Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Mirrorless Cameras => Topic started by: Paul2660 on December 11, 2013, 02:28:19 pm
-
After working with the A7r yesterday afternoon I came away with some questions and wanted to pass them on to the members of the forum. As I feel that everyone has their own opinions on image quality, I am only looking for help on useability features/functions.
I used the A7r with my LA-EA2 with Sony Alpha lenses, 16-80 and 24-70 both of them the Zeiss lenses. I shot both raw and fine jpg and worked up the files in LR RC 5.3. I saw lots of fine details as I expected but also noticed some issues with a stock blue sky in that I was having a hard time nailing down the blue hue. This is something that probably will get worked out over time and or was a sign of my inexperience with the raw files. I am hoping to shoot my D800 next to the A7r some tomorrow mainly for some color testing. I will say the screen on the A7r is a bit misleading as the actual useable LCD is much smaller than the holder. There are large dark sections on each edge of the screen. The camera feels very good in the hand and the grip to me is excellent, just enough.
1. The camera iso starts at iso 50. Unlike the Nikon D800 family which allows you to get to 50 with menu settings, (Nikon never really calls it 50), Sony just allows you to dial right down to the iso 50 setting. I am wondering if Sony has tweaked the chip so that you are at a "true" iso 50 base and not a tweaked iso 50 as Nikon did. Nikon's base on the D800 is iso 100.
2. Both of the lenses I used, 24-70 and 16-80 did not focus well with the LA-EA2 with AF on. This was more apparent in the 50mm to 80mm range. I did not have time to make a AF adjustment. With Focus peaking on and MF mode focus was very good and I my hit miss ration dropped way down. All shots were hand held. There was some vignetting with the 16-80, very slight.
3. LR does not see the camera as a alpha, thus it will not allow the use of the 16-80 profile (alpha). This may change later on but for now all lens adjustments with an Alpha lens on would have to be manual. I had this same issue with my Nex 7 when I used the LA-EA2 on it.
4. The use of any Nikkor lenses, G will rely on a adapters like the Metabones or Novoflex style. These do not allow any AF. What I am also curious about is if they allow 1/2 or 1/3 aperture settings. From looking at the adapters on-line it seems like the aperture adjustments are done totally manually thus you only get full stops. This would be just like using a copal shutter on a tech camera lens. Focusing in close with MF was easy, at distance with peaking on (16mm to 35mm) was hard at first, but after figuring out the zoom function, you can pretty much nail a good focus each time. It's just having to be manual for every shot to me eliminates this camera for most some shooting conditions.
5. Has anyone tested the metabones AF III with Canon lenses? If so what are your opinions. Is the AF fast and accurate? Also I am curious if on shifting with a 17mm TS-E or 24mm TS-E if there is a bit of corner vignetting especially on shifts?
6. Remote support, from what I can tell this is pretty non-existent. Dpreview mentions a wired remote, but on the Sony site under accessories, there is no mention of a wired remote only a wireless unit which has very basic support. The USB 2 port on the camera is a proprietary Sony pinout, one that they started using with the Nex-6. If a pin conversion did exist to take it to the more common mini USB2 port (like the one used on external hard drives 3.5 inch) then it might be possible to get a remote to work. However since this port is where you charge the camera from it may not have the ability to be used with a remote. With the older Sony Nex line there was as IR remote, and some people have found ways to convert it to a intervalometer However I don't think the A7r has the IR port, instead it appears to use wireless. I would like to be able to use this camera for night shooting, however without the ability to use a intervalometer then stacking frames will be out. Sony does sell a camera app called Timelapse however from what I can tell it's much more oriented to the creation of a time laspe movie and like Nikon's tool on the D800 and D600 is driven by the camera's timer which will only go to 30 seconds. 30 seconds will not work in most night time stacking situations where you tend to be more in the line of 2 to 3 minute shots. If you use the timelaspe camera app, you required to have a phone or iPad to run it at least from what I can tell. Interface is between the device and camera via wireless. Also not too sure how this will effect the battery life of the camera since a wifi connection will need to be running the whole time. Currently Sony does not allow for the A7 family in the Timelaspe camera app.
These may be non-issues for most folks. However the AF issue with Nikkor lenses concerns me but the lack of a remote that works as a intervalometer surprised me. The fact that Sony uses a proprietary port is pretty standard for them and thus I don't see an easy way around this.
This is all based on the limited time I had to work with the A7r in my hands, and research I have done. If someone has some different information, please share it.
Paul Caldwell
-
I have a Novoflex Nikkor-to-m43 adapter. Assuming it works the same as the NEX/A adapter, you get continuous aperture adjustment. No stop detents or markings.
-Dave-
-
Hi,
ISO ratings are wildly misleading.
