Sony A7 - Great Camera

[sonicbuffalo]

rex.....i like your signature quote....it's really true for most of us!

 

[gsgary]

have you ever tried manual focus, thats the big problem with Nikon and Canon digital cameras its a lot harder than the A7

Yes I have. Two of the first three lenses I had for my Canon were a Takumar 55mm and an Auto-Chinon 135mm.

However, I did not have a proper focus screen and it was more difficult than it's worth.

And it may be much easier to manual focus on the A7 than the Canon, but that doesn't mean it's easy.

The fact that manual focus on the A7 is easy to you doesn't help out the people who don't have that skillset.

It makes more sense (to me) to just buy a different camera as opposed to buying the A7 and learning an entirely different, specialized skillset, in order to workaround the camera's autofocus issues.

What autofocus issue ?

 

[sonicbuffalo]

damn good question.....I have no issues!

 

[Derrel]

24 megapixels on full-frame is a nice capture size, and allows high-volume shooting without an incredible download and storage hassle. I shot a HUGE set of 1,055 raw 24-megapixel images yesterday on 28 gigabytes of memory. You get fairly big pixels on FF, compared to the same number crammed onto a smaller sensor, so you get a bit better High ISO performance capability, and the real advantage is the way the lens focal lengths work on the 24x36 sized capture medium; a 50 is a normal lens, and 85mm is a USABLE telephoto, even inside of a living room! You don't have to be 35 feet back to successfully deploy the 85mm for vertically-framed, full-length, standing portraits! I hope you enjoy the new rig!

Real, old-school manual focus lenses have slower, more-precise, and usually mechanically superb focusing ring control; MOST autofocus lenses have an incredibly loose, sloppy, non-dampened focus ring movement, which goes like this: Infinity, then in 10 degrees of rotation, 3 meters! it makes it damned near IMPOSSIBLE to accurately and repeatedly focus on stuff in the all-important ranges between infinity and over 10 feet!!!! ACK! Sure, you can hit focus, but not always consistently, because the mechanics are so loosey-goosey. But...use a precision-built, manual-focus designed lens, and the focusing distances are spread out over up to 240 degrees of rotation, so its EASY to get the focus right, time after time!

 

[usayit]

Congrats on the new camera. I'm pretty much sold on the idea of the Sony A7R to be used with adapted lenses... in particular my M-mount lenses and perhaps my collection of Pentax/Takumar. Just waiting for the right price.

My only issue with a FF mirror-less cameras is that the lenses themselves haven't really gotten any smaller. I think its simply a physical limitation from the size of the image circle needed for a FF sensor. I am also a MFT shooter and I find that system established the ideal balance between performance and size. There is a huge difference in size between the Sony A7# + 70-200 f/4 + 24-70 f/4 and the OMD EM5 + 35-100 f/2.8 + 12-35 f/2.8. So with that size difference and "enough" performance delivered, I'm content. Of course, everyone has their own notion of "ideal balance".

EM5 12-35 f/2.8, A7 24-70 f/4

Compact Camera Meter

EM5 35-100 f/2.8, A7 70-200 f4

Compact Camera Meter



On the other hand, I found that adapting lenses designed for FF on a sub-sized sensor results in an experience that is less than interesting to me. I still love shooting the M9 BUT I have to say Sony offers an interesting proposition; small body with small high quality FF lenses. With that the A7R has my interest.... and I am willing to explore (yes I have heard of corner issues). Looking forward to trying it out..

M9 50/2, EM5 25/1.8, A7 55 1.8

Compact Camera Meter

 

[Derrel]

Autofocus has made many lenses a LOT larger than their manual focus predecessors. From left, 85mm f/1.4D, 85mm f/1.8 AF-S G, and 85mm f/2 Ai-S Nikkor lenses.

[ DSC_4931_85mm trio.jpg photo - Derrel photos at pbase.com ] The 85mm f/2 Ai-S is about the same size as the 35mm f/2 Ai-S is; they in fact appear to be almost identical in size, almost as if they were built on the same barrel and helicoid systems! The 85mm f/2 (far right lens) has a VERY high "telephoto factor" compared against the newer 85mm autofocusing lenses, which are significantly longer in physical length. The 85mm f/2 AI-S is about the size of a 50mm f/1.4 lens. It is VERY compact. Super-easy to carry, and affordable.

Nikon's 105mm f/2.5 Ai-S is a splendid lens in terms of optics and mechanical smoothness, and focuses amazingly well. The one-oh-five-two-five might be one of the easiest lenses to focus by hand-and-eye. It's almost perfectly engineered!

 

[usayit]

Autofocus has made many lenses a LOT larger than their manual focus predecessors. From left, 85mm f/1.4D, 85mm f/1.8 AF-S G, and 85mm f/2 Ai-S Nikkor lenses.

Absoutely. Of course these are just "loose" comparisons since they don't account for complexity etc... but here's a similar comparison when you can design around a smaller image circle:

EM5 45/1.8, EM5 75mm f/1.8 (just for kickers), D3300 85mm f/1.4

Compact Camera Meter

Of course, I'm not saying that one, FF, APS, or MFT, is better but certainly there are certain things at play here when it comes to size. A lens that is both designed for FF with AF is going to be large. Make it a faster lens and it will only get larger. Me, a A7R + M adapter + M lens (FF no AF of course) seems to be within size that I'm willing to deal with... so its certainly got my curiosity. One thing is for sure, Olympus and Panasonic have demonstrated how well a smaller image circle can translate to nice small packages.

 

[gsgary]

24 megapixels on full-frame is a nice capture size, and allows high-volume shooting without an incredible download and storage hassle. I shot a HUGE set of 1,055 raw 24-megapixel images yesterday on 28 gigabytes of memory. You get fairly big pixels on FF, compared to the same number crammed onto a smaller sensor, so you get a bit better High ISO performance capability, and the real advantage is the way the lens focal lengths work on the 24x36 sized capture medium; a 50 is a normal lens, and 85mm is a USABLE telephoto, even inside of a living room! You don't have to be 35 feet back to successfully deploy the 85mm for vertically-framed, full-length, standing portraits! I hope you enjoy the new rig!

Real, old-school manual focus lenses have slower, more-precise, and usually mechanically superb focusing ring control; MOST autofocus lenses have an incredibly loose, sloppy, non-dampened focus ring movement, which goes like this: Infinity, then in 10 degrees of rotation, 3 meters! it makes it damned near IMPOSSIBLE to accurately and repeatedly focus on stuff in the all-important ranges between infinity and over 10 feet!!!! ACK! Sure, you can hit focus, but not always consistently, because the mechanics are so loosey-goosey. But...use a precision-built, manual-focus designed lens, and the focusing distances are spread out over up to 240 degrees of rotation, so its EASY to get the focus right, time after time!

Have you got any Voigtlander lenses ? they seem to work better on the A7

 

[The_Traveler]

If the next version of the Sony has faster AF then I can easily live with f4 lenses.
I did a Lightroom search and 5.6% of 42,000 images with exif were shot at f2.8 or wider (and ~2% were between 2.1 and 2.8) so I can live with slightly slower lenses if the AF is fast.

 

[Lucryster]

I did kinda the opposite, I used to use the nex7 and switched back to dslr with the d810. I do a lot of HDR, and sony's 3 shot max brackets was driving me nuts. Plus, even with the nex series being out for a couple years, there were still no really good lens for it, and using the adapter to use 3rd party lens like nikon and canon (with no auto focus, mind you) was just too much of a pia.