venchka
Veteran
gdi
Veteran
A7r is really for native glass only if you are really picky. A few exceptions. It has lots of problems with SLR glass on the edges at wide apertures too.
A7 is much better, but not like M9 with RF 35 and wider.
However plain A7 is superb with SLR.
I've been shooting lots of frames a day with a bunch of SLR stuff, and I like it
No regrets at having sent the R back.
To day I shot a bunch of skiing with the OM 200/5 and results are pretty...well they exceed my expectations.
I thought about trading my A7r for an A7, but I saw no real performance advantage with RF lenses demonstrated side-by-side (though admittedly I may have missed something). And in the end, the biggest advantages to the Sonys that attracted me were not present on the A7, so it was either get a refund and stay Leica digital or keep the r.
Regarding SLR lenses, I wonder if anyone has done any controlled comparisons between the A7 and A7r with them. It seems illogical that the A7 would perform better with SLR lenses than the A7r, unless we are just seeing the superior sensor in the A7r making any lens flaws more apparent.
My limited shooting with SLR lenses as wide as 24mm on the A7r shows very good performance and no problems that I wouldn't expect to see on any other FF digital with a wide angle. It is so easy to test these lenses with the Sony by focusing on the corners and adjusting for falloff. I used similar legacy lenses on my old Canon 5D and saw similar results, so I don't know if things get that much better in the world of adapted lenses and no software tweaking.
uhoh7
Veteran
I wish you the best with any camera you have, and there's no doubt the A7r can take great photos.
However it has multiple layers over a very dense bunch of pixels.
The real test is pretty simple. You find a landscape with high detail on the edges out past 100 meters: the further the better if the air is good.
Then just shoot from wide open down to f/16. I use hand signals to keep track.
I found the R center detail to degrade well before the edges with numerous SLR lenses even at f/8. It's a small degradation at f/8 but it's there, and more than a lens performance issue.
I believe that sensor needs native glass to give great edges on many lenses. Interviews with the design team hint this is the case.
The A7 is not perfect, but there is a large difference--very obvious when you study results.
So if anyone keeps the R, my advice is: get the native glass as it becomes available. You should get very good results.
I have never sent a camera back until the R, and I did not do so lightly. I honestly am convinced the A7 is far superior with general legacy shooting, both RF and SLR, when it comes to wide and medium aperture edge performance. There may be exceptions but I have seen it again and again with my collection of 80 or so lenses.
But you will have fun with the R regardless
I don't want to bum anyone out; but I do want people to know as much as possible going in, so they can save a chunk.Also the native zoom which comes with the A7 28-70, is actually quite good and a steal at the combo price. I wish I would have got it :bang:
gdi
Veteran
I wish you the best with any camera you have, and there's no doubt the A7r can take great photos.
However it has multiple layers over a very dense bunch of pixels.
The real test is pretty simple. You find a landscape with high detail on the edges out past 100 meters: the further the better if the air is good.
Then just shoot from wide open down to f/16. I use hand signals to keep track.
I found the R center detail to degrade well before the edges with numerous SLR lenses even at f/8. It's a small degradation at f/8 but it's there, and more than a lens performance issue.
I believe that sensor needs native glass to give great edges on many lenses. Interviews with the design team hint this is the case.
The A7 is not perfect, but there is a large difference--very obvious when you study results.
So if anyone keeps the R, my advice is: get the native glass as it becomes available. You should get very good results.
I have never sent a camera back until the R, and I did not do so lightly. I honestly am convinced the A7 is far superior with general legacy shooting, both RF and SLR, when it comes to wide and medium aperture edge performance. There may be exceptions but I have seen it again and again with my collection of 80 or so lenses.
But you will have fun with the R regardless
Also the native zoom which comes with the A7 28-70, is actually quite good and a steal at the combo price. I wish I would have got it :bang:
I appreciate your perspective and viewpoint since you have owned both cameras, and it doesn't bum me out at all! I am quite rational about these things and I let logic and experience guide me.
Above, I think you are trying to say that your A7r with SLR lenses had worse center resolution as you stopped down; of course that has to be first report I have read of that. I have compared a few SLR lenses and done exactly as you say noting aperture settings (with a notepad, rather than hand signals, but I don't think that matters ! ) and without exception shots showed improvement, not degradation, in center quality as I stopped down to F8, unsurprisingly. That is my first hand experience and I wouldn't try to rationalize the behavior you describe away. That is exactly what happened with a number of early buyer reports that rationalized terrible RF edge and corner results as not mattering to real world photography (I am sure you remember that
). I knew quickly that these cameras would not be up to Leica M standards and stopped trying to force fit the combo. The results I have seen thus far with SLR lenses show weaknesses similar to (maybe a little better, maybe a little worse) those we have seen on any full frame digital to this point. But that is just my user experiences and of course I am open to any reliable professional reviewer to demonstrate why my results would be invalid - but in the meantime I have to rely on my first hand experience and common sense. So I understand that you have invested a lot of emotional energy into first the A7r and now the A7, and I hope that the new camera proves to be the right choice for you. For me, if I do find that the A7r doesn't produce to my expectations with my lenses, I'll simply sell it and move on - for me I don't see much in the A7 that would steer me there over the digital Leica, even though it may be exactly what others are looking for.
Enjoy!
uhoh7
Veteran
Sorry I was not clear: A7r center resolution is very good and stays good till f/11. Superb performance stopped down in the center--and wide open.
With some exceptions, but in general true.
The problem is the edges where the light is coming at steep angles on the dense sensor. these rarely or never match the center--beyond lens performance.
Here is the Canon SLR 35/2 SSC concave @f/8:
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3700/11429263613_2151ab00ed_o.jpg
watch the distant details fall off as you approach the edges.
the design team has the processor recognize the natives and address this.
You do not see this effect on the A7 to anywhere near this degree. It's much bigger pixels take in the angled light on the edges much better without correction. This is also why you see so much less color shift on the A7 and RF wides, and far less smearing at a given aperture.
moving on, a few shots with OM 135/2.8 today:
DSC05706-2 by unoh7, on Flickr
DSC05704-3 by unoh7, on Flickr
DSC05646-3 by unoh7, on Flickr
at 360 grams this is a great handling lens on the A7. No problem to ski with.
now back to the car:
DSC05632 by unoh7, on Flickr
gdi
Veteran
Thanks for the clarification. I have no first hand experience with the edge differences between the two cameras, but would interesting to see a good review comparing them. After seeing what the A7r can do with my 90 Summicron-M stopped down (and ignoring the extreme corners) I went for broke and bought a 55 FE. So I should be able to have some fun seeing just how good this sensor really is.
Have fun
Have fun