Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: joezl on March 08, 2014, 05:09:59 pm
-
I use a Canon 5D2. I usually use it on a tripod set to iso 100 and stitch exposures using a tilt and shift lens. I produce large prints (24 x 30 and larger). Stitching isn't always an option so I was hoping to eventually purchase a Medium Format system but I don't think that is going to be possible ($$$). Instead, I'm considering purchasing a high pixel count FF body (in lieu of a MF system). I'm tired of hoping that Canon will announce a new high resolution FF camera so I'm considering a Sony A7r body. I would keep my Canon and Zeiss lenses and use them via a Metabones adapter. Has anyone out there done this? If so, I'd like to know how it's working out for you.
-
I know 2 close friends having done exactly that.
They seem very happy, have not experienced the problems reported by some with the a7r in terms of raw compression artifacts/shutter induced vibrations. They also seem very impressed by the low ISO image quality compared to their 5DII and 7D.
The 5DII owner had tried the D800 two years ago. He loved the image quality, but not the live view.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Shot for the first time with mine in the studio today. I use the 90tse a lot and the 24. Menus are a bit all over the place but I have sorted all the custom buttons out and have it working how I like. I use the sony app to fire the camera into the capture folder of a capture one session
I was about to pull the trigger on a h4d40 or leaf credo but with a house purchase imminent spending 10k to gain next to nothing seemed a bit pointless, the only plus point I could see was client perception of a MFD but with an adapter and a tilt/shift lens the sony looks a bit odd and not like a normal camera.
The files look great though I'm going to work on them properly tomorrow. For me if the lenses are good then I don't really see any differences. The MFD 'look' people go on about means nothing to me when you can shoot with less depth of field with the fast lenses and also have more when you need it when shooting still life, I shot 10x8, 5x4, 6x6 and have used done a lot of retouching on p45 files so am familiar with formats other than 35mm and feel the gap is not worth the money.
The only camera I have seen that produces files that are giving results outside my terms of reference are those of the sigma DP Merrill's, if there was a MFD version I feel the results would be worth putting up with the foibles but I don't feel that way about current MFD systems I have tried, they are all flawed in some way.
I'll continue to use the 5dIII for some things where the AF and ease of handling are needed, it's a great camera that I like using, I wasn't a fan of the d800 and didn't want to change to a nikon system as the equivalent lenses I use were not good enough and the ergonomics seemed badly thought out.
-
I use a Canon 5D2. I usually use it on a tripod set to iso 100 and stitch exposures using a tilt and shift lens. I produce large prints (24 x 30 and larger). Stitching isn't always an option so I was hoping to eventually purchase a Medium Format system but I don't think that is going to be possible ($$$). Instead, I'm considering purchasing a high pixel count FF body (in lieu of a MF system). I'm tired of hoping that Canon will announce a new high resolution FF camera so I'm considering a Sony A7r body. I would keep my Canon and Zeiss lenses and use them via a Metabones adapter. Has anyone out there done this? If so, I'd like to know how it's working out for you.
I'm in the same boat as you--5D2,zeiss & leica lenses.
My close friend just got the Sony,and he loves it,with the exception of the menu set up
After he had it 1 month,I asked him.."is there a big difference between the 5D2 & the new Sony"?...his answer was yes
Then 4 weeks went by ,& I asked him the same question ,..answer--"kind off,somewhat"
My feeling now is,unless there is a major,night & day increase in image quality...I'll stay put.
Good luck with your decision,
Mike
-
Hi joezl,
Personally I left Canon long time ago and went to the D800e but recently have added a Sony A7r that is working out really well. One of the features of the Canon then I miss the most was the ability to use my Zork shift adapter for doing multiple stitches at very high resolution. In the interim I had used the Nikon system by stitching multiple exposures using nodal point settings with 35mm 1.4 which works great in almost all cases. The Zork shift adapter is really fantastic using the Pentax 35mm Fa lens and the 120mm macro. If you're going to be using the A7r with tilt shift lenses and the meta-bones adapter there are issues with internal reflections that some people are having problems with and others not. From what I have heard there is a new adapter coming from Novoflex that is supposed to solve lots of these problems. I am finding the A7r to be a much easier and better platform for stitching than the Canon ever was.
-
I would keep my Canon and Zeiss lenses and use them via a Metabones adapter. Has anyone out there done this? If so, I'd like to know how it's working out for you.
