« Sunday Open Mike: News! | Main | July Print Offer: David Dyer-Bennet »

Monday, 07 July 2014


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Meilleure caméra possédée et utilisée à date. Pour moi, elle est suffisamment rapide, sauf à l'ouverture. Les résultats en terme de qualité de photos sont impressionnants. Je l'utilise avec les 55, 1.8 et la 24-70 de Zeiss et, avec l'adaptateur, l'Elmarit 28, une vieille Summaron 35 et la Summicron 50, et traite les fichiers dans Lightroom 5,4.
J'adore le son au déclenchement. Il est rare que j'aie besoin de silence en photographiant.
Petite, légère et discrète. Un plaisir.

I have an A7 and love it. I had the 35mm f2.8 with it for the longest time, but ultimately didn't love the lens as much as the camera. I just sold it and got the excellent 55mm f1.8 which really lends itself to great portraits and is sharp as can be. Additionally, just last week I bought a used Voigtlander 21mm f4 and Voigtlander close focus adapter which has made for a great super wide lens on the A7 thanks to all the features of the camera that make manual focusing a dream.

The vast majority of my pictures are of my kids (as I'm taking at least one picture of them a day for every day of their lives), but you can see all the Voigltander pictures here:


And all the 55mm pics here:


I have the standard A7 thanks to an amazing Sony Rewards sale price. As an A99 user I am very happy with the familiar image results from the A7. Most of the use for mine is with the LA-EA4 adapter and my A mount primes like the 35/1.4G, 85/1.4Z and 24/2Z.

My initial plan was to go with the A7R, but the price was too good to pass up, and for photographing events I use it side by side with my A99 seamlessly.

I'd love to eventually add an A7R and maybe even an A7S for a killer combination of options.

I don't have one yet but I'm seriously considering the 7s. Three or four stops of extra usable sensitivity is a huge boon to low light shooting. And the silent shutter mode is a biggie too. The shutter on the 7 and 7r that I've tried have been on the loud side. But I do like the instant feedback of seeing the picture I've just taken on the EVF. Much better than a screen on the back of the camera for chimping, especially in outdoor situations. Been using a Sony RX-100 for the past couple years and have been impressed at how much better its auto-exposure is, over the Nikons and Canons I had been using. So you could say I'm confident that Sony is bringing to market cutting edge camera technology. Now should I spend my $2500 on the 7s or save it for the fixed-lens medium format camera Sony will be bringing out, made with the 50 Megapixel 33 x 44 sensor that's also used in the Pentax 645Z, as well as Hassy and Phase cameras?

Very quick rundown from the top of my head:

- Very sturdy, solid manufacturing.
- Smallest FF camera.
- Good EVF.
- Can use all the lenses in the world (see below).
- Image quality improvement from my 5D2 (see below).
- Tiltable screen.
- Focus peaking.
- Tethered shooting with Android worked very well.
- EV compensation dial is great.
- Shutter noise much quieter than expected.

- Tone compression. I saw it appear several times during my brief testing and it was a dealbreaker.
- Shutter shock. I normally dismiss Internet's typical outrage over minor things, but in this case I found I was getting blurry shots at 1/80 ~ 1/160 (shot with a 40mm), which was disturbing. Strike two.
- Two-press to manual focus zoom is annoying (the fn button is placed a bit awkwardly for my hands).
- My stable of manual focus lenses did not work well. Doing careful (tripod, live view focusing, etC) shooting alongside the 5D2, the Canon output better images, more contrasty and with better detail. The sensor in the Sony showed less resolution, and it had a tendency to reflect light back into the lens and back to the sensor, which caused bad veiling. I learned about adding velvet-like materials to the inside of adapters, but that was a nasty workaround for that price of a camera.
- Very few lenses at the moment I bought it, and very expensive.
- Not enough of an IQ improvement over the 5D2 for that amount of money. Had it been $1000, I would have kept it, but for $2200 it was not worth it.
- Confusing usage of the EV compensation dial when in manual (there are four controls - aperture, shutter speed, iso and ev compensation- for three parameters).
- My copy had a nasty case of banding when lifting the shadows a lot. I never got Sony to answer if the camera was supposed to behave that way or not, so I returned it.

A bit of history: For decades, I had the Rollei SL66, a fantastic camera for nature and landscape work. When digital lured me away from the darkrooom, I went from the Kodak SLR/c (clunky quirky, but fantastic acutance when everything was right) to the Canon 5D and 5D2 and an assortment of Canon lenses. Then came the Olympus OMD-EM5 which, in A3plus prints, matched the 5D2 in resolution and improved on it in DR. So I sold the 5D2 but kept some of my Canon lenses in the hope that there would be a successor that could match the Nikon D800E in resolution (which the 5D3 would not).

So when Sony announced the A7R, I was moved by the hope of finally being able to use my Canon lenses with a very high-resolution sensor. That hope has been mostly disappointed.
My first copy of the MetaBones III EF adapter was too tight to accept the lenses. The second one fits, and it works very well (though with very slow AF) with the 100 mm Macro IS. With the 17-40, however, the edges (which were a bit soft with the 5D2) are completely unusable even if stopped down. With my favorite 70-200 f/4 IS, everything is ok optically, but the dreaded shutter shock made me lose so many great shots on a recent landscape tour in the Dolomites (always on a solid tripod) that I stopped using it.

With its native lenses, however (I have the 35/2.8 and the 55/1.8), the A7R is the wonder of the world: Acutance like the Kodak SLR/c, DR better than the EM-5, and resolution so fine that even on an A2 print I need a magnifying glass to see the detail. And while I had thought of the A7R as a tripod camera for landscapes and nature work, I also discovered that I could take beautiful handheld portraits with the 55/1.8 lens wide open and the (small) focus point on the nearest eye: Perfect AF and beautiful soft bokeh -- just as beautiful as that of the Olympus 75/1.8 on the EM-5.

