Undecided about lenses for Sony A7

<p>On my A7 I am using the 35mm, 50mm and 90mm lenses I used on my Leica M6. No complaints, but with the relatively low cost of lenses made for film SLR cameras, I am tempted to replace my current lenses with those. With the money I get for the Leica mount lenses I may have enough for the auto-focus 55mm lens by Zeiss and MF Nikkors of 35mm and 105mm. What is stopping me, apart from the hassle of buying through friends (being in India, I cannot send money to another country) is the length of the adapter, which makes lenses stick out. It may be rational to use, for a while, only the Micro-Nikkor I now have and see how I get on with the change in geometry. I'd like to take advantage of the experience of others who have made the switch.</p>

<p>The A7 doesn't work well with Leica lenses 35mm or shorter. Due to the thick cover glass on the sensor, and extremely short back focus of these lenses, the edges of the image get smeared, like putting vasoline on a filter.</p>

<p>SLR lenses have a long back focus for mirror clearance, and work surprisingly well on the A7. They're just not nearly as sharp anywhere else as a Leica lens or one designed for the M or an A7. The adapter (I use a Novoflex for Nikon lenses) is bulky, but still easy to use, and allows you to use the aperture ring normally, or even G lenses with the aperture set by the adapter.</p>

<p>You won't find a better lens for the A7 than a Leica 50mm or 90mm in terms of sharpness. If you're okay with manual focus and aperture, you're at a sweet spot in image quality.</p>

<p>The Sony-Zeiss 35/2.8 and Sony 25/2 are excellent lenses with corner-to-corner sharpness and auto-focus. The 35/2.8 is on the expensive side, but the 25/2 is priced like a comparable Nikon SLR lens. The Sony-Zeiss 55/1.8 is an outstanding lens, but no better than the Leica lens except for auto-focus.</p>

<p>I elected to go the Zeiss Loxia route for a first-rate 35mm lens (35/2). I like and even prefer manual focus, and the Loxia lenses are designed specifically for the Sony camera with its 2mm thick cover glass. While the MTF curves seem to indicate soft edges, that's testing outside the camera. On the A7 they are razor sharp from corner to corner. The Sony 70-200 f/4 was a must-have lens for my photographic needs (weddings, events and concerts). Like the other lenses (and Leica), it is sharp even when wide open, and the auto-focus is very quick (Nikon D3 quick).</p>

<blockquote>

<p>is the length of the adapter, which makes lenses stick out.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I purchased the A7 with the intent to use Leica M-mount lenses on it; I particularly like how easy manual focusing is with the aids provided - much better than manual focusing on a DSLR screen (and dare I say better than a Leica rangefinder). Now, I also have a few Nikon F-mount manual focus lenses (28/2.8, 105/2.5, 75-150/3.5) as well as an F-mount modified Leica-R lens (180mm). I occasionally use the latter - the length of the adapter adds is rather insignificant. I hardly ever use the Nikon lenses on the A7 though - they just don't feel right for me on the A7 and the adapter length has a lot to do with it. I do carry an adapter that allows me to mount Nikon lenses that lack an aperture ring (G lenses) - as a stop-gap measure should my Nikon DSLR fail (with the caveat that they are manual focus then and aperture control is rather coarse).</p>

<p>I'm sure I will press the 105 into service on occasion - it's ideal for portraits. But I won't be carrying it around for general shooting. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>It may be rational to use, for a while, only the Micro-Nikkor I now have and see how I get on with the change in geometry.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Seems like the smart thing to do before committing to the sale of the lenses you have and buying others.</p>

<p>PS: I not only prefer my M-mount lenses for their (relative) compactness but also for the way they render images. Something you may or may not feel strongly about too - but something to consider before making the decision to sell you Leica glass.</p>

 

<p>You won't be disappointed with the Sony/Zeiss FE 55mm f/1.8. A superb lens on all counts and worth getting. In fact all my Sony FE mount lenses are very good, even the kit FE 28-70mm zoom. The 35mm f/2.8 is a standout and very compact with fast AF. To my eye, the FE 70-200mm f/4 OSS is as good as the Canon EF one.</p>

