PDA

View Full Version : Buying into another system


Kiwi Paul
26th January 2016, 05:41 PM
I've been curious how full frame compares to m43 in IQ, dynamic range etc but I've never fancied lugging about a FF kit as the size and weight puts me off.
Recently a mate bought the Sony A7ii with a couple of Sony zooms. I was impressed with the body, very nice, small and compact, not much bigger than the EM1 if at all bigger. The 2 lenses were large compared to m43, he had a 16-35 f4.0 and 24-280 so equivalent to m43 7-14 (more or less) and 14-140, the lenses were much bigger and heavier.
However I was impressed and today bit the bullet and ordered the Sony A7ii and will order the 55mm f1.8 Ziess prime lens and see how I like it and consider more lens options after I've had a play.
The A7ii and 55mm lens both get stella reviews so I'm interested to see how it compares to my EM5 ii and m43 lenses. (I have the Lumix 25 f1.4 prime so that will be an excellent comparison).
It's not my intention to get rid of m43 but use the Sony setup for landscape and more close up stuff and use the m43 for telephoto work (the 40-150 Pro with TC and EM5ii). Also m43 will be my light travel kit, although depending what lenses I end up with for the A7ii if I use a few primes then it may not be very cumbersome.
Anyway I'm looking forward to playing about and seeing the results.
I like printing A2 size so I'm curious if I'll get better more detailed prints from the FF camera.


Paul

pdk42
26th January 2016, 07:15 PM
I've looked at the A7 lots of times and have many times got close to "pulling the trigger", as our gun-happy American cousins would say. I may still do, but what keeps stopping me is this:

- Whenever I do my job right, I'm very satisfied by the quality from u43. I've done large 30x20 canvas prints from E-M1 shots and the quality is superb.

- I really don't want two systems and building a Sony A7 kit to match my Olympus gear would likely set me back well over 6k. The problem is that the price of good Sony FE lenses is eye-watering. Compared to u43 or other FF systems (Canon, Nikon) they're maybe 1.5 - 2 times the price. Even the "budget" Sony (non-Zeiss) primes are 400 or more.

- In some ways they're not up to u43 in terms of handling or features - battery life, IBIS, frame rate, AF speed, focus bracketing, live composite etc

- Aside from a few wide/normal primes (28 and 35), the lenses get big and heavy. Compare the 16-35 f4 with the Panasonic 7-14 f4 or the 55 f1.8 with the Olympus 25 f1.8. There's a huge difference.

- Finally, I know that if I go pixel peeking then I'll find the A7 better (esp the A7rii - a steal at 2300), but will it actually deliver me better pictures for the majority of what I do? Would a purchase just be a GAS-induced slide into more gear and no real benefit?

I guess if I were doing lots of low-light, hand-held stuff, or maybe needed uber high resolution then it might be different, but as per my first point if I'm honest then u43 delivers for 95% of what I do. As for that last 5%, well, I'll just work on my technique or find another route (I'm looking at the Voigtlander 17.5 f0.95 right now - not cheap, but cheaper than an A7!).

Anyhow - just my random thoughts. I'm not trying to douse your enthusiasm or criticise your decision - in fact, I'm looking forward to seeing your images and getting your thoughts vs Olympus.

mstphoto
26th January 2016, 07:33 PM
I'm with Paul on this, Paul
Still, wouldn't say no and may well join you in the Sony camp later.
I much prefer having a "one system does all" setup - even though I still have my Canon gear.
Hopefully I will get to take a few shots with your new setup when you get back onshore.
You never know, you may change my mind ;)

Mike

Kiwi Paul
26th January 2016, 08:24 PM
- I really don't want two systems and building a Sony A7 kit to match my Olympus gear would likely set me back well over 6k. The problem is that the price of good Sony FE lenses is eye-watering. Compared to u43 or other FF systems (Canon, Nikon) they're maybe 1.5 - 2 times the price. Even the "budget" Sony (non-Zeiss) primes are 400 or more.
- In some ways they're not up to u43 in terms of handling or features - battery life, IBIS, frame rate, AF speed, focus bracketing, live composite etc

- Aside from a few wide/normal primes (28 and 35), the lenses get big and heavy. Compare the 16-35 f4 with the Panasonic 7-14 f4 or the 55 f1.8 with the Olympus 25 f1.8. There's a huge difference.

Yes I said the zooms are big, but I'm only going to be carrying one zoom and the 55mm 1.8 prime which is about the same size as the Pany 12-35, I'm not looking to be buying long zooms, as I said I'll keep m43 for that.

- Finally, I know that if I go pixel peeking then I'll find the A7 better (esp the A7rii - a steal at 2300), but will it actually deliver me better pictures for the majority of what I do? Would a purchase just be a GAS-induced slide into more gear and no real benefit?

I guess if I were doing lots of low-light, hand-held stuff, or maybe needed uber high resolution then it might be different, but as per my first point if I'm honest then u43 delivers for 95% of what I do. As for that last 5%, well, I'll just work on my technique or find another route (I'm looking at the Voigtlander 17.5 f0.95 right now - not cheap, but cheaper than an A7!).



Anyhow - just my random thoughts. I'm not trying to douse your enthusiasm or criticise your decision - in fact, I'm looking forward to seeing your images and getting your thoughts vs Olympus.

The prices are much the same, Oly 12-40 720, Sony 24-70 800, Oly 12 f2 550, Sony 28 F2 370, 40-150 F2.8 Pro 1100, Sony 70-200 1K, Oly 7-14 840, Sony 16-35 1K, and of course the Oly 300 F4 2200!! For that price you can buy the A7ii, and a couple of good primes or a good zoom.

Actually the tests I've read say the handling is very good, I've held one and like it, frame rate is slower but 5fps is plenty for me, the IBIS is meant to be excellent as is AF speed and the CAF is meant to be very good too.

Yes I said the zooms are big, but I'm only going to be carrying one zoom and the 55mm 1.8 prime which is about the same size as the Pany 12-35, I'm not looking to be buying long zooms, as I said I'll keep m43 for that. I may choose to go all primes in which case I only need 3, 20mm, 24mm and 55mm. You can also use all the Canon lenses with full auto focus etc using an adapter so the choice of lenses is unlimited.

I'm curious to find out, the reviews I read and I've read many have folk who have moved from m43 to the A7 system, who were very satisfied with m43 but found they preferred the Sony A7 system.
I'm not going pixel peeping either, I'm curious if when printing large the FF format gives better prints.


Paul

Ricoh
26th January 2016, 08:26 PM
Paul (pdk42), If you think the price of a Sony FE lens is 'eye watering', have a look at the cost of a Leica M 50/f1.4, as an example !!!

Zuiko
26th January 2016, 08:41 PM
This will be an interesting comparison, especially if you print large. I'm looking forward to your conclusions. :)

Ricoh
26th January 2016, 08:41 PM
Kiwi Paul, there's no doubt a FF file will impress you. As a retirement present I bought myself an M240 together with a 35mm/f2 ASPH (I'm a one lens shooter so far). The RAW files are so so malleable, if required, but in fact I'm finding I have to do so little in PP, to the extent I thought I was doing something wrong when I started processing the Leica files.
But let's give credit to the Olympus product, it does a very credible job for a fraction of the cost.

Kiwi Paul
26th January 2016, 08:47 PM
Kiwi Paul, there's no doubt a FF file will impress you. As a retirement present I bought myself an M240 together with a 35mm/f2 ASPH (I'm a one lens shooter so far). The RAW files are so so malleable, if required, but in fact I'm finding I have to do so little in PP, to the extent I thought I was doing something wrong when I started processing the Leica files.
But let's give credit to the Olympus product, it does a very credible job for a fraction of the cost.

I'll soon find out, yes m43 is excellent, and I'm planning on keeping my m43 kit. The A7ii is pretty much the same price range as the top m43 bodies so I don't see where folk are getting the idea it's so expensive. The lenses are in the same ball park as equivalent m43 lenses too, there are some expensive ones but not all. You can buy the Canon adapter and then have access to all the Canon lenses too, new and old.

Paul

Kiwi Paul
26th January 2016, 08:55 PM
Kiwi Paul, there's no doubt a FF file will impress you. As a retirement present I bought myself an M240 together with a 35mm/f2 ASPH (I'm a one lens shooter so far). The RAW files are so so malleable, if required, but in fact I'm finding I have to do so little in PP, to the extent I thought I was doing something wrong when I started processing the Leica files.
But let's give credit to the Olympus product, it does a very credible job for a fraction of the cost.

Holy moly, I see what you mean about the M240, it's not for the budget minded lol :eek:;)

Paul

JonSchick
26th January 2016, 10:00 PM
I'll be interested to see how things work out. I recently bought a Nikon df, partly because it's about as compact as a FF dSLR can get (about the same size as the higher end E System cameras originally were) and also because it has such as fantastic sensor (16MP FF sensor from the D4 is giving some lovely results).

I tend to be a prime lens person most of the time, so I'm happy with a handful of relatively cheap and compact Nikkor AF-D lenses complete with aperture rings so I can use the camera the way I learned - aperture ring, shutter speed dial, etc...and I'm loving it.

But the big but is good quality zoom lenses, which are big and expensive for FF dSLRs. It's not a problem for me as I'm not planning on buying fast zooms, but if you're seriously into those then you'd need to be happy carrying some bulky lenses which aren't exactly discrete....

pdk42
26th January 2016, 10:14 PM
The prices are much the same

Hi Paul - you know, I didn't really believe you at first, but I did some checking of equivalent lenses to u43 lenses I already own. Using Amazon prices I can see that in fact there isn't a big difference - unless you go looking at the Zeiss Batis and Loxia lenses. Except for the small primes (28 and 35), they do tend to be bigger though. However, for a minimal kit, it's probably not a huge difference, particularly if you compare to the Oly Pro lenses which are all quite big.

Naughty Nigel
26th January 2016, 10:47 PM
I haven't really looked at the Sony, but I doubt that Sony or even Zeiss lenses would be that much better than the Olympus Pro range, which seem to be very highly regarded by all, including Zeiss!

The advantages, if there are any, will be from the larger size of the Sony sensor and its resolution. The Olympus 43 sensors are very good, but Sony has put a heck of a lot of development into the A7 sensor, which is very much bigger than 43.

I also understand that some landscape photographers are using Pentax and Mamiya medium format lenses on the Sony body.

Ricoh
26th January 2016, 11:38 PM
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Olympus introduced a FF camera themselves. Unless, that is, there's a revolution in electronics allowing the smaller sensor to resolve photons as well as a larger FF sensor, if not it could end up in decline. But any developments in light measurement techniques will flow through to the 35mm FF as well, so everyone wins.

alfbranch
26th January 2016, 11:52 PM
I have looked at the Sony A7R and A7R II as I would not see the point of such a large camera without all of the extra pisels.

I looked on Saturday at the A7RII and the FE90mm f2.8 macro lens which I was offered for 3250.

Ralph Harwood
26th January 2016, 11:55 PM
I looked on Saturday at the A7RII and the FE90mm f2.8 macro lens which I was offered for 3250.

That seems an aweful lot more than an E-M1 and a 60mm Macro!

alfbranch
27th January 2016, 12:02 AM
That seems an aweful lot more than an E-M1 and a 60mm Macro!

A lot heavier and bigger (mostly the lens) but the AF did work nicely in pretty poor light but not the sort of money SWMBO would let me spend.

Greytop
27th January 2016, 12:30 AM
For critical landscape images (from my perspective) I use my trio of Sigma DP Merrills. Handily small and compact but with resoultion closer to a 36MP Sony sensor than the 24MP variant. Quite frankly the output is nothing short of astonishing for a 15MP file.
I will admit I was tempted by the A7RII but the cost and the fact that m4/3rds comfortably punches above it's weight has kept me in the Oly camp :)

pdk42
27th January 2016, 07:25 AM
I have looked at the Sony A7R and A7R II as I would not see the point of such a large camera without all of the extra pisels.

I looked on Saturday at the A7RII and the FE90mm f2.8 macro lens which I was offered for 3250.

I agree Alf. If I do go for an A7, then it would have to be the R. I'll not bite though while the body is 2400 though! That's just too much for a hobby.

Kiwi Paul
27th January 2016, 07:39 AM
I have looked at the Sony A7R and A7R II as I would not see the point of such a large camera without all of the extra pisels.

I looked on Saturday at the A7RII and the FE90mm f2.8 macro lens which I was offered for 3250.

The A7ii is less than half the price of the A7rii and I saved another 200 buying an open box one from Wex, the camera body is not large, smaller I'd say than the GH3 / 4 and the 28, 35 and 55mm primes are not at all large. As with m43 the A7 series is mirrorless so the lenses designed specifically for that system are typically smaller that lenses designed for DSLR's due to the lens being closer to the sensor, but as focal length increases the advantage diminishes.
Apparently the A7 mirrorless system lenses are closer to the sensor plane than m43 are so you can adapt m43 lenses to work with A7 cameras but not the other way around.

Paul

Kiwi Paul
27th January 2016, 07:44 AM
I agree Alf. If I do go for an A7, then it would have to be the R. I'll not bite though while the body is 2400 though! That's just too much for a hobby.

I was contemplating the A7rii but I also decided it was just too expensive, so got the A7ii to see how I like the system, maybe if I like it at a later date if I feel there would be a benefit get the A7rii.

Paul

Jim Ford
27th January 2016, 09:38 AM
I wouldn't buy a Sony on principle. From what I've seen and experienced their customer support is dreadful. Their response to a difficult problem is sullen silence.

Here's an example:
https://www.community.sony.com/t5/Cybershot-Cameras/RX100-Battery-Drain/td-p/44245

Jim

Kiwi Paul
27th January 2016, 10:03 AM
I wouldn't buy a Sony on principle. From what I've seen and experienced their customer support is dreadful. Their response to a difficult problem is sullen silence.

Here's an example:
https://www.community.sony.com/t5/Cybershot-Cameras/RX100-Battery-Drain/td-p/44245

Jim

I think all companies have their bad service stories though.

Paul

griffljg
27th January 2016, 10:37 AM
I've been through this exercise and made the jump, but still kept a foot in both camps. - That has lead to confusion and indecision......

About 3 years ago, I became thoroughly unimpressed with Olympus' refusal to bring out an E-7 to replace the E-5. I was running an E-3 and had a decent array of Zuiko lenses, including the really beautiful 12-60mm zoom.

I though a bit about it and decided that, if I was going to "jump ship", then I might as well go full frame. I looked at Nikon and Canon, but preferred the ergonomics of Canon. I bought a Canon EOS 6D with a 24-105mm f/4 L lens. Not long after that, I bought the old type 100-400mm L and the beautiful 24-70 f/2.8 II L zooms. The 24-70 now just about lives on the 6D.

