Amazing colors with Sony A7

The Sony A7 is the most amazing camera, maybe with exception of Leica M9 and M. I did own an M9 and wanted an M, men settled for the Sony mainly since I really can use auto focus.
I have stated before here that the Sony with the amazing Zeiss Sonnar 55mm really can measure itself with Leica when it comes to sharpness and how it handels colors.
Just have a look at some of the photographs som this summer.

I won´t go back

I did actually buy an adapter for my Leica lenses to the Sony A7. I will not use it.
Everybody seems to love the idea to keep shooting manual focus even after buying a great AF camera. I have met several photographers who only shoots manual with a Sony A7 or A7r. I don't get it.
It´s not that I cant nail the focus with the focus peeking function. It works quite well. Its just that its is unnecessary complicated. In most cases I just want the image to be sharp. Yay. The Sony takes care o that.
Sometimes I want to fucus on a particular part in the image. Well, big surprise, the Sony is quite capable of fixing that as well. Easier than focus peeking. Just set the camera to fucus on one single spot, and there you go. If I really want to manually focus, I just turn the ring on the lens and thats it.
For me the only remaining argument to use manual Leica lenses would be hat they are much better than the Zeiss glass. But with a truly amazing lens like the Sonnar 55mm, thats not an issue.

Here are a portrait of Hanna, first with a Leica Summarit 90mm (one of my favorite Leica lenses) and then with the Sonnar. You can argue which ons is better, but I don´t see a reason to trade the Zeiss AF for the Summarit.

Hanna with Sony A7 and Summarit 90mm

Hanna with Sony A7 and Sonnar 55mm

I have not tested the 35mm yet, and I suspect that Leicas Summicron ASPH is way better. On the other hand, I will get an amazing 35mm in the shape of Sigmas 35mm 1.4 ART to my Nikon for a third of the cost of the Summicron. And that has AF as well. Leica really needs to look out!

More colorful Sony-images

Just making my point. The Sony can produce great colors. The Sonnar 55 is actually an amaxin lens. m still not convinced that the crispiness is on par with the Leica M9 when its as its best, but close and definitely on par with the new Leica M.

I think the Leicas CCD still can produce some magic, but for 99 percent of cases, the modern 24 megapixel is better. To start with, the Sony is usable above 800 asa, and it does not screw up the colors all the time:)

What about the feeling? Can Sony compare to Leica?

I have lived with my new Sony A7 for a few weeks now. I got an adapter for my Leica lenses, but I have to admit I hardly use it. Manual focusing just doesn't work that well for me. Without Leicas rangefinder, I prefer to let my camera take care of focusing.
The big question for me is if the Sony/Sonnar combo really can compete with the excellent image quality I did get from my M9 with the amazing Summarit 90 and 35mm:s. There is something in the CCD sensor that just blows me away.
Here is just one example of what the Leica can do with a Summarit.

California,USA

The Leica mage is amazing in it´s quality and colors. But so far I´m more than happy with the result from the Sony. I have not made poster size prints, but I will order a few next week. From what I see on the screen, the colors, sharpness and bokeh are world class. No wonder that the Sonnar 55mm has been dubbed a Zeiss Otus lite. I can honestly say that the lens outperforms Leicas standard Summicron 50mm easily and it can rival Leicas legendary Summilux 50m.
What I have yet to determine is if the combo can deliver the same level of crispiness as the Leica. I know it´s close, but not 100% sure its on par.
Have a look here and judge for yourself.

Smart way to read magazines

Here is a useful thing for all of you that loves to read lot of photo publications. It quickly drains your wallet to buy three or four magazines a month. A nice solution if you have an iPad, Galaxy tablet or pc is the new Swedish service Readly, that just launched in the US. Think of it as a Spotify or Netflix for magazines.
You can read several photo magazines for only $ 9,99 per month, or SEK 99 if you live in Sweden.
Right now you will get titles such as Shutterbug, Popular Photography and American Photo. In total more than 140 different magazines are included in Readly US.
For Swedish users, Readly can access more tan a dozen Swedish photo magazines and in total almost 160 various titles.
I love Readly both since I can get a new magazine without making the trip to the store, and I can download as many titles to my iPad that I ever need before a trip, without having to drag a ton of paper.

Here you can find out more about Readly and how you get the app from different parts of the world.

Then how about the reading experience? Photography is pretty demanding, and we all want nice prints, don´t we. Im actually quite happy with how well Readly has taken the magazine experience to digital. Especially if you have an iPad with a retina display, the image quality will be excellent. So you won´t really miss paper that much. If you don´t believe me, trial is free, so you have nothing to lose!

Soon he will be reading digitally!

Why Sony A7 is a better street camera than Leica M(9)

It´s a few weeks now since I traded my Leica M9 for a Sony A7. A crazy thing to do, many people would say, but so far I don´t have any regrets (except missing the feeling to own a digital Leica). I have to admit that in most cases the Sony is a better camera.
The Zeiss Sonnar 55mm is huge, but the body is actually the same size.The lens quality is amazing, clearly up to Leica standards. The 24 megapixel sensor is to my knowledge comparable to Leicas M. And most important, I  love autofocus. I did not think I would ever write that, but the fact is, I love AF.
Yes, its a different way of taking pictures the slow Leica way. And yes, it has many advantages. But at the end of the day, I get more usable photos out of the Sony than I did with the Leica. And the people who sees my photos only cares about the picture, not what camera I used to take it. So If I get more good photographs out of a modern AF camera, It´s time to trade.

Here are a few shots from a 15 minutes walk today in Stockholm. I doubt I would get as many sharp shots from the M9 in that short time.

Is the 55mm really that good? (part 1)

Before getting the SonyA7 and a prime 55mm I read a few reviews on the web of the lens and every tester seems to be impressed by the glass. DXO Mark claims its the best AF lens they have ever tested, a lens thats only rivaled by the Otus 55mm.
The 55mm 1.8 is not small, in fact for a 1.8 lens it´s huge. And it´s not chap. Again, for a normal 1.8 lens its very expensive. Only Leica thinks its OK to charge more for a slow 50mm lens.
But when shooting with the lens I realized, it´s worth the money. The contrast and the crispiness is absolutely first class. What I see when I shot portraits reminds me of when I had a chance to briefly test the already legendary Zeiss Otus 55mm 1.4 on my Nikon D600. This is obviously first class glass.

Just for fun I did a small test shot this morning, comparing the Sony A7 and Zeiss 55mm with my Sigma 50mm 1.4 on my D600. The cameras are comparable, both are 24 megapixel and have modern and similar sensors. (Yes, they are not 36 megapixel, but thats i really something will never ever notice since I don´t do 50 inch prints.)
Also I chose the Sigma in stead of my Nikon 50mm, since the Sigma is a much more ambitious lens than Nikons older 50mm. (The new 58mm 1.4 is another story.)

Have a look for yourself and see what you think.

 In case you wonder, The pictures are first Sigma then Sony:)

None of the pictures have been edited, just concerted from RAW. The Sigma is in my opinion a bit smoother. The Nikon/Sigma also produces a bit lighter photos. The Sony would probably need a bit editing in Photoshop, but the end result is sharper, crispier and more contrasty.By far!