So while the Oly remains my favourite all-round camera (I see no reason to switch to the EM-1), the Canon lenses will have to go, but the Sony will stay, even though in comparison to the Canon and the Olympus it strikes me as a very unfinished camera badly in need of an improved successor. But like the Kodak SLR/c, what it does when everything is right is incredibly good.

A7R from 5DMK2 setup.
TLDR: outstanding resolution, ergo not up to sony/nikon standards. could be too small for those with bigger hands.

Got one when they first shipped. I have an 800e and wanted at least as good image quality, the significantly lighter kit (I am 65), and the ability to shoot any lens I want (I have drawers full, 35, medium, and large format). Here is what I found:
• Micro-contrast improvement over 800e.
• Tonal compression is a concern, though I have not seen evidence of a problem from it.
• The Sony/Zeiss 2.8/35 (pictured) and 1.8/55 are superb.
• My vintage lenses' character shines through, including their shortcomings. The camera is quite revealing.
• My contemporary F mount lenses (Zeiss ZF, adapted Leica R, Sigma A) perform admirably, though the size and weight of them on the body is a bit absurd.
• The menu system is a blessed relief after using the Nikon.
I used Lightroom and Iridient Developer for conversions.
I returned the body because of the shutter shock problem, but I am about to repurchase… I have been hoping for a solution from Sony, but the added mass approach will work for me (landscapes).
Off Topic, but related:
I am currently using the lenses on the a6000 for handheld people photos. I tried a couple of Metabones Speedbooster adapters on the 6000 for vintage lenses, but both of them were poorly assembled. Neither would focus to infinity, one of them would only focus out to maybe 20 feet, and one had a decentered element. Back they went.

overall impressions . . . problems or annoyances

A friend has a regular A7. He says there are two big problems: the focus is too slow (though it is accurate) for the price, and, as everyone else has mentioned, the lenses are too few and too dear. Using only the 55mm in a controlled environment is pretty good.

"Meilleure caméra possédée et utilisée à date. Pour moi, elle est suffisamment rapide, sauf à l'ouverture..."

That's easy for you to say, Jacques.
Cheers! Jay

I purchased an A7R in May along with the Zeiss 24-70 f/4 zoom as a two-pound replacement for the four-pound Nikon D800E, 24-120 f/4 combination I previously used for backpacking.

So far I am quite pleased with the camera-lens combination. I previously had an NEX-6 so I found it easy to transition to the A7R.

The print quality of the panoramas recently taken with the A7R in Theodore National Park appears to be on par with previous panoramas taken with the D800E.

Because of a lack of a full range of Sony-Zeiss lenses (and my desire to not loose automation) I do not consider the camera a replacement for the D800E which I still own. I am concerned about battery life during backpacking trips which begin in August.

I am pleased that Sony produced the camera and look forward to its continued use.

Coming from film cameras (Contax III, Olympus OM, Leicas (3f and g, then M6 and M7)), my first first in depth experience with digital cameras was the NEX 5n. The multi level menus made me go bananas, but the end results were better than what I was used to with film. That 30mm Sigma was better than my 30 and 50 mm Summicrons, but I did not quite get used to the crop factor thing.

Then came the A7r with its logical menus, programmable buttons and large sensor - and out went the darkroom and also the M7s with all their lenses. I now use a 21mm Olympus, their 50mm macro and their 100mm as well as the Sony/Zeiss 35 and 55mm.

On the A7 I miss the touch screen I had on the 5n. It made setting the focus point sooo easy. I miss the 5n EVF because it could be tilted upwards.

I do not think the A7r shutter is loud, and I do not miss an IS, and I have not experienced the shutter shake. I have programmed the buttons so that I seldom need to use the menu. And the function button gives acces to more functions than I need. The JPEGs are excellent and I do not use RAW. Wifi is a real advantage.

My only complaint is the bracketing function with a minimum of three exposures when two would suffice. Still I am happy and satisfied.

I went for the A7 rather than the A7r (the S wasn't out at the time) as I reasoned that 24mp would be enough for me as the 12mp of the Canon 5D had been enough as had the 8mp of the 20D.

I use my A7 with Rokkor and Zuiko primes although I also have the 28-70mm. The reason for the legacy primes is that I don't like modern fly by wire lenses with no end stops and no markings.

I'm very happy with the camera and it's the best camera I've ever owned. There are only a few things changes I'd change...

I'd fit a fully articulated screen that could be turned to the body and I'd fit an inbuilt flash and...

I'd add the ability to assign back display off to a custom function.

All of these things could be easily incorporated into a firmware update.

(I'm joking...)

PS. I shoot raw and process with CS5.

Mine is the A7, and overall I'd give it four and a half stars. Image quality is excellent, the three lenses I use with it - the 35, 55, and 24-70 Zeisses - are excellent to outstanding (the 55). Low light performance is very, very good as well. Only real complaints are the merely adequate autofocus speed and the rather loud shutter.

As mentioned in my Fuji post, for me it is; Panasonic for video, Sony for resolution and detail, but as an overall system I tend to rely on my Fuji X system. The 56mm f1.2 is astonishingly good, the sensor amazingly flexible, and everything "comes good to hand."

