Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: Graham Clark on January 28, 2014, 08:52:57 pm
-
The decision to jump to the a7R was quite an easy one actually, even though I’ve never owned a Sony camera product. For me personally the Canon 6D is quite possibly the best SLR on the market for landscape photography:
- Ultralight (worlds lightest and smallest full-frame SLR)
- Amazing full-frame image quality
- EF lenses
When the Sony a7R was released the following really got my attention:
- Lighter than the 6D (worlds lightest and smallest full-frame camera)
- Smaller than the 6D
- Medium-format resolution range
- EF lens compatibility (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/983747-REG/Metabones_MB_EF_E_BM3_Canon_EF_Lens_to.html/BI/19568/KBID/11943/kw/MEEFEBM3/DFF/d10-v2-t1-xMEEFEBM3)
(http://www.grahamclarkphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Sony-A7R-Sunset-Long-Exposure-with-Canon-17-40mm.jpg)
Rodeo Beach Sunset | 276s F22 ISO 50 17mm
Download RAW .ARW: https://app.box.com/s/cncipoemhi6o2ar7da3q
Download .TIFF: https://app.box.com/s/tllwrnvwpbudr4qrxotb
Update! Click here for a review I just posted: http://www.grahamclarkphoto.com/sony-a7r-review-canon-ef-lenses/ (http://www.grahamclarkphoto.com/sony-a7r-review-canon-ef-lenses/)
So I immediately bought one with an EF adapter (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/983747-REG/Metabones_MB_EF_E_BM3_Canon_EF_Lens_to.html/BI/19568/KBID/11943/kw/MEEFEBM3/DFF/d10-v2-t1-xMEEFEBM3) to use my existing Canon lenses, which I quite like. There’s some downsides, which I’ll get into in my upcoming Sony a7R hands-on review, however my real drive for the purchase was the ultralight factor, size and image quality, which the verdict is still out on wether or not it actually does perform better than the latest line of Canon CMOS sensors.
The truth is that I don’t have affinity with any particular brand, I just use what I think is best for my particular use case. I used to be quite the opposite in fact, and I used to swear by my Nikon D2X and Nikon lenses. Until I read Camera and Lens: The Creative Approach by Ansel Adams (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000LZHO2Q/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B000LZHO2Q&linkCode=as2&tag=theartofpho-20):
(http://www.grahamclarkphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Ansel-Adams-Camera-and-Lens-The-Creative-Approach-Sony-a7R.jpg)
On the first page of the introduction to the book Ansel Adams outlines something profound - move away from the marketing and branding of the photography industry and focus instead on the creative potential. Interesting how this was written in 1969, however it’s probably more relevant today than when it was written!
My reason for buying the A7R is also one of simplicity. Take a look below at how the top of the camera has been redesigned:
(http://www.grahamclarkphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Canon-6D-vs-Sony-a7R-size-top-weight1.jpg)
Keep in mind that the size here is probably not exactly to scale, and I’ll be taking quite a few images of these two cameras side-by-side. Instead focus on the button layout and the simplicity of top-case design. I really love how Sony has reimagined the control layout, with an emphasis on classic industrial design cues.
I bought the a7R from B&H, should get it this Friday. Will post 35GB or so of test images on Monday.
Graham
-
I've had my A7r for 2 1/2 weeks now. I like it a lot, more than I expected to actually. The 35 & 55mm lenses are really good and my Y/C Zeiss 25 & 85mms work well on it too via adapter. For handheld pic taking, which IMO is what the A7 & A7r are built for, I find shooting at shutter speeds no slower than 2x focal length to be important as the camera is indeed light and the shutter does vibrate some. Being able to use exposure comp. with Auto ISO in "manual" mode is lovely...I wish my other cameras could do this.
I'm not a resolution fanatic so the pixel count isn't a big deal to me, though it does mean I'm future proofed for 8k stills display should 8k ever become a reality. :D Mainly I just wanted a 135 format platform for some of my favorite older SLR lenses. So far so good on that! Plus I was curious about the current state of the art in 35mm sensor design. Pretty impressive in that regard. It gives my Pentax 645D a run for its money in terms of spatial detail, though IMO the Pentax creates a richer image tonally. Different lenses for each system too, of course.
-Dave-
-
I've had my A7r for 2 1/2 weeks now. I like it a lot, more than I expected to actually. The 35 & 55mm lenses are really good and my Y/C Zeiss 25 & 85mms work well on it too via adapter. For handheld pic taking, which IMO is what the A7 & A7r are built for, I find shooting at shutter speeds no slower than 2x focal length to be important as the camera is indeed light and the shutter does vibrate some. Being able to use exposure comp. with Auto ISO in "manual" mode is lovely...I wish my other cameras could do this.
I'm not a resolution fanatic so the pixel count isn't a big deal to me, though it does mean I'm future proofed for 8k stills display should 8k ever become a reality. :D Mainly I just wanted a 135 format platform for some of my favorite older SLR lenses. So far so good on that! Plus I was curious about the current state of the art in 35mm sensor design. Pretty impressive in that regard. It gives my Pentax 645D a run for its money in terms of spatial detail, though IMO the Pentax creates a richer image tonally. Different lenses for each system too, of course.
-Dave-
Hey Dave,
Awesome!
Quick question - are you experiencing shutter vibration when the camera is on a tripod, or is it primarily shooting handheld?
Graham
-
Thanks for sharing!
Personally, I am not buying into the A7r yet. Maybe next year or so, I want to see where the system is going. Personally, I also feel I want a system with an antialiasing filter. From my reading it seems to be a very good camera.
Right now I am more into saving for travel, after buying a P45+ back, so I have a camera with the resolution of the A7r and with no OLP filter.
I am going to read your postings carefully, and it may affect for my planned purchases. Enjoy your A7r. I also wish Sony much luck with the A7r so they develop an A9.
Best regards
Erik
The decision to jump to the a7R was quite an easy one actually, even though I’ve never owned a Sony camera product. For me personally the Canon 6D is quite possibly the best SLR on the market for landscape photography:
- Ultralight
- Very small
- Amazing full-frame image quality
- EF lenses
When the Sony a7R was released the following really got my attention:
- Lighter than the 6D
- Smaller than the 6D
- Medium-format resolution range
- EF lens compatibility (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/983747-REG/Metabones_MB_EF_E_BM3_Canon_EF_Lens_to.html/BI/19568/KBID/11943/kw/MEEFEBM3/DFF/d10-v2-t1-xMEEFEBM3)
So I immediately bought one with an EF adapter (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/983747-REG/Metabones_MB_EF_E_BM3_Canon_EF_Lens_to.html/BI/19568/KBID/11943/kw/MEEFEBM3/DFF/d10-v2-t1-xMEEFEBM3) to use my existing Canon lenses, which I quite like. There’s some downsides, which I’ll get into in my upcoming Sony a7R hands-on review, however my real drive for the purchase was the ultralight factor, size and image quality, which the verdict is still out on wether or not it actually does perform better than the latest line of Canon CMOS sensors.
