filmfan
Well-known
I've been out of the game now for a while, but now that I have a 5 month old daughter, I have been inspired to shoot some photos of her and of the family (am I old now?). Gone are the days of my 20 year old lifestyle kicking dirt around the American West with girls and traveling around Europe shooting black and white film and processing it in puddle water in cheap hotel rooms. Now I want a camera that can shoot images of my beautiful baby daughter and wife that I can preserve as memories. I have ZERO time in my life to make room for film unfortunately.
I still have a variety of film cameras and ~100 rolls of undeveloped film. I also have ~50 rolls of film I have actually developed, but that are still sitting in a box waiting to be scanned. I just don't have the time or motivation to develop my own film and scan anymore and it has resulted in a lack of enthusiasm to shoot photos. Digital may help change all this.
I want a small digital camera with high IQ (full frame), that is robust and easy to bring with me and shoot quickly (exact opposite of my Pentax 6x7 camera), and that will provide me with some nice images that I can get printed. I would like to use my Olympus OM lenses with adapter (28mm 2.8, 35mm f2, 50mm 1.8). I found the Sony A7 series and am interested in buying a used A7 (original), A7II, or A7R (original version). I also plan on buying an autofocus 50mm lens (either their 50mm 1.8 or the much lauded Zeiss 55mm 1.8).
1. Which of these Sony cameras (A7, A7II, or A7R) should I be focusing on for top quality using adapted OM lenses?
2. What is the best adapter to buy for my OM lenses?
I don't need blazing fast auto focus ability (I only use center AF point), nor have I ever found a need for quality high ISO above 1600 (just have never come across this situation EVER). Video is not of importance. I want a high dynamic range image that does not need a lot of tweaking in photoshop to get a "film look".
Any tips with the Sony cameras?
Thanks!
I still have a variety of film cameras and ~100 rolls of undeveloped film. I also have ~50 rolls of film I have actually developed, but that are still sitting in a box waiting to be scanned. I just don't have the time or motivation to develop my own film and scan anymore and it has resulted in a lack of enthusiasm to shoot photos. Digital may help change all this.
I want a small digital camera with high IQ (full frame), that is robust and easy to bring with me and shoot quickly (exact opposite of my Pentax 6x7 camera), and that will provide me with some nice images that I can get printed. I would like to use my Olympus OM lenses with adapter (28mm 2.8, 35mm f2, 50mm 1.8). I found the Sony A7 series and am interested in buying a used A7 (original), A7II, or A7R (original version). I also plan on buying an autofocus 50mm lens (either their 50mm 1.8 or the much lauded Zeiss 55mm 1.8).
1. Which of these Sony cameras (A7, A7II, or A7R) should I be focusing on for top quality using adapted OM lenses?
2. What is the best adapter to buy for my OM lenses?
I don't need blazing fast auto focus ability (I only use center AF point), nor have I ever found a need for quality high ISO above 1600 (just have never come across this situation EVER). Video is not of importance. I want a high dynamic range image that does not need a lot of tweaking in photoshop to get a "film look".
Any tips with the Sony cameras?
Thanks!
CharlesDAMorgan
Mentor
I shoot an A7s with numerous adapted lenses - I bought it for its low light performance, as I have a penchant for old, dark, church interiors. It is ideal, focus assist gets you there most of the time.
I use a variety but have largely settled on KF adapters as robust enough and reasonable. I can see the advantage of Novoflex or metabones construction, but it's not enough for the additional price, and it means I can have more than one of the same adapter.
I am a decidedly unadventurous non-technical shooter, so most functions are rather lost on me, but get a lot of batteries and a battery grip too, as battery life on the first two generations is not great.
But for mounting old lenses it's brilliant, ditto for macro.
I use a variety but have largely settled on KF adapters as robust enough and reasonable. I can see the advantage of Novoflex or metabones construction, but it's not enough for the additional price, and it means I can have more than one of the same adapter.
I am a decidedly unadventurous non-technical shooter, so most functions are rather lost on me, but get a lot of batteries and a battery grip too, as battery life on the first two generations is not great.
But for mounting old lenses it's brilliant, ditto for macro.
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
I am sure someone will give you an answer soon but I see in your signature that you own a Canon 5dII. Why don't you get an OM-to-EOS adapter and use the zuikos on the Canon?
