Quality Glass on the A7s

Kholi said:
And sharpness in general, I just want "sharp enough", it doesn't have to be razor sharp: I owned the Sigma 50a for about a week or two, and that thing was TOO SHARP for me. Like, I could cut my eyes on some of the images I pulled down with 4K DNG RAW. Likewise, as much as I liked the tamron 24-70 VC, wide open at 2.8 it was freakin' razor.
Click to expand...

Completely agree: I don't want razor sharp, I want a good combination of softness and detail, so people look good (no unnecessary wrinkles and skin defects) but the image feels sharp and detailed.

But I know some people will feel bad if their new lens is not sharper than what they had before, that's what I always remind them that these Leica-R lenses are sharp, but not the sharpest lenses around. The Nikkor 55mm f/1.2 pre-AI is sharper than my Summilux-R 50mm f/1.4; the Leica has better bokeh, though, and that Nikkor wasn't easy to beat in that front. And on an APS-C sensor, my 24mm f/2.8 is clearly softer in the corners than my old Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC set at 24mm (APS-C sharpness tests). And I don't mind: it has so much more going for it.

BTW, all my Leica-R lenses are perfectly sharp in the center wide open (the 50mm summilux may need to go f/1.8), it's in the corners that there is some softness wide open that goes away if you close down just slightly (FF sharpness tests). I try to shoot FF at f/3.5 or narrower anyway, for DoF reasons.
 
Last edited:
cpc said:
I looked at the M 75 a few times but it just seemed too big for an M (well, the price didn't help steer me to buying either ;).
FWIW, my 1982 doesn't seem to manifest anything ninja star-like at the aperture range you mention.
What adapter are you using to mount the heavier R lenses (like the 80) on E-mount? I wouldn't trust my cheap Chinese R-to-E adapter with the 80; it isn't solid enough and has some play. I used to use a Leitax for it on Canon, but Leitax is not really an option as these days I mostly have it sitting on my R5 camera so I can't use a semi-permanent interchangeable mount.
Click to expand...

If I ever get an M 75, it'll be the first version without the built-in hood. That one is lighter at 490 grams and less front-heavy (w/o hood of course), and the rings are more generously sized and spaced. But yeah, the R 80 is a much better "bargain" at about half the price.

Thanks about the ninja star: maybe mine are just out of spec. I just got another old R 90/2 that also ninjas a bit at wide-ish apertures. Oh well.

I am using a Novoflex adapter, which is very solid but has developed a tiny bit of play. I had a cheap Chinese one before and it was fine with heavy lenses; it wasn't the absolute cheapest kind--even the Chinese stuff comes in different grades. This Shanghai company Kipon is generally okay. And the Metabones one is reportedly good, but heavy.
 
Samuel H said:
BTW, all my Leica-R lenses are perfectly sharp in the center wide open (the 50mm summilux may need to go f/1.8), it's in the corners that there is some softness wide open that goes away if you close down just slightly (FF sharpness tests). I try to shoot FF at f/3.5 or narrower anyway, for DoF reasons.
Click to expand...

Yeah, on a Zeiss vs Leica thread on fredmiranda (http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1190503), someone said that in general Leica (or at least the Mandler-era lenses) tends to prioritize central sharpness, whereas Zeiss tends to have a more even field of sharpness. This is consistent with my experience. The Summilux-R 35 and 50 (e55) and 80 are all sharper than Contax 35/1.4 50/1.4 85/1.4 at the center wide open, but they have some coma and softness on the edges, and the Lux 35 also have a donut ring of lower resolution around the central region. The Cron-R 35 is notorious for its field curvature, which is why Andrew Reid's corner sharpness comparison with the Sigma 35/1.4 a few months back wasn't completely fair.

In any case, I also think sharpness and bokeh, the two most easily observable and internet-reviewable characteristics, are actually less important than color richness and spatial rendition and OOF transition, which the Mandler Leica R's are great at. They're translucent and dreamy and romantic for that reason.

I have a Summilux-R E55 (with built-in hood) and E60 right now. The E55 has soft edges wide open because of field curvature, and more vignetting and a bit more purple CA wide open, and hexagonal aperture. The E60 wide open also has soft edges, but not because of curvature, and less vignetting. It's a bit better for sure but so far I'm not seeing earthshattering improvements, nor am I expecting such.
 
