Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/02/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]http://www.getdpi.com/forum/sony/49391-fun-a7-7r.html and the next 59 pages shows a wide variety of lenses on the A7(R)..... john ________________________________________ I suspect that you would not have these color shifts or edge sharpness falloff with SLR lenses adapted to the A7. It would be interesting to see how a 24mm or 19mm Elmarit R would perform. I have been playing with the 24mm Elmarit R on the M240 with the Leica adapter and it works perfectly. Thanks again for taking the time to demo this... Very informative. --Jim On Feb 21, 2014, at 4:28 PM, Sonny Carter <sonc.hegr at gmail.com> wrote: > This was a totally unscientific test, but Jim Laurel asked a question, and > I had the stuff to answer it, and I think it will help me in the future. > > The question was, Does the V/C 15mm exhibit magenta corners with the Sony > A7r? Also up was the question of smearing with wides on that camera. > Looks like the answer is yes on both counts, though it may not be only the > camera. (I haven't tested the lens for smearing on my M9.) > > I also held a ir-uv cut filter up to one side of the lens, and to my eye, > it seemed to lessen the magenta effect. If I can find one of the correct > diameter, I'll try that one again full frame. > > I also did the same shot with my 21 pre asph Elmarit and the Sony Zoom set > at 28mm. > I just set the camera at auto for all 3 lenses. > > This test probably is not in depth enough for some of you, but it tells me > what I want to know, and that's to use these two lenses on my M9. Easy > enough, as I barely use them anyhow. I rarely take a 35 off my camera ever > except for my flower shooting. > > Here are the snaps. > > http://sonc.com/look/?page_id=3324 > > To see full sized jpegs of the four shots, go to www.sonc.com/a7r > > www.sonc.com/a7r/15-big-DSC00641.jpg > www.sonc.com/a7r/21bigDSC00648.jpg > www.sonc.com/a7r/28zoomDSC00650.jpg > www.sonc.com/a7r/filter-bigDSC00645.jpg > > > On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 6:23 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at > gmail.com>wrote: > >> Leica raah raah forum !! >> On Feb 22, 2014 1:00 AM, "Steve Barbour" <steve.barbour at gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Feb 20, 2014, at 5:46 PM, Jim Laurel (gmail) <jplaurel at gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> All I've seen, Steve, is some anecdotal evidence. Don't get me started >>> on Ken Rockwell, but on this page, he does have some examples of a 21mm >>> Super Elmar-M adapted to the A7 that appears to show sensor reflections >> and >>> smeared corner detail. Lurking around the dpreview forums, I've seen >> others >>> report similar results. But of course it's hard to know for sure >>>> >>>> http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comparisons/2013-12-leica-sony-canon/ >>> >>> hi Jim, we are happy to see you back. My point of course is....we don't >>> exactly have PROOF of anything, though we do have anecdotal and selected >>> stories by people with an agenda. No completeness or worst case scenarios >>> by unbiased individuals with data for the leica M240, as well as the Sony >>> A7 and A7r. Selected stories to make a point by people who wish to make >> a >>> point. No semblance of a real unbiased careful comparison. All of this is >>> then presented to a leica rah rah forum by people who like leica, whether >>> they use one or not.. I would like to know what the real facts are, based >>> on real world data, with carefully done comparisons. And if the cameras >> in >>> question have flaws in some areas, I will use the cameras accordingly, >>> always the case for all of us. >>> I used a CV 12 mm lens on my A7r, with many usable results, but some >>> unacceptable results as well. >>> That alerted me to be careful, especially with the widest of the wide. >>> Extrapolating this to all lenses under 50mm is not a conclusion based on >>> the facts. Some results of the widest lenses are acceptable, and we need >> to >>> have some reasonable ground rules. It occurred to me that we don't have >>> rigorous comparative data, even for the M240. What is clear is that >> many!! >>> lenses on the A7r, give incredibly wonderful results, it would seem far >>> greater in number for the A7r than the M240 because the list includes >> most >>> lenses ever made by most optical companies, including all of the leica R >>> lenses. >>> >>> Looked at in this light, I feel that the least we need to do, is approach >>> this question with complete understanding of the situation, an open >> mind, >>> and armed with some real world comparative data. >>> >>> By the way, the above subject line says OT, but in my estimation this >>> subject is very much on topic. >>> >>> thanks for bringing it up, >>> >>> Steve >>> >>> >>> >>>> --Jim >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Feb 20, 2014, at 5:10 PM, Steve Barbour <steve.barbour at gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> Steve Barbour >>>>> >>>>> On Feb 20, 2014, at 4:39 PM, Jim Gmail <jplaurel at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Aren't there a lot if reported issues with adapted lenses? The Leica M >>> primes, at least, seem to perform much better on the M240 than on the A7. >>>>> >>>>> where is this proven? >>>>> >>>>