YYV_146
Well-known
I always kept it at the lowest setting. With my high contrast ZM lenses the EVF would light like a Christmas tree at anything higher
I see. The Zeiss line does tend to be very contrasty and not work so well with peaking. My only Zeiss lens is the 15mm which I scale focus at all apertures.
Peaking seems to work best with high resolution/lower contrast lenses such as the 50mm Summilux ASPH and pre-A 35mm Summicrons.
cz23
-
Victor, I wish I had been able to produce B&W output like yours during my A7 experience. Leica lenses maybe? Or perhaps weak post-processing skills on my part.
Whatever reason, you show what's possible with the Sonys. Enjoyed your 500px very much.
John
Whatever reason, you show what's possible with the Sonys. Enjoyed your 500px very much.
John
Huss
Veteran
You definitely want to rent one then. EVFs make me nauseous after using them for just a minute or two. Like getting sea sick. It has something to do with the refresh rate and the way my brain handles it.
I have heard that this is not uncommon, and it seems that if you are getting a headache, you may be having the same issue.
But not all EVFs affect me in the same way. The Fujis, for me, are the worst. I feel it after using them for just a few seconds. Sony and Olympus takes a few minutes.
Huss
Veteran
"Cloth seller's daughter", and "lighting the evening fire" are just wonderful shots.
Peter David Grant
Well-known
I shoot the A7s and a Leica Monochrom.
I can't speak for using fully manual focus lenses on the A7s (I use the 35mm f2.8, which has AF) while I do leave it on manual focus, I tend to punch in my focus when required (using the button in the AF/MF switch). Never used it with a Leica lens, sorry.
Settings wise, shutter speed, aperture and iso all have their own dials, which given ISO on an M is behind a menu (Least M9 / MM), it is slightly more useful.
I always convert to B&W, so tend to leave my ISO to auto, manually setting speed and aperture.
Only frustrating thing for me is you can't have the silent shutter mode set to a custom button.
1/50th f5.6 ISO 5000
I can't speak for using fully manual focus lenses on the A7s (I use the 35mm f2.8, which has AF) while I do leave it on manual focus, I tend to punch in my focus when required (using the button in the AF/MF switch). Never used it with a Leica lens, sorry.
Settings wise, shutter speed, aperture and iso all have their own dials, which given ISO on an M is behind a menu (Least M9 / MM), it is slightly more useful.
I always convert to B&W, so tend to leave my ISO to auto, manually setting speed and aperture.
Only frustrating thing for me is you can't have the silent shutter mode set to a custom button.
1/50th f5.6 ISO 5000
YYV_146
Well-known
Thanks
Part of it is a good amount of PP. I process for color first and then do the B&W conversion with Nik Silver EFEX. I simply cannot recommend this software enough - quick conversions when you need them, but also plenty of fine-tuning possible. IMO the Leicas don't have much of an IQ edge over the Sony Zeiss. Sony Zeiss is generally more contrasty, and some Leica lenses have better bokeh and aberration control, but the difference is subtle. I use Leica because I appreciate the small size and don't care for fly-by-wire manual focusing.
cz23
-
I use LR and Silver EFEX. What I found wanting with the Nex and A7 B&W was the lack of creamy tonality in the light grays and whites. I attributed it to the character of the sensor, but yours say otherwise.
I would appreciate your thoughts on this point.
John
I would appreciate your thoughts on this point.
John
YYV_146
Well-known
Hmmm...not sure what "creamy" means in this context. But the default tonal contrast from CMOS sensors may be too weak for a good B&W conversion. But with Silver EFEX it is possible to sharpen separately for finest details vs. edges.
CMOS sensors have less highlight space than CCDs (at the benefit of shadow details). If you mean blown-out or close-to-blown highlights, metering for the brightest spot (or always taking 1/3-2/3 stops away from the built in meter) may be a good idea. It is almost certainly less damaging to lift the shadows verses dim the highlights with a CMOS sensor.
What I do is meter for the highlights, then selectively lift the shadows, boosting contrast and detail sharpness as needed. Don't be afraid to push the settings around with A7 files - they can handle a lot more than your average CCD file.
I also find it crucial in processing B&W to make sure the monitor gamma is right. If the monitor itself is blown-out or has too much contrast, no amount of PP will make the files look right.
cz23
-
Thanks, Victor.
sleepyhead
Well-known
Everyone: thank you for your detailed and informative answers to my question.
The conclusion I have drawn is that I NEED to try out the A7s before buying one. If the focus peaking isn't what I hope for, and the EVF makes me ill, then I can lay the idea to rest.