Graham Clark has started a blog, made a video report and commented in several threads on exactly that. He's also using Canon. You may want to check it out ... http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=87616.0
-
Also this - deals with wide-angles and stitching.
http://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2014/02/wideangle-options-sony-a7r/
-
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1247661 - start at approx. page 95-100
http://www.arthurdomagala.com/blog/2014/01/the-sony-a7r-dealing-with-an-existential-camera-crisis/
http://community.sony.com/t5/Alpha-NEX-Cameras/A7-A7R-Light-leaks/m-p/254835#U254835
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1278639
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1247655
-
Thank you all for your (very quick) replies. After reviewing the suggested links I think I will just stand pat for now. There clearly is increased resolution with the A7r but not as much as I anticipated (of course this is based on viewing jpg's on the internet, prints might show significantly different results). Using my Ts-e lenses on the 5D2 to stitch yields me an equivalent 46 x 36mm 40Mp file which, numerically, is better than the A7r. So, I'll wait to see what Canon does for a while longer. Another wrinkle is Sony's penchant for changing lens mounts, menus and models. I'd like to see if they decide to settle on something and stay with it long term.
I should mention that I also have a Sigma Dp2m. The files I get from it are deeper than my Canon files both in resolution and color. The files remind me of Velvia film. Trouble is the Sigma is a bit of a pain to work with. I HATE being limited to the lcd and the Sigma optical finders are next to useless if you wear eyeglasses, which I do.
I don't miss film but I miss using my 4x5, my Mamiya 7 and my Contax G2. It all made sense and I could forget about equipment and concentrate on the task at hand.
-
Actually if you use TS lenses, the EVF and focus peaking will be very helpful when using tilt. Changing the plane of focus and getting the image sharp from close distance to infinity is quite easy. With an OVF and only live view as a help the matter becomes very difficult. With larger FLs almost impossible.
An yes, I sold my Canon 5DMIII for a Sony A7r.
-
For landscape, cityscape and architectural photography, I've replaced my 5D2 bodies with A7r bodies and couldn't be happier (I still use Canon bodies for wildlife/action photography).
The resolution gain is great and the DR gain more so. But the biggest gain is the lack of pattern noise at low ISO - it makes post-processing and making large print so much easier.
I still haven't used AF on the camera, outside of testing that it works (it's slow but extremely accurate, and you can AF anywhere in the frame) - manual focus is very fast with focus peaking and, with Live View zoomed in, very accurate. Focusing tilted, shifted lenses in low-light conditions is no longer a problem.
-
Using my Ts-e lenses on the 5D2 to stitch yields me an equivalent 46 x 36mm 40Mp file which, numerically, is better than the A7r.
you can do superresolution and end up w/ 24x36mm 144mp shot from A7r w/o any stitching ... www.photoacute.com
-
that's exactly my opinion too..
-
I own a 5DII and bought an A7r with 35, 55, grip etc but sold it all after two months. I think for your type of work you may like the Sony, but for mine (people, handheld) I needed fast autofocus and I couldn't get used to an EVF and that long slow shutter that blacked out the viewfinder for way too long with each exposure. However the image quality of the Sony was excellent, and that 55mm lens is truly awesome considering its size and price. Back to the 5DII for me for now.
Ben
-
I own a 5DII and bought an A7r with 35, 55, grip etc but sold it all after two months. I think for your type of work you may like the Sony, but for mine (people, handheld) I needed fast autofocus and I couldn't get used to an EVF and that long slow shutter that blacked out the viewfinder for way too long with each exposure. However the image quality of the Sony was excellent, and that 55mm lens is truly awesome considering its size and price. Back to the 5DII for me for now.
Ben
Truly don't think there is a more versatile camera than a 5d2 (the 5d3 to me looks too plastic smooth), but It hurts my eyes to look at it, makes my life easy to shoot with it other than that tiny usb tethering connection.
Then again I'd pick it any day over any canon I've owned and I've tried for three years to be Canon free.
IMO
BC
-
mine is never likely to leave the tripod or be used with AF.
and i haven't left canon as the 5dIII is far too versatile to dump as there are occasions where i need reliable fast AF. if/when canon release a high MP camera i'll look at the options and maybe sell the A7r or keep it as a spare or maybe just buy the one zoom and use it as a easy to cary travel camera.
either way buying the A7r made sense regarding the lenses i use and financially especially as it was a refurb and only £1k with the vat off, for the way i work it was a no brainer business transaction.
