The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

NEX-7 test images up on Imaging Resource - WOW!

bradhusick

Active member
There's a full suite of test images up on Imaging Resource and all I can say is WOW! These compare well to the Canon 5D Mark II, the Nikon D3X and by quite a bit the Pentax K5. At ISO 6400 the NEX-7 is nearly as good as the D3X.

I can't re-post the images here due to copyright, but you can visit there and use their Comparometer™ to check for yourself.
 
L

luznoi

Guest
Do you mean d3s instead of d3x? D3x at 6400 isn't that great I remember reading. They looks pretty good but AF is more of my issue. :toocool: On the other hand, the Nex 7 is aps-c while the d3x is FX...so it is definitely not bad! I guess it is pretty good actually:)
 

pegelli

Well-known member
Do you mean d3s instead of d3x? D3x at 6400 isn't that great I remember reading.
It depends if you're pixel peeping or doing a practical relevant comparison.

At 1:1 on the screen the d3s is a lot better than the d3x.

However printed at the same subject magnification the difference is not as big as many people would want to make us believe.

So if the Nex 7 can repeat that with a smaller sensor it's indeed pretty darn good.
 
L

luznoi

Guest
Well, sure...practical vs. pixel peeping. It depends on one's mindset...I still shoot, on occasions, my d70. It isn't all that different printed 8x10 at, say, 400 ISO than compared with a d700.:watch: The photographer matters much more:thumbup:

Obviously, I was in the "peeping" mindset on my first post.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Thanks for the heads up on this Brad!

The 6400 is less interest for me than say 1600 is because the loss of detail is still too great ( at least with these samples processed the way they were) ... however 1600 seems really quite good, and 3200 usable in a pinch. Remains to be seen what real world results are in crappier light where higher ISO comes into practical play.

My primary interest is use of this camera with the faster Leica M lenses @ 1600/3200. Combined with focus peaking, and real time review of WB, and all that, this could well be the camera to extend the usefulness of M lenses. My NEX-5 already does that to a much smaller degree but still can't compare to the M9 ... however, at 24 meg and a real viewfinder, that may change and bring the utilitarian ability of the Sony closer as a companion to the M9.

Here's hoping!

At any rate I have one on pre-order with Robert. Can't wait to slap the 0.95 on this thing!

-Marc
 

JCT

Member
This is very encouraging!

Finally finished selling off old gear, so I'm ready to buy as soon as my number is called on Robert's list!
 

Jan Brittenson

Senior Subscriber Member
None of the images of the mannekin manage to differentiate strands of hair particularly well. Anything over ISO 100 -- 200 and up -- has noticeably smudgy spots like detail was removed by excess noise reduction. Those would definitely show in even a small print like 11x17. Meh.
 

etrigan63

Active member
The real test will be RAW files. OOC JPEGS are for Ken Rockwell. Sony's NR algorithms are notoriously strong.
 
Couldn't agree with you more, Jan. I looked at the 400 iso sample and it looks like it was dipped in plastic. Then I used the comparometer and compared 400 iso files to those from the Canon 7D and 5DII and the Canon files had less noise in shadows and cleaner detail in the green fabric of the mannequin's dress. Some serious detail smudging going on with the Sony files... My DMR is significantly cleaner than this at 400 iso and under, and though we're talking 24 vs 10 megapixels I can't see this as progress when compared to the DMR's six year old technology.
 

jonoslack

Active member
The real test will be RAW files. OOC JPEGS are for Ken Rockwell. Sony's NR algorithms are notoriously strong.
Absolutely Carlos - I can't even be bothered to look. When it's RAW files from production firmware then I'll have a look (but probably only at the shots I've taken!)

all the best
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Absolutely Carlos - I can't even be bothered to look. When it's RAW files from production firmware then I'll have a look (but probably only at the shots I've taken!)

all the best
+1.

Plus, at 24 meg. which lenses you use will also be revealing. I sure am not getting this puppy to use the kit lens on it :)

-Marc
 

etrigan63

Active member
+1.

