Sony A7/(r) image sharing thread

[albertri]

Look at it this way. Crop the A7 for 1.2x crop (the crop factor of the M8) and many RF lenses work w/o issues on the cropped image. The A7 is cheaper, no IR cut filter juggling, magnification for accurate focus and approx 16mp image even after crop. The only things you'd miss are the rangefinder cred and RF way of viewing/framing. Also note that the longer lenses are less of a hassle on an A7. M8 is not a bad camera if one likes it, esp so if one likes the CCD sensor and RF way of operation. But if you are agnostic to those, then why bother.

Awesome thanks for the response bro yeah true hehe maybe it's just lust I am feeling Lolz

 

[spinworkxroy]

haa tks for the reply. yea just brought my boy for a vaccination and that was pre-caution in case fever sets in.

no doubt the FE55 1.8 is one fine lens, just overpriced. My personal view on the above bokeh comparisons is that the FE55 1.8, whilst has more DOF with more of the baby in focus, if you look at the background bokeh, the 1.8 is actually smoother than the 1.2.

The FD 55 1.2 renders the baby softer and works extremely well for close up shots, the parts in focus are actually very sharp. but for bokeh in the background and for portraits of subjects further away, say over 5 metres, it is not that good.

That said, it is darn good value at 1/4 the price fo the zeiss FE 55 1.8 at a faster aperture, and the lens imperfections give a nice retro/film look to images compared to the clinically sharp modern lenses like the FE 55 and the Sigma Art.

Ah i see..yea, when my baby goes for vaccination, i also scared of fever but lucky so far...touch wood..nothing yet and sometimes i actually get the doc to give 2 jabs at once to save the number of trips to the doctors haha..thats why there's 2 legs mah, 1 jab left, 1 jab right...

Anyways, back to the lenses, Price wise i don't find the FE55 overpriced. We have to compare modern lenses of today. The FD55 is a 30-40yr old lens that's pure MF. The price back them vs a brand new lens, surely the new one will cost more. I bet if you compared a brand new 55mm F1.2 Leica or Voigtlander type lens, they will all be similar or more expensive than the FE55. And the FE55 is AF. Taking all that into consideration, i believe it is expensive yes but it's still within the prices of modern day 50mm lenses (Sigma included)

 

[ricleo]

wa can jab 2 legs at one go meh? won't the different virus clash hehe....antibodies have to work extra hard against 2 viruses? Nowadays even take jab also have packages to sign...

hehhe overpriced for being a F1.8 lens, sharp yes but relatively slow aperture. Typical F1.8 50ish mm lenses go for $100-300, F1.4 lenses from 400 - 600. Paying for the blue zeiss badge . But hopefully our investments into these FE lenses will pay better returns in future FE bodies that have better/faster AF.

The Leicas will always be more expensive courtesy of the red dot prestige. Voigtlanders not very cheap, but are typically faster. I probably also overpaid for my 50 1.5 Chrome VM hehe... but it is such a sexy piece of lense in chrome, but still pricy for a F1.5 lens.

the new Sigma Art is F1.4, faster, uses more glass and raw materials vs the zeiss, and costs less thant the F1.8 zeiss.

Ah i see..yea, when my baby goes for vaccination, i also scared of fever but lucky so far...touch wood..nothing yet and sometimes i actually get the doc to give 2 jabs at once to save the number of trips to the doctors haha..thats why there's 2 legs mah, 1 jab left, 1 jab right...

Anyways, back to the lenses, Price wise i don't find the FE55 overpriced. We have to compare modern lenses of today. The FD55 is a 30-40yr old lens that's pure MF. The price back them vs a brand new lens, surely the new one will cost more. I bet if you compared a brand new 55mm F1.2 Leica or Voigtlander type lens, they will all be similar or more expensive than the FE55. And the FE55 is AF. Taking all that into consideration, i believe it is expensive yes but it's still within the prices of modern day 50mm lenses (Sigma included)

 

[silvermoon1407]

Anyways, back to the lenses, Price wise i don't find the FE55 overpriced. We have to compare modern lenses of today. The FD55 is a 30-40yr old lens that's pure MF. The price back them vs a brand new lens, surely the new one will cost more. I bet if you compared a brand new 55mm F1.2 Leica or Voigtlander type lens, they will all be similar or more expensive than the FE55. And the FE55 is AF. Taking all that into consideration, i believe it is expensive yes but it's still within the prices of modern day 50mm lenses (Sigma included)

Well, if there's a need to compare, the FE 55 should be compared with the cheapo canon 50/1.8 and nikon 50/1.8D or G. Comparing the FE55 to modern 1.4s or vintage 1.2s is not an apple to apple comparison. In my opinion, no doubt the FE55 is a solid performer, but is it 10times better than the canon nifty fifty and worth 10 times the price? Hard to quantify, but I would choose not to agree.

