P45+ Planar 100/3.5 - f/8 | A7rII + Sony 90/2.8G - f/5.6 |
(http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/P45+_vs_a7rII/FocusCrop20160123-CF047059.jpg) | (http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/P45+_vs_a7rII/FocusCrop20160123-_DSC4107.jpg) |
(http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/P45+_vs_a7rII/BokehCrop20160123-CF047059.jpg) | (http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/P45+_vs_a7rII/BokehCrop20160123-_DSC4107.jpg) |
P45+ Macro Planar 120/4 - f/11 | Sony A7rII + Sony 90/2.8G - f/8 |
(http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/P45+_vs_a7rII/20151225-CF047043_focus_crop.jpg) | (http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/P45+_vs_a7rII/20151225-_DSC3485_focus_crop.jpg) |
(http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/P45+_vs_a7rII/20151225-CF047043_bokeh_crop.jpg) | (http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/P45+_vs_a7rII/20151225-_DSC3485_bokeh_crop.jpg) |
Just to say, these images are not intended as artistic samples, although I actually like the 20151225 images.
Not sure what you meant by "20151225 images", but IMHO A7RII images are very noticeably better.
In a sense, the idea is not to say which image is better but to give some kind of idea about the image quality from each system.
I understand :D What I'm saying is that, to me, image quality from A7RII is better.
Hi,
Your opinion is much appreciated! Thank you very much!
Best regards
Erik
I agree with the others regarding sharpness, but I also prefer the Sony for color and contrast.
the sharpness on the P45+ is softer than on the Sony, and I also think color contrast maybe better...if you look at the 3rd and fourth frames with spiky grass.
here is another compare...
https://youtu.be/Ku8xRf72xFA
Hi Erik,
I went through a similar exercise when I acquired my Canon 5DsR and comparing to my Contax 645 IQ160. Adjusting distance for equivalent lens focal lengths and format differences as much as practical, I used a Sigma 70mm F/2.8 macro on the 5DsR and a Zeiss 120mm F/4 Apo Makro Planar on the Contax.
I was shocked how close the Canon system came to the Contax in terms of resolution. So much so that I was "forced" to upgrade to a IQ180 to maintain a more clear resolution advantage. ;-)
Maybe a 60MP XF system might show a bit more resolution advantage than the Contax, but it's clear to me that The Sony and the Canon are defintely in what was exclusively 39-60 MP MFD territory, resolution-wise.
The attached jpegs are 100% crops of my test. (Grayscale just save on space) Looking at the images at 200% is really the only way to see any differences, and others may even disagree with me on which is actually sharper.
Regards,
John
Clyde Butcher is now shooting digital with the A7R. I've seem some really impressive digital large prints from them in his Florida gallery.
Great samples to look at...thanks Erik, and John.
The Contax does look sharper/ flat, and I hope with a Zeiss120 it better.
Is he shooting stitches with Actus?I believe he does. But not sure if all of them are stitched.
I believe he does. But not sure if all of them are stitched.
Butcher's getting old. LF equipment appears to be pretty heavy for him nowadays, it appears. You got to do what you got to do.
I agree with Zorki.
I think it is unfortunate for the sensor size hierarchy but the Sony combo is visibly sharper.
Eduardo
It has a lot less to do with the sensor hierarchy than what's in front of the sensor.
I have seen much sharper images from the P45+ mated to a more modern body and lenses than what Erik usually posts.
Not a knock on Erik, just that when you use legacy gear, expect legacy results.