This combo suits my style of photography. - Mostly scenic, with some cityscapes and some occasional family parties...... Until a local engineers group spotted some of my photos and asked me to be the official photographer for conferences in Queensland.

The 6D is really great for subjects which have a high dynamic range. It also didn't take me long to sort out my initial problems with the relatively shallow depth of field.

Then I looked at my array of fine Zuiko lenses "gathering dust" in my old camera museum in my lounge room..... I looked at reviews of the Olympus OM-D E-M1....... I took my old 4/3 70-300mm zoom in to one of our local camera stores to try it out on the E-M1..... And came away about AUD1700 poorer. - Yes, I also bought the MMF-3 adaptor and the 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO.

For the past nearly two years, I have been running both systems. - One backing up the other. At engineers' conferences I use the 6D for group shots and presentations of awards, while the E-M1 is usually used for photos of exhibitors' stands and social events.

Privately, I prefer the 6D for landscape photos and the E-M1 for in-city photography. - The E-M1 with the 12-40 is eminently "luggable".

After having used both systems for nearly two years, I have now noticed that I am using the E-M1 far more then the 6D. - It is far easier to cart around. Looking at the two side-by-side, it is immediately clear that the E-M1 is half the size, half the weight and approximately half the price of the 6D.

The advantage of the 6D is that it handles a greater dynamic range and does it well. Photos which require the 6D's greater dynamic range make up less than 5% of my photos. I haven't yet done a comparison on how large prints from each camera compare.

Whatever way I look at it, I am having a very hard time justifying to myself that I should hang onto the Canon EOS 6D and lenses and am seriously looking at selling it and using the funds for the forthcoming purchase of an Olympus OM-D E-M1 II.

Naughty Nigel
27th January 2016, 11:11 AM
I wouldn't buy a Sony on principle. From what I've seen and experienced their customer support is dreadful. Their response to a difficult problem is sullen silence.

Here's an example:
https://www.community.sony.com/t5/Cybershot-Cameras/RX100-Battery-Drain/td-p/44245

Jim

I have heard the same from several reliable sources now.

But their equipment is usually very good.

Kiwi Paul
27th January 2016, 02:17 PM
After having used both systems for nearly two years, I have now noticed that I am using the E-M1 far more then the 6D. - It is far easier to cart around. Looking at the two side-by-side, it is immediately clear that the E-M1 is half the size, half the weight and approximately half the price of the 6D. .

Yes, size and weight, that's why I've never ventured into FF before, but now with the A7ii being the same size as the Oly EM-1 (infact fractionally smaller) I decided it was a good time to give it a try, true the zooms are still huge in comparison to m43 zooms but the primes are not too big or heavy so it's my intention to have a prime lens setup for the A7ii, anything longer than 55mm (FF size) I'll switch to the Oly EM-5ii and 40-150 Pro. A dual setup using the strengths of each system

Paul

Walti
27th January 2016, 02:44 PM
I just wish my photography was good enough to stretch the limits of the Olympus camera and lenses I have... so I could worry about such things!

The only problems I've had have been the numpty holding the camera!

I must admit to liking the look of the Sony series, but feel that IF I were to ever get to the point that the m4/3 system couldn't cope I'd go for a pro spec Canikon (BUT I can never see me spending THAT sort of money, Olympus is as far as I want to spend!)

katran
27th January 2016, 04:48 PM
Maybe this article was posted already.
This guy shows that a FF mirrorless from Sony does not have any weight advantage against an NIKON FF system:

https://photographylife.com/the-mirrorless-hype

Looking at the weights I saw in that article for Sony lenses, I do not think Sony FF has any chance to get close to an m4/3 regarding weights and dimensions.

-

Kiwi Paul
27th January 2016, 05:07 PM
Maybe this article was posted already.
This guy shows that a FF mirrorless from Sony does not have any weight advantage against an NIKON FF system:

https://photographylife.com/the-mirrorless-hype

Looking at the weights I saw in that article for Sony lenses, I do not think Sony FF has any chance to get close to an m4/3 regarding weights and dimensions.

-
He forgot to mention that mirrorless systems with an adapter can use any brand of lens, some with full control that can't be done with a DSLR.

If he found the Sony too small with his big hands he certainly wouldn't be a fan of m43 either, he didn't give m43 a mention in fact.

The A7ii and A7Rii are both the same size as the Oly Em-1, infact slightly smaller and smaller than the GH3 / 4, the lenses will always be bigger than m43, but as I've already said the wide angle to mid range primes are not big at all and it's my intention to carry 3 or 4 primes, better IQ and faster speed.

Paul

Paul

katran
27th January 2016, 05:16 PM
The A7ii and A7Rii are both the same size as the Oly Em-1, infact slightly smaller and smaller than the GH3 / 4,
Paul

E-M1 + battery weights 497 gr
Sony A7 II + battery weights 726 gr (this means aprox. 50% heavier than E-M1). No matter what lens you put on it, it will weight 1Kg or more. It is heavy.

And yes the size is the same with E-M1. But we are comparing with the bigest camera from Olympus, you can choose E-M10 by example which is much smaller and half the weight of the Sony.

As smaller you make the Sony, you have less space for the sensor to make the IS performant.

Kiwi Paul
27th January 2016, 05:32 PM
E-M1 + battery weights 497 gr
Sony A7 II + battery weights 726 gr (this means aprox. 50% heavier than E-M1). No matter what lens you put on it, it will weight 1Kg or more. It is heavy.

And yes the size is the same with E-M1. But we are comparing with the bigest camera from Olympus, you can choose E-M10 by example which is much smaller and half the weight of the Sony.

As smaller you make the Sony, you have less space for the sensor to make the IS performant.

The guy in the article was already complaining the Sony is too small, so he would hate the smaller m43 cameras.
In real terms the A7ii is not big or heavy, I've held one, I like the ergonomics and feel and didn't find it heavy, some folk prefer slightly bigger bodies anyway which is why the GH3 and GH4 and EM-1 are so popular, with some folkl the EM5 or EM10 series are just too small.
THe A7 and A7r were even smaller and lighter (without IBIS though) but folk didn't like them that small so Sony made the mark ii versions with different ergonomics.

Paul

Ian
27th January 2016, 05:38 PM
There is no getting away from very big lenses - that's physics for you. There is also a dearth of lenses unless you want to invest in adapters for using even bigger Canon DSLR lenses, for example. I haven't tried the very latest A7 models but the earlier ones were also mechanically very unrefined (loud). But there is no argument that the sensors in the A7 are awesome, but personally I am past worrying about sensor quality these days.

Ian

Ralph Harwood
27th January 2016, 06:17 PM
Apparently the A7 mirrorless system lenses are closer to the sensor plane than m43 are so you can adapt m43 lenses to work with A7 cameras but not the other way around.

Paul

Hi Paul!

You could adapt your m4/3 lenses to fit the A7, but the image circle would be far too small to fill a full frame sensor - Sony had to work really hard to get a full frame sensor covered with such a small distance from the lens to the image plane.

Cheers,

Ralph.

Ps I believe that quite a few people use OM lenses on the Sony mirrorless cameras though, with good results.

Imageryone
27th January 2016, 07:32 PM
At these prices I will stick to my E-1 for landscape work :eek: At 21.3 million pixels in TIFF format, printing A-2 is not a problem :D

Kiwi Paul
27th January 2016, 08:30 PM
Hi Paul!

You could adapt your m4/3 lenses to fit the A7, but the image circle would be far too small to fill a full frame sensor - Sony had to work really hard to get a full frame sensor covered with such a small distance from the lens to the image plane.

Cheers,

Ralph.

Ps I believe that quite a few people use OM lenses on the Sony mirrorless cameras though, with good results.

Hi Ralph,

actually the Sony E system - m43 adapters only work on the NEX crop sensor bodies apparently, I misread an article saying you could use the m43 on the A7.

But yes I'm sure the OM lenses work fine via an adapter.

Paul

timboo
27th January 2016, 08:59 PM
Well done with ur purchase looking forward to your review when you tried it out. It sure seems a good bit of kit from reviews i have seen.

My only issue is the brand Sony from my past experience.

I owned a hifi, portable cd player, speaker system, compact camera. All of which went faulty after a couple of years. The only item, which lasted has been my PS3 to date, which is fab.
I cant comment on sony slr cameras hope they fall into the ps3 reliability wise :-) sure they will.

Ralph Harwood
27th January 2016, 11:18 PM
My only issue is the brand Sony from my past experience.


Hi there Paul / Timboo!

I have had only good experiences with Sony - not least with my Xperia phone which has outlasted 3 of my wife's Samsung phones without a mark (and I have had to repair the screen twice on her last phone too!)

I hope that their cameras are as well put together as their phones.

Cheers,

Ralph.

drmarkf
28th January 2016, 12:08 AM
I recently bought a second hand A7S to replace my Fuji X100T to further my enjoyment of night and low-light photography and to use my collection of classic lenses at native magnification.

They have come down in price a lot with the release of the mkII (you'd pay 1500 more for some dubiously effective IBIS, a larger body, slightly higher res screen and some video enhancements I don't understand in the new one). There's too much subject movement for the E-M1 IBIS to work for this sort of application.

I'm delighted so far, and am particularly enjoying using it with the wonderful 35mm f2 Zeiss Loxia manual lens (bought ex-display from LCE). Manual focusing with peaking is definitively the way to go for that sort of photography, with the flip screen often.

ASA 25600 is fully usable with some modest noise management in Capture One or dfine.

The only long lenses I'll be using with this are the 200 and 300 OM Zuikos.

Kiwi Paul
28th January 2016, 06:32 AM
I recently bought a second hand A7S to replace my Fuji X100T to further my enjoyment of night and low-light photography and to use my collection of classic lenses at native magnification.

They have come down in price a lot with the release of the mkII (you'd pay 1500 more for some dubiously effective IBIS, a larger body, slightly higher res screen and some video enhancements I don't understand in the new one). There's too much subject movement for the E-M1 IBIS to work for this sort of application.

I'm delighted so far, and am particularly enjoying using it with the wonderful 35mm f2 Zeiss Loxia manual lens (bought ex-display from LCE). Manual focusing with peaking is definitively the way to go for that sort of photography, with the flip screen often.

ASA 25600 is fully usable with some modest noise management in Capture One or dfine.

The only long lenses I'll be using with this are the 200 and 300 OM Zuikos.

Glad you like it, sounds like a good deal too.
From what I've read and my friends experience the IBIS on the A7xii series is meant to be good, certainly has good reviews.

Paul

Harold Gough
28th January 2016, 08:33 AM
I agree Alf. If I do go for an A7, then it would have to be the R. I'll not bite though while the body is 2400 though! That's just too much for a hobby.

I was after an A7 but an A7R got in the way on Ebay. I put in a bid I could afford and expected that to be the end of it. Yesterday a parcel arrived, containing an "as new" (my words) full kit with some extras (batteries, etc.). That was for less than 780 delivered.

I have only opened the box and fondled it a bit. A quick side-to-side comparison with my EM-1 shows the size to be so similar that I may find myself picking the wrong one out of my bag.

I will now be able to use my full-frame film lenses, specially the ultra-wides, as I used to with film.

Now, where is that used manual?

Harold

drmarkf
28th January 2016, 09:44 AM
I have only opened the box and fondled it a bit. A quick side-to-side comparison with my EM-1 shows the size to be so similar that I may find myself picking the wrong one out of my bag.

I will now be able to use my full-frame film lenses, specially the ultra-wides, as I used to with film.


The A7 is a lot heavier than the E-M1 and you'll soon notice which one you've picked up! I must say mine has a very solid and quality feel - a bit like when I first picked up an E1 back in the day, and I do like the handling. Although mine was second hand, the shutter count is only in the 40s and it still has that new camera smell.

Reviews of the A7S II's IBIS are a bit mixed - Gordon Laing at CameraLabs wasn't impressed in real-life use, for example. I figured that if I really took to the A7 series and the IBIS was good (or was tweaked to be better) I could always sell the mkI for not much less than I paid and upgrade. Currently, though, even second hand mkIIs are around 1300 more than my s/h MkI and that's just ridiculous.

The Sony eCommunity isn't nearly as mature as the Olympus one (or Fuji's, actually), with a high troll quotient. There's a fair number of complaints over firmware crashes and (alleged) de-centred lenses, but I haven't noticed any issues yet...

Kiwi Paul
28th January 2016, 09:57 AM
The Sony eCommunity isn't nearly as mature as the Olympus one (or Fuji's, actually), with a high troll quotient. There's a fair number of complaints over firmware crashes and (alleged) de-centred lenses, but I haven't noticed any issues yet...

Yes I noticed that, I think there are a lot of inexperienced "wanna be" photographers that want to impress others by having a A7ii or even preferable for them A7Rii (more bragging rights :mad:), some of the photos posted were very poor, and the Americans seem to like really pushing saturation to the extreme.

Paul

Harold Gough
28th January 2016, 10:41 AM
I was after an A7 but an A7R got in the way on Ebay. I put in a bid I could afford and expected that to be the end of it. Yesterday a parcel arrived, containing an "as new" (my words) full kit with some extras (batteries, etc.). That was for less than 780 delivered.

I have only opened the box and fondled it a bit. A quick side-to-side comparison with my EM-1 shows the size to be so similar that I may find myself picking the wrong one out of my bag.

I will now be able to use my full-frame film lenses, specially the ultra-wides, as I used to with film.

Now, where is that used manual?

Harold

Still not having consulted the manual I had quick go with my OM 24mm shift lens, which I have not used for at least five years. I stood at the back of my house and gave the lens full sideways shift. To my horror, when I shifted it, a huge OOF triangular shadow appeared in the bottom right of the viewfinder. That was also in the image recorded. I detached and re-attached the lens and tried again. Same thing.

I detached the lens and looked through it, seeing two coloured part-discs separated by a thin black area. I had forgotten about the built-in filters, selected by a thin ring between the front of the lens and the aperture ring. The selector was not aligned with the mark on the barrel. I selected the neutral one and all was OK.

Now, where is that manual?

Harold

drmarkf
28th January 2016, 11:24 AM
Still not having consulted the manual I had quick go with my OM 24mm shift lens, which I have not used for at least five years. I stood at the back of my house and gave the lens full sideways shift. To my horror, when I shifted it, a huge OOF triangular shadow appeared in the bottom right of the viewfinder. That was also in the image recorded. I detached and re-attached the lens and tried again. Same thing.

