Sony A7 models with non-Sony lenses

BrentBoshart wrote in post #16805046
What wide angle lenses (<28mm) are working well with the A7R? Anyone using the Zeiss 21mm ZE with success? I have read about issues with the corners with the A7R and wide lenses.

My most used lenses on the A7R are the TS-E 24II and the Zeiss 21 and I didn't notice any issue in the corners.

ptcanon3ti wrote in post #16805545
Do you have a link to this King adaptor?

not really I bought mine on ebay. It says King on it. Will be comparing it to Metabones tomorrow hopefully.

Hmm i dont use my Canon Glass on the A7, beacuse i dont get the point of buying that small camera and making it bulky again when putting my L Glass in front of it.

Besides that little Zeiss FE 55 1.8 outresolves just any canon glass on this planet

so here we go, all a7 + 55 1.8 mostly wide open, all AL. love that combination

and here some more

DigitalAngel wrote in post #16806238
Hmm i dont use my Canon Glass on the A7, beacuse i dont get the point of buying that small camera and making it bulky again when putting my L Glass in front of it.

Besides that little Zeiss FE 55 1.8 outresolves just any canon glass on this planet

I didn't get an A7R because of its size. Being tiny is just a plus. I got it for its sensor. The day Sony gets their versions of the TS-E 24II or Zeiss 21 I might stop using my L glasses on it.

RedCatPhoto wrote in post #16806300
I didn't get an A7R because of its size. Being tiny is just a plus. I got it for its sensor. The day Sony gets their versions of the TS-E 24II or Zeiss 21 I might stop using my L glasses on it.

^^^ This!!!

RedCatPhoto wrote in post #16806300
I didn't get an A7R because of its size. Being tiny is just a plus. I got it for its sensor. The day Sony gets their versions of the TS-E 24II or Zeiss 21 I might stop using my L glasses on it.

I'm sure for most canon switchers it's all about that sensor.

i dunno... i got it because it's a full frame sensor and the size of a small camera... not gonna sit here and lie!

Personally, and this is personally, my 5D MKIII outperforms my A7........ But, i use my A7 more because it's smaller form factor.... Fullframe sensor is just a plus for me.

Anyhow, those are some amazing shots... i might be picking up that 55mm really soon.

dtufino wrote in post #16806518
i dunno... i got it because it's a full frame sensor and the size of a small camera... not gonna sit here and lie!

Personally, and this is personally, my 5D MKIII outperforms my A7........ But, i use my A7 more because it's smaller form factor.... Fullframe sensor is just a plus for me.

Anyhow, those are some amazing shots... i might be picking up that 55mm really soon.

lol I wish I were in your position.

DigitalAngel wrote in post #16806238
Hmm i dont use my Canon Glass on the A7, beacuse i dont get the point of buying that small camera and making it bulky again when putting my L Glass in front of it.

Besides that little Zeiss FE 55 1.8 outresolves just any canon glass on this planet

1) that is because you have A7 and not A7r. A7 is somewhat similar to Canon 5DM3/6D sensor in MPs. A7r is a whole different world out there, because Canon DOES NOT currently have any camera with anything remotely close to Sony's 36MP sensor. Nikon obviously does in D800/800e. I've owned both Canon 5DM3 and Nikon D800 for extended periods of time. I can tell you for a fact that placing the same L glass in front of A7r vs Canon makes a big difference in terms of resulting photos. In fact, you see your existing L glass in a whole new light because it DOES resolve the 36MP sensor, and the resulting sharpness is refreshing, after seeing same lenses on Canon full frame cameras. That is until Canon comes up with 30+ MP sensor, is the only game in town for Canon lens owners. Being able to AF with Canon glass via Metabones type adapter is a big bonus.

