Thoughts from people who know the A7r and FE 90 2.8 Macro

[Buzzard]

I am in the market for a new camera and the A7r is one I am seriously considering as my first full frame camera. After reading reviews on the shutter induced lens shake, I am worried the 90mm might be a problem, especially hand held. The FE 90 Macro and the Sonar 35 FE are two lenses on my short list, if I decide to get the A7r. Any handheld shooters have experience with FE 90 Macro and A7R combo? If so how is the performance?

 

For those who are wondering why I like this camera. Its light, full frame, and offers 36 MP Full Frame resolution. If I can figure out a very good set of lens choices between 24 and 90, I will get it. Image stabilization is a required option. I like shooting by hand and being older my hands are not as steady as they use to be.

 

I am sorry if this has already been posted and I did read paiyan's post at this link which is why I see some hope.

http://www.sonyalphaforum.com/topic/3343-a7r-fe-90mm-macro-japan-autumn-2015-exclusive/?hl=%2Bsony+%2B90mm+%2Bmacro+%2Blens

 

Thanks in advance for the input!

[detlef]

Hi.

 

I have not tested the macro. But i see some problems. Lens AF is not the fastest (info from several reviews) and A7R AF not the best. It may be hard to catch some living stuff.

 

An other thing is the aperture f2.8. I was trying a new Batis 25/2 this week, very sunny day, but into the forest it was dark. To catch this two images i do need a moderate shutter speed to hold my favorite ISO 100 (1/50, f2). Not much space.

 

I think for serious macro shots a tripod is needed. Here are some impressions from Steve Huff.

 

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/05/25/the-sony-90mm-macro-2-8-g-lens-for-the-fe-a7-system/

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Buzzard]

Hi.

 

I have not tested the macro. But i see some problems. Lens AF is not the fastest (info from several reviews) and A7R AF not the best. It may be hard to catch some living stuff.

 

An other thing is the aperture f2.8. I was trying a new Batis 25/2 this week, very sunny day, but into the forest it was dark. To catch this two images i do need a moderate shutter speed to hold my favorite ISO 100 (1/50, f2). Not much space.

 

I think for serious macro shots a tripod is needed. Here are some impressions from Steve Huff.

 

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/05/25/the-sony-90mm-macro-2-8-g-lens-for-the-fe-a7-system/

My plan for the FE 90 is as a walk around lens that gives me a different perspective than anything I have ever used. And it will be fun just trying out macro as it would be my first macro lens.

 

I currently own a Pentax K3 and my most used lens is easily a 40mm prime. I shoot 100% of the time during the day and at ISO 100 to 200 more times than not. I will take a picture of anything that catches my eyes. People, frogs, ducks and geese walking around, flowers, bushes, trees, buildings, snow, and cloud formations. Action and sports photography is not the type of camera or lens I am looking for.

 

I have researched this camera plenty. If I can get two or three lens that work with it I will probably buy it. The key is the 90mm focal length. Can I use this lens for hand held shots of mostly stationary objects? Or does the hard shutter shock effect it to much for this. Every review site I have read, and it has been a lot, states for the most part this shutter shock in the A7r starts to show itself in zoom/telephoto lenses once it gets to 100mm and out.

 

I cannot find any handheld reviews about the A7r being used with the FE 90MM Macro. 90 is close to 100 so that makes me a little concerned. I figured the best thing to do is come to the source and ask people who own the camera and lens for their opinions and experiences.

[Michael_j]

I have the 90mm macro and it is excellent on my A7 and A6000. I only tried it briefly on a friend's A7R and it did show camera shake on several images. Not a definitive answer I know - it could have been my fault.

[detlef]

Yes I understand. The macro has OSS, this helps. But is it enough for near distance on 90mm, that's a good question on the A7R. I can't help here. U can try it while renting the combo for 1 or 2 days. Think you must test it out.

 

But are you sure you loose more than you win with the A7 II (not much price difference)? Really need the 36 MP?

 

A lightweight tripod is another option.

[michelb]

This lens is outstanding. sometimes in low light, AF may hunt a bit in Macro but since the AF/MF is touch away (Push/Pull in the focusing ring) it is a very easy lens to work with.

 

The fact that it adds OSS to the A7r makes the camera that much better. I found myself taking close-ups at 1/30 sec and got sharper results than i anticipated. With this body, going up to 800 ISO is not a problem for noise and it helps a lot on the handheld shots. For walk-around, the focus limiter helps to prevent loooooong lasting AF hunting.

