Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-17-2014, 06:06 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2013
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 346
QuoteOriginally posted by infoomatic Quote
The MultiMount is a nice idea, but I wouldn't limit the usage of one Pentax APS-C camera to use my lenses only in manual mode just to be able to use the Zeiss on APS-C (I want to use that lens on FF primarily - as a substitution to my 15mm ltd; I hope and guess the Zeiss is much sharper).
I'm pretty sure that K-mount lenses are not forced into manual mode by the MultiMount; the page mentions those limitations "for all adapted lenses", and the mount still has all the contacts and the hole for screwdrive AF. Gnarelsek, can you clarify?

07-17-2014, 06:38 PM   #17
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,404
I use only old manual focus lenses on my A7 and find it much easier to focus than my K-5, and that's with peaking turned off. (Can't get precise focus with peaking on - not accurate enough.) Of course I've been doing manual focus for over 50 years and hate autofocus. For my lens collection and shooting style the A7 is a great FF solution.
07-17-2014, 07:53 PM - 1 Like   #18
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,391
IMO, it boils down to AF and long lenses.
If you need faster, more reliable AF in all situations, and long lenses, go for a Canikon
If you like MF and like old lenses, go A7

EVF is subjective, as suggested, better try it at a store first.

To me, the A7 is the best camera for MF lenses despite its warts.
I am a believer in 'real world use', so all the best theories in the world mean nothing to me if the camera is going to be painful to use in the field.
So far, I think the A7 is 'ok' (I've got samples of use in a few situations on my flickr)
As close to a digital LX as there is for now.


The A7 is a viable choice if you don't need as fast AF though.
Its got a few native lenses and you'd can also make do with the AF adapter for some Sony A mount lenses.
AF isn't that slow in fact, ok for most things, esp in decent light.
It can be inaccurate though as I find the AF seeks out high contrast and this can result in it focusing at the point of higher contrast over the actual intended point (within the CDAF box)
07-17-2014, 08:25 PM   #19
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: eastern Pennsylvania, USA
Posts: 151
QuoteOriginally posted by Ole Quote
I would suggest you try out the A7 and try manual focusing. I found it somewhat slow and difficult to manually focus accurately even with focus peaking and if the subject is moving it is outright impossible. Until I got the chance to test it out I had thought, like you, that it would be a fine FF camera for my Pentax lenses. It is not, it is a poor solution, a big step backwards. Which makes me so much more happy with my K-3!.....
My experience has been quite different. I just purchased a Sony A7S for my wife. While I have dumped my Pentax dslrs, I have kept the following for my film cameras: 43mm ltd, 77mm ltd., 85mm Zeiss zk, 180mm f4 Voigtlander.

These lenses all focus *beautifully* on the A7s. In fact, the 85mm Zeiss zk has given me (her) the best shots ever with this camera. This lens, which suffers from focus shift, is a very difficult beast on a dslr. However, the Sony with its stopped down focusing completely eliminates the problem. I use yellow focus peaking and go to magnified focus (second level) and get dead-on focus--even at f1.4-- in 90% of my shots. The 77mm ltd. focuses with equal ease and precision, but gives an even higher rate of keepers.

While it is generally true that lenses other than those native to a given camera will perform less well than those designed for that camera (certainly this was the case when I used my Pentax lenses on my Fuji Xpro 1), the Sony A7S has proved to be the exception.

If you have a large stable of K mount glass but yearn for full-frame (and you don't mind mirrorless), you should give one of the A7 cameras a try.

07-17-2014, 09:22 PM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 9,012
QuoteOriginally posted by Byrd-2020 Quote
My experience has been quite different.
I think you many not have found "slow" any different with those manual focus lenses, no? I mean catch action slow. At least that was my experience taking shots with an adapted lens on a mirrorless.
07-18-2014, 12:38 AM   #21
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,438
Canon got all their F1.2, sounds like the logical choice for you.
07-18-2014, 05:28 AM   #22
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteQuote:
I would suggest you try out the A7 and try manual focusing. I found it somewhat slow and difficult to manually focus accurately even with focus peaking and if the subject is moving it is outright impossible.
Wow, I wonder how I was able to shoot Drag Racing with manual focus cameras for most of my life.
07-18-2014, 06:14 AM   #23
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 36,269
If I were you, I'd probably keep my Pentax kit and go with a D610 or Canon 6D, with a couple of fast lenses for narrow DoF. FF only realizes it's advantage for narrow DoF if you're using a fast lens. If you're shooting standard zoom lenses 3.5 to 5.6 kind of stuff, you can do the same thing with faster APS-c glass. And now that there's a Sigma 18-35 1.8, to go with the 50 1.4 and 77 1.8, you have to have better than 2.8 glass on your FF, or you aren't getting what you want. Remember, in terms of depth of field the 77 1.8 is the rough equivalent of 135 2.8 on FF with much better low light performance. I'm not clear on why you've dismissed it as an APS-c lens.

