[ Discuss ] What is the attraction of Sony A7 compare to m43?


The problem is do you trust sony? Look at all the promises sony made about NEX. They promised more lenses but nex still suffers from lack of native lenses. Then Sony decided no more nex name. Everything is alpha. Now you have alpha bodies with A mount, E mount and FE mount. Sony keeps changing direction.

Actually, this might have been true a year ago, but Sony has released a lot of E-mount lenses for NEX and you can get just about anything you need. They are slightly bigger than M43 lenses, but are very light.
 

Original 4/3lens was stopped in production too. Market and products swift. Buy what u need.
 

With a sensor that size, the lenses have to be BIG. Compare the Nikkor 24-70/f2.8 against Lumix 12-35/f2.8. Size and price.

Other than the bodies, I feel these systems are not comparable but somehow the comparison seems to creep up here and there in this forum. The biggest attraction of the m43 for myself have been portability amongst others, which I feel will NEVER be rivaled by the Sony FF FE system.

Thoughts?

Exactly, I don't how it can be compared. m43 was conceived for its size advantage. The mount was further shrink from the original 43 mount as well. Hence the philoshopy of creating an ever smaller lens. For NEX, the mount were meant to take future FF lens as well, therefore it was actually bigger than what it is needed for APSC. However, for Sony to design a FF lens to be small it couldn't be fast and vice versa. Despite the physical limit (in aperture size), the FF of course still does have the sensor size advantage. But, at the end of the day, the m43 advantage would always be the lens size.
 

picture to share?

Haha, later la when I get back and update my APAD/APAW section. Nepal's great for both street and scenery.
People here are friendly and actually like to be photographed so long as u r respectful with them.
 

I think people overestimate the threat to M43 from full frame. As many have pointed out, most people migrated to M43 for high quality images in a compact package. The A7 may be compact enough, but will ultimately be larger (but not necessarily heavier) than M43 when you add the lens. The real threat to M43 is from the 1 inch sensors. Cameras like the RX100II already equal M43 in image quality, but can fit in a shirt pocket. The main defense of M43 from 1 inch sensors come from similar arguments that full frame users use over M43 like bokeh and DOF.

The comparison below shows that an EM5 with kit lens has about the same image quality as a RX100II and a APS-C Nikon 16MP with kit lens. All 3 use Sony sensors... Some may find this surprising :P

10683471334_cb62b5055f_o.jpg


Here's the link

http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...)/0/(lens3)/159/(brand3)/Nikkor/(camera3)/680
 

Last edited:
With a sensor that size, the lenses have to be BIG. Compare the Nikkor 24-70/f2.8 against Lumix 12-35/f2.8. Size and price.

Other than the bodies, I feel these systems are not comparable but somehow the comparison seems to creep up here and there in this forum. The biggest attraction of the m43 for myself have been portability amongst others, which I feel will NEVER be rivaled by the Sony FF FE system.

Thoughts?

Exactly, I don't how it can be compared. m43 was conceived for its size advantage. The mount was further shrink from the original 43 mount as well. Hence the philoshopy of creating an ever smaller lens. For NEX, the mount were meant to take future FF lens as well, therefore it was actually bigger than what it is needed for APSC. However, for Sony to design a FF lens to be small it couldn't be fast and vice versa. Despite the physical limit (in aperture size), the FF of course still does have the sensor size advantage. But, at the end of the day, the m43 advantage would always be the lens size.

For m43, the 43 sensor was retained. To allow for more compact lens, the sensor to flange distance was reduced without the mirror box (mirrorless). I guess it should be similar for the A7. But even then, because of the sensor size, the lenses will still large compare to m43. And for the faster lens, the diameter MUST be much larger compare to the m43 lenses.

Compare the size of the Lumix 12-35/f2.8 or Oly 12-40/f2.8 with the Zeiss FE 24-70/f4.

Wt: 430g vs 305g.

Dimensions: 73x94.5mm vs 67x73.8mm.

Filter Diameter: 67mm vs 58mm.

And of course max aperture of f4 against f2.8 (the link actually noted a max aperture of f2.8 for the Zeiss .....)
 

Here is a link that compares the A7 with FE zoom and EM1 with 12-35 and 12-50 (they didn't have the 12-40)

Interestingly, the EM1+Panny lens is 802g, while the A7 with kit zoom is 769g

Also, the Oly/Panny would be FF equivalent 24-70 with FF DOF of 5.6, while the A7 would be 28-70 F3.5 to 5.6

The full frame sensor appears to have about 1.5 stops advantage over the EM1 sensor (from DXOMark), while the full frame lens is 0.5 to 2 stops slower, so both should take similar photos in low light...

