Note: A couple of A7r cameras are in Stock at [shoplink 23117 ebay]BestBuy on eBay (Click here)[/shoplink]. A7 body and kit are in Stock via third party resellers at Amazon US (Click here).
New A7-A7r reviews:
Kai is really becoming a Sony fan 🙂 He just posted the Zeiss 35mm lens review and quite likes the lens! Just watch the video on top!
Steve Huff posted the full A7-A7r review.
A7 vs A99 vs A900 by Scott Lewis.
ISO + WB sample photos and raw available at ePhotozine.
the full ILCE 7 help guide 450 pages made from the interactive guide (Google Drive).
55 Responses
Steve Huff is really funny. There’s only standard in his world, Leica. Three remarks:
– Strange that his harshest criticism is about having to deal with TWO models. I call that a benefit.
– Leicaphiles stick to the ‘advantages’ of their brand, even though they’re drawbacks really, such as the rangefinder (no reliable finder for non-standard lenses, parallelism, hard to focus in bad light, calibration issues).
– Still, Steve can’t deny the quality of the new Sony’s.
Yes, there are some strange points in his review, too obvious or too irrelevant.
In other words, you don’t like what he has to say about your favorite camera so now you have to attack something.
In other words, there are some strange points in his review, too obvious or too irrelevant. “Kit zoom is lacking in quality”, who would’ve thought? “Some wide angle Leica M mount lenses have issues when adapted (but this should not be a con)”, yet it is listed as one. But, hey, attack me because I said something you don’t like about your favorite reviewer.
Steve Huff is a good photographer, but he’s a poor reviewer on my mind. It’s obvious that he likes photography but he seems to be in love with certain cameras. He’s ready to says everything and his opposite.
His favorite technique :
– write a first paper with enormous assertions
– wait for an enormous debate in the commentary sections (and most of times answer to it, I must admit it)
– write a second paper like : “Guys guys it’s juste photography, we’re not pixel peepers, it’s not about technique, some people must have a very sad life to be so agressive! Peace and love my brothers. But hey PS : I’m totally right in my assertions and you’re just wrong”
2 paper and a lot of reactions and traffic on his website. Nice job… He needs buzz. I read his reviews sometimes, he has a communicative enthusiasm, but don’t take them to seriously… However, the “daily inspiration” section is sometimes nice.
… only ONE standard…*
Cameralabs said that stepped down this lens is sharper than the Summicron 35/2 on the A7R, which is nice.
Yes it is not as fast as the RX1 but the lens seems to have less distortion as well.
Steve seems to be a nice guy but he is a bit like a kid with a new toy and all is wonderful till the next new toy comes along .Kai is little more than comedy relief.
Nothing personal but I cannot say that a ghost-buster and a comedians ideas of a “review” deliver much in the way of reliable data .
Kai is a genius. If you didn’t catch what he was saying, it is your loss.
Am I the only one who found the number of times Kai stroked the FE35 unnerving?
I do the same with my 24mm Zeiss on the NEX-7 as well as with the Zeiss touit and the camera itself 😀 To be honest, if a product look so sleek and “sexy” from outside and you want to touch it and hold it in your hands all the time you see it then Sony and Zeiss have really done a great job in their product design. I’d never do this with any of the cheap looking (even if they are f***** expensive) plastic rubber lenses of most other manufacturers as well as with their bodys, particularly the plastic and rubber of DSLRs.
For the 35mm 2.8 lens, I will not get it as I have the 24 1.8 for APS-C NEX and from what I see for my purpose I won’t get any pictures that “look” better. Colors and contrast are the same, maybe the 35 is slightly sharper wide open in the corners but that’s not important for me. For for my purpose (enthusiast, private pictures) the 24mm in 15MP crop mode is still an outstanding lens on the A7R. Other advantages of the 24 are the much better closer minimal focussing distance 15 vs 35 cm) and the imho better looking out of focus area over the whole frame (look at the strange bokeh in corners in Kai’s review, never seen this on the 24). The F1.8 als gives me 1.5 stops better low light capability or faster shutter speed, so really, nothing in the world will make me buy it.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t say the 35 is a bad lens and I’d immediately buy it if I wouldn’t own the 24 1.8. But it’s not going to make my photography getting better, nor the look of my pictures so I skip on this one.
A genius of what?
Genius? Well -but PR minded and fun!!