When you consider 135 is 200 on FF, I wouldn't look at less than A D610 with 70-200 2.8 along with a 85 1.4, a 50 1.4 and a 35 1.4. Those lenses would give you capabilities you won't get with APS-c. If you're planning less than that, pick up the above mentioned lenses and see if you can make do.

As for the Sony, no I wouldn't use a camera that needed an adapter and had to be manually focussed in low light situations for weddings... for events and weddings.. I want to concentrate as much as possible on what's happening and as little on the camera as possible.

07-18-2014, 12:24 PM - 1 Like   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,873
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
the 77 1.8 is the rough equivalent of 135 2.8 on FF with much better low light performance.
Incorrect. They have the same low-light performance.
07-18-2014, 12:34 PM - 1 Like   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 574
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
Incorrect. They have the same low-light performance.
Yes given FF better low light advantage.

But, the smaller sensor comes out on top IF you restrict ISO to the same on both cameras and are shooting wide open in low enough light sans tripod where shutterspeed is going to determine if there is motion blur or not. It's an edge case, but one that many ff aficionados tend to miss.
07-18-2014, 01:03 PM - 1 Like   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,873
QuoteOriginally posted by RyanW Quote
Yes given FF better low light advantage.

But, the smaller sensor comes out on top IF you restrict ISO to the same on both cameras and are shooting wide open in low enough light sans tripod where shutterspeed is going to determine if there is motion blur or not. It's an edge case, but one that many ff aficionados tend to miss.
If you use the equivalent ISO, F/1.8 on APS-C is neither better nor worse than F/2.8 on FF. The shutter speed would be the same.

The FF will generally be sharper of course.
07-18-2014, 01:29 PM   #27
Veteran Member
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,354
Do you have any budget constraints?
If not, many wedding photographers have done quite well with the Nikon D610 + 12-24mm + 24-70mm f2.8 and a fast prime. If you are on a budget, both Sigma and Tamron offer nice lenses in that range with optical stabilization (which IMHO is better than sensor stabilization).
07-18-2014, 02:37 PM   #28
Veteran Member
Christine Tham's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,269
If you want AF and OVF and don't mind abandoning your very nice Pentax lens collection (I was drooling reading your post), then go Nikon and don't look back.

If you don't mind MF and want to retain and reuse your Pentax lenses, go Sony (as a stop gap solution until there is a Pentax FF - some of us are still hoping).

If you really like shallow DOF, there are some nice Voigtlanders you can use on the Sony. The Nokton 35 f1.2 and 50 f1.1 for example.

The only person who can answer your question is yourself. They are very different cameras.
07-19-2014, 04:53 PM   #29
Veteran Member
Clicker's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,241
Nikon D810x2, 16-35 and 70-200 ~$10K you're good to go.

Sony's A99 and similar lense would be slightly cheaper.
07-29-2014, 09:28 PM   #30
osv
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: So Cal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,080
QuoteOriginally posted by infoomatic Quote

So, you might have guessed it: I lean towards the Sony solution, also because of some nice and lightweight M39 (any info about how good they perform on the A7?) glass I could buy...
on the a7r, anything 24mm and wider really highlights poor field curvature designs in lenses... wide rangefinder type lenses suffer the most, so the old wide m39 stuff could be questionable.

i think that it also happens with full-frame sensors like the a7, but it's not as obvious, because of the lower resolution.

maybe post the zd 21mm/a7 question on the alternative lens forum, at fredmiranda.com.

focus peaking is like autofocus, in that it's not real accurate all the time... what you need to test is focus magnification, as others have mentioned.

get good with both, and you'll never want to use an ovf again... plus evf is wysiwyg, with overexposure zebra warnings, so you can throw away all of the old exposure rules that you used with film... and you'll never need to stop down to set focus again, either.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
31mm, a7, adaptor, aps-c, cameras, da*, dslr, experience, ff, flash, full frame, fullframe, hope, lag, lenses, ltd, mirrorless, nikon, pentax, sony, time, zeiss
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Upgrade k3 vs k5 II? (low light considerations, features, expense) Rice Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 06-14-2014 03:40 PM
filling up the gap between k20d and future fullframe hansenn Pentax DSLR Discussion 26 09-28-2012 10:39 AM
February 2010 Winner: Considerations K McCall Winners' Showcase 7 04-14-2010 12:56 AM
Light tripod considerations juu Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 10 12-16-2009 04:15 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:44 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top