Sony A7 vs. Digital M

[Monochrom]

I made a little reasearch because i wnted an a7 to use only voigtlander wides, this research conclusion is the A7 can´t handle these lenses.

The sensor can only deal with retrofocus and normal lenses in M or ltm mount.

Many say it also has vibration blur at hi speeds which i´ve never experienced in my digital m´s.

Pesonally i focus my leicas very fast, never have any complain about that.

Leicas are in many cases aspirational goods and many have them only for saying they have one or to be seen with one, but prefer eventually using AF cameras with easier shooting modes...

 

[Takkun]

I feel it too. The opposite, really; that I am not giving my Nikons enough love. The point made earlier is that a tool is just a tool, but I think all of us who appreciate Leicas here appreciate them not for specifications or prestige, but for the quality of the experience using them. I've been far more prolific, creative and successful in my personal work since going back to film and RFs, since they're far more usable for me, but holding that beast of an SLR really gets me excited the same way I assume some people get excited sitting in a fast car. (I don't know, I don't drive)

 

[uhoh7]

If you love great glass, the a7 and m9 are very complimentary tools.

I wonder what these guys might do with an A7:

https://www.maxmax.com/

 

[GaryLH]

Yep maxmax.. I would love to c them do a monochrome conversion of that camera.

Gary

 

[Godfrey]

Okay, I did my little experiment this morning. I carried both the M9 and the A7 along with just the M-Rokkor 40mm f/2 lens. To further constrain the results, I set the lens to about f/4.7 and the ISO on both cameras to 320.

In use, there are some situations where the A7 is much easier to focus and other situations where the M9 is much easier to focus. But by and large most situations prove equally easy to focus with either, and there are workarounds in technique that you can use to get around when either are more difficult to focus. The end result is that you can focus either camera with acceptable accuracy with a little practice and understanding.

In all cases, it's much easier to see the framing accurately with the Sony. You always see precisely what the lens sees. The Leica allows you to see a bit around the outside of the actual frame by varying amounts depending upon the particular focal length, the distance you're focusing at, and your eyesight (because of how you see through the viewfinder). As a consequence, with the Leica I normally want to shoot a little "loose" to be sure I've got everything I want in the photo. This is the same if I were comparing an SLR and a RF camera of any type.

The Leica M9 is a bit bulkier, a bit heavier than the Sony. The differences are not enormous. Likewise, the ergonomics of the two cameras differ a lot, but which fits your hands and use better is a matter of personal opinion. As is the ability to make settings with the camera not to your eye ... they both do, but how you do it and how you see what you're doing is different, and which you like more will also differ.

The Sony A7 (and particularly the A7r) gets a bad rap for shutter noise. Well, the sound of the shutters is quite different:

M9:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/A7-M9-side_by_side/M9.mp3

A7 with EFCS enabled (the normal mode):
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/A7-M9-side_by_side/A7-ECFS.mp3

A7 with only mechanical (same as A7r):
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/A7-M9-side_by_side/A7-mechanical.mp3

The recordings were made at about 7 inches from the cameras, above and to the right of them. The M9's softer sound is followed by the longer, slow shutter recock. The A7 EFCS mode is sharp but quick, the A7 mechanical mode is clattery. None of them is particularly quiet, really, and from 8 feet way in an open field you'd hardly notice any of them. For a quiet concert hall ... Give me a quiet leaf shutter camera, please.

In the end, the question becomes "Which camera makes a better photo?" I've seen on this thread that some people think the M9 creates a sharper photo ... which seems kind of odd since the A7 has more pixel resolution. If you're using the same lens on either, and the lens is a good match to either sensor, the 30% more pixel resolution should count for more than the difference that the A7's light AA filter can reduce resolution by (the A7r's lack of AA filter and double the M9 resolution should account for even more than that), and perceptual sharpness is after that more of an image processing/local contrast issue.

So here's the challenge: Look at these ten photo pairs and tell me for each one of them which is the M9 and which is the A7 exposure.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/A7-M9-side_by_side/side_by_side-01.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/A7-M9-side_by_side/side_by_side-02.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/A7-M9-side_by_side/side_by_side-03.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/A7-M9-side_by_side/side_by_side-04.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/A7-M9-side_by_side/side_by_side-05.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/A7-M9-side_by_side/side_by_side-06.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/A7-M9-side_by_side/side_by_side-07.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/A7-M9-side_by_side/side_by_side-08.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/A7-M9-side_by_side/side_by_side-09.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/A7-M9-side_by_side/side_by_side-10.jpg

(I've got the legend here, but I'll let you do guess first.

As to what I like using ... Well, I like using them both. But I think I like using the A7 more: I'll take 'easier to see with most of the time' over the "RF experience"... but that's my predilection.

G

 

[hepcat]

Godfrey, your comparison tells me that the technology was mature with the M9. While pixel peeping 1:1 at RAW files may reveal some difference, and you can see a little difference in saturation in the comparison photos, there's just not a lot of difference. Certainly not enough for me to try to tell you which shot came from which camera.

I think you're right... it's about the way you perceive the user interface now.

Thanks for doing this. It was very informative.