The truth is that I don’t have affinity with any particular brand, I just use what I think is best for my particular use case. I used to be quite the opposite in fact, and I used to swear by my Nikon D2X and Nikon lenses. Until I read Camera and Lens: The Creative Approach by Ansel Adams (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000LZHO2Q/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B000LZHO2Q&linkCode=as2&tag=theartofpho-20):
(http://www.grahamclarkphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Ansel-Adams-Camera-and-Lens-The-Creative-Approach-Sony-a7R.jpg)
On the first page of the introduction to the book Ansel Adams outlines something profound - move away from the marketing and branding of the photography industry and focus instead on the creative potential. Interesting how this was written in 1969, however it’s probably more relevant today than when it was written!
My reason for buying the a7R is also one of simplicity. Take a look below at how the top of the camera has been redesigned:
(http://www.grahamclarkphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Canon-6D-vs-Sony-a7R-size-top-weight1.jpg)
Keep in mind that the size here is probably not exactly to scale, and I’ll be taking quite a few images of these two cameras side-by-side. Instead focus on the button layout and the simplicity of top-case design. I really love how Sony has reimagined the control layout, with an emphasis on classic industrial design cues.
I bought the a7R from B&H, should get it this Friday. Will post 35GB or so of test images on Monday.
Graham
-
The decision to jump to the a7R was quite an easy one actually, even though I’ve never owned a Sony camera product. For me personally the Canon 6D is quite possibly the best SLR on the market for landscape photography:
- Ultralight
- Very small
- Amazing full-frame image quality
- EF lenses
...however my real drive for the purchase was the ultralight factor, size and image quality, which the verdict is still out on wether or not it actually does perform better than the latest line of Canon CMOS sensors.
...
The truth is that I don’t have affinity with any particular brand
Graham,
Well... Compared to the D800/D800E, considered by most on this site and elsewhere as the reference landscape DSLR, the difference in weight of the 6D is 230gr... to be compared with the typical 10-20kg of a backpack for landscape applications. That is between 1 and 2% of weight difference.
In terms of size, the canon is 1mm narrower and 11mm less tall which is... minor by most standards when you consider the bulk of the lenses and the overall equipment you need to carry around.
As far as the image quality goes, the 6D certainly has a good sensor that performs great at high ISO, but it is far behind the Sony sensor of the D800 for most landscape applications, as you will soon find out with the Sony a7r tests. The jury has been out for a long long time on this one.
I am sorry, I fail to see how the 6D can objectively be considered the best DSLR on the market for landscape photography. Its minor advantage in size over the D800 is hardly relevant for landscape work and very far from compensating for his inferior image quality.
Now, there are some niche applications, like climbing photography, where weight really does matter, but you'll still be better off with a Nikon D5300 in terms of image quality in good light compared to the 6D... and that will be significantly lighter still when considering lenses. The only scenario I could relate to is climbing photography in poor light where high ISO is required... but is it really a use case you want to dimension your equipment for? ;)
But anyway, you are giving up on the 6D in favor of the Sony a7R, so I guess we have the new best camera for landscape photography identified, correct?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Thanks for sharing!
Personally, I am not buying into the A7r yet. Maybe next year or so, I want to see where the system is going. Personally, I also feel I want a system with an antialiasing filter. From my reading it seems to be a very good camera.
Right now I am more into saving for travel, after buying a P45+ back, so I have a camera with the resolution of the A7r and with no OLP filter.
I am going to read your postings carefully, and it may affect for my planned purchases. Enjoy your A7r. I also wish Sony much luck with the A7r so they develop an A9.
Best regards
Erik
Hey Erik,
Thanks!
Just a couple questions:
1. Why are you looking for a camera without an AA filter?
2. What lenses do you use with the P45+ back? (i'm not familiar with the system)
Graham
-
Graham,
Well... Compared to the D800/D800E, considered by most on this site and elsewhere as the reference landscape DSLR, the difference in weight of the 6D is 230gr... to be compared with the typical 10-20kg of a backpack for landscape applications. That is between 1 and 2% of weight difference.
In terms of size, the canon is 1mm narrower and 11mm less tall which is... minor by most standards when you consider the bulk of the lenses and the overall equipment you need to carry around.
As far as the image quality goes, the 6D certainly has a good sensor that performs great at high ISO, but it is far behind the Sony sensor of the D800, as you will soon find out with the Sony a7r tests. The jury has been out for a long long time on this one.
I am sorry, I fail to see how the 6D can objectively be considered the best DSLR on the market for landscape photography. Its minor advantage in size over the D800 is hardly relevant for landscape work and very far from compensating for his inferior image quality.
Now, there are some niche applications, like climbing photography, where weight really does matter, but you'll still be better off with a Nikon D5300 in terms of image quality in good light compared to the 6D... and that will be significantly lighter still when considering lenses. The only scenario I could relate to is climbing photography in poor light where high ISO is required... but is it really a use case you want to dimension your equipment for? ;)
But anyway, you are giving up on the 6D in favor of the Sony a7R, so I guess we have the new best camera for landscape photography identified, correct?
Cheers,
Bernard
Hey Benard,
I own the Nikon D800e - it's a great camera I agree. Personally I prefer the Canon 6D as the smaller size and weight is noticeable to me.
I'm not saying that the Canon 6D is the best landscape photography camera on the market as a blanket statement. I'll quote my first line in case you missed it:
"For me personally the Canon 6D is quite possibly the best SLR on the market for landscape photography"
I'm completely agnostic to brands, and in this case I own both and prefer one over the other. Let's leave it at that as we all know photographers love to go back and forth about equipment, but I don't. I'm looking at this from a purely practical perspective.
-
I'm keeping an eye on the A7R as well, though with a focus (sorry) on the lenses.
I get that it's lighter & more packable than my 800e, but the system still falls short on glass.
Is an adapted lens as good as one of the Sony or Zeiss lenses made for the A7r ?
That said, it's exciting where all this is going.
-
Let's leave it at that as we all know photographers love to go back and forth about equipment, but I don't.
.....so you post a long diatribe about a piece of equipment you haven't even received from the retailer yet.
Who were you trying to impress?
-
Hi,
I prefer a camera with OLP-filtering. The reason is that I feel it is the right way to go. I also think that the right way to go is smaller pixels (within reasonable limits). This is a small article describing the issue:
http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/78-aliasing-and-supersampling-why-small-pixels-are-good
Regarding the second question I use the P45+ on a Hasselblad with 5 Zeiss lenses. Here is a summary of the experience this far: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/80-my-mfd-journey-summing-up
The way I see it, the sensor should outresolve the lens, and the best way to achieve that is reducing pixel size. Adding an OLP filter is second best.
Just to explain, AA-filtering and OLP-filtering are interchangable terms. OLP filtering stands for Optical Low Pass.
Best regards
Erik
Hey Erik,
Thanks!
Just a couple questions:
1. Why are you looking for a camera without an AA filter?
2. What lenses do you use with the P45+ back? (i'm not familiar with the system)
Graham
-
I'm completely agnostic to brands, and in this case I own both and prefer one over the other. Let's leave it at that as we all know photographers love to go back and forth about equipment, but I don't. I'm looking at this from a purely practical perspective.
