Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Non Rangefinder Cameras > CSC : Digital Compact System Cameras - > Sony NEX / Full Frame Alpha non DSLR Cameras

Sony NEX / Full Frame Alpha non DSLR Cameras Sony does a lot of things well. Naming their cameras so the nomenclature makes sense is not one of them. The NEX series has now become the Alpha NEX series, not to be confused with their Alpha DSLRs. Huh ? IS the person who misnamed the Leica M10 the Leica M240 now working for Sony? The new full frame Alpha 7/7r are incredibly successful. I wonder how long it will take the other manufacturers to make their version of the 7/7r full frame cameras.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 01-02-2014   #51
taemo
Registered User
 
taemo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Age: 29
Posts: 428
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Oh I agree. Gear only matters to some extent. However, it is important to feel comfortable with what you are using to accomplish your photography... that is why there are so many different takes on camera design... and why we are so drawn to a certain design.
This, I know a buddy who was looking for an M9, he bought an A7r mid-December because it was a cheaper FF camera that takes M-mount.
Eventually he returned it and just 2 days ago he bought an M9 and he's happy with it.
Really, we can take photos with any type of cameras, hell, I even considered using P&S for street shooting but I wanted more control and comfortable gears to shoot with.
__________________
earldieta.com - flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2014   #52
ChrisLivsey
Registered User
 
ChrisLivsey's Avatar
 
ChrisLivsey is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,328
M240 on offer at £4750 at UK dealer, what waiting list ?
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/red_eyes_man/

It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2014   #53
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
What would you have suggested they add?


Nothing seriously John ... but higher ISO capabilities. That personally is all I'd want in a digital M ... as the M9 currently stands it has everything a photographer needs.
__________________
---------------------------
zenfolio

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2014   #54
Wobba
Registered User
 
Wobba is offline
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by malland View Post
For me the big issue is the color rendition of the M240: from everything that I've seen, including DNG files that I've processed, I much prefer the color rendition of the M9. Recenlty "fotografz" (Marc), whose concern has been skin tones and whose color judgment I trust, has tried the M240 as well as the A7R. Someone sent me fotografz's conclusion which is a follows (I don't know where he posted this):The experience of "Prosopos" (Peter), written up on his blog, is similar: because of its unsatisfactory color rendition he sold his M240 and went back to the M9. In the light of this I am surprised that no one in this thread has discussed the issue of color rendition, which, according to fotografz, seems to be outstanding from the A7R, although I have not looked into this myself.

—Mitch/Pak Nam Pran
Tristes Tropiques [WIP]
I agree, the colour rendition of the M240 leaves a lot to be desired. The A7R, on the other hand, is outstanding and can come very close to the colour rendition of the M9.

Prosophos/Peter, by the way, also came very close to ditching his M9's. He posted this on his blog a few days ago:

"In frustration, I came close to selling all of my Leica equipment a few days ago.

After an ice storm that left this city without power (and some of our fellow citizens still have no heat!), the whole family became ill (and we still are…).

What does this have to do with Leica?

Well, the one day where everything was “normal”, thankfully, was Christmas Day — our power had been restored and we hadn’t yet gotten sick. Naturally, I was looking forward to photographing.

After shooting some frames and reviewing the images, I realized the focus was off! A few key moments were lost (or at least, rendered blurry). I took a few test shots and realized my M9 was back-focusing by about an inch. Enough to mess things up when photographing at f/1.4.

This is one of the charms of rangefinder ownership. The rangefinder focusing mechanism, over time, can spontaneously (or with little provocation) deviate from spec.

No problem, I thought. That’s why I have a back-up M9(P).

So I started photographing with it. But I realized why this camera has been relegated to back-up status. Its buffer chokes up after a few frames and it takes several seconds before I can start photographing again. The outcome: I missed a few more key moments.

A specific charm of Leica ownership is that one M9 can behave in a much different way from another — identical — M9 (with the same SD card and the same firmware!). Leica still hasn’t mastered the whole electronics thing… which may be perceived by some as somewhat of a shortcoming in the digital age.