Best regards
Erik
1. The camera iso starts at iso 50. Unlike the Nikon D800 family which allows you to get to 50 with menu settings, (Nikon never really calls it 50), Sony just allows you to dial right down to the iso 50 setting. I am wondering if Sony has tweaked the chip so that you are at a "true" iso 50 base and not a tweaked iso 50 as Nikon did. Nikon's base on the D800 is iso 100.
-
The only testing I've done was using A mount lenses, all of them with the Adapter. I never tried an E mount lens.
The A7r was slow focus, or better put, would slightly lock, hunt, lock where the A7 was closer to my olympus em-5 which is the fastest single focusing camera I've used.
Both the A7 and R versions seemed to work the same, except the focus and fps.
I've also made numerous inquiries about the Sony proprietary port for usb 2 (why 2?) and have never received a response that I understood, because I was looking for tethering capabilities.
IMO
BC
-
1. The camera iso starts at iso 50. Unlike the Nikon D800 family which allows you to get to 50 with menu settings, (Nikon never really calls it 50), Sony just allows you to dial right down to the iso 50 setting. I am wondering if Sony has tweaked the chip so that you are at a "true" iso 50 base and not a tweaked iso 50 as Nikon did. Nikon's base on the D800 is iso 100.
ISO settings on digital cameras do not at all correspond to the ISO sensitivity ratings of film, which are/were based on shadow handling. They are more like the exposure index setting on an external light meter, and their primary function is to adjust the exposure levels chosen in auto-expoure modes. It seems that the 50 and 100 settings on the A7R correspond to the same ISO highlight-based sensitivity of about 73, as indicated by the graphs that Erik has embedded above. So the "EI=50" setting is to bias the autoexposure modes towards overexposing somewhat, for when there is not much brightness range between midtones and highlights and you want a high placement of the midtones.
Aside: "ISO" is an organization that publishes a great many standards, including several closely related but different measurements to do with sensor sensitivity and exposure settings: the relevant one here is ISO12232:2006, described in part at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_speed#Digital_camera_ISO_speed_and_exposure_index.
-
Thanks for the input.
Dave: I will take a look at the Novoflex, as at least having the 1/3 stops settings for aperture will be nice.
BC: I didn't even consider tethering, and USB3, very good point and really any camera of this price point and time frame should consider USB3 standard. These are large files for sure.
Eric and BJL, Thanks for the info on the iso. I was thinking back to my Canon days, where the base iso of 100 again was standard. Canon allowed you to get to 50 (this is on the 1ds MKII and 5D MKII) but everything I read was that you lost DR especially in the highlights, which was what I was trying to hold so I rarely used 50. From my Phase One Days, I have always tried to stay at the published base iso for the back, iso 50 as the Phase backs just seem to work best there. I was curious of Sony had created a newer version of the chip so that iso 50 was truly the base, not a push as it is on Nikon's version in the D800.
Paul
-
Eric and BJL, Thanks for the info on the iso. I was thinking back to my Canon days, where the base iso of 100 again was standard. Canon allowed you to get to 50 (this is on the 1ds MKII and 5D MKII) but everything I read was that you lost DR especially in the highlights, which was what I was trying to hold so I rarely used 50.
Right. ISO "50" with those cameras is just the base ISO (100...well, a stop or so more sensitive than "50" anyway) with the quantized photon counts/electron voltages divided by two. A bit of a cheat but it often works well enough for people who don't ETTR.
From my Phase One Days, I have always tried to stay at the published base iso for the back, iso 50 as the Phase backs just seem to work best there. I was curious of Sony had created a newer version of the chip so that iso 50 was truly the base, not a push as it is on Nikon's version in the D800.
The sensor itself may well have the same intrinsic sensitivity as the D800's. Who knows what else is going on? Maybe Nikon chose to use a mathematical ISO "50" rather than the true base sensitivity for reasons known only to it. Non-linearities in sensor response perhaps (pure speculation here). Maybe the RGBG Bayer filters are more opaque on the A7r version of the sensor. Maybe something else entirely...
-Dave-
-
Hi,
The DxO plot for ISO sensivity was identical for the D800E and the A7r, it just shows a single curve.
Best regards
Erik
Right. ISO "50" with those cameras is just the base ISO (100...well, a stop or so more sensitive than "50" anyway) with the quantized photon counts/electron voltages divided by two. A bit of a cheat but it often works well enough for people who don't ETTR.
The sensor itself may well have the same intrinsic sensitivity as the D800's. Who knows what else is going on? Maybe Nikon chose to use a mathematical ISO "50" rather than the true base sensitivity for reasons known only to it. Non-linearities in sensor response perhaps (pure speculation here). Maybe the RGBG Bayer filters are more opaque on the A7r version of the sensor. Maybe something else entirely...
-Dave-
-
I've also made numerous inquiries about the Sony proprietary port for usb 2 (why 2?) and have never received a response that I understood, because I was looking for tethering capabilities.
