On 12/14/2016 5:14 AM, Frank wrote:
Hey Olaf,
long time no see. Everything well?
Yeah! How be 'ya?
I have an A7 myself, and looking to upgrade to an IBIS (II) version, as I
find that very beneficial for my photography (still enjoying m43 as well).
. . .
I think the Sony mirror less offers a superior 'shooting experience'
compared to the Canon full frames, at least my keepers ratio has increased
significantly (without scientific proof btw).
I heartily agree. I can't imagine going back to a DSLR. Using the A7 is a great deal
like using µ4/3 bodies.
In particular image magnification in the viewfinder enables this, and to a
lesser extend focus
peaking.
Yes, I have MF and focus magnification set on buttons on all my bodies. Indispensable. Focus peaking works a treat with
some subjects, lenses and apertures, and is not very useful with others.
The Canons I owned (original 5D and 6D) also suffered from
irregular exposure when somes lenses were stopped down. My Sony is OK with
that
They have had that problem from the beginning. It's a consequence of measuring light off the viewfinder screen.
Mirrorless measures exposure at the sensor, so had no such problem.
. . .
Mayby the quality increase from 24 to 36/42 Mp will be a stretch for some
Zuiko's wide open. But the lineair resolution increase is less then the
pixel amount suggests (a 84 Mp sensor would double the 24 Mp resolution,
36/42 is somewhere like a 30% increase). Not enough to worry that all
Zuiko's would produce blurred images I think. They will show their age in
the corners however.
I'll leave the fine wine tasting on which Zuiko's are best on digital to
Ken ;-).
His take so far has been that it's different for different sensor/bodies.
Have fun, and you're welcome in Zeist for a test-drive.
PS For macro there is a nifty adapter OM->Sony E
<http://www.ebay.com/itm/Adjustable-Focusing-Macro-Infinity-Helicoid-Adapter-Tube-Olympus-OM-Lens-To-Sony-/291554417499>
with a built in variable extension tube. Mine is OK with the 90mm, not with
smaller focal lengths.
Cute idea, but if it doesn't work for shorter than 90 mm, I can't see much
point.
OM register distance is 46 mm, Sony E-mount is 18, mm, so an adapter should be the difference, 28 mm. I just measured a
combo of OM=>EOS and EOS=>E, and got 27.9 mm.
So the 33 mm in the item listing illustration can't be right for infinity focus
on any OM lens. Weird.
. My default adapter is this one
<http://www.ebay.com/itm/K-F-Concept-adapter-for-Olympus-OM-mount-lens-to-Sony-E-mount-NEX-a5000-A7II-/272474743547>,
nice build.
Funny, I don't have an OM=>Sony E mount adapter. With OM=>EOS EF mount adapters at hand and some other EF mount MF
lenses, I've gone the stacked mount route. I also have Nikon F and T2 mount to E adapters., oh yeah, and now a Minolta
MC/MD=>E adapter.
2016-12-14 8:08 GMT+01:00 Olaf Iwert <oiwert@xxxxxxx>:
Dear OM afficionados.
The time has come that I am finally tempted to get a Sony A7 to fit to all
beautiful Olymus OM lenses via an adaptor in addition to maintaining the
classical OM bodies.
Hence I am wondering what is your experence on which model would fit best ?
Is it the A7 S or the A7 R, respetively version ii for both models
concerning sampling and pixelsize which would fit best to classical OM
lenses image quaility ?
Also please comment on advantages / disadvantages of the Sony A7 versus
the digital wonderbricks of Canon.
With best wishes
The second Iwert on the list
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|