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

Best mirrorless FF camera body for MF lenses
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 12:45 am    Post subject: Best mirrorless FF camera body for MF lenses Reply with quote
My MF lens collection has grown to perhaps 200 lenses, plus or minus. I have my share of cats and dogs, a modest number of nice lenses, and a couple of very good lenses (Angenieux, Noritar). I've been thinking about possibly purchasing a FF camera body to use with all these lenses, since virtually all of my lenses were originally intended for FF (film) camera bodies. I want to buy a mirrorless FF camera body with:

*image stabilization since none of my lenses, all being older, has IS

*a mount type having many adapters available, to allow future purchase of a wider array of MF lenses (see note below)

*no camera body parts too close to the mount; with my current Sigma SD14 camera body, for example, some MF lenses protrude too far into the camera body so cannot be used. I want a camera body that will not limit my use of MF lenses.

*a through the lens viewfinder would be great

Can anyone suggest a mirrorless FF camera body that meets all those criteria?

Question

Note:

For example, one of my Angenieux lenses has an Exakta mount. It would be foolish of me to buy a camera body having a mount for which no Exakta adapter is available.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 12:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I can only recommend the Sony A7 Mk 2. It isn't perfect (no camera is) but it will accommodate the greatest range of lenses with IS and TTL focusing.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 1:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The obvious answer is one of the Sony a7 series, with the a7RII being the standout. 42MP, in-body stabilization, adapts almost anything ... but unfortunately it's not that simple.

What kind of lenses do you mainly shoot? Some wide, short flange lenses struggle on the Sony a7 series. Guessing budget isn't really an issue if you are shooting Sigma SDs.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 1:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Mirror less + FF + IBIS = Sony A7II & Sony A7IIR.
Sony A7II & A7RII are the only cameras meeting your requirements. Not many options, really.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 2:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
For FF & Mirrorless, you have a few options, Leica M, & Sony A7/A7r/A7s/A7II/A7rII and Leica's new SL.
With IS, that short list gets reduced down to the Sony A7II & A7rII.
The A7 series is really one of the best options available for adaptability, and each new release has improved on the previous versions.
The biggest issue you will come across is the corner performance of Rangefinder wide angles lenses, Kolari is performing a thin lowpass filter replacement, it helps reduce corner smear and color shading/shift.
http://kolarivision.com/product/sony-a7-series-thin-filter-legacy-lens-upgrade/


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:44 am    Post subject: full-frame for blowups? colour depth? low noise? Reply with quote
A long time ago I used the Kodak full-frame DSLR. About 14mp which at that time was about the best , very good colours but not good in low light and not that good for finding the right manual focus point. I found that a smaller sensor with larger pixel density would also allow cropping and big size prints and the more recent device gave less noise. The size of the camera also allowed it to accompany me more often. As for the number of pixels, with 300dpi, most bodies today allow A3prints, but a large pixelcount can to a certain extent substitute for a zoom lens.

At the moment I am using a Canon SLR (with the MFscreen) for "long mount" optics and its remote control abilty via the computer for tripod and bellows indoors. I use a tiny, internally stabilized Olympus for short manual optics. It also alllows the use of some excellent c-mount glass.

Both have their faults. Canon; too big for pockets and for Leitz M optics. Olympus, terrible touch-screen, moving the light metering spot and focus magnification area randomly when, inevitably, it is touched and no rear screen is good in strong light . Neither camera has a convenient method of forcing exposure time without faffing around with menus and squinting at screens. The Olympus stick-on electronic viewfinder works, and tilting it up is good for low-tripod-macro outdoors, but slightly defeats the purpose of having a small, pocketable camera and another pocket for extra optics.

I have looked at camera bodies with electronic VF built in (Sony, Fuji), but would also like to have internal stabilization, no battery eating WiFi & no rearscreen to get broken. Fuji has a shutter time wheel on some models, but is a bit big. Sonys big-sensor lives in a body that does not easily fit in a pocket.

Conclusion, for my part I will continue to use two different systems and wait until a better combination of features turns up and until some "features" go away.

p.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
Conclusion, for my part I will continue to use two different systems and wait until a better combination of features turns up and until some "features" go away.