Best camera I've had so far....
I use it on wedding with Zeiss ZM and some voigtlanders. Bought the close adapter from voigtlander and you can see why anyone would fall in love with this kind of combo. Imagine using a beautiful 35mm f 1.2 II voigtlander or a 35mm Zeiss ZM f2 with close focus abilities, or any lens for that matter. It's a very unique system specially when you use the EVF in B&W mode so you can concentrate on your composition and focus using red peaking, and magnify on the AF/MF button. There's no other camera on the market that can focus that quickly with manual lenses. I love it.
The sensor on the A7 is the WOW factor, you can use it with ease from ISO 100 to 6400, but you should protect the highlights when exposing, since you can recover underexpose files in LR5 with at least +4 exposure, the detail and low noise on shadows is truly remarkable. You really have to see it. On FB there's a great Sony A7 group with lots of interesting photographers from Brian Smith to the most amateur guys. There you can easily see great examples of shots taken with the A7.
I personally traded my D800e and 3 lenses for a A7, no regrets so far.

I have been using an A7R for about 3 months now. I am happy with the results. Interestingly I bought the A7R to replace a Canon 5D2. Unlike Alberto I have not experienced "shutter shock". In my view the files being much larger give more latitude in processing. This and the fact that the camera is quite a bit smaller than the 5D2 means that the latter camera remains in the cupboard.
I keep hearing that a lack of lenses is a detriment but again disagree. I use a Metabones adapter to fit my favourite Canon lenses, the 45mm T/S and 90mm T/S. I have also had good results with the Canon 40mm pancake.
I process in Lightroom just as I did with the 5D2. Nothing different there.
What I want is the A7R with a black and white sensor.

Oh my! I should have known this was coming. I ended up falling far, far down the internet rabbit hole this weekend after your "Fuji X-T1 Opinions" post. Coincidentally, that rabbit hole led me to reading quite a bit about this Sony A7x series. Looks like I'm not out yet! I'm very much looking forward to hearing the TOP community's thoughts on these.

I've passed up the other cameras, though I own two E-M1s and tested the X-1. I also own the A7r. In short, I loved the Fuji, but the squishy back buttons turned me off and the lack of the excellent Olympus IBIS made me stick with Olympus, despite the larger Fuji sensor.

I'm currently in Japan, where I trust my olympus to deliver the goods fast and reliably.

In a few days I fly to Hawaii, where I will switch to the Sony for the slower landscape work I plan to do there.

So, the Olympus for it's no-holds-barred deliverance under virtual all conditions. The Sony for slow work with an excellent sensor. I wouldn't dream of relying on the Sony for city shooting.

My journey over the last 5 years started with the A900; an amazing camera that still gives beautiful tone and color at low ISO's.

But looking for a more light weight solution I used the OMD-EM5 (m43) with the 17mm and 45mm F1.8, and then the Fuji XT-1 with the 23mm F1.4 and 60mm F2.4. However, perhaps because I was used to A900 quality I was never really satisfied.

Since 1 month, I now have an A7r with the 35mm F2.8 and a lovely Zeiss Contax G 90mm F2.8 (manual) lens. And I am happy again :-)

The shutter noise is quite overstated IMHO and again, coming from the A900, I even enjoy the sound. I must say I am blown away by the image quality -- there is a huge gain over the A900 at higher ISO's. Moreover, the camera just works well and is intuitive to use.

Together with the LA-EA4 I am able to use my 400mm F4.5 telephoto lens which just focuses really well with that adapter; amazing, it is even better than on the A900 -- due to the SLT design continuous auto focus is really really good!

I had an a7r and returned it.

Pros for me:
- great sensor
- wonderful lens (35 zeiss)
- excellent EVF
- small size
- outstanding picture quality to cost ratio

Cons for me:
- commonly used controls require too much hand movement (like the play button)
- commonly used controls require too much finesse (like the rear control wheel)
- pedestrian autofocus
- weak with manual focus lenses (peaking is uselessly vague for me)
- shutter sounds like it's blowing apart every time it's fired
- no good 21mm

I loved the image quality, but didn't enjoy shooting with the camera. It doesn't matter how good a deal a camera is, you've got to like using it for it to be worth anything.

Got the A7
It's totally boring in the way that only perfect things can be.
It plays nicely with my collection of odd lenses.
It seems to work well with studio strobes.
The only thing that bugs me is that there is no way to quickly switch from eye level finder to waist level finder.
Sony obviously thinks that the automatic switch can tell the difference between my eye and my stomach but it can't.
A simple switch type of remote would be nice.

It's got features up the wazoo that are the sort if thing that some people like, but it does a credible job of imitating a tech camera circa 1960

The only reasons I'd use the A7r are the things that the shutter shake would mess up, but I'm so used to stitching exposures together that I don't need 36 mpx.

I can finally sell the canon full frame gear.

It is a brilliant camera is many respects but I sold my A7r with 35/2.8 FE lens(and a couple of longer focal length lenses). The two reasons that killed the camera for me were: 1. It had more shutter vibration at certain speeds than total vibration from most DSLRs (w/o using mirror-lock up on the DSLR), which adversely affect a lot of my shots with lenses longer than 50mm. 2. It is not a true 14-bit imaging camera as claimed and worst of all uses lossy compression of raw files. I could see some subtle artifacts in some images with even vanilla processing of raw files (plus a lot of artifacting on some shots when doing some heavy processing).

#2 represents a poor design decision in my opinion, given that the a7r is not meant as a sports camera (where shooting many shots per second might require some compromise in the processing chain given other restrictions in camera design).

The shutter sound is multi-parted and loud, so forget about candid photography in most settings.

The autofocus is on the slow side.

Maybe the next iteration of a future similar 36mp full frame camera will mitigate these problems. I hope so.

