A7M: help with RF wide performance

A7M SEM21 f/4

a7m_sem21_f/4 by unoh7, on Flickr

f/3.4 (WO)

DSC00375 by unoh7, on Flickr

The SEM21 is now usable for landscapes wide open. I need more sun for good before/after shots 🙁 It's the most improved lens I own.

The 28 cron is quite good but for a serious landscape you want f/8

a7m_28cron_f8 by unoh7, on Flickr

and with the ZM35/2 you'll want f/11
here is a dark f/8

a7m_zm35-2_f8 by unoh7, on Flickr

Wide Open, at f/2, both 28 cron and zm 35/2 loose it well before the edges in these long infinity shots, which of course you never shoot wide open anyway.

ZM35/2 WO

a7m_zm35-2_f/2 by unoh7, on Flickr
28Cron WO:

a7M_28cron_f2 by unoh7, on Flickr

Bottom line: all RF wides are going to improve with this mod. Whether they make it all the way to really good is going to depend on the lens. Both ZM18 and especially SEM 21 and SEM24 are getting close to M240 levels here, uncorrected. 28 Cron is really good. ZM35/2 is much improved but not at the level of the previous three.

I will test my 21 and 35 Skopars but don't hold out high hopes they will reach their film performance. Sorry I don't have the CV 15. I'd expect the new one to be pretty good.
 
I better post some real shots after those ugly test pics:
SEM21:

DSC00590 by unoh7, on Flickr

wide open:

DSC00530 by unoh7, on Flickr

yum yum:

DSC00541 by unoh7, on Flickr

28cron WO:

DSC00512 by unoh7, on Flickr

Better not leave out the little Sonnetar:

a7m_st_f1c4 (1 of 1) by unoh7, on Flickr

Thank God this mod was not available a year ago or I would never have bit the M9 bullet. 🙂 That camera has taught me a great deal.
 
This wouldn't improve the quality of old Minolta AF glass too terribly, would you think? Of course they're designed for film, but they're also telecentric. I'd imagine that removing the translucent mirror would do more?

I hope an LA-EA5 is released with a screw motor, but without the mirror once on-sensor phase detect autofocus becomes standard on FE mount cameras.
 
Samouraï said:
This wouldn't improve the quality of old Minolta AF glass too terribly, would you think? Of course they're designed for film, but they're also telecentric. I'd imagine that removing the translucent mirror would do more?

I hope an LA-EA5 is released with a screw motor, but without the mirror once on-sensor phase detect autofocus becomes standard on FE mount cameras.
Click to expand...

I have a couple, 100-200 which was pretty good, and a 35-?. I will try them. Any lens designed for film will be better, but with the longer ones maybe you could not tell. But there are some mid-range zooms which are really cheap, and I bet would clean up great, as well as the wider AFprimes. 20/24/28. The 28/2 would be really interesting.

I've owned the A7r and the A7.

This is a different camera. I really love the mod.

here is the elmarit 28 v3 today:

DSC01148 by unoh7, on Flickr

Sonnetar 1.1 WO today:

Thinkin by unoh7, on Flickr

I really was not using the camera much, but am really inspired by the new performance.

75 Lux:

DSC00690 by unoh7, on Flickr

75 Lux:

DSC00641-2 by unoh7, on Flickr

50 cron:

DSC00633 by unoh7, on Flickr
 
So, I had a short weather break and managed to get some shots with two lenses I consider "worst case", the tiny CV 21 and 35 Skopars. I had no expectations, but I thought I might as well see what they would do.

Since there is big copy variation and many of these lenses are decentered, not to mention the variable of adapters, these should not be seen as definitive, but these lenses can at least do this well.


a7M_CV21_11 by unoh7, on Flickr


a7M_CV21_8 by unoh7, on Flickr


a7M_CV35_56 by unoh7, on Flickr


a7M_CV35_8 by unoh7, on Flickr

For me, these lenses were totally unusable with heavy smearing at all apertures with infinity shots like this on the A7 and A7r. Here a close look will reveal considerable strangeness, but I'd say they are way better. I would not use them, I don't even use them on the M9, although they are much better than this with that camera.
 
This is the Contax C/Y mount 85 f2.8 lens on the A7S at f4. Hard to imagine it getting sharper with the mod 🙂 I also have the ZM 35/f2 Biogon and have decided to buy the 35 Sony Sonnar f2.8 rather than modify my only full frame digital body. I will enjoy the Biogon on the M3, where it works beautifully all the way to the edges. I will be able to work quicker with the auto-focussing 35 Sonnar on the A7S. I also have ZM Sonnar and Planar 50's, which work well on the A7S, but still show some edge effects depending on subject and distance.
650_triumph_800px.jpg
 
mcfingon said:
This is the Contax C/Y mount 85 f2.8 lens on the A7S at f4. Hard to imagine it getting sharper with the mod 🙂 I also have the ZM 35/f2 Biogon and have decided to buy the 35 Sony Sonnar f2.8 rather than modify my only full frame digital body. I will enjoy the Biogon on the M3, where it works beautifully all the way to the edges. I will be able to work quicker with the auto-focussing 35 Sonnar on the A7S. I also have ZM Sonnar and Planar 50's, which work well on the A7S, but still show some edge effects depending on subject and distance.
Click to expand...


