The future is here - Sony Nex 7

[fotografz]

Compared to what? Looking with your bare eyes? An optical DSLR? Sure, fine, whatever. Stick with an optical dslr if you want, or a rangefinder.

The idea that the EVF "sucks" on the NEX-7 is pure, unadulterated nonsense. Unless Sony is totally lying, the EVF is the best EVF that has shipped on digital camera ever.

Since the EVF on the Panasonic GH series is quite fine, there is zero chance the EVF on these new sony's "sucks" by comparison.



So, obviously, it is impossible for the EVF to suck compared to the EVF on the NEX-5, right? and the EVF for the NEX-5N is the same one, so it can't suck by comparison to that.



Nonsense.

The reason people spread this kind of bullshit is to dissuade potential customers from buying these products.

Personally, I was referencing the Sony images from the A77 made available for download as high res files (same sensor as the NEX7) ... I found them lacking and the high ISO deplorable ... even the ISO 200 images had artifacts, noise and blobs in the sky ... so I said I would be in the "wait and see camp".

I also have owned and used an A55 which I did not like because of the EVF and associated lag ... so while not against it since I bought one, I do not think it is there to the extent that it can compete with a normal optical finder for my applications ... a caveat which I've always added to any opinion. I will wait until I can actually try the NEX7 before buying one. I'm sure it is the best to date. That best still may not be good enough for a lot of people ... but if it's fine for you, knock yourself out.

Since I do not make a nickel for any opinion good or bad ... whether anyone buys or doesn't buy something because of what I have said is of little consequence to me. Buy it, don't buy it ... I could not care less.

-Marc

 

[jonoslack]

Ah ha! I don't think we're disagreeing much after all. I'm not saying that aps-c lenses can't be made smaller for NEX. Samsung has some cool little lenses,too. I was just saying that I'm not sure how much smaller a 24/1.8 could have been

hi Douglas. Then we certainly aren't disagreeing. I fully understand the size of the Zeiss.
I just would like some smaller zooms than the huge kit lens (and some af primes as well). Hopefully they will come. I'm with you and Quentin on the IQ. I'll judge it when I see RAW files.
Right now I'm off to check in, then it's off to Crete to do some snappin' (ep3, M9 and 6 primes with the one zoom).

 

[douglasf13]

There are three major reasons why we have no idea what the Nex-7's files will look like, based on the A77 samples out there:

1) Pre-production firmware
2) No proper raw support
3) The A77's mirror hurts noise by a half of stop, and it affects detail as well, when compared to the Nex-7.

 

[jonoslack]

Liza. Using words like nonsense and bullshit with respect to the intelligent remarks by "multi system" people like Lars and Marc simply reflects back on you. Seems to me that you misrepresented one and misunderstood the other. Of course, you're perfectly entitled to disagree!
All the best

 

[das_schlechte_gewissen]

There are three major reasons why we have no idea what the Nex-7's files will look like, based on the A77 samples out there:

1) Pre-production firmware
2) No proper raw support
3) The A77's mirror hurts noise by a half of stop, and it affects detail as well, when compared to the Nex-7.

Testers of the cameras say tat the final firmware results are much better. We will see, but fw 0.5x probably can't be perfect.

We will see what the new SLT mirror does concerning resolution. Propably there is no difference at all. If there is any difference in practice it should be in favor of A77's pictures. Size and weight of the bigger camera as well as ergonomy and build-in image stabilization will be the reason for sharper pictures. Without the tripod is how 90% of all pictures will be made. 24mpixel are demanding in regard to good shooting technique.
For the remaining 10% tripod assisted pictures people will argue for years if the SLT mirror causes any image quality issues or not. Let's be positive and assume that Sony improved sth. with the second generation SLT system.

 

[douglasf13]

Testers of the cameras say tat the final firmware results are much better. We will see, but fw 0.5x probably can't be perfect.

We will see what the new SLT mirror does concerning resolution. Propably there is no difference at all. If there is any difference in practice it should be in favor of A77's pictures. Size and weight of the bigger camera as well as ergonomy and build-in image stabilization will be the reason for sharper pictures. Without the tripod is how 90% of all pictures will be made. 24mpixel are demanding in regard to good shooting technique.
For the remaining 10% tripod assisted pictures people will argue for years if the SLT mirror causes any image quality issues or not. Let's be positive and assume that Sony improved sth. with the second generation SLT system.

I certainly hope they improve the resolution aspect of the "translucent" mirror, but I can only comment on that in a static setting. If we're not talking about a tripod test, then there are just to many variables to judge. Of course, if we're not talking about using a tripod, there really isn't much advantage in resolution of a 24mp sensor over a 16mp sensor in the first place.

 

[Lars]

Testers of the cameras say tat the final firmware results are much better. We will see, but fw 0.5x probably can't be perfect.

