Sony A7 models with non-Sony lenses

David Arbogast wrote in post #17257641
Thanks!

Interesting review. It looks like a winner! I'm not sure how to interpret the comparison between the Zony 16-35 and Canon 16-35 since there is a significant resolution difference between the two cameras (5D III vs. a7R).

Just for giggles I did a little comparison including the 14-24mm:

http://www.dxomark.com …__1467_917_813_​792_1367_0

Thoughts?

Its very good for a first pass at a native wide angle lens. Im just spoiled by a lens like the Sigma 35 Art. I will def pick up the 16-35 and the native AF it brings. Should do well compared to the canon 16-35 L that i have been using with it and being lighter always helps

Here are my thoughts about the a7 series UWA zoom options:

Get the Sony FE Carl Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* 16-35mm F4 ZA OSS if you:

1. Want the best overall shooting experience:

Best autofocus experience.

In-camera lens support.

Smallest/lightest overall camera/lens weight.

2. Want the best Raw converter support for your gear (DXO Optics Pro and Capture One won't let you apply lens profiles independently from the camera model)
3. Want/Need lens stabilization (OSS).

Get the Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM if you:

1. Want to use the lens on either Canon or Sony mirrorless cameras.
2. Aren't ready or willing to fully commit to the E-mount system.
3. Want/Need lens stabilzation (IS).
3. Want a great UWA zoom for less cost.

Get the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED if you:

1. Want f/2.8.
2. Want 14-15mm (and don't need 25-35mm).
3. Want maximum sharpness.
4. Are willing to suffer a total lack of lens support (zero AF, ambiguous aperture control, no lens EXIF data for Raw Converters to work with (LR lens profile ineffective against distortion and vignetting, so these have to be adjusted manually by eye.)

These are just my thoughts so far - I'll change them as others poke holes in them.

David Arbogast wrote in post #17257672
Here are my thoughts about the UWA zoom options:

1. Get the Sony FE Carl Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* 16-35mm F4 ZA OSS if you:

1. Want the best overall shooting experience on the Sony a7 series camera (Autofocus, in-camera lens support, etc.).
2. Want the best Raw converter support for your gear (DXO Optics Pro and Capture One won't let you apply lens profiles independently from the camera model)

2. Get the Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM if you:

1. Want to use the lens on either Canon or Sony mirrorless cameras.
2. Aren't ready or willing to fully commit to the E-mount system.
3. Want a great UWA zoom for less cost.

3. Get the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED if you:

1. Want f/2.8.
2. Want 14-15mm (and don't need 25-35mm).
3. Want maximum sharpness.
4. Are willing to suffer a total lack of lens support (zero AF and no lens EXIF data for Raw Converters to work with (LR lens profile ineffective against distortion and vignetting, so these have to be adjusted manually by eye.)

These are just my thoughts so far - I'll change them as others poke holes in them.

Very good thoughts. Also add the sony has OSS as well while the other two do not offer image stabilization plus the obvious weight savings.

vipergts831 wrote in post #17257677
Very good thoughts. Also add the sony has OSS as well while the other two do not offer image stabilization plus the obvious weight savings.

The Canon model has IS, so similar in that regard. I edited my post to include the weight savings (a very nice plus for the Zony!).

David Arbogast wrote in post #17257682
The Canon model has IS, so similar in that regard. I edited my post to include the weight savings (a very nice plus for the Zony!).

Opps didnt see you were comparing it to the F4 version. I always default to the 2.8L

I really dont think I could live without the 14mm on the wide end. I shot with the 16-35 and 14 roki for a few months, kept being drawn back to the 14mm, although the 16-35 was quite good. I could probably deal without the exif for the 14-24. If it's possible to derive a preset for 14mm, then one for 24mm for the corrections, I could get by with that. I like the idea of manual aperture control, so I can use with the ND throttle, not interested in 150mm filters. The only thing that worries me is precise aperture control, I need to borrow this lens from a friend to test.

Very good David. I would add filter size. Some of us are heavily invested in a certain size. 72mm on the Sony could sway somebody towards another choice.

digital_AM wrote in post #17257727
Very good David. I would add filter size. Some of us are heavily invested in a certain size. 72mm on the Sony could sway somebody towards another choice.

adapter rings shouldn't be that much of a problem.

14-24 however is... unique :/

^^ nice thought out David. thank you

I am debating which uwa and that helps in some ways

between fe 16-35 or 14-24

DTBaan wrote in post #17257773
adapter rings shouldn't be that much of a problem.

14-24 however is... unique :/

I'm hoping it plays well with the ND throttle. I'm going to get a G to EF adapter, and use with EF to E mount ND throttle. If that works well, then I will buy the 14-24. No way I'm investing in 150mm filters, I find that 100mm are large and cumbersome enough, I really dont want to deal with large filters in the field. I'm guessing david already has a 150mm set to use with his 17tse.

Charlie wrote in post #17257723
The only thing that worries me is precise aperture control, I need to borrow this lens from a friend to test.