I have those lenses and use them with one such adapter on a 10D and has taken some very interesting pictures despite the cropped sensor. Having said that, I like the way zuikos perform on film much better that digital.
I have those lenses and use them with one such adapter on a 10D and has taken some very interesting pictures despite the cropped sensor. Having said that, I like the way zuikos perform on film much better that digital.
JeffS7444
Well-known
I've owned an original A7 since the day it went on sale and think I've gotten my money's worth. But startup times can be sluggish (~10 seconds?) and Sony cut costs by using a mostly plastic lens mount on the A7 Mk I. Which is fine for lightweight glass, but not so hot for a 90/2.8. AFAIK, all other models use all-metal lens mounts. I replaced mine with the lens mount from the A7R/A7S which is a drop-in replacement (~60 USD for genuine Sony part). All Mk II and Mk III cameras use metal mounts.
Lens adapters: For non-electronic adapters, I've seen little practical difference. One of them had a rather shiny interior, and painting this flat black seemed to improve performance. In theory, chromed brass mating surfaces might be the smoothest and longest-lasting, but brass adds a surprising amount of weight too. All-aluminum adapters work fine for me.
"Smart" adapters are where you might see more difference between budget and higher-end units. For instance, I've got an early Yongnuo EF -> Sony adapter which supports autofocus. Works fine, cost me something like $80 versus $300 for Metabones. But autofocus with the $80 adapter is pretty slow, whereas it's supposed to run at native speeds with the pricier units.
Lens adapters: For non-electronic adapters, I've seen little practical difference. One of them had a rather shiny interior, and painting this flat black seemed to improve performance. In theory, chromed brass mating surfaces might be the smoothest and longest-lasting, but brass adds a surprising amount of weight too. All-aluminum adapters work fine for me.
"Smart" adapters are where you might see more difference between budget and higher-end units. For instance, I've got an early Yongnuo EF -> Sony adapter which supports autofocus. Works fine, cost me something like $80 versus $300 for Metabones. But autofocus with the $80 adapter is pretty slow, whereas it's supposed to run at native speeds with the pricier units.
retinax
Well-known
Look into the techart autofocus adapters, that could give af ability with all your lenses.
capitalK
Warrior Poet :P
Not sure what brand adapter I use (it was cheap), but of all my adapted glass on My A7 II, I think my OM lenses are my favourite. Just the right size, feel solid, work well.
Currently I am using the 28mm f/3.5 and 50mm f/1.4 on it.
Currently I am using the 28mm f/3.5 and 50mm f/1.4 on it.
Huss
Mentor
Get one of the 2nd gen A7 cameras. Proper lens mount and they got
rid of the sensor flare issue. Super cheap (compared to the original price) right now and still in production.
rid of the sensor flare issue. Super cheap (compared to the original price) right now and still in production.
Tim Gray
Well-known
I can’t speak about those models, but I do have an A7rII. It’s been pretty decent. I think the II series has some features that make it nice for manual focus. Can’t remember why! Sorry, I know this isn’t helpful. I do know that if you can spring for them, the Loxia lenses are a treat. I like the 50 and the 25 the most.
joe bosak
Well-known
I bought an original A7, I've never found it took long to boot up, nor had a flare issue (I understood that happens with bright point sources so depends on what you shoot). Plastic mount can be replaced for cheap with metal if you need it, not had an issue so far but I don't strap bazookas to it.
kuuan
loves old lenses
besides the mentioned difference of material of mount the original A7 has a somewhat smaller and lighter body than the later MKII and MKIII ( 474 vs. 599 vs. 650 grms ), the later have a deeper grip and in-body stabilization.
You may want to handle both to find out which you prefer in hand.
Techart autofocus adapter, which would also autofocus your OM lenses with a stacked adapter, only would work well with MKII and MKIII.
( weights taken from: https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/features/sony-a7-vs-sony-a7-ii-vs-sony-a7-iii
Other comparisons on the web:
https://www.cinema5d.com/sony-a7-a7-ii-comparison-stabilizer-test/
https://thedigitalcamera.net/sony-a7-vs-a7ii-whats-the-difference/
https://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/sony/a7/vs/sony/a7-ii/
https://3dinsider.com/sony-a7-vs-a7-ii/
You may want to handle both to find out which you prefer in hand.
Techart autofocus adapter, which would also autofocus your OM lenses with a stacked adapter, only would work well with MKII and MKIII.