2) I just sold my Zeiss 55 1.8 lens but I've shot several thousand shots on it. It is true about it being a very sharp lens, however, your statement about Canon glass making it bulky holds true with 55 1.8 because It is not a smallest lens size wise, when it is mounted on A7/r. 35FE is but not really 55FE. In fact, mount a Canon 50 1.8 II on Metabones adapter, or even better Voiglander 40/1.4 on Leica M adapter, and you will have a more compact package than with 55FE.

3) new native FE lenses are even worse in that size regard. the 70-200 F/4 FE that is coming out later this month is actually heavier than either 70-200 F4L or 70-200 F4L IS FYI.

Great photos btw!!!!!

5D MKIII outperforms your A7, will it outperforms A7R also?

In all cases, my main reason for Sony A7R is not that small size or even sensor size, but it is that more mp, so 36mp on smaller body and full frame is no brainier, and i like to have more mp most of the time just in case i shoot landscapes and architectures a lot and i want to print some at very large sizes exceeding 36-40" wide, on Getdpi they told me that if i will print up to 30" then A7 is more than enough or best choice, if up to 40" then A7R is the choice, but if i want larger than 40" they told me it is better i use my digital medium format, so it means A7R is closer to MF in image quality than less mp DSLRs.

RedCatPhoto wrote in post #16806300
I didn't get an A7R because of its size. Being tiny is just a plus. I got it for its sensor. The day Sony gets their versions of the TS-E 24II or Zeiss 21 I might stop using my L glasses on it.

+1

Tareq wrote in post #16806616
5D MKIII outperforms your A7, will it outperforms A7R also?

In all cases, my main reason for Sony A7R is not that small size or even sensor size, but it is that more mp, so 36mp on smaller body and full frame is no brainier, and i like to have more mp most of the time just in case i shoot landscapes and architectures a lot and i want to print some at very large sizes exceeding 36-40" wide, on Getdpi they told me that if i will print up to 30" then A7 is more than enough or best choice, if up to 40" then A7R is the choice, but if i want larger than 40" they told me it is better i use my digital medium format, so it means A7R is closer to MF in image quality than less mp DSLRs.

"Perform" is a term that means different things to different people. If "performance" means faster/more accurate AF, or better high ISO capabilities, etc. then, sure, the 5D III outperforms the a7 and a7R.

On the other hand, if you're looking for greater resolving power and dynamic range, or if you primarily use manual focus lenses (as I do) then the a7 and a7R outperform the 5D III.

Because each camera has it's unique definitive strengths there is a place for both in my gear case.

Well it just depends what you want. I dont need 36mpixel so the A7 was my obvious choice. Its also cheaper, quieter, has a better AF, shorter viewfinder black out, faster write times and i dont need as much storage space and cpu time to work the files. and i won´t ever put non native glass on it as it will make the cam bigger and autofocus is just rubbish. so as a people photographer, A7 is exactly what i wanted

besides, even that "little" sensor outperforms my 5D3

David Arbogast wrote in post #16806724
"Perform" is a term that means different things to different people. If "performance" means faster/more accurate AF, or better high ISO capabilities, etc. then, sure, the 5D III outperforms the a7 and a7R.

On the other hand, if you're looking for greater resolving power and dynamic range, or if you primarily use manual focus lenses (as I do) then the a7 and a7R outperform the 5D III.

Because each camera has it's unique definitive strengths there is a place for both in my gear case.

Dear, i know that, but it is not my fault, the OP who posted it should explain or elaborate what it outperforms in, if you mention a so general word it is difficult sometimes to understand which parts is the meaning.

And yes, i am talking mostly about IQ more than other technical things, sometimes you can't have one camera that have all top best everything, we all will buy that camera no doubt, but we know many cameras have pros and cons, so sometimes we take those pros from each camera for different situations.

My H4D-60 outperforms all those 35mm DSLRs very very easy in term of resolution only, and you know that, but coming to AF speed and fps and video and ISO, it is the worst you can have, and for sure its price also is a big BIG issue, but i bought it only and only for that mp, Simply.