So am I, I couldn't care less about brands.
My reaction is not about the 6D, it is about me not understanding the kind of landscape applications for which a camera with the spec/performance of the 6D would be considered superior to a camera with the spec/performance of the D800e.
But I do have very little visibility on what you do which may explain my inability to understand. ;)
Would you mind explaining why this small delta in terms of weight/size impacts your applications? What do you typically pack when you shoot landscape for example?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
A7r seems to be a fantastic camera indeed and a breakthrough as it's short flange distance allows for adapters into various lens systems, such as Canon's excellent TS-E II lenses (I own the TS-E 24 II).
However, there are issues with adapter quality (manufacturing precision, reflections), so I'd wait to buy into it until we see better quality adapters on the market, which seems to be coming.
From my point of view the key advantage over D800e the A7r has is the ability to use Canon glass (and other manufacturers), but with this resolution capability it requires top quality adapters.
-
However, there are issues with adapter quality (manufacturing precision, reflections), so I'd wait to buy into it until we see better quality adapters on the market, which seems to be coming.
If I'm not mistaken doesn't this relate to the Metabones Canon EF/E-mount adapter - particularly regarding TS lenses?
I own a series of Novoflex and Metabones adapters for both Leica M and Nikon. I have had zero issues with QC, always working with manual focus and live view combined with , if necessary, focus peaking.
-
… my real drive for the purchase was the ultralight factor, size and image quality, which the verdict is still out on wether or not it actually does perform better than the latest line of Canon CMOS sensors. […] Instead focus on the button layout and the simplicity of top-case design. I really love how Sony has reimagined the control layout, with an emphasis on classic industrial design cues.
Graham/
As you say the trick is to reassign the Fn menu plus the custom buttons to a layout which is comfortable for you. Anyone who has used either version of the RX100 will understand what I'm referring to.
Not sure about the canon CMOS sensors part, but we'll skip that - FYI Sean Reid has today published an informative review of the A7r v Leica M(240). Regarding the many lens/IQ combinations there are quite a few references throughout the forum … e.g.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=85244.msg696857#msg696857
Good luck!
M
-
If I'm not mistaken doesn't this relate to the Metabones Canon EF/E-mount adapter - particularly regarding TS lenses?
I own a series of Novoflex and Metabones adapters for both Leica M and Nikon. I have had zero issues with QC, always working with manual focus and live view combined with , if necessary, focus peaking.
I'm basing this on info from this review among others: http://www.fredmiranda.com/A7R-review/
Quote: "Step one in adapting a lens: Find a high quality adapter. Unfortunately, this is not as easy as it sounds. My options were limited, and my good options few and far between. After trying a couple brands, the best I found was the Metabones Mark III. But, I had sample variation among the different Metabones adapters I tested. Before you start out, it’s crucial to get a well-centered adapter. Any mount tilt will translate to blurry edges when using ultra wide lenses."
-
… the best I found was the Metabones Mark III. But, I had sample variation among the different Metabones adapters I tested. Before you start out, it’s crucial to get a well-centered adapter. Any mount tilt will translate to blurry edges when using ultra wide lenses."
Toger/
Absolutely true but just to point out that this is a SmartAdapter III incorporating amongst other things both AF and IS, in short electronic integration. I can't remember where I read it but both novoflex and metabones have 'shaved' the depth of their adapters by a fraction of a millimetre - to allow accurate manual focusing via LV (especially at infinity ?) - not sure how that will integrate with the canon adapted AF lenses.
I'm not sure that it's mount tilt that gives lack of edge contrast using ultra wides. Many believe it to be the acute ray angle.
Paul Roark posted this:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=86470.msg703283#msg703283
Also MR's review :
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/a7r_m_lens_report.shtml
-
I'm keeping an eye on the A7R as well, though with a focus (sorry) on the lenses.
I get that it's lighter & more packable than my 800e, but the system still falls short on glass.
Is an adapted lens as good as one of the Sony or Zeiss lenses made for the A7r ?
That said, it's exciting where all this is going.
Excited to see the test results from the Canon and Sony A7R side by side.
-
.....so you post a long diatribe about a piece of equipment you haven't even received from the retailer yet.
Who were you trying to impress?
lol.
-
So am I, I couldn't care less about brands.
My reaction is not about the 6D, it is about me not understanding the kind of landscape applications for which a camera with the spec/performance of the 6D would be considered superior to a camera with the spec/performance of the D800e.
But I do have very little visibility on what you do which may explain my inability to understand. ;)
Would you mind explaining why this small delta in terms of weight/size impacts your applications? What do you typically pack when you shoot landscape for example?
Cheers,
Bernard
Hey Bernard,
I'm seeing very little difference when printing up to 40x60 between the 5D1, 5D2, 5D3, 6D and D800e. Therefore I perceive the performance more theoretical and the 6D more practical from a size / weight perspective.
Recently traveled to 30+ national parks in North America, before that from Alaska to Argentina by land. Usually with a 30L backpack with the lightest and smallest L lenses. My ideal setup would be a point and shoot without sacrificing image quality. So any advancements in this direction are more ideal for me and I'm willing to buy and test them to that end.
-
A7r seems to be a fantastic camera indeed and a breakthrough as it's short flange distance allows for adapters into various lens systems, such as Canon's excellent TS-E II lenses (I own the TS-E 24 II).
However, there are issues with adapter quality (manufacturing precision, reflections), so I'd wait to buy into it until we see better quality adapters on the market, which seems to be coming.
From my point of view the key advantage over D800e the A7r has is the ability to use Canon glass (and other manufacturers), but with this resolution capability it requires top quality adapters.
I saw one mention of machining quality with a 4x loupe on one Amazon review, but I haven't seen it mentioned elsewhere!
I agree with you that it's significant but bottle necked at the adapter level, and I'm particularly interested to see first-hand what the adapter quality is like.
Graham
-
Hi,
I prefer a camera with OLP-filtering. The reason is that I feel it is the right way to go. I also think that the right way to go is smaller pixels (within reasonable limits). This is a small article describing the issue:
http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/78-aliasing-and-supersampling-why-small-pixels-are-good
Regarding the second question I use the P45+ on a Hasselblad with 5 Zeiss lenses. Here is a summary of the experience this far: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/80-my-mfd-journey-summing-up
The way I see it, the sensor should outresolve the lens, and the best way to achieve that is reducing pixel size. Adding an OLP filter is second best.
Just to explain, AA-filtering and OLP-filtering are interchangable terms. OLP filtering stands for Optical Low Pass.
Best regards
Erik
Awesome site, tons of great information.
Taking all this into consideration how would you measure the resolving power of the lens against a respective sensor?
-
I'm basing this on info from this review among others: http://www.fredmiranda.com/A7R-review/
Quote: "Step one in adapting a lens: Find a high quality adapter. Unfortunately, this is not as easy as it sounds. My options were limited, and my good options few and far between. After trying a couple brands, the best I found was the Metabones Mark III. But, I had sample variation among the different Metabones adapters I tested. Before you start out, it’s crucial to get a well-centered adapter. Any mount tilt will translate to blurry edges when using ultra wide lenses."
