Giacomo Sardi: simply poor lens performance in the corner..... purple fringing.. i don't believe... ZEISS WTF ?
35 mm has come to a limit clearly....apart some otus lenses that weight 1,5 kilos...and some sigma nothing can resolve sensor like this, that's why medium format can sleep well in the future...the medium format can go to 100 million pixel easily.
Dylthedog: Is it just me or do these look like they were shot on film?
Not having looked at much high MP output, it sure takes some getting used to. At screen size it looks awesome but as soon as you hit 1:1 almost everything turns soft and grainy. Time to look at some Canon and Nikon 40+ MP output for comparison I think!
Interesting that Barney used noise reduction even at ISO 100. Also be great to know if these are all hand held or shot with a tripod.
It's also worth thinking about if you have to always work RAW to get what you want - damn that's a lot of storage.
I'm so torn on this camera. What to do...
they are samples from a lens that look like a kir lens for sony a6000 but cost 3000 dollar because of zeiss badge...but don't tell here or it will be problematic for sony fanboys health.i hope it's user technique not so good...i'd like see some shot with tripod, b
Joerg V: It looks like the lens has not been designed with landscape photography in mind (high amount of fringing and pretty bad corner performance). What a bummer given the great dynamic range.
open your eyes and watch the sample man!! these looks like samples from a kite lens...no softness? the fact are two
1- you lie to yourself2- you have never managed to use a sharp lens.
in my opinion 42 millions pixel and such a design cannot produce shape results. the 35 mm with the technology current and miniaturization of the lens will produce these results always, then manufacturer rely on software correction ( the problem is when manufacturer thinks software can correct everything...in this case not...the fringing is terrible for a lens like this, it's a 35 f2 one of the most common design since photography is born). probably they should have stick with a 35 2,8 producing a much smaller camera and easier to make sharp.
I said the same in the beginning was accused of trolling... I dont understanf the wow effect of many here.. Performance is abysmalFor a camera that cost 3300 dollar and has a zeiss badge in front. the leica q lens comparedIs a monster optically but even a lot of lenses for interchangeableRun rings around this. Maybr they make it for bokeh and short focus . The images have noise even at base iso. Maybe 42 million is tolMich for the 35 mm. Sure medium format is another world and im talking also of a7. Probably the sony 36 million was the best compromise.
jonny1976: so impressive....the shot of river at f8 show a level of fringing i rarely have seen in a kit lens...there is softness corner even at f8...so difficult to create a lens able to exploit the 42 million sensor, apart otus series.
troll?f8...ok i mistake..no over but tons of fringing not even a 40 years old on a medium format at f8 give this results...and most of all i looked other photos and not even the level of sharpness i would have expected from a 4000 camera...leica q less pixel but not comparable as far as as sharpness...
so impressive....the shot of river at f8 show a level of fringing i rarely have seen in a kit lens...there is softness corner even at f8...so difficult to create a lens able to exploit the 42 million sensor, apart otus series.
M1963: Three articles on the Sony Alpha 7R II in four days. Not quite sure what to think of it.
u must be paid good to spend all your life in everry forum here..
sony x100 3 is june 2014 available...this prove you are just a sony employe liar.....you lie and lie.....
ricoh gr is 2013 sony x100 3 is june 2014...compare it to sony x1100 2....
the cheapest used is 499 dollar...still the new old model sell forbear its price, 550 600 dollar...you can't find new the old gr at less than 600 euro.....it's pretty impossible to find one used u know why? cause ricoh gr is loved by their owner, canikon pentax only pana owner buy ricoh gr.
you are simply an ignorant fanboy,...that's your problem...645d has plenty of lenses....less dr? yes maybe...from what i have seen around i will take it anyway against any 35 mm....many people had d800e and 645d ask them which camera produces the best output..
find me on eBay a gr at 400 dollar...pentax lens keep value much better....is a fact....i know it hurts but sony is this...without sensor they will losing billions with cameras and lenses.
new prices means nothing. a vendor can sell a sony alpha 7r for 3000 dollar if he believe it can sell...used prices tell more. a ricoh gr repeat you struggle to find one cheaper than 500 euro used and it costed 750 euro new...a sony rx1r now can be bought for 1200 euro on eBay...so you paid one years ago 3000 euro and now you sell it 1200. this say a lot about sony product.great but they not
i use camera as tools, i will also buy a sony a7r as soon as it will cost 600 dollar in a month or two...et2 is just an employed who work clearly for sony advertising a brand and this should be against the law of this forum. the
k3 is 2 years old product...it sell now for 850 euro on adorama...it means no more than 250 dollar less than its nominal price...used market is important cause many people resell theyr camera.....look price of sold a7r rx1r a7 a7s...compare to they new product...you can't even keep a 50% value after just one year in most cases....now that sony has sold a new rx1r2 what you expect your rx1r is worth?
idiotic will be your father maybe...i not offended u...so respect first. you are paid by sony u spend all your time advertising and defending product of son...u not even use a camera....so what are you entitled?by the way him looking for a ricoh gr first edition, it's impossible o find on used at good price, new price are no less than 20 % after 2 years of production.....you can find a rx1r used in eBay for 1000 euro after not even 2 years...it means 2000 euro less than nominal price....same for any pother sony product.when you buy a sony camera you know that 1 years later sony will sell a similar camera new and your camera won't be worth nothing.
jonny1976: looking the comparometer i don't say any revolution compare to nikon d810, living aside the medium format, both in high iso or dr. then i look the sample in gallery and watch my photo of 645d and 30 years lens and i cannot understand if it's the operator or the hype is still only hype
in addiction i personally prefer the 4*3 format, and for me even with slower lens the capability of separation in different plane of focus install much bigger in medium format even when using 1,4 lenses in 35 mm.LAst medium format lenses , the new one especially, are ready for 100 million sensor pixel, like phase one or new pentax for example, while 95% of lenses in 35 mm struggle even with a 36 mm sensor. v
i use cmos and ccd camera, ccd fo at base iso especially for landscape is unbeatable.the results i see from the file i have, compared to what i see from a7 d800 d810 is not in the same league, that's why medium format is used by most of the greatest and successful portrait and landscape photographer. only zeiss otus lens for me produce that kind of medium format quality , but is a 4500 lens so in medium format price. i don't care of size i use all kind of camera and size is not importantt for me. but et2 fanboy who spend is life advertising sony product, like most of preview staff in this moment, cannot tiunderstand.
looking the comparometer i don't say any revolution compare to nikon d810, living aside the medium format, both in high iso or dr. then i look the sample in gallery and watch my photo of 645d and 30 years lens and i cannot understand if it's the operator or the hype is still only hype
Michael H: A modest upgrade from the existing lens. Differences include:-10g heavier;-one more diaphragm blade;-a few changes to the external design of the lens (looks more like the 50mm); and-different coatings on the glass.
Overall not much difference. Perhaps tests will reveal better optics.
well i have the a35...if they have maintained the sharpness and improved the rest is a gem. r
Personally i use the 645d with a a35 3,5, and it's my most sharpest lens, crazy sharp, for those who have used otus 55 , that kind of sharpness with medium format rendering.So if pentax has improved the small fringing u see wide open, and improved the level of contrast giving a fast autofocus sealed lens, it's already great.
For those who say ff sony or nikon are equal to pentax 645 systemm, clearly they have never used or seen the results...those who had both system already knows the difference, that is not resolution, is all the rest. personally i doubt there is any lens under 30 mm in sony nikon or canon mount, so sharp and distortion free, especially in the corner, as the a35 or fa35. l