Love my Sony A7r with 35mm f2.8 Zeiss. Sold my Canon 5d Mk2 and 4 lenses to finance it. I used an Olympus EM-5 with 40mm Panasonic lens for about a year first to see if mirrorless was a better way for me to work. It was (the Canon sat for a year) but M4/3 files were too small (having been used to and liking full frame Canon files). Now I shoot with the Sony A7r and it's nearly the same size as the Olympus with a vastly superior sensor as compared to the full frame Canon sensor. More detail, better dynamic range than the Canon. The 35mm Zeiss lens is also wonderful. Its tiny, and funny looking but fabulous! It's all I have, and all I need. I have a 24 inch Epson printer and 22x33 inch prints from this lens and that sensor are stunning. I have tested for shutter vibration issues with the 35mm lens and see no problems. I have never been a long lens kinda guy so I don't expect to have any issues with shutter vibration. I could probably shoot with this 35mm Zeiss lens for the rest of my life if I had to and not feel deprived. If I did buy another lens at some point, it would be a Zeiss 24mm or even a 21mm but only if one of those becomes available in the Sony E-Mount. I had a Zeiss 28mm lens for my Canon that was stunning but that one lens weighed more than my beloved A7r with the Zeiss 35mm attached! Less is more. The less gear I lug about, the better my photos.

I have an A7 – almost purchased A7r, but learned about shutter shake and the possibility that plain A7 would afford less corner tinting and smearing with M lenses. I wanted to use it as a low-light/high ISO complement to M9. The Sony and M9 sensors yield images that can go in the same portfolio at 14x21" size, without calling attention to any technical differences. In fact the A7 images generally need less post-processing.

Prophecies that the A7/r would be great with M lenses, especially Michael Reichmann's, were wide of the mark. It turned out that many or even most Leica lenses in the 28-50mm range would not cover the corners at wide apertures without tinting and smearing. The irony is that A7 turned out to be the camera body that 'saves' R lenses rather than M (and promptly caused them to rise in price). Being retrofocus, they don't cause corner distortion.

I didn't like the Sony 35mm lens and would like the 55 even less, because I like the image quality of older, less 'clinical' Leica lenses. What I found was that I could use my favorite 40mm Summicron at full aperture, and that Zeiss lenses for Contax are marvelous on A7, offering an unusual sense of depth within the image – a 3D quality. They rival the R lenses and code 1/3 to 1/2 as much.

I've ended up keeping the Sony 35mm for the rare occasions when I want/need AF. Otherwise I use the 40 Cron and Zeiss/Contax 28mm f2.8 Distagon, 35 f1.4 Planar. I've acquired a 35-70 Vario-Sonnar for the few occasions when I might want a zoom.

The A7 has turned out to be my main color camera. My M9 lives in its box, perhaps waiting to be sold, and I'm using a Monochrom for BW.

IMO Sony's A7 series is a work-in-progress. I'm not really bothered by the weak lens lineup, because I prefer older manual focus lenses. But the clumsy menus with superfluous options, the loud and/or jarring shutter, and other glitches suggest the best Sony A7 version is yet-to-come.

Just picked up an a7 & kit lens for $1100 barely used.

After 2 days of testing the camera: I will sell my a850 and lenses!


The IQ is slightly superior to the a850, and processes better in lightroom. Noise is finer, there is less of it, but also has that 'organic' look like the a850. I've never had a problem with the IQ from that camera on any job ever. The a7 has a nicer roll-off into highlights.

I will get the sony 35 & 55. The Metabones Canon adaptor means I can rent any specific lens I need for a particular client/job. When sony bring out a tele prime I will probably get that too because I do like their Z lenses generally.

I am starting to venture into video production (because that's where the market is going - and I always wanted to make music videos as a teenager!!) so the video features are nice, and with the launch of the a7s it seems like this platform will be very popular and well maintained by sony. Due to the lens adaptor situation I don't worry about sony not developing their own lenses, though it will be nice when they do.

I envisage I will have the a7 and a7s in my bag; the A7 will be the primary stills camera and video B camera, and A7s will be video A camera and backup stills camera. Neat.

I think it is the most attractive camera I have used. The Fuji and Oly cameras felt a touch too 'retro' when I tested them. The a7 references solid clean lines and sharp edges of old, but in a really contemporary way. I know it shouldn't matter, but lets just admit we care about these things. I want to WANT to pick up my camera.

I bought the DSC-R1 as my first digital camera. It promised so much and tried to be what a digital camera should be. DSLRs I have found odd; they are not digital cameras so much as SLRs with a digital sensor and technology stuffed in them. The a7 series seems to actually deliver what the DSC-R1 was promising!! (I gave the DSC-R1 to one of my friends and she constantly shoots gorgeous work with it still)

The A7 is a great camera for me. Easy to carry and shoot. Wonderful for travel. The low light performance is very good. Manual focus is just plain fun with focus peaking. It is great for video.

The downside? It isn't (and doesn't pretend to be) a dslr. A D600 has more oomph, if you know what I mean. But, when I shoot sports with the Nikon, I bring the A7 as a second camera, and that gives me some nice flexibility.

In sum, it doesn't answer all the questions, but it makes me want to shoot, and that is all any camera should do.

I love my A7R. Personally, I believe it is a better R solution than the Leica M. It's hard to focus on the Leica M with the EVF while using lenses longer than 100mm.

I have the native 55/1.8 but I prefer to use my R lenses in low light conditions since focusing is not accurate for me - maybe it's just me. I like using manual focus anyway with a real aperture ring. I have been using the Metabone R adapter on the A7R.

I don't remember when I last use my D800E. I hardly use it these days after I got the A7R. I will keep it since it would be easier to use my 180/2.8 APO and 280/4 APO on it using the APO extenders.