Plus, at 24 meg. which lenses you use will also be revealing. I sure am not getting this puppy to use the kit lens on it :)

-Marc
+1 Marc

I ordered the body only + Zeiss 24mm f/1.8. The kit lens never crossed my mind. However, most gadget sites (and Ken Rockwell) will base their "in-depth reviews" solely on the bundled lens. You would think Sony (and any other camera maker) would know this and make the kit lens worthy of the body it is bundled on instead a tease for you to buy better glass.
 
M

memories

Guest
....My NEX-5 already does that to a much smaller degree but still can't compare to the M9 ... however, at 24 meg and a real viewfinder, that may change and bring the utilitarian ability of the Sony closer as a companion to the M9.
...

-Marc
Hi

does the different DOF with fullframe of M9 vs. APS-C of NEX5/7 with the same lens does not disturb you?
 
M

memories

Guest
I shoot with a 50/0.95 ... what DOF? :ROTFL:

-Marc
:)

Hi

no, I meant it differently. Let's assume you only have a Leica 35/1.4 and a 50/1.4.

If you use i.e. the 35/1.4 lens on a NEX7, you would end up in a kind of a similar crop, but a bigger DOF then the same photo made with the 50/1.4 mm lens on the M9. But you do not want to go more "tele" in that situation for other reasons.

Would that not bother you? With APS-C I find the background often too much distracting compared to FF. I have often situations, where I can not choose another background or another distance to the subject.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
:)

Hi

no, I meant it differently. Let's assume you only have a Leica 35/1.4 and a 50/1.4.

If you use i.e. the 35/1.4 lens on a NEX7, you would end up in a kind of a similar crop, but a bigger DOF then the same photo made with the 50/1.4 mm lens on the M9. But you do not want to go more "tele" in that situation for other reasons.

Would that not bother you? With APS-C I find the background often too much distracting compared to FF. I have often situations, where I can not choose another background or another distance to the subject.
Yes, I understand the concept. I currently have M9s and a NEX5. Given the same distance to subject the DOF is the same, it is just that the FOV is smaller with a crop frame. When the FOV is the same, then the DOF is greater with a crop frame because you have to move back to equal the FOV of a FF camera. The further you move back, the greater the DOF at any given f stop.

Another way of looking at it is with a 50mm f/0.95 at the same distance to subject, it's like the FOV of a 75/0.95.

I'm not a fan of crop frame cameras of any type, but the NEX cameras are a bit unique in size and features which make it attractive for use with M lenses ... ease of focusing, tilt screen and a better screen than the M9, and live view. A nice supplement or less expensive back-up to a M9, but most certainly not a replacement ... at least not for me.

-Marc
 

jonoslack

Active member
+1.

Plus, at 24 meg. which lenses you use will also be revealing. I sure am not getting this puppy to use the kit lens on it :)

-Marc
-1
. . . . I think the kit lens is rather bad-mouthed, I gave it a good going over, and I thought it was pretty good - added to which, there are times when a small camera with a kit zoom just hits the spot - sure, the quality isn't as good, but sometimes the best is the enemy of the good. . . . and it's amazing what stopping down a little will do.

. . . . For a lightweight walkabout kit the NEX7 and zoom should be fine - even if it's not it's main purpose.

We've just spent a few days in Palermo, and I was using an M9 . . and the A77 with the much criticised 16-80 SZ lens - I've got plenty of worthwhile shots with that combination that I simply would have missed with the M9 (mostly because of close focus and long distance, nothing to do with the capabilities of the M9).

For me there's a definite use for small, all purpose zooms, but certainly not for everything.

As for making them better quality - wouldn't it be nice, but I think that will simply make them bigger.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Yeah Jono, I also have both the AF kit lenses, and they most certainly do have their place ... I've used the 16mm as a pocket camera that actually fits in a pocket when in social situations like my wife's company parties. If I brought something more Pro looking, I just end up having to shoot stuff because people there know I'm a professional photographer ... instead of enjoying the party. :)

I need to at LEAST have something in hand that's better than my wife's iPhone 4 ... which she is pretty darned good at using :eek:

-Marc
 
Top