Image courtesy: ThePhoBlographer
New tests:
Sony Zeiss 50mm f1.4 tested on the A7r at ThePhoBlographer.
Canon 5D Mk III vs. Sony A7 vs. LEICA M typ 240 by Ken Rockwell (As you can see corner performance sucks).
Shock News! Sony make decent kit lens – The 28-70mm and the Sony A7 (Soundimagesplus).
A7r test at Focus Numerique (google translation here).
Trey Ratcliff reviews the A7r at StuckinCustoms.
A7-A7r test at Japanese DC.watch.
A7 and A7r hands-on at Bestmirrorlesscamerareviews.
Magnus Lindbom, a Swedish landscape photographer are trying out the Sony A7R.
A7r with Zeiss Otus at The.me.
A7r Shutter sound as Waveform.
The Sony compression causes artifacts. It needs to be brought to light. Digilloyd and others are finding these.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1260660
http://www.flickr.com/photos/110671606@N08/
Videos showing Moiree on the A& and A7R (one and two).
Non-scientific images with the Zeiss FE 55mm/1.8 and a Nikon 50mm/1.8 in a small studio setting at MichaelRommel.com.
—————————————————
Specs and Preorders in US and Canada:
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
Sony G 28-70mm lens at Sony DE, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO.
Asia:
A7r at Digitalrev.
A7 at Digitalrev, Amazon Cina.
64 Responses
Ken Rockwell’s comparison is a bit ridiculous. He compares a Leica with its native lenses to a Canon with its native lenses to a Sony with native Leitz lenses and concludes the Sony is the loser. If he’d taken the Sony with the Canon lenses, I’m pretty sure which one would have been the winner. To prove an already proven point (‘the Sony isn’t happy with rangefinder lenses, especially in the short range’) is a bit, well, er, pointless. And stupid too. Sorry Ken.
I would of liked to see the Canon lenses on the A7, direct compassion which should show if longer flanges help corner performance
Not Canon but I’ve tested all of my Nikon F-mount lenses from 21mm to 500mm (21, 24-70, 25, 28, 35, 50, 70-200, 80-400, 85, 300, 500, 1.4x) on the A7R with a Novoflex adapter on the ISO 12233 test chart and there was no corner resolution or distortion issues with any of them – they were essentially indistinguishable form the same test shots done with a D800E using the same lenses. I’d say the longer flange distance resolves the problem seen on lenses designed for rangefinders.
Except that this is what A7/r users are doing in the real world.
Because Leica lenses are a much better ergonomic match for the camera than big ugly Canon dslr lenses and because there are not many native Sony lenses. M lenses have always set the standard in performance.
All the well known reviewers are doing this.
Shock news! Compression causes artifacts! Inform the camera police at once!
Other cameras do not have this problem. No need to be a moron just because you’re a brand loyalist.
The fact is, there are serious problems with the image data encoding going on in Sony’s cameras. It’s most likely related to a process that all the manufacturers use, which is color data culling. It is found that a good deal of color data is useless after readout so it’s just dumped to save space. Technically, it makes “lossless” RAW files in other brands (Sony doesn’t use this in A7 but it’s implied, I suppose) a lie. However, proven out and evaluated, it’s effectively true.
Sony is likely doing the same thing but their culling tables suck badly and it is resulting in a large amount of color modulation in gradients. It’s producing utter garbage results straight into the RAW files for certain scenes.
Whether it is noticeable is highly dependent upon the type of scene you photograph, but, frankly, it shouldn’t matter. Nikon’s D800 doesn’t do it. Neither does the D610. They both do it if you enable lossy compression, though. It’s not as strong as what is seen in the A7/A7r but it is there.
In fact, these artifacts are pretty common in most cameras. The difference here is that most cameras are not $1700+ and aimed at professional and advanced amateur photographers.
If this problem was only in JPEG (it’s worse in JPEG) then it wouldn’t matter so much, but, sadly that is not the case.