I haven't seen the connector but if it is indeed custom as opposed to a micro USB2, as on the RX100 MkII - you're not likely to get one either. It would be typical Sony. The only 'defence' as to not using USB3 is that the connectors are much larger than the the USB2 micro/mini equivalents and that would entail a substantial reworking of the internals - nevertheless they could bypass this with the use of a connector cable.
At first glance, it would seem that the only current tethering solution is a kludge - You'll have to use Wi-Fi / NFC capabilities with a Sony app and set Lightroom, or equivalent, to use a 'watch' folder. Hardly tethering, yet. And if tethering support is eventually added to LR and C1 - with a custom connector, how long a cable will you be able to use ?
-
I've only seen the A7 briefly, from what I've heard and read it seems the A7, non-r version, has good AF, better continuous shooting speed and a quieter shutter but may not be as adaptable for use with Leica M / Canon / Nikon lenses etc. due to the differences in sensor/ micro lenses ( apart from the OLP filter) - does anyone have any first hand experience or info as to why ?
ps
Just checked the Sony website specification, and they describe the socket as a " multi/micro USB terminal " which "supports Micro USB compatible device". It looks identical to a usb2 micro connector - are we sure it requires a custom cable ? If so, the cable is also absent from the accessories page ..
-
The A7r supports the Remote Infrared Control.
Its a mini USB connector.
There is a wired remote control. It uses the USB connector, which makes me wonder how to use the remote control and charge at the same time. I assume Sony wants to do that with Apps. Playmemories (How can you use such a name???) Smart remote control lets you control bracketing, but there is no timecounter, or time interval function. If the iPhone goes Standby, the apps will not work any more anyway. Beside that, why should I use my iPhone to control my cam? So I have to devices running out of batteries?
The remote control cable is a joke. I am sure it will never stay in place outdoors. You can use the remote wireless control though.
-
Right. ISO "50" with those cameras is just the base ISO (100...well, a stop or so more sensitive than "50" anyway) with the quantized photon counts/electron voltages divided by two. A bit of a cheat ...
It does more than that, but to understand, we need to step back from the bare-chested manly world of "I alway use manual exposure settings and shoot only raw", and look at the way that the ISO dial of cameras is used by the vast majority of photographers --- which includes both using auto-exposure and producing JPEG's in-camera.
The short answer is that changing from ISO 50 to ISO 100 will double the exposure level in any auto-exposure mode (half the shutter speed in aperture priority, etc.), and will double the exposure level that is reported as "on meter" in manual mode, along with adjusting the levels in default JPEG output.
In more detail, the ISO setting on a camera does several things:
1) It sets the exposure index on the internal light meter, affecting both the exposure parameters chosen in auto-exposure modes, and the "under/over" indications given in manual exposure mode.
2) It determines what I will call the "JPEG sensitivity": the amplification ratio between a given amount of light reaching the sensor and the resulting output levels in default JPEG conversions. The more technical names for this measure of sensitivity are Standard Output Sensitivity [SOS] and "Recommended Exposure Index": all Japanese cameras are required by their industry association, CPIA, to calibrate their ISO settings by one of these two methods, both of which relate to the entire processing path through to default in-camera JPEGs, not to raw levels.
3) It might also change the degree of analog gain applied between the photosite and raw conversion, and if so, it effects what I will call the "raw sensitivity", meaning the ratio between light level at the sensor and numerical levels in the raw output. However, that is not always done (since appropriate final output level can be achieved with various mixes of analog gain and the "tone curve" used in conversion from raw), and the ISO standard makes no requirements about analog gain or raw level placement; the ISO standard writers have left the intermediate stage of raw format to be used as each camera maker wishes.
-
Tethered support is possible using Sony's 'Remote camera Control' App. I got mine here: http://www.sony.com.au/support/download/525288 (http://www.sony.com.au/support/download/525288)
Then set up auto import into LR 5.3. Works. The app also has a basic intervalometer setting as far as I can see, but I haven't tried it.
I have the metabones EF III adapter. Although it works, the AF is slow. Not good for pro use. But the awesome focus peaking in the EVF almost makes AF redundant for me. I can trust my eyes again with manual focussing... :)
The only complaint I have about my A7r is the slow clunky shutter. It's "chu-chuckuh-chu-chunk" instead of my Canon 5D's "click". The viewfinder is black for too long. I wish the A7r had an electronic first curtain like the A7 because it might remedy this a bit.
Ben
-
Thank you. Very cool.
-
Tethered support is possible using Sony's 'Remote camera Control' App. I got mine here: http://www.sony.com.au/support/download/525288 (http://www.sony.com.au/support/download/525288)
Then set up auto import into LR 5.3. Works. The app also has a basic intervalometer setting as far as I can see, but I haven't tried it.
