[HopelessTogger]

I have one Zeiss/Sony lens. Excellent imaqe quality. I gather that Zeiss/Sony quality control could use some improvements, but the use of the term "zero" in that regard is an exaggeration.

What is the exact nature of your problems with the Sony system? How experienced a photographer are you? If Sony is that awful, why did you buy one in the first place?

Are you sure your skills are up to par? What if you start using a K-1 and have an equally horrible time with it?

This is a Pentax forum. Why do you repeatedly use it is a platform for bashing another brand while offering little if any real evidence to support your claims?

I like Sony gear. I like Pentax gear. They are different systems. So what?

Why are you so bothered?

[John Poirier]

Why are you so bothered?

If you insist on interjecting your generally irrelevant complaints about another brand, why should you not be questioned? What is your point?

[HopelessTogger]

If you insist on interjecting your generally irrelevant complaints about another brand, why should you not be questioned? What is your point?

You just want to have a go at someone, because that's what blow your skirt up.

[Rondec]

If you insist on interjecting your generally irrelevant complaints about another brand, why should you not be questioned? What is your point?

If someone doesn't like the ergonomics of Sony cameras and feels frustrated by them, that's just the way it is. Sony folks feel perfectly free to show up and explain how Pentax has screwed up by not releasing a full frame mirrorless camera with an EVF on a frequent basis. Statements like: "I'll never buy another camera that doesn't have an EVF," are not infrequent, just are traditional Pentaxian's opinion that there isn't an EVF out there that truly matches a good OVF. Both opinions are fine to have and probably the big issue is the hyperbole that tends to surround such statements.

As to the QC issues with Sony glass, it looks as though the new G Master lenses are signifcantly better, but Roger Cicala did an analysis on Sony lenses and found really poor consistency in their lenses with regard to performance. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/10/sony-e-mount-lens-sharpness-bench-tests/

[pathdoc]

traditional Pentaxian's opinion that there isn't an EVF out there that truly matches a good OVF.

Fixed that for you.

SRSLY, if Pentax/Ricoh could make an EVF they were happy with, you'd see a full-frame K-02 tomorrow. The K-01 is the cutest little camera, ideal for mounting Limited primes and Plastic Fantastics, but rear screens wash right out in very bright sun and there are many occasions in the past year on which I could not even have composed a shot with one, let alone reviewed the adequacy of the results.

[HopelessTogger]

If someone doesn't like the ergonomics of Sony cameras and feels frustrated by them, that's just the way it is. Sony folks feel perfectly free to show up and explain how Pentax has screwed up by not releasing a full frame mirrorless camera with an EVF on a frequent basis. Statements like: "I'll never buy another camera that doesn't have an EVF," are not infrequent, just are traditional Pentaxian's opinion that there isn't an EVF out there that truly matches a good OVF. Both opinions are fine to have and probably the big issue is the hyperbole that tends to surround such statements.

As to the QC issues with Sony glass, it looks as though the new G Master lenses are signifcantly better, but Roger Cicala did an analysis on Sony lenses and found really poor consistency in their lenses with regard to performance. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/10/sony-e-mount-lens-sharpness-bench-tests/

I've had torrid time with it. The 35/1.4 ZA is decentred so badly it's shockingly soft in the lower right corner even stopped down past f/7.1!!! Ming T took a look at the output for me and said yes, it's a dud. MT and Lloyd Chambers went through ten samples of this lens until they found an acceptable copy, similar with the FE 1.8/55. I couldn't return them or get them sorted under warranty because I picked them up and flew out for twelve months back home to the Far East. Bad timing indeed.

The A7r is slow and clonky in all respects, refuses to focus in anything but decent light and the ergonomics are shot to pieces. The lossy RAW ain't good either. The only thing it has going for it is the weight and Eye AF, Sony struck gold with that but it could be implemented a bit better.

Anyway, if this stuff was a few hundred quid I wouldn't quibble, but we're talking thousands, upon thousands of Pounds here. I have had the real hump about this for a while now and shooting the K-1 really brought home to me how bad the A7r and gear really was.

To be fair, the A6000 is a stunning wee camera, especially on the FE 4/70-200 G. It's like a mini-sports shooter set up and I will miss it.

[osv]

You just want to have a go at someone, because that's what blow your skirt up.

that's called "trolling", lol, and it speaks volumes about you, not sony.

pentax had a horrendous sdm failure rate on several of their lenses, so according to your warped logic the entire pentax brand is junk and should be written off.

i think not; all brands have failures, it's up to the buyer to be informed about what to avoid.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/articles/photo-articles/pentax-sdm-failure-survey-results.html

Attached Images

 

[HopelessTogger]

that's called "trolling", lol, and it speaks volumes about you, not sony.

pentax had a horrendous sdm failure rate on several of their lenses, so according to your warped logic the entire pentax brand is junk and should be written off.

i think not; all brands have failures, it's up to the buyer to be informed about what to avoid.