I will look into renting one for a month from the Swedish shop that Jockos pointed out.
The conclusion I have drawn is that I NEED to try out the A7s before buying one. If the focus peaking isn't what I hope for, and the EVF makes me ill, then I can lay the idea to rest.
I will look into renting one for a month from the Swedish shop that Jockos pointed out.
uhoh7
Veteran
I agree with Raid here
The advantage of one of the A7 series as a second camera is that it will take any M lens, full frame.
No the results are not as good, esp 35 and wider, but basically I never prefer the Sony results with any lens over the M9. However they can be really good.
As to wide smearing, remember the centers are still very good, so in many shots it's actually not noticeable or an issue at all. The A7s is better in this regard, but does still smear.
The shooting experience is very different, and if you like the M9, you may not love the Sony. Worst is the lack of accurate infinity stops without almost all adapters, except the Hawks CF V3 which has an adjustment. Lack of a way to manually switch from EVF to LCD is really bad, as it can really act up in auto mode. The Mag and Focus peaking need really time to figure out real world. I was pretty used to them, bought an M9, and at first only the results kept me shooting it as the tiny patch just seemed ridiculous.
9 Months later, I far prefer the M9 focusing.
Also I prefer the M9 low light to the Sony A7 (not S), the secret is simple: use fast lenses like the CV 35/1.2 and 50/1.1
Results are superior in low light to A7 for me. Obviously the S is another story. But the Sony Raws are really poor compared to Leica raws when edited in LR.
Sonys are a big step forward, but still quirky and half-finished, for me. Since the tech is all available to produce a really good M body, much smaller and lighter than the M9, I hope we will see one soon. The A7 is essentially the same size or often bigger than the M9 because of the lenses it likes best.
DSC06189 by unoh7, on Flickr
GaryLH
Veteran
The a7 is a breath of fresh air compared to the Sony nex5n. I used the 5n as my default universal digital back for all my legacy lenses both slr and rf. I now use the Sony a7 for this. The menu system is so much better. Having both front and rear dials to control aperture and shutter speed is really nice when using native af lenses in manual mode. The dedicated exposure compensation dial makes all difference. All the main items outside of iso are controlled w/ a single real control.
The only native fe lens I own is the 35f2.8. I am able to use the old e mount lenses as well at lower 11mp file size though. Focusing w/ Sony version of peaking is good. The center button on the scroll wheel can be used for mag to help focusing.
Don't expect all your legacies lenses to work perfectly w/ the Sony. IMO the 5n worked on a wider range of wide angle rf lenses then the a7. The a7s has been reported to do very well on wide angle rf lenses (I only have the a7).
The shutter on the a7 is not as loud as the a7r, w/ electronic first shutter curtain, about or maybe a bit quieter than the 5n. The a7s w/ electronic shutter is dead quiet.
However, if u are after an rf experience, right now in digital Leica is your only choice especially if u want new. For me, when I have that urge, I'll pick up my film camera
This week I have been shooting w/ the a7 and the vc 40f2 SL and Nikon 105f2.5.
Gary
The only native fe lens I own is the 35f2.8. I am able to use the old e mount lenses as well at lower 11mp file size though. Focusing w/ Sony version of peaking is good. The center button on the scroll wheel can be used for mag to help focusing.
Don't expect all your legacies lenses to work perfectly w/ the Sony. IMO the 5n worked on a wider range of wide angle rf lenses then the a7. The a7s has been reported to do very well on wide angle rf lenses (I only have the a7).
The shutter on the a7 is not as loud as the a7r, w/ electronic first shutter curtain, about or maybe a bit quieter than the 5n. The a7s w/ electronic shutter is dead quiet.
However, if u are after an rf experience, right now in digital Leica is your only choice especially if u want new. For me, when I have that urge, I'll pick up my film camera
This week I have been shooting w/ the a7 and the vc 40f2 SL and Nikon 105f2.5.
Gary
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I have an M9 and a Sony A7. I've not used the NEX cameras other than very superficially; I've used the M9 and A7 extensively. The A7 for me is a body to use with my Leica R and Nikkor SLR lenses. I do occasionally use an M-mount lens on it, but it works better with SLR lenses in general.
The $1300 price tag on the A7 body was justified by the fact that I expected it to prove the best way to make use of what was (when new) about $16,000 worth of excellent lenses, and a lot less expensive than the upgrade cost of going from M9 to M typ 240.
Using the A7:
- It's a clunky little plasticky-feeling camera.