We will see what the new SLT mirror does concerning resolution. Propably there is no difference at all. If there is any difference in practice it should be in favor of A77's pictures. Size and weight of the bigger camera as well as ergonomy and build-in image stabilization will be the reason for sharper pictures. Without the tripod is how 90% of all pictures will be made. 24mpixel are demanding in regard to good shooting technique.
For the remaining 10% tripod assisted pictures people will argue for years if the SLT mirror causes any image quality issues or not. Let's be positive and assume that Sony improved sth. with the second generation SLT system.

There will of course be some loss of light, which translates to higher ISO for the same exposure, which translates to more noise. If it's less than half a stop then it won't matter much, though.

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Liza, your language and aggressiveness may be the norm for sites such as DPReview but it totally alien to this forum, especially when directed against professional photographers of the calibre and experience of Fotografz.

 

[das_schlechte_gewissen]

There will of course be some loss of light, which translates to higher ISO for the same exposure, which translates to more noise. If it's less than half a stop then it won't matter much, though.

Yes, you are correct with this. Somewhere I had seen a different issue adressed. Somebody found a way to make photos with a A55 without/with SLT mirror and compared them with comparable or same ISO settings. It was clearly visible that the picture with the SLT mirror had some issues with lost of detail and contrast. Of course this was just a test of an individual person and nobody can say if this is reproductable. I read this somewhere on the dxyum website.
This is what I had in mind when I answered to Douglas.
I think that image issues due to higher ISO settings within a fraction of one stop will not hurt much.

 

[douglasf13]

Yes, you are correct with this. Somewhere I had seen a different issue adressed. Somebody found a way to make photos with a A55 without/with SLT mirror and compared them with comparable or same ISO settings. It was clearly visible that the picture with the SLT mirror had some issues with lost of detail and contrast. Of course this was just a test of an individual person and nobody can say if this is reproductable. I read this somewhere on the dxyum website.
This is what I had in mind when I answered to Douglas.
I think that image issues due to higher ISO settings within a fraction of one stop will not hurt much.

I'm not so sure. I would think that a 1/2 stop would be enough to see a tangible difference. ISO 800 vs. ISO 1200?

BTW, I'm not knocking SLT. I'm simply saying that we shouldn't necessarily be looking at A77 files for a perfect NEX-7 reference.

 

[edwardkaraa]

I saw the thread in question on Dyxum and the results seem to be true and reproducible. There is a discernible image softening due to the translucent mirror, and I can imagine the effect is even worse on a 24 mp sensor. I would expect the Nex 7 to show a clear advantage over the A77, and that is why I feel that the mirror is the only true weak point in the new cameras, not the EVF.

 

[memories]

@LizaWitz

The purpose of internetforums is to exchange opinions. Every user gives his personal opinion based on eperience in the past with his own equipment and influenced by his/her needs for the job which has to be done with it.

There is nothing wrong with this. It is always an advantage to hear many different opinions. So I do not see your point. Especially not regarding the two mentioned users.

But your tone and wording was IMHO rude. I hope that you only had a bad day.


@fotografz

...There are early adopters of any new technology, and they are often quite evangelic about their choices ... but that doesn't mean that specific technology is better or even parity to what exists ... it often is not. Some folks just won't buy into it until it is clearly superior ....

I totally agree. And many even did not exploit yet the full potential of their existing cameras or lenses, while rushing already into newer models. Unfortunately I am often one of them. I now try to wait longer - at least sometimes...

 

[Show Performance]

Unless you shoot jpeg, I wouldn't be concerned much about the A77 performance. I've followed Sony for a long time, and their jpeg engine has always been far away from their raw performance. Plus, the A77 has a mirror in the light path, which both negatively affects noise by about 1/2 stop and hurts resolution a little bit.

No, I don't shoot JPEG and as I said, I understand these are early files (and JPEGS at that).

However, I have downloaded some of the RAW files and looked at them in RPP on the Mac, and again, not impressed.

Since, I have no plans to buy the A77, I don't much mind but as an indicator of what the NEX-7 sensor has in store for us, I'm not feeling optimistic. Not to say that SONY isn't going to pull the rabbit out of the hat and wow us all. I sure hope so.

I'm a huge fan of the current NEX cameras as digital backs for adapted lenses so I remain hopeful but I'm hedging bets and pre-ordering the 5N which looks to be very solid. 24mp is overkill for most of my work anyway.

 

[uhoh7]

If I include the volume of my nexviewer, my NEX-5 setup is actually bigger! :thumbup:

glad you mentioned that part :angel:

I don't thnk lars has any axes he's grinding system wise, and he's not alone at all in his views.

But I can tell you, perusing the various forums, of all types of users, the nex-7 is like hurricane Irene.

On top of that the 24/1.8 also has many many preorders.

The nex-7 is already more popular than the "iconic" Nex-5, the evf and the dials have melted many stubborn hearts.

