Sony A7 photo sample - share Sony A7 series photos here

[Albi86]

It's "New Homes" Sale baloon
I so wish this sensor was inside my 5D III.

I think its a good thing that this Sony sensor is not in the 5D MK III ... the Nikon/Sony cameras (with 24 or 36MP
Sony sensors) that I own(ed) and/or tried, do not have the same versatility, speed and accuracy of AF like the 5D MKIII ... from my limited experience I feel Sony sensors are "specialty" sensors, that are good for great image quality & DR but they are not good "all rounders".

Agreed.

Recipe for the perfect camera: take a 5DIII, add the a7 24 MP sensor with the BionZ processor and the VF of the D600/800. Done.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

It's "New Homes" Sale baloon
I so wish this sensor was inside my 5D III.

I think its a good thing that this Sony sensor is not in the 5D MK III ... the Nikon/Sony cameras (with 24 or 36MP
Sony sensors) that I own(ed) and/or tried, do not have the same versatility, speed and accuracy of AF like the 5D MKIII ... from my limited experience I feel Sony sensors are "specialty" sensors, that are good for great image quality & DR but they are not good "all rounders".

Agreed.

Recipe for the perfect camera: take a 5DIII, add the a7 24 MP sensor with the BionZ processor and the VF of the D600/800. Done.

The a6000 (although APSC sensor) seems to fit your description ... that's why I eagerly look forward to getting the a6000 ... who knows maybe one day we will see an a6000 incarnation in a full frame camera.

 

[Albi86]

It's "New Homes" Sale baloon
I so wish this sensor was inside my 5D III.

I think its a good thing that this Sony sensor is not in the 5D MK III ... the Nikon/Sony cameras (with 24 or 36MP
Sony sensors) that I own(ed) and/or tried, do not have the same versatility, speed and accuracy of AF like the 5D MKIII ... from my limited experience I feel Sony sensors are "specialty" sensors, that are good for great image quality & DR but they are not good "all rounders".

Agreed.

Recipe for the perfect camera: take a 5DIII, add the a7 24 MP sensor with the BionZ processor and the VF of the D600/800. Done.

The a6000 (although APSC sensor) seems to fit your description ... that's why I eagerly look forward to getting the a6000 ... who knows maybe one day we will see an a6000 incarnation in a full frame camera.

The EVF is not as good as that in the a7/r - which is good, but still improvable. I'm OK with either a very good EVF or OVF. The OVF in Nikon cameras imho is much better than in Canons.

I also like the form factor of a reflex. It would be nice if it was mirrorless and with the shape/form-factor of the RX10.

 

[drjlo]

The EVF is not as good as that in the a7/r - which is good, but still improvable. I'm OK with either a very good EVF or OVF.

I think tolerance for EVF's is a very person-dependent thing. I find even A7R's EVF to be intolerable, and my dislike is not due to the lag or refresh rate but color. I found the EVF color to be too lumpy, warm, saturated, and cartoonish. There is a temperature adjustment; however, when I adjusted it cooler for some parts of the frame, other objects then became too cool, and all this changed with slight change in available light/type of light, being worst indoors in evening under mixed light. I would say dump the EVF and lower the price, but the problem is the rear LCD is not viewable in sunlight

 

[Rienzphotoz]

The EVF is not as good as that in the a7/r - which is good, but still improvable. I'm OK with either a very good EVF or OVF.

I think tolerance for EVF's is a very person-dependent thing. I find even A7R's EVF to be intolerable, and my dislike is not due to the lag or refresh rate but color. I found the EVF color to be too lumpy, warm, saturated, and cartoonish. There is a temperature adjustment; however, when I adjusted it cooler for some parts of the frame, other objects then became too cool, and all this changed with slight change in available light/type of light, being worst indoors in evening under mixed light. I would say dump the EVF and lower the price, but the problem is the rear LCD is not viewable in sunlight

Not only is the LCD not viewable in sunlight, sometimes when I turn off the camera (a7), the LCD screen still stays on for a few more seconds ... it bugs the hell out of me, but the excellent image quality from the camera lets me tolerate the lag and the issue of slow start-up and turn-off.

 

[drjlo]

Unfortunately, The Sony/Zeiss 24-70 f/4 OSS lens has received disappointing reviews at both photozone and SLRgear.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/24-70mm-fe-zeiss-gets-tested-by-photozone-and-slrgear-doesnt-meet-the-expectations-from-the-reviewers/

 

[Rienzphotoz]

Unfortunately, The Sony/Zeiss 24-70 f/4 OSS lens has received disappointing reviews at both photozone and SLRgear.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/24-70mm-fe-zeiss-gets-tested-by-photozone-and-slrgear-doesnt-meet-the-expectations-from-the-reviewers/

I read those reviews and that's pretty much what I feel about the FE 24-70 f/4 lens ... it is a good lens to have for about $700 (maybe $800 max, but no more) but for close to $1200 it is just not worth it, one might as well stick with the kit lens.