For for evening walks, I take my A7R w/80/1.4R and RX100 in my pocket :) Yes, RX100 III has a built-in EVF.

I don't care about video and so A7S is out for me. For people who want video and who wants auto focus, A7 maybe a better option.

I have an A7 with the "kit" zoom and the 35 mm f2.8. The 35 mm lens has become one of my favorites. I liked the A7 the first time I tried one out. Good weight, balance, and quality feel. For me, it is intuitive to use. The electronic viewfinder is excellent, with capabilites (level, histogram)that optical viewfinders do not have. I am very pleased with the quality and resolution of the photos, especially those taken with the 35 mm lens. The smaller size and weight compared to a full-frame DSLR is quite a relief. The well-discussed downside is the (so far) limited availability of FE lenses, especially fast lenses. (Yes, Sony does have a bit of a hodgepodge of lenses and bodies.) Simply said, the A7 works very well for me, so much so that I almost always have mine with me.

I bought both an A7r and A7 to replace a D800E and D600 kit with a bunch of Zeiss ZF lenses quite simply because I got fed up of the bulk and weight. I got the 35mm, 55mm and 24-70mm FEs as well as some manual focus Contax SLR lenses (the 28mm f2.8 Distagon a particular gem).

Whilst I can't say I adore them as they feel a bit like driving a computer I certainly do like them a lot - particularly as a very capable landscape kit fits into a small bag. A smaller camera also means that I can get away with a much smaller tripod very often; the tilting screen also invaluable as I don't need to bend over to look through the camera anymore either as I had to with the Nikons.

Shutter vibration with the A7r does occur very occasionally but I find pressing down on the camera when on the tripod usually sorts it. Handheld I don't think I have really seen it.

Image quality is comparable to the D800E to my eye though if you look hard at the RAWs you can sometimes see some funny little artefacts that may be due to the choice of file compression.The lens roadmap looks great so all in all very happy. For me the DSLR is history.

I have an A7r.
Echoing what somebody else said it's boring because it just works.

I've been in the Sony ecosystem since the A900, with a short jaunt to leica land.

I don't see issues with shutter shock (mostly because I shoot handheld or super slow shutter speeds).

I'm disappointed with the amp glow I see as compared to the A99.

Menus and controls are good but the zoom in image review is dumb.

For me its digital film to use with my adapted lenses, the only native lens I have is an E-mount 16mm which is actually quite fun with crop mode disabled.

I really like the shutter feel, even though others complain, I think its great that you don't have to bottom the button out to trigger the shutter.

I would have preferred if it had a nex7/6/a6000 layout and a small onboard flash.

I have huge palms and normal length fingers and find the ergonomics fine when using adapted lenses.

I'll probably get an A7s if I can buy it in the US, if not I'll wait for them to get cheaper.
The cameras check all my boxes: it's always with me, high iso isn't too much of a compromise, I can use the glass I want, it's a live view camera. I'm not really in love with it though but it's better than anything else out there for my wants.

If sony made a trio of RX1 style fixed cameras with a 24, 55, and a 90mm all f2 lenses with an gx7 or A6000 style body I'd probably fall in love. The hinted double sized FF fixed lens camera would also be an option.

TLDNR; I consider the 1900€ I spent on the A7r a reasonable price for a nice sensor and EVF. I wouldn't sell a kidney for it though.

I bought my A7r after a progression through several Canon Full Frame bodies, and a toe in the mirrorless waters with a NEX-6. I was lucky enough to get a great trade in deal for my 1Dx so I bought the Zeiss 35 & 55 lenses to go with it. I like the small form factor, excellent high resolution sensor quality and lens flexibility.

Love both the Zeiss FE primes but while the ‘quality’ of the 55/1.8 is peerless, almost magical in fact, I actually prefer the lesser 35/2.8 in use. I used the camera with the FE primes extensively on a trip to Rome where doing a bit of street shooting I quickly realised that the shutter sound is much less of an issue than pointing a honking great DSLR at people.

The AF also coped OK - That said, my honest opinion is that - up to and including the Eos 1Dx - I’ve never found an AF system doesn’t just get in my way as much as it helps.

Shutter shock - yes it does exist but it’s not been as big a issue as the forums seem to indicate. I have the accessory grip for extra mass when required and also to raise the body enough to get all movements with my Canon TS-E lenses.

Actually, the grip brings me to one of my biggest gripes - the battery life is hopeless and Sony doesn’t provide a spare or a charger in the box (unless you buy an A7s). Worse you can’t charge batteries when they are in the grip, so as sold you have to take the grip off pull the 2 batteries out and charge them one at a time in the camera!

I use the Metabones III adapter (but may swap for the IV as it’s got a bigger aperture) to shoot Canon TS-E lenses. The resolution gain there isn’t quite as great as I’d hoped but it is tangible. I also have a cheap chinese adapter for Contax/Yashica fit Zeiss lenses having built a decent collection of these over the past few years. They perform admirably on the Sony, though I find the high resolution sensor very unforgiving of small focussing errors.

When focussed I reckon the old Contax 50mm f/1.4 Planar actually gets me about 90-95% of the new 55’s performance but with a slightly warmer rendition. The 28-85 Vario-Sonnar also lives with the 36Mp sensor and gives a beautiful, delicate, colour rendition.

Exposure-wise coming from a canon the camera seems to underexpose - so I dialled in +1/3-2/3 stops over, unfortunately this led to clipped highlights. There is MUCH less latitude in the highlights than from a canon. Clearly some of the much vaunted shadow performance of Sony sensors comes from having a different tonal response profile.

I have had an A7 since November, I think, and generally I am quite fond of it, but it has many areas which are just crude, compared to more refined cameras, like my D800. The worst things about it are:

1) You cannot set the slowest speed in Auto ISO mode!!!
2) The sensor glass is truly nasty, causing smearing, reflections, flare, etc.
3) The operation of the camera is generally crude, especially the C2/zoom button placement, and the menu organisation.
4) The shutter sound is fugly and loud, even with EFCS on.
5) Sony barely releases lenses! Sony, take a look at Fuji!

Having said that, my D800 doesn't get much use any more, despite having the better image quality, because the A7 is close enough, and with the brilliant EVF I can actually focus my beloved Zeiss ZF.2 lenses wide open nearly every time, where I was really struggling with the D800. The image quality is generally quite good, although the D800 files are nicer to work with, and have less aberrations (see sensor glass comment). I did pick up the FE 35 and 55 lenses, and am fond of both, although I really wish the 35 was an f/2, and it gets much less use of the two. I am still thinking about the 24-70/4, but it gets such mixed reviews that I am very unsure about it.

N.B. The A7 looks very amusing with the Leica 180mm f/2 APO-Summicron-R on it.

My A7 has been with me since about a week after they came out. I immediately purchased the 35 and the 55. I know that it is a great camera because every time I convince myself I need something new/better/different, I immediately reverse and realize the "new camera" thing is a problem for me, and what I have is good enough. It is like rehab.

I can use virtually any old lens that I own with the thing. Not only do the old lenses mount, the focus peaking (much better than Oly or Fuji peaking) makes manual focus easy.

I am not good at memorizing menus; but the menu system on the A7 makes up for it, somewhat, because it is so fast and easy to search the whole thing.

They talk/write about "construction quality" in modern cameras. For me, the discussion/writing is mostly Greek. In hand, the A7 feels about as solid and substantial as my 50s era M3 and my old Canon F1 (both still with me, and both of which provide lenses for use on the A7.)

Is it loud? About the same as the old F1; but it does not have that metallic ring the F1 has.

Is it "fine art" capable?.....Its fun! It is 24 MP, full frame. It even has a feature that allows you to shoot APSC-crop mode while using full frame lenses; you get to see the cropped view in the viewfinder while you compose.

As far as lens selection goes, next week I am renting the Canon 80 1.2. Metabones makes an adapter that allows full function of the Canon lens while mounted on the A7.

I can't help but think about your Lincoln Memorial print sale write-up. Where you note the photographer cant verify which camera he used to make the image.....More rehab.

Well, I got my A7R in January, and although I don't love it as I have other cameras in my life, it is certainly among the best I've had (I just traded in one of the cameras I loved, the A850---plus and NEX7 and a lot else----on the purchase of a 645Z. Reading the manual on the train this am.).

I am puzzled by some of the negative comments above---especially the tone compression one---because I have not had any of those problems with the camera. Its loudness is not an issue for me---I don't do the sort of work where that would be a problem---and I haven't seen the dreaded shutter shock problems, which upon long reflection by many more savvy than me are now thought to be real, but overstated in terms of the initial concerns.

Much of the camera I do like very much, and manually focusing with it (and getting it dead on) is better with this camera than any I've ever owned. The EVF at night was a revelation---almost like night vision. I believe there is a definite improvement in the tonality of this camera than any other digital I've owned, especially in the shadows.

So, I am very pleased, and may grow to love the camera as I use it alternately with the 645Z as my lightweight unit, and hopefully with the coming Cambo Actus rail system: https://captureintegration.com/cambo-actus-view-camera/. I am using 3rd party/legacy lenses with it, always in manual mode. The Contax 45 and 90, the Rokinon 35 f1.4 and Sigma 85 f1.4, and the always surprising Tamron 28-75 all have been terrific. None of my Voigtlanders were, so they just got traded, as did the excellent early version Sigma 50 f1.4 which worked very well but I have the Contax 45. Also, the Sony/Zeiss CZ 16-35 worked beautifully, but I had to trade it. The big surprise is that the Sony E-mount 10-18 works better than it has any right to in the middle of its range.

That's my brief report. Haven't done video yet.

I don't own one, but I' m deciding to get an A7r. During film time I collected a fair amount of very good lenses, Zuikos 21, 28, 100 and macro 50, all f2.0, and the superb 35-80 f2.8. Also some Leica M lenses such as the summicron 50 f2.0, 90 f2.8 and Apo-Telyt 135 f3.4. There are some good examples of shooting with these lenses on the web, such as here shooting the A7r with the Zuiko 28 f2.0


I've had my A7r for several months now and grown to love it. I didn't like how the RAW file processed at first until I chose the High Contrast mode in Capture One 7. Then things started coming out like I wanted them.
The three main gripes I've heard about the camera are the shutter noise, shutter shock and light leak. I've must have an exceptional version, because I just don't see it in mine. Of course when you normally shoot a Mamiya AFDII, anything is quieter.
I tried a couple of older Minolta and Nikon lenses on it and didn't like the results. I love the Zeiss 24-70. Why would you shoot with anyting else?
My advice - don't bother with the extra battery grip, it's a useless piece of junk. You'd be better off buying a seperate battery charger that comes with two batteries from Amazon. That is more than enough to get me through a day's shooting.

I got an A7 for my Pentax lenses since Dec2013

1. EVF with peaking and magnification which in combination can give very accurate manual focus
2. Meters well with manual lenses
3. Nice small body coupled with smallish MF primes
4. Good RAW o/p

1. Not well thought out as a camera in terms of photographic flow of use.
a. fixed/rigid bracketing combinations
b. No timer release for bracketing
c. magnification button takes 2 presses
d. fixed magnification at a high value (which can make it hard to find the target upon zoom in)

2. Sensor reflection issues
3. Poor JPG that seems very harsh or NR kick in somehow even at ISO200 (but I shoot RAW)
4. Limited native lens options (esp. a UWA and short+fast short tele prime)
5. Issues with wide RF lenses

All said though, its the best camera out there now for manual lenses.
With the right lens selection, it can still form a highly effective small package.
At this point though, I feel that its not ready as a full native system w/o the UWA and fast portrait prime.
If the user is willing to use alternate options like manual lenses, then its a nice system to have.

I just completed a photo trip to Bali with the A7 and a couple of manual lenses. (CV12; Pentax 24; 50; 85)
You can see them here :

I've had my a7 for a few months now and really like it. My NEX-7 was nice but full frame just works so much better with my Leica M lenses. And most people don't mention it, but the finder is improved, larger optics looking at the EVF I guess.

Even when I need a lens from my Nikon I am more likely to use it on the a7 than the D600, the EVF focus with magnification is more accurate than the AF of of the D600. It's slower however.

Sold my 5D2 for an A7R.

Nice sensor, fairly horrible camera.

EVF is okay. 35 f2.8 is nice, 55 f1.8 is not wowing me like everyone else on the planet.

Certainly plenty of resolution, but shutter shock easy to demonstrate.

I must admit to finding it hard to use properly, easy to mess up the settings accidentally and get horrible under or over exposure, etc.

My X100 was perfect for me from the first time I picked it up, my 5D2 was heavy but reliable and ergonomically excellent.

My A7R? Well, I've spent too much and gone too far to go back to Canon, but I'm very disappointed that I didn't wait around long enough for the XT1.

Buying the right camera can give your photography a boost. Buying the wrong one can sure put a damper on things.

I don't have an A7 or an Olympus OMD or a Fuji X. or in fact much cash for one of these cameras which opinions have been asked for over the last few days. I've had an Olympus epl-3 for 2 years and really don't have experience of anything else or know any better. I've been reading so much online about these cameras for a while now as I'm wanting to upgrade but it doesn't really help as for everyone who likes camera x the same amount don't. However I'm gravitating towards finding a second hand A7 to be able to use my collection of old lenses at their true focal length. So whatever people's opinions are, I can't be disappointed, can I?

I have the A7r. Incredible image quality. I use an A99 at work and would never be able to use the A7r in many of these circumstances, due to the slow focus and the loud shutter.

But for my landscapes. Amazing. I'm surprised that some people are not happy with the 35mm lens. (Well, other than the price.) Besides than vignetting, it's spectacular.

The 55 is special. Period. I also bought the kit lens 28-70 on ebay for less than $200. It's light, the middle of the image throughout the range is sharp and contrasty.

I've been a Canon shootist since 2000; my last system was a 6D with Canon 24-105 and F4/70-200IS and Zeiss ZE 18/3.5. Bought an a7R a few months ago. Sold it and will deliver it this week.

1. Gob-smacking resolution, at least with the Zeiss/Sony lenses; had the 24-70 and 55 and Sony FE 70-200/4.

1. REALLY clunky, physically, with or without batterygrip. Feels sort of like a broomhandle in my hand.
2. The plastic lensmount and especially flexible batterygrip top allow heavy lenses to droop considerably.
3. I never got used to the menu system and operating buttons. The latter ALWAYS were in the wrong place and turned the wrong way.

After being really impressed with modern Zeiss/Sony lenses, I have a used SLT-a99 on its way and am buying a few Zeiss/Sony A-mount lenses...the BIG 16-35/2.8 that so far produces fabulous images thru the '7 (with 'EA4 adapter) and the 50/1.4...plus the Sony G-series 70-300.

I bought the Sony A7 in the hopes that it would be a good performing, compact digital body for my Leica R and Nikkor SLR lenses. It's about the right size, weight, and shape to replace my favorite old film shooter, a Nikon FM2n. I went for the A7 model because it was a) less expensive, b) had EFCS, and c) I thought it would be a little 'kinder' to my old lenses than the 36 Mpixel r model.

What I've come to see is that, despite it being a bit clunky in control layout and menus, it is just configurable enough to work well for my purposes with adapted lenses (I own no native lenses for it) the way I want it to. The sensor is excellent and the lenses perform well with it. The viewfinder is very good—not quite the equal of the Olympus E-M1, but good enough to do just fine. Focusing and such is easy with the magnification feature, I don't find the peaking all that useful. The shutter is somewhat noisy but no worse than my Nikon FM or F.

I've found that some of my Leica M-mount lenses work well with the A7 sensor, for when I want to have a bit more compactness and less weight to carry. Also, the sensor's excellent performance at extreme sensitivities shows it to be an excellent camera for pinhole/zone plate photography (link provided below). And one further: the A7's video capabilities are quite compelling, it's pushing me to do more movie work. I wish the battery had about twice the capacity, but then I just need to add the battery grip for that.

All in all, it does not replace or compete with the Olympus E-M1 for all around speed, versatility, and automation features. But it is a valuable addition to my camera kit and enables me to use these wonderful lenses on a nice-size (read: not bloated) digital body, finally.

I've had my A7R since it shipped December 2013. I have used my A7R exclusively with the Voigtlander M-to-E adapter and Leica and Voigtlander lenses. This adapter is rock solid and seemingly well machined.

I have used my Leica Noctilux, Leica 50mm Summicron and Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 lenses. I tried my 90mm Summicron but it was too front heavy and gave me a pain in the neck.

I don't classify myself as a "technical" shooter (i.e. I try not to over-analyze what I'm doing which is a contradiction considering my tendency toward being anal… whatever). I would say that the A7R takes the sharpest images I've ever experienced (digital or film). Much sharper than my Leica M240. However, the images are a little flat compared to the M240 (more contrast with the M and less contrast with the A7R so I've gradually set the A7R aside in favor of my M240 since the wife is my greatest critic and loves contrast). Love the EVF and the focus peaking magnification (superior to the M240)…(I programmed the top C1 button to turn on the peaking).

I have not tried any Sony auto focus lenses… the one Sony lens I had with an NEX6 was the worst lens I've ever owned.

Anyway, with the Leica and Voigtlander glass, the camera works just fine for me.

Enjoying the A7. Many of the pros and cons are already mentioned above but the highlight for me is its lens versatility. Yes, there are not that many FE Lenses yet, but I think that's not really relevant with this camera as I am using an Sony E Mount 10-20 which gives full frame capabilities, a couple of voigtlanders from a long ago camera system which I've held onto, the 55mm FE Zeiss (which is superb), a couple of Sony A Mount Lenses from my A850, and 2 extremely old Summicron Lenses which are surprisingly still quite solid. Bit of a hodgepodge of lenses but it is quite liberating no longer being stuck into one brands lens system.

As far as I am aware there is not a camera on the market that allows this level of interchangeable lenses from any lens manafacturer. I am, quite simply, liberated from buying into a system. This, for me, along with some great IQ is the biggest feature for me.

Perhaps this is the way of the future?? Who know??

i picked up the a7 when it went on sale for $1260 at b&h. i have a few complaints about it, but love it because fits my shooting better than any digital camera ever has. image quality is fantastic and lets me use the full image circle of my favorite lenses.

i shoot exclusively manual focus – i've never found a camera that makes me think AF is more of a help than a hindrance (yes, i've shot with canon and nikon pro dslrs). for a long time dslrs have been designed to make manual focus much harder than it used to be compared to my old minolta xd-11 or contax aria (or any film slr designed for manual focus really). the a7 evf makes manual focus a breeze and can fit all my favorite lenses both rangefinder and slr. i don't bother with peaking unless i'm shooting fast action or birding – the evf is good enough that i find that i can easily hit focus dead on at f/1.2 95% of the time without using peaking or magnification (i do have sharpness turned all the way up in jpeg settings to make seeing focus easier).

i only shoot in manual mode and aperture priority and don't use any of the fancy features of the camera so i don't have any strong opinions about the menus. i really like all the customizable buttons that keep me from ever having to enter the menus at all other than to format the card. a couple buttons could be placed better, but i feel the same way about all cameras. the grip is a perfect fit for me. i very much like the existence and placement of the EC dial - easy to use looking down at the camera and looking through the viewfinder. i don't like the front dial placement, but i've never had occasion to need to use yet either. for my own personal preferences, i wish the camera came in the nex-7 form factor, but i know many others disagree.

there are a few major cons with the camera in my opinion (but i have even more with all other cameras on the market) in order of importance to me:

1) the shutter is terribly imprecise and soggy feeling, my timing for key moments definitely suffers because of this.

2) there is no way to set one of the custom buttons to toggle between the evf and lcd (the eye sensor is too sensitive to allow waist level shooting with it set to automatic).

3) no way to set lower limit on shutter speed with auto iso.

4) magnification button takes 2 presses.

5) the shutter is quite loud, i notice a definite difference in response when taking environmental portraits with it compared to my rx1.

6) doesn't play well with some rangefinder lenses (still better than everything else except a leica though).

link to images i've taken with the a7 on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/search?user_id=28476552%40N04&sort=interestingness-desc&text=a7

I bought an A7 and A7R as an early adopter. My Leica M8 and Canon 1Ds Mk II now go essentially unused. I have an NEX-7 as a backup camera.

I love the 55mm f1.8. It's a great lens on either camera with spot-on autofocus that seems adequately fast for my uses. My Leica M glass, 35, 50 (summicron and noct), and 90 work just fine. I have long R glass as well.

If could could redesign one think it would be the manual focusing on the camera with manual lenses. The button pressing is awkward to get the magnified view. It doesn't "just work". For a camera had to be envisioned to make use of other vendor's manual lenses it's like Sony didn't think it through or test it adequately.

One thing I note that others haven't remarked on anywhere: I need to use color noise reduction in addition to luminance noise reduction in even moderate ISO shots (using ACR workflows). This is unexpected in my experience although I have a fairly limited experience with other cameras.

The A7 I chose for indoor sports and higher ISO situations.

I don't find the shutter noise offensive but it's hardly a silent camera. I have not noticed the shutter shake problem even with a 560mm Leica lens. I use a heavy duty tripod though.

I'd like native lenses in the 80-100mm range for the use of autofocus. The results with the Leica 100mm R f2.8 APO on either camera are quite stunning when there's time to focus.

I'll be interested to see what Sony does with the 2nd generation of this camera.

I'm also a bit amazed to see the rapid price deflation on the new market. Sigh - the joys of early adopter hood.

How about doing a post like this for the Panasonic GH4, which is another camera on the list of options I'm considering. You're welcome!

[It's not been submitted yet, so I can't promise, but I'm expecting a full GH4 review any day now. --Mike]

Leica shooter for 30 years, digital since 2007. I haven't touched either of my Leica digital bodies in the last 6 months since I bought a Sony A7. I added the 35mm and 55mm primes after ok results with my Leica glass, but enjoy the EVF compared to the rangefinder window, and have discovered video. My A7S body comes tomorrow, and I am considering selling my Leica ME.

The comments to this entry are closed.



Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 06/2007