I should mention: I am sending back my A7 and returning to Fuji for another year at least until this problem (as well as lack of worthwhile lenses) is worked out. I’m a little tired of being an early adopter beta tester at such high costs so I figure I’ll take advantage of retailer return policies and bail.
Good luck to anyone hoping Sony addresses this issue in a firmware update.
Maybe. Or maybe just FUD.
I never noticed any such problem on my A99, and Sony is leading in color depth and dynamic range.
Where can I find samples that prove this problem?
Worthwhile lenses, I’m very happy with the 35 and I wish I could afford the 55 and the 24-70 but I haven’t used that one yet, the 55 is so sharp.
I’m getting a ton of mileage out of my A7 and adapting my legacy slr glass, so much of it works so well but I brought it to do so.
You sound like you have buyer regret, its a shame your not like your FF Nex as much as me. The ISO performance, the grip, the evf, dials, physical controls all work/feel great.
I have no RF glass beyond 3 Industars and I don’t plan on buying any because its so dam pricy.
I am sorry, but I simply cannot take that seriously. That’s the reason why you are sending your a7 back?
And on top of that, not wanting to be a beta tester, you are going to Fuji?
+100
Fuji is the epitome of beta tester with its consumers.
Except that Fuji has constantly updated their firmware. You at least know they’re going to fix any software issues and perhaps give new features.
Features that should’ve been there since the beginning. That is precisely the whole point. Not to mention the whole X-trans issue. Don’t get me wrong, I do think Fuji’s offerings are great, but to switch to them, because one doesn’t want to be a beta tester, sounds preposterous to me.
Zachery is a hipster troll.
He’s going back to a cheesy plastic faux vintage camera that only shoots jpegs and uses cute little velvia filters. Xtrash sensors are super limited. Even Adobe can’t figure them out.
Good luck Zachery, move on to the fujirumors
Plastic cameras? X-Pro1 is full metal body, seriously do a bit of research before you post nonsense like that. And as for Adobe, they’ve had all info they needed to update ACR accordingly but they can’t be asked, other RAW developers manage nicely, from the big ones Aperture and CaptureOne
Hahaha – it is hilarious to read such stupid comments. The Sony has the ultimate sensor with a poor design and lacks a sufficient set of high-quality lenses that are balanced with the body. Fuji has a very nice sensor, but not full frame; however, the bodies are well designed and the lenses are superb and getting even better in build quality. At this point, I would choose a Fuji over the Sony. And, within a year. Fuji may design their own full frame MILC, which will likely come with some high-quality fast primes. So, perhaps they will still be the better choice for me.
Goodbye Zachery! Guess you will be leaving us for the Fuji world.
Would love to see the “utter garbage” examples with for example some Rawdigger screenshots or even better, the RAW files so I can check.
Sofar I’ve mostly seen theoretical discussions, speculation and some Adobe converted crops. Which still leaves a whole lot of possible factors untouched, other than the same compression that Sony has used for quite a few years without clear visual examples of the suggested practical problem.
Here, this explains it all.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1260544/4#12003521
Yeah, Adobe coverted files (which introduces their profiling, their demosaicing, their filtering of hot and dead pixels, etc.), 800% crops, no controlled A/B comparison, the usual. 😉
I’ve followed the discussion about the compression for years, first really explained by Iliah Borg. I know the effects on histograms, but I have yet to see a clear and controlled A/B comparison (without the above caveats) that shows an obvious visual impact than can be ascribed to the compression algorithm. DCRAW (for example RawTherapee) could already take Adobe and all kinds of filtering under the (converter) hood out of the equation too.
Max Berlin is a known trouble maker over there
5uck the captchas. the textbox doesn’t show on my small laptop, so I never add it. THen the html redirect forgets my text
” The Sony is a toy from one of the world’s leaders in video and audio gear. It’s fun to put different lenses on it, but it can’t compete with real cameras from Nikon and Canon. ”
– Ken Rockwell
Can’t disagree my A7 is a toy, I toy I love to death. It has its issues but so did my 5D2.