( weights taken from: https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/features/sony-a7-vs-sony-a7-ii-vs-sony-a7-iii
Other comparisons on the web:
https://www.cinema5d.com/sony-a7-a7-ii-comparison-stabilizer-test/
https://thedigitalcamera.net/sony-a7-vs-a7ii-whats-the-difference/
https://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/sony/a7/vs/sony/a7-ii/
https://3dinsider.com/sony-a7-vs-a7-ii/
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I used Oly Zuiko with focus confirmation adapters on 5D. To be honest, they are nothing special film era lenses.
Honestly, watch how manual focus works on Sony. Every time I watch it, I realize it is not worth it.
Just sell it all and get camera with normal AF lens.
Honestly, watch how manual focus works on Sony. Every time I watch it, I realize it is not worth it.
Just sell it all and get camera with normal AF lens.
Freakscene
Obscure member
Welcome back Sam.
I've been there. Just get whatever you can find fastest and shoot, shoot, shoot. And consider getting the 85/2 OM lens - a short tele is surprisingly useful for kids for portraits and getting closer when they are old enough to run away!
Marty
I've been there. Just get whatever you can find fastest and shoot, shoot, shoot. And consider getting the 85/2 OM lens - a short tele is surprisingly useful for kids for portraits and getting closer when they are old enough to run away!
Marty
peterm1
Mentor
I have been down this track recently and while I have not pulled the trigger on a Sony A model (yet) I think it is inevitable that I will eventually. BTW the main reason I have not done so yet is that I already own a Sony NEX 7 which though not full frame is perfectly fit for purpose. It is an excellent camera and the A series are too.
My inclination was to get not the base A7 model which is the cheapest of the cameras you mention mainly because I wanted the better capabilities of the later models. It is still a very good camera however and perfectly fine if you do not need some of the extra capabilities of the later models. In particular the later ones have in body image stabilization which I find to be invaluable for use with vintage lenses. But I am also tempted to get one of the models which has the latest auto focus - not because I want to use native Sony lenses as such but rather, because the latest AF supports the third party lens adapters which have AF. This would allow me to adapt OM or other lenses to those adapters and thereby get AF into the bargain. I like that idea for use with my Leica glass (the adapters are in Leica M mount to Sony A mount) but of course there is nothing to stop me from getting an OM to Leica M adapter and using OM glass in this manner too - it is now possible to get adapters that adapt various SLR lenses to Leica M and by stacking in this way you get AF on pretty well any lens you want so long as its not too heavy). Whether you should get an A711 or one of the other models I will not opine in any definitive way as I think this depends on your budget so long as the model you choose has the key features you want. BTW they all have focus peaking which also helps with using vintage glass but to be honest I find that programming one of the function buttons to zoom the image helps even more as focus peaking can be a bit approximate in terms of letting you know exactly what is in focus. Still taken together it all works and if you are experienced in using MF you should find that the Sony works as good in this department as any other digital camera and better than most.
If you are happy to stick with manual focus on your Sony (whichever model camera you end up with) I would strongly suggest looking at the K&F Concept lens adapters. They are mid range in price (about say $25 US per adapter for most camera systems) but are much much better and more consistent quality than the cheapest Chinese "no name" brands found on eBay. Some people like the idea of spending a hundred or a couple of hundred dollars on the top end manual focus adapters and while I would not argue against this if that is your inclination when the time came for me to consider this I really had to ask myself if those adapters (which admittedly are nicely engineered) really do give me 5x or 10x the value of the K&F brand. And the answer for me was no. Besides I play with lots of different camera lens marques on digital bodies and would have needed to buy several adapters making a hundred or a couple of hundred bucks each just too pricey.
The IQ of every Sony camera I have tried is excellent and I understand the full frame sensors on the A series to be amongst the best in the game. My preference is to shoot in RAW and JPG fine (the camera can be told to save one type or the other or both both simultaneously) . While saving both simultaneously consumes more storage on memory cards and hard drives it gives me the best of both worlds. RAW files can be tweaked more if that is required - eg if there are blown highlights these can often be recovered in a way that JPG images simply cannot. Unneeded RAW files can then be erased from your hard drive if that is a consideration. But if you have saved JPG files you can also select one of the in-camera image type modes and just use the image straight from the camera with little extra tweaking if that is your inclination. My Sony NEX does not purport to emulate specific film types but from memory you never the less have various Creative Styles available in menu settings (e.g. styles such as "Smooth", "Landscape", "Dynamic" etc.) And you can modify these existing styles to better provide a customized image style. There are also Scene Modes and Picture Effect Modes though I do not believe I have ever used these as they strike me as mostly overdone and gimmicky. I would be surprised if the FF models are much different in this regard.