Covered pretty much everything (and some 🙂 ) about the lens in 7 mins! Awesome!
Talking about genius! Have you guys checked the other “rumor sites”. Andrea is (almost) a genius. SAR is so much better and so is the comment parts!
Congrat Andreas
Genius?!? Seriously?!? Yeah his ability to regurgitate the camera specs straight off the Sony media release is unparalleled…
There are different sorts of genius. I think he’s more a genius in the respect that he knows how to put up an entertaining, yet informative review of something fairly technical.
+1 Kai is a class act. I think he got a woody stroking the lens
A bit OT but still, is the a77 lcd hinge gone forever?
I like it and would have expected it on some more models , like the a7 (r).
Possibly reserved for upcoming A-mount semipro/pro SLT models which has 4k video shooting in mind.
Man he mentioned focusing issues a few times, I hope it won’t be that much of an issue. Could this possibly be fixed with a firmware update?
Uninteresting lens, f2.8 is too slow, there is no IS, it’s £600 odd. Sony really screwed up with non IS lenses and no IBIS.
I’d take the A7 and cause it problems with my A mount bodies and IBIS, I can wipe out any advantage in sensor size just on IBIS
Denis, you state that IBIS can wipe out any advantages in sensorsize so, and please correct me if Im wrong, but can you explain how IBIS can:
1. freeze moving targets (like in sports, playing kids, etc)?
2. can deliver better DOF wit the same FOV?
3. can deliver better pictures when high shutterspeeds are used, like in full sun etc?
4. How IBIS stops motionblur in very dark situations where you need long exposure times ( like 1 sec or longer)? You need a good tripod for both…
All I want to say is that IBIS is not the solution to every problem…
I’m not saying IBIS is a solution to everything, but I am saying there are problems here.
35mm f2.8 should be a 35mm f2, that extra stop makes a difference. I don’t expect “zoom” lens speeds at this focal length
Regarding DOF control you gain one stop shallower DOF from APS-C to FF, so I’d actually have better shallower DOF with Sony’s plastic cheapie 35mm f1.8 on APS-C.
In a low light scenario I gain little in going to the A7, due to the lack of IBIS. If the sensor is say 2 stops better in low light, I can gain 2-3 stops of IS.
No it won’t freeze motion but then shoot a wedding inside and suddenly this cameras lack of IS is a problem, people don’t move fast here. I’m stabilised on every lens, not so with Sony who expect you to pay extra for this. And then having CZ primes with no IS is a bit odd let’s be honest.
“No it won’t freeze motion but then shoot a wedding inside and suddenly this cameras lack of IS is a problem,”
Denis, amongst the most common lenses used for weddings neither Canon or Nikon 24-70mm F2.8, or 85mm F1.4 or 50mm F1.4 have any IS .Yet Canon & Nikon users dominate the wedding photography professionals group by a huge margin.
I have been shooting weddings for 20yr with no need for IS , for the few static shots I simply use a monopod. I am in the Northern UK so dim interiors are not unusual.These shots make up a tiny fraction of the portfolio and I have never needed to go over 1600, there are no shortage of fast primes for FF . I think for still IS is by a ways the single most exaggerated feature in modern cameras.
For those who cannot live without it there are FF lenses for Nikon & Canon going from 16mm-1200mm {1800mm }in DX mode. With or without IBIS i strongly prefer to use video on a tripod/monopod, other than news reports and some sports. Almost all moving images we see on TV/cinema /web have been done with tripod set ups,the run and gun style is often visually annoying. I have an E-P5 so I am aware of the pro points but certainly not a deal breaker.
I am convinced that IS/IBIS/VR/OSS what ever your choice is can be detrimental to maximizing image quality.Sure if it is your only option it is better than nothing but if you do a quick experiment take a shot in low light using IBIS then try the same with a tripod the very obvious difference you see is the downside.
You don’t need image stabilisation on a 35mm lens…It is not required until you get at least over 50mm.. that why they have it on the 24 – 70mm.
you need it for vídeo! and that’s the reason why we start seeing IS on some wide primes.
I would have to agree. I notice when I use my olympus 24mm sigma 19 & 30 on my nex-6 they almost behave like my 50mm 1.8 oss and those lenses don’t have oss so I don’t think you really need oss for a 35mm. Shooting with the nex-6 with a few lenses like the samyang 85mm 1.4 and nikon 105mm 2.5 leads me to believe oss is a bit over rated. It is very useful in certain situation but not a deal breaker.