Every lens designed for a film plane will do better. Whether you can really see it or not is another question.

I agree the FE35/2.8 is the best 35 available for the A7 series, un-modifed, out performing the Loxia 35/2 which does not do as well as the ZM 35/2 on an M9.

Leica 400/6.8

My Elk by unoh7, on Flickr
 
15mm Super Wide Helliar

15mm Super Wide Helliar

I own the 15mm Super Wide Helliar and it is horrible on the A7r regarding smearing. I would be VERY interested in anyone who is testing the modified A7r with this lens. Post some samples please if anyone can.
 
Noctilux f1.0, Voigtlander 35mm f1.2

Noctilux f1.0, Voigtlander 35mm f1.2

I also own a Noctilux f1.0 and Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 Nokton and would like to see shots taken at f1.0 and f1.2 to see if the modification has any negative affect. I have read that there may be problems at fast f stops, but maybe not. Any samples would be appreciated!
 
Elmarit 28mm v3 question

Elmarit 28mm v3 question

uhoh7 said:
I have a couple, 100-200 which was pretty good, and a 35-?. I will try them. Any lens designed for film will be better, but with the longer ones maybe you could not tell. But there are some mid-range zooms which are really cheap, and I bet would clean up great, as well as the wider AFprimes. 20/24/28. The 28/2 would be really interesting.

I've owned the A7r and the A7.

This is a different camera. I really love the mod.

here is the elmarit 28 v3 today:

DSC01148 by unoh7, on Flickr

Sonnetar 1.1 WO today:

Thinkin by unoh7, on Flickr

I really was not using the camera much, but am really inspired by the new performance.

75 Lux:

DSC00690 by unoh7, on Flickr

75 Lux:

DSC00641-2 by unoh7, on Flickr

50 cron:

DSC00633 by unoh7, on Flickr
Click to expand...

I also have the 3rd version of the 28mm Elmarit M and there is much smearing wide open which seems to get a little better at around f8.0. I would like some more detail on how well this lens works, how much of an improvement the modification has made, before and after. I would imagine it would be great improvement, but it is best to hear it from someone who has the lens and modified camera.
 
eleskin said:
I also own a Noctilux f1.0 and Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 Nokton and would like to see shots taken at f1.0 and f1.2 to see if the modification has any negative affect. I have read that there may be problems at fast f stops, but maybe not. Any samples would be appreciated!
Click to expand...

Where did you read that?

here is a snap from CV 35/1.2

Mr H by unoh7, WO

Since the sensor is now more like film, which has no sensor stack, I do not think any lens designed for film cameras can perform worse in terms of sharpness, edges etc. compared to the stock A7 series machines.

It's possible that auto WB has been effected, but the camera has alot of adjustments and of course RAW files can be easily edited on a wide gamut.

I don't have the 50/1 but I do have the CV 50/1.1 and I will try to get some shots 🙂

eleskin said:
I also have the 3rd version of the 28mm Elmarit M and there is much smearing wide open which seems to get a little better at around f8.0. I would like some more detail on how well this lens works, how much of an improvement the modification has made, before and after. I would imagine it would be great improvement, but it is best to hear it from someone who has the lens and modified camera.
Click to expand...

I hate to say it, but this is just not the best lens on M9 even. I've tested quite a bit. But it improves considerably on A7 series with thin CG. The 28 cron is worlds ahead on the edges and overall sharpness, and especially any infinity work. On film it's probably better.

the v3 gives nice detail if you are close. It is good on the M8 cause the bad bits are mostly cropped LOL
 
Besides focus issues the A7 is also prone to shutter shake much more than M9 🙁 So for awhile I was wondering about the CV 35/1.4 (pre-asph 35 lux knock off, as sebboh at FM notes🙂)

Well I got this one right, around f/8 could even be 5.6:

DSC02987 by unoh7, on Flickr

This is actually superior in the corners to my 40/2 shots.
If you look at the flickr mag, center frame just over the haze in the distant valley is another ridge line. That's 80 miles away. 🙂
I have to say, for this lens in this situation, the M9 might be no better, except it's pristine CCD look and feel (to me). I remember some zone issues in tests with the M9 on this lens, which led me to find a biogon. They are hard to spot here.

I wonder if there is a LR lens preset which would fix the nokton's distortion in a click?

Also one last ZM18 shot where the distant focus is perfect and we see the lens really performing right out to the edges:

DSC02805 by unoh7, on Flickr

Now I just need to learn to hold the thing steady and constantly focus properly (both easier on M9) to duplicate this performance consistently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom