Zeiss Otus 85/1.4 mounted a the a7R

[Max the Dog]

You realize you're putting the best lenses in the world on a camera that cuts resolution by 20-25% and bit depth down by 75%? 

 

The Otus 85mm and 135 Apo are the exact reasons I abandoned Sony and bought the Nikon D810.   

 

https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/2015/02/19/zeiss-apo-sonnar-135mm-imatest-on-sony-a7r-and-nikon-d810/ 

 

 

My impression is, that most posters here are just talking theory!

I had the Nikon D3 (1200gr.) and the Nikkor 14-24mm (1000gr.) for about 5 years, very havy.

I canceled my order for the D800e and sold all my Nikon gear two years ago and got the A7R asap when it became available.

I use the OTUS 1,4/85mm with Canon ZE mount with a Metabones IV adapter on the A7R without any problems. I focus open and the camera and adapter stops down. Control with the camera and EXIF is perfect. No chance for it with Nikon adapterd lenses. Even more problems with Nikon G lenses!

With a heavy lens like the Nikkor 14-24 or the OTUS I don't hold the camera body but hold the lens. Who is holding a 1kg lens on a DSLR by just holding the camera body?? On a tripod the system mounts on the adapter and not on the body, that balances it without problems.

Robert,
"I was unable to control the aperture with a dial on my a7R.Without aperture control I was forced to shoot with the aperture stopped down fully to f/16"
What did you not like on the bad adapter? Any Nikon adapter is all manual. There is no aperture control and you have to stop down manually.
BTW: stopping down an OTUS to f/16 you really don't need the potential of this lens, as you loose all by diffraction. Get a cheaper and lighter 85mm.

"Jason Lanier reviewed the Metabones IV adapter"
nobody is expecting a AF performance on an adapted lens.
He said, "for Nikon... fit... with no issue"
He is complaining about the AF speed on the Metabones,

with Nikon you don't have any AF at all!!!


here is my album with OTUS 1,4/85mm:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dierktopp/sets/72157648057411871/

 

 

OTUS 1.4/85mm Canon ZE mount on Metabones IV on A7R

 

 

 

with f/1.4

 

 

 

 

stitched multi row panorama with f/1.4, 180 MPixel

[dierk]

You realize you're putting the best lenses in the world on a camera that cuts resolution by 20-25% and bit depth down by 75%? 

 

The Otus 85mm and 135 Apo are the exact reasons I abandoned Sony and bought the Nikon D810.   

 

https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/2015/02/19/zeiss-apo-sonnar-135mm-imatest-on-sony-a7r-and-nikon-d810/ 

If you love the D810, it will be a great tool for you.

For me DSLR is out. Not flexible enough and the EVF is not usable for my poor eyes with a 1.4 lens.

 

How do you put a Canon 17mm TS-E or Leica-M lenses like the 35mm Summilux on it?

 

BTW: the links to your sonyvnikon are not working.

[Lotus Eater]

Imatest and definitive results are far more meaningful than "that leaf looks sharp to me" horsesheet comparisons.    There will be a mix of qualitative and quantitative test results as time goes on. 

 

Sure, I guess so, if you're interested in testing cameras in environments and usage scenarios that don't match up to where and how they were intended to be used.

 

A graph doesn't tell you anything, photographs do.  Reviews where actual photographs were taken and published show the A7R matches the D8x0.

 

Your utterly weird blog page achieves absolutely nothing and is of no use to anybody.

[Max the Dog]

If you love the D810, it will be a great tool for you.

For me DSLR is out. Not flexible enough and the EVF is not usable for my poor eyes with a 1.4 lens.

 

How do you put a Canon 17mm TS-E or Leica-M lenses like the 35mm Summilux on it?

 

BTW: the links to your sonyvnikon are not working.

 

"love" is still out for the 810.  It's not as easy to use as the Sony.  I was happily shocked how light the Sony system is when I did the 70-200 test when compared to the Nikon.   (The Sony has been lying around unused (other than these tests) Many of my friends have eye issues that make them believe they can't handhold and focus a D810.  This is certainly true at f/1.4 with the Nikon and lenses below 85mm.   Wider open 2.8 + covers focusing error via DOF, in fact the longer the FL the easier the lens can be focused manually but most of my long end is with AF.  

 

This should work.  Copy and paste the url.  SAR seems to apend the URL to make it unworkable.

 

 sonyvnikon.wordpress.com

 

I see more reasons to lean towards the Nikon each week -

 

1. The true 14 bit color files are primary.

2. Resolution is typically 20% better

3. White balance issues are practically non-existent. Especially in portraits and skin tones.  A sony file can be made right but sometimes it took an hour + to fix what the Nikon captures correctly.

4. Recovery of blacks and lack of posterization and banding artifacts caused by Sony compression. 

 

Also, using off camera flash (although I never bothered with the Sony) is incredibly well thought out with the Nikon.

[Max the Dog]

You're removing all doubt on your intelligence in this area.    (or demonstrating a logical process towards evaluating photography and IQ) 

 

 

 

Sure, I guess so, if you're interested in testing cameras in environments and usage scenarios that don't match up to where and how they were intended to be used.

 

A graph doesn't tell you anything, photographs do.  Reviews where actual photographs were taken and published show the A7R matches the D8x0.

 

Your utterly weird blog page achieves absolutely nothing and is of no use to anybody.

[Max the Dog]

Dierk -

 

One place the Sony really excels is when you use the Novoflex ASTAT/NEX and collar.  As you know the Otus 85mm is substantial and puts considerable torgue on the mounting flange of the A7r.    The use of the Novoflex pieces prevent this load (also compounded by the fulcrum lever of the adapter)  by putting the force on the adapter directly. 

 

 

http://diglloyd.com/prem/s/ALLVIEW/SonyNEX/lens-tripod-collar.html 

 

 

By the way - your portraits are very good.   

 

 

 

If you love the D810, it will be a great tool for you.

For me DSLR is out. Not flexible enough and the EVF is not usable for my poor eyes with a 1.4 lens.

 

How do you put a Canon 17mm TS-E or Leica-M lenses like the 35mm Summilux on it?

 

BTW: the links to your sonyvnikon are not working.

[Steve C]

Really? What's the adapter attached to? The lens weight is now exacerbated by its increased length of the cantilever.

Physics.

[dierk]

Dierk -

 

One place the Sony really excels is when you use the Novoflex ASTAT/NEX and collar.  As you know the Otus 85mm is substantial and puts considerable torgue on the mounting flange of the A7r.    The use of the Novoflex pieces prevent this load (also compounded by the fulcrum lever of the adapter)  by putting the force on the adapter directly. 

 

 

http://diglloyd.com/prem/s/ALLVIEW/SonyNEX/lens-tripod-collar.html 

 

 

By the way - your portraits are very good.   

Max,

your links end with this strange sign, when I delete it in the browser, I get the correct page!

There must be an error in your link procedure.

[Max the Dog]

Ming Thein did a nice review on Sony.  He sees the same issues I do. 

 

Sony’s raw compression is still inexcusable

 

Deep shadow tonality test – anything below about level 40 is rather ‘fragile'; the signal isn’t that clean and care must be taken if any significant tonal manipulations are to be undertaken.

 

 

No matter how much technology is packed into the rest of the camera, if the sensor does not deliver – then we might as well go home. I am still not happy with the crippling 11+7 bit raw compression: you can still run into posterization fairly easily in highlights and shadows, especially if adjusting color balance under mixed lighting. Watch carefully for clipping, too – it doesn’t roll off nicely in the highlights like the D810. ISO for ISO, lens for lens, the D750 delivers a better quality file – with about 1-1.5 additional stops of usable (i.e. clean, manipulable in postprocessing without artifacts) dynamic range – in addition to slightly more transparent color, and surprisingly, about a stop less noise.

 

I have been challenged repeatedly on the file compression/ banding/ usable DR issue. Yes, everything looks good at web sizes, but then again you’re also oversampling by a factor of 20 or so, so deficiencies get averaged out. Here’s a 100% crop of an affected file (‘Skyline reflection’, from above) - this is an ideal exposure scenario; base ISO on a tripod and sufficient light. And there’s pretty clear purple/magenta banding/posterization in the sky, up to RGB luminance level 50+, which is visible in print and almost impossible to post process out. The D810 under similar conditions does not show this, and the D750’s response is identical. Neither file has noise reduction or exposure adjustment applied in ACR. It is NOT necessarily an issue for all types of photography, but as they say – you pay your money and take your chances.

[Max the Dog]

This test is now complete - https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/2015/03/16/nikon-d810-v-sony-a7r-with-zeiss-otus-85mm/

 

 

 

You're wasting your time.  Putting an Otus on a Sony mirrorless is like putting a Ferrari engine in a Yugo.  Sony's sensor glass causes astigmatism and the 11+7 color bit algorithm robs you of all of the things you paid $4500 for.  You're right about the Novoflex adaptors though.  They're the best and they actually do something nice for the lens mount when used with the ASTAT/NEX unit in releiving stress from the camera (especially inportant with these heavy lenses.   

 

After wasting a year on the A7r I switched to Nikon's D810 and it only took a week or two to really get a strong feel for the camera.  The Sony's can't approach the resolution, color depth and accuracy of Nikon.  Sure the Sonys are easy to use but they are far from professional results.  Any semi-trained eye can tell you.   

 

It only took 1 comparison shot of a Sony A7r file and a Nikon D810 file for me to call in an order for the D810. https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/2015/03/16/nikon-d810-v-sony-a7r-with-zeiss-otus-85mm/

[Guest all8]

That review is on the A7II, and he seemed to like it enough (for what it is) http://blog.mingthein.com/2015/01/19/review-sony-a7-mark-ii/

 

Ming Thein did a nice review on Sony.  He sees the same issues I do. 

 

 

Deep shadow tonality test – anything below about level 40 is rather ‘fragile'; the signal isn’t that clean and care must be taken if any significant tonal manipulations are to be undertaken.

 

 

Here is what he wrote of the A7R (http://blog.mingthein.com/2014/01/08/sony-a7r-review/)

 

 

 

The A7R certainly shares the D800E’s seemingly never-ending deep shadow recoverability. Assuming similar level optics on both, I would have trouble distinguishing results from the two cameras in a blind test. In short: this is a D800E body in a much, much smaller size.

[Max the Dog]

I doubt he would write that now.  We were all pretty excited when the A7r came out and overlooked these things.  Like a bad girlfriend the A7r just takes time to figure out why you need to dump her.  

 

His review for the A7ii is relevant to the A7r - they both have the same well documented lossy 11+7 bit compression.   

 

That review is on the A7II, and he seemed to like it enough (for what it is) http://blog.mingthein.com/2015/01/19/review-sony-a7-mark-ii/

 

 

 

Here is what he wrote of the A7R (http://blog.mingthein.com/2014/01/08/sony-a7r-review/)

[Max the Dog]

We do have an update on Ming's thoughts on the A7r -

 

"Mainly on image quality and increased control over depth of field grounds, the serious amateur or working studio pro has to really look at full frame – and that means a DSLR of some description, because frankly, the compression and shutter vibration issues of the A7R make it pretty much unusable – that is, if the extremely limited lens selection doesn’t already rule it out."

 

 http://blog.mingthein.com/2014/09/29/system-thinking/

 

 

That review is on the A7II, and he seemed to like it enough (for what it is) http://blog.mingthein.com/2015/01/19/review-sony-a7-mark-ii/

 

 

 

Here is what he wrote of the A7R (http://blog.mingthein.com/2014/01/08/sony-a7r-review/)

[Max the Dog]

Holy smokes.  I just looked at your portfolio and honestly it's as if you're not even really trying. 

 

Blurry, underexposed, poor composition, pathetic subject matter, bland light and color.    It's as if you took the soul of a 110 disposible and then cloned it into every aspect of your life.

 

Is this some kind of a joke ?

 

I just realized you're a masterful troll.    Hilarious.  Good job. 

 

 

 A Nikon troll, how droll. We are flattered you made an account just for this. Do you have any pictures? You guys are almost always forum spammers, and seldom photographers.

[Guest PenGun]

Holy smokes.  I just looked at your portfolio and honestly it's as if you're not even really trying. 

 

Blurry, underexposed, poor composition, pathetic subject matter, bland light and color.    It's as if you took the soul of a 110 disposible and then cloned it into every aspect of your life.

 

Is this some kind of a joke ?

 

I just realized you're a masterful troll.    Hilarious.  Good job. 

 Well thank you. I do appreciate your interest. You take pictures?

[Guest all8]

yes, an update from 6 months ago, the A7ii review was 6 weeks ago ... that's the one with the catch line "nearly there"

 

Here is the quote you want to read from that one ...

 

 

 

Sony’s raw compression is still inexcusable, however, the stabilizer goes quite some distance to making up the gap in practice: if I need 1/100s and ISO 1600 on a D750, the A7II can still produce a critically sharp image at 1/25s and ISO 400, and with a bit of care, 1/12 and ISO 200

 

 

It would seem that in capable hands, the raw compression can be mitigated. Nice to know.

 

 

We do have an update on Ming's thoughts on the A7r -

 

[Max the Dog]

The raw compression can't be mitigated.  You're reading between lines that aren't even in existence.   Lack of color is one problem.  Resolution is another.  The A7ii's ability to create images at lower ISOs and lower shutter speeds while nice does absolutely nothing to affect color depth.  It's still an 11+7 bit color camera and no amount of IBS and OSS will change that.

 

Here's another reviewer's opinion - http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/sony-a7-versus-nikon-d750.html

 

 

Sony really needs to put more effort into respecting raw data. The Nikon DSLRs can output 14-bit raw data that is not compromised. The Sony A7 cameras output 11-bit raw data that has lossy compression in it. The A7 cameras are also not speed demons at saving that altered raw data to the card, either, though they’re not bad in basic write speed. When I wrote about this in my Sony A7 reviews, I got hammered by a lot of Sony users who wrote “we don’t see any difference.” Well, you very well might not see differences between a Sony raw file and a Nikon one. However, I’m a bit uncomfortable with “massaged data” as opposed to a more true raw data. I’m also disappointed by the 11-bit aspect of the Sony cameras: too much post processing manipulation and you risk posterization.

 

 

yes, an update from 6 months ago, the A7ii review was 6 weeks ago ... that's the one with the catch line "nearly there"

 

Here is the quote you want to read from that one ...

 

 

 

It would seem that in capable hands, the raw compression can be mitigated. Nice to know.

[andyfromboston]

Max,

 

I'm new to this board, but I already can't help but notice that you seem to have some serious camera related mood issues. You're being quite rude and dismissive to anybody who disagrees with you, you have a site that's actually called Sony v Nikon and you use words like "fanboy" and "bullsh*t" on it while getting unusually angry about cameras. And you've already said that you've "abandoned" Sony anyway.

 

You're taking all this unusually seriously. What's the problem? Did a Sony billboard fall on your house or something?

[Austerror]

The Phase One cameras also use RAW compression:

 

http://www.phaseone.com/Camera-Systems/645DFplus.aspx

 

I don't think its a big an issue as some people think it is.

[Max the Dog]

RAW compression is not the issue.  Nikon has a very good 'lossless compression' that limits file sizes just as Sony does, however, with millions of photos analyzed by the best pros in the industry no one claims that Nikon's lossless files are a problem.  However, Sony advertises 14 bit RAW but only delivers 11+7 lossy files that contain as little as 10% of Nikon's discrete color values.  This results in banding, posterization, edge artifacts and shadow recovery limits.  This is the core problem with Sony. 

 

http://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/sony-craw-arw2-posterization-detection

 

The Phase One cameras also use RAW compression:

 

http://www.phaseone.com/Camera-Systems/645DFplus.aspx

 

I don't think its a big an issue as some people think it is.

[Max the Dog]

brilliant insight. 

Max,

I'm new to this board, but I already can't help but notice that you seem to have some serious camera related mood issues. You're being quite rude and dismissive to anybody who disagrees with you, you have a site that's actually called Sony v Nikon and you use words like "fanboy" and "bullsh*t" on it while getting unusually angry about cameras. And you've already said that you've "abandoned" Sony anyway.

You're taking all this unusually seriously. What's the problem? Did a Sony billboard fall on your house or something?

[Guest PenGun]

brilliant insight. 

 Any chance we can see some of your brilliant work? It must be pretty good, what with the great depth of understanding you display here.

[Max the Dog]

I posted 2 photos taken with Sony cameras that illustrate the problems with Sony images.  Neither of the images were highly processed, nor ETTR (which make things worse for Sony's cRAW) and yet they both have banding, posterization and noise at base ISO issues.  You should be able to view them in full resolution and without any Google 'enhancements'. 

 

https://plus.google.com/u/0/108086133375344739535/posts/H8gi8NiSRHZ?pid=6128738040482052514&oid=108086133375344739535

 

https://plus.google.com/u/0/108086133375344739535/posts/6yDxt5eUW6R?pid=6128737374666201090&oid=108086133375344739535

 

These are unacceptable images with 100% of that fault as a result of Sony's lossy compression and astigmatism.  Lens used was Zeiss 21 Distagon 2.8 @ 5,6 for both.   

 

After a few months with the Nikon, I can not find an accpetable use or reason for keeping the Sony.      Documented further here -  https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/

[Max the Dog]

It looks like Google did something to clip the files below 1mb.  Full size are available here -

 

These are available until March 26 ( or 1st 5 people)  and I won't reload them -

 

 https://www.transferbigfiles.com/577d8fa3-712f-4c8d-bdf3-b4394b6c4505/hs-quKzuzhowBv7Pc9oGug2

 

 https://www.transferbigfiles.com/c2d296ae-789a-4174-9e5a-66da396ffef7/MPq-9w68G5iAeFjJWMuy4w2

[Guest all8]

It looks like Google did something to clip the files below 1mb.  Full size are available here -

 

These are available until March 26 ( or 1st 5 people)  and I won't reload them -

 

 https://www.transferbigfiles.com/577d8fa3-712f-4c8d-bdf3-b4394b6c4505/hs-quKzuzhowBv7Pc9oGug2

 

 https://www.transferbigfiles.com/c2d296ae-789a-4174-9e5a-66da396ffef7/MPq-9w68G5iAeFjJWMuy4w2

 

Would be more interesting to have a copy of the RAW file. Thanks.