Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

24mm full frame recommendations needed
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 10:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

lumens pixel wrote:
Probably an even better solution would be the Panasonic S1r or Leica Sl2 which reputedly have thinner sensor stack. But you need some €€€€€.


Indeed, this is a big hurdle. I have investigated this issue quite intensely but the Leica was definitely too costly.
Therefore I've selected the A7R II with the newer sensor technology hence I had already quite a huge collection of RF lenses from my Ricoh GXR-M and wanted to migrate to FF.
Most of my lenses perform quite well with the newer sensor technology, at least far better compared to the old style; e.g. color shift is non-existant and border/edge performance is much better.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 12:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Thomas for the valuable info.

I thought that, after reading a lot of posts on Fred Miranda and Dpreview on this subject, that the BSI technology was about vignetting, colour cast and F-stops but that the glass on the filter was of same thickness than for previous models (perhaps for the sake of not recomputing the previous lenses so in fact manufacturers seem to be prisoners of their initial sensor conception).

This is why I thought that for field curvature (mostly affected by glass thickness if I am correct) there was not much differences between Sony's generations. I would be glad if that is not the case since I might, in the coming years, grab a second hand camera for cheap to upgrade from the A7II.

Truly I am not much interested by sensor performance (24 Mpix is enough for my purposes and I am a low isos guy) but I was astonished by the Nikon Z viewfinder that would facilitate focusing with manual lenses. So when a 5 M pix viewfinder camera will become affordable I might bite the bullet.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

lumens pixel wrote:
Thanks Thomas for the valuable info.

I thought that, after reading a lot of posts on Fred Miranda and Dpreview on this subject, that the BSI technology was about vignetting, colour cast and F-stops but that the glass on the filter was of same thickness than for previous models (perhaps for the sake of not recomputing the previous lenses so in fact manufacturers seem to be prisoners of their initial sensor conception).

This is why I thought that for field curvature (mostly affected by glass thickness if I am correct) there was not much differences between Sony's generations. I would be glad if that is not the case since I might, in the coming years, grab a second hand camera for cheap to upgrade from the A7II.

Truly I am not much interested by sensor performance (24 Mpix is enough for my purposes and I am a low isos guy) but I was astonished by the Nikon Z viewfinder that would facilitate focusing with manual lenses. So when a 5 M pix viewfinder camera will become affordable I might bite the bullet.


The new BSI design moved the pixel sensors from the very back to the middle of the sensor, resulting in a thinner sensor stack. You're right that 24MP are enough, but 42 MP offers a alot of crop reserve and results also in higher image quality when downsized to and compared with 24MP; truly visible at higher ISO. For me the possibility to use the Techart Pro AF adapter (for ALL of my MF lenses at least adaptable to LeicaM) and the compatibility of my Minolta AF lens collection was much more important than any better electronic viewfinder. In fact I'm able to use 99% of all of my lenses with AF now. That's very convenient and much faster than MF by myself.
Therefore I'm really happy with the A7R II, since the modified mirrorless LA-EA4 "monster"-adapter delivers the same AF functionality in combination with Minolta AF (and Sony A lenses) like the native FE ones.
All in all that's at least for me a nearly perfect solution, since my eyes are rather getting worse.....


PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
lumens pixel wrote:
Thanks Thomas for the valuable info.

I thought that, after reading a lot of posts on Fred Miranda and Dpreview on this subject, that the BSI technology was about vignetting, colour cast and F-stops but that the glass on the filter was of same thickness than for previous models (perhaps for the sake of not recomputing the previous lenses so in fact manufacturers seem to be prisoners of their initial sensor conception).

This is why I thought that for field curvature (mostly affected by glass thickness if I am correct) there was not much differences between Sony's generations. I would be glad if that is not the case since I might, in the coming years, grab a second hand camera for cheap to upgrade from the A7II.

Truly I am not much interested by sensor performance (24 Mpix is enough for my purposes and I am a low isos guy) but I was astonished by the Nikon Z viewfinder that would facilitate focusing with manual lenses. So when a 5 M pix viewfinder camera will become affordable I might bite the bullet.