Thankfully, a. all the Sony gear went today! and b. . . . I've found the ignore function!

Edited to add

[monochrome]

It's a bit rich for a certain poster to be throwing out the 'T' word here.

Then again, I only saw it in Quote.

As with anything else, anyone is entitled to spend his money on whatever gear he wishes, but it is to rude to disparage another man's choice of gear.

Unless he chooses a Ford. *



*

[Eyewanders]

Unless he chooses a Ford. *

Agreed, but in this case I think a bit of sympathy and a ready crying-shoulder go further down the figurative road. (since the real road won't be traveled far)

[John Poirier]

opinions are fine to have and probably the big issue is the hyperbole that tends to surround such statements.

Exactly. I have no problem with reasoned comments, based on experience and sensible research, that can be used to illuminate a discussion.

[Driline]

that's called "trolling"

Really? I think not. That word get's thrown around waaaaaaayyyy too often without real merit.

---------- Post added 05-17-16 at 09:27 PM ----------

Exactly. I have no problem with reasoned comments, based on experience and sensible research, that can be used to illuminate a discussion.

But his comments were based on "His" experience. There's no rule that says you must do 6 months of intensive research and list all your sources add nausem'. I personally think the Canon 60D is a plastic hunk of junk. My experience is walking into a Sams Club Store and testing the camera out for about 5 minutes. That's "my" personal opinion that count's for n o t h i n g.....just my observation

Ok I should shut up now before I really dig myself a hole

[John Poirier]

Here are some thoughts about the A7r, without hyperbole.

Before buying an A7r, I defined my requirements and did due diligence. The due diligence process took place over a six-month period after the camera was released.
As a long-time professional, that is how I approach major equipment purchases. As distinguished from my hobbyist side, where I make impulse buys of all sorts of "obsolete" lenses.

My remaining professional level work is tripod-mounted landscape photography with large prints as the finished product. All other work is entirely casual. I don't really care about AF, burst rate, etc. etc. I do need a high-quality sensor and the ability to focus manually with very wide lenses in dim light.

My due diligence included reading all available independent reviews and many user reports. In particular, I researched reports on the performance of specific adapted lenses on the A7r. My conclusion was that many of my manual focus lenses would work well on the A7r, but I would need a major upgrade on lenses wider than 28mm. I then bought a Leica adapter and went to a friendly local store where I made test shots with my trickiest lens, a pre-aspherical Leica Summilux 35/1.4. I also verified that there was nothing fatally nasty about the camera's handling, controls and viewfinder. When I examined the RAW files they met my expectations as a member of the Ancient and Honourable Order of Pixel Peepers. A month after I bought the camera, the 16-35 became available locally and, as planned, I bought one.

I'm very happy with the technical quality of my results over the last two years, and have found the camera pleasant to use within my personal parameters. As I've said elsewhere, I wouldn't recommend the A7r as a generalist photographic tool. The K-1 at first glance, and several established cameras from other brands, are better. However, in terms of my personal requirements in my dotage the A7r has been a great success.

The A7r is slow and clonky in all respects

The "performance" is not at top-of-the-line Nikon or Canon levels in many ways. This was well-known soon after release. When I researched the A7r, I concluded that for my work an approach similar to my use of medium format film cameras would be appropriate. That has proven to be the case. Fine by me. I'm not a spray and pray type.

I find the EVF and focus magnification extremely useful in my most challenging conditions.

efuses to focus in anything but decent light

It was widely acknowledged soon after release that the AF performance of the A7r was not brilliant. Sort of average by mirrorless standards at that point. Doesn't matter to me. I've never even bothered to try continuous AF on the thing.

I've done some very casual low-light AF work using adapted A-mount lenses. The performance was adequate. There are issues using native e-mount lenses in low light because they tend to focus stopped down, and some menu diving may be required to overcome this.

and the ergonomics are shot to pieces

"Ergonomics" is a matter of personal preference, experience and flexibility.

I had no problem customizing the interface to meet my needs. Thousands of other people are using the camera happily. In terms of size/weight, I view the camera as modular. I use the battery grip with large lenses. If I want to go compact, I take the grip off and use my Leica lenses. This was expected, which is why I bought the grip as a package with the camera.

The lossy RAW ain't good either

Lossy RAW compression strikes me as a rather goofy idea. I've no idea why Sony came up with it. That being said, I've seen no evidence of any problems in most conditions. I have seen a few examples of possible artifacts under extreme conditions. It's only a problem when it's a problem, and that is rare.

You left out shutter vibration, which is at a level that I find very weird in a mirrorless camera. On the other hand, I was prepared for it and had no problem developing simple workarounds for my applications. I can see where it could be a pain in the butt in a fairly narrow range of circumstances.

