6 stop push: 5DsR vs A7R vs A7RII

[Aglet]

So why is there image quality falloff at the edges when using adapters with lenses?
...
Whilst there are some available for sale 2nd hand, if they were the problem that some are making them out to be then there would be more metabones showing up on places like craigslist.

I 'splained dat a few pages back.
The filter stack in front of the sensor refracts the incoming light more as you move away from center.
If that stack refraction isn't accounted for in the lens design, you may have IQ loss away from center.

..because Nikon's/Canon's/Sony's/Pentax/Fuji/whomever's filter stacks may not all have the same effective total refraction so there'll be differences.
Metabones (latest) speed-boosters should be made to compensate for that.

So this makes me wonder how 3rd party glass is made to compromise for this as well.
Does anyone know?
Do they make the rear elements custom to the mount to compensate for this or do they just use a compromise method and employ a longer effective register distance to minimize the effect?

Did Sigma use a compromise before but now the Art lenses are better tuned to each mfr's stack to provide the best possible performance?
4/3 systems at least had a design standard (with some rather thick filter stacks)

 

[Eldar]

If I have to push more than 2 stops, I trash the image.

I posted this on another thread also, but it can work as an example. Would you throw this away? What do you think I have done here? (I can reveal that overall EC is 0)

 

[msm]

So the dream of getting Canon lens resolution capacity from non Canon bodies for high quality stills images is not a clear cut case.

It's more than clear cut...haven't you heard? Using an adapted lens on a Sony body is possibly even better than native.

No, that is no longer a choice you have to make. Not when the competition can use lenses from multiple "camera systems" and perform extremely well...possibly even better than cameras from within the same system.

Thanks Neuro, if it hadn't been for your sharp eyes that might have slipped me by. So I am good to get the A7RII now and use my EF lenses for even better performance?

Why do you guys think people adapt Canon lenses on Sony bodies? Because they are stupid?

 

[Sporgon]

If I have to push more than 2 stops, I trash the image.

I posted this on another thread also, but it can work as an example. Would you throw this away? What do you think I have done here? (I can reveal that overall EC is 0)

Just in relation to my reply on to this on the other thread: EC 0 doesn't mean that you haven't unneccessarily underexposed.

 

[Eldar]

If I have to push more than 2 stops, I trash the image.

I posted this on another thread also, but it can work as an example. Would you throw this away? What do you think I have done here? (I can reveal that overall EC is 0)

Just in relation to my reply on to this on the other thread: EC 0 doesn't mean that you haven't unneccessarily underexposed.

I exposed for the buildings on the left and the sky. I made no EC to these areas in post.

 

[Sporgon]

If I have to push more than 2 stops, I trash the image.

I posted this on another thread also, but it can work as an example. Would you throw this away? What do you think I have done here? (I can reveal that overall EC is 0)

e

Just in relation to my reply on to this on the other thread: EC 0 doesn't mean that you haven't unneccessarily underexposed.

I exposed for the buildings on the left and the sky. I made no EC to these areas in post.

Were you spot metering from the white buildings ?

 

[Eldar]

What do you think I have done here? (I can reveal that overall EC is 0)

You've lifted the shadows. The black light pole is too light.

btw, that image could do with a bit of CA correction!

This is now being discussed on two threads. See:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=27237.msg540617#msg540617

I have made a general shadow lift and I have made an EC compensation in certain areas. I also had the hightlight reduced, which I don't think I should have, since it made the image flatter. It was a quick job on a laptop in an airport lounge. Now it's time to fly.

The CA thing is interesting. I have a couple of examples now, where I have seen (significant) CA on jpeg-images I have posted. But looking at the full resolution image in LR shows nothing. Why that is happening is a mystery to me. Anyone knowing why that happens?

 

[krisbell]

I'm late to this game. Who even pushes shadows 3 stops in real life? The only instances of pushing shadows that much is for creative exercise. In my 10 years of digital photography, I've not once had to push shadows beyond 2 stops, let alone 6 stops.
Lesson learned from this comparison: if you want to push shadows by 6 stops, get a a7rII!

Perhaps you should have taken the time/courtesy to read the previous posts before replying - you dont push shadows 2 stops but many of us do.

