Showing posts with label Sony A7. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sony A7. Show all posts

Sunday, 17 July 2016

Full-Frame & Keeping The Compactness


For nearly three years now, Sony's A7 series have been the uncontested champion of compact, full-frame ILC's (Interchangeable Lenses Cameras). Keeping them small can be tricky however. In a push for ultimate image quality most of Sony's newer lenses are large and heavy.

Although I've since sold the Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 (above) because it was bad for infrared, I have tried a few other small lenses during my time with the A7. Here are my thoughts on what makes a good choice when trying to keep the size and weight of your camera bag to a minimum.

Before I go any further though, let me iterate why this camera/system is so interesting for infrared... 
  • EVF means you get to see in the wavelength you're shooting in
  • Ability to adapt to any SLR/RF lens helps choose lenses that don't suffer from hot spot
  • Cleaner Full-Frame IQ helps with heavy manipulation often needed for IR processing
Adapting to SLR lenses (especially older ones) often helps with the IR hot spot issue, but it also adds to the size & weight (due to the larger, usually metal, adaptors), thus compromising on size & weight.



Shown off the camera you can see the difference in size a little more easily. This also illustrates how a moderately sized SLR lens can become quite front heavy when added to an adaptor for the A7. Although the Nikon 35mm f/2 lens is a great IR performer I will not be featuring it here due to it's lack of compactness. Here are the lenses I will be talking about...

35mm and 40mm lenses are a great for general / travel photography in my opinion. Just the right balance between wide and tele. Plus they're usually the smallest option, as long as you don't want them too fast. Over the last two years I have used the three lenses above and I wanted to compare them all here because I like each of them for different reasons. Here are some technical details before I start to get into more opinions.

NOTES: The dimensions, below (length & weight) are including the camera. The weight is with no strap or lugs (not to reduce weight, but because I hate camera straps). The weight also doesn't include a lens cap or hood, but it does include the battery and memory card, so this is what you'll notice when actually using them (in most cases). I haven't included the price of the adaptor (where needed) here, but I will mention it in the text below.




Weight

In this regard the Zeiss is king by a mile. Even with it's meager f/2.8 max aperture it's hard to believable how light it is. The official weight of the camera is listed as 474g (including battery and media), but mine comes to 455g, for some reason. The breakdown for the full Zeiss 35mm package is as follows:
  • Camera: 411g
  • Lens: 119g
  • Battery: 42g
  • Hood: 12g
  • Cap: 5g
  • SD: 3g

So, the total (including the hood and lens cap this time) is 592g. It makes a rather interesting comparison to my previous camera - the Nikon D3. Now I know these cameras are very different, but what do I really miss from the transition? The main thing is AF speed, especially in low light, because the D3 was a miracle by comparison. Apart from that I really don't miss much about the pro DSLR. My camera is now with me most of the time and much of this is down to the weight.

Let me put this change into perspective - The Sony A7 body, Zeiss 35mm lens, memory card and 5 (yes five) batteries weighs less than half that of the Nikon D3 body alone (with no lens)! OK, how about this... All of this next list weighs less than the Nikon without anything (no memory cards, battery or lens):
  • Sony A7
  • Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2
  • Zeiss 35mm f/2.8
  • Zeiss 55mm f/1.8
  • 2x batteries + SD card

To be fair 5 Sony batteries probably don't last as long as 1 in the Nikon D3, but that's not totally fair because of the EVF and live-view being on constantly. Before roasting me about dual memory cards and other features; I do admit that it's not exactly fair to compare the cameras on this level. This is purely about how amazing it is to have a functioning camera that weighs so little, whilst still being able to produce amazing quality images. It has made a huge difference to me and where I take it.

Size

The other two lenses are much heavier. If we concentrate on AF options the Canon + Metabones is quite a bit heavier. It weighs almost as much as the Zeiss 55mm f/1.8, which is not only a phenomenal lens for colour, but for IR as well. That said it is quite a bit longer, so apart from it being the wrong focal length I didn't include it here for that reason. The newer Sony 50mm f/1.8 lens is different story and I am tempted to add that one to the comparison because I do own that one as well.

If you're OK with spending good money on manual focus lenses there are some other choices that I will mention now, but can't talk about extensively here because I haven't tried them. If you're curious I advise looking in to rangefinder lenses from Leica and Voigtlander. It's not just because they're small, but the adaptor is much thinner too (see the top image for reference). 

