Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/02/21

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] OT - Sony Alpha 7R
From: steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour)
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 19:25:29 -0800
References: <CF2BB9E0.185C5%mark@rabinergroup.com> <5321466E-C881-40C2-AB08-4C66A30B3654@gmail.com> <CAFfkXxsWcCic2qhJegHpoerEnFh1ZB7zm6_47qHdVhUkn9hGww@mail.gmail.com> <2B9DDEAB-D9F4-4E7F-B0CD-663F5090D7D7@gmail.com> <3F24E644-A878-4172-AF84-EEEDBBAF40DC@gmail.com> <1F81C9A1-127D-466E-BA2E-DBD3A9E9F883@gmail.com> <FE5E005E-0ED3-405D-ABAE-20D035F8AD35@gmail.com> <E13AEC97-118F-44FD-9F10-87D4D779FB40@gmail.com>

On Feb 21, 2014, at 8:23 AM, Jim Laurel (gmail) <jplaurel at gmail.com> 
wrote:

> That much is certain, Steve. We don't have any good quantifiable data yet. 
> And I think reasonable people could argue that it may not even matter as 
> long as people are using the tool and it's doing the job for them. I have 
> sort of come to that conclusion myself with regard to the Micro 4/3, which 
> I have been using for some time now. I had always fixated on obtaining the 
> best image quality. But the m4/3 system taught me that handling and that 
> elusive joy-of-use factor are just as important. Because those are the 
> things that influence the likelihood of actually getting the shot, 
> regardless of image quality, and whether or not you'll actually have the 
> camera in your hand when the opportunity presents itself.


so true Jim, you will carry the camera that you enjoy, so that's the one 
that will get you the images you want.

s


> 
>> From what I can see in this thread, the simple fact that it is a 
>> mirrorless full-frame platform is really what's driving all the interest 
>> in the A7. And to be honest, this remains one of the things I enjoy most 
>> about the M4/3 system. I have been using the Olympus OMD cameras - the 
>> EM-5 since it was released and now the EM-1. I especially value the 
>> ability to use the short Leica M telephotos. On the EM-1, the APO Telyt M 
>> 135mm f/3.4, a lens that is well nigh impossible for anyone over the age 
>> of 30 to focus on a Leica rangefinder accurately becomes an ultralight, 
>> blisteringly sharp, fast, stabilized 270mm FOV equivalent lens that fits 
>> in the palm of your hand. The APO Summicron 90mm f/2 becomes an 
>> incredible stabilized 180mm f/2. A Noctilux becomes a 100mm f/1 and so 
>> on. I bought an old Nikkor EF ID 300mm f/4 to use for birds and am 
>> thrilled to have a 600mm f/4 equivalent that can be hand held as low as 
>> 1/125 sec. Of course, it all falls apart when it comes to wide angle when
>  your Elmarit 21mm ASPH becomes a relatively uninteresting 42mm f/2.8...
> 
> Setting aside the undeniably wonderful ability to mount all sorts of 
> legacy glass, it will be interesting to see if the A7 twins will become 
> interesting as a system in their own right. Sony has a long way to go to 
> match Canon and Nikon's lens lineup. If history is a guide, they are more 
> concerned with slow-ish zooms than interesting primes. I do most of my 
> photography underwater these days. Many of us have waited for Sony to ship 
> at least a full frame fisheye and a 100-120mm FOV equiv 1:1 macro for the 
> NEX cameras, but it never happened.
> 
> In any case, I think I'll head down to Glazers today and have a closer 
> look at the A7r. Maybe it could be just the thing for landscape work with 
> my old Leica R lenses. ;)
> 
> --Jim
> 
> 
> 
> On Feb 21, 2014, at 7:00 AM, Steve Barbour <steve.barbour at gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Feb 20, 2014, at 5:46 PM, Jim Laurel (gmail) <jplaurel at gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> All I've seen, Steve, is some anecdotal evidence. Don't get me started 
>>> on Ken Rockwell, but on this page, he does have some examples of a 21mm 
>>> Super Elmar-M adapted to the A7 that appears to show sensor reflections 
>>> and smeared corner detail. Lurking around the dpreview forums, I've seen 
>>> others report similar results. But of course it's hard to know for sure 
>>> 
>>> http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comparisons/2013-12-leica-sony-canon/
>> 
>> hi Jim, we are happy to see you back. My point of course is....we don't 
>> exactly have PROOF of anything, though we do have anecdotal and selected 
>> stories by people with an agenda. No completeness or worst case scenarios 
>> by unbiased individuals with data for the leica M240, as well as the Sony 
>> A7 and A7r. Selected stories to make a  point by people who wish to make 
>> a point. No semblance of a real unbiased careful comparison. All of this 
>> is then presented to a leica rah rah forum by people who like leica, 
>> whether they use one or not.. I would like to know what the real facts 
>> are, based on real world data, with carefully done comparisons. And if 
>> the cameras in question have flaws in some areas, I will use the cameras 
>> accordingly, always the case for all of us.
>> I used a CV 12 mm lens on my A7r, with many usable results, but some 
>> unacceptable results as well.
>> That alerted me to be careful, especially with the widest of the wide. 
>> Extrapolating this to all lenses under 50mm is not a conclusion based on 
>> the facts. Some results of the widest lenses are acceptable, and we need 
>> to have some reasonable ground rules. It occurred to me that we don't 
>> have rigorous comparative data, even for the M240. What is clear is that 
>> many!! lenses on the A7r, give incredibly wonderful results, it would 
>> seem far greater in number for the A7r than the M240 because the list 
>> includes most lenses ever made by most optical companies, including all 
>> of the leica R lenses. 
>> 
>> Looked at in this light, I feel that the least we need to do, is approach 
>> this question with complete  understanding of the situation, an open 
>> mind, and armed with some real world comparative data.
>> 
>> By the way, the above subject line says OT, but in my estimation this 
>> subject is very much on topic.
>> 
>> thanks for bringing it up,
>> 
>> Steve
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> --Jim
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Feb 20, 2014, at 5:10 PM, Steve Barbour <steve.barbour at gmail.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>> Steve Barbour
>>>> 
>>>> On Feb 20, 2014, at 4:39 PM, Jim Gmail <jplaurel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Aren't there a lot if reported issues with adapted lenses? The Leica M 
>>>> primes, at least, seem to perform much better on the M240 than on the 
>>>> A7.
>>>> 
>>>> where is this proven?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] OT - Sony Alpha 7R)
Message from jplaurel at gmail.com (Jim Laurel (gmail)) ([Leica] OT - Sony Alpha 7R)
Message from sonc.hegr at gmail.com (Sonny Carter) ([Leica] OT - Sony Alpha 7R)
Message from jplaurel at gmail.com (Jim Gmail) ([Leica] OT - Sony Alpha 7R)
Message from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] OT - Sony Alpha 7R)
Message from jplaurel at gmail.com (Jim Laurel (gmail)) ([Leica] OT - Sony Alpha 7R)
Message from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] OT - Sony Alpha 7R)
Message from jplaurel at gmail.com (Jim Laurel (gmail)) ([Leica] OT - Sony Alpha 7R)