 

See more handheld samples here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/55173440@N08/albums/72157667425271366/with/27719265180/

[detlef]

There is noise @800 ISO. For 100% crops this is not the same clearness as ISO 100. Maybe a question what you do with your shots too. I have taken the two shots without IBIS and OSS on a A7S, but only at 25mm and without macro function.

 

Can you show a 100% crop of this picture or it is already?

[Buzzard]

This lens is outstanding. sometimes in low light, AF may hunt a bit in Macro but since the AF/MF is touch away (Push/Pull in the focusing ring) it is a very easy lens to work with.

 

The fact that it adds OSS to the A7r makes the camera that much better. I found myself taking close-ups at 1/30 sec and got sharper results than i anticipated. With this body, going up to 800 ISO is not a problem for noise and it helps a lot on the handheld shots. For walk-around, the focus limiter helps to prevent loooooong lasting AF hunting.

 

See more handheld samples here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/55173440@N08/albums/72157667425271366/with/27719265180/

 I came here wanting someone to say the 90mm and A7R work well together is how bad I want this setup to be honest. Very nice shots and I did look at the others. I appreciate your input and am very close to picking this camera.

[Buzzard]

There is noise @800 ISO. For 100% crops this is not the same clearness as ISO 100. Maybe a question what you do with your shots too. I have taken the two shots without IBIS and OSS on a A7S, but only at 25mm and without macro function.

 

Can you show a 100% crop of this picture or it is already?

I don't  think many expect ISO 800 to have less noise than ISO 100 with no out of camera processing done. Everything I have read on this camera indicates it compares favorably at medium to high ISO with other cameras in its price range.

 

See the DP Review. Link is below:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-a7r/15

 

I am not questioning this cameras overall abilities by any means. I just want to be able to use at least a 90mm focal length lens handheld.

[detlef]

I use a 85mm handheld. But macro is more than that. That's why i say for serious macro you need a tripod anyway.

[Buzzard]

I use a 85mm handheld. But macro is more than that. That's why i say for serious macro you need a tripod anyway.

I get what you are saying with the tripod, same if I wanted to take a landscape on a windy day. My style now is go to a park, venue, or any place I like and take a walk with my camera. I have several old tripods, both light and heavy, but the last time I took one of them for a walk was over five years ago.

[michelb]

All the pics on Flickr are direct out of camera with no PP.

If you want to see 100%  just download the full size files ( Bottom right arrow, click on the size you want up to 7360 X 4912)

 

And yes for serious macro work, a good tripod (and maybe also a focusing rail) is often a must to nail focus.

[zenzei]

I use the 90mmf2.8, but on a a7r2. Handheld for non-macro usages works very well - landscapes, people, street, whatever. Sharp as a scissor.

Not sure about the impact of not having EFCS though... but that can countered with higher shutter speeds. The lens is stabilized, so that will help.

 

hope this helps

[addicted2light]

I don't have direct experience with the 90mm, but I do have an A7r. For what it's worth, I remember reading on one of the major review sites (Digilloyd maybe? Sorry but it was a long time ago) when I was shopping for the camera that stabilized lenses might have a problem with the A7r.

 

Due the interference between the shutter shock* and the image stabilization, vibrations can "resonate" and be amplified. Again, I've no personal experience with the 90, so don't kill the messenger but it might be something worth checking before committing a sizable chunk of money.

 

 

*of this I have plenty of personal experience, especially with long-ish lenses (but it happened in a few occasions even with a 24mm! most likely because I was shooting on soft ground?); I've seen it even on a 3Kg tripod with a 1Kg Arca B1 ball head that's 2x bigger then the Sony A7r itself...so no, this is not just something I've read

[Buzzard]

I don't have direct experience with the 90mm, but I do have an A7r. For what it's worth, I remember reading on one of the major review sites (Digilloyd maybe? Sorry but it was a long time ago) when I was shopping for the camera that stabilized lenses might have a problem with the A7r.

 

Due the interference between the shutter shock* and the image stabilization, vibrations can "resonate" and be amplified. Again, I've no personal experience with the 90, so don't kill the messenger but it might be something worth checking before committing a sizable chunk of money.

 

 

*of this I have plenty of personal experience, especially with long-ish lenses (but it happened in a few occasions even with a 24mm! most likely because I was shooting on soft ground?); I've seen it even on a 3Kg tripod with a 1Kg Arca B1 ball head that's 2x bigger then the Sony A7r itself...so no, this is not just something I've read

Thanks and I agree 100% about the checking it our part before spending 1800.00 on the camera. I really want this camera; and I am even considering the 24-70 OSS lens instead but I would really like to get the 90 prime. I sent paiyan a message yesterday, maybe he will offer some insight soon on how he uses this camera and lens combo.

