View attachment 96747Moustachio is back by William Solis, on Flickr
-
Cameraderie, a friendly photography forum, join now for free!
View attachment 96747Moustachio is back by William Solis, on Flickr
Ghosthunter
boo!
- Location
- London UK
- Name
- Andy
Val
I know the A7 is FF and the GX7 is M4/3 but when processing how different do you find the files? Is there a huge difference in detail and clarity? I have been thinking about getting an A7 for ages but the lack of lenses puts me off. If I got one I would use it mainly for scenery/Landscape so a MF lens would actually be OK. SO at the moment I am looking to get a wide lens for my GX7 but just want to see how the A7 performs in comparison.
Many thanks
I know the A7 is FF and the GX7 is M4/3 but when processing how different do you find the files? Is there a huge difference in detail and clarity? I have been thinking about getting an A7 for ages but the lack of lenses puts me off. If I got one I would use it mainly for scenery/Landscape so a MF lens would actually be OK. SO at the moment I am looking to get a wide lens for my GX7 but just want to see how the A7 performs in comparison.
Many thanks
Garylh
Veteran
- Location
- Contra Costa County, California
Andy
I recently acquired an a7. The Nex 5n has always been my universal digital back for my legacy cameras...but it has never been my camera of choice due to stupid movie button location, the simplistic menu system, control interface and the feeling of awkwardness and cramping I felt holding the nex5n. The Nex 7 fixed a lot of this, but it never interested me before. The a7 has rectified all of my issues... Right now I also have the Zeiss 35f2.8 as my only native lens for it outside of some old e mount lenses from my nex5n.
I also have a gx7 w/ the 12-32 (bought both separately), pany 14f2.5, 20f1.7, 45-200, Sigma 30f2.8 and 60f2.8.
- af speed wise slightly slower than the gx7 but close (new fw and the phase detect cells help)
- raw files hold up well to being pushed or pulled due to better dynamic range
- people keep on saying high iso much better than other cameras. Maybe I am too picky about noise or there is something wrong w/ my camera but anything greater than 3200, the noise does not look that good too me.
- I like the drive mode option of setting up -/0/+ ev 0.3 or 0.5 five shot multi-frame sequence. I have this setup on custom settings. The 0.3 one is on custom 1 for finding the right exposure under difficult light. Custome 2 is using the 0.7 setup for HDR (I will select the shots for HDR post processing later).
The difference is pretty narrow between modern m43 sensors that are in the gm1/gx7/em1 vs apsc sensors. The difference between apsc and ff is also pretty narrow. They are mainly in respect to
- dynamic range as sensor size goes up
- higher iso capability before noise becomes an issue
- the need for subject isolation (dof, background blurring)
- a 50mm is a 50 if u are using legacy lenses
From m43 to ff there is enough of a difference vs apsc to ff. Whether that difference is enough (I agree w/ Zack Arias funny video about ff btw), ymmv greatly.
I like the look of the files from the a7 much better than the nex5n, even in crop apsc mode (10-11mp instead of 24mp) when using older e mount lenses due to better awb even w/ loss of the resolution. I suspect the new a6000 is just as good.
U mentioned landscape. My landscape camera is the dp or sd1 Merrill cameras. To my eye nothing beats then for landscape work..IMHO, ymmv though..
When using my legacy lenses, there is a look from the files that is just hard to explain when I compare that same lens on different cameras like gx7 or Ricoh gxr a12 m module. I don't know if it is just my imagination or what.. I also find I like the look from my legacy glass much better than the Zeiss 35f2.8 native lens. The Zeiss just feels too clinical (not sure if this is right way to express it).
Good luck
Gary
Sent from my iPad using SeriousCompacts
I recently acquired an a7. The Nex 5n has always been my universal digital back for my legacy cameras...but it has never been my camera of choice due to stupid movie button location, the simplistic menu system, control interface and the feeling of awkwardness and cramping I felt holding the nex5n. The Nex 7 fixed a lot of this, but it never interested me before. The a7 has rectified all of my issues... Right now I also have the Zeiss 35f2.8 as my only native lens for it outside of some old e mount lenses from my nex5n.
I also have a gx7 w/ the 12-32 (bought both separately), pany 14f2.5, 20f1.7, 45-200, Sigma 30f2.8 and 60f2.8.
- af speed wise slightly slower than the gx7 but close (new fw and the phase detect cells help)
- raw files hold up well to being pushed or pulled due to better dynamic range
- people keep on saying high iso much better than other cameras. Maybe I am too picky about noise or there is something wrong w/ my camera but anything greater than 3200, the noise does not look that good too me.
- I like the drive mode option of setting up -/0/+ ev 0.3 or 0.5 five shot multi-frame sequence. I have this setup on custom settings. The 0.3 one is on custom 1 for finding the right exposure under difficult light. Custome 2 is using the 0.7 setup for HDR (I will select the shots for HDR post processing later).