There is an AF adaptor for rangefinder lenses now, in the form of the Techart Pro. This is about the same price as the Metabones (£350), which isn't too bad in of itself, but the price of the lenses and the fact that it only focuses "well" on the A7RII has stopped me from being able to try one. If you have the high-end Sony however then that's not your only other option for mini AF lenses though. Techart also make an AF adaptor for Contax G mount lenses. This would enable you to use the fabulous looking Contax 35mm f/2 lens (which is actually Zeiss made). The lens is not too expensive for what it is either, but be warned this AF adaptor is no longer listed (or supported?) on the Techart website and the lens doesn't have a 'normal' manual focus ring.

Cost

Including the Metabones adaptor in the cost of the Canon lens makes it almost as expensive as the Zeiss, but with the latest firmware (June 2016) it allows pretty decent phase detect AF, even on these first generation A7 models. This makes it a really nice option if you want to use other Canon lenses. If you're only buying it for this pancake lens however then you might want to think twice, unless you're more interested in IR performance and have to have AF.

The Konica 40mm lens is a great option if you're on a tight budget and can live with manual focusing. It's possibly the best lens here for IR image quality too. The fact that it's over a stop faster than either of the two AF options and weighs less than the Canon, despite being all metal and glass and needing a big SLR adaptor is really impressive. The wide open performance is fine on close up portraits, but for distance shots it's awful. You'd need to stop it down to f/4 to get real sharpness, but is that really different from many other lenses? and here the sharpness does impress. For something so cheap it's stunning. 

Autofocus Only Options

Since the latest update for the Metabones adaptor (June 2016) the Canon 40mm STM lens focuses so much faster on the first generation Sony A7 bodies! Getting proper access to phase detect AF. This is a huge benefit  to owners of the older Sony cameras (like me), but this update wasn't really hyped so some may have missed it. Before this it was painfully slow to focus on anything, even with good light. With low light it would generally fail to focus at all. This would really put you off using Canon lenses on the original A7/r/s. Now that it's got PDAF however it seems faster to focus than the new Sony 50mm f/1.8 lens (although I haven't done a direct comparison for that yet, or been able to try the firmware upgrade for the 50mm).

I could have included Sony's new nifty 50 here (purely based on size), although it would have been the biggest, but I decided to stick to slightly wider lenses that are better suited for travel. If you're really curious to see this comparison let me know because I could add it later...

Comparing the two AF lenses together directly doesn't come out particularly well in favour of the Canon. The 35mm Zeiss lenses extra 5mm of FoV makes it a bit better as a travel lens, but it's also smaller, significantly lighter, has better image quality overall, focuses noticeably faster and hunts less as well. 
Where the Canon pulls ahead is with infrared performance and this is why I keep it around. That and I managed to save £300 on the Metabones adaptor by getting it with the camera. That saving made it less than half the cost of the Zeiss, so if you can find a deal like that I highly recommend it. 

Filters For IR

Ultimately I couldn't resist the charm of the little blue badge. It's IR performance can be annoying, but I'm soon going to be trying it out on an AR (Anti Reflective) coated internal filter conversion, so I'm hoping it does a lot better there. Time will tell on that one, but one other thing I wanted to mention about IR is when using filters. The Zeiss lens' hood is quite clever, but when using thicker (49mm) filters the hood may not attach any more. If that happens then you also can't get the lens cap on and this is a really stupid design flaw. If only they included a 49mm lens cap in the box as well as the weird 40.5mm version then this wouldn't be a problem. If you're buying this lens for use with a full spectrum conversion then do yourself a favour, buy a spare 49mm lens cap as well. The official ones can be picked up for as little as £6, so why on earth they didn't include one in the box is beyond me.

The Canon lens' filter size is the most common 52mm, thus making it cheap and easy to find anything you want for a full spectrum or IR conversion. The Konica is more annoying, with a 55mm filter thread. It may not sound like much, but this is a pretty rare size to find second hand options, so this will push the price up if you want some specialised filters. What's most annoying about this is that stepping down to 52mm works fine, with no vignetting, If this was just because they wanted the weird text on the front that's super annoying.

Here's one more shot of the two main AF options on the original Sony A7...


Sunday, 3 July 2016

Kolari's Answer To The Hot Spot Issue

Kolari Vision are a popular choice for IR conversions on many camera types. Their prices are reasonable and they have many wavelengths on offer. Recently they've added an option to have any of these internal filters coated with a special anti-reflective (AR) coating to reduce hot spots. When I heard about this I had to give one a try because a lot of native lenses for the Sony FE cameras (A7 series) suffer from hot spots and many of them quite badly. Normally there is no fix for the hot spot issue because it's due to the lens, but let's put it to the test to see if it's as good as they advertise...