” The Sony is a toy… ”
Said the man who also writes articles that it’s not your equipment’s fault 😀
Shooting raw pictures and setting the white balance later and checking what results the “toy” gets with “real” lenses.
don’t forget that Ken is the one that said years ago that he prefers to shoot with a compact than with a Sony A100 (one of the best SLR’s in its price range of its time), that’s how serious you should take Ken Rockwell…
Sony also is one of the pioneers in digital cameras and sensors, I guess he forgot about that
Ken Rockwell is not a fool. Even though he knows what he’s talking about, he occasionally says proocative things like to that increase traffic to his site.
One day KenRockwell will do a Hasselblad Lunar review and gives 5 star rating to it.
Sorry mr. Rockwell, but you are feeding all the people with the opinion that your a fan boy, quite nicely. A not so fair comparison of Leica and Canon with native glass and the Sony with 3rd party glass without lens profile. It is not really news that the 21mm Leica is not the best lens for the A7(R). His conclusion is rather arrogant: “The Canon EOS is a real camera system for photographers to make real photos.” and than calling the Sony a toy… Did anyone find a Sony product in his long list of recommended products? Of course not, Sony is for plebs, not for the big boys they play with Ferrari’s or Leica’s for that matter…
KenRockwell is not serious and doesn’t like Sony. But “we” all have to blame ourselves a little bit for hyping A7/A7r as a camera for any lens!
See the comments about Ken Rockwell in the Sound Images Plus link above. He expresses my sentiments about Ken Rockwell’s credibility perfectly.
I must be blind because I read that Soundimagesplus link above several times and could not ind anything about Rockwell in it. Ken says a lot of crap and he himself has adm itted in the past that often it is said just to create buzz on other sites so that they click to his site or link to it resulting in profit for him. You should take very little of what he says seriously.
Ah OK, I found it – it was in a different article than the one linked above. I concur with that guy’s statements.
This is the actual link: http://soundimageplus.blogspot.be/2013/12/why-on-earth-do-people-keep-moaning.html
I like admin posting a link to Ken Rockwell, apparently accepting his conclusions as fact :-)meantime a photographer who sets up a reasonably controlled test ,tripod , static shot , consistent lighting and posts 100% JPEGS gets a “Non-scientific images ” warning 🙂
Actually, the “non-scientific” phrase came directly from myself. 🙂 I received the FE lens probably as one of the first “normal” customers and wanted to try out the difference between this native lens and a lens I had from my Nikon times, which (together with an adapter would be several times less expensive). I know that there are many, many more professional users and labs out there, which are more professional than me. I therefore avoided any conclusions, i just wanted to share the pictures. Unfortunately I discovered after the shoot, that during a battery swap the camera settings were reset to JPEG only and not RAW+JPEG, as I set earlier, so I might take these images again over the christmas period. So, please don’t blame Andrea for that phrase, it is just my own precautionary phrase.
Cheers, Michael
Hi Michael, It just seemed funny that though not perfect, your test was certainly of more merit than Ken Rockwell { whose every post should have a warning added to it 🙂 }
Andrea – not sure you can really call Ken Rockwell’s a test. He appears to have an agenda with everything he does. I suspect he chose that lens as he discovered it didn’t perform as well.
I’m not really sure he has sufficient IQ to be taken seriously
Really? Does he think that comparing a native lens with a lens with adapter is something professional??
Credibility is hard to build but easy to destroy.
Ken Rockwell has a photography site that’s meant to be funny, quirky, and reflect kind of a goofy “everyman” view on shooting. It’s great entertainment, but let’s not get crazy about whether his tests reflect sound procedure, etc.
The point is valid, though. If you think the A7/r is some kind of replacement for a Leica M and will perform spectacular across the board, you’re kidding yourself.
The rest of us are very happy for what the A7/r is.
Except that wasn’t his point, so there’s actually nothing valid in his post.