Last edited:
To the OP: I'm also looking into the possibility of legacy glass and the A7s. Could you fill me on what you specifically have? Any other moderately-expensive options that are good performers on the A7s? I've read about Canon FDs, Rokkors, etc..Very curious - the internet has mixed tales on the subject. Thanks a lot!
 
Fun thread.. Thought it was time to contribute. Some stills taken with an A7s and a Contax Zeiss 85mm f1.4 of Olympic Gold-winning boxer Nicola Adams




Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr




Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr



Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr



Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams Shoot for Nintendo by Soma Pics, on Flickr



Nicola Adams by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams by Soma Pics, on Flickr


Nicola Adams by Soma Pics, on Flickr





Nicola Adams by Soma Pics, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
@ben: great photo's, great lens, great grade. :) good job.


@all
Bought my a7s yesterday and tested it with my FD's straight away.
I didn't want to make a topic for this but I do have to mention because I did not expected this at all.
The canon FD lenses I have are all full frame. These might not be high quality in sharpness and speed but they have soul.
I feel like a dumbass I did not know, alway used them on the fs100.
Did you guys knew they are full frame?

Where these old 35mm photocamera's full frame?? I never did photography before digital so forgive my ignorance.

2 years ago I bought my FD lenses for €300,-. And they where like new.
24mm 2.8, 28mm 2.8, 35mm 2.8, 50 mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8, 135mm 2.8, 70-200mm 4
I feel like a lucky man using them fullframe on my a7s.


An other finding i did wich is not so nice is: the canon ef fullframe lenses I can not use full frame in comination with my viltrox ef-nex adapter.
 
Thanks Joost.

35mm stills film cameras are the 'full frame' from which the term is derived. Cinema's 'Super 35mm' is somewhere around 1.4/1.5 so closer to the APS-C digital sensor size. If you lens for for a 35mm stills film camera system it's 99% a certainty that they are full frame.

sensor%20size%20comparison%20finalx.jpg
 
Well I just bought my own A7s and a Nikkor 24mm 2.8 Nikon F + adapter for my steadicam. Thinking I'm going to have to start trolling ebay more.
 
I'll just throw a shoutout to Olympus OM Zuiko lenses. Great glass. Liked them when I had a GH2. Love them on the A7s.
 
Together with my a7s, I also bought a new lens for a nearly-pocketable setup. I was seriously considering the Sony 55mm, but in the end I went for the long-run investment (or the stupid collector mind, depending on who you ask) and bought the Leitz Summicron-C 40mm f/2.0 for Leica-M mount. I'll be testing it out at a very nice party this weekend :)
(it should be very nice according to what I've read)

(not my pic, just something I googled to give you an idea of how small this is)
attachment.php
 
Samuel H said:
Together with my a7s, I also bought a new lens for a nearly-pocketable setup. I was seriously considering the Sony 55mm, but in the end I went for the long-run investment (or the stupid collector mind, depending on who you ask) and bought the Leitz Summicron-C 40mm f/2.0 for Leica-M mount. I'll be testing it out at a very nice party this weekend :)
(it should be very nice according to what I've read)

(not my pic, just something I googled to give you an idea of how small this is)
attachment.php
Click to expand...

Grats, it's a great lens. Very sharp and very small. Same as the corresponding Minolta Rokkor. Also, seems to work fine on the A7 series, being a Double Gauss design.
 
From what I've read, it should be similar to my other Leitz lenses, maybe even better than many of them. That's not a small feat. And without a7-thick-ground-glass issues, as you mentioned. I'll know soon enough :)

So far the only thing I'm not crazy about is the small aperture ring right at the front of the lens. It could be worse (it could be the focus ring!) but it's very difficult to use when you have a big-ish filter on (I already glued a 37-to-49mm step-up ring in the front, since the smallest proND I could find was 49mm).
 
Samuel H said:
From what I've read, it should be similar to my other Leitz lenses, maybe even better than many of them. That's not a small feat. And without a7-thick-ground-glass issues, as you mentioned. I'll know soon enough :)

So far the only thing I'm not crazy about is the small aperture ring right at the front of the lens. It could be worse (it could be the focus ring!) but it's very difficult to use when you have a big-ish filter on (I already glued a 37-to-49mm step-up ring in the front, since the smallest proND I could find was 49mm).
Click to expand...

