Market for Medium format => 135 is, of course smaller, but quality could be much superior to regular SB (135=>aspc), because there is barely enough clearance between 135 SLR lens and E-mount shutter for reducer to fit, and there is a lot more space for medium format=>135 (FF E-mount shutter requires the SAME clearance as APS-C one)
People are more obsessed with how their camera looks, than being obsessed with getting a great shot, with great light, composition and a story.
It’s all in what you shoot and how you use it, really. This shot using the Voigtlander 12mm looks great:
http://siammirrorless.com/board/index.php?PHPSESSID=gkil1o0892tgm1dp7oid1tck22&action=dlattach;topic=1644.0;attach=8787;image.
For people who would only really use it for tight, dark interiors or B&W this isn’t too bad.
Still waiting…. Zeiss 35mm f/2 Biogon
These photos should be dumped on Flickr, can probably handle the load much better. Half the images don’t load.
this, hopefully someone saved the files. the site is totally dead now…
I’m a little curious why they didn’t include a sample of the Canon 20mm f2.8 FDn at f8 like they did with Zeiss 18. The Zeiss 18 looks pretty good at f8, I suspect most legacy wide angles are going to perform just fine at working apertures, using an UWA wide open is an effect shot.
and now… same test with A7 please….
It looks like many here don’t know what a Speed Booster/Lens Turbo NEX adapter is. It’s an adapter with 0.71x focal reducer lens that was made ONLY for full frame lenses on NEX APS-C cameras. There is no advantage of using full frame lenses with .71x focal reducer on the A7,A7r or VG900 in APS-C crop mode.
does anyone edit or proofread these posts? Its THEN not THAN in the first line
Sure would be nice to get some results with nikkor glass!
Brian Smith used that same zeiss 18mm with wonderful quality corner to corner after using corner fix to fix the color shift and vignetting.
http://briansmith.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Sony-a7r-Haiti-2201.jpg
At least it is in my opinion, would like to see it bigger though. 😉
That’s basically a thumbnail.
Admin
There is a lot of chatter about the new tamron 150-500 really being a 150-600.
Are you planing to post the newer info?
bah, the link to siamirrorless is dead 🙁
Someone needs to check if 16/2.8 and 16-50PZ work better on A7R than on e.g. NEX-5N.
Shifted microlenses would improve image quality.
So this post caused the that website to go down….
how about the existing zeiss 24-70mm with the a-mount LA EA 4 adapter.. is it still 24-70mm on the A7R? i read somewhere else this will be cropped as well???
If you’re interested in that Canon 200mm f/2.8 I’d suggest instead that you look at a Minolta 200mm ƒ/2.8 G High Speed. It’s a very very good lens (test on full frame on photozone.de) and I have personally used it on a NEX-7 with LA-EA2 adapter and it’s very very fast to AF. Very accurate too. If I didn’t intend to buy the 70-200/4 I would almost certainly buy this lens and the LA-EA4 adapter.
Who knows, maybe in time I would do so anyway.
heard conflicting reports. So what is it? A7 is good with legacy lenses 35mm+? Or it sucks period and you need a7r. also heard from one source the a7>a7r for legacy. I dont know what to believe
I don’t get it. The pictures I see in the forum are 952 px on the longest side. How can I make any judgements based on that?
It seems odd that the Canon 20mm FD has corner issues, but the Canon EF 17-40 works fine with the Metabones. Both lenses has similar distances from pupil to film plane. I wonder if the problem maybe with the adapter used with the wide angle FD lens. Maybe it is designed for crop sensors and has a narrow bore. I suggest someone try some different adapters with some of these wide lenses. I have a 20mm FD and have an A7R on order, so I will test when I get it. I am not giving up until I try it with a wide bore adapter.
Anyone to try a Canon fd 50mm f/1.2 L on the Sony A7 ?
Hasselblad Planar 80mm f2.8 please!