Anti-Reflective coated external filters are nothing new, so it's been possible to use them on a full spectrum conversion for a while. Filters like the 093 MRC, from B+W (an 830nm IR filter) have this coating. You can spot these because instead of being an opaque (black) colour they reflect a blue/purple. The same is true of the Kolari internal filter (see below).

Full spectrum conversion (left) vs the AR coated 720nm conversion from Kolari (right)

The problem with these external filters is that they don't do anything for hot spots. I have tested this on several different types and there is no discernible difference at all. Because of this I was a little dubious as to the effectiveness using a similar trick on the internal filter replacement. Fortunately that concern was very short lived because this internal coating does indeed work. It doesn't completely remove the effect, but it does take it down by 1-2 stops in intensity. What I mean here is that; Let's say a hot spot normally starts to show up on a lens (using a normal internal conversion) at f/8, it will start closer to f/16 on the coated conversion, and that can make all the difference.

Results

Here are some samples, comparing a few different AF lens options for the Sony FE platform. All of these options are known to produce a hot spot to varying degrees. These will be compared between a standard (uncoated) 720nm filter and the Kolari Anti-Reflective Coating conversion. From left to right, these lenses are:

  • Sony FE 50mm f/1.8
  • Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2
  • Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art (with MC-11 adapter)


Note: In all the below samples Kolari's coated version will be on the right.

Sony FE 50mm f/1.8

▲Uncoated Filter▲ -  f/1.8 - ▲Kolari AR Coating▲
▲Uncoated Filter▲ -  f/4 - ▲Kolari AR Coating▲
▲Uncoated Filter▲ -  f/8▲Kolari AR Coating▲
▲Uncoated Filter▲ -  f/22 - ▲Kolari AR Coating▲

The IR hot spot on the FE 50mm is not bad at all. It's not as clean as theSony/Zeiss 55mm f/1.8, but then not many lenses are. What little hot spot there is here on the smaller apertures is almost non-existent on Kolari's coated filter. Let's see how it does with a worse performer...

Simga 35mm f/1.4 Art

▲Uncoated Filter▲ -  f/1.4 - ▲Kolari AR Coating▲
▲Uncoated Filter▲ -  f/2 - ▲Kolari AR Coating▲
▲Uncoated Filter▲ -  f/4 - ▲Kolari AR Coating▲
▲Uncoated Filter▲ -  f/8 - ▲Kolari AR Coating▲
▲Uncoated Filter▲ -  f/16 - ▲Kolari AR Coating▲

The difference here, between the standard and coated filter is much more noticeable. The difference at f/8 being the stand-out one for me. This lens really starts to get annoying at f/8 on a normal filter, whereas the coated version is considerably better.

Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2

▲Uncoated Filter▲ -  f/2 - ▲Kolari AR Coating▲
▲Uncoated Filter▲ -  f/4 - ▲Kolari AR Coating▲
▲Uncoated Filter▲ -  f/8 - ▲Kolari AR Coating▲
▲Uncoated Filter▲ -  f/22 - ▲Kolari AR Coating▲

Some lenses provide terrible results when stopped down and this is frustrating true of native wide Sony Lenses. Although the coatings clearly help, it won't be enough to save the day in these extreme cases. It'a worth noting that 720nm is also pretty forgiving. The hot spot will be intensified with the stronger wavelengths like 830nm or higher.

At 720nm the Batis lens is generally acceptable at f/4, when using Kolari's coated conversion. With a standard 720nm filter the chances of getting usable results on the same lens and settings are heavily against you, producing a large amount of failures. This is where the coated option shows it's true value in my opinion. Common middle apertures see improvements that often make the difference between a good image and a bad one.

Vignetting

You may have noticed that there is significantly more vignetting on the normal filter. In some small part this may be due to the improved hot spot, but there is another big reason why this is happening. As well as the AR coating this conversion is also using a special 'thin' filter. This has the effect of greatly reducing vignetting on the Sony A7 due to the normal filter cluster having very thick glass on the filter. You can read more about that here. This service can be applied to normal Sony A7 series cameras as well as full spectrum or IR conversions. I'm so impressed by this that I want to have it done to all of my A7 cameras and I will if I can.