In short any of these Sony cameras will do everything you have mentioned and more.
I do use some OM glass on my Sony body and like them mainly because they tend to be small lenses which match the Sony A series cameras well and have very good IQ. BTW way I agree with Freakscene below who suggests you get a short tele lens. But I have to say my preferred short tele in the OM range is the 100mm f2.8. It is tiny - about the same size as a normal 50mm lens and it is cheap for some reason though the IQ is excellent. I suspect this low price is just because 85mm lenses are better known and hence in more demand.
If you have other specific questions please ask.
My inclination was to get not the base A7 model which is the cheapest of the cameras you mention mainly because I wanted the better capabilities of the later models. It is still a very good camera however and perfectly fine if you do not need some of the extra capabilities of the later models. In particular the later ones have in body image stabilization which I find to be invaluable for use with vintage lenses. But I am also tempted to get one of the models which has the latest auto focus - not because I want to use native Sony lenses as such but rather, because the latest AF supports the third party lens adapters which have AF. This would allow me to adapt OM or other lenses to those adapters and thereby get AF into the bargain. I like that idea for use with my Leica glass (the adapters are in Leica M mount to Sony A mount) but of course there is nothing to stop me from getting an OM to Leica M adapter and using OM glass in this manner too - it is now possible to get adapters that adapt various SLR lenses to Leica M and by stacking in this way you get AF on pretty well any lens you want so long as its not too heavy). Whether you should get an A711 or one of the other models I will not opine in any definitive way as I think this depends on your budget so long as the model you choose has the key features you want. BTW they all have focus peaking which also helps with using vintage glass but to be honest I find that programming one of the function buttons to zoom the image helps even more as focus peaking can be a bit approximate in terms of letting you know exactly what is in focus. Still taken together it all works and if you are experienced in using MF you should find that the Sony works as good in this department as any other digital camera and better than most.
If you are happy to stick with manual focus on your Sony (whichever model camera you end up with) I would strongly suggest looking at the K&F Concept lens adapters. They are mid range in price (about say $25 US per adapter for most camera systems) but are much much better and more consistent quality than the cheapest Chinese "no name" brands found on eBay. Some people like the idea of spending a hundred or a couple of hundred dollars on the top end manual focus adapters and while I would not argue against this if that is your inclination when the time came for me to consider this I really had to ask myself if those adapters (which admittedly are nicely engineered) really do give me 5x or 10x the value of the K&F brand. And the answer for me was no. Besides I play with lots of different camera lens marques on digital bodies and would have needed to buy several adapters making a hundred or a couple of hundred bucks each just too pricey.
The IQ of every Sony camera I have tried is excellent and I understand the full frame sensors on the A series to be amongst the best in the game. My preference is to shoot in RAW and JPG fine (the camera can be told to save one type or the other or both both simultaneously) . While saving both simultaneously consumes more storage on memory cards and hard drives it gives me the best of both worlds. RAW files can be tweaked more if that is required - eg if there are blown highlights these can often be recovered in a way that JPG images simply cannot. Unneeded RAW files can then be erased from your hard drive if that is a consideration. But if you have saved JPG files you can also select one of the in-camera image type modes and just use the image straight from the camera with little extra tweaking if that is your inclination. My Sony NEX does not purport to emulate specific film types but from memory you never the less have various Creative Styles available in menu settings (e.g. styles such as "Smooth", "Landscape", "Dynamic" etc.) And you can modify these existing styles to better provide a customized image style. There are also Scene Modes and Picture Effect Modes though I do not believe I have ever used these as they strike me as mostly overdone and gimmicky. I would be surprised if the FF models are much different in this regard.
In short any of these Sony cameras will do everything you have mentioned and more.