I've shot the Minolta branded version on a CLE years ago. It can be crazy sharp.
I'd expect very sharp center on the A7s; edges will likely be worse than your R lenses on the A7s, especially with aperture open and near open.

On a related note, Zeiss MF lenses for E-mount finally appeared:
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-...oxia-35mm-lens-announcement-on-september-1-2/
This 35/2 Biogon might be the first small 35mm MF lens that actually works as intended on the A7 series. I'm tempted.
 
The M wides are wonderful, but I just can't get into the knuckle / fingertip focus thing :(

The Loxia 50 focuses down to 0.45m, and the 35 from the photo seems focus down quite a bit, maybe even to 0.3. That's great news for me.

I wonder if the by wire aperture rings will be "lightly" clicked for video shooters' benefit, or even switchable between clicked and declicked.
 
aly324 said:
The M wides are wonderful, but I just can't get into the knuckle / fingertip focus thing :(

The Loxia 50 focuses down to 0.45m, and the 35 from the photo seems focus down quite a bit, maybe even to 0.3. That's great news for me.

I wonder if the by wire aperture rings will be "lightly" clicked for video shooters' benefit, or even switchable between clicked and declicked.
Click to expand...

Apparently, switchable aperture:
http://www.zeiss.com/content/dam/Photography/new/pdf/brochures/loxia/loxia_leaflet_en.pdf

(The focusing tab on the RF wides can be very useful for quick focus/prefocus once you memorize what position corresponds to what distance.)
 
I'm getting rid of my Canon 24-70, just too damn big and heavy for the a7s (I photograph about half the time). But so far I only got Samyang (Rokinon) 85mm f1,4, which I like and a Konica 40mm f1,8 (still waiting on adapter).

I was looking at the Canon or Sigma 24-105 f4, 70mm is just too short for full frame (I use crop mode all the time when filming) and both are pretty big for the a7 series. Canon is actually T5 and loses another stop at the long end (Not really a problem with the a7s and the low light capabilities, but still). It has stabilization but just forget autofocus. The Sigma is huge, 2 pounds and 82mm filters. And the focus ring is thin and the closest too the camera. It feels really weird in the hand. There is autofocus with the a-mount adapter but no stabilization. I really wish Sony come with one 24-105 f4 but in the same size as their 24-70 f4. But I can imagine the price.

I been looking at M-mount, especially the Voigtlanders 35mm f1,2 and 50mm f1,1. Really like their rendering and feels good in the hand. But damn, those price tags. But Zeiss looks nice too, but again: Price. The Loxia line looks nice, if only it had autofocus and stabilization options.

But it's tough to decide what glass to use. You want to be able to use it for the rest of your life but I won't probably have the same mount for the rest of my life. And adapter, I really hate them. Especially if they're big like when using Nikon glass on a mirrorless. Huge adapters! M-mount to E-mount is better. Voigtlander's close-focus one is really cool!
 
Last edited:
Make sure you don't get rangefinder glass that will have softness issues because of the thicker sensor cover glass.
 
I know, Samuel. It's all this info that make me paranoid, haha. I wish I had an infinite wallet. Where I live I can't test lenses (or anything really), so reading on the internet is all I have. Hope to be able to test lenses IRL more when I'm moving from the Swedish woods to Vancouver next month.
 
Samuel H said:
Make sure you don't get rangefinder glass that will have softness issues because of the thicker sensor cover glass.
Click to expand...

Samuel could you please elaborate a bit on this? I'm not sure I get it. Only I am having difficulties with my Leica R 24mm making it difficult to get infinity focus with some, but not all, adaptors. my 50 leica r works very well though. Help greatly appreciated.
 
Leica-R should not be a problem, and I have the Elmarit-R 24mm f/2.8 and it hasn't given me any issues on the a7s. I used that combo here and here (the other lens used in those two pieces is the Elmarit-R 90mm f/2.8).
My guess is that your Leica-R was serviced at some point in time and someone assembled it wrong. Very common on these lenses, I wrote about this here.

What I was talking about is the thicker ground glass of the a7 cameras. This makes all lenses designed for other cameras softer in the edges of the image. But it affects rangefinder lenses a lot more than it affects SLR lenses, since the problem is bigger for lenses with a short exit pupil distance (nothing to do with the distance to the rear element, it's an optical concept, not something you can touch). More about this here here and here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top