Back to the story…

Maybe it was because I had spent the weekend and some of the week re-enacting scenes from Pioneer Village, or maybe it was because I was getting sick, but I had had enough!

(I know, I know, these are “First World” problems, and — believe me — I know how fortunate I am. I’m just venting).

I started packing away the M9s.

But what other camera(s) would I now use?

Out of everything currently out there, the only non-Leica camera that will accept my M lenses and give me a full frame sensor is the Sony A7(R). And its CMOS sensor comes the closest to achieving my coveted M9 CCD sensor rendering (the Sony colour signature is another story). But… Leica lenses (especially wide angle ones) don’t necessarily shine on other manufacturers’ platforms. So my pricey Leica Summilux lenses would be worth little on the Sony.

No problem, I thought once more. I’ll just sell my lenses too and start from scratch.

But, but… I used the Sony RX1R earlier this year and the computer-as-camera user interface left me cold. That, and having to rely on the EVF: through it, it didn’t feel like I was watching the world… it felt like I was watching TV.

So I turned my attention to DSLR cameras.

The only contender for me would be the Nikon Df. Small for a DSLR, plenty of external controls for manual shooting, etc. And I was close to purchasing it, despite the downgrade in base ISO image quality it would represent (high ISO functionality is another story).

But I prefer to manually focus. And I’d been-there-done-that with the D3 and D3s, both coupled to a Noct Nikkor 58/1.2 AIS lens. When photographing action wide open, the hit rate with this system is low (even when using the “green dot” focus aid).

Plus, I’ve grown accustomed to the “see the world outside of the frame” view of the rangefinder window. With it, I can see elements outside of what the lens sees, and I can therefore better anticipate how a given moment may unfold.

Finally — believe it or not — I was once more tempted to switch to a new Leica M240. Oh, but the image quality would be… (well, you know). And don’t forget those electronic gremlins, which continue to plague Leica, even with their latest bodies…

In the end, I decided to keep my current gear. Yes, I know… I’ve become predictable.

Which places my photography situation in a precarious position, with respect to any future “upgrade” path.

Hopefully, by the time my current M9 cameras die (or their sensors spontaneously crack — but that’s another story!), there will be other viable options out there for me).

I’m holding out hope for Sony to sort out its user interface, and I’m also closely watching for advances in EVF technology.

Or maybe Leica will finally produce a non-beta version of a camera.

Yes, it’s a love-hate thing.

—Peter."
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2014   #55
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,319
Happy New Year. Thanks for the detailed comment above.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2014   #56
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,955
Mitch's advice about never exceeding ISO 640 and pushing DNG in post is important.

Much more important is the photo in Mitch's post is a wonderful example of how to leave well enough alone and let shadows just be what they are... shadows.

Just because shadows might not have a poor signal-to-noise ratio at ISO 3200 doesn't meant one should automatically push them too far. I think people (myself included) are tempted to lift shadow regions just because they can.
__________________
"Perspective is governed by where you stand – object size and the angle of view included in the picture is determined by focal length." H.S. Newcombe

Self-Induced Transparency Photography, FLICKR, Professional Portfolio.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2014   #57
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,665
no question M9 is superb camera. I want one.
__________________
twitter: uhoh007
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2014   #58
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
Mitch's advice about never exceeding ISO 640 and pushing DNG in post is important.

Much more important is the photo in Mitch's post is a wonderful example of how to leave well enough alone and let shadows just be what they are... shadows.

Just because shadows might not have a poor signal-to-noise ratio at ISO 3200 doesn't meant one should automatically push them too far. I think people (myself included) are tempted to lift shadow regions just because they can.

That is such an issue for me these days. I see so many images that have had shadows lifted well beyond the way the human eye perceives them ... it ruins a lot of good photographs IMO.

