Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/02/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I simply try to optimize my ability to easily capture the most good images. The Canon 5D2 beat my MF film cameras, the Leica M9 beat the Canon, and the Sony a7r appears to be out-shooting the M9. Sony's a7r -- with 36 MP, through the lens viewing, ability to take M optics 50 mm an up, best 35mm lens I've ever tested (and my main lens for any system), near perfect auto exposure, modern electronics, including level -- for my type of photography appears to take imaging to a new level, and at a price that is a fraction of Leica's. It is not a perfect camera, but the outfit I carry is the lightest I've ever carried and is producing the technically best image files I've yet seen. While I may run into glitches, the Sony a7r appears to be a significant advance in our camera technology. Paul www.PaulRoark.com On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Jim Laurel (gmail) <jplaurel at gmail.com>wrote: > I wish someone could explain all the hype around the Sony A7 twins. Ok, I > get that it's a full frame mirrorless and that puts it in an exclusive club > with just two members, alongside the M240. I understand everyone's desire > for a full frame platform for mounting legacy glass. But as a system in its > own right, I don't get it. Sure, the body is small, but so what? Lenses > that produce an image circle suitable for a full frame sensor are going to > be just as large as, say, the Canon system. At the end of the day, your bag > is going to weigh nearly as much as any other full frame system. You're > only saving a ounces on the body. And that assumes that there are > interesting native mount lenses for the A7, which there aren't...not yet, > anyway... > > --Jim > > > On Feb 20, 2014, at 10:55 AM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> > wrote: > > > I came into the photo game after they put in the click stops so I hadn't > > done much shooting at f 2.7 or f9 or 101st of a second.! > > Things were pretty much rounded off for me! I'd have a had a hard time > > getting my head around f9. Did it exist? > > When the A & P settings got put in camera bodies in I think the early > 80's > > I did use these and any odd settings as that's what the A settings on my > > cameras gave me. Though you could not see it in any metadata you could > > remember they were there!! > > In a way of thinking it was an added level of precision which I thought > was > > pretty cool! Of a sky needed 101st of a second that's what it got! > > Not some measly 100th just so the thing would go click! > > > > Is a one percent level of precision something I should NOT be worried > about? > > Sure! But I'll take it if they're handing it to me. And all those 1% > levels > > of precision on the myriad areas of camerawork add up I should think. > > > > The major thing about auto settings is really about loosing less shots as > > you've got your eye more on the subject than needle or led's or controll > > knobs. Your not constantly trying to maintain your exposure you just know > > its there! > > > > > > -- > > Mark William Rabiner > > Photographer > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Leica Users Group. > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >