lebigmac

Here is a hopefully more consistent set. All with f8 and 1/30 on tripod. In contrast to the previous sets, I didn't rely on focus peaking at all but on magnification. All .jpgs and raws here, and there's also a set with IBIS on (which doesn't seem to make a difference): https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/466oznln2oz53txn3nyn6/h?dl=0&rlkey=4a0m3kmpo1puuatt1f5xfojq3 A7 above, A7iv is below Minolta MD 50: Olympus 50mm: Sony FE 50mm The manual lenses look here far better than on the previous pictures.

Lightroom and Luminar

Maybe, you should wait what comes out of this. Apart from the issue discussed here at the moment, I find it a bit difficult to adapt my workflow to the raw files of the A7iv. Normally, I look for room in the shadows and lift it, for instance, and alter an image starting from there. With the A7iv, all the dynamic range seems already baked in when taking the picture and it is sometimes surprising that I can't seem to lift the shadows as far as I am used to.

I really feel honored, but I think, you are overestimating my skills by a long margin. BUT the setup that you've send now is outright genius!! You are just awesome. I'll arrange things as advised first thing tomorrow, and I'll give my best in the kitchen sink to make the aromaboy look like the one in your pic. And I'll look for a constant lighting environment. Regarding your 'out of focus' observation, there is a comparison set with balcony pictures linked above in one of the first posts, there seems to be the center of the scene out of focus as well on several pictures. And that was my impression after starting to shoot with the new camera. I've been shooting for years with these lenses, on a gx85, NX1, Nex5n/t, Nex3, Z6, a ton on the A7, and while they performed differently, they did always as expected and I never had the impression that something is not right with the results – until the A7iv. That's how it started. I can't rule out that in the end the photographer is to blame, since my eyesight seems in steep decline - esp. after sunset – due to my fast progressing age and decades of screen work – but still, it feels strange. Is the EXIF from the last shot? 'Steady Shot' was on and set on 50mm focal length for this, it was handheld.

Here a quick shots handheld with f 11 and the MD. Only relied on focus magnification, no focus peaking (Sorry Andrew for the file size).

No, I zoomed booth it in for convenience in preview, by the same factor, and the image of the A7iv is larger. Yes, I've seen that, but for me, it's hard to explain. I shot all from a tripod, the distance to my aroma boy is about 1m. With f 5.6 both objects should be in focus. I checked the focus bfore pulling the trigger with the peaking function, and based on that, both items laid with in the focus area. I'll look for a brighter area and make some photos with around f 11.

.. Aperture was 5.6 with 1/60

Here is another comparison a7->A7iv with three different 50mm lenses: The vintage Olmypus OM 50 1.8 and Minolta MD 50mm 1.7 plus the modern Sony FE 50mm AF lens. Shocking. The whole set with jpg and raws is here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/qa013alqdxzgxgw/AAC_xXoEPTZ_p-U1lOU0qTYda?dl=0 The above is the A7, the below the A7iv

I thought of that too, but the pictures were sharp to my eye in the evf. And I worked the same way with the A7. So that would imply that the fp works more accurate on the A7 than on the A7iv. Maybe, but then from 24 to 33 is not that of a difference as that increase in blurryness, I would say.

I directly compared the A7 to the A7iv with three lenses (there are raw examples for all 3 behind the link in the post above) and they showed all about the same quality gap in between the cameras. The MD 28mm 2.8, came out worst, but it is the weakest lens of the set on the A7 as well, followed by the 50mm 1.7., and the 35mm 1.8mm.

That looks familiar. Possibly, it looks a little more favorable because the canon glass is of better quality than these old Minolta kit lenses. But the S1 picture doesn't look as detailed as one might expect from the Canon, does it? I'll put a bunch of my analogues in front of the A7, GX85 vs. A7iv to the test again, under the same daylight conditions.

I work with raws usually, above there is also link to the raw files of the comparison shots. It would be great to know, how others A7iv shooters experience the work with old analogue lenses.

The adapter served me well in all those years, I really think, it's something else that's at play here. I even sent my camera in to Sony's repair contractor before posting here, and they told me that me copy is perfectly 'within the normal parameters'. Not being technically savvy at all, it sounds logical what you and Andrew said about the thickness/layers on the sensor. Or maybe the software in the A7iv is processing the sensor information with these lenses in a way it shouldn't. Strangely, the motifs always look perfectly well in the evf, whereas the playback already shows clearly the diminished quality. I still have to compare it to what comes out of the video mode.

I wasn't aware of this at all, would have definitely been a reason to keep it. If this is behind the lackluster performance of the A7iv (and supposedly other modern cameras to come), it's outright painful to accept that one has to lay the old glass to rest sooner or later.

I don't know, since there's no brand name on it and I have since the old NEX-3 days, but it's solid and of metal.