[addicted2light]

Thanks and I agree 100% about the checking it our part before spending 1800.00 on the camera. I really want this camera; and I am even considering the 24-70 OSS lens instead but I would really like to get the 90 prime. I sent paiyan a message yesterday, maybe he will offer some insight soon on how he uses this camera and lens combo.

 

 

Again, no direct personal experience with the 24-70. But from the load of full size samples I've seen online (I was considering the purchase as well) it looks like it's downright a dog in most situations, at least for landscapes.

 

What I ended up buying instead is the *fantastic* Contax 28-85/3.5-4. It's 3x cheaper and I have a strong feeling it smokes the 24-70 out of the water. It's one of the few zooms that have the quality level of a prime lens. A bit of CA in the very extreme corners when you have branches against a white sky (but why would you want to shot a white sky anyway  and in any case waaaay less than the Canon 24 L I used to have ), but @ 28mm sharp across the frame up to almost the very far corners, and @85mm sharp even in the very far corners.

 

No OSS, but being a quite heavy lens (around 750g) stabilizes the A7r a lot just for that: I can shoot it @ 85mm at 1/15s with tack sharp results most of the times. And it's one of the few lenses, again I suspect due the weight, that has never showed even a hint of shutter shock, neither handheld nor on a (decent) tripod.

 

Here you can see a couple pictures shot with this lens, just to give you an approximate idea of its rendering style:

 

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

My 2 cents.

[detlef]

The Contax need an adapter. And is a very different lens comparing to a macro. 0,6m closest focusing distance.

 

I'm not sure but I think the A7 II with the 90mm macro is a good alternative. Not as much issues as the A7R and enough MP for most cases. 36 MP are good for very large prints or to crop if the image is worse composed. I think so, but it is interesting to see what others mean

[addicted2light]

The Contax need an adapter. And is a very different lens comparing to a macro. 0,6m closest focusing distance.

 

I'm not sure but I think the A7 II with the 90mm macro is a good alternative. Not as much issues as the A7R and enough MP for most cases. 36 MP are good for very large prints or to crop if the image is worse composed. I think so, but it is interesting to see what others mean

 

 

Just to be clear, I was suggesting the Contax as an alternative to the 24-70 that the OP was considering buying alongside the 90mm, not as a macro substitute

[Buzzard]

Just to be clear, I was suggesting the Contax as an alternative to the 24-70 that the OP was considering buying alongside the 90mm, not as a macro substitute

Your pictures are great looking; the foliage looks like I could reach and touch it. I agree the 24-70 is not a great lens; and certainly not in the same quality range of the 90MM. That just shows you how much I like the camera. In the end, I don't think I will sacrifice lens quality in all honestly just to get it.

[detlef]

Your pictures are great looking; the foliage looks like I could reach and touch it.

It's a Zeiss. Post-processed? And are you speaking about the f4 or GM?

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Buzzard]

It's a Zeiss. Post-processed? And are you speaking about the f4 or GM?

 

tmp_5405-flower_and_sun888709858.jpg

I was replying to @addicted2light

Pictures shot with the Contax 28-85/3.5-4 lens.

 

I like your pictures for sure! As I stated earlier, my style of shooting is a lot less macro and more normal scenes shot with a 40MM Lens. While wanting to branch into some macro, what makes the 90mm attractive is its ability to do a little bit of everything. Portraits, scenes, and macro.

[addicted2light]

 

Your pictures are great looking; the foliage looks like I could reach and touch it. I agree the 24-70 is not a great lens; and certainly not in the same quality range of the 90MM. That just shows you how much I like the camera. In the end, I don't think I will sacrifice lens quality in all honestly just to get it.

 

Thanks, Zeiss microcontrast helps a great deal in this regard. And btw, obviously they are post processed. Besides the fact that an unedited raw file from any camera would look like crap by design, the ones from the Sony A7r IMO in this regard are even worse, with a green-ish tint pretty difficult to remove (I'm talking even with the right white balance, obviously). Sometimes it works in your favor, sometimes not.

 

I've decided to sell mine to go with another brand and now it's on ebay (the major difference being how much less time I've to spend postprocessing the files), otherwise I would have bought a Color Passport to calibrate the camera before each major change in shooting scenario because my "simple" gray card wasn't enough.