I detached the lens and looked through it, seeing two coloured part-discs separated by a thin black area. I had forgotten about the built-in filters, selected by a thin ring between the front of the lens and the aperture ring. The selector was not aligned with the mark on the barrel. I selected the neutral one and all was OK.

Now, where is that manual?

Harold

Love it! Another Oly 'gotcha' to add to the list.

I can vouch for the OM Zuiko 24mm f2.8 working a dream on my A7S, and I am now looking for some wider classics. (Being interpreted, that of course means I'm actually trying to resist a Leitz Tri-Elmar 16-18-21 :eek: )

You do have to be careful with wideangle glass on the A7, especially the first series. They had a thick filter stack on the sensor and it plays havoc with some lens' angle of exit. Some lenses are fine (including the Tri-Elmar) but others vignette madly and give magenta colour shifts. There's plenty of information about it on the full-frame Sony forum on dpreview (while ignoring all the trolling know-it-alls) and on a couple of the specialist blogs.

Do you have any Sony or Zeiss native glass for the FF E-mount system?

Minniesmum
30th January 2016, 02:52 PM
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Olympus introduced a FF camera themselves. Unless, that is, there's a revolution in electronics allowing the smaller sensor to resolve photons as well as a larger FF sensor, if not it could end up in decline. But any developments in light measurement techniques will flow through to the 35mm FF as well, so everyone wins. There have been rumours......the ONLY thing that would tempt me to upgrade from my E-P5 would be an Olympus FF. And that would be a few years after it got released- if that ever happens ;)

Harold Gough
30th January 2016, 03:10 PM
Love it! Another Oly 'gotcha' to add to the list.

I can vouch for the OM Zuiko 24mm f2.8 working a dream on my A7S, and I am now looking for some wider classics. (Being interpreted, that of course means I'm actually trying to resist a Leitz Tri-Elmar 16-18-21 :eek: )

You do have to be careful with wideangle glass on the A7, especially the first series. They had a thick filter stack on the sensor and it plays havoc with some lens' angle of exit. Some lenses are fine (including the Tri-Elmar) but others vignette madly and give magenta colour shifts. There's plenty of information about it on the full-frame Sony forum on dpreview (while ignoring all the trolling know-it-alls) and on a couple of the specialist blogs.

Do you have any Sony or Zeiss native glass for the FF E-mount system?

I have no E-Mount lenses, and no plans to obtain any. For general telephoto, down to close-up, I would use my Kiron (Vivitar Series 1) 105mm (FD mount), which I use in preference to my Leitz Elmarit 60mm macro.

Harold

drmarkf
31st January 2016, 12:39 AM
There have been rumours......the ONLY thing that would tempt me to upgrade from my E-P5 would be an Olympus FF. And that would be a few years after it got released- if that ever happens ;)

There are a lot of rumours in the Sony interwebs that Olympus are going to announce some FF lenses for the A7 series. Telephotos would be good, since there's precious little available at the moment. I shan't be buying any, but if it helped Olympus's profits then it would be worth doing.

Kiwi Paul
31st January 2016, 06:21 AM
There are a lot of rumours in the Sony interwebs that Olympus are going to announce some FF lenses for the A7 series. Telephotos would be good, since there's precious little available at the moment. I shan't be buying any, but if it helped Olympus's profits then it would be worth doing.

Hmmmm, I'd be surprised if that happened though.
Personally I'd prefer a couple of wide angle primes.

Paul

pdk42
31st January 2016, 12:23 PM
I do a lot of landscapes. I always shoot raw and I also do a lot of PP. In theory then, the A7r should be exactly what I need. This thought keeps popping up from time to time and one day I'm going to have to get one to really prove to myself one way or another.

I got pretty close yesterday when I saw a very nice, little used A7r up for sale at 749. I very nearly pressed "buy" but then decided to download some raws and do some pixel peeking first. I found quite a selection at various ISOs on the Imaging Resource site.

What did I find? - well of course, the noise at higher ISOs is better on the A7r and there's definitely more resolution. But... I'm still not convinced that I'd get better overall results than with my E-M1. At low ISO there isn't a huge amount in it unless the objective is pixel peeking or printing very large. I ty to avoid the former and the latter is such an edge case for me - and in any case with careful upresing it isn't actually a show stopper.

Where the A7r excels is when pushing a shot heavily in Post Processing - especially shots at higher ISO combined with the need to use shadow fill and cropping. In this regard it definitely shows how a bigger sensor will always win. However, with more care at capture stage, which is always a good discipline, this advantage can be minimised.

Overall, I'd still go ahead and get an A7 if it weren't for the fact that I really can't face the cost and agro of building another system. And I really don't want two systems - that's a guaranteed recipe for never having the right gear with you!

Finally, I read an interesting post from someone who moved from an E-M1 to an A7r and he made an interesting analogy - he said the A7r is like a 20' ladder whilst the E-M1 is like a 12' ladder. But when you only need to scale a 10' wall either will do - and then other factors come into play. I think most of my photographic walls are mostly in the 10-12' range and as regards the other factors - it'll be hard to beat the Olympus IBIS, the overall compactness (especially the lenses) and the excellent features and usability of the bodies.

So, I've decided to hold off on any further A7r thoughts until the E-M1ii comes along. If that offers a decent (or indeed any!) improvement in noise and DR then I'll stick with u43. If not, then I'll have to think carefully.

I just hope that the Pen F isn't the final word on IQ improvement with the new sensor since it seems there is no notable improvement - confirmed by the jpegs I took at the launch event and the lack of emphasis Olympus are putting on it. There was ZERO mention of the new sensor by the Olympus marketing guys during the presentation and when I asked in open forum, the question was given only a brief reply before the Pro guy there started talking about creativity and how the new jpeg knob would make all the difference!

Internaut
31st January 2016, 12:57 PM
I've been thinking of buying into full frame for some time, albeit on a very modest scale. The Nikon D610 consistently sells for less than 800, from various eBay sellers, and there's good availability of quality 50mm (and other f/l) primes.

One thing that surprised me, during my research... Canon full frame cameras consistently go for more, on eBay, than their nearest Nikon equivalents.

Ricoh
31st January 2016, 01:03 PM
Well, as long as doing so doesn't interfere with the family budget, do so, you, like the rest of us, only live once.

Even if you don't get along with the D610 or A7 whatever, you can sell it on; ok you'll make a loss but less than golfers who pay to spoil a good walk.

David M
31st January 2016, 01:16 PM
Hmmmm, I'd be surprised if that happened though.
Personally I'd prefer a couple of wide angle primes.

Paul

If they were going to do that they'd have done it years ago for all the Canon shooters using OM and Zeiss wide angle manual focus primes.

Harold Gough
31st January 2016, 01:18 PM
I've been thinking of buying into full frame for some time, albeit on a very modest scale. The Nikon D610 consistently sells for less than 800, from various eBay sellers, and there's good availability of quality 50mm (and other f/l) primes.

One thing that surprised me, during my research... Canon full frame cameras consistently go for more, on eBay, than their nearest Nikon equivalents.

If resolution of detail really matters to you, consider one without an anti-aliasing filter.

It may not be an issue, but I would not consider one without a hot shoe.

Harold

Kiwi Paul
31st January 2016, 09:00 PM
I think its interesting trying out full frame, I've only ever owned crop sensor cameras, mainly 4/3 and m4/3 so I just want to try another system out of interest and then I can comment about the advantages and disadvantages of each system from my own experiences.
I'm certainly not expecting the A7ii to revolutionize my photography, indeed I may even decide m43 is everything I need and full frame doesn't have any real advantage, then again I might, but at least I'll know and have got it out of my system.

Paul

drmarkf
1st February 2016, 09:45 AM
If one's got the interest and necessary time and money then it is fun trying other systems, and if you can get the kit second-hand it certainly softens the blow, including when it comes to sell things on.

Personally I'm extremely unlikely to move on from m4/3 as my main system because these days my back and neck can't cope with heavier weights, and current sensors and in-camera processing give me adequate performance and IQ. I am content, and I have never had an image criticised in our camera club for having insufficient pixels or too much noise.

Now, of course I'd like more pixels and less noise, and I'd most certainly like adequate CAF, but I'm able to compensate partially for the first two by maximising use of the frame, exposing to the right, tweaking in PP and only producing DPIs, plus I don't bother trying to shoot birds in flight.

I'm happy to consider a separate system if it offers significant* advantages in one or more of those areas without bringing disadvantages or weighing too much.

Hence the A7S: I do a lot of street photography and enjoy doing it at night and inside buildings with reasonably fast shutter speeds. The camera's unrivalled for that, but it's also not perfect - for example, the focus peaking is not as good as that of the E-M1, and it is slower to autofocus and to meter. I like the Zeiss manual lenses, so Af isn't an issue and they are fairly light, and I still try to utilise the whole frame, of course, since it's only 12-odd Mp.

I'm planning to start digital printing later this year, and I might consider an A7R (or other filter-free body) if I find I need more resolution. To achieve that in real life, though, I'm told by people I respect, requires great efforts to stabilise the camera on a heavy tripod. Between you and me, I suspect a lot of people who drone on about the superb resolution of the A7R II/D810 etc don't do that at all, or most of the time, and they would be enormously better off if they just carried an E-M1 and a bag of Pro lenses :D

[* and I mean significant: 1/3 stop won't convince me, but the A7S gives usable images at 25600ASA which makes it worthwhile in my view]

Ricoh
1st February 2016, 10:35 AM
For night-time street work a fast AF weather resisting lens would be a welcome as an addition to the U4/3 line up. I've tried the 12-40 /2.8 but a) I consider a telephoto has no place on the street and b) f2.8 is not fast enough, plus the resulting DoF can be too deep on occasions.

Night street photography is a growing interest for me, it's weather independent, to a degree, and the rain induced reflections can be quite nice.

Kiwi Paul
1st February 2016, 11:04 AM
For night-time street work a fast AF weather resisting lens would be a welcome as an addition to the U4/3 line up. I've tried the 12-40 /2.8 but a) I consider a telephoto has no place on the street and b) f2.8 is not fast enough, plus the resulting DoF can be too deep on occasions.

Night street photography is a growing interest for me, it's weather independent, to a degree, and the rain induced reflections can be quite nice.

One of the 25mm lenses might suit you, the Pany 1.4 is very good, I have it but can't recall if it's weather proof, otherwise the Oly 25 1.8 lenses?

Paul

Harold Gough
1st February 2016, 11:11 AM
If one's got the interest and necessary time and money then it is fun trying other systems, and if you can get the kit second-hand it certainly softens the blow, including when it comes to sell things on.

This is what I did with 35mm film.

I bought a brand new Canon A1 when it was the latest thing, with starlight exposure possible, etc.

Then the OM series with OTF flash metering came in, so I started with a brand new OM2n, then I bought used OM4s (believe it or not the first OM4 was intended as no more than a spot meter for the 2n!

From the OM system I branched out into X-Pan and a swing-lens Horizon 202.

Harold

Ricoh
1st February 2016, 12:03 PM
One of the 25mm lenses might suit you, the Pany 1.4 is very good, I have it but can't recall if it's weather proof, otherwise the Oly 25 1.8 lenses?

Paul
Thanks Paul, I have a copy of the PL25/1.4, my first lens along with the EM5 Mk1 I purchase, it's a cracking lens. It's not weather resisting, in fact I've not seen any U4/3 prime advertised as such. Strange as it should be easier to accomplish compared to something like the 12-40/f2.8. Perhaps Olympus are of the opinion that most weather agnostics are zoom users. Well, I have news for them!

Bikie John
1st February 2016, 12:41 PM
I think you are right, Steve, lovely as the standard primes (25/1.8 etc.) are, they are not weathersealed. I too thought this was rather a missed opportunity: there are some cracking high-spec lenses with price to match like the 75/1.8 so leaving out weather proofing seems rather corner-cutting to me. Not to mention the absence of lens hoods!

John

mstphoto
1st February 2016, 01:18 PM
A comparison shot between the Olympus E-M1 with 12-40 PRO and Sony a7
with Sony 16-35.
The Sony has had a wee bit of sharpening added but no sharpening added to the Olympus version

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1494/24658116841_b9bc6cc69b_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DyXi4x)3 Sony (https://flic.kr/p/DyXi4x)

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1700/24736888315_5ac9592175_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DFV25p)Bullers of Buchan 2016 (https://flic.kr/p/DFV25p)

Kiwi Paul
1st February 2016, 01:24 PM
There's no obvious differences in quality but at web resolution I wouldn't expect that anyway, the sun has broken through the clouds a bit in the Sony shot which has changed the contrast of the shot somewhat too but other than that no notible differences other then one is slightly zoomed in than the other.

Paul

mstphoto
1st February 2016, 01:32 PM
Of the 2, I much prefer the Olympus version.
Print quality may be a different kettle of fish though and this could be where the Sony would succeed

drmarkf
1st February 2016, 02:21 PM
The A7S isn't weather sealed and I don't think many of the native Sony or Zeiss lenses are either.

It isn't nearly as configurable as the E-M1 either, especially on the fly in the street. You can't do select focus and shoot via the rear screen (non touch sensitive), and I can't find a way to have immediate access to shutter speed, aperture and +\- exposure, with ISO only a lever flick and dial twiddle away. I believe the mkII versions may be easier for that, though.

It would be nice if the forthcoming Oly 1.2 primes were weather sealed.

Kiwi Paul
1st February 2016, 02:29 PM
The A7S isn't weather sealed and I don't think many of the native Sony or Zeiss lenses are either.

It isn't nearly as configurable as the E-M1 either, especially on the fly in the street. You can't do select focus and shoot via the rear screen (non touch sensitive), and I can't find a way to have immediate access to shutter speed, aperture and +\- exposure, with ISO only a lever flick and dial twiddle away. I believe the mkII versions may be easier for that, though.

It would be nice if the forthcoming Oly 1.2 primes were weather sealed.

Yes the A7ii series are meant to have better ergonomics and controls and are weather sealed. The 2 lenses I'm getting initially, the 55 Ziess F1.8 and Sony 28mm f2 are both weather proof (I'm think the 28 is).

Paul

drmarkf
1st February 2016, 02:40 PM
The 55 Zeiss gets a very good press: I'd be interested to see how you get on.