Ben
So this software is a tethering/processing suite like Canons DPP (which by the way is bulletproof).
The link you provided doesn't show it works with the A7, does it?
Thanks
BC
-
Tethering via USB but not processing. Just places the files into a folder you choose.
Works for me for the A7r.
Ben
-
Even with raw?
Erik
Tethering but not processing. Just places the files into a folder you choose.
Works for me for the A7r.
Ben
-
Yes, the raws get saved in the folder and LR5.3 can process them.
Ben
-
Also, DNA software have a plugin for Lightroom 5 that allows tethered capture for the A7r. Windows version out at the moment, but I have tested a Mac beta that also works.
http://dslrsoftware.com/index.php (http://dslrsoftware.com/index.php)
Ben
-
Ben ,
Interested in your experience with metabones adapter on a7r, particularly with canon TS lenses
I am considering this combo but concerned about image quality.
Thanks in advance
Eric
-
Also, DNA software have a plugin for Lightroom 5 that allows tethered capture for the A7r. Windows version out at the moment, but I have tested a Mac beta that also works.
http://dslrsoftware.com/index.php (http://dslrsoftware.com/index.php)
Ben - thanks both the links, much appreciated.
As of today, 13th, the mac is a full release.
M
ps
BTW can you confirm what plug / cable connected the a7 to your computer and the length of cable used.
I've been told the 'multi' socket is also micro usb compatible - it certainly looks it from the photograph. Is it ?
I can't test it yet, awaiting delivery of an a7 late next week, but grateful for any reliable info in the meantime.
-
Thanks for all the feedback. Does anyone have a link for the sony wired remote? I am thinking I can get one and cut off the port and add it to a standard intervalometer that has the USB2mini port.
Paul Caldwell
-
Paul - The remote is the RM-VPR1. Here it is at B&H:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/925709-REG/sony_rm_vpr1_remote_control_with_multi_terminal.html (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/925709-REG/sony_rm_vpr1_remote_control_with_multi_terminal.html)
This link mentions it has a multi terminal, so I suppose that what the A7/r has, but it looks like micro usb. Although I'm not very familiar with all those small sockets and plugs.
Eric - I don't have any T/S lenses so I can't comment on the quality or possible vignetting etc using these, sorry.
Manoli - The cable that comes with the A7r is only about 30cm/12" long, but I successfully shot tethered with the DNA LR plugin with a 5m usb extension cable.
I got a battery grip and extra batteries today which is nice, but a little disappointing ergonomically - it's not that easy to find the dials and buttons without taking your eye away from the viewfinder. I know I'll learn where they are automatically with practice, but the dials aren't within finger's reach from the shutter release, and you have to physically change your grip to get your thumb and forefinger on the dials.
Ben
-
Manoli - The cable that comes with the A7r is only about 30cm/12" long, but I successfully shot tethered with the DNA LR plugin with a 5m usb extension cable.
Ben,
Many thanks for the feedback - could you please clarify a few points :
(a) was the extension cable you used attached directly to the camera or was it connected to the Sony 'multi connection' cable that comes with the A7r ?
(b) if you attached the 5m cable directly to the camera, am I correct in assuming that this was a bog standard male/female extension cable ?
(c) if you attached the 5m cable directly to the supplied sony cable, did the extension cable have a female micro USB socket ?
(c) just to clarify some previous posts, the socket is NOT MINI usb. It may be MICRO usb or MICRO usb compatible. FWIW, Sony , in the manual describe the socket as a 'Multi Terminal' and the cable supplied as a 'micro USB cable'. FYG, below is a link to the people who've supplied me with custom tethering cables in the past. Strongly recommend the angled type plug, depending on the camera, for minimising the risk of pulling the cable out during a shoot.
http://www.usbfirewire.com/understanding.usb.right.angle.html
-
Hi Manoli,
The extension cable was a standard 'active' usb male/female, like the picture below. I attached the supplied Sony cable directly between the extension cable and the camera.
Ben
-
Ben - many thanks for the input.
All best
M
-
Ben ,
Interested in your experience with metabones adapter on a7r, particularly with canon TS lenses
I am considering this combo but concerned about image quality.
Thanks in advance
Eric
Both the 17 and 24TS work fine with the A7r. I posted an image at
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=84713.0
which was made with the 17TS.
Cheers
Jan
-
Hello Jan,
did you have any problems with flare using the Canon TS-E lenses? Another user in a German forum wrote about this problem, especially under tungsten light conditions and compared to the Canon 5D Mark 3 under the same conditions.
Jan
-
No, I didn't but I did only outdoor shooting.
-
The a7R works great with Canon's TS-E lenses, via the Metabones III adapter.
-
We had dinner the other night across from the Sony store (not a plan but it worked out).