Just because something is there doesn't mean you have to use it.
On Sony, for example, Network Menu > Airplane Mode On - no more wi-fi/networking.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The camera that suits your needs best is the Sony A7Sii, but only if you can live with a 12 MP sensor. This camera has a sensor that works well with many wide lenses that produce smearing and color shift with the other A7 family cameras. If you wish to save some money you could also buy the A7S which can be had for a lot less second hand. Both cameras use the same sensor but the A7S lacks image stabilization. The thing is, the A7S and the A7Sii are low light monsters and you can you higher ISO than with other cameras. Maybe the A7S is enough because of this, maybe you don't really need stabilization if you choose this camera.

If money is no object then I would choose the A7Rii with a native mount lens for the wide end and use legacy lenses for the longer focal lengths. Or buy an A7Sii for the wider lenses and a A7Rii for the longer ones.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 8:59 am    Post subject: Re: full-frame for blowups? colour depth? low noise? Reply with quote
paulhofseth wrote:

Conclusion, for my part I will continue to use two different systems and wait until a better combination of features turns up


That's exactly my solution as well. Different cameras for different purposes. Wink


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
For me the A7x would be the best MF lenses cameras if the focus magnifier would need only one press and not three. I don't understand that Sony does not offer the choice in the menu.
A magnifier not occupying all the surface of the image would be nice too.

The new Panasonic GX8 seems to have a much more advanced ergonomy for manual focusing. So Sony, go back to work and and include that in a firmware if you care about your customers !

Why mirrorless do not offer also a focus confirmation based on spot contrast AF like DSLR with phase AF ? It would be not as accurate as the magnifier but far more quicker in some occasion. I don't like FP.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you!

Guys I appreciate the many responses. Thank you.

There is a lot here for me to consider, and it's going to require time and study. My only observation at this point is surprise there are not more options. I have already waited a couple of years on this, while collecting MF lenses all along. I (wrongly) thought that by now more camera body manufacturers would be catering to MF lens aficionados, like us. That's probably naive. But I'm still disappointed.

BTW, a couple of responses raised the issue of cost. Money is, and is not, a factor. I don't object, in general, to paying the "going rate" for something I want. However, with there apparently being so little competition, one could surmise the "going rate" in future, if camera bodies from more manufacturers become available, might be less than it is today. I don't mind waiting somewhat longer, but I would enjoy having a camera body for all these lenses before I die. Laughing


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 12:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
memetph wrote:
For me the A7x would be the best MF lenses cameras if the focus magnifier would need only one press and not three. I don't understand that Sony does not offer the choice in the menu.
A magnifier not occupying all the surface of the image would be nice too.

I have to agree with you, that's how it works on my NEX-7, and I believe the NEX-6 too.
the extra button press ruins the flow, it became less intuitive to me.

Quote:
The new Panasonic GX8 seems to have a much more advanced ergonomy for manual focusing. So Sony, go back to work and and include that in a firmware if you care about your customers !

I swear Sony have no photographers on staff to get the fundamentals right.

Quote:
Why mirrorless do not offer also a focus confirmation based on spot contrast AF like DSLR with phase AF ? It would be not as accurate as the magnifier but far more quicker in some occasion. I don't like FP.

That would be very handy.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 12:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
guardian wrote:
Thank you!

Guys I appreciate the many responses. Thank you.

There is a lot here for me to consider, and it's going to require time and study. My only observation at this point is surprise there are not more options. I have already waited a couple of years on this, while collecting MF lenses all along. I (wrongly) thought that by now more camera body manufacturers would be catering to MF lens aficionados, like us. That's probably naive. But I'm still disappointed.

BTW, a couple of responses raised the issue of cost. Money is, and is not, a factor. I don't object, in general, to paying the "going rate" for something I want. However, with there apparently being so little competition, one could surmise the "going rate" in future, if camera bodies from more manufacturers become available, might be less than it is today. I don't mind waiting somewhat longer, but I would enjoy having a camera body for all these lenses before I die. Laughing

You could try the NEX-6 & NEX-7, they are great MF platforms, though they are only crop sensors.
The NEX-7 still has amazing IQ in relatively good light(ISO800 & lower), noise starts becoming an issue in low light.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 2:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
I have to agree with you, that's how it works on my NEX-7, and I believe the NEX-6 too.
the extra button press ruins the flow, it became less intuitive to me.