Can somebody (maybe) explain to me why F2.8 is too ‘slow’ today. I can understand that it doesn’t have knife-edge DOF, but slow? Maybe that was relevant in the 1990s, but with FF 6,000 ISO giving way better results now than film pushed to 1,600 then, I really find it hard to give a care about F2.8 or even F4.0…
2.8 is slow for a prime lens like this
And it is even not as small as Canon 40 f/2.8
Because the camera snd aperture collectors cannot shoot without a lens that says .0 something on it.
Although it starts his final word with this:
“I really enjoyed the A7 and A7r cameras. At launch I was insanely excited about them because there is simply nothing else like them at this price point, and even my beloved Leica M..well, the A7 and A7r surpass it in overall IQ. While they do not offer the same build, feel or joy of use as my Leica M, they can compete and surpass in overall IQ, and do. At a fraction of the cost as well.”
He has to quickly bring them down with this:
“Still, I love and adore my Leica for many reasons, not just the great IQ. To those who own one and shoot with one you will know exactly what I mean. It is the quintessential photographers camera.”
And this:
“The build is good but not Leica M or Nikon D800 or Olympus E-M1 good. They are sort of an in-between. They feel more hefty than the NEX-6 and NEX-7 but not up there with the top of the heap.”
“Like I said, I really enjoyed these cameras and I took many fantastic images without any issues or problems but for the 1st 2 weeks I was not bonding with them, and I could not put my finger on it as to why that is. Then it hit me.
I like the build, the feel, the design and the features but I think the response is just not there when compared to my Olympus E-M1, which is lightning fast in response. I have been shooting that E-M1 like mad and when I switched it up to the A7 and A7r it seemed like I was working in slow motion..and I am not talking about AF, just overall response time of the camera.”
And before you forget, he changes your reading with this:
“So after I realized this I started to take out the A7 and I thought of it as a medium format rig.”
Quite simply because he can’t write that a Sony camera is that good.
Yes, he did say something close about the RX1, but its easier when its a fixed lens camera.
I can’t ever trust the man. He is not a Ken Rockwell, he is smarter than him, but he is just a man that even if a digi Zeiss Ikon was to be made in every way better than a Leica…it would still not be Leica…whatever that meant.
“the quintessential photographers camera”. That was the funniest part.
Great analysis. Why this analysis is relevant to anyone is a different question.
Are you going to buy one or not based his or any review?
I must be difficult for Steve to write a Sony camera review while knowing in the back of his head how many people plunked down $5-$10,000 + on a Leica system based on his words.
LOL. Steve Huff is a Leica shill.
Omfg, man, you just reviewed a review. Now go do the same for Steve BS Huff.
I’m getting tired of seeing ppl say IBIS is not needed. IBIS helps me go wider indoors, and it does help with video a lot. I have a glider, but being able to play around with the A99’s steadyshot, it reduced my need for extra exquipment.
Not sure I’m glad that Kai comments on the focusing – I’ve had mine 1 week, and it’s okay with old Zeiss/Contax primes – manual-focus of-course – but it is terrible with the 18-55mm and 2.8-16mm lenses from my NEX 5N – I’d say it’s wrong 90% of the time.
I’ve noticed that sometimes when ‘stable’ out of focus, and I twist the lens a little, suddenly it focuses. Both lenses click easily into place, and both have the same issue – have asked Sony Customer Service if is this a compatibility issue, or a problem with my particular A7R…
I can send it back in the next week if unhappy – which I currently am. For info, I have reset all the settings in the menu – to ensure I had not done something stupid with the settings – but the problem persists…
I also have this background focusing problem with the A7R & 35/2.8 and it’s really annoying… I hope Sony brings out an Update soon! Also the two red dots from the lens and the Lenshood are not correctly aligned. Does anyone else have the same problems?
So, you did pay attention to Kai. 🙂
That is the nature of the beast (CDAF). Nothing can be done about it. Either use manual focus lenses and dump the AF lens or learn to live with it. It will not change with FW update or another lens!
But I didn’t have his Problem with iPhones, Xperias, Compact Cameras, NEX 5, F3 and so on, and they all had contrast AF. Why should it be different with die A7R?