- In use, because I use it with manual focus, adapted lenses, it feels more like a compact DSLR.
- The EVF is very good quality. For lenses 50mm and up, I can focus critically with neither magnification nor focus peaking. I find focus peaking only a moderate assistance at the best of times; magnification is more useful with short focal lengths.
- The sensor is very good and nets very clean results up to ISO 6400, with still "very good" results at ISO 125000 and 256000 if I'm careful with exposure..
- Although there are a bunch of mostly useless buttons and features for my uses, there is just enough cutomizability that I am able to use A and M modes with direct access to ISO, shutter time and aperture without needing to dig into menus. There are a few options that you must dig into the menus, but once you remember where they are, it's not off-putting.
- The EVF and LCD are very good, but the EVF lacks some of the sophistication of the Olympus E-M1 EVF and does not adapt as well to bright sunlight conditions.
- The in-camera panorama and video capture are useful plusses, occasionally.
By comparison to using the M9, the A7 is more versatile and better suited to long lenses or very short lenses (I have R lenses down to 19mm and up to 180mm). The M9 I find to be best used with 28 to 50, occasionally 90, mm lenses where the coupled rangefinder/viewfinder works best. Where I can get marginally good B&W out of the M9 at ISO 2500 and decent color at ISO 1600, the A7 nets two stops more sensitivity. The A7's live histogram, level indication, etc, all provide a great deal of flexibility when shooting.
Which do I like using more? The M9, certainly. It just feels better, better finished, and, when used with 28, 35, and 50 mm lenses that are a good match for the sensor, the image results are easily a match for the A7's 24Mpixel sensor.
Which do I use more? Well, the A7 gets the nod as I feel it works better with a 24mm or 90mm lens.
These are very different cameras. If my goal was to maintain use of my R lenses but keep only one body, I'd sell both the M9 and A7 in exchange for an M-P typ 240. The Live View, optional EVF, improved responsiveness, larger battery, etc, all combine to make it a significant upgrade to the M9.
But I'm lucky and happy to be able to keep both bodies and enjoy them for their individual merits.
G
The $1300 price tag on the A7 body was justified by the fact that I expected it to prove the best way to make use of what was (when new) about $16,000 worth of excellent lenses, and a lot less expensive than the upgrade cost of going from M9 to M typ 240.
Using the A7:
- It's a clunky little plasticky-feeling camera.
- In use, because I use it with manual focus, adapted lenses, it feels more like a compact DSLR.
- The EVF is very good quality. For lenses 50mm and up, I can focus critically with neither magnification nor focus peaking. I find focus peaking only a moderate assistance at the best of times; magnification is more useful with short focal lengths.
- The sensor is very good and nets very clean results up to ISO 6400, with still "very good" results at ISO 125000 and 256000 if I'm careful with exposure..
- Although there are a bunch of mostly useless buttons and features for my uses, there is just enough cutomizability that I am able to use A and M modes with direct access to ISO, shutter time and aperture without needing to dig into menus. There are a few options that you must dig into the menus, but once you remember where they are, it's not off-putting.
- The EVF and LCD are very good, but the EVF lacks some of the sophistication of the Olympus E-M1 EVF and does not adapt as well to bright sunlight conditions.
- The in-camera panorama and video capture are useful plusses, occasionally.
By comparison to using the M9, the A7 is more versatile and better suited to long lenses or very short lenses (I have R lenses down to 19mm and up to 180mm). The M9 I find to be best used with 28 to 50, occasionally 90, mm lenses where the coupled rangefinder/viewfinder works best. Where I can get marginally good B&W out of the M9 at ISO 2500 and decent color at ISO 1600, the A7 nets two stops more sensitivity. The A7's live histogram, level indication, etc, all provide a great deal of flexibility when shooting.
Which do I like using more? The M9, certainly. It just feels better, better finished, and, when used with 28, 35, and 50 mm lenses that are a good match for the sensor, the image results are easily a match for the A7's 24Mpixel sensor.
Which do I use more? Well, the A7 gets the nod as I feel it works better with a 24mm or 90mm lens.
These are very different cameras. If my goal was to maintain use of my R lenses but keep only one body, I'd sell both the M9 and A7 in exchange for an M-P typ 240. The Live View, optional EVF, improved responsiveness, larger battery, etc, all combine to make it a significant upgrade to the M9.
But I'm lucky and happy to be able to keep both bodies and enjoy them for their individual merits.
G
Bille
Well-known
AV, Auto ISO, maybe RAW and you should be done. What did you try to find in the menus?
