Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/11/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]If you download the full files and examine them you'll see that it's not simply a light fall-off, dark corner vignette issue. The corners are grossly out of focus and smeared. And we're looking at and talking about a 35 mm lens not a 28, 24, 21, 18, 16 or 12 here. So far the optical results of Leica 50 mm and wider are simply coming in as unacceptable (when compared to the same lenses used on an M9, MM or M) To buy premium f:1.4 lenses and not be able to use them until f5.6 and 8 and see diffraction at f: 8 does not make the A7r desirable for use with Leica glass. It may work extremely well with the Zeiss glass and some of the longer Leica glass though that's not my only interest as most of my M shooting is with 28 cron asph and 50 lux asph So this is a simple fact. YMMV OF COURSE ............................................. Sticking my head up again foolishly ;-) While I maintain that the best vehicle for any lens system is likely to be the body for which they were designed, I know that there is quite some interest in anything but the Leica bodies (for cost, functionality and other reasons) on which to use the M lenses . To YMMV, I would add that the corner and edge performance with any camera, can also by significantly affected by what is being done in camera firmware (for raw and JPG) as well as whatever is done in developing (Photoshop, LR, Aperture etc etc or third party such as Cornerfix). So a firmware change can shift the results there quite a bit and it's common for original firmware to be modified after release. That certainly applies with the Leica bodies. I would be very surprised if the Sony cameras are not in the same boat once they actually get to market in any quantities. The emphasis is likely different within that process with the lens register and legacy design constraints with M lenses but also better correction for CA for example on the other side of the ledger. Someone else's lenses/system might require distortion correction for example but perhaps have less constraints due to different design decisions, lens register, mount diameter, external dimensions etc. That's relevant to Canon, Nikon full frame wides (others?) and especially the micro four thirds wides for examples. As I've mentioned previously, there is always a cost in dynamic range and resolution for any of those corrections. Just like if the exposure was perhaps one or more stops wrong for the image. That may or may not matter in practical terms. Cheers Geoff http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman