Jump to content

Sony Lens Question


Recommended Posts

I'm a Canon DSLR, and Leica MM photographer. I'm considering unloading my Canon gear for Sony. Are the Sony AF lenses for a Sony A7s comparable to Canon L lenses in terms of IQ?

 

Is the rumored A9 something that can use Leica M mount lenses with an adaptor?

 

Please excuse my lack of Sony knowledge but that's why I'm here, to learn from those of you who know the system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Canon has many fast lenses over Sony.

 

Fast lenses are not as sharp as slow lenses.

 

But many are getting the A7s & A7 II and using lenses from Carl Zeiss (Hasselblad 500), Rolleiflex (6008), Leica/Nikon/Samyang.

 

You would need the adapter to using Sony A-Mount (Zeiss lenses) to get great IQ and fast lenses.

Or use manual lenses and all Sony has ATG peaking (Focus Peaking)

 

SZ (Sony AF Zeiss) has 16-35/2.8

SZ has 24-70/2.8

SZ has 85/1.4

SZ has 135/1.8

SG has 70-200/2.8G II (has Zeiss Optics). This cost $1,000.00 more than C/N's

 

ATG's suggests on the following:

1. If you want to shoot more videos over stills, then get A7s

2. It one can't hold camera steady or want to use many lenses, get the A7 II. OSS (IS/VR) is in the body.

3. It you don't want to use a flash and shoot wide open, go A7s

4. If you want large prints, go A7 II

5. If you buy an A-Mount to E-Mount Adapter, you can use on both cameras. Meaning also you can use Minolta lenses

6. If you want to shoot stealth, get the A7s

 

Do to small Flange-to-Focal on Sony E-Mount, you can use Leica with an adapter for all of these cameras.

Just use the great ATG's peaking (color will glow/appear on image)when doing manual focus.

 

Many & including myself are using Voiglander & Samyang lenses for these cameras.

Link to post
Share on other sites

your leica lenses should work absolutely fine. i use the 21 1.8, 40 1.4, and 75 1.8 voigtlanders all m-mount using an adapter to emount on both full and crop sensor.

 

ive only used the 85 1.2L so i have no experience with the majority of af L lenses but id say most of the zeiss and zeiss badge primes would be easily comparable. however, you should still keep your gems as you can use them also with the appropriate AF adapter. even if the AF isnt lightning fast in the current adapter, its just a matter of time. and will be improved yearly im sure. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Every lens is an combination of many faults, which exists on speedy lenses wide open. The typical best results can be expected with 2 f/stops down!

This seems to be not the answer to my question. I know that lenses are not most sharp with maximum open aperture.

 

The question was:

Why should a fast lense be not as sharp as a slow one using the same aperture, e.g. f/4.5?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems to be not the answer to my question. I know that lenses are not most sharp with maximum open aperture.

The question was:

Why should a fast lense be not as sharp as a slow one using the same aperture, e.g. f/4.5?

I guess, if you stop down your fast f/1.4 lens to f/4.5 it will be as sharp as an f/4.5 lens fully open! That should be the difference!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I guess, if you stop down your fast f/1.4 lens to f/4.5 it will be as sharp as an f/4.5 lens fully open! That should be the difference!

Yes. And maybe the fast should even be more sharp because it is not at it's aperture limit?

 

But this is the opposit opinion compared to:

 

Fast lenses are not as sharp as slow lenses.

 

So I still do not know how this statement is meant.

 

Ernst

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I guess, if you stop down your fast f/1.4 lens to f/4.5 it will be as sharp as an f/4.5 lens fully open! That should be the difference!

Yes. And maybe the fast should even be more sharp because it is not at it's aperture limit?

 

But this is the opposit opinion compared to:

 

Fast lenses are not as sharp as slow lenses.

 

So I still do not know how this statement is meant.

 

Ernst

Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on the L lens and which other Sony lens you are comparing it with.

 

Not all Canon lenses are equal in their performance. Not all Sony lenses are equal in their performance too.

 

But, you can get adapters for the Canon lenses, so that they operate on the A7 series with autofocus.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Posts

    • Hello ! A friend gave me an old Sony SLT A65 that was locked in a suitcase for some years and guess what... It was pretty dirty. The translucent mirror looks strange. I know it's a pellicle mirror, but something is really weird , at least to me who never saw this entity before. It shows a rainbow pattern when lit, like a diffraction grid. And when I point the camera to a strong light source, let´s say streets lights or car lights, a huge halo and a diffuse pattern appears, almost like one of that photographic filters from the '70s. I guess the mirror is damaged. Does enyone have any experience with this ? I managed to remove the mirror and carefully rinse it with water and detergent solution , rinse again and dry, but the rainbow patter persists. My question is basically about the translucent mirror behavior with strong highlights and if the rainbow pattern on its surface is normal.   Thanks!  
    • Sounds like you need a manual, and you are correct different settings can affect what you can do in the drive more.  Did you simple press the DRIVE button and select the THREE rectangles? There are several "burst" modes -- that you set with the Fn button or DRIVE button.  One takes several photos, when you press the button once (CONTINUOUS).  Another requires you to press the shutter button each time (SINGLE).  When you press the DRIVE button, what icon shows up -- a single rectangle or three?
    • If the 18-105 is too bulky, then so is the Tamron 17-70. Quality wise however, definately pick the Tamron over the Sony Zeiss 16-70, which is a compromised and dated design and similar in quality to the 18-105. I was in the same boat as you for a while (also had the 16-50 kit lens and 18-105 f/4), and went with the Sony 16-55 F/2.8 G. Happy with the choice as it's more compact than the Tamron 17-70 and vastly better quality than the Zony 16-70. In your case however, the omission of stabilized optics might be a dealbreaker. Did you consider the tiny but decent Sigma 18-50 f/2.8?
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...