Leica M9P50mm Summilux ASPH18mm super elmar ASPHformer Canon DSLR user
AKH: I must say I'm not the least impressed by those images, but maybe it is just the images, because the lens should be fine I guess. I would definitely go for the 28mm f/2 instead and save a lot of money and maybe lose a little in IQ: http://www.dailycameranews.com/2015/03/sony-fe-28mm-f2-lens-sample-images/
He was being sarcastic
macjonny1: what I love about these mirrorless cams is the ability to pretty much use any legacy lens ever made in MF. The native AF class is a bonus but that's not what I purchased mine for. If you need AF glass, and it's FF, then it's going to be a big size. If you want small, FF compatible glass, it's going to be MF only.
Pick two: SMALL, AF, FF compatible.
@BeksvartOK you are right.....don't know then why we can't have smaller lenses...
Lou P Dargent: I like the A7, but that Zeiss 35 f1.4 looks like a DSLR lens + adapter. It is bloody huge. Does it even have OIS?
And no, I'm not getting confused by the small body size of the A7.
It is bigger than this:
35mm is roughly the distance from the tip of his thumb to the knuckle.
I know that you can't make a direct correlation between focal length and lens size, but that monster is almost as big as my Nikkor 180mm f2.8 AI-S boat anchor.
@Krich13 I am only assuming so because it hasn't been done. I have no idea about lens design but I'd sure hope that if Sony could produce a small AF lens they would! I could be totally wrong here though!
Yes but that's a MF lens. I'm guessing AF has to be the problem with making small FF lenses
what I love about these mirrorless cams is the ability to pretty much use any legacy lens ever made in MF. The native AF class is a bonus but that's not what I purchased mine for. If you need AF glass, and it's FF, then it's going to be a big size. If you want small, FF compatible glass, it's going to be MF only.
Photomonkey: Pretty risky showing us how to get around Amazon's patent.
Yeah I'm not trying this as I would get sued by DPreview or Amazon. I think they are just trying to get us to do this technique so they can come after us for money. Sorry DPreview you almost had me but I"m not falling for it!
Canon, no one cares about these boring lenses. Maybe do something innovative instead of a MK II version of a lens that is just fine the way it is. Spend your resources getting out of the obsolescence that you seem to be heading at light speed.
olla: what happened to Zeiss? they seem to have dropped the ball on digital cameras. I guess they did not think a full frame Contax G3 would find a market. My G2 was not only a beautiful camera, the lenses produced sharp & detailed photo's without needing photoshop correction. Most camera companies seem to be growing their mirowless digital camera's choices. I think Zeiss made a big mistake in abandoning the digital camera market.
@quezrathe Leica m240 sensor is one of the highest ranked sensors on DXOMark. It isn't the latest/greatest but not 3-4 gens behind that's a bit ridiculous.
Smeggypants: I put "tilt shift little people" in the same pigeon hole as "acid trip HDR" "10stop NDR Blurred waterfall/beach" shots a long time ago. It was cool for the first couple of shots I saw :)
pretty much everything could be called gimmicky or a fad. Personally I like the miniature look but it's kind of strange at the same time. Don't like HDR, do like long exposure pics. To each their own.
they should outlaw zoom lenses too. In fact, you should have to use prime lenses and only shoot in a wheelchair so you can't foot-zoom. Wheelchair wheels locked of course, or it would be OK to shoot standing if you tie your shoe laces together.
JosephScha: Aperture: ... Lowest value 16Should that be "1.6" instead of "16"? If not, I'm confused. But then I'm confused by T1.6 instead of f/1.6
No the DOF will be equiv to the 34mm f/2.8 full frame.Light gathering/speed is still the 1.6. Equivalents is only for DOF
I think Magic Lantern is rockin' it lately. Bravo to organizations like this.
I went out on my back patio, laid on the ground, and took a photo of my kid's bigwheel. Put a bleach bypass filter effect using ColoEfex pro, and looks just like this. Even took it in front of my neighbor's rancher for effect. Granted the bigwheel is plastic but looks the same to me!
Wow trounced by the Sigma 35mm?!?!?
alfaflash: I always bought Leica optics, but never Leica bodies. The lenses are unbeatable, but the bodies are behind the times and don't offer the features of a NEX or a FF Canon. I'm getting great results from a NEX 7 with a Leica Macro-Elmar-M 90mm f/4, and Metabones adapter. The best part is that I will be able to upgrade to the next generation body without having to sell a kidney. I think people who get goofy about Leica bodies are just looking for recognition for having cool equipment.
That's what folks like about Leica bodies. The lack of features. They are the anti-NEX (well, at least until now). I had a Fuji X100 and got rid of it because of all the crappy menu junk.
tominhk: re Leica glass... Is it not possible for Canon or nikon etc to make the same? Maybe an L plus lens? And match with a body with no aa filter?
Andrew53 wow you are prob the only person to ever have said those words. Bravo!
Rob13: First let me say, I've got a few Leicas, but to me the M is still falling short. The only good point is that they didn't set the price at $7k!
So my major beef is that.......without an anti-shake sensor we're still not quite there.Can you imagine what your videos and low light stills are going to look like?I guess that leap in technology may have to wait for another couple of years, along with a facelift on an ageing body style.
Was there any discussion of the low light-high ISO performance? Hopefully, its a leap forward...
What we need is a full frame NEX-7 or full frame Ricoh GXR which have nice compact bodies to slap on the M glass and it'll be bye-bye Leica.
ISO up to 6400.
videos without anti-shake sensor and low light stills will look just like every other camera, of which there are many, without anti-shake sensor. My videos with my Nikon D800E and 85mm f/1.4 look fine. No anti-shake. Never shoot above 6400 ISO.
interesting but you look like you were out looking for little children to lure into your van
nice shot...too bad it's a fat guy in the pic though