Hmm, do you mean to take it to full 11x magnification? 5.9x here is just two presses. I have it set to C2, A7II.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 2:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
meanwhile wrote:
Quote:
I have to agree with you, that's how it works on my NEX-7, and I believe the NEX-6 too.
the extra button press ruins the flow, it became less intuitive to me.


Hmm, do you mean to take it to full 11x magnification? 5.9x here is just two presses. I have it set to C2, A7II.

Yes, the redundant button press that only brings up the box that shows you where the next press will zoom to, I don't mind having a lower and then higher magnification level, most of the time I find the lower magnification is good enough.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 4:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's an extremely interesting benchtest of Sony Native lenses on Roger's optical bench:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/10/sony-e-mount-lens-sharpness-bench-tests/comment-page-2#comment-100777

relating to this discussion:

"First, unlike most of the Canon and Nikon mount tests we've already done, we've added 2mm of optical glass to the testing path of these lenses. Why? Because we ran lots of trial tests and found that at least the first Sony lenses we tested performed much better with that amount of glass in the optical path. It made a big difference with the Sony lenses, while it did not make much difference for most of the Canon and Nikon lenses we tested."

Reverse this finding. What is "the glass in the path" on the body? What is it doing to our legacy lens performance?

Real vindication for a Kolari Mod I think. Smile

I think IBIS is overrated and requires alot of fiddling with each lens to set properly on the Sony. It's ultimate sharpness potential is less than without. Adds bulk and complication to the camera. Pick an appropriate shutter speed and there is no need. Just my own take there.

What is the best legacy glass body? The Leica SL.

What is the best affordable solution? A7 (700USD) Kolari Mod (400) = 1100 USD.
With IBIS? A72 (1300) + Kolari (500) = 1800USD

PS Copy variation of modern zeiss lenses is not inspiring, note the graphs in the tests. Yikes.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 6:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sony glass needs a 2mm glass to be better on Mr Cicala's bench. That is fine.
It does not have much influence on other brands. Great finding.

On my A7 I did not find that my legacy lenses suffer compared to my FE lenses. I am happy that my A7 is not modified.

Regarding the Leica SL, we shall see the reviews and feed backs. It is an expensive , big and heavy camera so it has to perform exceptionnaly to deserve a recommendation for legacy lenses.
Unfortunately it seems that they copied Sony .... The focus magnifier needs multiple press to be activated.
It is stupid when you know that Leica owners and fans have M lenses. Some of them expect finally a solution to get a reliable focusing to use their fast lenses on digital.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
PS Copy variation of modern zeiss lenses


The Sony Zeiss are not modern Zeiss. Sony Zeiss are Sony.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
meanwhile wrote:
Quote:
PS Copy variation of modern zeiss lenses


The Sony Zeiss are not modern Zeiss. Sony Zeiss are Sony.


It appears that the Zeiss logo on several products is nothing else than a kind of "ISO" standard ("manufacured to certain Zeiss standards" - whatever that may be) for which you have to pay some extra money. However, if that is true that this is even below the ISO in respect to sample variation than the whole marketing gag is in question.
I cannot say anything about it personally as I was never prepared to pay the extra money for that and what I read from others that was certainly a wise decision.
Modern times have changed a lot and as it turned out recently the "modern" marketing strategies of companies are more pointing in a direction to cheat the customers as much as possible and optimizing profits than to deliver good and honest quality (Volkswagen, Bosch, etc.)....
Modern times. Wink


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
meanwhile wrote:
Quote:
PS Copy variation of modern zeiss lenses


The Sony Zeiss are not modern Zeiss. Sony Zeiss are Sony.

http://lenspire.zeiss.com/en/sony-and-zeiss-what-photographers-should-know-about-the-partnership/
Quote:
Who develops the lenses?

ZEISS lenses are developed exclusively by ZEISS. ZEISS also determines the features of the lenses, such as their focal length and internal construction, in line with the company’s product strategy.