Fair enough. Sometimes looking for gems in his blog posts invokes the “thousand monkeys banging on a typewriter” concept.
When I’m reading a camera and lens review, I don’t need goofy, funny, and quirky. As Harv says in the first post above, why wasn’t the Sony tested with it’s new native 55mm Zeiss lens against the native Lieca and Canon lenses. Oh, he didn’t have the lens to test. Then why was he so quick to do this “objective” test. Let’s keep goofy, funny, and quirky on the comic book blogs where they belong. For the rest of us who want serious discussions on this blog, hopefully the next time we see the name KEN ROCKWELL appear here, we will associate that name with GOOFY, and not bother to read whatever he has written.
It is okay to have a little fun. You have permission, my friend! There’s room for entertainment in the uber-serious world of camera reviews.
I don’t understand why people getting upset from ken’s test result. If you look at the test result between Leica and Sony, it’s a fair comparison. The point I took from the test is that, not all 3rd party lens working well on A7/R. To those who own Leica lens or other 3rd party lens should bring the lens to camera store, put the lens on A7/R and test them before making the purchase. Besides the lens issue, there are some technical issues on A7/R that need to be addressed. I agree with Ken, A7/R is a toy when comparing to 5Dmk3 or D800. However, Sony took the first steps toward the right direction for next generation of camera and hopefully the next version of FF mirrorless will be better.
The 21mm corner test is obviously invalid.
As to the 50mm colour test, I wasn’t there and so can’t say which are more accurate, but the Sony colours look far better to me. The colours look less artificial to me.
I tend to agree with him. His first article was super positive and enthusiastic about the cameras – emphasizing that they do what fullframe dslrs do in a much smaller package.
But he’s correct that the thick sensor coverings make using different lenses with the cameras crapshoot, and this was demonstrated in the comparison here.
All the reviewers have done this with M lenses and arrived at the same conclusions – Steve Huff, The Camera Store, Trey Ratcliff, Rockwell, so it’s hardly fair to single out Ken.
In the link of Ken R, to me Leica has far better WB than the canon and the canon better than the Sony a7.
having said that I have received my a7 couple of days ago but i have not tried it yet, because i am waiting my lens to arrive as well. i hope what ken r has encountered is due to his mishandling the camera otherwise i will be very disappointed if the Sony WB doesn’t get it right or at least as close to the canon for accuracy, because i will not expect to edit every photo I take. that would put me off.
There are reports of A7s out there having faulty WB out of the box. It could be that Ken has got one with that problem. I have clearly no idea if this is a problem at all, but I’m just saying there may be a batch of cameras with faulty sensors. What Ken shows is definately an example of very bad auto white balance performance, and he definately have all rights to complain about such performance.
Or he selected some bizzare Creative style to bias the results. It wouldn’t be the first time that Ken Rockwell purposely biased the results of a test.
I find Sony AWB to always be skewed a little to magenta and sometimes needs warming up. He is just picking on known issues and hopefully driving people to his site. I don’t mind if people ask you to donate for free content but ken over does it when he starts to try and be controversial like he’s lady gaga.
Ken is an idiot and has been for many years.
Stick to review Nikon and learn more about the system and learn how to use Nikkor lenses.
What is interesting on Ken’s comparison is the last two images – what is that???
Ken’s review seems a little harsh IMO. For those of you who want to dig deeper into what the A7R has to offer I recommend you visit Trey Ratcliff’s review. He is a personal friend of mine and I truly value his opinion and insight. What you have to get out of all these reviews, including Ken’s is this is a personal experience. I’ve held the a7r and only used it on showroom floor where i had access to it, it had an otus 50m plus several other lens via metabones. I won’t disagree when Ken says its a toy…but I see it the word ‘toy’ as something fun to play with because you can use many lenses with it, granted some will have an issue at wide angle. but this does not take away from the fun toy experience which is what a lot of us enjoy, an opportunity to pickup that camera and have fun. its much lighter than my D800 and refreshing to have a smaller footprint, lugging around a 5lb camera gets old after a few hours.