Summary

I don't really need to write much here as the pictures speak for themselves. Kolari's 'anti reflective' coating is doing a great job in my opinion. It's not going to fix any lenses hot spots entierly, but it will help and can make the difference of certain apertures being acceptable or not. I wouldn't necessarily suggest upgrading your current conversion for this, but that's totally up to you how much you're affected by this problem and that will depend on what lenses you're using. However, if you're thinking about getting a camera converted then I highly recommend going for this.

Future Tests

I will continue to post results comparing lenses on these two cameras. next up will be the Sony/Zeiss 35/2.8, this was another bad performer and could become not too bad with the Kolari camera. I want to do more testing on the Sony/Zeiss 55/1.8 because although that lens doesn't suffer from hot spot it did suffer from some issues with external filter, which I assume would be gone here. I'm also curious whether the thin filter on the Kolari conversion would adversely affect corner sharpness, so all those tests will be coming soon...

Monday, 13 June 2016

Photos - Switzerland By Train

I've wanted to visit Switzerland for as long as I can remember. Last month I got to explore it pretty thoroughly for more than a week, by train. Since I've been back I don't think a day has passed without me thinking about some aspect of this journey, so it's safe to say that it left quite an impression. I took the full spectrum camera with various filters (ranging from colour to 830nm), so I have a bunch of IR photos to share here today. Actually this has been hard to edit down, so this will be a pretty photo heavy post. I want to post them all now and not write too much, but that doesn't seem right, so I will spend a little time on the words, to give a little story behind each batch.

So this was how it all began - We took the Thameslink to St. Pancras at around 6:30am. Here's a shot of the Eurostar, ready to depart for Paris. Ours was the newer model on the right, which apparently is capable of a higher top speed. It seemed more comfy than the old one we went to Paris on last time.


This trip spanned 8 days in total and involved travelling entirely on trains. In fact we would be on a train nearly every day (except one). We did this because we wanted to see as much of Switzerland as possible. Here's a list of the train changes we made for the whole trip:
  • Day 1: London - Paris - Geneva - Montreux
  • Day 2: Montreux - Lucerne - Bern
  • Day 3: -
  • Day 4: Bern - Brig - Visp - Zermatt
  • Day 5: Zermatt - St. Moritz
  • Day 6: St. Moritz - Tirano - Chur
  • Day 7: Chur - Zurich
  • Day 8: Zurich - Basel - Cologne - Brussels - London

Note: Each letter is a place we stayed over night

This involved three scenic trains - The Golden Pass, The Glacier Express and The Bernina Express. The above places don't count any intermediate stops during any of the train trips. The longest single train journey was the Glacier Express (green), which took around 8 hours.

The Eurostar was the only train that we had any significant delay on. It was due to being held before the tunnel (which is extremely common these days). This meant that we missed our connection in Paris by one minute and we then lost three hours of our exploring time in Montreux. A big shame because it would have been a thousand times nicer than a skanky Paris station! :(. Swiss trains were faultless throughout and although we didn't use them as much, so were the French and German trains.


Not too far into Switzerland we got some epic views of this impressive bit of engineering. This double decked road network curved around the mountain for several killiometers. I struggled to eliminate window reflections on most of the shots, but I'm glad I tried.


Montreux

Once here we were quite tired of being sat on trains for so long (and stuck in Paris), so we wandered around the station for a few minutes. Took some photos and worked out where our train would leave from the next day, before moving on to our hotel. At this point it was just starting to rain, but Montreux still looked amazingly pretty!



I took three different wavelength filters with me. Here's a list and roughly how much each got used:
  • 590nm - 25%
  • 720nm - 15%
  • 830nm - 40%
I also took three lenses, but only used the Zeiss FE 55mm f/1.8 was used for infrared. I used the Canon FD 85mm f/1.2 for the last 20% of colour shots and unfortunately didn't touch the Sony FE 28mm lens once.

This was the fast train that we came from Geneva on (below). It was pretty fast and was the only Swiss train that tilts, which was pretty noticeable as we often couldn't see the horizon when curving around parts of Lake Geneva.


The next morning, after a nice breakfast in the hotel, we wandered around the edge of the lake for an hour or so before going back to the station to catch the first of our scenic trains. It was still drizzling a bit and very cloudy, but you could still get a hint of how epic this location was:




The Golden Pass (Scenic Train)

This was train that would take us on the first leg (of three). It was very spacious and not that busy, so we had plenty of room for moving around to take photos. It goes on the rack very soon after leaving Montreux because it climbs very steeply. Within 25-30 mins it was in the snow, even at this time of year (May 1st).