One very interesting thread was at the m43, buried by the mods but with many posts, basically all in awe of the thing.

At the pro level it's the same: game changer.

Many just love the fact sony is pushing the envelope----right in the faces of Canon and Nikon.

Lars, the bulk creep of the DSLRs has been outrageous. Compare an OM SLR to a 7D. It's friggin ridiculous.

The nex-7 really is the rebirth of the Pen-F, which was killed by kodak, and the old Pen F lenses shoot great on the nex.

What we have here is just a huge breath of fresh air in a stagnant prosumer market, which has just had to take what ever monstrousity they were presented with OR had to shell out 7K for the " real thing", an M9.

That camera still rules the roost IMHO, but is inflexible in many ways.

Perhaps the great gift the nex-7 will give: within two years we will have a FF in that footprint from someone.

At the same time the m43 is at its zenith as a system--many lenses and features, but its time has past.

my latest little beauty:

I have 6 135s and this one out resolves them all

Take a shower, have some coffee, lars, the world is new again.

 

[David Teo]

For me, the interest in a camera such as a micro 4/3, or the new Nex, is an outward manifestation of the inner desire for a camera to take the place of the Leica M9, a camera which I cannot, and wouldn't afford in my current capacity as a freelance photographer.

The M system is one I shot with for nearly 8 years, albeit with film. And I greatly miss a camera of that genre, size and capability. That was ironically, when I wasn't mainly making a living out of photography, but stuck in a cubicle working up to 18 hours a day churning out line of code.

My current full frame Nikons with their iso 6400 capability and small fast AFD primes (24, 35, 50 and 85) pays the bills, are dead-on dependable and rock solid reliable (no card write errors, cracked sensors, red corners, freezes or such).

But it's no Leica where size and discreetness are concerned, even if I have used them successfully on the open streets.

The NEX-7 looks like it could be a substitute digital light-tight box to mount M lenses while working in a pseudo Leica M style. I could even excuse the fact it doesn't have a REAL finder...

I wouldn't have thought I would say this, but my NEX(T) camera could be a Sony. The sound of that statement still makes me wince a little.

David
http://www.5stonesphoto.com/blog

 

[Ben Rubinstein]

Will peaking work in the viewfinder?

 

[thrice]

So long as you don't want to shoot wider than 24mm equiv, the NEX looks great

 

[Lars]

glad you mentioned that part :angel:
I don't thnk lars has any axes he's grinding system wise, and he's not alone at all in his views.
But I can tell you, perusing the various forums, of all types of users, the nex-7 is like hurricane Irene.
On top of that the 24/1.8 also has many many preorders.
The nex-7 is already more popular than the "iconic" Nex-5, the evf and the dials have melted many stubborn hearts.
One very interesting thread was at the m43, buried by the mods but with many posts, basically all in awe of the thing.
At the pro level it's the same: game changer.
Many just love the fact sony is pushing the envelope----right in the faces of Canon and Nikon.
Lars, the bulk creep of the DSLRs has been outrageous. Compare an OM SLR to a 7D. It's friggin ridiculous.
The nex-7 really is the rebirth of the Pen-F, which was killed by kodak, and the old Pen F lenses shoot great on the nex.
What we have here is just a huge breath of fresh air in a stagnant prosumer market, which has just had to take what ever monstrousity they were presented with OR had to shell out 7K for the " real thing", an M9.
That camera still rules the roost IMHO, but is inflexible in many ways.
Perhaps the great gift the nex-7 will give: within two years we will have a FF in that footprint from someone.
At the same time the m43 is at its zenith as a system--many lenses and features, but its time has past.

On a general note, I have absolutely nothing to prove in this discussion - I'm not making any claims, I'm just being skeptical. Others including you are making claims, without any way to back those up since we are still talking vaporware until the NEX7 ships.

Re bulk, my personal preference is that smaller and lighter isn't necessarily better. I have no illusions about being typical there - after all I prefer to add the power grip to my D700 to make it bigger - with the extra grip it fits like a glove (and yes it's bigger than a 7D). It's still tiny compared to my 810G. The only way I could grip a NEX series camera in the store was to pinch it between my thumb and index finger (almost). Perhaps the target market has smaller hands. But that's just me.

I realize that the real novelty with the NEX7 is that it ups the resolution at a more affordable price point.

Generally though - what is hype about a product before it's been released, more than hype? Changing the game means having an impact on competitors, and since the NEX7 isn't out yet, it hasn't changed anything - competitors aren't feeling it in sales numbers. How do you define "many preorders"? Millions? That's how many entry level DSLRs Nikon and Canon sell on a monthly basis. Or is it more like 845 preorders (which is still a lot for preorders)? Without numbers you cannot logically claim that any game is changing. Maybe it will, but that's yet to be seen. And in a short time (maybe even by the time NEX7 ships) there will likely be more cameras using the same or similar sensor, so the only thing NEX7 will have for it in the eyes of the mass market is size. And then we're back to where we were before it was announced - DSLR vs tiny EVF camera. Evolution, not revolution.