I took my em-5 and once again asked the Sony people to load up an A7 (not R) with A mount lenses and adapters and compared it directly to the olympus. Photographed some people around the store in mixed lighting.
Came back and was really surprised. Now this wasn't a real test, because I'd have to shoot something that is a real project, but just focusing, trying different settings etc. the A7 file looked strange.
I purposely shot it at 1250 iso, the em-5 at 1000. The Sony at 3.5, the em-5 at F2. Both the same shutter though the Sony needed more light and had to drop the shutter some, so got a lot of blur movement, where the em-t had zero, even at the same shutter speed.
What kind of surprised me was the A7's file was kind of muddy and had that painterly look. You know where hair strands get kind of mushed together and you see those strange artifacts on skin like blotches like when there is too much noise reduction.
The Olympus had more noise, but had a sharpness and depth to it. Not as deep as my digital backs but had the same sharpness look.
Don't anybody misunderstand me, because this wasn't a real test or a fair test as I know the em-5 well and have the settings perfect for the post production I do and don't know the A7 well.
I'm also not saying the em-5 is a better camera . . . well ok, it actually is a better camera imo, but I didn't think it would shoot a prettier file given the size of the sensor.
The lady behind sony counter was knowledgable and nice and asked to hold the olympus. She said that's really well built how much is it and I said half the price of the A7. She said ohhhh.
Anyway I still like the thought of the Sony, don't like some of the functions, but guess I'm going to have to rent one and test it in the real world.
One thing I notice, when I was leaving the restaurant it was very pretty out, very dark and I did a quick snap hand held at 1/20th of a second of stationary objects, not people and it was dead sharp. Olympus really has stabilization down.
IMO
BC
-
Were you comparing out of camera jpgs?
I have to say that I find tha Sony's OOC jpgs to be horrible.
I find the RAWs, on the other hand, to be excellent.
-
BC
Also curious on the output, jpg or raw. If raw was any in camera noise reduction on? on the Sony? As this always seems to create the painterly look to my tastes. Not sure if at that iso 1250 if the camera might have turned on some noise reduction, (would only be applied to jpgs) but I also believe what you view on the LCD (even when you shoot only raw) is jpg.
Pop Photo gave the A7r camera of the year, but did show a issue of noise on iso settings past 1600. I was not happy to see that, but it also tracks with Sony on other chips that are used between Nikon and Sony. The D800 with the same chip tested about 1 full stop better on noise and did not get to "unusable" until 6400. I pretty much stop my D800 at 3200. The images at 3200 have been in the most case good.
Paul Caldwell
-
I returned my A7R because of two problems that are each show stoppers for me.
1. The file compression applied to the raw files is lossy. Artifacts are clearly visible at 100 percent view as sort of an egg shell stipple on surfaces that should be smooth. While this would be unlikely to show in a print up to native size (and actually might help smooth transitions while maintaining a sense of surface), heavily working a file in Lr and Ps will make it worse and visible in prints. Tonal banding is also likely in more extreme cases since these are essentially 8 bit files.
2. This second problem is likely less of an issue for those using the camera hand held, but the problem of vibrations impacting image quality when used on a tripod is real. This was reported by Lloyd Chambers, and examples can be seen on his site. It has to do with the single curtain shutter mechanism on the R model. The A7 apparently has both and does not experience the same problem.
The first problem can probably be eliminated by a firmware update that would allow saving uncompressed 14bit raw files. Whether that will be forthcoming remains to be seen. But the second problem obviously can not. As I said, I do not think the vibration problem will be significant for street shooters because of the typical use of shorter lenses and hand holding the camera.
I am really disappointed because I have a lot of legacy lenses that I can't use with my 800e that I would like to use, and the reduction in weight would have been very welcome. I also like Sony's aggressive rethinking of what a pro/prosumer camera can be these days. I had a Sony R1 years ago that I really enjoyed using and made many very good images with. That experience convinced me that I would welcome a professional level mirrorless camera. For me the A7R is soooo close, but not quite there. Maybe there will be an A9R before long? I am hopeful.
-
I returned my A7R because of two problems that are each show stoppers for me.
1. The file compression applied to the raw files is lossy. Artifacts are clearly visible at 100 percent view as sort of an egg shell stipple on surfaces that should be smooth. While this would be unlikely to show in a print up to native size (and actually might help smooth transitions while maintaining a sense of surface), heavily working a file in Lr and Ps will make it worse and visible in prints. Tonal banding is also likely in more extreme cases since these are essentially 8 bit files.
Hi Mark,
Thanks for your feedback. I'm a bit surprised by the 'egg shell stipple' effect you mention. I'd have expected an overly smooth effect, especially in the highlights, not structure. Tonal banding would indeed be the anticipated result when pushing the tonemapping a bit further than 'usual'.
It would be appreciated if you could post a crop that shows the effect.
