sony + leica = giant killer budget camera

[vuk]

i recently ordered a leica-M adapter for the sony system and borrowed my parents' alpha 6000 today to try it out. given that nobody seemed to be saying much about this lens/camera combination, i was prepared to be disappointed. unfortunately, i didn't have a whole lot of time today, but here are a few shots for now that, to my eye, are very convincing and demand serious comparing to what i am getting via the fuji.

i chose the summicron 40 for this first round mainly because it is not very expensive (second-hand) because it doesn't interest the typical leica collector-user.

to view in a better context than pfm bright background...

http://vukfoto.com/?g=20180811_leica

 

[vuk]

 

[vuk]

 

[vuk]

 

[vuk]

...and something more conventional for our missionary friends...

 

[Mr Perceptive]

vuk, for clarity are you using the Leica glass on your Fuji, or is 'your comparison' Sony+Leica v Fuji+Fuji or Sony+Leica v Fuji+Leica ???

 

[vuk]

vuk, for clarity are you using the Leica glass on your Fuji, or is 'your comparison' Sony+Leica v Fuji+Fuji or Sony+Leica v Fuji+Leica ???

short answer:
sony+leica vs fuji+leica

long answer:
i placed a leica lens (40mm summicron) that i have used often on a fuji body on a budget sony body. what i saw was impressive enough to start this thread. the fact that i need to do more controlled tests to tell is already a victory for sony at 1/3 the price.

anarchist answer:
i really dislike leica as a company, but i'm forced to own their lenses because i see something special in them. the compromise strategy is to buy second-hand and items that collectors don't value on grounds irrelevant to performance (like being made in canada vs. germany).

 

[Lefty]

Nice images Vuk.

Sony do produce cameras with wonderful sensors. The UI / ergonomics of their cameras needs some work but this is definitely improving with their most recent cameras.

Lefty

 

[drummerman]

I am sure the Sony cams are very good but where they are said to severely lack is in ergonomics.

I have not used one but have watched a trillion tube reviews which obviously makes me an instant expert ...

Ps. Just saw Amar's post above of which mine is a copy. Severely hungover, apologies.

 

[JemHayward]

In the days of film the only thing that really influenced the image quality was the lens, the camera was really just a box with an opening flap, but we still upgraded our camera bodies in the hope of getting better pictures. If you wanted to use Leica lenses, you bought a Leica, though I do remember the days when Leica users used Zeiss lenses as they were considered to be better than the Leitz alternatives! Nowadays the sensors do make a difference, not just in terms of size, so we have two variables. There are fewer sensor manufacturers than camera makers, and Sony probably make some of the best ones. Mirrorless cameras allow the adaptation of lots of different lenses so we can choose bodies and lenses separately. So it's no real surprise that a relatively cheap Sony body and an excellent lens produces lovely results. I use Fuji bodies, with Fuji and Zeiss lenses, and have reluctantly admitted to myself that the Fuji lenses are better! I would, and nearly did, use Sony but I really can't live with the ergonomics.

 

[vuk]

In the days of film the only thing that really influenced the image quality was the lens, the camera was really just a box with an opening flap, but we still upgraded our camera bodies in the hope of getting better pictures.

i never did that.

The UI / ergonomics of their cameras needs some work

I would, and nearly did, use Sony but I really can't live with the ergonomics.

I am sure the Sony cams are very good but where they are said to severely lack is in ergonomics.

as for ergonomics, i'm not quite sure what everyone finds so bad. there isn't really mush difference, apart from having to look into the finder to see shutter speed change/setting when rotating the dial -- actually, i think it is faster this way (though i am sentimentally tied to the traditional way). the camera is smaller (and lighter) than the fuji, but i find that to be a good thing.

 

[Paulicus]

There's not a hint of the 1970's character in the first three, (which are very nice by the way) they appear quite sharp and detailed like a modern lens rendition, to my eyes at least. The fourth is Vuk classic, but honestly, who would've known what camera or lens had been used if they'd been posted in the PAW thread, or am I on the wrong tack, and it's more a camera size thing?

 

[vuk]

There's not a hint of the 1970's character in the first three, (which are very nice by the way) they appear quite sharp and detailed like a modern lens rendition, to my eyes at least. The fourth is Vuk classic, but honestly, who would've known what camera or lens had been used if they'd been posted in the PAW thread, or am I on the wrong tack, and it's more a camera size thing?

size + price + quality, although quality is not as obvious scaled down to posting size like these.

btw -- by "fourth", i assume you mean the glass building -- right?

 

[drummerman]

I assume your Fuji has a 24mp sensor rather than the previous one?

Perhaps you just prefer a Bayer arrangement?

 

[Paulicus]

Yeah, the glass building. The profusion of detail in that particular shot, even in B&W, is like a vivid conversation.

 

[Tony L]

Vuk, what degree of post-processing have you done to these? I can believe the one of the digger is pretty much straight out of the camera, but the others look like they’ve had a lot of curves and sharpening to me (e.g. the saturation and high-contrast of the graffiti, the jagged pixelated diagonals of the office building).

 

[vuk]

I assume your Fuji has a 24mp sensor rather than the previous one?

Perhaps you just prefer a Bayer arrangement?

no, my fuji is the older one -- 16mp, so not a "fair" comparison on those grounds. i'll see about borrowing a newer fuji from the shop to carry out a proper comparison.

 

[vuk]

Vuk, what degree of post-processing have you done to these? I can believe the one of the digger is pretty much straight out of the camera, but the others look like they’ve had a lot of curves and sharpening to me (e.g. the saturation and high-contrast of the graffiti, the jagged pixelated diagonals of the office building).

tony.

the 1st and last shots had the least post-processing.

the 2 black and white ones were curved the conventional way one would with those.

the yellow one has had a lot of contrast applied.

the sharpness you are seeing is the sharpness of the lens.


here is a 100% crop of the 1st pic: http://qstatistic.com/pfm/g-crop.jpg

 

[Stunsworth]

Images with thin diagonals are very difficult to reduce in size without producing the ‘jaggies’ that you can see. In Photoshop the type of resizing used can sometimes make a difference.

For many years I used Leica R lenses on various Canon digital bodies. When Leica released the M8 is was wonderful to go back to a rangefinder body, however the R lenses worked really well on the Canons, though of course focussing was manual and there was no automatic aperture control.

 

[Lefty]

as for ergonomics, i'm not quite sure what everyone finds so bad. there isn't really mush difference, apart from having to look into the finder to see shutter speed change/setting when rotating the dial -- actually, i think it is faster this way (though i am sentimentally tied to the traditional way). the camera is smaller (and lighter) than the fuji, but i find that to be a good thing.

How do you move the focus point/s on the A6000? On the A7rII it is a torturous experience. Although as you are using MF lenses, this won't be a problem for you (unless you intend to use AF lenses at some point).

Also, the 'feel' of the front / rear wheels is terrible with no clicks / indents to indicate when you have gone from one setting to another.

Changing ISO is also sub-optimal. Sure, you can configure it to be done in a number of ways, but none of them are as elegant as Nikon's ISO button which you depress and then turn a wheel. This is typical of my main complaint with the Sony. It's almost too configurable, making it feel more like a computer than a camera.

Lefty