The difference is pretty narrow between modern m43 sensors that are in the gm1/gx7/em1 vs apsc sensors. The difference between apsc and ff is also pretty narrow. They are mainly in respect to
- dynamic range as sensor size goes up
- higher iso capability before noise becomes an issue
- the need for subject isolation (dof, background blurring)
- a 50mm is a 50 if u are using legacy lenses
From m43 to ff there is enough of a difference vs apsc to ff. Whether that difference is enough (I agree w/ Zack Arias funny video about ff btw), ymmv greatly.
I like the look of the files from the a7 much better than the nex5n, even in crop apsc mode (10-11mp instead of 24mp) when using older e mount lenses due to better awb even w/ loss of the resolution. I suspect the new a6000 is just as good.
U mentioned landscape. My landscape camera is the dp or sd1 Merrill cameras. To my eye nothing beats then for landscape work..IMHO, ymmv though..
When using my legacy lenses, there is a look from the files that is just hard to explain when I compare that same lens on different cameras like gx7 or Ricoh gxr a12 m module. I don't know if it is just my imagination or what.. I also find I like the look from my legacy glass much better than the Zeiss 35f2.8 native lens. The Zeiss just feels too clinical (not sure if this is right way to express it).
Good luck
Gary
Sent from my iPad using SeriousCompacts
Ghosthunter
boo!
- Location
- London UK
- Name
- Andy
Thanks SO much Gary. I will have to look very closely at the A7. I have a 55mm f2 Helios which is nice and also a Konica Hexanon 40mm f1.8 to be getting on with IF i go for it. I will have to look out for a decent wide lens of around 18mm or wider. The Voigtlander 15mm & 12mm lenses have always intrigued me so may look at that option.
Many thanks once again.
Many thanks once again.
Garylh
Veteran
- Location
- Contra Costa County, California
Andy
On the a7, I can c some corner/edge smearing on the 15.. But since I don't use this camera for landscape, I don't mind.. There is vignetting that can be fixed easily in post processing. Center out to about 70 to maybe 85% of frame is fine, if I remember correctly. I don't own the 12, so I cannot comment.
In general slr lenses like the Konica do better than the rf lenses.. People have been reporting the new a7s not only does better w/ a lot more rf lenses, but the electronic shutter works very well. If there is an issue I have w/ the a7 or a7r is the shutter is loud. It is louder than my Fuji xp1. It maybe as loud as the noise from a dslr.
Gary
Sent from my iPad using SeriousCompacts
On the a7, I can c some corner/edge smearing on the 15.. But since I don't use this camera for landscape, I don't mind.. There is vignetting that can be fixed easily in post processing. Center out to about 70 to maybe 85% of frame is fine, if I remember correctly. I don't own the 12, so I cannot comment.
In general slr lenses like the Konica do better than the rf lenses.. People have been reporting the new a7s not only does better w/ a lot more rf lenses, but the electronic shutter works very well. If there is an issue I have w/ the a7 or a7r is the shutter is loud. It is louder than my Fuji xp1. It maybe as loud as the noise from a dslr.
Gary
Sent from my iPad using SeriousCompacts
Ghosthunter.
Dynamic range is the most noticeable thing for me, I usually have to under expose the GX7 just so it doesn't clip so quickly in the highlights, the A7 files just look more gradual and of course have better highlight recovery.
in far away detail, the A7 resolves better, the GX7 files are a bit more "clumped" and/or more grainy, I think it's because it's sensor tech+FF+24mp, I have a 12-35mm f2.8 and the 24-70mm f4 and the 12-35mm has better corners.
in close-medium shots, the difference between the two is less and I often use M43 in close shots mostly because I love, love LOVE the 25mm f1.4.
I'm keeping my M43 because I simply love using it and they have awesome, small lenses already available. Sensor tech will only improve, seeing how far M43 has come is incredible, I also do a lot of video so I prefer the GX7 video options.
If I did buy the A7, I would get it body only, get a metabones adapter and get some primes, I spent a few years manually focusing so that's not an issue, no zooms for me because they're too friggin big and heavy. even the 24-70mm f4 is probably the limit for me.
If I had no gear and had to buy today between the A7 and the GX7, hmm I just don't know, leaning to the A7 but like I said, I do video and I don't like AVCHD at all
mnhoj
gee aahrr
- Location
- Los Angeles
- Name
- John
Lucille
Veteran
- Location
- Hepcat City
Ghosthunter
boo!
- Location
- London UK
- Name
- Andy
Thanks guy's for the input. The A7 is very tempting but I think I'm going to wait a bit and see what other lenses they come out with this year.
Garylh
Veteran
- Location
- Contra Costa County, California
Hopefully.. Both Zeiss and Sony will do a better job of supporting the a7 series then they did the Nex e mount. Back then, there was always more camera body announcements every year then lenses. It would be great if other third party lens makers like Sigma were to enter the fray.
Gary
Sent from my iPad using SeriousCompacts
Gary
Sent from my iPad using SeriousCompacts
Penfan2010
All-Pro
- Location
- NJ, USA
- Name
- Ed
NightBird
Regular
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
- Name
- Darren
I took these images on the weekend to try a couple of inexpensive legacy lenses at night, namely a Minolta MD 50mm f2.0 which was about $35, and a Sigma Mini Wide II 28mm I picked up for comparatively less of a bargain price of $85, albeit it is in absolutely minty condition. I was pleasantly surprised overall with the older lenses except for a little flat colours (or perhaps a colour cast) from the Minolta MD 50mm. Unfortunately I didn't have my Rokkor MC 50mm f1.4 with me, I would like to see how it compares to the MD 50mm f2.0.