Cheers,
Bart
-
The first problem [lossy compression] can probably be eliminated by a firmware update that would allow saving uncompressed 14bit raw files. Whether that will be forthcoming remains to be seen. But the second problem [shutter vibration] obviously can not.
I think there could be a firmware fix to part of the shutter vibration (no camera with a focal plane shutter will ever get rid of it all). Add a new drive mode called "single shot shutter delayed". It can be accessed with the Fn key like the other drive modes. When the camera is in that mode, the first press of the shutter button closes the shutter, and the second press opens and closes it to make the exposure. It then opens again for live view to work.
As an alternate implementation, and, being a long-time Hasselblad user, the one that I prefer: Allow one of the assignable keys to be assigned to open and close the shutter when the camera is in normal shooting mode. If open, live view would work the way it does now. If closed, upon depression of the shutter release, the shutter would open then close, and remain closed. Live view would not work until the assignable button was pressed again, just like the mirror control on a Hasselblad.
Jim
-
I understood that a little different.
Start Quote:
...lenses in the range of 180mm on up might be problematic with the A7R shutter simply because the longer size allows more movement than a shorter, stockier lens.
End Quote
There is no shutter vibration with the A7 due to the electronic first curtain.
Concerning lossy compression he writes:
Start Quote:
..it works very well and maybe has little or no effect on most images—see explanation at bottom.
End Quote.
Can you see a difference?
What focal lengths are the legacy lenses you have? If not longer that 120mm you should't have any problems. If you really need longer lenses the the A7 does the job. But of course, you then have only 24MP and not 36MP, which in the end are just numbers.
By the way, there is (another) interesting review at lensrentals.com.
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/12/sony-a7r-a-rising-tide-lifts-all-the-boats
Cheers
Jan
-
In another development, Lloyd Chambers has reported that the a7R shutter vibration is worse when the camera is in portrait orientation. This makes sense if the camera is mounted directly to the tripod head, or if the mounting is very close to the camera, but my guess is that for long lenses with tripod collars that the effect is not significant.
Here's my reasoning. I have determined that the main vibration of the shutter is up and down when the camera is in the landscape orientation. (http://blog.kasson.com/?p=3757) Tripods are usually better at resisting up and down motion than side to side motion. You can demonstrate this to yourself by pressing on the top of the ball head and pressing on the side. Therefore, if the camera is mounted directly to the ball head, when it's in landscape mode, the vibration will occur in the direction that the tripod is best able to resist. In portrait mode, the tripod is vibrated in its less effective direction.
With a big lens with a tripod collar, the camera/lens combination vibrates as a torsion pendulum even if the tripod is perfectly resistant to motion. There's no a priori reason to think that this vibration has a preferred orientation, although it might.
Lots to test here.
Jim
-
Very interesting link. Thank you.
Why didn't Sony choose an electronic first curtain for the A7r? Is there any advantage the mechanical first curtain has? They must have had a reason, right?
-
Why didn't Sony choose an electronic first curtain for the A7r? Is there any advantage the mechanical first curtain has? They must have had a reason, right?
My suspicion is that they already had a chip that they'd designed that didn't have an electronic first curtain: the one used in the Nikon D800 and D800E. Depending on the rumor that you believe, they either used that design as is or made minor tweaks. It was cheaper than designing a new chip.
Jim
-
Why didn't Sony choose an electronic first curtain for the A7r? Is there any advantage the mechanical first curtain has? They must have had a reason, right?
The A7R lacks several features of the less expensive A7; this electronic first curtain shutter and on-sensor PD AF.
My guess is that this is because the basic electronic design of the sensor in the A7R is inherited from the D800 sensor (even if CFA's, micro lenses and processing have been modified) and so it is older than the design of the sensor in the A7.
-
Too bad, I use the 180mm f2.8 APO a lot on the D800 for distant pano stitches since those Leica R APO lenses are optimized for that very application. It looks like Sony didn't quite fully validate all the usage patterns here.
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3742/9366790917_f1087aa9d2_o.jpg)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I returned my A7R because of two problems that are each show stoppers for me.
1. The file compression applied to the raw files is lossy. Artifacts are clearly visible at 100 percent view as sort of an egg shell stipple on surfaces that should be smooth. While this would be unlikely to show in a print up to native size (and actually might help smooth transitions while maintaining a sense of surface), heavily working a file in Lr and Ps will make it worse and visible in prints. Tonal banding is also likely in more extreme cases since these are essentially 8 bit files.
Did you experience those issues yourself?
I've been using an a7R for over a week now, both hand held and on a tripod, and haven't had an issue with the shutter causing vibration.
I don't mean to suggest that it's not a problem others have seen but I certainly have not yet seen it.
-
There is also the basic human psychology at play here as well as the maybe buyers remorse.If its not your brand be it cameras, cars or whatever - what is an annoyance to be worked around on your favorite becomes an unacceptable problem on a competitors equipment.
