dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
NazgulKing
Established
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.
lhotse
Member
it is times like these where I feel glad I am colour blind 
willie_901
Mentor
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.
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.
arthury
Arthur Y
I believe someone did and the results were not good pairing Leica lenses on the A7r ...
http://www.dirkahlgrim.com/wordpress/?p=1637
http://www.dirkahlgrim.com/wordpress/?p=1637
Monochrom
Well-known
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/comparisons/2013-12-leica-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.
Compared canon 5d mark infinte, m240 and a7...
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/comparisons/2013-12-leica-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.
uhoh7
Mentor
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.
ChrisLivsey
Mentor
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.
f16sunshine
Moderator
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....?
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....?
cosmonaut
Well-known
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.
gsgary
Well-known
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
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
2WK
Rangefinder User
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.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
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
Samouraï
Well-known
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.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
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
Godfrey
somewhat colored
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
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I just looked at Rockwell's comments myself. He didn't make the Sony sound very good--or the Leica, either. I played with an a7 and an a7r at the dealer's yesterday. Nicely made, and a nice small size! But I don't know about that electronic viewfinder, or how it would be to try to focus my RF lenses on it.
Funny, Rockwell didn't compare it with a D700 or the like, in Nikon gear.
I just don't know, either . . .
maddoc
... likes film again.
I am glad that I found this rather old thread, quite informative. The M240 is the most "recent" digital M that I ever handled in a shop (MAP Camera in Shinjuku, Tokyo, to test focus & sharpness of my 35mm Summicron) but I I did not really found the camera handling convincing enough to spend that much money. However, I bought the A7 this year and I am very happy with the results. Focus peaking doesn't really work for me, I use the enlarging mode all the time or the very good native Sony lenses, especially the SEL3528ZA and SEL2820.