10683581733_7e38bb4709_o.jpg


http://j.mp/173jFjV

http://j.mp/173kgSF
 

Last edited:
yes agree with all of you that for AF lenses, the m4/3 will definitely have a significant size advantage to the full frame counterparts. I think alot if not most of the peope interested in the A7 are looking to adapt small range finder lenses that are similar size to m4/3 counterparts, faster, and yet cover full frame to give the size advantage and DOF advantage.

alot of m4/3 users actually bought these mirrorless bodies to adapt manual lenses. I think of it as a budget alternative to buying a leica M, which is manual as well.
 

yes agree with all of you that for AF lenses, the m4/3 will definitely have a significant size advantage to the full frame counterparts. I think alot if not most of the peope interested in the A7 are looking to adapt small range finder lenses that are similar size to m4/3 counterparts, faster, and yet cover full frame to give the size advantage and DOF advantage.

alot of m4/3 users actually bought these mirrorless bodies to adapt manual lenses. I think of it as a budget alternative to buying a leica M, which is manual as well.

As you can see from my link, there is a small size advantage, but less than I thought earlier. And there is no weight advantage.

Interestingly, the A7 & kit zoom, will be significantly cheaper than an EM1 & Panny 12-35!!
 

Last edited:
As you can see from my link, there is a small size advantage, but less than I thought earlier. And there is no weight advantage.

Interestingly, the A7 & kit zoom, will be significantly cheaper than an EM1 & Panny 12-35!!

well that's because the kit zoom on the A7 is F3.5 - 5.6. The A7 body is a bargain though considering it is full frame.

size advantage is even lesser when u compare to the range finder manual lenses. The link you provided only allows matching with existing sony lenses but not the manual leica, zeiss, voigtlander RF lenses.

em1 has almost zero size advantage
emaanda7r-680x453.jpg


these RF lenses are tiny. look at that 35 1.4 and the 15 4.5.
voigt_15m_282_3514a.jpg
 

As you can see from my link, there is a small size advantage, but less than I thought earlier. And there is no weight advantage.

Interestingly, the A7 & kit zoom, will be significantly cheaper than an EM1 & Panny 12-3.65!!

I agree on "no weight advantage" part, though I doubt the kit zoom would be as good optically as P12-35 / O12-40. The zeiss 24-70/4 would be a better comparison. Slightly longer/larger and slightly heavier than EM1+12-40, of course, some would argue about the size & weight to grams and mm. Optically Zeiss will be better than Sony 28-70 and quite a bit more expensive than O12-40, let's see the reviews first, shall we?

As a system, there's other qualities like AF speed (single and continuous), IBIS, anti-dust, reliability, lens range which I would think sooner or later Sony will get some of these from Olympus too. There's already quite a bit of Wow factor in A7/7r so perhaps they didn't need to include some of the features in the first series.

As for manual adapted lenses, I would think it's interesting for A7/r and personally would be seriously looking at more reviews before taking plunge. Cosina voigtlander 12/5.6 is a lens that I've long liked using on Ricoh GXR, it would be good to be able to use it at 12mm instead of 18mm. For AF lenses mirrorless, m43 is still the system for me at the moment. For MF lenses especially RF lenses, if it really works well with A7/r, it would be interesting as ricleo had presented. my 2 cts thoughts on A7/r vs m43 :)
 

Last edited:
I think people overestimate the threat to M43 from full frame. As many have pointed out, most people migrated to M43 for high quality images in a compact package. The A7 may be compact enough, but will ultimately be larger (but not necessarily heavier) than M43 when you add the lens. The real threat to M43 is from the 1 inch sensors. Cameras like the RX100II already equal M43 in image quality, but can fit in a shirt pocket. The main defense of M43 from 1 inch sensors come from similar arguments that full frame users use over M43 like bokeh and DOF.

The comparison below shows that an EM5 with kit lens has about the same image quality as a RX100II and a APS-C Nikon 16MP with kit lens. All 3 use Sony sensors... Some may find this surprising :P

10683471334_cb62b5055f_o.jpg


Here's the link

http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...)/0/(lens3)/159/(brand3)/Nikkor/(camera3)/680

All the comparisons don't even make it past a DXoMark score of 13.

A Lumix 12-35/f2.8 on a GH2 body scored 17 and this same lens on an EM5 body scored 19.
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...793/(lens3)/159/(brand3)/Nikkor/(camera3)/680

In other words the Oly 12-50 and Nikkor kit lens both s*cks. As for the Sony RX100 ....no hope coz body/sensor is fixed. With the Lumix 12-35/f2.8, a better body can potentially improve the score further.
 