I also think that this thread is highlighting what a good camera the M9 actually is when used to it's potential!
__________________
---------------------------
zenfolio

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2014   #59
aeturnum
Registered User
 
aeturnum is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 155
I had an M9, which produced the highest quality output of any digital camera I've used. Very crisp, files could be pushed for ages, nice color. I sold it because I couldn't justify a ~$4k camera that didn't have an ISO above 1600. If I'm shooting digital, it's because it's dark. If I can use ISO 400, I'll go with my film rangefinders.

The M240 and MM look wonderful and are extremely expensive. $7k (or so) on a digital that 'only' goes to 6400 / 10,000 is a bitter pill to swallow. Subjectively, I absolutely prefer the form factor and find my keeper right much higher on a RF system.

My personal experience with the A7 is that its color gets very dodgy at ISO 6400+ and it's a little temperamental in general. However, ISO 12,800 can look great. No matter its faults, I can use my RF lenses (X-Pan as well as M!) at their listed focal lengths, and I can buy ~4 A7s for the price of one M240.

So, in a real sense, it's all about image quality. I cannot afford to make images with the M240, I can afford to with the A7.
__________________
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2014   #60
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
 
dcsang's Avatar
 
dcsang is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Toronto Canada
Age: 49
Posts: 4,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
That is such an issue for me these days. I see so many images that have had shadows lifted well beyond the way the human eye perceives them ... it ruins a lot of good photographs IMO.

I also think that this thread is highlighting what a good camera the M9 actually is when used to it's potential!
I agree with this Keith.. especially the lifting of shadows...

Cheers,
Dave
__________________
I own a Leica and I am NOT a dentist (I don't even portray one on TV!!!)

I have an idea what I'm looking for but it only becomes real once I see it - Constantine Manos

ITS THE MAGIC I SEE IN THE Light, Texture, & Tone
that Intoxicates Me - Helen Hill

My Flickr - it's where I post my RF and P&S shtuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2014   #61
NazgulKing
Registered User
 
NazgulKing is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 191
I must be an utter iconoclast when while I think that color is important, it hasn't bothered me much, having switched between 4 camera companies in the span of 3 years, each when their own generic color palette. Never mind that I have never had a really preferred film.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-04-2014   #62
lhotse
Registered User
 
lhotse is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 21
it is times like these where I feel glad I am colour blind
__________________
Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-04-2014   #63
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,955
Color control is complicated and tedious, but it is possible.

Those who use raw files can render color just about about anyway they see fit . This does not require sophisticated software.

Those who use sophisticated software can create countless versions with different color renditions from a single image.

Certain programs enable one to create a custom color profile for their camera's raw images if one is competent and patient enough to do it.

Of course completely controlling color rendition requires a scene with decent light. A performer on stage bathed in a blue spotlight greatly limits rendering flexibility. Significant contamination from IR light is also problematic, but easily solved at the tim elf exposure.
__________________
"Perspective is governed by where you stand – object size and the angle of view included in the picture is determined by focal length." H.S. Newcombe

Self-Induced Transparency Photography, FLICKR, Professional Portfolio.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2014   #64
arthury
Arthur Y
 
arthury is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 34
I believe someone did and the results were not good pairing Leica lenses on the A7r ...

http://www.dirkahlgrim.com/wordpress/?p=1637
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2014   #65
Monochrom
Registered User
 
Monochrom's Avatar
 
Monochrom is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 760
Hi i just looked a comparison made by rockwell on his website.

Compared canon 5d mark infinte, m240 and a7...

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comp...ca-sony-canon/


I was thinking to buy me one a7 for using VC wide angle lenses...but after this compraison i just don´t know...

On another site i looked a comp tween a7r and a7 plain....i just don´t know if it worths to buy the more expensive a7r...

I just don´t know nothing anymore about the a7.
__________________
M9 + red scale elmar + orion-15
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2014   #66
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monochrom View Post
Hi i just looked a comparison made by rockwell on his website.

Compared canon 5d mark infinte, m240 and a7...

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comp...ca-sony-canon/


I was thinking to buy me one a7 for using VC wide angle lenses...but after this compraison i just don´t know...