Interesting! I'll post a number of TIFFs on this subject on Monday to see what impact this has. I also wonder, if there is machining issues especially at these small thresholds, what variations in copies there are.
-
A7r seems to be a fantastic camera indeed and a breakthrough as it's short flange distance allows for adapters into various lens systems, such as Canon's excellent TS-E II lenses (I own the TS-E 24 II).
However, there are issues with adapter quality (manufacturing precision, reflections), so I'd wait to buy into it until we see better quality adapters on the market, which seems to be coming.
From my point of view the key advantage over D800e the A7r has is the ability to use Canon glass (and other manufacturers), but with this resolution capability it requires top quality adapters.
the advantage compared to the d800e is that it can use nearly ALL glass, not just canon and nikon and that it has a very good live view and that it is lo weight .
-
Quick question - are you experiencing shutter vibration when the camera is on a tripod, or is it primarily shooting handheld?
This is handheld. What little I've done on a tripod (just playing really) has been with the camera attached to a large carbon fiber Vanguard and my heavier metal Gitzo using short-ish lenses (I'm not interested in anything longer than 100mm or so with this camera) so I haven't seen any of the "shutter shock" stuff that has had some folks up in arms. The vibration is partly to do with the shutter—it's a bit juddery at slower handheld speeds—and partly to do with a lack of adequate handholding mass. But upping the shutter speed takes care of it.
-Dave-
-
This is handheld. What little I've done on a tripod (just playing really) has been with the camera attached to a large carbon fiber Vanguard and my heavier metal Gitzo using short-ish lenses (I'm not interested in anything longer than 100mm or so with this camera) so I haven't seen any of the "shutter shock" stuff that has had some folks up in arms. The vibration is partly to do with the shutter—it's a bit juddery at slower handheld speeds—and partly to do with a lack of adequate handholding mass. But upping the shutter speed takes care of it.
-Dave-
interesting! looking forward to really getting this tested out.
thanks for your response!
-
However, there are issues with adapter quality (manufacturing precision, reflections), so I'd wait to buy into it until we see better quality adapters on the market, which seems to be coming.
This has been a non-issue so far with my (Novoflex) adapters for Y/C Zeiss, Nikon F and Pentax K. I'm using lenses I'm very familiar with...on the Sony they behave as they do on their native cameras.
This past weekend my friend Bruce & I did some brief pic taking outside in the Arctic-like weather we've recently been suffering through. Bruce had a borrowed Leica M240 & 28/2 Summicron while I had the A7r and a Pentax M-series 28/2.8 that I've owned for ages. No surprise to either of us, the Sony/Pentax duo outresolved the Leica...though admittedly not by much, and it required some measurbating to ferret out. Much to our surprise, though, we also found the Sony/Pentax was more consistent across the frame (at the lens' f/9.5 optimum) and more subtle tonally. This was evident in 4096x2732 downsamples too. I'm sold on this point: Erik is right, more photosites are cool! BTW, the Pentax lens currently goes for around US $100 used and isn't even considered the best version. :)
-Dave-
-
Hi,
I am using a program called Imatest. It can measure MTF of lens+sensor using a very simple slanted edge target. I used to buy my for 99$US in something called Studio version, but I don't know the price. There is another program using the same methods.
MTF results are very much dependent on sharpening.
If I have time (and energy) I will try to to post some more info end of this week.
Best regards
Erik
Awesome site, tons of great information.
Taking all this into consideration how would you measure the resolving power of the lens against a respective sensor?
-
I have purchased a A7R and find it a good compact camera with some limitations.
I use the metabones EF mkIII adapter and after covering the interior with felt, I have no issues with reflections.
That being said, I did not shoot much with it before covering with felt.
Check here (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=85249.0) for a template I made from Marc Aurel's sketch to make the felt process easier,
My experience so far is that with quality lenses, such as the TSE24II or CZ55/1.8, I am achieving an high level of detail and low shadow noise that was simply not achievable with my current camera bodies (5D3, 6D). Ofcourse the detail is not the same as the IQ180 I used to own, but at the price and dynamic range that exceeds the IQ180, it is a very good compromise. I can stitch easily to generate MF resolutions.
I have not had issues with shutter vibration so far, this may be chance or my technique/equipment are minimizing the effect. I have been shooting up to 100mm lenses but mounting the body to the tripod, not using the adapter foot or lens plates. Hand held I have tack sharp images with the EF300/2.8IS, even below 1/300th of a second. The large lens mass and holding technique probably reduces any blur.
Some of the limitations I have found are:
- There is no live RGB histogram like on my canon bodies. I have not shot enough to know how much headroom I have before clipping channels with the zebras. The luminosity histogram is a copy of the green channel. So To confirm I have not clipped a blue or red channel, I have to check the image playback RGB histogram.
- High ISO quality is not that great compared to my 6D. There is detail smearing. This is not a big deal for me as I am 90% of the time a base ISO shooter.
- Using the camera on the tripod, it is so small that when trying to adjust settings, the viewfinder detection will trigger the LCD display to turn off. I can set the camera to turn off the viewfinder, but I can not set this function as a custom function. I can with disabling the LCD monitor. Annoying I can not toggle it with a custom programmed button. (if anyone knows how to, please let me know)
For me, it is a great compact camera for landscape use with my current canon lenses with out having to buy a D800 + Nikon Glass.
It takes up barely any room in my pack when I am using the 5D3 for anything that I need auto-focus for and the 6D I use for any astro-long exposure stuff.
Hope this aids people with there decisions.
Cheers
Dave
-
I have purchased a A7R and find it a good compact camera with some limitations.
I use the metabones EF mkIII adapter and after covering the interior with felt, I have no issues with reflections.
That being said, I did not shoot much with it before covering with felt.
Check here (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=85249.0) for a template I made from Marc Aurel's sketch to make the felt process easier,
My experience so far is that with quality lenses, such as the TSE24II or CZ55/1.8, I am achieving an high level of detail and low shadow noise that was simply not achievable with my current camera bodies (5D3, 6D). Ofcourse the detail is not the same as the IQ180 I used to own, but at the price and dynamic range that exceeds the IQ180, it is a very good compromise. I can stitch easily to generate MF resolutions.
I have not had issues with shutter vibration so far, this may be chance or my technique/equipment are minimizing the effect. I have been shooting up to 100mm lenses but mounting the body to the tripod, not using the adapter foot or lens plates. Hand held I have tack sharp images with the EF300/2.8IS, even below 1/300th of a second. The large lens mass and holding technique probably reduces any blur.
Some of the limitations I have found are:
- There is no live RGB histogram like on my canon bodies. I have not shot enough to know how much headroom I have before clipping channels with the zebras. The luminosity histogram is a copy of the green channel. So To confirm I have not clipped a blue or red channel, I have to check the image playback RGB histogram.
- High ISO quality is not that great compared to my 6D. There is detail smearing. This is not a big deal for me as I am 90% of the time a base ISO shooter.