I agree. I spend more time pulling exposures than pushing. If you have to push your exposures all the time, you are doing it wrong. But i guess there are those that are lazy and don't want to use histograms to maximize what their cameras can deliver.

If you have a Sony, pushing is the best way to maximise what your camera can deliver, just like for a Canon ETTR is best. And without knowing what and how people are photographing whatever they are, what is the point in this comment?

If I have to push more than 2 stops, I trash the image.

See my first comment above. Also, I wager my wife's weekly allowance that you wouldnt be able to tell which images I have pushed by 2 stops versus not pushed at all - but if you want to trash perfectly good images on some pre-defined, arbitrary and self-imposed limit all power to you. Canon cameras produce their best images by exposing as far to the right as possible and then reducing exposure significantly in post - do you trash any image you have to pull by more than 2 stops even if that produces the cleanest images?

 

[privatebydesign]

So the dream of getting Canon lens resolution capacity from non Canon bodies for high quality stills images is not a clear cut case.

It's more than clear cut...haven't you heard? Using an adapted lens on a Sony body is possibly even better than native.

No, that is no longer a choice you have to make. Not when the competition can use lenses from multiple "camera systems" and perform extremely well...possibly even better than cameras from within the same system.

Thanks Neuro, if it hadn't been for your sharp eyes that might have slipped me by. So I am good to get the A7RII now and use my EF lenses for even better performance?

Why do you guys think people adapt Canon lenses on Sony bodies? Because they are stupid?

Because Sony make half a dozen lenses per mount and Canon make around seventy EF lenses, anybody that wants anything but a very modest lens selection with a Sony camera has to use third party lenses. People think they will get the 'best' of all worlds if they use Canon lenses on 'superior' performing sensors, the claims have now gone from, 'you can use your existing lenses on this camera' for the A7R without mentioning the myriad of caveats, to 'your EF lenses will work just as well as on your Canon body, if not better' on the A7RII, what utter bull.

Generally, yes, I think most people who buy a Sony camera to shoot Canon lenses are stupid and buy into the hype and sales speak. I don't buy into hype or sales speak, I personally test every lens I buy and every body too, if it has features or IQ differences that are meaningful and relevant to my images I buy them, if they don't then I don't buy them.

 

[Txema]

"Generally, yes, I think most people who buy a Sony camera to shoot Canon lenses are stupid and buy into the hype and sales speak. I don't buy into hype or sales speak, I personally test every lens I buy and every body too, if it has features or IQ differences that are meaningful and relevant to my images I buy them, if they don't then I don't buy them."

I think that buy canon lenses for canon bodies is neither stupid nor clever. Buying the new A7RII to use it with your canon lenses is neither stupid nor clever. Thinking that the people who chose the option you didn't is stupid is stupid indeed.

 

[Loswr]

Why do you guys think people adapt Canon lenses on Sony bodies? Because they are stupid?

Because they wanted the features of a Sony camera but are forced to compromise to use the lenses they want, either due to the very limited native lens selection, or to limited budget. Many may not be aware of the compromise they're making, because they've bought into the hype of the 'best of both worlds'. Some will not even know – or care about – the impacts of using an adapter.

But to claim that such impacts don't exist is false, and the argument that mounting a Canon lens on a Sony body via an adapter maximizes the performance of both is specious.

 

[East Wind Photography]

I'm late to this game. Who even pushes shadows 3 stops in real life? The only instances of pushing shadows that much is for creative exercise. In my 10 years of digital photography, I've not once had to push shadows beyond 2 stops, let alone 6 stops.
Lesson learned from this comparison: if you want to push shadows by 6 stops, get a a7rII!

Perhaps you should have taken the time/courtesy to read the previous posts before replying - you dont push shadows 2 stops but many of us do.

I agree. I spend more time pulling exposures than pushing. If you have to push your exposures all the time, you are doing it wrong. But i guess there are those that are lazy and don't want to use histograms to maximize what their cameras can deliver.

If you have a Sony, pushing is the best way to maximise what your camera can deliver, just like for a Canon ETTR is best. And without knowing what and how people are photographing whatever they are, what is the point in this comment?

If I have to push more than 2 stops, I trash the image.