 

[CameraQuest]

Godfrey,

Your M9 obviously needs repair or adjustment.

None of the posted comparison shots has that LEICA GLOW which Leica Nutz love to brag about.

Please have your M9 serviced and try it again.

Stephen

 

[hepcat]

Stephen... we REALLY need a "like" button. ROTF!!!

 

[Dez]

I'm sorry I got caught up in the effort to use M lenses on my A7 - most of those that work well are longer than I'm interested in using. Wish I'd realized at the start that A7/r is the new body for R lenses.

I have heard grumbling about the A7's ability to produce good images with ultrawides from a few sources now; presumably this has to do with the sensor's ability to handle light coming in way off axis, which is a special design consideration in the digital Leicas, but is there a substantial improvement with the A7R? Is there a particular consideration for wide angle lenses here, or does it have something to do with the elimination of the anti-aliasing filter???

Cheers,
Dez

 

[Dez]

Godfrey,

Your M9 obviously needs repair or adjustment.

None of the posted comparison shots has that LEICA GLOW which Leica Nutz love to brag about.

Please have your M9 serviced and try it again.

Stephen

Isn't 'Leica Glow' what you get when you have a thumbprint on your Summilux?

Cheers,
Dez

 

[CameraQuest]

Isn't 'Leica Glow' what you get when you have a thumbprint on your Summilux?

Cheers,
Dez

For me, its the glow I get when looking at new Leica prices.

Stephen

 

[Roger Hicks]

Apples and oranges... Kangaroos and microscopes....

A7 and digi-M are so different that the comparison only makes sense to anyone who has (a) tried both and (b) likes the A7 more.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Wenge]

Thanks Godfrey for the effort in doing those tests; very good and informative.

 

[Dez]

(I've got the legend here, but I'll let you do guess first. G

It's difficult to make any IQ judgement given the size of the images. I'm assuming that these pix are RAW files with no post at all. There seems to be about 1/2 stop difference in exposure in every pair, with the lower pic more exposed; so I suspect all the pairs are split the same way. I think the upper picture in every case looks a bit better exposed in these small images, but that's not a very significant difference. So my guess is 'Don't know'.

Cheers,
Dez

 

[Takkun]

Godfrey,

Your M9 obviously needs repair or adjustment.

None of the posted comparison shots has that LEICA GLOW which Leica Nutz love to brag about.

Please have your M9 serviced and try it again.

Stephen

I'm imagining "User reports no glow emitted from sensor" listed on a repair invoice.

 

[gdi]

I have heard grumbling about the A7's ability to produce good images with ultrawides from a few sources now; presumably this has to do with the sensor's ability to handle light coming in way off axis, which is a special design consideration in the digital Leicas, but is there a substantial improvement with the A7R? Is there a particular consideration for wide angle lenses here, or does it have something to do with the elimination of the anti-aliasing filter???

Cheers,
Dez

If you mean ultra wide M/LTM lenses, the A7r does no better than the A7 with them, and most see the A7 as better. I don't consider these as a top notch platforms for Leica RF lenses - but they sing - especially the A7r - with Leica R (and most other SLR ) lenses.

 

[Godfrey]

Godfrey,

Your M9 obviously needs repair or adjustment.

None of the posted comparison shots has that LEICA GLOW which Leica Nutz love to brag about.

Please have your M9 serviced and try it again.

Stephen

LOL! If I want the Leica Glow, I put a thumbprint on my lenses.

If I want the Leica Look™, I use Leica lenses ... That'll be the Leica R lenses that work so nicely one the A7. I only own Voigtländers in M-mount, other than the M-Rokkor 40/90 and Hektor 135. ]'-)

G

 

[Godfrey]

I have heard grumbling about the A7's ability to produce good images with ultrawides from a few sources now; presumably this has to do with the sensor's ability to handle light coming in way off axis, which is a special design consideration in the digital Leicas, but is there a substantial improvement with the A7R? Is there a particular consideration for wide angle lenses here, or does it have something to do with the elimination of the anti-aliasing filter???

Short-register RF lenses have lots of problems with digital sensors in general, as they were not designed with digital sensors in mind until very very recently. SLR lenses work much better ...

Sony A7 + Nikkor 18mm f/3.5 AI-S

Full resolution image:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/25268645/sonyA7-nikkor18mm/140301-00406.jpg
​

G

 

[Godfrey]

It's difficult to make any IQ judgement given the size of the images. I'm assuming that these pix are RAW files with no post at all. There seems to be about 1/2 stop difference in exposure in every pair, with the lower pic more exposed; so I suspect all the pairs are split the same way. I think the upper picture in every case looks a bit better exposed in these small images, but that's not a very significant difference. So my guess is 'Don't know'.

Cheers,
Dez

Don't make any assumptions at all. Just pick as best you can which ones are which. If you cannot tell, that says something too.

G

 

[Godfrey]

Apples and oranges... Kangaroos and microscopes....

A7 and digi-M are so different that the comparison only makes sense to anyone who has (a) tried both and (b) likes the A7 more.

No, not at all. Get off your high horse and make a few guesses, Roger. It's for fun.

G