On another site i looked a comp tween a7r and a7 plain....i just don´t know if it worths to buy the more expensive a7r...

I just don´t know nothing anymore about the a7.
it's not the best with WA RF glass, for sure. The A7r is worse.

For very high image quailty at wide angle we will have to wait for native glass on these cameras, but there are a few exceptions:

the CV 12 is not terrible on the A7.
CV 21/1.8 is good.
zm 18 is usable.
__________________
twitter: uhoh007
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2014   #67
ChrisLivsey
Registered User
 
ChrisLivsey's Avatar
 
ChrisLivsey is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,328
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monochrom View Post
I just don´t know nothing anymore about the a7.
No you, like me I'm afraid, know too much, far too much about these cameras.


BTW "The Canon was set to Standard Picture Style with 7 sharpening and +4 saturation with A3 white balance trim. The LEICA was shot at HIGH saturation. The Sony was shot at +3 saturation."

All jpeg

I suspect the number of M240 shooters here using jpegs at High Saturation is vanishingly small.

Most testers across platforms attempt to level the playing field for all concerned.
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/red_eyes_man/

It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2014   #68
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 46
Posts: 4,092
Rockwell does not shoot RAW. He's comparing Jpeg engines as much as sensor performance.
If this works for you great. I never shoot jpegs unless it's with my iPhone.

On the other hand...Is it even remotely fair to compare the a7/r with these other cameras and not have a same focal length...native Sony FE lens mounted?
Why not make these comparisons with a Sony FE35 or FE50 compared to Leica Summilux and Canon 50L ?

To me the yet unpopulated lens stable is the biggest knock against choosing the Sony at this time. The future may indeed be bright but... they need to prove it.

It's like buying a sports sedan with a powerful engine yet only 3 gears with the promise of 3 more coming in the future.

If a person is ready to buy into a currently 2 prime lens.. 1 zoom lens system it seems like a perfectly good option and not unreasonably priced compared to the other options on the market.

Otherwise....?
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-24-2014   #69
cosmonaut
Registered User
 
cosmonaut's Avatar
 
cosmonaut is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: North Georgia
Posts: 1,204
The a7 has an electronic first curtain and the a7R doesn't. I would imagine because the a7R is 36 mlix. I have never experienced shutter shock with my a7R. I think this happens more with the Olympus cameras as their sensor floats when the IS is on. The a7R doesn't have in body IS and the sensor is fixed into place. The only way the image can blur is with a slow shutter speed and hand movement. I have never had it happen on tripod with my a7R unless my tripod was moving during the exposure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
Very recently there has been a great deal of discussion in on-line articles and forums reporting shutter shock (excessive vibration) with the A7r.

Some people claim they never see it with focal lengths below 100 mm. Others see it with a 55 mm lens.

Some claim it only happens on a tripod while others find otherwise. The same goes for native and adapted lenses.

The A7 has a different shutter.
__________________
Cosmo
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-22-2014   #70
gsgary
Registered User
 
gsgary is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Chesterfield, Derbyshire
Posts: 485
Ive just bought the A7for colour photography i don't have a digital M only film M's but so far i am delighted with it
all shots using Voitlander close focus adapter

Jupiter 12 wide open, close focus fully out less than 300mm from subject


40mmF1.4 SC Nokton


Crop



50mmF1.5 Nokton M mount


28mmF2 Ultron
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-2014   #71
2WK
Rangefinder User
 
2WK's Avatar
 
2WK is offline
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 662
I tried an A7 with novoflex adapter for my 50 Summilux at the camera shop yesterday. I really like the viewfinder and the focus peaking. It feels solid and I don't mind the shutter, I like how quick it is. I took some test shots and under mixed lighting the WB is pretty weird. Files are very cyan / warm compared to my other digital cameras. I still want to try one out. Thinking of selling the X-Pro system for it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-2014   #72
Godfrey
wonderment
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
So, all of you that are leaving Leica for Sony never cared about rangefinders in the first place? It was only about the lenses?
I have three Leica RF cameras at present, have owned many others over the years, but I always had a preference for SLRs in the film world ... the Leicas were my "compact complement" to the Nikon. I love the look that Leica lenses produce, R or M. Always wanted a Leicaflex SL and a set of R lenses, and then later wanted an R8, and could not afford them. Rangefinders are great when TTL viewing is unneeded and when a more compact, quieter, lighter body is desired, but in the end (for me) Leica is all about the lenses and simplicity of operation.

