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!

New Sony, all I can say is, "WOW!"

barjohn

New member
Congratulations John, I will look forward to you real world report on the camera :salute:

Cheers

Brian
I'll call it as I see it. I don't think this will be the be-all, end-all camera we all phantasize about and maybe m4/3s will improve if the newer sensor technologies migrate to the format but it all remains to be seen. So far all we have seen are JPGs and no RAW conversions so we still don't really know how good or bad the sensor is. if it is as good it appears to be from some of the JPGS then that will be the deciding factor on its success.
 

Brian Mosley

New member
Yes John, the lacklustre colour and dynamic range should be improvable when the camera gets raw support... but the user interface and challenge of lens quality to mount registration distance may prove to be a bigger hurdle.

Meanwhile, we have the Pen and the 20mm f1.7 - an awesome combination already, with a higher spec model to come... if it has a global shutter and no teething problems we'll be laughing :D

Cheers

Brian
 
R

raymondluo

Guest
Maybe the 100-300mm will be a constant f3.5 with no change to weight and size with the new competition, PHOAR!
 

PeterB666

Member
The zoom lenses are just far too bulky for the camera but the camera body itself is an amazing example of what you can do with a 'compact' camera.
 

jonoslack

Active member
The zoom lenses are just far too bulky for the camera but the camera body itself is an amazing example of what you can do with a 'compact' camera.
Well, I quite agree with you about the camera body . . . . but if the lenses have to be so big, what's the point?
Why not either go the full hog and have a full frame camera (that's what I'd like) or else take advantage of the smaller lenses in mft. It seems to me that whilst APS-c might be the sweet spot for a Dslr, it's hardly perfect for this kind of camera.

I've just been doing some A2+ prints from the EP2 with the 45 panalieca (which I can fit in my pocket). There are certainly theoretical advantages of a slightly larger sensor, but whilst I can get fantastic results with something that is otherwise so much more convenient and already has a long list of excellent and proven lenses . . . . .

And if you want maximum quality, well then the Sony ain't it either.

As for using M lenses - I've long since given up using anything less than 50mm (100mm equivalent), because the lack of angled micro-lenses means you don't get the best out of anything wider. The 90 f2.8M is fab on the EP2 though - a larger sensor is going to make the wide end problem worse, and the longer lenses less interesting.

Sexy though it may be, and if pixel peeping isn't more interesting than the photography, I just can't see it's advantage, at least, not yet.

all the best
 
V

Vivek

Guest
The "theoretical advantages" of a larger sensor are wasted in the NX10 and the NEX3/5 by increasing the pixel count.

As Rich points out, it would have been better if Samsung/Sony/PanaOly etc had kept the pixel count marginally lower while trying to match up the performance (image quality- lower noise, higher DR) of an APS-C DSLR.

The camera body is not a big problem. I saw a medium format digital in action yesterday. I could hardly notice it was on top of a tall tripod. Barely enough room for tripod mount at the bottom. For an APS-C digital back with a built in shutter, the NEX3/5 are OK.
 

douglasf13

New member
Jono, as Vivek pointed out earlier, the m4/3 performance at the edges is partly due to the extra thick sensor toppings. We don't know how the NEX will behave, yet.

As far as size, the NEX prime is comparable in size to the m4/3 primes. It's the zooms that are big, but I can't imagine using a zoom on this kind of camera, anyways. I handled the EPL-1 with zoom the other day, and I was suprised how big it was. My as well just bring a DSLR if you're using zooms on these things, IMO.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Jono, as Vivek pointed out earlier, the m4/3 performance at the edges is partly due to the extra thick sensor toppings. We don't know how the NEX will behave, yet.
Well, that's possible, certainly the Epson wasn't too bad at the corners . . . for sharpness, but the vignetting was pretty startling on anything wide.

As far as size, the NEX prime is comparable in size to the m4/3 primes. It's the zooms that are big, but I can't imagine using a zoom on this kind of camera, anyways. I handled the EPL-1 with zoom the other day, and I was suprised how big it was. My as well just bring a DSLR if you're using zooms on these things, IMO.
Ah . . . and if you're going to use primes you may as well bring along the M9 :).

I love the EP2, but, truth be told, 90% of it's use is with the 45 panaleica macro, a lens which is unlikely to be repeated on the Sony.
Of course, my feelings relate largely to my own needs, the EP2 makes a good companion piece to either the M9 or the A900 - the Sony wouldn't really be particularly useful with either (for me of course).
 

douglasf13

New member
Argh, Jono! I've got some nice guitars sitting in a closet that I could sell to fund the M9, but I can't stomach selling sentimental guitars that hold their value for a digital camera, and I'd like to leave the guitars to my kids someday. I technically have the money buy the dang M9, but I've made an agreement with my wife to go into super-saver home buying mode, so selling something is my only option. In West Hollywood, a small 2bed/2bath home in our neighborhood goes for around a million bucks, so that's a lot of pennies to save! lol.