The metabones adapter has a wonderfully smooth aperture dial, but with no detents (probably not feasible because every lens has different aperture ranges) being absolutely precise poses a challenge. However, with a little math you can be quite precise: Set the camera in aperture-priority mode and the apeture dial to wide open. Take note of the shutter speed and do the math on what the shutter speed would be at the desired aperture (a phone app or light meter would be handy for doing that), and then simply turn the aperture dial until you get to the right shutter speed. The aperture dial does have numeral indicators, so you can do all the math at home to find out what aperture each number on the aperture dial most closely correlates to.

For my part, I am not too concerned aperture precision. Usually I want to either: 1. Shoot wide open for maximum shutter speed or thinner DOF, or 2. Shoot in the f/8-f/11 range to maximize DOF and lens sharpness. I generally avoid f/22 for diffraction concerns. So, in my limited experience thus far I either have my aperture dialed to wide open or right smack in the middle.

digital_AM wrote in post #17257727
Very good David. I would add filter size. Some of us are heavily invested in a certain size. 72mm on the Sony could sway somebody towards another choice.

Great point - I should have thought about that.

David Arbogast wrote in post #17257807
The metabones adapter has a wonderfully smooth aperture dial, but with no detents (probably not feasible because every lens has different aperture ranges) being absolutely precise poses a challenge. However, with a little math you can be quite precise: Set the camera in aperture-priority mode and the apeture dial to wide open. Take note of the shutter speed and do the math on what the shutter speed would be at the desired aperture (a phone app or light meter would be handy for doing that), and then simply turn the aperture dial until you get to the right shutter speed. The aperture dial does have numeral indicators, so you can do all the math at home to find out what aperture each number correlates to.

For my part, I am not too concerned aperture precision. Usually I want to either: 1. Shoot wide open for maximum shutter speed or thinner DOF, or 2. Shoot in the f/8-f/11 range to maximize DOF and lens sharpness. I generally avoid f/22 for diffraction concerns. So, in my limited experience thus far I either have my aperture dialed to wide open or right smack in the middle.

Great point - I should have thought about that.

math part sounds good, I figured I was going to compare to the 14 I currently have and just match exposure at given apertures, then maybe put marks on the ring for reference. I'm not going to be using metabones though, planning on using my ND throttle instead of typical square filters. Flange distance is changed slightly so I need to make sure it can still focus at infinity.

Would be nice to have a zoom with super optics and 14mm. Just checked out the distortion, and it looks like only 14mm really needs it.... would have to figure out a software solution. I'm sure someone has encountered this problem before right? Hope I can google up a solution. Either way, will worry about it when I test it.

Charlie wrote in post #17257850
math part sounds good, I figured I was going to compare to the 14 I currently have and just match exposure at given apertures, then maybe put marks on the ring for reference. I'm not going to be using metabones though, planning on using my ND throttle instead of typical square filters. Flange distance is changed slightly so I need to make sure it can still focus at infinity.

Would be nice to have a zoom with super optics and 14mm. Just checked out the distortion, and it looks like only 14mm really needs it.... would have to figure out a software solution. I'm sure someone has encountered this problem before right? Hope I can google up a solution. Either way, will worry about it when I test it.

Well, I'm really glad you brought up aperture precision, Charlie. Over lunch I tested out my suggestion for finding out where the aperture stops are and now I know exactly where f/8 and f/11 are on my aperture ring. Who knows how long I would have waited to make the effort to do so otherwise.

As for a software solution for correcting the distortion at 14mm, you can create a custom profile for LR: http://blogs.adobe.com …ur-own-lens-profiles.html or, if you don't want to bother with that, just make a manual distortion adjustment and save it as a processing preset.

I'm with you about the niceness of having 14mm - and having it in a sharp zoom. I'm pretty happy with my 14-24mm right now, and thanks to this discussion, I'm getting happier.

If Canon ever comes out with that rumored 11-24mm f/2.8L, and if it's crazy-good, then that could be really insane on the a7R.

David Arbogast wrote in post #17258106
Well, I'm really glad you brought up aperture precision, Charlie. Over lunch I tested out my suggestion for finding out where the aperture stops are and now I know exactly where f/8 and f/11 are on my aperture ring. Who knows how long I would have waited to make the effort to do so otherwise.

As for a software solution for correcting the distortion at 14mm, you can create a custom profile for LR: http://blogs.adobe.com …ur-own-lens-profiles.html or, if you don't want to bother with that, just make a manual distortion adjustment and save it as a processing preset.

I'm with you about the niceness of having 14mm - and having it in a sharp zoom. I'm pretty happy with my 14-24mm right now, and thanks to this discussion, I'm getting happier.

If Canon ever comes out with that rumored 11-24mm f/2.8L, and if it's crazy-good, then that could be really insane on the a7R.

In fact, i was hoping Sigma can do that, but they were iin rush and produced Sigma 12-24 mkII, i have Sigma 12-24 mk1 and it is crazy wide on FF, but it is not sharp, and i don't know about 12-24 mkII, and both aren't f2.8, so if Sigma can produce a lens say 15-30 f2.8 or 12-24mm f2.8 for FF then i am always in.

I want to have Nikon 14-24mm, but because it is very expensive and the filter thread is another issue and needing an adapter i passed it.