The new BSI design moved the pixel sensors from the very back to the middle of the sensor, resulting in a thinner sensor stack. You're right that 24MP are enough, but 42 MP offers a alot of crop reserve and results also in higher image quality when downsized to and compared with 24MP; truly visible at higher ISO. For me the possibility to use the Techart Pro AF adapter (for ALL of my MF lenses at least adaptable to LeicaM) and the compatibility of my Minolta AF lens collection was much more important than any better electronic viewfinder. In fact I'm able to use 99% of all of my lenses with AF now. That's very convenient and much faster than MF by myself.
Therefore I'm really happy with the A7R II, since the modified mirrorless LA-EA4 "monster"-adapter delivers the same AF functionality in combination with Minolta AF (and Sony A lenses) like the native FE ones.
All in all that's at least for me a nearly perfect solution, since my eyes are rather getting worse.....


That is understandable. I was interested also in the monster adapter. I backed off when reading I could not AF at taking aperture. A lot of Minolta glass is subject to focus shift. Either there is an in computer loop adjusting focus to the distance and the aperture or I might not take the full benefit of such fine glass. This is why I limited myself to the MD line where manual focusing has nice haptics and focusing could occur at taking aperture. I would like an adapter with in house tables allowing focus adjustment per lens distance and aperture. That would be a game changer.

But I have completely derailed the thread. Sorry about that.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

lumens pixel wrote:
This is why I limited myself to the MD line where manual focusing has nice haptics and focusing could occur at taking aperture. I would like an adapter with in house tables allowing focus adjustment per lens distance and aperture. That would be a game changer.


I'm using all my Minolta MD glass with the Techart Pro (adapted with a MC/MD to LM adapter). This solution is working purely at taking aperture with some limitations; i.e. it might be problematic to shoot within a dark room at F16.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
lumens pixel wrote:
This is why I limited myself to the MD line where manual focusing has nice haptics and focusing could occur at taking aperture. I would like an adapter with in house tables allowing focus adjustment per lens distance and aperture. That would be a game changer.


I'm using all my Minolta MD glass with the Techart Pro (adapted with a MC/MD to LM adapter). This solution is working purely at taking aperture with some limitations; i.e. it might be problematic to shoot within a dark room at F16.


Sorry about the misunderstanding I was discussing an adapter for Minolta AF glass adjusting for focus shift whenever there is.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

lumens pixel wrote:

Sorry about the misunderstanding I was discussing an adapter for Minolta AF glass adjusting for focus shift whenever there is.


I did understand you. Just wanted to mention my solution for the MD line.
However, I didn't encounter focus shift up to now when using AF glass with my monster adapter. Have you specific lenses in mind?


PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
lumens pixel wrote:

Sorry about the misunderstanding I was discussing an adapter for Minolta AF glass adjusting for focus shift whenever there is.


I did understand you. Just wanted to mention my solution for the MD line.
However, I didn't encounter focus shift up to now when using AF glass with my monster adapter. Have you specific lenses in mind?


No in the sense that I do not own AF Minolta glass. However I own and use equivalent computations of MD glass such as Beercan (70 210 F4) 28 2,8 (5 elements), 50 1,7 and 50 1,4 (7 elements) and I noticed focus shift for all of them.

If you didn't experienced focus shift with your AF lenses that might pave the way to the hypothesis of an in lens correction of focus between AF confirm and shutter opening through communication between lens and camera. That would be awesome.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2021 8:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

lumens pixel wrote:


No in the sense that I do not own AF Minolta glass. However I own and use equivalent computations of MD glass such as Beercan (70 210 F4) 28 2,8 (5 elements), 50 1,7 and 50 1,4 (7 elements) and I noticed focus shift for all of them.

If you didn't experienced focus shift with your AF lenses that might pave the way to the hypothesis of an in lens correction of focus between AF confirm and shutter opening through communication between lens and camera. That would be awesome.


Although the lens construction is similar when comparing 24mm MD III and AF versions, the focus mechanism is different hence I doubt that focus shift exists with the AF line.
However, the MD III on Techart was slightly superior to the AF on Monster; both on A7R II, at least concerning the border/edge performance. Center sharpness, i.e. focus accuracy was excellent with both lenses/systems on all aperture settings.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 14, 2021 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The coolest looking 24? IMHO the isco westrogon.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 14, 2021 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jamaeolus wrote:
The coolest looking 24? IMHO the isco westrogon.


For sure cool looking. I used to have a Tamron adapt-a-matic 24mm. Really cool looking and quite massive piece of glass as well.