- Using the camera on the tripod, it is so small that when trying to adjust settings, the viewfinder detection will trigger the LCD display to turn off. I can set the camera to turn off the viewfinder, but I can not set this function as a custom function. I can with disabling the LCD monitor. Annoying I can not toggle it with a custom programmed button. (if anyone knows how to, please let me know)
For me, it is a great compact camera for landscape use with my current canon lenses with out having to buy a D800 + Nikon Glass.
It takes up barely any room in my pack when I am using the 5D3 for anything that I need auto-focus for and the 6D I use for any astro-long exposure stuff.
Hope this aids people with there decisions.
Cheers
Dave
Hey Dave,
Awesome insight!
Question regarding internal reflections - do you think that affects non TSE lenses? A TSE directs light in a non-linear path, thereby hitting the edges of the adapter, whereas a non-TSE lens wouldn't do this, right?
Lack of RGB is interesting!
One of the features I use on my 5D3 and 6D the most is Live View when composing with ND filters, without simulation mode. The 6D compensates for low light and adjusts the ISO upwards to compose, and even though I've never shot on H1 and H2, I find that these are incredibly useful for the purposes of composing. Without those high ISOs and being locked into Live View without them, it seems that the A7R has a downside here.
Do you have a shutter release? Another downside in my view is the lack of an intervalometer : (
-
Graham,
Regarding the reflections, it could be possible to get them with non TSE lenses but I have covered the sides where the mirror box would normally be as well. The canon cameras do not have felt but they do have a non-reflective coating on the inside of the mirror box so it could be an issue. Just spend the hour, covering the adapter with felt :) See marc's post where the template I made is.
There is a custom function called "shot preview" or something like that. It is different to the aperture preview from as much as I can tell as it will give you a simulated preview of the shot.
I have not found a need for it yet as when making changes or stopping the lenses down with the aperture preview, the liveview compensates like my canon cameras do.
In terms of remotes, I bought the Sony RMVPR1 video remote.
The record button triggers video and the on-off mode swtich puts the camera into a sleep mode and it wakes up from quickly as compared to turning the camera off/on.
The W-T buttons do not provide any useful function but they do try to communicate with the camera. I get a not compatible with RAW quality type message and if I switch the camera to JPG mode, I get another non compatible message about the lens type, even with the native CZ55/1.8 lens. Part of me was hoping I could either change focus or exposure compensation with the remote.
The only down side is that the connector sticks straight out of the camera for about an inch. It means I have to slide the RRS L-Plate to accommodate for portrait orientation shots. I prefer the canon style 90deg connector.
There is a smart phone app that gives intervalometer functionality but when using the smart phone app as a normal remote (before my wired remote arrived) the LCD monitor would turn off and I would not get any histogram on the phone, even reviewing the image. So I ended up using the timer function which made it fun predicting when waves would be in the right spot of the frame.
Cheers
Dave
-
Hey Dave,
Thanks for the response!
I'll certainly cover the interior as was previously posted, but I'm really interested to do a before and after without TSE lenses to see the effect this has on contrast. Thanks for the PDF you created, huge help.
As for the remote application on your phone, does it have a intervalometer setting or is it designed for time-lapse?
Graham
-
Graham,
Regarding the reflections, it could be possible to get them with non TSE lenses but I have covered the sides where the mirror box would normally be as well. The canon cameras do not have felt but they do have a non-reflective coating on the inside of the mirror box so it could be an issue. Just spend the hour, covering the adapter with felt :) See marc's post where the template I made is.
There is a custom function called "shot preview" or something like that. It is different to the aperture preview from as much as I can tell as it will give you a simulated preview of the shot.
I have not found a need for it yet as when making changes or stopping the lenses down with the aperture preview, the liveview compensates like my canon cameras do.
In terms of remotes, I bought the Sony RMVPR1 video remote.
The record button triggers video and the on-off mode swtich puts the camera into a sleep mode and it wakes up from quickly as compared to turning the camera off/on.
The W-T buttons do not provide any useful function but they do try to communicate with the camera. I get a not compatible with RAW quality type message and if I switch the camera to JPG mode, I get another non compatible message about the lens type, even with the native CZ55/1.8 lens. Part of me was hoping I could either change focus or exposure compensation with the remote.
The only down side is that the connector sticks straight out of the camera for about an inch. It means I have to slide the RRS L-Plate to accommodate for portrait orientation shots. I prefer the canon style 90deg connector.
There is a smart phone app that gives intervalometer functionality but when using the smart phone app as a normal remote (before my wired remote arrived) the LCD monitor would turn off and I would not get any histogram on the phone, even reviewing the image. So I ended up using the timer function which made it fun predicting when waves would be in the right spot of the frame.
Cheers
Dave
Also, aside from the non-L shaped connector do you think the Sony remote you bought is worth $70 or so?
Graham
-
....................while I had the A7r and a Pentax M-series 28/2.8 that I've owned for ages. No surprise to either of us, the Sony/Pentax duo outresolved the Leica................. the Pentax lens currently goes for around US $100 used and isn't even considered the best version. :)
-Dave-
Very interesting to hear this Dave; I have a closet of old Pentax M lenses (including the 28mm f/3.5), I would love to use them at their designed angle of view. I might wait awhile and see if Pentax uses this sensor, if not, maybe the Sony.
Tom
-
Graham,
No problems on the quick responses, I am off work today as I gave myself concussion mt. biking last night so I have to take it easy.
I have only used a wired remotes on any of my cameras.
The Sony one I mentioned is pretty good quality. You would not want to drop it in water as it does not appear to be well sealed but other brand remotes are not either.
The cable is quite thin and is quite stiff near the strain relief of the connector. It could fail with repeated bending right at that point. I had this happen to my Canon TC80 intervelometer.
I am in Australia and Sony AU does not stock that remote, so I had to buy it from BH photo so paid more for it than I would have liked. I just bundled it with a bunch of other small stuff to make the most of the shipping. Even still, it was cheaper than it would be if they start selling it here.
I still think it was a good buy for the on/off wake up function. Saves my batteries if I am waiting for the light to be just right when getting to a location too early.
I have not managed to work out yet if I can use the movie button as a custom function. If so I wonder if I can trigger it by the REC button on the remote. I probably should read the manual!
There is a IR remote and have seen a demo indoors of the person using it without pointing it at the camera, but for landscape use, I did not want to take the risk of it not working and or batteries going flat.
The Sony phone apps are under a name of PlayMemories and can be found here (https://www.playmemoriescameraapps.com/portal/).
There is a timelapse app (https://www.playmemoriescameraapps.com/portal/usbdetail.php?eid=IS9104-NPIA09014_00-000003), but I have not purchased it.
I have only used the free remote app shortly until I worked out it would not suit my shooting style.
On a plus note though, focus, liveview update and image review was quick with the phone. I was surprised. It just did not give me the histogram as mentioned above.
Cheers
David
-
(1)
- High ISO quality is not that great compared to my 6D. There is detail smearing. This is not a big deal for me as I am 90% of the time a base ISO shooter.