I quite like the 'look and feel' of the Sony raws, by the way, and the colours are nice as well. I've always used Capture One as a raw processor and they have an agreement with Sony, and certainly they don't need as much processing as orfs do to get a crisp result with good apparent dynamic range. How much of that is down to sensor size and performance and in-body processing I don't know.

pdk42
1st February 2016, 04:17 PM
A comparison shot between the Olympus E-M1 with 12-40 PRO and Sony a7
with Sony 16-35.
The Sony has had a wee bit of sharpening added but no sharpening added to the Olympus version

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1494/24658116841_b9bc6cc69b_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DyXi4x)3 Sony (https://flic.kr/p/DyXi4x)

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1700/24736888315_5ac9592175_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DFV25p)Bullers of Buchan 2016 (https://flic.kr/p/DFV25p)

Thanks for posting that. There really isn't a huge difference between the two, although there are these to dwell over:

- The Sony has burnt out regions on the sky whereas the Oly doesn't. Maybe it's just differences in cloud cover although I notice that the Sony is at ISO 50 whereas the Oly is at 200. That's native ISO for the Oly, but an "extension" ISO for the Sony. Low extension ISOs usually have reduced DR which might explain it.

- The Oly shot is over-sharpened IMHO - there are halos around the edge between sky and earth for example.

- The colours are a little different, but I'm sure that could be fixed in PP

- Resolution and noise are a wash - not surprising at these resolutions (2000 pix max) and both shot at low ISO. I suspect it would be a different story if at max resolution and taken at ISO 3200.

Out of interest, are these raws or jpegs from camera?

pdk42
1st February 2016, 04:19 PM
I passed by LCE in Leamington today and had a play with the A7ii. It's very nice :)

mstphoto
1st February 2016, 04:23 PM
They are both RAW files
The Olympus image has no sharpening added at all in processing the image whereas the Sony image had Hi Pass sharpening added as I thought it was a tad soft

drmarkf
1st February 2016, 04:51 PM
I passed by LCE in Leamington today and had a play with the A7ii. It's very nice :)

Yes, they feel good in the hand, don't they. I actually prefer the feel of the mkI body, which is thinner than the mkII.
Quite 'dense' and solid, and after carrying it round for a morning with the 35mm f2 Zeiss Loxia attached I can feel my tennis elbow beginning to twinge!

If I was going to get another lens I'd either go for the Tri-Elmar 16-18-21 Leitz (if I was feeling very flush, but they do hold their value well) or the new 21mm Loxia (if they actually ship any of them; there was a long pre-order list). Changing lenses is a bit of an issue, though: A7 owners seem to complain a lot about sensor dust.

pdk42
1st February 2016, 07:15 PM
Yes, they feel good in the hand, don't they. I actually prefer the feel of the mkI body, which is thinner than the mkII.
Quite 'dense' and solid, and after carrying it round for a morning with the 35mm f2 Zeiss Loxia attached I can feel my tennis elbow beginning to twinge!

If I was going to get another lens I'd either go for the Tri-Elmar 16-18-21 Leitz (if I was feeling very flush, but they do hold their value well) or the new 21mm Loxia (if they actually ship any of them; there was a long pre-order list). Changing lenses is a bit of an issue, though: A7 owners seem to complain a lot about sensor dust.
The Sony/Zeiss 35/2.8 looks pretty light and compact, but at 550 for an f2.8 35mm lens, I reckon they're having a laugh!!

As regards sensor dust - don't the mk1 A7 cameras have plastic bayonet splines in the body? That's got to be a huge dust generator!

crimbo
1st February 2016, 08:41 PM
Well I dropped for a Nikon D 750 for low light work for Up Helly Aa
Was happily using it at 1/25O th f5. 6 Iso 25,600
I did research the Sony A7S ii bit for stills it appeared no better.
But I am photographing a concert in a church tomorrow and the Nikon will be left at home. -EM 1 with 40-150

Zuiko
2nd February 2016, 12:17 AM
Well I dropped for a Nikon D 750 for low light work for Up Helly Aa
Was happily using it at 1/25O th f5. 6 Iso 25,600


There is no doubt that a full frame camera such as the D750 excels at this type of low light work and there is no way you could use an E-M1 at ISO 25600. However, with these exposure settings you could easily use the E-M1 at f2.8 and ISO 6400 and still get the same DOF. Okay, the Nikon will still have about a one stop advantage with noise and, of course, still have something in the tank should the light drop even lower, but factoring in the ability to use apertures 2 stops larger with the Olympus yet still retain the same DOF makes it less of a clear cut decision. By coincidence I looked at a second-hand D700 in a local camera shop on Saturday and it was simply huge, more like a medium format camera than a 35mm SLR!

crimbo
2nd February 2016, 06:55 AM
By coincidence I looked at a second-hand D700 in a local camera shop on Saturday and it was simply huge, more like a medium format camera than a 35mm SLR!

Oh yes it is big
But also the low light focus is fast
Its a tool for a job

Harold Gough
2nd February 2016, 07:29 AM
They are both RAW files

According to their properties (right click) they are ".jpg". I may be wrong but I don't think you can post RAW files into this kind of software.

Harold

mstphoto
2nd February 2016, 08:20 AM
According to their properties (right click) they are ".jpg". I may be wrong but I don't think you can post RAW files into this kind of software.

Harold

They started life as RAW files and were then processed and saved as jpeg

Mike

Kiwi Paul
2nd February 2016, 08:21 AM
They started life as RAW files and were then processed and saved as jpeg

Mike

They are alive!!?? :eek::eek::D

paul

Harold Gough
2nd February 2016, 08:32 AM
They started life as RAW files and were then processed and saved as jpeg

Mike

That's the way I operate but there is no way I consider them to be RAW files. However, to state that they were shot as RAW files is relevant in such a discussion of quality, as it would be to state the file size if shot as JPEGs.

Harold

Internaut
2nd February 2016, 08:39 AM
Thanks for posting that. There really isn't a huge difference between the two, although there are these to dwell over:

- The Sony has burnt out regions on the sky whereas the Oly doesn't. Maybe it's just differences in cloud cover although I notice that the Sony is at ISO 50 whereas the Oly is at 200. That's native ISO for the Oly, but an "extension" ISO for the Sony. Low extension ISOs usually have reduced DR which might explain it.

- The Oly shot is over-sharpened IMHO - there are halos around the edge between sky and earth for example.

- The colours are a little different, but I'm sure that could be fixed in PP

- Resolution and noise are a wash - not surprising at these resolutions (2000 pix max) and both shot at low ISO. I suspect it would be a different story if at max resolution and taken at ISO 3200.

Out of interest, are these raws or jpegs from camera?

The burned sky is likely due to the way the Sony makes the exposure, and how this effects the distribution of dynamic range. I see the same difference between Olympus and Panasonic. In good light, I can easily push the exposure between one and two stops, with a modern Olympus body, without seeing any burning in the clouds. With the Panasonic GM1, the sky burns easily and, while I can usually recover those highlights, they're the first to blow when I move the whites slider, so I sometimes have to resort to more complex processing to protect the sky.

E-P5 example, pushed by 1 stop when taking the exposure, pulled back by 0.7 in post, with adjustment to highlights, shadows, blacks and whites (just enough to create a little bit of absolute black and a touch of absolute white (not in the clouds, where even a little bit can look digital):

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1571/24391173679_2ac59b33fa_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/Dan9ae)
The Crossing to Fuerteventura (https://flic.kr/p/Dan9ae) by Jason Hindle (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jason_hindle/), on Flickr

With the Sony, I suspect the optimal exposure is going to be negative in anything other than good light, which doesn't matter because you're going to be able to push and pull those files far more than with a comparable Olympus raw file.

pdk42
2nd February 2016, 08:41 AM
By coincidence I looked at a second-hand D700 in a local camera shop on Saturday and it was simply huge, more like a medium format camera than a 35mm SLR!

I had a play with a friend's D800 and had pretty much the same view. I took a look at a used D610 in LCE too and even though it's smaller than the D800 it's still a beast. I also found the OVF disappointing - dim and lacking essential information. I guess that DSLRs just don't do it for me anymore!

Ian
2nd February 2016, 09:38 AM
It's a shame the framing is not the same. What do you notice about the two shots?

Ian

A comparison shot between the Olympus E-M1 with 12-40 PRO and Sony a7
with Sony 16-35.
The Sony has had a wee bit of sharpening added but no sharpening added to the Olympus version

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1494/24658116841_b9bc6cc69b_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DyXi4x)3 Sony (https://flic.kr/p/DyXi4x)

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1700/24736888315_5ac9592175_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DFV25p)Bullers of Buchan 2016 (https://flic.kr/p/DFV25p)

Ian
2nd February 2016, 09:39 AM
I had a play with a friend's D800 and had pretty much the same view. I took a look at a used D610 in LCE too and even though it's smaller than the D800 it's still a beast. I also found the OVF disappointing - dim and lacking essential information. I guess that DSLRs just don't do it for me anymore!

Interesting comment about the viewfinder; never thought I'd see comments like that!

Ian

Wee man
2nd February 2016, 09:46 AM
Viva the revolution!!

Internaut
2nd February 2016, 09:56 AM
It's a shame the framing is not the same. What do you notice about the two shots?

Ian

Would have been lovely to get the grass in both shots (nothing like a nice bit of long grass, when I'm obsessing over sharpness). The 12-40 is insanely sharp - I can imagine that making a difference compared to the full frame equivalent.

mstphoto
2nd February 2016, 10:12 AM
I didn't set out to shoot a side by side comparison.
My shot was taken closer to the edge of the cliff than the Sony's.
Its just that my mate bought an a7 and I plopped my card in and rattled off a few shots at his settings.
I did find that the Oly shots were a lot sharper with no sharpening added than the Sony with Hi Pass sharpening but I think I already said that :D
My verdict is Olympus is the better of the 2 with Sony a very close second.

Once all my Canon gear is sold off I would seriously consider either one of the a7 or a7r models but in the meantime I'm sticking with Olympus for my needs

pdk42
2nd February 2016, 01:47 PM
Well, I've finally weakened and decided I needed to try this Sony stuff. I'm pretty sure I'm not going to switch systems but hell, you only live once, and I need to satisfy my curiosity! So, I've bought a used A7R from LCE at what I think it a good price. My plan is to use it with some OM lenses I have. I'm going to have to get used to cranking up those shutter speeds again!

drmarkf
2nd February 2016, 02:16 PM
Aha! I wondered how long you'd hold out.
I'm sure you won't regret the experiment, and both the 7R and 7S compliment m4/3, but in different ways and for different purposes: as you say, we're only here once...

Do you have any OM Zuikos wider than 24mm?

I got my 35mm Loxia ex-dem from LCE: I've used them for quite a lot of s/h kit over the years and have always found them 100% kosher.

BTW I'd be interested if you manage to find a good Sony full-frame discussion site. There's been more knowledgeable, pleasant and interesting discussion on this one thread here than in a week's worth of the Sony FF forum at dpreview.

pdk42
2nd February 2016, 02:24 PM
Aha! I wondered how long you'd hold out.
I'm sure you won't regret the experiment, and both the 7R and 7S compliment m4/3, but in different ways and for different purposes: as you say, we're only here once...

Aye - well, I really don't like running two systems, but I'll give it a go. I'm sort of secretly hoping that the Sony falls flat on its face!


Do you have any OM Zuikos wider than 24mm?

No - I have the 24/2.8 and the 50/1.8. That'll be a good starting point. I'd really like the 21mm f3.5 and in fact bought one a while back but returned it since it had some issues.


I got my 35mm Loxia ex-dem from LCE: I've used them for quite a lot of s/h kit over the years and have always found them 100% kosher.

That's the one I'd like. It ain't cheap though is it?



BTW I'd be interested if you manage to find a good Sony full-frame discussion site. There's been more knowledgeable, pleasant and interesting discussion on this one thread here than in a week's worth of the Sony FF forum at dpreview.

Try Amin Sabet's TalkEmount site:

https://www.talkemount.com/

drmarkf
2nd February 2016, 06:19 PM
No - I have the 24/2.8 and the 50/1.8. That'll be a good starting point. I'd really like the 21mm f3.5 and in fact bought one a while back but returned it since it had some issues.

That's the one I'd like. It ain't cheap though is it?

Try Amin Sabet's TalkEmount site:


I had a 21 f3.5 back in the day with my OM-4 (part of a 3-prime kit with the 35 f2 and 100 f2.8): lovely little lens which I regret selling. Probably worth checking it's OK with the Sony sensor stack before committing yourself.

No, the Loxia isn't exactly bargain basement, but it's a treat to use and feels just as good as anything from Leitz that I've ever handled. It has electronic links to the body so you can set it to zoom focus when you move the focus ring if you wish. Nice bokeh, and excellent highlight stars for night street use, which is quite an advantage for my main use. There are occasionally some slightly odd bobbly artefacts around those same highlights, but I believe that's a feature of the mki bodies and not the lens.

Thanks for that forum tip - I've signed up. Looks much more civilized than dpreview.

Zuiko
3rd February 2016, 01:21 AM
Thanks for that forum tip - I've signed up. Looks much more civilized than dpreview.

12th Century Mongolia looked much more civilized than dpreview! :D

Kiwi Paul
3rd February 2016, 09:26 AM
l I've got my 2 new lenses for the A7ii....... now come Parcel Force deliver the camera

Kiwi Paul
3rd February 2016, 09:28 AM
Well, I've finally weakened and decided I needed to try this Sony stuff. I'm pretty sure I'm not going to switch systems but hell, you only live once, and I need to satisfy my curiosity! So, I've bought a used A7R from LCE at what I think it a good price. My plan is to use it with some OM lenses I have. I'm going to have to get used to cranking up those shutter speeds again!


Oh dear, what have I started lol.

Hope you enjoy using it, I've just got my new lenses, now waiting for the camera to arrive.

Paul

drmarkf
3rd February 2016, 11:22 AM
12th Century Mongolia looked much more civilized than dpreview! :D

Right on!

There are some good people who contribute to the various forums there - certainly m4/3 and Sony - and some of them have a lot of useful experience.

However, you do have to filter out the emanations from all the wannabe Genghis Khans...

Ian
3rd February 2016, 12:00 PM
Well, I've finally weakened and decided I needed to try this Sony stuff. I'm pretty sure I'm not going to switch systems but hell, you only live once, and I need to satisfy my curiosity! So, I've bought a used A7R from LCE at what I think it a good price. My plan is to use it with some OM lenses I have. I'm going to have to get used to cranking up those shutter speeds again!

Of course I do hope your experiment works well for you but I'd also caution that the A7 body might reveal things about your old Zuikjo lenses you'd rather not know about! :)

Ian

pdk42
3rd February 2016, 12:27 PM
Of course I do hope your experiment works well for you but I'd also caution that the A7 body might reveal things about your old Zuikjo lenses you'd rather not know about! :)

Ian

I'm sure you're right on that Ian. I'm hopeful but under no illusions!

Ian
3rd February 2016, 12:38 PM
I'm sure you're right on that Ian. I'm hopeful but under no illusions!