Pretty much, yes. The a7 has a dedicated exposure comp. dial. Otherwise it´s as menu driven as the NEX 5n.
anerjee
Well-known
I've used the A7S and it is a very different camera.
I find that I don't need to change settings almost ever -- I set my aperture to f/4, speed to 1/160 and let the auto-iso figure things out.
if something seems wrong, use the exposure compensation dial.
With the Zeiss 35mm and the A7s, I've never really been in a situation (bright or dark) where the camera was a limiting factor.
I find that I don't need to change settings almost ever -- I set my aperture to f/4, speed to 1/160 and let the auto-iso figure things out.
if something seems wrong, use the exposure compensation dial.
With the Zeiss 35mm and the A7s, I've never really been in a situation (bright or dark) where the camera was a limiting factor.
kuuan
loves old lenses
+1, which is just about what I had written earlier ( and had been ignored. it is so easy to bash the NEX for their badly designed menus ) but imo if one needs to dive into it one simply has not learned to use this camera well or has never set it up properly.
the hard buttons on my 5n set ISO, shoot mode, drive mode, exposure compensation, magnification and the wheel selects shutter speed. That's all I need.
( Actually I have access to a few more settings via hard buttons: on my cam the button left to the wheel sets drive mode ( single shoot, cont. shoot, self timer asf. ) the middle button ISO ( from there 4 more configurable settings can be accessed with another push of left / right buttons, e.g. WB, metering mode, quality and 5 others more to choose from ) the right button selects shoot mode ( A , S, M asf. ) the lower button around the wheel selects exposure compensation. Leicas are hailed for not being cluttered with buttons, the NEXes get criticized for not having more..)
regarding focus peaking, best set peaking sensitivity to 'low' and focus with lens wide open. Middle and high sensitivities easily show more in focus than actually is. I find the resolution of the EVF fine enough that I can rely on my eyes, not on focus peaking, but do use magnification which I find the more powerful tool. Some recommend to set the camera to B&W for focus peaking working best. If shooting RAW ( + jpeg ) the full file still is there, the B&W image only shows in the EVF ( and recorded jpeg ). My mayor gripe with the 5N is the location of the magnification button, that is improved on the A7 series.
All that said 'in defense' of the 5N, even though it's sensitivity and colors cannot be changed the focus peaking as implemented on my Ricoh GXR M works much better. I can rely on it, however because of the lower resolution EVF I also need to. ( generally I prefer the use and handling of the Ricoh. Can't get myself to buy a A7 because I love EVFs to be articulating, can't talk highly enough of it's many advantages. I consider an EVF taking over the limitation of an OVF of being fixed as a design flaw that I believe manufacturers consciously choose because cameras with fixed EVF 'look' better and therefore sell better )
Last edited:
DavidKKHansen
Well-known
Yaron, another benefit of the A7s is the ability to get the Voigtländer VM close focus adaptor... all of a sudden your M-mount lenses become much more versatile!
That very one
You mean the bridge from the Bridge film series?
That very one
mcfingon
Western Australia
I just went and had another go at using peaking on the A7S and found it worked usefully for me if I turned it to its lowest setting and used my ZM lenses at or near wide open - f2 for the 35 f2 Biogon and f2 for the 50 f1.5 C Sonnar. Interesting comment about Zeiss lenses getting false positives out of the focus peaking because of the high contrast. It's great getting different ideas on these things. I'll have to try my '59 Elmar wide-open! Thanks for nice comments about my Bhutan photos. Much appreciated. Photo from today with focus peaking helping things at f2 on ZM C Sonnar:
sleepyhead
Well-known
I just went and had another go at using peaking on the A7S and found it worked usefully for me if I turned it to its lowest setting and used my ZM lenses at or near wide open - f2 for the 35 f2 Biogon and f2 for the 50 f1.5 C Sonnar. Interesting comment about Zeiss lenses getting false positives out of the focus peaking because of the high contrast. It's great getting different ideas on these things. I'll have to try my '59 Elmar wide-open! Thanks for nice comments about my Bhutan photos. Much appreciated. Photo from today with focus peaking helping things at f2 on ZM C Sonnar:
Lovely catch. Glad to hear that the focus peaking may be better with some tweaking.
sleepyhead
Well-known
Yaron, another benefit of the A7s is the ability to get the Voigtländer VM close focus adaptor... all of a sudden your M-mount lenses become much more versatile!
That very one
Yes, good point David. I'm not used to thinking about close ups. Thanks.