Sony A7R with Leica lenses

[Jubb Jubb]

Has anyone got any experience with the Sony A7R and Leica lenses, in particular the 35mm M Summicron?

Does it vignette as bad as people say?

thanks for any help

 

[Matt Nesbitt]

-used the 35mm 'cron v.4 with no issue
-I prefer the 40mm 'cron
-used color skopar 21mm f4 with great success
-50mm 'cron rigid worked fantastic as well

 

[Matt Nesbitt]

40mm 'cron

40mm 'cron

 

[thompsonks]

Do a google search – many discussions of this on a number of forums.

Have to disagree with Matt about 35 Cron. V1, 3, & 4 all cause some color vignetting and distortion in the far corners at wide apertures.Don't know about v2, but assume it's no different.

But agree 100% re: 40 Cron – it's the widest Leica lens that covers corners nicely at all apertures.

Kirk

 

[uhoh7]

Has anyone got any experience with the Sony A7R and Leica lenses, in particular the 35mm M Summicron?

Does it vignette as bad as people say?

thanks for any help

It's terrible, I'm sorry to say.

Believe it or not the CV 35/1.4 is usable. ZM 35/2 also terrible.

FLE is OK.

Ultron-M is the best RF lens at 35 for the A7 series, CV 35/1.2 probably next, but the native FE 35/2.8 is technically the best on the quirky sony sensor.

 

[Lss]

Terrible lead time.

 

[goo0h]

It's terrible, I'm sorry to say.

ZM 35/2 also terrible.

Has anybody tested this on the a7rII? I imagine not much changed. Still, curious...

 

[benmacphoto]

Has anybody tested this on the a7rII? I imagine not much changed. Still, curious...

I've used the A7R mkII with the 35mm f1.4 pre ASPH on it and corner performance was great.
I think the new sensor on the mkII is a big improvement over past A7 models as far as wider than 50mm lenses.

 

[Shac]

Like others my 35 summicrons V1 and V4 - have major corner smear with A7r2 wide open and to f4

 

[uhoh7]

I've used the A7R mkII with the 35mm f1.4 pre ASPH on it and corner performance was great.
I think the new sensor on the mkII is a big improvement over past A7 models as far as wider than 50mm lenses.

You would have to post samples to get me to believe this, I'd wager you shot "on the curve".

The only accurate test for these issues is to shoot an unforgiving long landscape where the corners are as far away as the centers.

The corners can seem fine when they match the relations of the sensor induced field curvature.

 

[sevo]

Has anybody tested this on the a7rII? I imagine not much changed. Still, curious...

The A7RII has a backlit sensor - in theory it should be better, and by all reports it indeed is superior to the A7R and A7(II) where short depth wideangle lenses are concerned. The original A7R is horrible in that regard (due to particularly deep sensor wells), the A7 suffers from its thick cover glass. Reports are less conclusive where comparisons with the A7S(II) and cover glass modded A7's are concerned.

 

[uhoh7]

The R2 is better than the R, for sure, especially with color shift. But the issues remain with all the usual suspects.

I also had thought the Backlit sensor would improve things, but those who know how to look for and identify the FC say, and show it's still there, and not only with RF wides.

For example, the 75 Lux which shoots pretty good on the A7, is weird enough on the A7r2 that Charles K sold his, and now uses natives, like the 85 batis, which seem quite good.

 

[Focalplane]

There is a great article on this site https://www.slrlounge.com/sony-a7ii-leica-glass/ with regards to Leica glass and the Sony a7

 

[unixrevolution]

This is likely to prove useful. i know if I was going to get an A7, i would consider this an essential mod.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1392833

 

[uhoh7]

There is a great article on this site https://www.slrlounge.com/sony-a7ii-leica-glass/ with regards to Leica glass and the Sony a7

from the article:
"Can the Sony A7II give you the same quality results as the M9 or M240 with Leica glass? The simple answer, yes it can."

Pure nonsense.

That's not to say you can't put somebody in the center of your frame and get a very pretty shot.

I'm sorry for anyone who has been mislead by that piece. The author obviously never bothered to do much research. The result is a "fake news" blog post. With the Kolari thin filter mod you do get close to M240, but with many lenses it's still not there.

Here is a good series of tests:
http://blog.kasson.com/?s=kolari

note there are 3 pages of posts.

I've shot at least 30 M/LTM lenses on stock A7 and A7r and A7 kolari. I'm looking to mod a A7r2 also. I shoot M9 as my main body. The truth about A7 and M LTM performance was nailed down at FM in late 2013, and reported here. Still you have people say they are just as good as M all the time. Really incredible.

Now, all that said here is something funny: right now what is the best 35 prime for A7x? ZM 35/1.4. That's not because it does as well as a M body but because Sony does not have it together at 35mm. I thought the FE 35/2.8 would beat the ZM, and at 2.8 I'd still bet on it. However at 6.3 the ZM rules the roost according to many.

 

[MIkhail]

from the article:
"Can the Sony A7II give you the same quality results as the M9 or M240 with Leica glass? The simple answer, yes it can."

Pure nonsense.

That's not to say you can't put somebody in the center of your frame and get a very pretty shot.

I'm sorry for anyone who has been mislead by that piece. The author obviously never bothered to do much research. The result is a "fake news" blog post. With the Kolari thin filter mod you do get close to M240, but with many lenses it's still not there.

Here is a good series of tests:
http://blog.kasson.com/?s=kolari

note there are 3 pages of posts.

I've shot at least 30 M/LTM lenses on stock A7 and A7r and A7 kolari. I'm looking to mod a A7r2 also. I shoot M9 as my main body. The truth about A7 and M LTM performance was nailed down at FM in late 2013, and reported here. Still you have people say they are just as good as M all the time. Really incredible.

Now, all that said here is something funny: right now what is the best 35 prime for A7x? ZM 35/1.4. That's not because it does as well as a M body but because Sony does not have it together at 35mm. I thought the FE 35/2.8 would beat the ZM, and at 2.8 I'd still bet on it. However at 6.3 the ZM rules the roost according to many.

Completely lost in the second part of your answer... and when I realized that I just went to your link on Flickr... And I have a question. It's a philosophical one, you don't have to answer if you don't wish to. It's seems to me that you pretty much doing snapshots, everybody in a middle of a frame looking straight anyway. Why would you need absolute best for that? It seems any half decent lens will do for that, no?
Thanks.

 

[mark_pw]

Leica Prime Lenses on Sony A7

Leica Prime Lenses on Sony A7

You may want to check out BigBigLens.com. There are many photos taken by Leica prime lenses on Sony A7. :angel:

 

[Scapevision]

I use the R series Summicron 50 on mine, it's brilliant. The 40 voigtlander 1.4 vignetted with smearing unfortunately. VM 50 1.5 was the best lens i have tried on sony from M line, Biogon 35 ZM was very bad, 50 planar ZM good, VM 50 1.1 was amazing as well.
I think you're better off with slr wides on this beast.


A Path Worth Taking by Scapevision, on Flickr