I base my caution on my own experience and that was with a 50 1.4 used with my old E-5 and all of its 12 megapixels :). It makes a passable soft focus effect lens which can be great for certain types of portrait.

Ian

Internaut
3rd February 2016, 01:18 PM
If resolution of detail really matters to you, consider one without an anti-aliasing filter.

It may not be an issue, but I would not consider one without a hot shoe.

Harold

The more I think about it, the less I'm concerned with hard numbers. Just today, I've been looking at various cameras on the used market, ranging from a Canon 1D III to a Nikon D3. Of course, the D610 remains an option. Oh, and my sister has loaned me her Canon film SLR, nifty fifty and a couple of rolls of film (but really waiting for good light before I give that a try). Now that would make a sub 400 1D III an attractive option (don't even need to buy a lens, until I have to give the lens back).

My motivation for wanting to fiddle with full frame? I'd like to muck about with very narrow DoF, with cheap lenses. If you've seen some of the photos I've posted here, you'll quickly realise a lot of my photography depends on the absolute opposite (i.e. what Four Thirds does very well), but I do occasionally like to play with the creative usage of limited depth of field.

drmarkf
3rd February 2016, 02:26 PM
I base my caution on my own experience and that was with a 50 1.4 used with my old E-5 and all of its 12 megapixels :). It makes a passable soft focus effect lens which can be great for certain types of portrait.

Ian

Quite! And don't even think about the performance of the 55 f1.2... (The rarer 50 f1.2 seems to be a different story, but I've never tried one).

Things have moved on a lot, but there are some OM Zuikos that give decent modern performance at middling apertures, plus their small size, light weight (for metal lenses) and direct focus and aperture rings have some particular advantages for (say) street photography and macro.

The failings of some classic lenses can also be turned to advantage for certain purposes, of course. I love my 55mm f1.2 Rokkor, which is dreamily low contrast wide open, but actually sharp and it firms up a lot by f2.8. It's the early version with the big, sculpted metal focus ring, which makes manual focusing a real pleasure.

Harold Gough
3rd February 2016, 05:02 PM
With an affordable OM to E shift adapter you could get an OM 24mm for around 100 lens and get the effect that would cost you 500 to over 1,000 in film days.

Harold

drmarkf
3rd February 2016, 06:01 PM
With an affordable OM to E shift adapter you could get an OM 24mm for around 100 lens and get the effect that would cost you 500 to over 1,000 in film days.

Harold

Can anyone recommend one of these shift adapters that actually works reliably?

Harold Gough
3rd February 2016, 06:23 PM
Can anyone recommend one of these shift adapters that actually works reliably?

I have only purchased a tilt adapter for m4/3, until today, when I ordered a2nother one, for E mount. I have 24mm and 38mm OM shift lenses, so have not had the need for a separate shift mount.

You need a lens with a large image circle e.g. 60mm for it to work on a tilt or shift adapter. Medium format should do it. I seem to remember that the OM 24mm is the same as the shift version but don't know for sure.

Harold

Kiwi Paul
3rd February 2016, 06:52 PM
My A7ii arrived at last, had a wee play and updated the firmware so now it has uncompressed RAWs, seems fine, although not as refined build quality as the EM5ii, I'll get out tomorrow and put it through it paces.

Here's a couple of comparison pics, A7ii + Ziess 55mm f1.8 and EM5ii + Pany 25mm f1.4 .

Paul

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1458/24797910535_c2734d1214_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DMiLRD)

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1476/24171036653_00fd552c39_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/CPUT6g)

Harold Gough
3rd February 2016, 08:06 PM
With an affordable OM to E shift adapter you could get an OM 24mm for around 100 lens and get the effect that would cost you 500 to over 1,000 in film days.

Harold

I'm sorry but wherever I learned that the shift 24mm was only an ordinary 24mm on a special mount, it seems to have been misinformation. Image circle information is very difficult to find but the shift has 57mm, the 35mm shift has about 60mm. Other OM wide-angles have only 43mm.

It varies a lot with some specialist lenses. I have two Schneider HM enlarger lenses. The 40mm has an image circle of around 43 mm (I can't find the exact value) but the 90mm has 66mm. I have used the 90 on a tilt mount.

Harold

drmarkf
3rd February 2016, 10:23 PM
Thanks, Harold.

The mkii A7 bodies are significantly bigger than the mki, which is actually smaller than my E-M1.

That 55 shows the differences between m4/3 and FF lenses very well! At the moment I've got both the auto Sony-Zeiss 35mm f2.8 and the manual Zeiss Loxia 35mm f2.0 and although both are quite a bit bigger than, say, the 17mm f1.8 Zuiko, the difference isn't nearly as significant practically.

drmarkf
3rd February 2016, 10:39 PM
Hmmmmmmm.

Look what have just been announced: http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/the-sony-a6300-is-the-ultimate-crop-sensor-camera-1314303

Olybirder
3rd February 2016, 10:49 PM
There are several articles about the Sony A6300 on the DP Review site. If the continuous autofocus is as good as they suggest that camera will make a lot of new friends. Over to you Olympus.

Ron

drmarkf
3rd February 2016, 11:00 PM
The A6000 already has CAF that's a lot better than the E-M1: personally I'd say the E-M1 mkII only needs to be as good as that for it to be a success (and for me to buy one). For me the Olympus has a range of other advantages over the Sony, probably still over the 6300, so I'm very unlikely indeed to switch systems.

Handling, handling and handling are the first three issues with the 6300 (only one exposure dial, for example) and m4/3 has a relatively huge lens choice.

Kiwi Paul
3rd February 2016, 11:51 PM
Thanks, Harold.

The mkii A7 bodies are significantly bigger than the mki, which is actually smaller than my E-M1.

That 55 shows the differences between m4/3 and FF lenses very well! At the moment I've got both the auto Sony-Zeiss 35mm f2.8 and the manual Zeiss Loxia 35mm f2.0 and although both are quite a bit bigger than, say, the 17mm f1.8 Zuiko, the difference isn't nearly as significant practically.

Yes the 55 is about the came size as the Pany 12-35, although the 55 is bigger then the Sony brand E fit 50mm f1.8 lenses but it's much better quality.
Looking at "Camera size" website the A7ii is the same size as the EM-1. The 28 f2 lens is smaller then the 55.

The A7ii just doesn't have the professional feel the EM5ii does, it's very plasticy, the dials and buttons just aren't quite in the right place and don't have the "feel" of the Oly, it looks cheap, even though it's not. The lenses on the other hand are very nice, look and feel good.
The A7ii is a funny camera to hold, because it looks so plasticy you expect it to be really light but it feels heavy, there's a very solid magnesium frame under all that plastic, possibly a bit too much magnesium as it feels heavier than it needs to.
Ergonomics are OK, but as I said things just aren't quite where you expect or want them to be. The EVF and screen are excellent, the photos look excellent, it focuses fast and accurately even in low light and as I'm getting used to finding all the functions and assigning various buttons etc the overall feel of the menus etc is not too bad, fairly easy to figure out considering it's a new camera system for me.
The EM5ii has far more features and things I just take for granted the A7ii doesn't have, touch screen, been able to adjust the size of the focus point, keystone correction etc, all those nice little things.

Anyway I'll take it out tomorrow and see what it's like in the real world.

But when it comes to handling and ergonomics my initial impression is EM5ii wins!!

Paul

Harold Gough
4th February 2016, 06:27 AM
I'm sorry but wherever I learned that the shift 24mm was only an ordinary 24mm on a special mount, it seems to have been misinformation. Image circle information is very difficult to find but the shift has 57mm, the 35mm shift has about 60mm. Other OM wide-angles have only 43mm.

It varies a lot with some specialist lenses. I have two Schneider HM enlarger lenses. The 40mm has an image circle of around 43 mm (I can't find the exact value) but the 90mm has 66mm. I have used the 90 on a tilt mount.

Harold

All may not be lost. You will not get the edge performance, at full shift, of the 24mm shift lens. However, with the image circle 8mm wider that the sensor, you should get something useful from sideways shift.

When it comes to vertical shift, for tall buildings, the circle is 19mm wider than the sensor and it would be surprising if the shift was not useful.

This is based on the non-shift 24mm being of similar quality to that of the shift version and the 43mm being correct, which I cannot establish.

Whether this limited function is worth the outlay remains to be seen.

In the meantime, the adapter I have just ordered is said to do some shift and some tilt and some tilt-shift. I will report back when I get it. At 28 it was worth a punt.

Harold

Simon Bee
4th February 2016, 08:42 AM
The mkii A7 bodies are significantly bigger than the mki, which is actually smaller than my E-M1.



When compared to the em-1 it is surprising how similar in size the mkII is to it.

Whilst I prefer the handling of the em-1, Sony have to be applauded for the A7 series, they have after all managed to fit in it a sensor that in area is four times larger than M4/3.

The link below takes you to a size comparison of both side by side, quite possibly a surprise if you haven't seen it before.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#482,579

The 'Camera size' site is very useful for comparing the dimensions of various camera bodies, be it same or different brands.

On another note .... native Sony lenses are mostly much larger than those for M4/3 but like M4/3 you can use many legacy lenses on the A7. Not all manual focus legacy lenses are sub-par on the Sony, the best OM Zuiko's are wonderful and of course if you have the budget then Leica 'M' mount lenses of 35mm and longer are truly superb and TINY too. Actually such Leica 'M' lenses and the best OM Zuiko's are rather lovely on the em-1 ( or similar ) also.

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/em5mk2_35_Leica_1_.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/83016)

The above 35mm F2 Leica is a tiny lens

And the 50mm F1.4 Leica below makes for a wonderful portrait lens on M4/3

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/em5mk2_50_Leica_1_.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/83019)


Of course Sony were not the first to produce a 24x36mm based body that is compact. Leica did it in the early 1900's and lets not forget the wonderful Olympus OM1.

Look how small the M9 is compared to the em-1, revealing ??

http://camerasize.com/compare/#482,213

They don't have a comparison with the OM1 ... shame:(

Personally, I think there are advantages to having both a Sony A7 series and a top M4/3 body especially if you have legacy lenses you can use on both. Or possibly as I would likely do ..... use the M4/3 for telephoto work with native tele lenses, an area where the system clearly wins out, and use an A7 or similar with wide to standard M/F legacy lenses ( albeit of high quality ) for portraiture and landscapes.

If I could only have or only wanted one? ...... simple ....the Olympus options, as an all-rounder they tick 99% of the boxes;)

Kind regards, Simon

drmarkf
4th February 2016, 09:12 AM
Personally, I think there are advantages to having both a Sony A7 series and a top M4/3 body especially if you have legacy lenses you can use on both. Or possibly as I would likely do ..... use the M4/3 for telephoto work with native tele lenses, an area where the system clearly wins out, and use an A7 or similar with wide to standard M/F legacy lenses ( albeit of high quality ) for portraiture and landscapes.

If I could only have or only wanted one? ...... simple ....the Olympus options, as an all-rounder they tick 99% of the boxes;)


Yes, I agree 100% with that. The other specific advantages of the Sony system are camera body-specific: the native resolution of the 7R I/II and the high ISO of the 7S I/II. The mkII 7 and 7R also seem to have somewhat better CAF than m4/3 does.

However for all round usability and portability you can't beat m4/3, Olympus in particular, and image quality is almost always good enough for the purpose in hand.

Bikie John
4th February 2016, 10:06 AM
That's a really good summing-up, thank you gents.

And Harold, please share with us the results of your tilt-shift adapter (and supplier details - if it's any good :) )

And Paul, thanks for kicking off an interesting thread, even if it has got rather a long way from where you started.

John

Ricoh
4th February 2016, 10:49 AM
'Photographic GAS' should be accepted as a serious 'financio-medical' illness and treated accordingly - therapy being freely available on the NHS (it would have to be free for most of us have no spare cash remaining for private treatment having spent it all on camera gear!). ;)

I suffer from this terrible ailment myself, one worse than most which is known as 'Leica-GAS', and worse still there's no known cure, as I understand it!! Perhaps GlaxoSmithKline or whoever should be encouraged to develop a psycho-suppressant, or whatever it is, to cure this madness. ;) I purchase something and having done so make a pact with myself not to buy anymore. Unfortunately, the withdrawal symptoms are so debilitating I find myself reaching for the ever suffering credit card, time and time again, thinking just one more lens or one more camera will transform my photography. ;) Will there ever be an end to this madness??

The serious thing, though, is that 99.9% of us do nothing more with our kit other than to take 'snaps', then some more 'snaps' and upload to a hosting platform such as Flickr. We get a few faves etc and repeat ad nauseam. Having become dissatisfied with the outcome of our efforts we blame it on our camera systems, when in fact most of the kit we already own is more than adequate for the purpose intended, i.e. taking 'snaps'.
Nobel winning words of wisdom, even if I wrote it myself :D

Kiwi Paul
4th February 2016, 10:56 AM
Personally, I think there are advantages to having both a Sony A7 series and a top M4/3 body especially if you have legacy lenses you can use on both. Or possibly as I would likely do ..... use the M4/3 for telephoto work with native tele lenses, an area where the system clearly wins out, and use an A7 or similar with wide to standard M/F legacy lenses ( albeit of high quality ) for portraiture and landscapes.

Yes that's what I said early on in the thread, I'm looking to get about 3 or 4 primes for the A7ii (I have the 28 and 55 so waiting to see if native 20mm and ideally a 14mm prime are introduced) then use the EM5ii with the 40-150 +TC for any work above the 55mm reach of the Sony setup.
But I'll see, after all my evaluation and stuff I may decide m43 is good enough and ditch the Sony gear, but at least I'll know and wont have that nagging doubt hanging over me.

Paul

pdk42
4th February 2016, 02:43 PM
Well, I found a used Sony Zeiss 35/2.8 at a reasonable price and bought that too - if I'm gong to test out the system then I figured doing it without a modern native lens is a little silly.

The A7r arrived in the post yesterday and a quick play last night, without a lens to put on it, revealed only that it's slower than the E-M1 and the shutter is L O U D with a very big capital L. Unless the IQ is really stunning I can't see it earning its keep.

BTW Steve - loved your post about GAS. I recognise all the symptoms.

Gwyver
4th February 2016, 05:50 PM
Hmmmmmmm.

Look what have just been announced: http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/the-sony-a6300-is-the-ultimate-crop-sensor-camera-1314303

The sensor spec gives a strong hint at what the E-M1ii should contain. I wonder if the PDAF detectors are cross-point?

Ricoh
4th February 2016, 05:51 PM
It's sort of autobiographical Paul, I've just 'shelled' out on a 50 Lux ASPH. I blame you guys, the 'two Pauls', I couldn't be outdone!

pdk42
4th February 2016, 05:58 PM
It's sort of autobiographical Paul, I've just 'shelled' out on a 50 Lux ASPH. I blame you guys, the 'two Pauls', I couldn't be outdone!

