Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: M on the A7 (non-R) = underexposure ? (and other thoughts)  (Read 1434 times)

mattbr

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
M on the A7 (non-R) = underexposure ? (and other thoughts)
« on: December 25, 2013, 04:53:45 AM »

So, I've been playing around with an A7 (the non-R version) and M glass. I don't have any native mount lenses, and I'm using a Novoflex adapter.

Couple of quick thoughts.

a) I've been getting pretty systematical, pretty severe underexposure. I'd say a good stop, stop and a half. Anyone else run into the issue ?

b) the RX1 (non-R) would appear to be sharper than the A7 + summicron IV combo. As a tool, I like the RX1 MUCH more, if only because it's totally silent. I'd like it even more if they'd thought of adding a sensor cleaning system in it, because dust DOES get to the sensor, and then you need to send it out for service, which just sucks.

c) the elmarit 21 pre-asph vignettes very heavily (at 5.6, not like I'm trying to split hairs here). I'm not certain if it's the adapter, or the sensor, or the lens, but it's a good couple of stops. It of course also goes purple on the sides, as has been reported elsewhere. I'm sure it could be monetised and made into an Instagram effect, or something. Color shift doesn't seem to be too, too bad with the pre-asph elmarit 24 and 28s, but I haven't done things like shoot a white piece of paper with them.

d) it's nice to be able to take that Leica glass out of the closet without getting hit with the dentist tax.

I've got to say I'm really liking both the RX1 and the A7, although both feel, for lack of a better term, half-assed in terms of the demographic they seem to be trying to reach. It's little things, really - uncompressed RAW (whether or not it makes an actual difference in the end) options would be nice on both the RX1 and the A7. Being able to choose file naming would be as well, if only because it makes things easier to handle for people who have more than one of their cameras. Spending money on a bit of absorbent foam for the A7 would have been a sweet touch, too...
Logged

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3149
Re: M on the A7 (non-R) = underexposure ? (and other thoughts)
« Reply #1 on: December 25, 2013, 01:35:58 PM »

the elmarit 21 pre-asph vignettes very heavily (at 5.6, not like I'm trying to split hairs here). I'm not certain if it's the adapter, or the sensor, or the lens, but it's a good couple of stops. It of course also goes purple on the sides, as has been reported elsewhere.

That's a shame. I use my pre-ASPH 21mm Elmarit on a Fuji X-E1, where it performs really well. Of course it's no longer an ultra-wide on that camera...but then again I seldom use it on my film Ms whereas it's my go-to lens on the Fuji.

My take is that using wider-than-40mm M lenses on non-M "full frame" bodies is more hassle than it's worth. The 35/2 ASPH may be an exception...don't own one but an acquaintance tells me his works okay on the A7. If I wanted an all-Leica lens set I'd go for the 24/2.8 R, or maybe even the 19/2.8, as my very wide option.

-Dave-
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11030
    • Echophoto
Re: M on the A7 (non-R) = underexposure ? (and other thoughts)
« Reply #2 on: December 25, 2013, 03:54:54 PM »

Hi,

The problem is not the focal length but the ray angle. A 24 mm Canon T&S works very well on the A7r, for instance, due to it having a small ray angle.

Best regards
Erik

That's a shame. I use my pre-ASPH 21mm Elmarit on a Fuji X-E1, where it performs really well. Of course it's no longer an ultra-wide on that camera...but then again I seldom use it on my film Ms whereas it's my go-to lens on the Fuji.

My take is that using wider-than-40mm M lenses on non-M "full frame" bodies is more hassle than it's worth. The 35/2 ASPH may be an exception...don't own one but an acquaintance tells me his works okay on the A7. If I wanted an all-Leica lens set I'd go for the 24/2.8 R, or maybe even the 19/2.8, as my very wide option.

-Dave-
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3149
Re: M on the A7 (non-R) = underexposure ? (and other thoughts)
« Reply #3 on: December 25, 2013, 06:01:31 PM »

The problem is not the focal length but the ray angle. A 24 mm Canon T&S works very well on the A7r, for instance, due to it having a small ray angle.

Right. This is why I would opt for the 19 or 24mm R lenses, both retrofocal SLR designs with moderate angles of incidence off axis (at least compared to wider M lenses), if I wanted an all-Leica lens setup on the A7(r). In reality I'd probably mix & match brands, picking the best option for each desired focal length regardless of who made it. One thing I'd do, though, is exclude Nikkor & Pentax lenses since they focus in the "wrong" direction relative to the others I own.  ;)

-Dave-
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up