HopelessTogger, I wish you better luck with the K-1.

---------- Post added 05-17-2016 at 08:51 PM ----------

There's no rule that says you must do 6 months of intensive research and list all your sources add nausem'.

Ok I should shut up now before I really dig myself a hole

Please note that in the comment your are "quoting" I suggested sensible research. There was no mention of 6 months of intensive research or of listing all sources.

I suppose indulging in hyperbole could be interpreted as digging yourself a hole.

[Driline]

Please note that in the comment your are "quoting" I suggested sensible research. There was no mention of 6 months of intensive research or of listing all sources.

Everybody knows that "sensible research" starts at 6 months and ends at 9 months. It's just a given fact. LOL All I'm saying is he has his opinion and you have yours. Obviously you have spent a lot of time with this camera and know it well. Someone reading this post will see his 3 words of exhuastive explanation of why he doesn't like the camera and read your novel of experience with this camera and walk away most likely giviing more weight to your opinion. That's all I'm saying..... And now I"m done....add nauseum'

P.S. I don't like that word "Hyperbole". Where's Rondec? He started this whole thing.....Dang Mid Westerners......you can't trust'em.

[HopelessTogger]

Here are some thoughts about the A7r, without hyperbole.

Before buying an A7r, I defined my requirements and did due diligence. The due diligence process took place over a six-month period after the camera was released.
As a long-time professional, that is how I approach major equipment purchases. As distinguished from my hobbyist side, where I make impulse buys of all sorts of "obsolete" lenses.

My remaining professional level work is tripod-mounted landscape photography with large prints as the finished product. All other work is entirely casual. I don't really care about AF, burst rate, etc. etc. I do need a high-quality sensor and the ability to focus manually with very wide lenses in dim light.

My due diligence included reading all available independent reviews and many user reports. In particular, I researched reports on the performance of specific adapted lenses on the A7r. My conclusion was that many of my manual focus lenses would work well on the A7r, but I would need a major upgrade on lenses wider than 28mm. I then bought a Leica adapter and went to a friendly local store where I made test shots with my trickiest lens, a pre-aspherical Leica Summilux 35/1.4. I also verified that there was nothing fatally nasty about the camera's handling, controls and viewfinder. When I examined the RAW files they met my expectations as a member of the Ancient and Honourable Order of Pixel Peepers. A month after I bought the camera, the 16-35 became available locally and, as planned, I bought one.

I'm very happy with the technical quality of my results over the last two years, and have found the camera pleasant to use within my personal parameters. As I've said elsewhere, I wouldn't recommend the A7r as a generalist photographic tool. The K-1 at first glance, and several established cameras from other brands, are better. However, in terms of my personal requirements in my dotage the A7r has been a great success.



The "performance" is not at top-of-the-line Nikon or Canon levels in many ways. This was well-known soon after release. When I researched the A7r, I concluded that for my work an approach similar to my use of medium format film cameras would be appropriate. That has proven to be the case. Fine by me. I'm not a spray and pray type.

I find the EVF and focus magnification extremely useful in my most challenging conditions.



It was widely acknowledged soon after release that the AF performance of the A7r was not brilliant. Sort of average by mirrorless standards at that point. Doesn't matter to me. I've never even bothered to try continuous AF on the thing.

I've done some very casual low-light AF work using adapted A-mount lenses. The performance was adequate. There are issues using native e-mount lenses in low light because they tend to focus stopped down, and some menu diving may be required to overcome this.




"Ergonomics" is a matter of personal preference, experience and flexibility.

I had no problem customizing the interface to meet my needs. Thousands of other people are using the camera happily. In terms of size/weight, I view the camera as modular. I use the battery grip with large lenses. If I want to go compact, I take the grip off and use my Leica lenses. This was expected, which is why I bought the grip as a package with the camera.



Lossy RAW compression strikes me as a rather goofy idea. I've no idea why Sony came up with it. That being said, I've seen no evidence of any problems in most conditions. I have seen a few examples of possible artifacts under extreme conditions. It's only a problem when it's a problem, and that is rare.

You left out shutter vibration, which is at a level that I find very weird in a mirrorless camera. On the other hand, I was prepared for it and had no problem developing simple workarounds for my applications. I can see where it could be a pain in the butt in a fairly narrow range of circumstances.

HopelessTogger, I wish you better luck with the K-1.

---------- Post added 05-17-2016 at 08:51 PM ----------



Please note that in the comment your are "quoting" I suggested sensible research. There was no mention of 6 months of intensive research or of listing all sources.

I suppose indulging in hyperbole could be interpreted as digging yourself a hole.

Minnie says "Thumbs up, John!"

(A7r + FE 35/1.4 ZA