Lenses like that Steve can be considered an investment. It's highly unlikely they'll lose any value, and they might even go up. Treat it like a rental, and remember, YOLO.

Ricoh
4th February 2016, 06:13 PM
I hope so Paul, well thanks to the 'heads-up' from a forum member here, who is also a Leica user, I 'bagged' the 'brass and glass' lux at a 600 discount from Ffordes. I don't think I'll lose out if I decide to sell it on, but man the bokeh!!

Internaut
4th February 2016, 06:31 PM
Look how small the M9 is compared to the em-1, revealing ??

http://camerasize.com/compare/#482,213

They don't have a comparison with the OM1 ... shame:(



The size difference will be down to little things like flip out screen and extra electronics for IBIS, but look at the weight difference. The M imight be functionally pared down to the basics, but it's clearly built like a tank. I think the Pen F would be a better comparison, in terms of size. I regard my E-P5 as Olympus' attempt at being poor man's Leica M, BTW (and refer to my GM1 plus 14mm as the paupers' Q).

Simon Bee
4th February 2016, 09:29 PM
The size difference will be down to little things like flip out screen and extra electronics for IBIS, but look at the weight difference. The M imight be functionally pared down to the basics, but it's clearly built like a tank. I think the Pen F would be a better comparison, in terms of size. I regard my E-P5 as Olympus' attempt at being poor man's Leica M, BTW (and refer to my GM1 plus 14mm as the paupers' Q).


Ahh but you are missing my point .... which is ... the M9, a camera of very similar proportions to the em-1 has a sensor in it that has a surface area some 4 times larger than that of M4/3 and most of its native lenses are as small or smaller than native M4/3 lenses;)

So called Full frame cameras ... i.e 24x36mm do not have to be huge, neither do their lenses. However in the case of Leica they do come at a hefty premium.


I have to say I do like the E-P5, a very capable and attractive camera which is fast becoming ( due to the inevitable 'digital depreciation ) something of a bargain.

Kind regards, Simon

Simon Bee
4th February 2016, 09:31 PM
but man the bokeh!!

OH yes Steve .... the bokeh :)

And apologies for helping you 'lighten your wallet':D

Kind regards, Simon

Simon Bee
4th February 2016, 09:33 PM
Lenses like that Steve can be considered an investment. It's highly unlikely they'll lose any value, and they might even go up. Treat it like a rental, and remember, YOLO.

Quite right Paul.

Kind regards, Simon

Simon Bee
4th February 2016, 09:46 PM
Well, I found a used Sony Zeiss 35/2.8 at a reasonable price and bought that too - if I'm gong to test out the system then I figured doing it without a modern native lens is a little silly.

The A7r arrived in the post yesterday and a quick play last night, without a lens to put on it, revealed only that it's slower than the E-M1 and the shutter is L O U D with a very big capital L. Unless the IQ is really stunning I can't see it earning its keep.

BTW Steve - loved your post about GAS. I recognise all the symptoms.


I think the native 35mm is a sensible first choice Paul, one can always have a 'play' with legacy glass later on.

Yes the shutter on the original A7 is very loud and has been well documented, to the point that Sony went to great lengths to ensure the shutter in the A7II is apparently much quieter. For landscape and portraiture I imagine the loud shutter will not really be a problem, apart from possibly annoying you. For concert/theatre, wedding ceremony or discreet street photography it would likely be very annoying.

If the loud shutter is not an issue the original A7 / A7r are becoming great 'bang-for-buck' options if you want to explore 24x36mm sensors. That said I have seen the A7II start appearing on the used market for around 799.00.

Kind regards, Simon

drmarkf
4th February 2016, 11:43 PM
The electronic shutter's nice and quiet :cool:

pdk42
5th February 2016, 07:49 AM
The electronic shutter's nice and quiet :cool:

Not on the A7R it isn't (because it hasn't got one)

Simon Bee
5th February 2016, 08:18 AM
Not on the A7R it isn't (because it hasn't got one)

Quite, much to the annoyance of many as the camera becomes almost useless for subjects such as theatre. However the original A7 series remains the best 'bang for buck' 24x36mm sensor based body available if you work outside of this and similar genre's.

Kind regards, Simon

Greytop
5th February 2016, 08:29 AM
It's only the A7R II that has an electronic shutter.

drmarkf
5th February 2016, 09:03 AM
The sensor spec gives a strong hint at what the E-M1ii should contain. I wonder if the PDAF detectors are cross-point?

That would be great if true, but the 6300 has an APSC sensor and I don't remember seeing one like that for m4/3 in that sony sensor road map someone found a while ago. If we're unlucky it will be the 20Mp from the GX8...

drmarkf
5th February 2016, 09:12 AM
It's only the A7R II that has an electronic shutter.

My A7S mkI has one, and I'd wrongly assumed the R mkI did as well.

Bit of a bu--er.

I'd never have considered the camera if it hadn't, because I use it most of the time on silent for close-in street photography.

You do have to be careful both outdoors at night and indoors because you get banding under led lights, but it's easy enough to spot in the viewfinder if you know to be alert for it, and I've programmed shutter choice on a button. I've almost never had the motion distortion people bang on about with electronic shutters.

Harold Gough
5th February 2016, 09:16 AM
Does a noisy shutter mean increased shutter vibration, to potential affect images?

Harold

pdk42
5th February 2016, 10:04 AM
Does a noisy shutter mean increased shutter vibration, to potential affect images?

Harold

I think it does Harold. There are lots of posts about shutter shock on the A7R across the blogosphere. Some say it's a big deal, others that it's an inconvenience that can be worked around. It seems to be only a big issue with longer focal length lenses, which personally doesn't bother me too much. It's the wide end that I want this camera for.

pdk42
5th February 2016, 10:10 AM
I'll just also add that the E-M1 seems like a super advanced piece of tech from another galaxy compared to the A7R. The speed, features and maturity are streets ahead of the Sony. For example, the Sony has:

- No live composite or live time
- No focus stacking
- No way to manually switch between EVF and rear screen
- Slow AF
- Slow everything else
- Noisy (and slow) shutter
- No touch screen
- Clumsy AF point selection (can't just use the arrow pad)
- Poor control dials compared to the E-M1 (size, location, ease of use)


The list goes on. But - that 36Mp sensor does things that our little sensors can't.

I can't see it happening, but I'd really like to see Olympus focus on improving sensor tech. I'm very, very disappointed that the new 20Mp sensor in the Pen F seems to offer no notable improvement over the current 16Mp sensors. It seems pretty sure that the E-M1ii will get the same sensor.

I can't understand why we're not at least getting BSI. That tech has been around for a few years now and it has worked in the RX100, NX1, A7Rii and others. I'm sure it would give a worthwhile improvement on u43. Disappointing.

Harold Gough
5th February 2016, 10:24 AM
Paul,

Most of your criticism are either irrelevant or positives for me, apart from the last one.

For example. it really annoys me, when fiddling with some control on my EM-1 or lens, to accidentally touch the rear screen, setting off my flash and shooting a wasted frame.

Similarly, that arrow pad and the focus point selection is a frequent source of incorrect exposure, due to accidentally moving the single one I use.

Harold

Graham_of_Rainham
5th February 2016, 10:45 AM
Within the PAGB printed image competition community and panel entries into RPS prints go up to 20" X 16" (50cm X 40cm)

The current 16Mp and the new 20Mp sensors are more than capable of producing prints at this size. For anything displayed HDTV, 4K and even 5K Monitors, the sensor resolution is more than is required.

The latest Canon & Nikon "flagships" only have a little more than 20Mp

So unless there is a compelling reason (tight crops) I don't see the need for more than the 20Mp that is now available and will hopefully, along with other really nice features, become available in the next models.

*chr

pdk42
5th February 2016, 10:50 AM
Within the PAGB printed image competition community and panel entries into RPS prints go up to 20" X 16" (50cm X 40cm)

The current 16Mp and the new 20Mp sensors are more than capable of producing prints at this size. For anything displayed HDTV, 4K and even 5K Monitors, the sensor resolution is more than is required.

The latest Canon & Nikon "flagships" only have a little more than 20Mp

So unless there is a compelling reason (tight crops) I don't see the need for more than the 20Mp that is now available and will hopefully, along with other really nice features, become available in the next models.

*chr

It's not the resolution that's the issue for me - it's the noise handling and ability to push images in PP.

Ricoh
5th February 2016, 10:54 AM
I think it does Harold. There are lots of posts about shutter shock on the A7R across the blogosphere. Some say it's a big deal, others that it's an inconvenience that can be worked around. It seems to be only a big issue with longer focal length lenses, which personally doesn't bother me too much. It's the wide end that I want this camera for.

Don't get s/s on my M240, and that's mirrorless!

Harold Gough
5th February 2016, 10:56 AM
I think it does Harold. There are lots of posts about shutter shock on the A7R across the blogosphere. Some say it's a big deal, others that it's an inconvenience that can be worked around. It seems to be only a big issue with longer focal length lenses, which personally doesn't bother me too much. It's the wide end that I want this camera for.

There is a standard fix, for digital cameras in general, for shutter vibration. Dial in a permanent anti shock of 1/8 second. (I don't know how widely that option is available).

Harold

Ricoh
5th February 2016, 11:09 AM
It's not the resolution that's the issue for me - it's the noise handling and ability to push images in PP.
That's it in a nut shell.
Signal / noise must have proportionality to the area of the photosite - for example if the photosite operated due the exitation of a single electron, noise would swamp the effects due to many factors, thermal, electromagnetic... As the area of the photosite increases to infinity, signal would swamp the random effects.

pdk42
5th February 2016, 11:10 AM
Paul,

Most of your criticism are either irrelevant or positives for me, apart from the last one.


Harold

Have you tried Live Composite Harold? It's a fantastic feature for all sorts of uses. For example, the show below was taken with a 4 minute succession of 2 sec exposures - it's done an effective job of removing the people without the need for any fancy post processing or using a ridiculously long exposure.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1669/24341146171_3cc9bfa5cc_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/D5WJHZ)
And then there were none (https://flic.kr/p/D5WJHZ) by Paul Kaye (https://www.flickr.com/photos/paul_kaye/), on Flickr

Ricoh
5th February 2016, 11:14 AM
Looks rather sterile without people though, don't you think. Like the aftermath of a nuclear war. It would be the sort of picture an estate agent might use to sell the building (is it grand central New York?)

Harold Gough
5th February 2016, 11:45 AM
Have you tried Live Composite Harold? It's a fantastic feature for all sorts of uses. For example, the show below was taken with a 4 minute succession of 2 sec exposures - it's done an effective job of removing the people without the need for any fancy post processing or using a ridiculously long exposure.

And then there were none (https://flic.kr/p/D5WJHZ) by Paul Kaye (https://www.flickr.com/photos/paul_kaye/), on Flickr

Circumstances have not been appropriate since I became aware of it. I am now doing almost entirely macro.

I need to get out more and it will be difficult to use my 24mm shift for macro.

I used to use 24mm and 17mm quite a bit with film, much of it for travel.

Harold

Walti
5th February 2016, 11:45 AM
Have you tried Live Composite Harold? It's a fantastic feature for all sorts of uses. For example, the show below was taken with a 4 minute succession of 2 sec exposures - it's done an effective job of removing the people without the need for any fancy post processing or using a ridiculously long exposure.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1669/24341146171_3cc9bfa5cc_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/D5WJHZ)
And then there were none (https://flic.kr/p/D5WJHZ) by Paul Kaye (https://www.flickr.com/photos/paul_kaye/), on Flickr

I'd forgotten about that as an option, I have to take photos of shops for my employer occasionally, it's a superb method of getting a clean photo, without any customers in the view (as we're not allowed to take/publish photos of customers without their written permission)

Got to read the manual again now!

Jim Ford
5th February 2016, 12:40 PM
Have you tried Live Composite Harold? It's a fantastic feature for all sorts of uses. For example, the show below was taken with a 4 minute succession of 2 sec exposures - it's done an effective job of removing the people without the need for any fancy post processing or using a ridiculously long exposure.

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1669/24341146171_3cc9bfa5cc_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/D5WJHZ)
And then there were none (https://flic.kr/p/D5WJHZ) by Paul Kaye (https://www.flickr.com/photos/paul_kaye/), on Flickr

That's a great effect!

What's caused the faint wispy line about a yard from the floor, from the RH opening to the RH one at the back?

Jim

pdk42
5th February 2016, 12:54 PM
Looks rather sterile without people though, don't you think. Like the aftermath of a nuclear war. It would be the sort of picture an estate agent might use to sell the building (is it grand central New York?)

Ah, so says the people photographer vs the things photographer!! I prefer it without the people - that way I can concentrate on the building's fine features and symmetry! Yes - it's Grand Central Station in New York.

pdk42
5th February 2016, 12:58 PM
That's a great effect!

What's caused the faint wispy line about a yard from the floor, from the RH opening to the RH one at the back?

Jim
Removing people works well with Live Composite so long as they're not overly reflective or carrying a light. The wispy line is either that, or maybe someone with a luggage truck or such like.

Jim Ford
5th February 2016, 03:57 PM
It's very impressive - do other make cameras have this feature?

'4 minutes of 2 second exposures' I guess the camera was on a tripod. I also guess that although you end up with one image in the camera, the camera has taken 120 exposures, which add to the camera total.

Jim

pdk42
5th February 2016, 04:30 PM
It's very impressive - do other make cameras have this feature?

'4 minutes of 2 second exposures' I guess the camera was on a tripod. I also guess that although you end up with one image in the camera, the camera has taken 120 exposures, which add to the camera total.

Jim

As far as I know this is a unique Olympus feature. I'm not sure in detail how it's implemented, but there is only one exposure on the card as a result of using it (and it's a raw file too). What happens is that it records only new light at each successive exposure. It's as if the processor is just looking for increased luminescence at each pixel and only recording it if it increases over previous exposures. So long as people are dull (!) compared to the background, then once they move, the lighter background overwrites them - so to speak. Very neat. It uses the electronic shutter, so no increase in shutter actuations.

It's also good for "light painting" - like the image below. I did that by shooting in a fairly dark room (dark enough such that the base exposure was heavily underexposed) and then used a torch to "paint" the garlic. After each "paint" with the torch I could see the image on the screen and repeat until I had the lighting effect I wanted.