Now things have changed due to the dropping price of film camera equipment and the orphaning of the R lens line without a Leica R10D body. Over the past two years, I've acquired a nice set of ten R lenses, two Leicaflex SL bodies, and an R8 body, all of them together at FAR less cost than I'd have spent for a body and two lenses in the 1990s.

I bought the Sony A7 specifically to use with the R lenses. It works beautifully with them. I also use a couple of my M-bayonet lenses on the A7 ... the M-Rokkor 40 and M-Rokkor 90 in particular work very well, as well as they do on the M9. While the A7 has a bunch of features more than any Leica M has had, set up with an R lens the way I like it is just as simple to use as any M or Leica R body. The sensor and viewfinder are excellent, it produces the goods.

My M9 has languished since I acquired the A7, I simply prefer shooting with the A7 most of the time.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-2014   #73
Samouraï
Registered User
 
Samouraï's Avatar
 
Samouraï is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 352
I'd like to see the A7S placed along the M240 and the other two A7 cameras. See how the images compare, then. I'd bet it plays nicer with rangefinder lenses that gave the A7 and A7R so much trouble.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-2014   #74
Godfrey
wonderment
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
It's interesting that the M240 has offered little over the M9 aside from video (who cares) and better high ISO performance. As said above Leica will need to lift their game if they want to maintain station against the tide of new full frame compacts that can mount their lenses.
I had a chance to try out the M240 again very recently, it had been over a year since I first handled one.

For me, the big thing that the M240 has over both the M9 and the A7 is responsiveness: the shutter response is close to what I get with the Olympus E-M1 and E-1, or the R8 and Nikon F film SLRs. The A7 is closer to the FM2 with MD-12 fitted, the M9 is slower responding.

In terms of output image qualities (color, tonal range, etc), it's different from the M9 or A7 but neither worse nor better. It produces less moiré at the limits than the M9 and about the same detailing as the A7 (a little more or less, I didn't shoot any certified resolution targets). The colors it produces in its raw files are just as malleable as the M9 or A7 raw files.

While it might do better with some wide RF lenses than the A7 or M9, I can only test with the lenses I have (Color Skopar 21, 28, 35 vs Elmarit R 19, 24, 35). I didn't have time to do any exhaustive testing, but my impression with the Color Skopar 28mm was that it color-shifts less on the M240 than it does on the M9. I haven't used that lens on the A7 yet; I prefer the Elmarit-R 24mm for the A7.

None of these cameras are perfect; no camera is. I've been very pleased with the M9 for use with the Color-Skopar 35/2.5 and Nokton 50/1.5 ASPH (LTM), and more than very pleased with the A7 for use with all of my R lenses.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-2014   #75
Godfrey
wonderment
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samouraï View Post
I'd like to see the A7S placed along the M240 and the other two A7 cameras. See how the images compare, then. I'd bet it plays nicer with rangefinder lenses that gave the A7 and A7R so much trouble.
Someone from another forum has been experimenting with RF lenses that caused significant problems on the A7r and M9. So far, from what I've seen of his research, the A7s does prove friendlier with them.

This was one of my reasons for picking the A7 model over the A7r model ... I wagered on the lower resolution sensor with light AA filter being less demanding of my older SLR lenses, and thought the EFCS would reduce any tendency to shutter vibration problems.

So far, it has worked out very well, very much as I expected. The A7s might be slightly better with RF lenses, but since that isn't my primary target (and 4K video certainly isn't) I can't see spending the premium price for it.

G
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 18:17.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.