Sony a7(R): Best thing that happened to Canon users this year.

khukri wrote in post #16605331
Hello tsdivine!
Not sure those reviews you offer are valid comparison. Put that 50/1.4 Canon lens on a 2013 Sony A7 sensor for a more equal comparison (Not a trashy sensor by Canon circa 2000!) Moreover, most of the differences that come up in optical bench tests are virtually not discernable to a naked eye viewing images on a compuer screen.

I am sure there are some folks here who own both these lenses and will be happy to offer us side by side results using both the lenses on the same subject shot under identical conditions.

Also, a lot of today's Zeiss is not German glass made in Germany. Zeiss sub contracts and licences stuff all over these days, incl to the Far East. That's like buying a Merc made in China.... May as well buy a Cosina!

On most forums, I percieve people seem to spend endless hours comparing lens quality without half as much thought to their photographic skills and talent. For example, the difference in DOF of a 50mm 1.4 and 1.8 or even f2 for that matter used wide open for purposes of street and general photography is almost neglibgible at 5 to 10m shooting distances. As for picture quality, it is almost the same. The minimal difference in light gathering is amply made up by today's high ISO range cameras. Only bokeh may differ, not sure how much...

That said, your personal choice/preference is what it is, I have no issues! If you are happy with a particular lens and its results, matters not what others think! But such comparison as you suggest cannot be considered justification.

Happy shooting!

The Canon 50 f/1.4 is a weak lens at the widest apertures. I have no doubt the Sony FE Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 will destroy it @ f/1.8 in a fair comparison.

Zeiss lenses are designed in Germany and manufactured in Japan. Nothing wrong with that.

mystik610 wrote in post #16605351
I've been using a 580ex in AV with a7r and its been working fine.

The flash doesn't affect how the camera exposes the ambient light. If the shot is overexposed, simply turning turn the speedlight's output down until your subject is exposed properly.

Thanks!

I NEED more practice with the SpeedLight for sure

Anyway, I'm so happy after my 580EX works with a7R

I'm going to sell my 24L II as well. Zeiss is so good for pixel-peeling, which is a mental disorder and no medication for it

David Arbogast wrote in post #16605416
The Canon 50 f/1.4 is a weak lens at the widest apertures. I have no doubt the Sony FE Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 will destroy it @ f/1.8 in a fair comparison.

I found this link http://3d-kraft.com …&id=151&catid=4​0&Itemid=2 (posted earlier in the thread) quite interesting.

I've seen quite a few fast 50's that look pretty soft until stopped down until well past f/2; which does somewhat seem to defeat the point. I'd definitely take that Sony f/1.8 (that's sharp at f/1.8) over a faster lens that's soft until f/2.

Only the Otus appears to manage significant sharpness at f/1.4, but the price is crazy.

x_tan wrote in post #16605583
Thanks!

I NEED more practice with the SpeedLight for sure

Anyway, I'm so happy after my 580EX works with a7R

I'm going to sell my 24L II as well. Zeiss is so good for pixel-peeling, which is a mental disorder and no medication for it

lol manual flash is a learning process for me as well....same story with manual focusing.

Overall this camera is forcing me to learn, and making me a better photographer overall.

x_tan wrote in post #16605583
I'm going to sell my 24L II as well. Zeiss is so good for pixel-peeling, which is a mental disorder and no medication for it

You are so right. I have the same disorder and the only cure is more Zeiss.

sploo wrote in post #16605607
I found this link http://3d-kraft.com …&id=151&catid=4​0&Itemid=2 (posted earlier in the thread) quite interesting.

I've seen quite a few fast 50's that look pretty soft until stopped down until well past f/2; which does somewhat seem to defeat the point. I'd definitely take that Sony f/1.8 (that's sharp at f/1.8) over a faster lens that's soft until f/2.

Only the Otus appears to manage significant sharpness at f/1.4, but the price is crazy.

Cool. Thanks for reposting that; I had missed it before. The Otus is indeed crazy-expensive when compared to other non-Leica alternatives. But, wow, that link really shows what you're getting for the money. And that really is what the Otus is all about: incredible performance at maximum aperture.
Now I really want an Otus. Thanks!

^ Just ask very very quietly: If Zeiss used to be poor man Leica or not?

BTW I'm keeping my 85L II and skip the 85 Otus.

David Arbogast wrote in post #16605765
You are so right. I have the same disorder and the only cure is more Zeiss.

Cool. Thanks for reposting that; I had missed it before. The Otus is indeed crazy-expensive when compared to other non-Leica alternatives. But, wow, that link really shows what you're getting for the money. And that really is what the Otus is all about: incredible performance at maximum aperture.
Now I really want an Otus. Thanks!

You're welcome.

TBH I'm almost more impressed with the Sony/Zeiss f/1.8 - especially given the huge cost difference between it and the Otus.

I'd much rather have the FE Sonnar than any copy of the Canon 50mm f/1.4 I've tested - which usually doesn't sharpen up significantly until past f2.2 (by which time I reach for a 24-70II, as it's hardly any slower, and destroys the prime in the AF department). Unfairly large cost difference between the Canon 50mm and the 24-70II for the comparison obviously.

mystik610 wrote in post #16605608
lol manual flash is a learning process for me as well....same story with manual focusing.

Overall this camera is forcing me to learn, and making me a better photographer overall.