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7288/16135771914_f3f1cf594c_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/qzS3Q3)
Garlic (https://flic.kr/p/qzS3Q3) by Paul Kaye (https://www.flickr.com/photos/paul_kaye/), on Flickr

It's great for startrails and fireworks too.

pdk42
5th February 2016, 04:53 PM
So, I got my 35mm f2.8 today and have done a few side-by-side comparisons of it on the A7R against my EM1 and 17mm f1.8. I'll try to post some pics so you can see for yourself, but in a nutshell:

- The Sony/Zeiss 35/2.8 is a better lens than the Oly 17/1.8 unless you stop down to around f8. I guess this just confirms what all the reviews say about the 17. It's OK, but not stellar. The Sony lens is stellar!!

- The A7R does better at higher ISO and there's obviously more resolution. But really, the difference isn't night and day.

- I haven't seen shutter shock yet, but the lack of IBIS, combined with 36Mp does make you think a lot harder about getting sharp shots.

- To get a fair comparison, I scaled down images from the Sony to match those from the Oly. It's perhaps unfair on the Sony since it robs it of resolution - but OTOH, it means the Sony's sharpness is enhanced and it makes its noise handling even better. Having done this, it's not difficult to see the difference between the cameras when pixel peeking and doing A/B comparisons; BUT I doubt for most photographs it would make that much of a practical difference, esp when printed where I would think the differences would vanish.

- For sure the extra resolution of the Sony is worth having if you want to pixel peek, or print very big. I try to avoid the former (!) and I rarely print bigger than A3+.

- If you want to shoot at ISO 6400 and above, then the Sony wins hands down. Even at ISO 1600, the Sony is very clean compared to the E-M1. TBH, this is the one thing that would push me towards the Sony, but if I look at my library, most of my shots are at ISO 200. Maybe that's because I avoid increasing the ISO due to noise, but it does tend to indicate that it's an edge case for me. I really want to see u43 noise handling improve - it's the Achilles heel of the system.

- I really don't like the handling of the A7R compared to the Oly. I suspect the mark ii models are much better but I'm not ready to spend two and a half grand on an A7Rii!

So - my conclusion? I don't see me keeping the A7R. Running two systems or spending a fortune on Sony FE lenses for the limited improvement doesn't make sense - but I'm now feeling unsatisfied by the Oly 17! Maybe I should have bought Jon Schick's Panasonic 15!!! Damn - I was so tempted!

Greytop
5th February 2016, 05:08 PM
So - my conclusion? I don't see me keeping the A7R. Running two systems or spending a fortune on Sony FE lenses for the limited improvement doesn't make sense - but I'm now feeling unsatisfied by the Oly 17! Maybe I should have bought Jon Schick's Panasonic 15!!! Damn - I was so tempted!

Interesting observations Paul.
I almost went the Sony route but the fact the my Olympus gear does most things so well stopped me. As you know if I want a more detailed image (for whatever reason) I would use one of my Merrills but I'm finding of late that my Oly gear is being used more frequently.
Regarding the 17mm, really what's changed? It's still as good as it was before you tried the Sony 35 *yes
In fact I can sympathise to a point because when I started using the Merrills I was pretty much stunned by the output but... they just are not as forgiving as the E-M1 and E-M5 MKII, still I guess it's nice to have both :)

pdk42
5th February 2016, 05:13 PM
Interesting observations Paul.
I almost went the Sony route but the fact the my Olympus gear does most things so well stopped me. As you know if I want a more detailed image (for whatever reason) I would use one of my Merrills but I'm finding of late that my Oly gear is being used more frequently.
Regarding the 17mm, really what's changed? It's still as good as it was before you tried the Sony 35 *yes
If fact I can sympathise to point because when I started using the Merrills I was pretty much stunned by the output but... they just are not as forgiving as the E-M1 and E-M5 MKII, still I guess it's nice to have both :)

Yes, the Merrills deliver pretty stunning images, but they're a PITA to use. I enjoyed mine while I had it, but I found it gathering dust on the shelf too often. The Oly system is very hard to beat as an excellent all-round player.

I'm coming to the conclusion that a camera's handling is very important to me. It's probably more important than absolute image quality. I think most interchangeable lens cameras are now capable of more than adequate results - esp if you learn their foibles and work accordingly.

Kiwi Paul
5th February 2016, 05:50 PM
I have used the A7ii for the last couple of days and actually like it very much, the shutter is a tad on the noisy side but has a nice sound to it so I don't mind. I'm very pleased with the IQ from both the camera and the 2 primes, particularly the Ziess 55mm f1.8, the detail and sharpness are excellent, I can see why it gets such stella reviews.
Unfortunately the EVF on the camera flickers, it's only noticeable in daylight and viewing bright scenes, sky, or any highlights flicker like mad, obviously a fault so I rang WEX and have returned it for my money back.
I've ordered another Sony A7 mark 2 series camera (but which model? ;) ) from a reputable grey importer for a very good price, well you DOLO to quote someone a few posts back :D
But overall I'm enjoying using the Sony stuff and very pleased with the results, it won't replace my m43 gear but will be used alongside it.
I must say I'm impressed by the headroom during PP, the highlights can be pushed a long way before clipping.

Paul

Kiwi Paul
5th February 2016, 05:55 PM
I'm coming to the conclusion that a camera's handling is very important to me. It's probably more important than absolute image quality. I think most interchangeable lens cameras are now capable of more than adequate results - esp if you learn their foibles and work accordingly.

Totally agree, you have to feel comfortable using a camera to enjoy photography, it can be odd sometimes the cameras you end up liking too, more then a few cameras I thought I would like but didn't and vice versa.

Paul

drmarkf
5th February 2016, 07:43 PM
Totally agree, you have to feel comfortable using a camera to enjoy photography, it can be odd sometimes the cameras you end up liking too, more then a few cameras I thought I would like but didn't and vice versa.

Paul

Yes, me too. It's so often played down in reviews, but is one of the very best features for me of the E-M1.

Actually I find the A7S's handling pretty good and so far I'm enjoying using it. This is a very personal thing, but the dials fall more or less correctly to my fingers and the right sided grip feels nearly as comfortable and secure as that of the E-M1.

I'm not bothered about the lack of a touch screen when using the Loxia manual 35mm (only having 2 hands...) but ive currently also got the auto Sony 35 f2.8 and it would be very useful with that. I can't decide at the moment whether to keep the f2.8: it's very useful when being lazy, and as Paul says its sharp as hell!

pdk42
5th February 2016, 10:12 PM
I have used the A7ii for the last couple of days and actually like it very much, the shutter is a tad on the noisy side but has a nice sound to it so I don't mind. I'm very pleased with the IQ from both the camera and the 2 primes, particularly the Ziess 55mm f1.8, the detail and sharpness are excellent, I can see why it gets such stella reviews.
Unfortunately the EVF on the camera flickers, it's only noticeable in daylight and viewing bright scenes, sky, or any highlights flicker like mad, obviously a fault so I rang WEX and have returned it for my money back.
I've ordered another Sony A7 mark 2 series camera (but which model? ;) ) from a reputable grey importer for a very good price, well you DOLO to quote someone a few posts back :D
But overall I'm enjoying using the Sony stuff and very pleased with the results, it won't replace my m43 gear but will be used alongside it.
I must say I'm impressed by the headroom during PP, the highlights can be pushed a long way before clipping.

Paul
Ooohh - A7Rii then! Now I'm sure that IS a stellar camera. You'll be putting your E-M5ii and lenses up for sale soon, of that I'm sure!

Kiwi Paul
6th February 2016, 04:24 PM
Ooohh - A7Rii then! Now I'm sure that IS a stellar camera. You'll be putting your E-M5ii and lenses up for sale soon, of that I'm sure!


Yes the A7Rii. I'm not intending selling my m43 gear though.

Here's 2 comparison pics, one with the Oly EM5 Mkii + Pana/Leica 25 1.4 and the other Sony A7ii + Ziess 55 f1.8. There is nothing to pick from them to be honest, they were taken on different days and the composition is slightly different too.
Of course at web resolution it would be impossible to see any small differences anyway.

Paul

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1485/24559025960_b8d1b5bd6a_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DqcqN5)

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1528/24761048591_c15f480e94_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DJ3R5T)

Harold Gough
6th February 2016, 04:45 PM
Yes the A7Rii. I'm not intending selling my m43 gear though.

Here's 2 comparison pics, one with the Oly EM5 Mkii + Pana/Leica 25 1.4 and the other Sony A7ii + Ziess 55 f1.8. There is nothing to pick from them to be honest, they were taken on different days and the composition is slightly different too.
Of course at web resolution it would be impossible to see any small differences anyway.

Paul

The colour saturation looks different but reducing the brightness slightly on the first one would lose that.

Harold

Ralph Harwood
6th February 2016, 04:54 PM
You beat me to it Harold! I prefer the less saturated olympus image on this screen (sony xperia phone) but the differences are so slight that a different monitor might make more difference than the cameras here.

Ralph Harwood
6th February 2016, 05:02 PM
Hi Everyone!

Does anyone know if there is a 4/3rds to E-mount adapter available? Due to this thread and the influence of the demon Ebay I am now developing a desire for an A7 too - but I can't possibly afford a second set of lenses. I do however have a very nice Samyang 85mm f1.4 and Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro and 70-200 f2.8 which I believe all are compatible with a full frame sensor. The Sigmas would both be ok wide open for telephoto work and don't need power to manual focus so a fully manual (contactless) adapter should be ok.

Cheers,

Ralph.

Kiwi Paul
6th February 2016, 05:09 PM
Try this link Ralph
http://www.digitalmediastore.co.uk/lens_accessories/lens_mount_adapters/sony_e-mount_body/Lens_Mount_Converter__Four_Thirds_System_Lens_on_S ony_E_Mount_Body__KIW-LMA43EM-D

Paul

Hi Everyone!
Does anyone know if there is a 4/3rds to E-mount adapter available? Due to this thread and the influence of the demon Ebay I am now developing a desire for an A7 too - but I can't possibly afford a second set of lenses. I do however have a very nice Samyang 85mm f1.4 and Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro and 70-200 f2.8 which I believe all are compatible with a full frame sensor. The Sigmas would both be ok wide open for telephoto work and don't need power to manual focus so a fully manual (contactless) adapter should be ok.

Cheers,

Ralph.

Kiwi Paul
6th February 2016, 05:27 PM
The colour saturation looks different but reducing the brightness slightly on the first one would lose that.

Harold

Its just down to pp, both were RAW files pped in Lightroom, I adjusted the black and white levels, colour balance and tint, so if one photo is different to the other thats why, threre's not much between them though.

Paul

Ralph Harwood
6th February 2016, 05:36 PM
Try this link Ralph
http://www.digitalmediastore.co.uk/lens_accessories/lens_mount_adapters/sony_e-mount_body/Lens_Mount_Converter__Four_Thirds_System_Lens_on_S ony_E_Mount_Body__KIW-LMA43EM-D

Paul

Many thanks Paul! You are making my build up of GAS even worse!

Kiwi Paul
6th February 2016, 05:39 PM
Many thanks Paul! You are making my build up of GAS even worse!

Sorry Ralph but when I have GAS I like to give it as many people as possible ;) :D

Paul

pdk42
6th February 2016, 05:48 PM
I did a fairly detailed comparison of the E-M1 vs the A7R here:

http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?p=375877#post375877

Bottom line - the Sony's got better IQ (hardly surprising), but is that enough?

pdk42
6th February 2016, 05:49 PM
Hi Everyone!

Does anyone know if there is a 4/3rds to E-mount adapter available? Due to this thread and the influence of the demon Ebay I am now developing a desire for an A7 too - but I can't possibly afford a second set of lenses. I do however have a very nice Samyang 85mm f1.4 and Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro and 70-200 f2.8 which I believe all are compatible with a full frame sensor. The Sigmas would both be ok wide open for telephoto work and don't need power to manual focus so a fully manual (contactless) adapter should be ok.

Cheers,

Ralph.

I very much doubt that Ralph since the image circle of a 4/3 lens would be way too small for an FF sensor.

You can get OM to E-mount adapters and in fact, the OM lenses work very well. I'll post some examples later.

pdk42
6th February 2016, 06:27 PM
I base my caution on my own experience and that was with a 50 1.4 used with my old E-5 and all of its 12 megapixels :). It makes a passable soft focus effect lens which can be great for certain types of portrait.

Ian

Well - I've tried my OM 50mm f1.8 and 24mm f2.8 on the A7R and I'm actually pretty impressed. Both are very sharp in the centre wide open and the 50 managed pretty well even into the corners. The 24 is soft in the corners wide open, but very sharp across the whole frame at f8. In fact, it's sharper a f8 on the A7R than the 12mm f2 at f5.6 (I reckon its best aperture) on the E-M1 so I'm not complaining.

A7R with the OM 24mm. Shot with the E_M1 and 45mm f1.8. Handheld at 1/8s f4, ISO 1600 - try doing that with the Sony and its 90mm lens!!
http://www.famillekaye.com/EM1vsA7R/EM160002-3_1280.jpg

OM 50mm f1.8 - shot at f1.8:
http://www.famillekaye.com/EM1vsA7R/DSC00007_1280.jpg

OM 24mm f2.8 shot at f8:
http://www.famillekaye.com/EM1vsA7R/DSC00012_1280.jpg

Ralph Harwood
6th February 2016, 06:58 PM
I very much doubt that Ralph since the image circle of a 4/3 lens would be way too small for an FF sensor.

You can get OM to E-mount adapters and in fact, the OM lenses work very well. I'll post some examples later.

Hi PDK42!

I agree that my native 4/3rds lenses wouldn't be any good, but both the Samyang and Sigma lenses are also available in Canon / Nikon mounts, as far as I know it is only the mount and interface that changes - the optical elements remain the same.

I have also got a few OM primes I can use but I was really wanting to try the Samyang.

Kiwi Paul
6th February 2016, 07:04 PM
Hi PDK42!

I agree that my native 4/3rds lenses wouldn't be any good, but both the Samyang and Sigma lenses are also available in Canon / Nikon mounts, as far as I know it is only the mount and interface that changes - the optical elements remain the same.

I have also got a few OM primes I can use but I was really wanting to try the Samyang.

The A7ii (don't know about the other models) has a setting for using crop sensor lenses, I never used it as I only have E system lenses but the 4/3 lenses may work with it.
You can't use m43 lenses with the A7 series cameras I believe, only with the crop sensor Nex cameras, I don't know why.
Apparently the A7 series cameras lenses sit closer to the sensor than m43 lenses do to m43 sensors, I'm surprised about that considering A7 series are full frame.