I also took an image using the Zeiss 35mm 2.8 and the Sony FE 28-70mm @ 50mm. Unsurprisingly I thought the colours were nicer from the modern lenses, however the Sigma did pretty well, and the Minolta MD 50mm was unsurprisingly a little sharper than the Sony 28-70mm.
All images except the one from the Zeiss had the same exposure settings, default Lightroom sharpening only, and identical Lightroom processing, so differences in those three images should come down to focal length and lens. The Zeiss 35mm I adjusted a little further, but still with default sharpening.
I hope it's of interest to someone. Larger images are in Flickr. I'm looking forward to picking up some further old lenses in the future.
Sony FE 28-70mm
Harbour Bridge from Observatory Hill by Darren.Nightingale, on Flickr
Minolta MD 50mm f2.8
Harbour Bridge from Observatory Hill by Darren.Nightingale, on Flickr
Sigma Mini Wide II f2.8
Harbour Bridge from Observatory Hill by Darren.Nightingale, on Flickr
Sony Sonnar T* 35mm f2.8
Harbour Bridge from Observatory Hill by Darren.Nightingale, on Flickr
I also took an image using the Zeiss 35mm 2.8 and the Sony FE 28-70mm @ 50mm. Unsurprisingly I thought the colours were nicer from the modern lenses, however the Sigma did pretty well, and the Minolta MD 50mm was unsurprisingly a little sharper than the Sony 28-70mm.
All images except the one from the Zeiss had the same exposure settings, default Lightroom sharpening only, and identical Lightroom processing, so differences in those three images should come down to focal length and lens. The Zeiss 35mm I adjusted a little further, but still with default sharpening.
I hope it's of interest to someone. Larger images are in Flickr. I'm looking forward to picking up some further old lenses in the future.
Sony FE 28-70mm
Harbour Bridge from Observatory Hill by Darren.Nightingale, on Flickr
Minolta MD 50mm f2.8
Harbour Bridge from Observatory Hill by Darren.Nightingale, on Flickr
Sigma Mini Wide II f2.8
Harbour Bridge from Observatory Hill by Darren.Nightingale, on Flickr
Sony Sonnar T* 35mm f2.8
Harbour Bridge from Observatory Hill by Darren.Nightingale, on Flickr
christilou
Legend
- Location
- Sunny Frimley
A 7R + ZM 50/1.5 Sonnar
Just playing around with this lens this afternoon
Such a lovely and compact size and perfect on the Fuji XE2.
Untitled by christilou1, on Flickr
Just playing around with this lens this afternoon
Such a lovely and compact size and perfect on the Fuji XE2.View attachment 96898This morning unedited by William Solis, on Flickr
NightBird
Regular
- Location
- Sydney, Australia
- Name
- Darren
Two from today with the Sigma Mini Wide II 28mm f2.8 & A7r
Lake Parramatta 4 by Darren.Nightingale, on Flickr
Lake Parramatta 3 by Darren.Nightingale, on Flickr
Lake Parramatta 4 by Darren.Nightingale, on Flickr
Lake Parramatta 3 by Darren.Nightingale, on Flickr
Garylh
Veteran
- Location
- Contra Costa County, California
Recently picked up a Sony A7 (the Sony NEX 5n has always been my universal digital back for all my legacy lenses). Various RF lenses - most of these shots have been cropped, since I mostly tend to use "1 camera 1 lens" with this camera so far. B&W converted using SFX2.
So far in terms of RF lenses, about half of my legacy lenses play OK with the A7, the Ricoh GXR does a better job with the super-wides then the Sony and even the old NEX 5n does a bit better than the A7.
Currently I own one FE lens, the Sony 35f2.8. Not sure if I will buy any others right now.
Leica 35f2
Canon 50f1.2
Minolta 40f2
Scale focused shots
Gary
So far in terms of RF lenses, about half of my legacy lenses play OK with the A7, the Ricoh GXR does a better job with the super-wides then the Sony and even the old NEX 5n does a bit better than the A7.
Currently I own one FE lens, the Sony 35f2.8. Not sure if I will buy any others right now.
Leica 35f2
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Canon 50f1.2
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Minolta 40f2
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Scale focused shots
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Gary
Garylh
Veteran
- Location
- Contra Costa County, California
Thanks bartjeej
Gary
Gary
pinholecam
Regular
A7+Pentax Super Takumar 135/3.5
I seldom used this lens even though it was my first 135mm lens.
Too long on aps-c and too dark for my 5D with EEG focusing screen.
I also have a bad addiction to fast 135mm and ended up with faster options.
But I gave this old lens a spin again last week and was certainly surprised by it again on the A7.
Much lighter and smaller than the faster options, but still good for shallow DOF isolation of subjects.
Seems like I will be using this lens much more from now on.