I do use some OM glass on my Sony body and like them mainly because they tend to be small lenses which match the Sony A series cameras well and have very good IQ. BTW way I agree with Freakscene below who suggests you get a short tele lens. But I have to say my preferred short tele in the OM range is the 100mm f2.8. It is tiny - about the same size as a normal 50mm lens and it is cheap for some reason though the IQ is excellent. I suspect this low price is just because 85mm lenses are better known and hence in more demand.
If you have other specific questions please ask.
gavinlg
Mentor
It’s kind of off track to your requirements but I would strongly recommend having a look at the Fuji x series - an xt2 xpro2 or xe3 body with the small, cheap and lightweight f2 lenses is about the best setup for someone that wants something fun and easy while maximising IQ. The Fuji x cameras are probably the best digital cameras I’ve used. The sony’s I’ve used have always felt like little computers and film era lenses on digital bodies have proven underwhelming in my experience.
Sorry if that’s too off topic but just my 2c.
Sorry if that’s too off topic but just my 2c.
filmfan
Well-known
Thanks everyone. I plan on selling Pentax 67 and Canon 5DII and replacing with Sony. Just trying to downsize and simplify the clutter. I think I am going to go with A7R model and just buy some native lenses like 50mm 1.8 and 28mm 2. Or maybe just the Loxia 35mm.
Great advice on the adapters -- I will also get the KF adapter for my OM lenses and just try them out for the fun of it. I also own Canon FD lenses but they are bigger.
Great advice on the adapters -- I will also get the KF adapter for my OM lenses and just try them out for the fun of it. I also own Canon FD lenses but they are bigger.
lynnb
Mentor
Hi Sam welcome back, and congratulations on the new family. I haven't used the Sony cameras, but I read good things about their eye-detect AF which would be very handy for photographing your daughter and her little friends when they grow old enough to get active - which will happen faster than you think. So I'd suggest make sure whatever model you get supports eye-detect AF, and if it were me I'd definitely get the native AF Sony or Zeiss offerings to make life easy.
Yeah, and take lots of pictures because they change and grow up really fast. If you have more than one make sure you take as many pictures of the later siblings as of the first - kids notice that later on
Cheers,
Yeah, and take lots of pictures because they change and grow up really fast. If you have more than one make sure you take as many pictures of the later siblings as of the first - kids notice that later on
Cheers,
BillBingham2
Registered User
Plan X
Get an XE-3 and a 50/2 and 16/2.8 or 23/2.
Plan H
Get an X100F and an Olympus Pen-F and a 75/1.8, never change lenses
Plan W
Ricoh GR III and take some pictures
Mine are 23 and 21 now, never had time to do the stuff with RAW I wanted to or to make a darkroom. I have many digital cameras over the years, and my favorite was the Ricoh series. Simple and fast when I need it and straight forward manual controls when I want it.
B2 (;->
Get an XE-3 and a 50/2 and 16/2.8 or 23/2.
Plan H
Get an X100F and an Olympus Pen-F and a 75/1.8, never change lenses
Plan W
Ricoh GR III and take some pictures
Mine are 23 and 21 now, never had time to do the stuff with RAW I wanted to or to make a darkroom. I have many digital cameras over the years, and my favorite was the Ricoh series. Simple and fast when I need it and straight forward manual controls when I want it.
B2 (;->
OlivierAOP
medium format
I have the A7 with a bunch of adapted MF lenses. It's a great camera for the price (bought mine 2nd hand) and using MF brings me back to the film days. MF can be tricky and you'll miss a lot of shots as your kids start moving around. Good call on getting AF if you can afford it. I have the Fuji X100t as well and I do appreciate the face-detect AF (and the great jpegs).
Regarding MF. Focus peaking is useful for 35mm and over focal lengths to get you close but you need to zoom-in to get critical focus. I find focus peaking not useful for wide-angle: zoom-in or use zone-focusing. You can customize buttons for zoom-in toggle and focus-peaking intensity.
I think the A7R has the same overly sensitive EVF/screen sensor as the A7. Put a ~1.5mm width of electrical tape over the middle of the sensor, it helps a lot.
Regarding MF. Focus peaking is useful for 35mm and over focal lengths to get you close but you need to zoom-in to get critical focus. I find focus peaking not useful for wide-angle: zoom-in or use zone-focusing. You can customize buttons for zoom-in toggle and focus-peaking intensity.
I think the A7R has the same overly sensitive EVF/screen sensor as the A7. Put a ~1.5mm width of electrical tape over the middle of the sensor, it helps a lot.