I cant speak for your nex cameras but phones and compact cameras have such deep DOF that it is pretty hard not to get things in focus. I am thinking maybe the you need to calibrate your lens. I believe there is a feature in the camera. I have it in my nex-6 but never had to use it. It was also a feature in my A900.
I always use my AF in center point focus. Don’t let the camera do that ‘I’ll just use the whole scene’. It never works. Unless maybe you’re shooting F/11. Put AF on the center point, point it where you want to focus, hold the shutter half down (or customize a button for focus lock), then compose your image. Works like a charm every time.
If that doesn’t work, then something’s broke.
There are two things I never trust a camera to do right: Exposure, (thus I always use an EVF. What you see is what you get.), and auto focus. I restrict it’s ability to chose how to focus as much as possible, or do it manual.
That’s what happens when you buy sony and believe in what sony tells you. Love it when fan boys get burned.
Hah. My Canon 6D was even worse with autofocus and exposure. That’s why I gave it to my brother and went and got a Sony again. Never had so many shots I had to throw away. Maybe 10% keepers is normal for most people, but I was more used to something on the realm of a third to half.
Maybe I didn’t know how to use the camera.. but should it be that hard?
Problems exists long time on the NEX cameras, I don’t think it’s a particular “lens problem”. On the street I go to direct manual focus mode (DMF) of AF for that and rely on the autofocus in multi field. This is generally quicker than center focus and focuses on the faces of people more reliable or just on the closest subject. However I hope they try to find a way to fix this in software. Another new option on A7 cmpared to NEX is to make the movable center focus area even smaller
This may be a bit off topic, but I’ve been wondering.. I’ve heard a lot of good things about the 35mm.. I have to admit, I’m mostly a telephoto person. I have always shot images of specific subjects.. wildlife, portrait sort of things, etc. While I’m still learning, and have a long way to go, I’d like to get something somewhat wide angle to practice with. So I was planing on getting the 55mm f/1.8 rather than the 35mm. But at half the physical size, the 35mm is attractive for its own reasons. Not to mention I’d like the practice of shooting ‘scenes’ rather than ‘subjects’.
Is there that big a difference between 35mm and 55mm when it comes to field of view? It doesn’t seem that big when I compare two shots side by side at an equivalent 35mm and 55mm. The 55mm just seems more versatile. Thoughts?
I would say a 35mm is always more versatile then a 50 or even 55mm, as you can get much more on your frame. You’ll mostly be able to go closer with a 35 “for portraits” but not able to go futher away with a 50 to “get the whole szene”. 35mm pictures for me are about an object or person in it’s surrounding and a 50 is more concentrating on the object while washing out the rest of the szene in bokeh when shot wide open. 35mm pictures look like “you’ve been there”, 50mm connect you more to the subject. For me It’s two different things.
But I think most people would agree, If you only have the chance to buy ONE LENS, then go for a 35. That’s why most fixed lens cameras like Sony RX1 or Fuji X100 have a 35mm or equivalent
I would say the 35 is more versatile but that would depend on your style. If you always find that you have enough space for the 55 then it becomes more versatile because it is faster and I personal prefer images from a 50ish lens than a 30ish lens. The only problem is you may have to increase the shutter speed because the 50 will be more prone to shake so it being faster may not really matter. It all boils done to your style. I would use a zoom if you have one and only shoot at 35 and 55 and see which works better for you.
I’ve been trying the zoom with 35 and 55, and around the house, at least, doesn’t seem terribly different. But I need to get out somewhere and play with it more. At short ranges, there probably isn’t much of a difference, compared to somewhere a lot more open.
Since you mention scenes, chances are you’ll enjoy the learning experience of a 35 more then a 55.
What’s your shortest tele focal length btw?
I had a nice L series 70-300 zoom lens that I loved. It covered most every shot I wanted to take. Not quite as sharp as the 70-200s, but lighter, a little more reach, and more compact. Most of the shots were around 70-200mm range anyway, and even around the yard when taking pictures of the pets or people, I rarely needed wider than 70. Again, however, I was usually trying to take a picture of something in particular, not a whole scene or event.
His review is lame just like his company’s customer service.
**I think for still IS is by a ways the single most exaggerated feature in modern cameras**
Quoted from above. Well sorry but it’s a free lunch and it is there if you need it. The lack of IBIS is a deal killer for some of us, and the reason why I’m sticking to A Mount.