If the NEX doesn't do well with an M mount 35mm lens, or Sony doesn't bring a standard prime for the NEX system, I'll undoubtedly go m4/3...or buy an M9 and flee to Mexico! :ROTFL::deadhorse:

p.s. I really shouldn't complain. the a900 with a standard prime isn't THAT big.
 

m3photo

New member
Re: Size

p.s. I really shouldn't complain. the a900 with a standard prime isn't THAT big.
Quite agree there. Much as I like my G1+Kit lens (tried the adapter route with other lenses - only one that make any sense to me on it is the CV 50 Nokton which turns into a 100mm equivalent), I still feel there's nothing better than (in my case) the D700 with a manual 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor on it.
 

RichA

New member
4/3rds and 6 megapixels = 1/4 of a Nikon D3x

The "theoretical advantages" of a larger sensor are wasted in the NX10 and the NEX3/5 by increasing the pixel count.

As Rich points out, it would have been better if Samsung/Sony/PanaOly etc had kept the pixel count marginally lower while trying to match up the performance (image quality- lower noise, higher DR) of an APS-C DSLR.

The camera body is not a big problem. I saw a medium format digital in action yesterday. I could hardly notice it was on top of a tall tripod. Barely enough room for tripod mount at the bottom. For an APS-C digital back with a built in shutter, the NEX3/5 are OK.
There could be an issue with the lens quality, the jury is still out, but the sensor appears to be pretty cutting-edge, having better noise control than older APS sensors in cameras like Nikon's D300s. But we need more images. I'm checking out Pentax's 645 Saturday, I hope I don't like it ($$$). :) Also, if at the Henry's show in Toronto Sony has prototypes of the NEX's, I'll try them.
 

RichA

New member
Re: Size

Quite agree there. Much as I like my G1+Kit lens (tried the adapter route with other lenses - only one that make any sense to me on it is the CV 50 Nokton which turns into a 100mm equivalent), I still feel there's nothing better than (in my case) the D700 with a manual 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor on it.
It's on another galaxy compared to the G1, if only because of noise control, tonal smoothness, not to mention the pro body. But the G1 and my Schneider 25mm f0.95 is capable of shooting city street scenes hand-held at night at 100 ISO, just not as sharply as the Nikon's 50mm stopped down to f2.8, I'd wager.
 

woodmancy

Subscriber Member
Re: Size

Quite agree there. Much as I like my G1+Kit lens (tried the adapter route with other lenses - only one that make any sense to me on it is the CV 50 Nokton which turns into a 100mm equivalent), I still feel there's nothing better than (in my case) the D700 with a manual 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor on it.
Oh dear:cry::cry::cry:

Anonymous
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Re: 4/3rds and 6 megapixels = 1/4 of a Nikon D3x

There could be an issue with the lens quality, the jury is still out, but the sensor appears to be pretty cutting-edge, having better noise control than older APS sensors in cameras like Nikon's D300s. But we need more images. I'm checking out Pentax's 645 Saturday, I hope I don't like it ($$$). :) Also, if at the Henry's show in Toronto Sony has prototypes of the NEX's, I'll try them.
I would have said, I will buy one immediately but given Sony's pricing history, I am better off to wait for another 4-6 months. In the meantime (again Sony' track record), they will bring out several other models as well.

I still have not bought an A350 (which morphed to A380) that I would like to have for special application, though the price is ~ half of what it was.

In the meantime, i have the NX10 to play with.

I love the intense activity in the mirrorless cam field. I would very much like to see Pana to come up with a better sensor and release the G3 soon.
 

RichA

New member
Some observations about three cameras I saw

RichA - you must report back on the Pentax!!!!
Sony NEX; The camera is probably at the limits of smallness for an interchangeable lens camera. It's a little hard handling it without
accidentally hitting buttons. The plastic body is slightly more comfortable to hold because it is larger and the angles on the hand grip are less severe. The image quality of the camera is decent, probably a bit better than my D300 Nikon for noise control. Image quality owing to the extreme portability, proximity of the lenses to the sensor may not be at the level of the average DSLR. The LCD is very thin, no cheap, thick plastic surround to bulk it up. The LCD is bright enough for daylight.
Samsung NX10. Nice and thin, but not as small as the Sonys. The grip
is reasonably comfortable (but not terrifically so, for that you need a full-sized DSLR) and the camera with its lenses is lightweight. Image quality is very good from all the lenses I tried, as good as any APS DSLR. Shutter slap is noticeable, but not bad.
Pentax 645. What a beautiful camera! Great weather-sealed body, very ergonomic, better balanced than any small format DSLR (you can comfortably hold it by the grip alone, it's that well-balanced) and not as heavy as I thought it might be. Focusing with the "kit" lens is not lightning fast, I'd say about the same as the mirror-less cameras I tested. Can't judge image quality, it was pre-production and I couldn't sample from it. One amazing thing is mirror-slap is practically non-existent. Just like with the small K7 DSLR. The LCD is probably has the best-looking image from LCD's I've seen, though not as high in resolution as Nikon's DSLR LCD. IMO, this camera coupled with Nikon's D3s would be a better choice for a pricey kit than the D3s and D3x, especially given the resolution advantage.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
That is good to read, Rich! Thanks!.

Nex-3 with a lower introductory price sounds very good. In a few months, it should be available for free with the purchase of something else Sony.;)
 
Top