-
i left the canons behind when the d800e came out, but didnt sold the lenses, esp. the 17&24tse and the zoerk with pentax 645 lenses was a too handy architecture setup, so i still hoped for a better canon to come out. i added a lot of nikon lenses , some havent been very good as their shift lenses and some others. finally i used the nikon mostly for aereal shooting with a set of voightländer lenses. now i sold all the nikon stuff and some of the Canon and voightlaenderlenses which i didnt used and bought two a7r, one with battery grip. adapted the canon and pentax shifts and bought sony/zeiss/contax 35/45/55/90 lenses for aereal and a olympus 50/1.2 om for other stuff ...
this is a real great and very versatile setup now! by far he best 35mm set i ever had ... at least for landscape/architecture and aerial shooting.
-
i left the canons behind when the d800e came out, but didnt sold the lenses, esp. the 17&24tse and the zoerk with pentax 645 lenses was a too handy architecture setup, so i still hoped for a better canon to come out. i added a lot of nikon lenses , some havent been very good as their shift lenses and some others. finally i used the nikon mostly for aereal shooting with a set of voightländer lenses. now i sold all the nikon stuff and some of the Canon and voightlaenderlenses which i didnt used and bought two a7r, one with battery grip. adapted the canon and pentax shifts and bought sony/zeiss/contax 35/45/55/90 lenses for aereal and a olympus 50/1.2 om for other stuff ...
this is a real great and very versatile setup now! by far he best 35mm set i ever had ... at least for landscape/architecture and aerial shooting.
Rainer, do you find that you are using the Sony sometimes instead of your Sinar for architecture?
-
The A7 is much better for blackout and matches (and maybe quicker) than dslrs since it has an electronic shutter.
I own a 5DII and bought an A7r with 35, 55, grip etc but sold it all after two months. I think for your type of work you may like the Sony, but for mine (people, handheld) I needed fast autofocus and I couldn't get used to an EVF and that long slow shutter that blacked out the viewfinder for way too long with each exposure. However the image quality of the Sony was excellent, and that 55mm lens is truly awesome considering its size and price. Back to the 5DII for me for now.
Ben
-
Actually if you use TS lenses, the EVF and focus peaking will be very helpful when using tilt. Changing the plane of focus and getting the image sharp from close distance to infinity is quite easy. With an OVF and only live view as a help the matter becomes very difficult. With larger FLs almost impossible.
An yes, I sold my Canon 5DMIII for a Sony A7r.
The focus peaking can be achieved by using Magic Lantern.
-
The A7 is much better for blackout and matches (and maybe quicker) than dslrs since it has an electronic shutter.
A7 has EFCS and so do some dSLRs (like Canons if I am not mistaken)
-
The focus peaking can be achieved by using Magic Lantern.
Not as with the Sony. There is only a beta version available for the 5DIII, it does not work with unchiped lenses, and you can't really compare it to the quality of the Sony build in focus peaking. At least I found it very inadequate.
-
Not as with the Sony. There is only a beta version available for the 5DIII, it does not work with unchiped lenses, and you can't really compare it to the quality of the Sony build in focus peaking. At least I found it very inadequate.
I haven't used Sony's focus peaking to comment on which one is better, but I have used 5DII + focus peaking which I thought was more than sufficient help, especially for landscape photography.
About it not working with un-chipped lenses, I guess the person doesn't have to worry about that for his Canon tilt shift lenses.
YMMV depending on what lenses you plan to use.
-
yes i do that ... and its hard for me to tell which system i like more.
-
I haven't used Sony's focus peaking to comment on which one is better, but I have used 5DII + focus peaking which I thought was more than sufficient help, especially for landscape photography.
About it not working with un-chipped lenses, I guess the person doesn't have to worry about that for his Canon tilt shift lenses.
YMMV depending on what lenses you plan to use.
Stockholm Syndrome ?
If you have limited needs then Canon is OK. But that is a major point Canon is complacent in its current industry dominant position and does just enough not to damage its current bottom line.
-
Sony battery chargers and metabones nex to canon adapters are very hard to get hold of in the uk at the moment, I wonder if that's indicative of people not jumping ship but getting an A7(r) as a compliment to their canon system?
-
The genius of Sony here is that they have clearly targeted the Canon shooters looking for a way to use their excellent lenses with a more recent sensor technology. The problem they will be facing though is that this may be a one shot win without the expected long term revenue stream normally associated with interchangeable lenses cameras.
Indeed, considering how cheap the Sony is, I am not sure why any Canon shooter would want/have to sell his Canon equipment. Those guys are likely to invest back in Canon bodies as soon as something worthwhile comes out.
Btw, Thom Hogan has just released his review of both, he is recommending the a7 over the a7r.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Stockholm Syndrome ?
If you have limited needs then Canon is OK. But that is a major point Canon is complacent in its current industry dominant position and does just enough not to damage its current bottom line.