Ken’s review is just a personal insight on it, read Trey’s personal review and you’ll get a totally different sense and he too like many enjoy playing with this toy because you can match it up with many different lenses. Creating different styles and mood from your favorite lens can be a rewarding experience and give it that very unique look.
I personally feel the A7R is not a ‘toy’ in the sense ken describes and I believe can be used for serious photography, its just a matter of using it properly, a combination of the shooter, lens and subject can lead to a truly fun exprience with a light, full frame camera.
I myself opted not to purchase it at this moment, my belief is it defeats the purpose of having a 2lb FF camera only to stick on it 3 to 5lb lenses. I have a collection of Nikon glass, so putting those onto the sony makes it big n heavy which is not what i want. hence I’m waiting for more lenses to be released.
for my style of photography they don’t have to be 1.4f, i simply want sharp, high quality glass thats form fitting size wise, i believe the 35, 55 and the proper size but I need more, a wide angle and a prime in the 200m catergory and when those come out than I’ll buy it.
Like Ken said, cameras work best with the lens they are made for and I believe this is true. I travel extensively hence why i want something lighter yet have FF quality and I believe Sony is int he right direction, this is the introductory one and it can only get better and if anything, other brands like canon and nikon have had the door slammed in their face. The bigger competition needs to wake up and the sony a7r will be remembered as the camera that shook the industry because now everyone else is playing catchup, the big dslr is a dinosaur and smaller more compact mirrorless cameras will be the new standard, sony has shown us what is possible.
The problem is you listened what Ken Rockwell has to say. I find his opinions are jokes most of the time. What a joke.
Andrea wrote:
“Shock News! Sony make decent kit lens – The 28-70mm and the Sony A7”
Already forgot the Sony 16-50/2,8 SSM “kit lens” for A77? 🙂
.
Leica should wake up and start making lenses for the A7, maybe they would survive. There’s no doubt that there optics are vastly superior to anything else so many people would be willing to pay for big bucks for them.
Leica has a mirrorless system with AF lenses already in the works. It was going to be APS-C… so we’ll see if it ever sees the light of day.
I want to pick one of these rare limited edition a7/a7r straps up. Anyone know how else to get them? Also i’m waiting for a Rockwell review before buying it.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=271353209999
Ken is so right about his review, I got and used my A7/28-70 for the last week , and I’m already in love with it, sure the lack of OVF is a drawback (for me), but still its image quality is on top level and I’ve been using it with a “Kit Lens”.
here is a list of what I owned and used for the last 3 Years:
Nikon D90/D300s: So easy to use/Speed/Very sharp/Bad colors
Canon 7D/5D MK1: Great Ergonomics/Great Colors/Bad DR
Leica M9-P: Sharpest lenses with distortion free/it’s a joy to carry around/BAD colors/to be used for black&white only/My iPhone has better Ergonomics
and now A7: Great Image Qaulity/Moderate Colors/Great DR/EVF still disappointing in low light and High contrast/ Moderate Ergonomics./The size is a big plus
Bottom line is if I want to spend the night in the desert waiting for sunrise The DSLR is the way to go, if I was a pro photographer and shooting weddings The DSLR is the way to go, Sports-DSLR, Wild life-DSLR, If I wanna enjoy capturing everyday life or enjoy my vacation My A7 will be my first choice for the next years unless something better comes.
Does anyone know where you can buy the brown leather strap in the photo by ThePhoBlographer ?
LOL it’s funny that some of you actually care what Ken says, he a useless tool that want’s to increase his web traffic. The real ken:
http://www.dirtygreet.com/kr.html
Does anyone know if Sony is working in some firmare update to make jpg´s in A7 look in the same level the A7 is? There were some talk about a new sw for jpg´s developed for the celphones, do you know somethng about this?
Rgds.
It’s called shooting in raw and exporting to jpeg. You owe it to yourself.