Original 4/3lens was stopped in production too. Market and products swift. Buy what u need.

What do you mean by "Original 4/3lens was stopped in production too"?
 

What do you mean by "Original 4/3lens was stopped in production too"?
What I try to say, is Panasonic already gave up the original 4/3. So if Sony is going to give up NEX lens, nothing wrong. (someone mentioned Sony cannot be trusted as they change mount NEX- FE)
Olympus if they are still producing, I dun know who will buy.;-)
 

In other words the Oly 12-50 and Nikkor kit lens both s*cks. As for the Sony RX100 ....no hope coz body/sensor is fixed. With the Lumix 12-35/f2.8, a better body can potentially improve the score further.

I wouldn't say the 12-50 sucks. Lenses with that score are still excellent lenses unless you blow up to huge prints.

Here are some shots from Robin Wong with the 12-50. Certainly sharp enough....

http://robinwong.blogspot.sg/2013/10/dpreview-awards-e-m1-gold-and-some.html
 

Actually, this might have been true a year ago, but Sony has released a lot of E-mount lenses for NEX and you can get just about anything you need. They are slightly bigger than M43 lenses, but are very light.

Yep. And sony just killed NEX. Will sony really support 3 mounts and produce all the necessary lenses for 3 mounts? Caveat emptor.
 

Yep. And sony just killed NEX. Will sony really support 3 mounts and produce all the necessary lenses for 3 mounts? Caveat emptor.

Depends on what you mean by "kill". The E and FE mounts are the same mount, just one has a full frame image circle. Sony isn't going to use the NEX name anymore, but is still going to produce APS-C cameras in E mount. The E and FE mounts are identical. A FE lens works fine on a NEX, and it gets the 1.5x crop factor. An old or new E lens works fine on the full frame A7. The camera will automatically recognize it and use just the smaller part of the sensor.
 

Depends on what you mean by "kill". The E and FE mounts are the same mount, just one has a full frame image circle. Sony isn't going to use the NEX name anymore, but is still going to produce APS-C cameras in E mount. The E and FE mounts are identical. A FE lens works fine on a NEX, and it gets the 1.5x crop factor. An old or new E lens works fine on the full frame A7. The camera will automatically recognize it and use just the smaller part of the sensor.

It is so.

There is NO FE Mount, they don't call the Mount the A7 or A7r is using as "FE" Mount. It is still E-Mount.

But they do call the lens A7 or A7r is using as FE lens which means Full-frame E-Mount Lens.

You can directly mount the Nex lens onto A7 or A7r albeit with cropped image, you only need an adapter for A-mount lens

And they just collapse the NEX brand under Alpha and focusing on two Mount i.e. E and A mount

New-Sony-A-mount-camera-in-2014.jpg


Do correct me if I am wrong

PS from Sony Alpha Rumour:

****
In October we had that big A7-A7r announcement. But it won’t be long until we will get our next big Sony event:

A trusted sources already unveiled to me that Sony will launch new APS-C and Full Frame cameras in Q1 2014 already! He couldn’t unveil more details, he only added one hint: One of the new cameras will be very loved by the SAR community
****

Also,
 

Last edited:
It is so. There is NO FE Mount, they don't call the Mount the A7 or A7r is using as "FE" Mount. It is still E-Mount. But they do call the lens A7 or A7r is using as FE lens which means Full-frame E-Mount Lens. You can directly mount the Nex lens onto A7 or A7r albeit with cropped image, you only need an adapter for A-mount lens And they just collapse the NEX brand under Alpha and focusing on two Mount i.e. E and A mount Do correct me if I am wrong PS from Sony Alpha Rumour: **** In October we had that big A7-A7r announcement. But it won’t be long until we will get our next big Sony event: A trusted sources already unveiled to me that Sony will launch new APS-C and Full Frame cameras in Q1 2014 already! He couldn’t unveil more details, he only added one hint: One of the new cameras will be very loved by the SAR community **** Also,

Lol. My bad. I stand corrected. Yes. Sony only has 2 mounts A & E. But 3 series of lenses. A mount, E mount. And E mount FE. Hmm. Putting too many eggs into different baskets IMHO.
 

The E and FE is no different from Nikon's DX and FX - same mount, different glasses for the respective sensor size.

Changing Nex to Alpha is just a rebranding exercise. No big deal. I think it is better and less confusing. :)
 

Back
Top