Sony/ZEISS lenses are jointly developed by ZEISS and Sony. ZEISS supports Sony throughout the optical design and development process and then tests and approves the prototypes. Finally, ZEISS determines the test specifications for serial production.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
uhoh7 wrote:
Here's an extremely interesting benchtest of Sony Native lenses on Roger's optical bench:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/10/sony-e-mount-lens-sharpness-bench-tests/comment-page-2#comment-100777


Thanks for that link. Very interesting reading. Seems that the "Zeiss-Voodoo" of Sony doesn't catch up to to the Sigma or Canon standard.

Especially Sigma is a big surprise for me as in the past Sigma was more known as "SIGnigicant MAlfunctions", particularly on Sony A-mount cameras with their strong AF drive. Many Sigma lenses simply collapsed mechanically on these cameras. That's the reason why I don't own any of these lenses. Maybe I should overthink my strategy. Wink

Roger stated that Sony "cheats" in software processing to enhance the optical quality of the used native lenses. This maybe the logical explanation for the sometimes rather poor performance of "unknown" legacy lenses on these Sony E-mount cameras. I was aware of such designs from manufacturers like Panasonic as they also did some firmware updates for their lenses because of this. However, I don't know about the practice of other manufacturers in that field.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
Roger stated that Sony "cheats" in software processing to enhance the optical quality of the used native lenses. This maybe the logical explanation for the sometimes rather poor performance of "unknown" legacy lenses on these Sony E-mount cameras. I was aware of such designs from manufacturers like Panasonic as they also did some firmware updates for their lenses because of this. However, I don't know about the practice of other manufacturers in that field.


A lot of people are coming to a lot of conclusions from those very new, jury-rigged tests. Exactly the kind of conclusions that Roger himself warned against making at this early stage.

A lot seems to happen on-sensor on Sony cameras (angled microlenses, for example) that are not software "cheats".


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
meanwhile wrote:
Quote:
Roger stated that Sony "cheats" in software processing to enhance the optical quality of the used native lenses. This maybe the logical explanation for the sometimes rather poor performance of "unknown" legacy lenses on these Sony E-mount cameras. I was aware of such designs from manufacturers like Panasonic as they also did some firmware updates for their lenses because of this. However, I don't know about the practice of other manufacturers in that field.


A lot of people are coming to a lot of conclusions from those very new, jury-rigged tests. Exactly the kind of conclusions that Roger himself warned against making at this early stage.

A lot seems to happen on-sensor on Sony cameras (angled microlenses, for example) that are not software "cheats".


No matter how you are calling it. Matter of fact is that it will be even more problematic in the future to find the right combination of lens and camera if you don't use the "native" lenses. At least that's my conclusion. I definitely prefer other solutions like e.g. the redesign of the sensor for better compatibility (like it was done in Ricoh or Leica cameras) over any software managed "optimization".
Obviously this may also be a matter of taste or the intended use of legacy lenses.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
FWIW, some of these most recent revelations are a little off-putting for someone like me who is less knowledgeable and sophisticated than many, and who has yet to purchase a FF digital camera body. Here in the USA we are going through the VW cheating scandal, where they messed with the computers in their cars to facilitate passing the emissions tests. It took quite a long while to discover VW's treachery.

So I'm wondering:

Are camera body manufacturers fooling with the computers in their camera bodies, or messing with their proprietary software, to enhance photographic results with their own (expensive) lenses while harming outcomes for those of us with a preference for (vintage or non-vintage) MF lenses? Obviously I dunno.

But let me tell you:

I still have several quite nice 35mm film camera bodies, every darn one of which is a FF camera body. And stuff like this is nearly enough to make MF lens users consider returning to film and eliminating the possibility of any such repugnant computer flim flam shenanigans!


PostPosted: Mon Oct 26, 2015 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Interesting discussion where we learn many new things !!
Native FE lens are made to work with Sony a7 serie sensors .
Some of those lenses are corrected by software.
Zeiss has an official cooperation with Sony.
Legacy SLR lenses works with the A7 ( there has been already serious tests made ). It is confirmed that there is almost no influence of this 2mm glass on SLR Nikon Canon lenses performance.
Uhoh7 likes Leica and finds ( or perhaps will find) the Leica SL the best camera for legacy lens.
Tb-a likes Ricoh
WV cheated everybody
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3