Paul

Ralph Harwood
6th February 2016, 07:32 PM
Just had a quick check on ebay and the samyang is available in e-mount for the A7 - so hopefully my 4/3 lens should work on an adapter. The Sigma is available with a canon mount and is compatible with a 5D so again should cover the full frame on the A7. The only issue I can see is that on native sony lenses the rearmost element is closer to the sensor than any adapted lenses, so the angle of incidence on the sensor is more extreme, but this will help prevent vignetting caused by the mount - adapted lenses might vignette as the rear element is farther away. If I do go ahead I'll let you all know.

Kiwi Paul
6th February 2016, 07:33 PM
Just had a quick check on ebay and the samyang is available in e-mount for the A7 - so hopefully my 4/3 lens should work on an adapter. The Sigma is available with a canon mount and is compatible with a 5D so again should cover the full frame on the A7. The only issue I can see is that on native sony lenses the rearmost element is closer to the sensor than any adapted lenses, so the angle of incidence on the sensor is more extreme, but this will help prevent vignetting caused by the mount - adapted lenses might vignette as the rear element is farther away. If I do go ahead I'll let you all know.

So you are going to get an A7 then, which variant?

Paul

Ralph Harwood
6th February 2016, 07:41 PM
If I do get one it will probably be just a mark 1 A7, as the prices are still high for the others. Having said that if an A7s comes along at a sensible price I might be tempted - I don't often need more than 12 Mp but the low light performance would come in handy.

pdk42
8th February 2016, 08:54 AM
There is a standard fix, for digital cameras in general, for shutter vibration. Dial in a permanent anti shock of 1/8 second. (I don't know how widely that option is available).

Harold

Actually Harold, that isn't the problem. The 1/8s delay (at least as Olympus had implemented it) was between pressing the shutter and the shutter sequence starting. It would perhaps help with camera shake, but it did nothing to stop vibration caused by the shutter opening before the exposure. The "0s" anti-shock setting is different though - it introduces a delay between the first curtain opening and the exposure starting (electronically). This is why it's also called "Electronic First Curtain Shutter" (EFCS). This is where the old 1/8s delay and the new "0s" (actually about 20ms) are introduced (on the E-M1 and E-P5):

- Press shutter
<---- Old 1/8 sec delay is here
- 2nd curtain closes (it was open for viewing the image)
- 1st curtain opens
<---- New "0s" delay is here (actually about 20ms)
- Exposure starts (electronically)
- 2nd curtain closes
- Exposure ends
- 1st curtain opens again for viewfinder

The problem of shutter shock is that the deceleration of the first curtain as it opens introduces vibration and resonance into the sensor assembly that takes time to damp down. All the delay in the world before the first curtain opens won't fix that! The new EFCS feature introduces the delay while these vibrations damp down and it really does work!

BTW - the newer shutters in the E-M5ii etc work slightly differently in that there are fewer curtain movements when 0s anti-shock is used. The EFCS trick can be applied immediately on pressing the shutter and not waiting for the 2nd curtain close/1st curtain open sequence to happen. I guess this cycle on the older shutters is not programmable from firmware so can't be changed.

Harold Gough
8th February 2016, 09:17 AM
Paul,

Interesting. I have seen a blog where that 1/8sec has helped a lot of (older?) camera users. I have not encountered the problem, so far.

Harold

pdk42
8th February 2016, 09:27 AM
Paul,

Interesting. I have seen a blog where that 1/8sec has helped a lot of (older?) camera users. I have not encountered the problem, so far.

Harold

The problem is that shutter shock can be hard to spot. When I had an e-p5 i thought for a while that it didn't suffer from shutter shock - until I tried it with a friend's Panasonic PZ lens. Then it was terribly obvious. In trying to characterise the problem I took a lot of test shots with various lenses and different shutter speeds. I then realised that there was shutter shock to some degree with all my lenses when using speeds in the 1/80th to 1/200 region - but in many cases the effect was quite subtle.

Add to that a helping of camera shake and its easy to understand why there are lots of opinions on the phenomenon. I didn't test the A7R specifically for the problem, but I didn't see any obvious issues in the shots I did take. It doesn't have the option of EFCS.

Kiwi Paul
16th February 2016, 02:31 PM
I got my A7Rii yesterday, very nice camera, excellent detail and resolution with the Zeiss 55 and Sony 28 lenses.
It has the same EVF flicker the A7ii had but I've tried a few different A7 series cameras and they all have it, I've reduced the effect by turning down the EVF brightness, otherwise a very nice EVF.
I'll post more once I've had a chance to properly evaluate it and the photos I've taken so far.

Paul

Harold Gough
16th February 2016, 04:07 PM
I got my A7Rii yesterday, very nice camera, excellent detail and resolution with the Zeiss 55 and Sony 28 lenses.
It has the same EVF flicker the A7ii had but I've tried a few different A7 series cameras and they all have it, I've reduced the effect by turning down the EVF brightness, otherwise a very nice EVF.
I'll post more once I've had a chance to properly evaluate it and the photos I've taken so far.

Paul

I have just been trying to stop myself buying a Leica 180mm by checking out my Tamron SP 180mm 35th Anniversery Edition +/- 1.4 matched TC. Using (eventually) a tripod, I have obtained some excellent images with my EM-1 but some (relatively) pretty fuzzy ones with the A7R (using focus peaking).

At, typically, 1/1000 sec and f8 on a tripod, this should not be happening.

Harold

Kiwi Paul
16th February 2016, 04:15 PM
I have just been trying to stop myself buying a Leica 180mm by checking out my Tamron SP 180mm 35th Anniversery Edition +/- 1.4 matched TC. Using (eventually) a tripod, I have obtained some excellent images with my EM-1 but some (relatively) pretty fuzzy ones with the A7R (using focus peaking).

At, typically, 1/1000 sec and f8 on a tripod, this should not be happening.

Harold

I read a few articles on the A7 series cameras where the reviewers recommend using lenses specifically designed for the full frame E mount mirrorless system cameras. They commented that good or even excellent lenses for Nikon,Canon and other brands don't perform as well on the E mount mirrorless bodies. Presumably because E mount lenses are designed to be close to the sensor.

I certainly have no complaints about the IQ of the shots I've taken with the 28 and 55 E mount lenses I've been using.

Here's one with the 28mm with the A7ii

Paul

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1655/24404410363_c9c0894f3d_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DbwYXV)

drmarkf
16th February 2016, 11:26 PM
I read a few articles on the A7 series cameras where the reviewers recommend using lenses specifically designed for the full frame E mount mirrorless system cameras. They commented that good or even excellent lenses for Nikon,Canon and other brands don't perform as well on the E mount mirrorless bodies. Presumably because E mount lenses are designed to be close to the sensor.


I thought this was more of a problem with wide angles and resulted from the thick Sony sensor stack (however I haven't paid much attention to teles for the system, so this might be wrong).

If it is sensor stack problems, Harold, you apparently often get magenta casts, especially in the corners, as well as soft images - any signs of this?

pdk42
16th February 2016, 11:57 PM
I thought this was more of a problem with wide angles and resulted from the thick Sony sensor stack (however I haven't paid much attention to teles for the system, so this might be wrong).

If it is sensor stack problems, Harold, you apparently often get magenta casts, especially in the corners, as well as soft images - any signs of this?

Yes, it's a sensor stack issue. Obviously when you put an adapted SLR lens on via an adapter, the register distance is the same as it would be on the original camera. The sensor stack on the A7Rii is significantly thinner than previous cameras - I guess specifically to address this issue.

Having said that, when I tried the OM 24/2.8 on the A7R (old model), it was pretty sharp into the corners with no obvious colour casts (so long as I stopped down to f8).

pdk42
17th February 2016, 12:00 AM
I got my A7Rii yesterday, very nice camera, excellent detail and resolution with the Zeiss 55 and Sony 28 lenses.
It has the same EVF flicker the A7ii had but I've tried a few different A7 series cameras and they all have it, I've reduced the effect by turning down the EVF brightness, otherwise a very nice EVF.
I'll post more once I've had a chance to properly evaluate it and the photos I've taken so far.

Paul

I'm very envious Paul - in a nice way! Enjoy and post some images and experiences.

Interesting comment about the EVF flicker. I didn't notice anything on the A7R I used. Maybe it's something some people are sensitive to but not others?

Harold Gough
17th February 2016, 07:24 AM
I have just been trying to stop myself buying a Leica 180mm by checking out my Tamron SP 180mm 35th Anniversery Edition +/- 1.4 matched TC. Using (eventually) a tripod, I have obtained some excellent images with my EM-1 but some (relatively) pretty fuzzy ones with the A7R (using focus peaking).

At, typically, 1/1000 sec and f8 on a tripod, this should not be happening.

Harold

Here are some images from the earlier, beanbag session, which are significantly better than the tripod ones (not show).

There is an uncropped and a cropped one with the 180 and no TC, followed by the same with TC

Harold

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/ufiles/41/1258141.jpg

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/ufiles/42/1258142.jpg

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/ufiles/43/1258143.jpg

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/ufiles/46/1258146.jpg

drmarkf
17th February 2016, 09:40 AM
I have noticed the A7S EVF is a bit more flickery than the E-M1, but not irritatingly so. The camera's a lot slower to switch on and noticeably slower to find an auto exposure: I understand the mkII versions across the range are better in both areas.

The mkIs are exactly that, and we should really be comparing them with earlier Olympus versions! It is a work in progress. Even the A7S shows a number of good developments on the earlier two models, such as a proper all metal bayonet.

The filter stack has been thinned on the mkIIs, but it seems that you're still well advised to check on the various blogs and forums that they are compatible before purchasing any legacy full frame glass to use on them. I'd thought it was purely down to the angle of exit of light from the rear of the lens, and hence the angle of incidence on the sensor (with the 'thick' layered sensor responding best to directly impinging light from wide exit pupil lenses with a greater distance between rear element and sensor) but I'm now not at all sure that's the whole story.

Anyway, there are plenty of excellent recommended combinations. I'm still trying to resist that Tri-Elmar 16-18-21...

crimbo
17th February 2016, 10:20 AM
Having got a Nikon d750 I dont have to worry about other lenses...if it aint Nikon it dont fit!

Kiwi Paul
18th February 2016, 12:56 AM
I'm very impressed by the resolution and detail the A7Rii + Zeiss 55 lens provide ( and the Sony 28 f2 lens).
Here's a couple of samples, I won't post any more photos from this camera as I know this is a Oly / 43 forum but just for interest here's a couple, go to my flickr to see more or in higher resolution.

Paul

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1677/24723631969_0a080fac15_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DEK5qH)

https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1645/24723445379_5a4ebfc7fb_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/DEJ7XD)

Phill D
18th February 2016, 06:57 AM
Paul did you do comparison shots with your Olys?

Ralph Harwood
18th February 2016, 10:33 AM
Hi there Paul!

The second shot shows great detail in the foreground, but the background is slightly OOF - was that deliberate or a function of the smaller DOF of the full frame sensor - I'm sure that an Olympus would have had everything in focus at f8!

Cheers,

Ralph.

Harold Gough
18th February 2016, 11:49 AM
Hi there Paul!

The second shot shows great detail in the foreground, but the background is slightly OOF - was that deliberate or a function of the smaller DOF of the full frame sensor - I'm sure that an Olympus would have had everything in focus at f8!

Cheers,

Ralph.

I'm getting out of practice at non-macro subjects but I would have thought f11 might be pushing it a bit.

Harold

drmarkf
18th February 2016, 01:06 PM
I'm certainly noticing that focus is much more critical with my A7S for the night-time street photography shots I'm currently using it for.

Having usable ASAs of 12800 (and even 25600) helps a lot especially with moving subjects, but the focus peaking isn't as good as that on the OMDs so I'm finding you have to use focus magnification as well, certainly for shots at f4 and 5.6 which would be much less critical in practice with m4/3.

Like anything else one gets better with practice, though.

Kiwi Paul
18th February 2016, 02:49 PM
Paul did you do comparison shots with your Olys?

No Phil I didn't.

Paul

Kiwi Paul
18th February 2016, 02:53 PM
Hi there Paul!

The second shot shows great detail in the foreground, but the background is slightly OOF - was that deliberate or a function of the smaller DOF of the full frame sensor - I'm sure that an Olympus would have had everything in focus at f8!

Cheers,

Ralph.

Hello Ralph,

Full frame requires twice the aperture to achieve the same dof as m43, that shot was at f13 so I would have required to shoot at f16 to achieve the same dof as Oly at f8. The nets were very close and the buildings a long way away, it's often hard to gauge what f stop is required to get enough dof, looking through the evf it all looked OK but it's hard to see critical focus through an evf without zooming in.

Paul

Ralph Harwood
18th February 2016, 06:10 PM
Hi there Paul!

I couldn't get the Exif data for the picture through flikr on my phone, so I did wonder how the photos were shot. On my recent walking trips I have been astonished by how much depth of field you get at f7.1 and using a hyperfocal distance - pretty much everything from 3m to infinity at 12mm.

If you were using the 55mm lens rather than the 28mm then that would probably explain the difference in the Dof. The important question though is are you enjoying using the camera?

Cheers,

Ralph.

Kiwi Paul
18th February 2016, 06:43 PM
Hi there Paul!If you were using the 55mm lens rather than the 28mm then that would probably explain the difference in the Dof. The important question though is are you enjoying using the camera?

Cheers,

Ralph.

HI Ralph, yes it was the 55 lens (27.5mm m43 equiv).
The camera is lovely to use, it's very similar in size and feel to the EM1 (I've used Mike's EM1).
There are a few annoyances but it doesn't cloud the user experience and there are a few things I like about it too, in aperture priority mode as you change the aperture the change in dof is shown in the live EVF, very nice.


Paul

drmarkf
19th February 2016, 02:46 PM
HI Ralph, yes it was the 55 lens (27.5mm m43 equiv).
The camera is lovely to use, it's very similar in size and feel to the EM1 (I've used Mike's EM1).
There are a few annoyances but it doesn't cloud the user experience and there are a few things I like about it too, in aperture priority mode as you change the aperture the change in dof is shown in the live EVF, very nice.


Paul

Yes, I must say that is my overall experience of the A7S as well so far: I don't find it has much of a less quality feel than the OMDs (as the other Paul reported) and the irritations are either surmountable with more familiarity, or else are relatively minor.

I find it compliments the E-M1 very well: different tools for different jobs.

Kiwi Paul
19th February 2016, 03:02 PM
Yes, I must say that is my overall experience of the A7S as well so far: I don't find it has much of a less quality feel than the OMDs (as the other Paul reported) and the irritations are either surmountable with more familiarity, or else are relatively minor.

I find it compliments the E-M1 very well: different tools for different jobs.

It was me that commented on the EM5ii having a better quality feel, I still think that although now I'm used to the A7Rii it's not as much as I first thought.
I also find it compliments my m43 system too.

Paul