See my first comment above. Also, I wager my wife's weekly allowance that you wouldnt be able to tell which images I have pushed by 2 stops versus not pushed at all - but if you want to trash perfectly good images on some pre-defined, arbitrary and self-imposed limit all power to you. Canon cameras produce their best images by exposing as far to the right as possible and then reducing exposure significantly in post - do you trash any image you have to pull by more than 2 stops even if that produces the cleanest images?

So by your own answer you clarified my point. The OP comparison here is useless.

 

[sanj]

If I have to push more than 2 stops, I trash the image.

Funny. You do that your images pls. Let me do what I want with mine, as I see no need to trash an interesting image if I have to salvage it by lifting part or whole of the image.

 

[msm]

Why do you guys think people adapt Canon lenses on Sony bodies? Because they are stupid?

Because they wanted the features of a Sony camera but are forced to compromise to use the lenses they want, either due to the very limited native lens selection, or to limited budget. Many may not be aware of the compromise they're making, because they've bought into the hype of the 'best of both worlds'. Some will not even know – or care about – the impacts of using an adapter.

But to claim that such impacts don't exist is false, and the argument that mounting a Canon lens on a Sony body via an adapter maximizes the performance of both is specious.

Hype is a bad thing. As is FUD, usually propagated and blown completely out of proportions on the internet by fanboys such as yourself who only have bad things to say about the a7 cameras and only good things about canon.

The reality is there are compromises with both choices, when you go for a Canon body you get the worst DR in the business, no manual focus aids, no IBIS and mirror slap.

 

[Loswr]

...fanboys such as yourself who only have bad things to say about the a7 cameras and only good things about canon.

Yep, that's me – never said a good thing about a7 bodies, never said a bad thing about Canon. How's the weather there in dilbertland? Do let us know when you return to reality, mmmkay?

 

[msm]

...fanboys such as yourself who only have bad things to say about the a7 cameras and only good things about canon.

Yep, that's me – never said a good thing about a7 bodies, never said a bad thing about Canon. How's the weather there in dilbertland? Do let us know when you return to reality, mmmkay?

Yep that is you, I can't recall ever seeing you say anything positive about a a7 camera, however I see you all the time spam threads like these with FUD about things you have absolutely no practical experience with.

 

[Loswr]

...fanboys such as yourself who only have bad things to say about the a7 cameras and only good things about canon.

Yep, that's me – never said a good thing about a7 bodies, never said a bad thing about Canon. How's the weather there in dilbertland? Do let us know when you return to reality, mmmkay?

Yep that is you, I can't recall ever seeing you say anything positive about a a7 camera, however I see you all the time spam threads like these with FUD about things you have absolutely no practical experience with.

Just because you can't recall seeing something doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Moreover, you really don't know everything about my practical experience, do you? Feel free to judge and make false statements anyway...after all, it's the Internet and that sort of thing is quite common here.

 

[msm]

...fanboys such as yourself who only have bad things to say about the a7 cameras and only good things about canon.

Yep, that's me – never said a good thing about a7 bodies, never said a bad thing about Canon. How's the weather there in dilbertland? Do let us know when you return to reality, mmmkay?

Yep that is you, I can't recall ever seeing you say anything positive about a a7 camera, however I see you all the time spam threads like these with FUD about things you have absolutely no practical experience with.

Just because you can't recall seeing something doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Moreover, you really don't know everything about my practical experience, do you? Feel free to judge and make false statements anyway...after all, it's the Internet and that sort of thing is quite common here.

Nope but if it happens it is so rare that it practically never happens. You pollute this forum with your useless sarcastic garbage at 10 posts a day, I should have seen it if you wrote anything positive about Sony or Nikon at any real frequency. :

As for practical experience, perhaps you can share with us your vast practical experience about Nikon QA, Sony compressed raws, adapter troubles which you seem to know so much about? : Instead of just mentioning crap you read about on the internet.

 

[Loswr]

Nope but if it happens it is so rare that it practically never happens. You pollute this forum with your useless sarcastic garbage at 10 posts a day, I should have seen it if you wrote anything positive about Sony or Nikon at any real frequency.

Yeah, I guess you missed the many times I stated that if landscape photography was my primary focus, I'd be using a D800/D810 and 14-24/2.8G (although that was before the 5Ds and 11-24/4L). But hey, if you didn't see it I guess it didn't happen. :

 

[sanj]

I learnt a new term: FUD