 

[spinworkxroy]

Well, if there's a need to compare, the FE 55 should be compared with the cheapo canon 50/1.8 and nikon 50/1.8D or G. Comparing the FE55 to modern 1.4s or vintage 1.2s is not an apple to apple comparison. In my opinion, no doubt the FE55 is a solid performer, but is it 10times better than the canon nifty fifty and worth 10 times the price? Hard to quantify, but I would choose not to agree.

Well, them the FE55 is considered cheap when compared to the Noctilux...is the noctilux 10x better? Also no mah. I believe when comparing lenses, cannot always compare based on Aperture..Different system, diff aperture..Should compare base on flagship per model. So the FE55 is the current flagship FE lens, should compare with flagship Canon 50L or Nikon 50G etc...it's the series of lens not the aperture that should be considered. when comparing if not, we'll be comparing the Sony SEL50F1.8 OSS then it's cheap...
Can also compare the Otus in this case...it's much cheaper and not much worse off..so if you compare this way the FE55 is actually cheap...but no one will compare this way

 

[spinworkxroy]

wa can jab 2 legs at one go meh? won't the different virus clash hehe....antibodies have to work extra hard against 2 viruses? Nowadays even take jab also have packages to sign...

hehhe overpriced for being a F1.8 lens, sharp yes but relatively slow aperture. Typical F1.8 50ish mm lenses go for $100-300, F1.4 lenses from 400 - 600. Paying for the blue zeiss badge . But hopefully our investments into these FE lenses will pay better returns in future FE bodies that have better/faster AF.

The Leicas will always be more expensive courtesy of the red dot prestige. Voigtlanders not very cheap, but are typically faster. I probably also overpaid for my 50 1.5 Chrome VM hehe... but it is such a sexy piece of lense in chrome, but still pricy for a F1.5 lens.

the new Sigma Art is F1.4, faster, uses more glass and raw materials vs the zeiss, and costs less thant the F1.8 zeiss.

Yes can do 1 jab at once..I did it at 1mth old and again at 5mth old..both time took 2 jabs...Doctor say can but few people do because all parents scared baby pain or get reaction..but i different hehe..my daughter so small how will she know 1 or 2 jab...might as well one time just give all the jab she can take...pain once better than pain many time haha..

back to lenses haha...I used to own the FD 55f1.2, the f1.4 also...but ultimately, i knew i had to get AF lenses...MF just isn't my cup of tea...so in that sense the best AF lenses for the a7r..is the FE55..so i bought it..if they made a better F1.2 version, i'll buy that...bottom line...i need AF

 

[merelyok]

A7 + 21mm colorskopar LTM

 

[albertri]

Some pix to share from A7r + Lux-R 50

 

[albertri]

And some Pentax-k 135/2.5 + A7r

 

[wangzb]

And some Pentax-k 135/2.5 + A7r

Nice!

 

[albertri]

few more for the night trying the black and white same gear Pentax-k 135/2.5 + A7r

 

[albertri]

Nice!

tks bro

 

[Thoth]

tks bro

Master of Pentax 135! Haha...

 

[albertri]

Master of Pentax 135! Haha...

I brought only 3 lens that day 1635 used maybe 5% Lux50 used maybe 5-10% and pentax 135 used mostly hehe I like the focal range of 135 just nice gives me some distance with my subject which I like as I'm shy not like other bros here who could approach three subject really close hehe. Also keep the candidness

 

[overworked]

Great work. Last christmas went to orchard road shot only with the 135mm on APSC some more hahaha. No prob at all.

 

[MacDaddy]

A7R Sigma 50mm 1.4. Both shot at F/2.0


_DSC3424.jpg by Marc Seow, on Flickr

_DSC3404.jpg by Marc Seow, on Flickr

 

[MacDaddy]

A7R Canon 24mm 1.4

_DSC3224-Edit.jpg by Marc Seow, on Flickr

_DSC3227-Edit.jpg by Marc Seow, on Flickr

_DSC3234-Edit.jpg by Marc Seow, on Flickr

_DSC3271-Edit.jpg by Marc Seow, on Flickr

 

[Thoth]

A7R Sigma 50mm 1.4. Both shot at F/2.0 https://flic.kr/p/nAGZKN_DSC3424.jpg by Marc Seow, on Flickr https://flic.kr/p/nAGAdg_DSC3404.jpg by Marc Seow, on Flickr

ART??!

 

[Thoth]

Great work. Last christmas went to orchard road shot only with the 135mm on APSC some more hahaha. No prob at all.

Bro u r bk? Tomm go turf city attend 9tro arena shoot xmm mai? Haha

 

[MacDaddy]

ART??!

Hey Bro, no la not the ART. Normal version...