I quickly switched from the 830nm filter to the 590nm so that I could get some colour separation and show off the snow. With b&w IR I was worried you wouldn't see it because it would have been white grass next to white snow.


The lovely wife. Using the Sony A7 mkII, Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art lens, with MC-11 adapter. I like the way that the metal parts on the camera pick up the infrared colour. She was having some trouble with the focusing speed in these conditions. Unfortunately the Sigma combo is really no quicker than a Canon lens on this camera.



Zweisimmen

This was our first stop on the Bernina Express. This route has three sections, so two stops. This is mainly for the change in train gauge, although I think they will simplify this at some point by having trains that can dynamically change (impressive). Unfortunately it means that you have to pay for reservations three times as well and the amount doesn't seem to be much less. The reservations are not that expensive, but this is on top of the Swiss travel pass, which was about 363 Swiss Francs each for 8 days. If you compare that to commuting costs into London it doesn't seem that bad and don't get me started on the quality and reliability comparisons between the two o.0.



Luzerne

We stayed at for about 3 hours until moving on to Bern. We used this time for a dinner break and a mini photo walk. Still raining...


Bern

This was the only day that we didn't go on any trains. We were lucky enough to stay in an old flat just to the left of this cathedral, which my wife found on Air BnB. It was so nice to stay in a real apartment after the rather average hotel in Montreux, the night before! This is where the sun started to come out, so I switched back to pure IR (830nm) for a bit.




Walking up to the Rossen Garden, in Bern. A beautiful place to look over the old city. The higher we go the more the sun came out too.




Friendly ducks.







Leaving Bern on day four was hard. We were having such a relaxing time and knew that it was non-stop from this point forward. What we didn't know however, was that it was all up-hill from here. Not only did we get physically a lot higher up after this point, but everything kept getting better and better and that's not to say that Montreux or Bern were bad in any way.


Once again I switched to the colour IR filter (590nm) so that the snow areas would be more noticeable. Looking down into these valleys was simply breathtaking. The most difficult thing was taking photos here.  We know that we were getting a lot of window reflections and motion blur, so we probably wouldn't want to keep many or any of the shots we felt compelled to take. We often said to each other that we should probably give up and just take in the views. Looking back on the more successful photos I'm kind of glad we didn't.




Brig

Stopping at Brig to change trains, towards Zermatt, although we also had to change at Visp. Although Brig has about 10 platforms inside a building there were four platforms outside in the street and these were the one's we needed. This was looking away from Visp, towards St. Moritz.


This image was looking in the direction we were headed.


This was the train from Visp to Zermatt. A super impressive run up the mountain takes you nearly up to the Matterhorn. This was quite a climb, so again the train used a rack to pull up to just over 1600m.





After a few shots using the pure IR filter out of the window I realised that the camera was really struggling with shutter speed at base ISO. When I realised that I could pull the window down to take photos I realised what the problem was - the windows actually block IR (not just darken).




Zermatt


Zermatt may be mountain to mountain hotels, shops & bars, but you'll never care about its cheesy side when you see the Matterhorn from the bridge on Kirchstrasse.



I still can't believe this was the view from our hotel room balcony. I got up around 5:30 and stuck my head out of the door to see what the Matterhorn looked like, but it was covered in clouds. About 10 minutes later it looked like this 0.o




After breakfast at the hotel, we made our way to the train station, passing the bridge view again. We were so lucky to get a super clean sky, so I took a panorama with the 55mm lens. This was about 10-12 shots, maybe equivalent to about 20mm.


The Glacier Express - As good as the hype!


It seems a shame to backtrack on a trip like this, but there are no other train routes out of Zermatt (and no roads at all). There are certainly worse places to see twice :P. The next few images are from just passed Brig, so at this point it was all new to us.



These great views were thanks to our carriage being the last one in the train. The door that would have connected through to another carriage was just a big sheet of glass so it was really easy to get nice clean photos. It was a bit disconcerting pulling up the hill here as it felt like I could have fallen out on to the tracks at times being so steep. You can see the rack in the middle of the track here.





Into the snow, at roughly 2200m






St. Moritz



Our hotel.


The town.


The lake.


The Bernina Express (scenic train)


The White Lake


The highest station.



Back on the train again. Moving towards Tirano (just around to the right of the mountain).


Chur