(2)
- Using the camera on the tripod, it is so small that when trying to adjust settings, the viewfinder detection will trigger the LCD display to turn off. I can set the camera to turn off the viewfinder, but I can not set this function as a custom function. I can with disabling the LCD monitor. Annoying I can not toggle it with a custom programmed button. (if anyone knows how to, please let me know)
(1)
How high is 'high' ? Are you using jpeg and have you turned High ISO NR off ? Use RAW.
(2)
A work around is to set the camera to return to the last used menu item and you can then toggle the LCD at will.
Settings > P3 > Finder/Monitor
-
There is an excellent intervalometer included in the Remote Control App - the downside is that you've got to shoot tethered. Considering the limited battery life - you probably would anyway.
-
A7r seems to be a fantastic camera indeed and a breakthrough as it's short flange distance allows for adapters into various lens systems, such as Canon's excellent TS-E II lenses (I own the TS-E 24 II).
However, there are issues with adapter quality (manufacturing precision, reflections), so I'd wait to buy into it until we see better quality adapters on the market, which seems to be coming.
From my point of view the key advantage over D800e the A7r has is the ability to use Canon glass (and other manufacturers), but with this resolution capability it requires top quality adapters.
Not only does it allow different glass, but manually focusing this glass is much nicer with the A7R than trying to manually focus with a D800.
-
There is an excellent intervalometer included in the Remote Control App - the downside is that you've got to shoot tethered. Considering the limited battery life - you probably would anyway.
Interesting, I thought there was no intervalometer functionality in the remote. Thanks!
-
I'm seeing very little difference when printing up to 40x60 between the 5D1, 5D2, 5D3, 6D and D800e. Therefore I perceive the performance more theoretical and the 6D more practical from a size / weight perspective.
Really? I have no images from a 5d1 I would ever print that large ... they might look OK to some, but definitely fall apart to much for me. There might be a few from the 5d2, but they are unique with no real detail. the d800e files even at 24x36 are visually superior, especially those taken with the Zeiss 50 and 100mm.
I haven’t tested that large with my a7r yet, but feel with good technique it will be equal to my d800e.
-
Interesting, I thought there was no intervalometer functionality in the remote. Thanks!
Graham, just to be clear , the Remote Control App is PC/MAC based. The confusion I think comes from other posts that are referring to a smartphone app (which I know zero about) and which may carry a similar name.
FYI, Sony have recently released an updated version of their 'Lens Correction App', which supports the A7. This app costs extra and needs to be downloaded onto the camera. Useful for all adapted lenses.
www.playmemoriescameraapps.com/portal/
-
Really? I have no images from a 5d1 I would ever print that large ... they might look OK to some, but definitely fall apart to much for me. There might be a few from the 5d2, but they are unique with no real detail. the d800e files even at 24x36 are visually superior, especially those taken with the Zeiss 50 and 100mm.
This is an area IMO where one's prefered subject matter and approach have a lot to do with perceived image quality at larger print sizes. Personally I go for the urban landscape more than the nature/scenic variety. What matters to me is the observed moment. Technical quality isn't unimportant but it's less important than being there and clicking the shutter button then. I'll happily zone focus when circumstances call for it. I tend to care more about the tonal qualities of my photos than about how sharp they are. I'll keep the slightly blurry shot that captures a dynamic moment and throw away the sharper one that doesn't. It's just a different approach to the one more in evidence amongst forum participants here. So I can often print photos very large, though I rarely do, without them falling apart...because the photos don't depend on (much) spatial detail to make their point.
One of my all-time favorite pics of my own is of my friend Amy and her then infant daughter. I took it about 14 years ago with a Zeiss Contaflex SLR, 50mm lens and Ilford Delta 3200 (at EI 1600) b&w film. Nothing in the photo is really sharp but that doesn't matter...it was a quick grab of a very touching moment, taken very close with the lens wide open. I was composing a more formal portrait pic when a bit of magic happened. I took other, technically better photos that day but I've never printed any of them. This one, though...many years ago I had it scanned high res and custom printed at 2x3' and it looks lovely.
-Dave-
-
Hi,
Attached are MTF-plots from My P45+ with a Planar 80/2.8 at f/8 and my Sony Alpha 77 SLT with a SAL 16-80/3.5-4.5 ZA at 80 mm and f/8. Please note that these curves are with no sharpening!
The P45+ has a Nyquist limit of 73 lp/mm and the Alpha 77 has Nyquist limit at 128 lp/mm.
The Planar yields around 10% MTF at Nyquist while the SAL 16-80/3.5-4.5 ZA achieves around 2-3% MTF at Nyquist.
It seems that 10% MTF is sufficient to generate Moiré while 2-3% is safe.
It seems that the Zoom on the SLT77 outresolves the Planar on the P45 but this comes both from the zoom being designed for APS-C and the higher resolution of the SLT77.
If we look at the figures giving 50% MTF the figure would give about 40 lp/mm on both lenses, but those 40 lp/mm would correspond 2880 vertical pixels on the P45+ but only 1280 vertical pixels on the SLT 77. Both figures would be much higher with adequate sharpening, but the unsharpened MTF is more relevant for aliasing.
I also attach screen dumps for both images sharpened with my standard settings. The Sony Alpha image is downscaled to 66% to match image size of the P45+ image and some sharpening was applied after downscaling. In my view the Sony image has more real detail and less fake detail, essentially proving that 3.9 micron pixels are better than 6.8 micron pixels using good lenses at medium apertures.
Note: I need to recheck sharpening on the P45+ image, it is a bit to intensive, but this affects neither artefacts or moiré.
Best regards
Erik
Awesome site, tons of great information.
Taking all this into consideration how would you measure the resolving power of the lens against a respective sensor?
-
Really? I have no images from a 5d1 I would ever print that large ... they might look OK to some, but definitely fall apart to much for me. There might be a few from the 5d2, but they are unique with no real detail. the d800e files even at 24x36 are visually superior, especially those taken with the Zeiss 50 and 100mm.
I haven’t tested that large with my a7r yet, but feel with good technique it will be equal to my d800e.
Hey Wayne,
It's a bit off topic from the a7R, but yes, I print from the 5D1 on 40x60 all the time still, as I've converted my 5D1 to IR.
I even recently printed a 350D 8.2MP print (lots of foreground ice and foliage detail) to 40x60 at Blow Up Labs and it looks amazing: http://www.blowuplab.com
If you're in Boulder check out Photo Craft, they have numerous beautiful national geographic prints from the 5D1: http://www.pcraft.com
Give them a call with questions as well, they're pretty darn knowledgeable and they're also excellent LightJet technicians.
Graham
-
Graham, just to be clear , the Remote Control App is PC/MAC based. The confusion I think comes from other posts that are referring to a smartphone app (which I know zero about) and which may carry a similar name.
FYI, Sony have recently released an updated version of their 'Lens Correction App', which supports the A7. This app costs extra and needs to be downloaded onto the camera. Useful for all adapted lenses.
www.playmemoriescameraapps.com/portal/
Ahh got it, you're right that's a bit confusing. Bummer there's no intervalometer on the app... perhaps one day!