Finally finger out 580EX manual mode with a7R, which is lots more user friendly and work much much better than Sony toy flash.

Don't mind your opinion, I have one too. But both were opinions......

ZE, ZF, etc. lenses are made by Cosina to Zeiss specs and undergo Zeiss QC. Sony ZA lenses are made by Sony, again to Zeiss's optical specs and QC. Canon lenses....well...are made by Canon, to Canon's specs and QC. I'm not sure what you are trying to imply....I'm guessing it's the typical "if it isn't German made Zeiss then it's crap." Cosina is a quality lens maker....making lenses in partnership with Zeiss. There's nothing wrong with that.

In terms of value, it's probably hard to beat a used 5D and a 50 f/1.4. If we pull in skills and ability, then even that combo for some people would probably be overkill.

You mentioned that you doubted the 55 FE was a good deal on the price/value front compared to a f/1.4 Canon or Nikon lens. The 55 FE on the a7R is a pretty impressive combo, at least from my experience....don't just discount it out of hand.

-Tim

khukri wrote in post #16605331
Hello tsdivine!
Not sure those reviews you offer are valid comparison. Put that 50/1.4 Canon lens on a 2013 Sony A7 sensor for a more equal comparison (Not a trashy sensor by Canon circa 2000!) Moreover, most of the differences that come up in optical bench tests are virtually not discernable to a naked eye viewing images on a compuer screen.

I am sure there are some folks here who own both these lenses and will be happy to offer us side by side results using both the lenses on the same subject shot under identical conditions.

Also, a lot of today's Zeiss is not German glass made in Germany. Zeiss sub contracts and licences stuff all over these days, incl to the Far East. That's like buying a Merc made in China.... May as well buy a Cosina!

On most forums, I percieve people seem to spend endless hours comparing lens quality without half as much thought to their photographic skills and talent. For example, the difference in DOF of a 50mm 1.4 and 1.8 or even f2 for that matter used wide open for purposes of street and general photography is almost neglibgible at 5 to 10m shooting distances. As for picture quality, it is almost the same. The minimal difference in light gathering is amply made up by today's high ISO range cameras. Only bokeh may differ, not sure how much...

That said, your personal choice/preference is what it is, I have no issues! If you are happy with a particular lens and its results, matters not what others think! But such comparison as you suggest cannot be considered justification.

Happy shooting!

My 50/1.4 G has been pretty good on the A7r so far. A strangely long focus throw for an AF lens (around 180 degrees from mfd to infinity). Very sharp too when I manage to get focus right. Only issue so far has been CA wide open.

I don't have anything to compare it to though. Haven't even shot with it on the D700

I was surprised how well the Canon 40mm pancake performed...granted it wasn't really a pancake anymore with the adapter. Still though, that lens is pretty amazing for the price.

-Tim

tsdevine wrote in post #16606189
I was surprised how well the Canon 40mm pancake performed...granted it wasn't really a pancake anymore with the adapter. Still though, that lens is pretty amazing for the price.

-Tim

I had been pondering that one...now that one really is a great bang_for_the_buck lens. Super cheap, impressively sharp (per Photozone.de).

The more I ponder something like the 40mm pancake, though, the more I see the validity of your FE 35mm f/2.8. Sure, it's a lot pricier, but is still quite compact and the AF is a whole lot better with respect to the a7(R). I just wish it was either less expensive or max apertuer f/2.

But, I may cave and do what you did: sell a Canon lens ( e.g. my 24-70 II ) to help offset the cost of the native FE 35mm and 55mm. I definitely want/need a good 50ish mm lens, and the 55mm f/1.8 may be a best answer (although the Otus is very very tempting).

David Arbogast wrote in post #16606420
I had been pondering that one...now that one really is a great bang_for_the_buck lens. Super cheap, impressively sharp (per Photozone.de).

The more I ponder something like the 40mm pancake, though, the more I see the validity of your FE 35mm f/2.8. Sure, it's a lot pricier, but is still quite compact and the AF is a whole lot better with respect to the a7(R). I just wish it was either less expensive or max apertuer f/2.

But, I may cave and do what you did: sell a Canon lens ( e.g. my 24-70 II ) to help offset the cost of the native FE 35mm and 55mm. I definitely want/need a good 50ish mm lens, and the 55mm f/1.8 may be a best answer (although the Otus is very very tempting).

I thought the same as you about buying a cheap Canon 40mm pancake but I already have the 35mm 2.8 FE too so it may be redundant.

The OTUS does have my interest but again, I already have a Leica 50mm Summilux asph (just need to find an adapter) so that's a tough call as it costs the same as my Lux.

The 55 1.8 FE may be the best option for a decent price for me

I'm thinking Zeiss 2.0/50mm Makro-Planar ZE maybe another portable / walk-around option for me...

Ok, I saw this beautiful young lady today, and ask mum to let me get a photo of her

Zeiss 1.4/35 @ f/1.4 with 580EX bounce. No way I'm going to use the Sony toy flash if I have the choice from today!
.

David Arbogast wrote in post #16606420
But, I may cave and do what you did: sell a Canon lens ( e.g. my 24-70 II ) to help offset the cost of the native FE 35mm and 55mm. I definitely want/need a good 50ish mm lens, and the 55mm f/1.8 may be a best answer (although the Otus is very very tempting).

You're going to need to sell more than a 24-70II for an Otus. Any kidneys left?