I use tripods for up to half my photography and accept that to get the best possible results from a 36 MP sensor your technique is required to to top notch in all respects.I only received my A7r on Monday ( it was 44.7 C) and due to all the real demands of life I haven't yet been able to do more than a few basic shots.
Also I don't think there is a camera,lens,tripod combination that doesn't have a shake problem somewhere in its speed range. With some it appears to be more of a problem at 1/8 to 1/15 whilst others are worse at 1/30 to 1/60 of a second.
-
I have yet to put my A7R with metabones Canon EF III adapter through its paces yet.
Here are some things I have noticed about both the camera and the adapter
Metabones Canon EF III Adapter
1. My adapter bore diameter was so tight, that I had to take the lens mount off the adapter and sand the chrome plating off the brass to increase the bore diameter. Once I had done this, I was able to fit Canon lenses with out forcing them on and having fear that I would break the lens mount trying to get the adapter off the lens. This tight fit was not due to the springs as it mentioned on the Metabones website.
2. The button on the adapter, that I had assumed to be DOF preview is actually the reverse! If a camera has stopped the lens down, pressing the button apparently makes it wide open. Not so useful for my photography.
Sony A7R
1. As previously mentioned, no first curtain shutter. I am yet to test to see if this will be a true issue for the focal lengths and shutters speeds I typically shoot at.
If there was the ability in Manual mode, to disable the full time live view, then this would reduce the close/open shutter vibration if the sensor /hardware design can not allow for a firmware update for electronic first curtain shutter.
2. No real time RGB histogram, only a luminosity histogram that appears to be just a copy of the green channel.
During image playback, you can get a split LRGB histogram and it appears that L=G channel.
I have not yet tested if the zebras are based on the first channel to clip or this luminosity channel. I fear the luminosity channel.
3. No DOF preview button.
Without this feature, using my TSE24 is difficult to set the plane of focus to maximise DOF.
I tried a walk around which involved the following:
- Take a long shutter speed shot at the desired aperture
- Mid shot decouple the lens and adapter pins by rotating the lens on the mount.
Be careful not to rotate too much and have your lens fall off. (red dot is near the EF-S white dot)
This will leave the lens stopped down
- Use the TSE rotation axis to rotate the tilt plane to the desired tilt axis (one detent stop)
- Set your plane of focus and if happy, securely mount the lens and rotate back to the proper position.
As I said I have not tested the kit out properly yet, just in my lounge room last night after modifying the adapter.
Over the Christmas break I will get and use it for landscape work and report back anything else I notice
Regards
David
-
David,
- The fit of my Metabones III adapter was also tight, but evidently not quite as tight as yours – that is to say, I didn't fear damage to the lens or lens mount. It felt to me as though it was just on the cusp of being "nice and tight" vs. "a little too tight."
- You are correct in that the button on the adapter seems to be useless in practice.
- You can set one of the function buttons (I set #3) to act as a DOF preview button.
After another day/night of shooting with the camera I must say that I'm still quite pleased with the rig. I'm still not quite at the point that I feel completely comfortable having it replace my 5DII, however I have used it on one (relatively low impact) client job with success.
-
Thanks for the tip about the setting custom functions. I skimmed through the manual/index looking for depth of field but did not find anything. It must be buried deep in a menu >:(
-
David,
Did you notice any issues with the shifts on when using the TSE24? There is another post in the forum where some users are seeing what may be the effect of reflections. Here a link to the post:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=85249.0 (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=85249.0)
Paul Caldwell
-
Paul,
I had not noticed any reflections and did see marc's post.
When i first received the adapter, I thought it was odd that it did not have felt.
Once I saw marc's post, I went ahead and did it as well. So i wont be able to test to see if reflections are a big problem.
Regards
David
-
I returned my A7R because of two problems that are each show stoppers for me.
1. The file compression applied to the raw files is lossy. Artifacts are clearly visible at 100 percent view as sort of an egg shell stipple on surfaces that should be smooth. While this would be unlikely to show in a print up to native size (and actually might help smooth transitions while maintaining a sense of surface), heavily working a file in Lr and Ps will make it worse and visible in prints. Tonal banding is also likely in more extreme cases since these are essentially 8 bit files.
2. This second problem is likely less of an issue for those using the camera hand held, but the problem of vibrations impacting image quality when used on a tripod is real. This was reported by Lloyd Chambers, and examples can be seen on his site. It has to do with the single curtain shutter mechanism on the R model. The A7 apparently has both and does not experience the same problem.
The first problem can probably be eliminated by a firmware update that would allow saving uncompressed 14bit raw files. Whether that will be forthcoming remains to be seen. But the second problem obviously can not. As I said, I do not think the vibration problem will be significant for street shooters because of the typical use of shorter lenses and hand holding the camera.