Bought the Sony RM-VPR1 remote. Sony probably makes this thing for 2.3 cents each, and selling for $70 it feels like a bit of a ripoff.
Graham
-
Hi,
Attached are MTF-plots from My P45+ with a Planar 80/2.8 at f/8 and my Sony Alpha 77 SLT with a SAL 16-80/3.5-4.5 ZA at 80 mm and f/8. Please note that these curves are with no sharpening!
The P45+ has a Nyquist limit of 73 lp/mm and the Alpha 77 has Nyquist limit at 128 lp/mm.
The Planar yields around 10% MTF at Nyquist while the SAL 16-80/3.5-4.5 ZA achieves around 2-3% MTF at Nyquist.
It seems that 10% MTF is sufficient to generate Moiré while 2-3% is safe.
It seems that the Zoom on the SLT77 outresolves the Planar on the P45 but this comes both from the zoom being designed for APS-C and the higher resolution of the SLT77.
If we look at the figures giving 50% MTF the figure would give about 40 lp/mm on both lenses, but those 40 lp/mm would correspond 2880 vertical pixels on the P45+ but only 1280 vertical pixels on the SLT 77. Both figures would be much higher with adequate sharpening, but the unsharpened MTF is more relevant for aliasing.
Best regards
Erik
Very interesting, thanks for taking the time.
Just so I'm understanding this graph properly, higher is better? In other words, the blue line representing the A77 is outresolving the P45+ ?
Graham
-
Sorry I was not clear about the High ISO comment.
When using High ISO, the rendered preview on the camera has detail smearing and makes it difficult to confirm accurate focus in low light such as night photography.
RAW high ISO is not bad considering the resolution.
Even with the finder/monitor settings (auto, viewfinder, monitor), I have to go into that menu if I want to change back to the other view option. I would like to be able to toggle with just pressing one button, not going into the menu system.
For example, if it is on the LCD monitor and I take the camera off the tripod and put it to my face, instead of the camera detecting my face, I would prefer to be able to press a custom button to turn the view finder on and vice versa. This way I can use the camera on a tripod without accidentally triggering the view finder from coming on, blanking the LCD monitor, but not have to dive into the menu to use the viewfinder.
-
Sorry I was not clear about the High ISO comment.
When using High ISO, the rendered preview on the camera has detail smearing and makes it difficult to confirm accurate focus in low light such as night photography.
RAW high ISO is not bad considering the resolution.
Even with the finder/monitor settings (auto, viewfinder, monitor), I have to go into that menu if I want to change back to the other view option. I would like to be able to toggle with just pressing one button, not going into the menu system.
For example, if it is on the LCD monitor and I take the camera off the tripod and put it to my face, instead of the camera detecting my face, I would prefer to be able to press a custom button to turn the view finder on and vice versa. This way I can use the camera on a tripod without accidentally triggering the view finder from coming on, blanking the LCD monitor, but not have to dive into the menu to use the viewfinder.
Hey David,
As you probably are aware the Exposure Simulation feature simulates the effects that changes to exposure settings will have on the image. For example, if you reduce the exposure the Live View image will get darker and if you increase the exposure the image will get brighter.
But with this default option turned off, Live View will auto-adjust ISO, Aperture and Shutter allowing the photographer to compose an image, even in very low light.
With a higher ISO it allows Live View to perform in lower light. For example, with a 6-stop ND filter at 3:00PM the camera may default to ISO 6400, at 4:00PM ISO 25,600, at sunset around 5:30PM it may go as high as ISO 102,000 and although the quality is very low, for the purposes of composing only, I'm finding it sufficient (as through the viewfinder is black).
In this situation where ISO 102,000 is nearly reaching its potential, if you manually select ISO 25,600 (the a7R's maximum) the Live View is rendered dark.
So for the purposes of Live View I'm finding the higher ISOs of the DIGIC 5+ useful insofar as composing is concerned. Through the viewfinder it has no impact, but seeing how the a7R's Live View is required (and the EVF is using the same settings as Live View) having a maximum of 25,600 does seem to shorten the window for composing under lowlight or through ND-filters, or both.
Graham
-
Hi,
Yes, but keep in mind that is line pair per mm. So A77 outresolves the P45+ per mm, but the the P45+ sensor is much larger so the resolution over the sensor is much better.
On the other hand, the A77 doesn't show fake detail. So, a large sensor with small pixels is optimal in my view.
Best regards
Erik
Very interesting, thanks for taking the time.
Just so I'm understanding this graph properly, higher is better? In other words, the blue line representing the A77 is outresolving the P45+ ?
Graham
-
It appears to be an excellent piece of equipment. I love my D800 and although the sensor is probably a close design, I feel like Nikon's engineers *might* have the secret sauce to the processing engine/cpu that produce best IQ. But for those needing large resolution and comprehensive flexibility, the Sony looks amazing.
Canon will be next to step in with a large MP camera. As a side note, my uncle has a LOT of old Pentax medium format glass. He no longer shoots film, as he uses a Canon 5d2 in his wedding business, but he tells me MF glass trumps 35mm glass all day long, all things considered. I believe his context was aimed at landscape applications in general.
I've been a hobbyist for 7+ years so I don't know if what he says is true or not. I would think the sensor size would play the biggest role, correct? Perhaps, 35mm lenses are limited to the diameter of the rear mount, which becomes increasingly complex to design the inner elements in order to limit all light aberrations. Now I really sound like a noob...haha. I don't think Peter Lik uses 35mm/FF bodies does he? What would be his reasoning?
-
Hi,
Quite a few images here, comparing my Sony Alpha 99 (24 MP) to my P45+ on a Hasselblad 555 ELD with Zeiss lenses.
http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/80-my-mfd-journey-summing-up?start=6
Hint, you can download the images in full size and raw files are available.
I feel that there is a resolution advantage of the 39MP P45+ over the 24 MP Sony Alpha 99, but I see no MF magic. Shooting with the 555 ELD is nice. I guess I am an MF skeptic.
Best regards
Erik
It appears to be an excellent piece of equipment. I love my D800 and although the sensor is probably a close design, I feel like Nikon's engineers *might* have the secret sauce to the processing engine/cpu that produce best IQ. But for those needing large resolution and comprehensive flexibility, the Sony looks amazing.
Canon will be next to step in with a large MP camera. As a side note, my uncle has a LOT of old Pentax medium format glass. He no longer shoots film, as he uses a Canon 5d2 in his wedding business, but he tells me MF glass trumps 35mm glass all day long, all things considered. I believe his context was aimed at landscape applications in general.
I've been a hobbyist for 7+ years so I don't know if what he says is true or not. I would think the sensor size would play the biggest role, correct? Perhaps, 35mm lenses are limited to the diameter of the rear mount, which becomes increasingly complex to design the inner elements in order to limit all light aberrations. Now I really sound like a noob...haha. I don't think Peter Lik uses 35mm/FF bodies does he? What would be his reasoning?