Although I agree about complacency from Canon, I think your hyperbole is misplaced. I don't need to try out whatever newfangled focus peaking tech is offered out there to know whether my current setup with ML got me the shot in focus or not. How much nicer the Sony's system is compared to Magic Lantern, and whether it's justified in cost is a personal choice.
The point of contention was only about focus peaking and EVF helping for original poster's Tilt shift lens usage, for the rest YMMV. Not to mention, the A7R + metabones may or may not be completely compatible with the tilt shift lenses. (Yes, I am aware of Graham Clark and the others who are researching this option now). I love my 24 TS-E II to death and I'm convinced that combined with the 6D, it's in the big boys club.
Personally, I'll take the DP Merrill trilogy over the A7R/A7 any day of the week with that kinda money.
-
The genius of Sony here is that they have clearly targeted the Canon shooters looking for a way to use their excellent lenses with a more recent sensor technology. The problem they will be facing though is that this may be a one shot win without the expected long term revenue stream normally associated with interchangeable lenses cameras.
Indeed, considering how cheap the Sony is, I am not sure why any Canon shooter would want/have to sell his Canon equipment. Those guys are likely to invest back in Canon bodies as soon as something worthwhile comes out.
...
Yes, I have considered this.
One the one hand, it might be that FF system cameras are sold at a loss/small margin, while the profits are made once the customer is "locked in" to a system. I certainly know that this was the case for guitars vs guitar strings etc when I worked my way through college. If this is the case, then perhaps Canon should be just as happy if they keep selling the same (high-profit) lenses, only to be mounted on Sony cameras instead of their own. And Sony would (once again) be making great technology without earning money.
But I have a feeling that this is too simple. Perhaps some enthusiasts have a drawer filled with old eastern-european lenses and Canon tilt shifts. I think that they are a minority. The majority of customers (and the Sony A7 is a moderate cost camera) might currently have a crop DSLR camera or MILF, and need new lenses when swapping body. I am guessing that many will primarily want an allround zoom lens with decent aperture, stabilization and AF performance (stills and video). And they might want a large-aperture prime or two (still good AF performance) and possibly a tele-zoom. They might want a flash or two (Sony, of course). All of a sudden, you have a nice flow of cash into Sonys pockets.
It is interesting to see what these cameras will do to the market.
-h
-
Not sure about the lens argument too. At least I sold mine. I had a 85/1.2 50/1.2 and 24-105. I could have kept the 85/1.2 but why keep the 50/1.2,and the zoom if there is an excellent 55/1.8 half the size, and a small 24-70/4? Together with the coming 70-200/4 this an makes excellent little combo. Much less in size and weight that any DSLR solution. So it's not only Canon, but others too, which are in focus.
But.... I did not change the Canon mount of my third party TS lenses, who knows, what will happen...
-
I have been waiting for lots of reviews dealing with the shutter vibration and the compressed raw issues before adding the Sony A7R to my mix. As of my last upgrades, I use Canon 5Dmk3's for my lifestyle work and Nikon D800E's for my architectural work. The Sony would be a perfect replacement for the Nikon role as I could then use all my Canon lenses on it including the superb shift lenses. I'm hoping the new firmware update in a few days will address some of the issues holding me back.... but I think Sony's design is certainly the future of camera bodies.
-
I'm using the A7R as a sort of "place holder" until Canon delivers a body with a sensor that satisfies me.
I have really liked the performance of the A7R sensor.
I have not had issues with the shutter vibration or light leaks – although I certainly acknowledge that the issues are real for some under certain situations (however I struggle to find a practical set of conditions under which the light leak would pose a problem).
I am not enamored with the Sony's ergonomics and control layout. It could largely be because of my years of time spend with the EOS system however to me the Sony's feels more like it was just "built" rather than having "evolved" as the Canon DSLRs have... if that makes any sense.
In any case the A7R is a nice small body with excellent image quality that performs as well or better with my Canon EF lenses than do the 5D Mark II or 6D.
-
The genius of Sony here is that they have clearly targeted the Canon shooters looking for a way to use their excellent lenses with a more recent sensor technology. The problem they will be facing though is that this may be a one shot win without the expected long term revenue stream normally associated with interchangeable lenses cameras.
Indeed, considering how cheap the Sony is, I am not sure why any Canon shooter would want/have to sell his Canon equipment. Those guys are likely to invest back in Canon bodies as soon as something worthwhile comes out.
Exactly.
Canon's been concentrating on action and video, with a great AF system and 4k video, among other things. At low ISO, however, their sensors haven't really gotten any better since the 5D2 in 2008.