I am really disappointed because I have a lot of legacy lenses that I can't use with my 800e that I would like to use, and the reduction in weight would have been very welcome. I also like Sony's aggressive rethinking of what a pro/prosumer camera can be these days. I had a Sony R1 years ago that I really enjoyed using and made many very good images with. That experience convinced me that I would welcome a professional level mirrorless camera. For me the A7R is soooo close, but not quite there. Maybe there will be an A9R before long? I am hopeful.
The obvious answer is to get the A7. It overcomes these problems. Easy!
As for those people worried about tethering. I find that a little bizarre, seeing that this camera is absolutely designed to be highly mobile. Nevertheless, Sony do make the A99 which would be more suitable for tethering.
-
The obvious answer is to get the A7. It overcomes these problems. Easy!
Neither the A7 nor the RX1 spit out full RAWs (which was point 1), nor does Sony seem to have a history of aggressive firmware updates, which makes me pessimistic about the prospects.
This said, I'd be sincerely curious to see if the compression makes any difference in real-life scenarios.
And, yeah, the non-R does probably solve some of the vibration issues - electronic first shutter + lower resolution will do that for you, but the underlying problem (which I'm guessing is somewhere in the hardware design) isn't solved. Hopefully, it's something that can be helped with a few cents' worth of absorbent foam somewhere on the assembly line...
-
Has anyone documented the problem when using lenses that do NOT require some form of "adapter"?
-
Neither the A7 nor the RX1 spit out full RAWs (which was point 1), nor does Sony seem to have a history of aggressive firmware updates, which makes me pessimistic about the prospects.
This said, I'd be sincerely curious to see if the compression makes any difference in real-life scenarios.
And, yeah, the non-R does probably solve some of the vibration issues - electronic first shutter + lower resolution will do that for you, but the underlying problem (which I'm guessing is somewhere in the hardware design) isn't solved. Hopefully, it's something that can be helped with a few cents' worth of absorbent foam somewhere on the assembly line...
With all due respect, any compression with the A7 is totally negligible and invisible in the few RAW files I have here (test photos designed to provoke the sensor). Ditto shutter vibration (which feels vastly different between the two models). If these issues are such a major concern to you, it seems that you really need a much heavier camera/tripod combination, maybe even a bigger format camera. I understand the search for perfection, so I'm not being critical, just realistic.
-
With all due respect, any compression with the A7 is totally negligible and invisible in the few RAW files I have here (test photos designed to provoke the sensor). Ditto shutter vibration (which feels vastly different between the two models). If these issues are such a major concern to you, it seems that you really need a much heavier camera/tripod combination, maybe even a bigger format camera. I understand the search for perfection, so I'm not being critical, just realistic.
FWIW, my comment about damping was based on the non-R. Extremely cursory examination makes me feel like the much talked-about volume level (a.k.a "OMG it isn't as silent as the leaf shutter on the RX1 or an M4" phenomenon) might have been somewhat alleviated with better damping and / or lower tolerances in the outer body assembly. I don't know if this is related to the sharpness problem some R owners are reporting, however, I'm pretty damn certain it wouldn't hurt.
Glad to hear the compression is a free lunch... I hadn't been able to find anything that gave an answer, one way or the other, which obviously made me curious. Because the camera also seems very prone to underexposure, at least with the lenses I've played with, I naturally can't help but wonder if compression and metering behaviour are linked - i.e, intentionally underexposing to compensate for something that would appear when exposing to the right.
Anecdotally, I've shot something like 10k files through my RX1, which seems to have the same sensor, often in very difficult light, and I'm extremely happy with the IQ it's spitting out... but hey, can't have too much of a good thing...
-
Bernard
Exceptionally good picture, what tech details?
Edmund
Too bad, I use the 180mm f2.8 APO a lot on the D800 for distant pano stitches since those Leica R APO lenses are optimized for that very application. It looks like Sony didn't quite fully validate all the usage patterns here.
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3742/9366790917_f1087aa9d2_o.jpg)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hi,
I would suggest aliasing artifacts? I have not seen the "stipple effect", but a lot of Aliasing on A7r test images.
Diglloyd referred to an article describing the Sony file compression. They use some block size, save min and maximum value and use seven bits to code the difference for each pixel. It could cause quantization error in very steep gradients, I guess, but would be fairly good. They have something similar to gamma curve. Sampling tight at low data numbers and more sparsely for high data numbers where photon statistics dominate anyway.
Best regards
Erik
Hi Mark,
Thanks for your feedback. I'm a bit surprised by the 'egg shell stipple' effect you mention. I'd have expected an overly smooth effect, especially in the highlights, not structure. Tonal banding would indeed be the anticipated result when pushing the tonemapping a bit further than 'usual'.
It would be appreciated if you could post a crop that shows the effect.
Cheers,
Bart