 

[Albi86]

Unfortunately, The Sony/Zeiss 24-70 f/4 OSS lens has received disappointing reviews at both photozone and SLRgear.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/24-70mm-fe-zeiss-gets-tested-by-photozone-and-slrgear-doesnt-meet-the-expectations-from-the-reviewers/

I read those reviews and that's pretty much what I feel about the FE 24-70 f/4 lens ... it is a good lens to have for about $700 (maybe $800 max, but no more) but for close to $1200 it is just not worth it, one might as well stick with the kit lens.

In fact I've read the kit lens is actually quite good for a "kit lens". Charging this premium for the Zeiss certainly makes people expect quite a bit more.

However, to my knowledge this is not a "Zeiss" lens. They only provide QC to Sony. In fact some new real Zeiss ZFE (or whatever they will be called) primes should be announced at the next Photokina.

 

[drjlo]

Unfortunately, The Sony/Zeiss 24-70 f/4 OSS lens has received disappointing reviews at both photozone and SLRgear.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/24-70mm-fe-zeiss-gets-tested-by-photozone-and-slrgear-doesnt-meet-the-expectations-from-the-reviewers/

I read those reviews and that's pretty much what I feel about the FE 24-70 f/4 lens ... it is a good lens to have for about $700 (maybe $800 max, but no more) but for close to $1200 it is just not worth it, one might as well stick with the kit lens.

In fact I've read the kit lens is actually quite good for a "kit lens". Charging this premium for the Zeiss certainly makes people expect quite a bit more.

However, to my knowledge this is not a "Zeiss" lens. They only provide QC to Sony. In fact some new real Zeiss ZFE (or whatever they will be called) primes should be announced at the next Photokina.

Is the FE 50 mm f/1.8 then not a real "Zeiss" lens, either? Pretty darn good if it's a Sony with only Zeiss QC.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

Unfortunately, The Sony/Zeiss 24-70 f/4 OSS lens has received disappointing reviews at both photozone and SLRgear.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/24-70mm-fe-zeiss-gets-tested-by-photozone-and-slrgear-doesnt-meet-the-expectations-from-the-reviewers/

I read those reviews and that's pretty much what I feel about the FE 24-70 f/4 lens ... it is a good lens to have for about $700 (maybe $800 max, but no more) but for close to $1200 it is just not worth it, one might as well stick with the kit lens.

In fact I've read the kit lens is actually quite good for a "kit lens". Charging this premium for the Zeiss certainly makes people expect quite a bit more.

However, to my knowledge this is not a "Zeiss" lens. They only provide QC to Sony. In fact some new real Zeiss ZFE (or whatever they will be called) primes should be announced at the next Photokina.

The optics of FE 24-70 f/4 are very much from ZEISS made by ZEISS, including the anti-reflective coating ... its just that the lens isn't all that good for the money they are charging, because of which some people speculate that ZEISS "only provide QC to Sony".

 

[Rienzphotoz]

Unfortunately, The Sony/Zeiss 24-70 f/4 OSS lens has received disappointing reviews at both photozone and SLRgear.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/24-70mm-fe-zeiss-gets-tested-by-photozone-and-slrgear-doesnt-meet-the-expectations-from-the-reviewers/

I read those reviews and that's pretty much what I feel about the FE 24-70 f/4 lens ... it is a good lens to have for about $700 (maybe $800 max, but no more) but for close to $1200 it is just not worth it, one might as well stick with the kit lens.

In fact I've read the kit lens is actually quite good for a "kit lens". Charging this premium for the Zeiss certainly makes people expect quite a bit more.

However, to my knowledge this is not a "Zeiss" lens. They only provide QC to Sony. In fact some new real Zeiss ZFE (or whatever they will be called) primes should be announced at the next Photokina.

Is the FE 50 mm f/1.8 then not a real "Zeiss" lens, either? Pretty darn good if it's a Sony with only Zeiss QC.

The optics for all E mount lenses branded with ZEISS logo, are very much made by ZEISS ... there are some silly rumors (that ZEISS only provides QC to Sony), to justify the not so good lenses like the FE 24-70 f/4 ... which unfortunately is my very first "ZEISS" lens I ever bought

 

[Albi86]

The optics of FE 24-70 f/4 are very much from ZEISS made by ZEISS, including the anti-reflective coating ... its just that the lens isn't all that good for the money they are charging, because of which some people speculate that ZEISS "only provide QC to Sony".

It's a bit more than a speculation.

I did some research, and Zeiss/Sony lenses are indeed designed by Zeiss, but in close collaboration with Sony, which is then the sole responsible for production and distribution. This means that Zeiss engineers are restricted to what Sony is able or willing to produce.

In fact it's not a contradiction that Zeiss will announce some manual focus primes for the FE mount. Those will be 100% Zeiss lenses like the ZE or ZF primes.