<p>I've tested my Contax G and Canon rangefinder lenses against a variety of old SLR lenses and, generally, the Nikkors, and Canon FD lenses came out on top, IQ-wise. My most used MF legacy lenses are Canon FD 50mm f/1.2, 100mm f/2, and 28mm f/2.8. I like the FD adapters that allow you to open and close the aperture independently. The Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 AIS and Micro-Nikkor 55 f/2.8 AIS see good use. Yes, the rangefinder lenses are more compact but the adapter size doesn't bother me. Many full size SLR lenses are big-ish on the A7. I've gotten use to it.</p>

<p>Some old lenses have found their way into my A7 bag based on beautiful rendering/bokeh or "character". The Canon LTM 85mm f/2 and M42 mount Meyer Gortlitz 58mm f/1.9 fit in that role. Both are a bit clumsy to use but nice for the effect if time is not an issue.</p>

<p>Several Canon EF lenses have adapted very well to the A7 with the Viltrox adapter (which is very short). The 100mm f/2.8 macro and 17-40mm f/4 both deliver very nice results with slow, but useable AF, and electronic aperture control in the A7 body. EF lenses, with rubber grips, also manually focus quite well.</p>

<p>I have to say the standard Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AIS is <em>stunningly</em> good on the A7, very compact (almost pancake), and inexpensive. This would be my choice if I wanted a MF normal prime and wanted keep a slimmer camera profile. <br>

</p>

<p>Thank you, Edward. My Cosina-Voigtlander Ultron 35mm f/1.7, a Leica mount lens, behaves well on the A7. The greater back focus of SLR lenses is an advantage for all focal lengths, but naturally clearer in the case of wides. The reason I am thinking of the Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 is that an auto-focus lens in my most used focal length may be sensible, particularly if my vision begins to give trouble. I am almost 65 and diabetic, and although I manage manual focus well enough now, I worry about the future.<br>

Dieter, I agree about the manual focussing aids of the A7. I found the "focus peaking" distracting and not accurate, so I use only image magnification. Most impressive. It helps that I seldom photograph fast moving subjects or work at small apertures. The adapter for Nikkors is considerably larger than those for Leica mount lenses. I have to find out if this really will pose problems or if I am imagining difficulties. I had a 105mm Nikkor in Leica screw mount, and its performance was not inferior to that of my 90mm M mount Elmarit (example shot from today attached, taken at full aperture). I can't feel strongly about "rendering" as I don't properly know what it means.<br>

Louis, what stands out in your helpful post is that the FE 55/1.8 is worth getting and that adapter length does not trouble you. I find the kit zoom okay, although barrel and pin-cushion distortion must ofen be corrected. It is also too slow to be used indoors without flash; and f/5.6 at 70mm is not what I expect of a medium tele. I shall only have the kit zoom, the Micro-Nikkor and three other lenses (one of which may be the Zeiss 55mm). Fewer lenses mean less weight and easier selection.<br>

Ideally, one's lenses should have the same general form. I mean by this the placement of focus ring and aperture ring. Makes for faster working. As I am not used to Nikkors, with the Micro-Nikkor I have to hunt for the focus ring and actually look at the lens to find the aperture ring. I am sure I shall get used to it, but this is a powerful reason for staying with the Ultron and the Elmarit, with which I am completely familiar. I may end up keeping those two and just replacing my Canon 50/1.4 (Leica screw) with the FE 55.</p><div></div>

<p>The Sony/Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 FE lens is terrific. </p>

<p>Thank you, Sebastian. All the reviews I have seen of the lens say what you say. It is a difficult decision. On the one hand is the good performance of my present 50mm at f/4, on the other is the relatively high price of the Zeiss 55mm.</p><div></div>

<p>this image quality here is extremely good (and of famous intellectuals i might add!)</p>

<p>Had the luck of being in the right place. I am satisfied with image quality.</p>