-
As a side note, my uncle has a LOT of old Pentax medium format glass. He no longer shoots film, as he uses a Canon 5d2 in his wedding business, but he tells me MF glass trumps 35mm glass all day long, all things considered. I believe his context was aimed at landscape applications in general.
IMO you can't judge the lenses in isolation...you have to consider the camera (format) too. For instance, Pentax's 35/3.5 is an excellent wide angle lens on my 645D. But it makes a decidedly average "short normal" on the A7r, or on a 35mm film Pentax camera for that matter. The native Zeiss/Sony 35/2.8 FE is in another league.
One of the things I like about MF, even the 645D's "smaller" MF, is the extra impression of depth you get from using a longer focal length—relative to 35mm format—to achieve the same field-of-view. You can stop well down, into the lens' sweet spot, and still be able to isolate your subject from the fore/back-ground. All while using FOVs that don't force you to move too far away from your subject matter (which results in flatter perspective). I chose the Pentax as my "serious" portrait camera for this reason. For landscapes, though, which typically employ deep DOF, I'm not sure MF offers much if any advantage beyond higher pixel counts. (If you're making big prints this is reason enough, I guess.) Mounting an MF back on a tech camera, though...that's a different thing.
-Dave-
-
Hey Bernard,
I'm seeing very little difference when printing up to 40x60 between the 5D1, 5D2, 5D3, 6D and D800e. Therefore I perceive the performance more theoretical and the 6D more practical from a size / weight perspective.
Recently traveled to 30+ national parks in North America, before that from Alaska to Argentina by land. Usually with a 30L backpack with the lightest and smallest L lenses. My ideal setup would be a point and shoot without sacrificing image quality. So any advancements in this direction are more ideal for me and I'm willing to buy and test them to that end.
If that is the case, you have an issue with the lenses you are using, or your technique may be impaired. Now I'm not saying that from a normal viewing distance the 5D or 6D images aren't acceptable, but there should be at least twice the detail in the prints from the D800E at that size. I have been shooting and printing with every Canon body for years and added the D800E last year, and can say that there is no comparison in detail. Although if your lenses aren't up to the task with the D800E sensor, then you may not see a difference.
Just saying…
-
If that is the case, you have an issue with the lenses you are using, or your technique may be impaired. Now I'm not saying that from a normal viewing distance the 5D or 6D images aren't acceptable, but there should be at least twice the detail in the prints from the D800E at that size. I have been shooting and printing with every Canon body for years and added the D800E last year, and can say that there is no comparison in detail. Although if your lenses aren't up to the task with the D800E sensor, then you may not see a difference.
Just saying…
Nikon 14-24, 16-35 F4, 16-35 77mm, 17-40mm.
Equal results. Stuff is being printed in major books and magazines as well as large format.
-
Hi,
The linear resolution is something like 30% higher on the D800/D800E so I would expect no more than a 30% difference. If it would be visible or not depends on the viewing distance and print size.
For instance I would not expect a visible difference in A2-size prints viewed at say 50 cm distance. (Based on my experience with Sony Alpha 99 (24 MP) and P45+ (39 MP).
Best regards
Erik
I have been shooting and printing with every Canon body for years and added the D800E last year, and can say that there is no comparison in detail. Although if your lenses aren't up to the task with the D800E sensor, then you may not see a difference.
Just saying…
-
One of the things I like about MF, even the 645D's "smaller" MF, is the extra impression of depth you get from using a longer focal length—relative to 35mm format—to achieve the same field-of-view. You can stop well down, into the lens' sweet spot, and still be able to isolate your subject from the fore/back-ground. All while using FOVs that don't force you to move too far away from your subject matter (which results in flatter perspective). I chose the Pentax as my "serious" portrait camera for this reason.
If you stand at the same spot, point the camera in the same direction, choose focal length for a given field of view and aperture for a given DOF, then cameras of different sensor sizes should provide "equivalent" images.
Often, the bigger sensor camera will have a lens that offers an aperture that cannot be matched by the smaller sensor camera, or the lens will be sharper at a given equivalent aperture. Further, larger sensors may have more sensels.
-h
-
Often, the bigger sensor camera will have a lens that offers an aperture that cannot be matched by the smaller sensor camera, or the lens will be sharper at a given equivalent aperture.
That's mainly what I was getting at. High res at the point of focus combined with shallow enough DOF for front/back spatial separation. Of course you can achieve this with smaller formats too, given the right lens(es), but with my Pentax and 150mm lens at least it just falls to hand. No exotic glass needed. And the 150 rolls off more gradually resolution-wise away from the point-of-focus, unlike the more abrupt rolloff of many current high-performance designs. I prefer the more gradual look.
-Dave-
-
Long exposure night shot taken tonight on the california coastline: 115s, F7.1, ISO 400 .ARW + .TIFF with Canon 17-40mm
(http://www.breakthroughphotography.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/San_Francisco_Night_Long_Exposure__115s__F7__ISO4001.jpg)
.ARW: https://app.box.com/s/fek9q2n0bhsjpkz3ne0j
.TIFF: https://app.box.com/s/96mw7vn3l0mc76xbwq21
Both: https://app.box.com/s/q009jzeuqud1pikac9mk
-
(http://www.grahamclarkphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Sony-A7R-Sunset-Long-Exposure-with-Canon-17-40mm.jpg)
Rodeo Beach Sunset | 276s F22 ISO 50 17mm
Download RAW .ARW: https://app.box.com/s/cncipoemhi6o2ar7da3q
Download .TIFF: https://app.box.com/s/tllwrnvwpbudr4qrxotb
-
Now that's a sunset I'd love to be standing in front of! (He types, as another 3–5" of unwanted snow falls outside.)
-Dave-
-
Graham:
striking images. What are the green "orbs"?
-h
-
Those are circles of confusion.
-
Graham:
striking images. What are the green "orbs"?
-h
Those are LED lights being spun around by someone, turned off, he moves, then turns them back on and spins again.
-
Just shot Chinatown in San Francisco with the A7R and a few 1960's lenses. For the first time, photographers can actually see in black and white. Combine that with manually focusing with focus peaking, and street photographers have a pretty magnificent tool for capturing the decisive moment.
In fact, it could be one of the biggest advancements for street photographers since fast, accurate and silent autofocus. Combine that with a massive resolution range on a small body. I think that's especially important to street photographers because now you can zoom in to ridiculous details, text, expressions on faces, all sorts of little things that in 50 years from now will seem fascinating.
(http://www.grahamclarkphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Chinatown_in_Black_and_White2.jpg)
Sure, EVF’s have existed on cameras before, but the A7R’s is the best one I’ve seen so far for a couple reasons:
• Really high resolution, can’t detect pixels
• Focus peaking combined with EVF is amazing. Sure, you can view it on the LCD but having your eye so close to a hi-res screen is really key when in harsh lighting
• Image playback inside the EVF means you don’t have to pull away from your viewfinder. Your eyes adjust to the viewfinder and you don’t have to compete with environmental light
• The exposure compensation dial changes actually reflect in real-time in the EVF. So now you can see in black and white, but you can also see the exposure changes through the viewfinder