Share your A7(r) Photos :)

[InTheSky]

Incredible result so far in my quick testing tonight after reception.

(taken with Iphone)

1459903_10152134008616514_642236508_n.jpg

(96.53 KiB) Downloaded 2321 times

It is sharp with no problem in the corner even at F2.0.

Regards,

Frank

[Dr. Harout]

Where are the shots, Frank?

[CharlieWebster]

swapped my A7r for A7:

DSC00117 by unoh7, on Flickr


DSC00114-2 by unoh7, on Flickr

that's with FD 35/2 SSC concave.

[CharlieWebster]

Charile,
Since I have a A900, and have adapters for Hasselblad, M42, MD, Nikon lenses, A7 does not do much for me, except, and that is a big one, I am realizing of late, the weight. On the other hand, A7r means a 50% increase in Pixels in additional to all other
goodies that come with A7/r family.
I realized just now as I am writing this, that my A900/A700 are 5 years old. My A100 and even older Dimage A2 are still kicking and strong.
Of course, the ISO sensitivity and dynamic range of new sensors are certainly factors but have not been a limiting ones for me so far.

Sury

Hi Sury,

I fell for the 36 mp ploy, but as you can see the advantage is invisible, and comes with a 600USD premium. In fact I'm pretty convinced now the A7 is superior with almost all legacy glass.

If you go fully native, then the A7r will be very nice, but even then I'm not sure the difference will be apparent without big magnification.

Sony has come close to a dream camera, but for whatever reason they have added a thick cover over the A7r sensor, several layers of god know what, which really compromises the edges of many legacy lenses under 50mm. The A7 has this problem also, but to a lesser degree.

Here is the same lens as above on the A7r in an f/8 test shot:

DSC04369 by unoh7, on Flickr

at first glance it's not bad, but check the distant details on the edges:
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3700/1142 ... 00ed_o.jpg

not close to the performance in the center. The native 35 is designed to work with this issue, and it has great edge performance.

At any rate the A7 is a steal and in my opinion is the better camera.

[Darinm]

Greetings photoclubalpha, I'm a long time Nikon and NEX user but never bonded with the NEX enough to join. The A7 on the other hand...

A7 & Canon FD 135mm f2, about half the weight and this one costs only 10% of the Sony Zeiss 135mm 1.8. Too bad the mfd is around 5'

_DSC3115.jpg (473.48 KiB) Viewed 5123 times

In use at f/2.8


Minolta MC W Rokkor HG 35mm f/2.8. I thought Tamron had the longest names, little did I know Minolta beat them to the punch years ago!

12-2013 0379.jpg (391.8 KiB) Viewed 5123 times

[sury]

Charile,
Since I have a A900, and have adapters for Hasselblad, M42, MD, Nikon lenses, A7 does not do much for me, except, and that is a big one, I am realizing of late, the weight. On the other hand, A7r means a 50% increase in Pixels in additional to all other
goodies that come with A7/r family.
I realized just now as I am writing this, that my A900/A700 are 5 years old. My A100 and even older Dimage A2 are still kicking and strong.
Of course, the ISO sensitivity and dynamic range of new sensors are certainly factors but have not been a limiting ones for me so far.

Sury

Hi Sury,

I fell for the 36 mp ploy, but as you can see the advantage is invisible, and comes with a 600USD premium. In fact I'm pretty convinced now the A7 is superior with almost all legacy glass.

If you go fully native, then the A7r will be very nice, but even then I'm not sure the difference will be apparent without big magnification.

Sony has come close to a dream camera, but for whatever reason they have added a thick cover over the A7r sensor, several layers of god know what, which really compromises the edges of many legacy lenses under 50mm. The A7 has this problem also, but to a lesser degree.



At any rate the A7 is a steal and in my opinion is the better camera.

Charlie,
Thank you for the examples and your rationale. Much appreciated and my apologies for the delinquency in acknowledging your reply as well as I completely missed it.

With best regards,
Sury

[sury]

[quote="Darinm"]Greetings photoclubalpha, I'm a long time Nikon and NEX user but never bonded with the NEX enough to join. The A7 on the other hand...

A7 & Canon FD 135mm f2, about half the weight and this one costs only 10% of the Sony Zeiss 135mm 1.8. Too bad the mfd is around 5'


In use at f/2.8


Minolta MC W Rokkor HG 35mm f/2.8. I thought Tamron had the longest names, little did I know Minolta beat them to the punch years ago!


Darinm,
Those are fantastic shots and I love the first landscape shot. Welcome to the forum.

With best regards,
Sury

[Birma]

Lovely landscape shots Darinm - and welcome to the forum from me as well.

[Darinm]

Thanks, it's been a joy to own so far, I've been trying lots of lens combinations but will probably end up sticking with old Nikkors just due to muscle memory for their focus direction.

A7 & beat up Nikkor 16mm f/3.5 fisheye

_DSC3124.jpg (439.1 KiB) Viewed 5084 times

Cropped a bit

12-2013 0883.jpg (472.49 KiB) Viewed 5084 times

[CharlieWebster]

Thank you for the examples and your rationale. Much appreciated and my apologies for the delinquency in acknowledging your reply as well as I completely missed it.

With best regards,
Sury

No worries, my pleasure.


DSC04759 by unoh7, on Flickr


DSC04782 by unoh7, on Flickr

Above is the Kiron 28/2 (OM mount) on A7

[mvanrheenen]

Seriously, I'm away for a few weeks and half the forum has bought into full frame here. Sjeesh!

To quote Doc:
I'm not jealous...
I'm not jealous...
I'm not jealous...

[CharlieWebster]

I know there are some minolta fans around here

Check out the Maxxum 100-200 f/4.5 on the A7, via LAEA4 AF adapter:

DSC03597-2 by unoh7, on Flickr


DSC03094 by unoh7, on Flickr

minolta colors alive and well

That lens goes for about 40USD on ebay.

The real issue here is that this setup is small enough for me to ski with under my jacket. Mobile Full Frame.

To day I was using the Oly 200/5 which is 455 grams INCLUDING adapter. Even lighter.

MF with peaking is so good I could shoot live skiing at f/5 and get half my shots in good focus. The lens appears to be quite sharp.

[CharlieWebster]

OM 135/2.8 (360 grams) on A7:

DSC05646-3 by unoh7, on Flickr


DSC05704-3 by unoh7, on Flickr

[CharlieWebster]

DSC05827-3 by unoh7, on Flickr


DSC05901-3 by unoh7, on Flickr

1956 5cm red scale elmar

[sury]

Nice shots Darin and Charlie. That skier shot (5827-3) is my favorite Charlie.

Sury