Re EVF - I think we have many years to go before an EVF truly match an OVF. For example, one thing that hardly ever comes up in discussions about EVFs is dynamic range - my eyes easily handle 20 stops and don't clip even extreme highlights.

Again, I have no agenda here, just saying that better is only better if it really is better. It's called being sceptical. Give me an EVF with 2K resolution and 20 stops latitude, no highlight clipping, and no lag, that's where we need to get to. I could see RED maybe getting close within a decade but probably nobody else. We'll see full-HD finders eventually, but to get there probably even battery tech needs to improve a lot (and for sure built-in compute power).

Just so you know where I'm coming from - my Toyo 810G is my primary high-end camera, even in the field. I'm not shooting film for film's sake, rather it's the most cost-effective way to shoot 200+ megapixels. My DSLRs and other cameras complement the 8x10 for snapshots and action. I'm not chasing megapixels in digital cameras, because I cannot afford to go where I want to be (at least 80+ megapixels) to replace the 8x10.

I have to go and reclaim my life now. Thanks for an entertaining discussion. We will see over the next year if/how the market changes. Exchanging opinions is almost always a healthy thing, especially in this forum it can be quite enjoyable.
-Lars

 

[hot]

Liza, your language and aggressiveness may be the norm for sites such as DPReview but it totally alien to this forum, especially when directed against professional photographers of the calibre and experience of Fotografz.

Everyone may say what he/she thinks. Liza is right - and if NEX7 isn't camera you wish ... it's very simple DON'T BUY IT.

Only defend what you have is childish!

I also think Sony NEX7's viewer is best you ever get and the reason to buy a NEX7 (I've NEX5 & A55)

 

[Stefan Steib]

@thrice
you can adapt the Sigma 8-16mm with Nikon mount , use a Nikon to Canon adapter (novoflex G-Ed adapter) and use this with Aperture on a canon Eos to Nex adapter. This would be a 12mm(24x36) equvalent - wide enough ?

@ lars
I am not an Astronomy specialist, but these could give you the full details about optical finders, resolution of the human eye and human viewing physiognomy. But it is already quite enlighting to see what the real resolution can be at max (exerpt from Wikipedia/eye):

"Visual acuity

Visual acuity, or resolving power, is "the ability to distinguish fine detail" and is the property of cones.It is often measured in cycles per degree (CPD), which measures an angular resolution, or how much an eye can differentiate one object from another in terms of visual angles. Resolution in CPD can be measured by bar charts of different numbers of white/black stripe cycles. For example, if each pattern is 1.75 cm wide and is placed at 1 m distance from the eye, it will subtend an angle of 1 degree, so the number of white/black bar pairs on the pattern will be a measure of the cycles per degree of that pattern. The highest such number that the eye can resolve as stripes, or distinguish from a gray block, is then the measurement of visual acuity of the eye.
For a human eye with excellent acuity, the maximum theoretical resolution is 50 CPD(1.2 arcminute per line pair, or a 0.35 mm line pair, at 1 m). A rat can resolve only about 1 to 2 CPD. A horse has higher acuity through most of the visual field of its eyes than a human has, but does not match the high acuity of the human eye's central fovea region.

Spherical aberration limits the resolution of a 7 mm pupil to about 3 arcminutes per line pair. At a pupil diameter of 3 mm, the spherical aberration is greatly reduced, resulting in an improved resolution of approximately 1.7 arcminutes per line pair.[33] A resolution of 2 arcminutes per line pair, equivalent to a 1 arcminute gap in an optotype, corresponds to 20/20 (normal vision) in humans....."


Now what does this tell ?
lets assume the maximum resolution of an optical finder with 1m virtual distance is 3000 linepairs - if you are young, have perfect vision and the scene is bright.

As finders are quite often working at a virtual distance shorter than 1 m this number is reduced further. Second the optimum resolution is also only reached if the light on the subject/Image is bright -the darker the scene becomes resolution of the eye dwindles away.
A resolution of 1024pixel on a viewing distance (I don´t know the simulated /real okular focal lenght and size of the Sony finder- so that are only estimations)) of maybe 50 cm will equal 500 x 2 linepairs (compared to the 1 m resolution) which is already matching your vision at dim light and open pupil. When your vision is less than perfect and it gets even darker this resolution already is BETTER than your eye. And finally you can lighten up the scene electronically and automatic + you can zoom electronically any time..........


So I guess this finder already is a gamechanger having higher resolution than any comparable electronic finder on the (consumer)market -comparison: the 50000€ Arri Alexa has 1280 X 768 pixels.


regards
Stefan