Jump to content

Recommended Posts

First of all:

 

http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/results.asp?chbLensType=1

 

and filter the results (once you get in the reviews) for the sensor you're interested in.

 

Bear in mind these are user reviews, but IMO given they are averaged among many users they are pretty much spot on.

 

So far I've found only a handful of reviews over 24Mp for the lenses you're interested in, and even then only for 36Mp sensors (I guess the price is not making the A7R mark II that popular).

 

That said, from the reviews I've seen when the A7r II came out there isn't that much of a difference in terms of strain on the lenses, so the results from the old 36Mp sensor should be good enough.

 

Personally, I can speak only about the 100/2.8 Macro on the original A7r. On that camera, the lens is seriously super sharp, even more so stopped down to f/4.

 

On the other hand, a month or so back I was chatting with one of Sony Artisans of Imagery (sorry no name, it was a private conversation), and he told me that the new 90/2.8 Macro FE is even sharper (but again, it will cost you 5 times more...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi rez sensors do not require sharper lenses 

than was required for film. High rez sensors 

still lower rez than medium and low ISO film.  

It's all just geekism run amuck. 

   

Can a higher rez sensor actually show you 

a difference between two lenses of greater 

and less IQ abilities ? Yes, acoarst, and the 

same was/is true of fine grain film. But just 

proving the existence of a discrepancy in IQ 

is a few worlds away from the mythology of 

higher rez sensors needing sharper lenses 

for actual real-world use. A single variable 

such as lens resolution, cannot govern the 

perception of IQ or sharpness. There are far 

more variables in play.  

   

Beats me why I bother about this when I do 

benefit at times from the "inferior" items that 

geeks leave behind ... being the scavenging 

bargain hunter that I am ;-) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use lots of older Minolta SR lenses on my A7R II and most of the primes are plenty sharp for it, the macros in particular. I'd doubt that the later Minolta lenses should be worse than those, but haven't tested them.

 

Even the Minolta 35-70mm zoom (which was built for Leica too) is very close to the famous Zeiss Contax C/Y 35-70mm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

I am new to the Sony world.  I have been a Nikon and Canon user going back decades.  I still have some Canon FD and Nikon AF-S glass that I am using with my new A7R2.  My question concerns using Minolta Glass.  

I seem to sense from what I read here that I might find Minolta glass that will permit using the AutoFocus when mounted on my A7R2.  Is that true?  If so what can I expect in the way of speed and accuracy?  Minolta made some very fine lenses in past years.  Which series of Minolta glass have AF that will work on the A7r2?  Of these which are the "best" lenses to consider?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

I use Minolta AF lenses on the A99II (same sensor). Most of them are sharp but some lose a bit of sharpness and contrast compared to a 24mp sensor. It's only a problem if pixel-peeping is important to you. (Hint: it shouldn't be.)

 

Because Minolta AF lenses are native to A-mount, not E-mount, you'll have to use an adapter. Any Minolta AF lens will have autofocus if used with the LA-EA4 adapter. They'll only have 15 AF points in the central parts of the frame, though, so it's mostly useful for fairly still subjects.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Re: A7RII

 

This is not a reply, but a question as I have just acquired the A7RII secondhand and have bought a few Minolta AF Lenses.  Can anyone tell me which Adaptor is best to use with this camera?  My friend tells me that the Sony Adoptor can be used.  Is that correct?

I want to make sure that I purchase the correct adaptors so that I can use the Minolta AF Lenses.

Thanks.

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
  • Posts

    • I've been using this lens extensively without any sharpness issues. At long focal lengths, you'll have to factor in the need for a faster shutter speed (< 1/500-ish at 350mm) and other factors like atmospheric distortion, fog/dust haze, etc. All these factors contribute to a deterioration of image quality at longer focal lengths.
    • That's supposed to be a pretty good APS-C lens. Can you try it on a different camera just for the heck of it? Friend? Camera shop? The lens is noted for sharpness, so if you're having as much trouble as you say, you may want to look into a replacement or repair. 
    • Hi everyone, I’m reaching out to the community because I’m facing a persistent image quality issue with my Sony 70–350mm f/4.5–6.3 G OSS lens, and I’d like to know if this is normal behavior or if my copy is defective. Problem description: I’ve extensively compared the 70–350mm G OSS with my Sony 18–135mm f/3.5–5.6 OSS, using a Sony A6700, under controlled conditions: • Identical lighting and background • Same subject and position (LEGO figure, consistent framing) • Tripod or steady support • Manual focus or AF with center point • Same shutter speed (e.g., 1/200s), similar ISO (ISO 4000–6400), RAW + JPEG • OIS turned on (and also tested with OIS off) My observations: • At 135mm, the 70–350mm G OSS delivers softer, flatter images than the 18–135mm, even when stopped down. • At 350mm, the sharpness drops significantly – the center is soft, and textures (like LEGO tiles or fabric) appear blurred or smudged. • Contrast and micro-detail are noticeably inferior across all focal lengths. • The 18–135mm at 135mm (even cropped) retains better edge sharpness and detail definition. • Both JPEG and RAW files confirm the issue – this is not just JPEG processing or noise reduction. Question to the community: • Have others experienced similar softness with the 70–350mm? • Is it possible I have a decentered or optically misaligned copy? • Is there a known issue with OSS introducing softness at long focal lengths? I wanted to love this lens due to the range and portability, but currently it’s unusable for anything where image quality matters. I’m considering returning or sending it for service. Thanks in advance for any feedback or comparison results you can share.  
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...