I shoot landscapes. They tend not to move very much. I also print large - to me, 20x30" is a small print - and shoot subjects with a very high dynamic range.
Trouble is, Canon makes good lenses. No-one else has a 24mm or 17mm tilt-shift lens as good as Canon, and I also have other good Canon glass I'd rather not get rid of. The only lens I have that will fit on a D800e is the Nikon 14-24. But all of these lenses will fit in front of an A7r.
To me, the A7r is a 35mm-format digital back, not a camera or a camera system that I'm buying into. If Canon lifts its game and releases a camera with a better sensor, I might buy that. If the next round in the IQ stakes is won by Sony, I'll get the A7r's successor. Same deal if it happens to be a Samsung, Fuji, Pentax or anyone else's camera - so long as it can fit behind my lenses.
-
To me, the A7r is a 35mm-format digital back, not a camera or a camera system that I'm buying into.
Well put. That's precisely how I see the A7R.
(Not so say that others won't appreciate it as a camera – or system – in it's own right.)
-
thats the way i look at it too, a 35mm digital back that you can cherry pick lenses for.
today i went into 2 pro rental MFD dealers looking for a longer tether cable for the A7r, at the first rental place they asked about the camera and were impressed with the focus peaking especially with the tilt/shift that i had on there. no cable so the next dealer i went into looking for a long stand/tripod bag and there was another photographer standing there with an A7r and 50mm lens, guy behind the counter was having a play with it. got chatting and he like me was a canon user but had sold his MFD and replaced it with the A7r. a sample of 2 does not signify much but the MFD sales at the lower mp end will have definitely lost some customers.
-
A sample of 2 does not signify much but the MFD sales at the lower mp end will have definitely lost some customers.
And similarly we have customers every month who call us because they were previously only canon/nikon SLR shooters and then tried an M9, or a Pentax 645D, or shot film again, and now recently A7R and had their eyes open that there is more out there than "just another Canon". Given that P1's sales are up year-over-year ever since the financial panic my guess is that the net result of more/different/better non-standard cameras has been a gain for MFD.
-
To me, the A7r is a 35mm-format digital back, not a camera or a camera system that I'm buying into.
Yep. My main reaction to using the A7r has been: "Damn, am I ever glad I held onto my Pentax lenses!" Like Graham with his FD-mount Canons (see other threads for examples) it's been a whole series of eye-popping moments for me as these lenses finally get to show what they can do in front of a 35mm sensor. I'll probably get a short tele FE lens if Sony/Zeiss market one but I don't need it.
-Dave-
-
The genius of Sony here is that they have clearly targeted the Canon shooters looking for a way to use their excellent lenses with a more recent sensor technology.
I agree, however I think Nikon was strongly impacted too. The biggest selling point with the D800 was the sensor. Now you can get that sensor in the cheaper and more versatile A7r. The way I see it, for fast work (sports, portraits, weddings), the best choice is still Canon. For slow work (landscapes, product photography), the best choice is the A7r with whatever lenses you want, including some quality Canons. So where does that leave Nikon?
For me personally, I'm staying with Canon because I value the speed and refinement of the whole system more than I complain about low ISO shadow noise. Basically, I need really good AF...
-
I agree, however I think Nikon was strongly impacted too. The biggest selling point with the D800 was the sensor. Now you can get that sensor in the cheaper and more versatile A7r.
According to DXO, the sensors indeed look to have similar performance.
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-A7R-versus-Nikon-D800-versus-Nikon-D800E___917_792_814
It seems that, at least for some pixel-peeping cases, the Sony approach can be shown to differ:
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=4847
http://diglloyd.com/blog/2014/20140214_1-SonyA7-artifacts-star-trails.html
I would not mind having the sensor performance or weight of the A7r on my Canon lenses. I think that for me personally, AF, ergonomy, UI, flash compability etc means that I am reluctant to switch. Hopefully, the A7(r) (and the D800 before it) will create enough pressure on Canon to deliver what I want.
-h
-
And similarly we have customers every month who call us because they were previously only canon/nikon SLR shooters and then tried an M9, or a Pentax 645D, or shot film again, and now recently A7R and had their eyes open that there is more out there than "just another Canon". Given that P1's sales are up year-over-year ever since the financial panic my guess is that the net result of more/different/better non-standard cameras has been a gain for MFD.
Hasselblad's sales of Lunars are up too.
And where I live there seems to be a Ferrari or Maserati or Rolls Royce shop on every corner. And used shops for year-old model cast-offs too.
I'm sure the financial panic has done the right people a lot of good.
Edmund