Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

  1. #1
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Wink NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

    Both have no AA filters. I searched.

    Only the dust shaker that is also the UV-IR cut filter (a mere 0.6mm thick) is present.

    The NEX-5 has a stacked/glued AA filter/UV-IR/dust shaker (Peter Ganzel showed the thickness to be 1.1mm).

    I don't know about the NEX-3 (or the new F3).

    The NEX-7 has a separate AA filter (0.5mm thick) and the UV-IR/dust shaker 0.6mm thick).

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,446
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

    real??? This is very good news if nex 5n has no AA filter, it means the Nex 5n is a fraction closer to the likes of the Leica M8 M9 DMR all which seem to not have AA filter and results in exceptionally sharp images

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

    Quote Originally Posted by mazor View Post
    real??? This is very good news if nex 5n has no AA filter, it means the Nex 5n is a fraction closer to the likes of the Leica M8 M9 DMR all which seem to not have AA filter and results in exceptionally sharp images
    Why would I post something that is not "real"?

    Normally, when I remove the UV/IR/AA stack from a sensor, I can see moire in Visible, UV or IR, readily. No such thing in these cases.

    I am not sure if the NEX-C3 or 5N are closer to the Leica offerings but surely they only cost a fraction!

  4. #4
    Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1117

    Re: NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

    Quote Originally Posted by mazor View Post
    real??? This is very good news if nex 5n has no AA filter, it means the Nex 5n is a fraction closer to the likes of the Leica M8 M9 DMR all which seem to not have AA filter and results in exceptionally sharp images
    A few good reviews have been done of the Nex 5n against the Ricoh M-mount which is a good bench-mark for no AA (Ricoh states that it is so). They use the same Sony sensor.

    Keith

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

    Quote Originally Posted by woodmancy View Post
    A few good reviews have been done of the Nex 5n against the Ricoh M-mount which is a good bench-mark for no AA (Ricoh states that it is so). They use the same Sony sensor.

    Keith
    Ricoh M mount lensor has a 16MP sony sensor?

  6. #6
    Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1117

    Re: NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

    Thanks Vivek - it's definitely old age creeping in (but I've been saying that since I was 21).

    The 12MP Ricoh M-mount Sony sensor has been reviewed a number of times against the 16MP Sony sensor in the 5n. The reviews I've seen have rated the Ricoh higher in IQ with extreme pixel peeping. That 12MP Ricoh sensor has no AA.
    The Ricoh A16 zoom does have the same 16MP sensor as the Sony 5n and also has no AA. The only detailed pixel peeping snap review I've read of the 12MP m-mount against the 16MP Ricoh A16 is by Sean Reid and you have to pay to get it. He rates the Ricoh A16 as his benchmark for APSC.

    I have all three sensors and can't tell the difference on any image I've posted on this forum. I love all three, but on my Apple cinema display I prefer the A16. But I love my Pentax K-01 and K5 images almost as much.

    Please take my input with a pinch of salt though. I'm the kind of guy who would swear his car is going faster after a car wash. Seriously - it happened to me this morning.

    Hope I've got it right this time . . . duhh

    Hate making mistakes in public

    Keith

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

    Hi Keith,

    I simply did not understand your post (other than the MP count). Did any of the reviewers look inside the cameras to verify the presence or the absence of the AA (blur component) filter? I did and hence this thread.

  8. #8
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

    Cool, Vivek. It seems that this is the likely the reason for the big difference between the 5N and 7 with symmetrical lenses.

    FWIW, I have compared the same scene with the GXR and 5N, using the Voigtlander 15, and the Voigtlander 15 has better edge detail and less color shift on the GXR, so Ricoh still has an advantage with wide, symmetrical lenses, even if both cameras don't have an AA filter.

    BTW, were you able to use the NEX-7 without the AA filter in place?
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  9. #9
    sinul
    Guest

    Re: NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Both have no AA filters. I searched.

    Only the dust shaker that is also the UV-IR cut filter (a mere 0.6mm thick) is present.

    The NEX-5 has a stacked/glued AA filter/UV-IR/dust shaker (Peter Ganzel showed the thickness to be 1.1mm).

    I don't know about the NEX-3 (or the new F3).

    The NEX-7 has a separate AA filter (0.5mm thick) and the UV-IR/dust shaker 0.6mm thick).
    Does this imply that by removing the AA filter the NEX-7 would be as good as the NEX-5N using symmetric wide angles?

  10. #10
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

    Quote Originally Posted by douglasf13 View Post
    Cool, Vivek. It seems that this is the likely the reason for the big difference between the 5N and 7 with symmetrical lenses.

    FWIW, I have compared the same scene with the GXR and 5N, using the Voigtlander 15, and the Voigtlander 15 has better edge detail and less color shift on the GXR, so Ricoh still has an advantage with wide, symmetrical lenses, even if both cameras don't have an AA filter.

    BTW, were you able to use the NEX-7 without the AA filter in place?
    Hi Douglas,

    I never challenged any other cameras (sharp, blurred) that I have no experience with.

    With only one screw holding the shutter mechanism in the NEX-5N, it does not need a blur filter. So, it makes sense to me in terms of cost cutting.

    My opened NEX-7 has to wait a while after my vacation to make it working ( I know what went wrong during reassembly) besides that, now, I have broken the battery compartment door (still should work without the door) during an accident. I have a replacement I bought from Jono. It still is in its original shape.

    Quote Originally Posted by sinul View Post
    Does this imply that by removing the AA filter the NEX-7 would be as good as the NEX-5N using symmetric wide angles?
    That is one possibility (check the other thread: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/sony/3...aa-filter.html). The other being the baffle inside the NEX-7. I have widened mine. Results await successful reassembly (will take a while).

  11. #11
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Hi Douglas,

    I never challenged any other cameras (sharp, blurred) that I have no experience with.
    Oh, I know. I was just sharing my experience with it.

    I can't wait to hear more about your NEX-7, once it is back in action!

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    337
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

    I am not sure I understand why a camera having an AA filter or not is good or bad news. After all,it is the pictures that matter. Either they have great detail, or they don't. If they do, does it matter why they do, and if they don't, does it matter that we know why they don't? My NEX 7 has stunning detail, yet it seems to have an AA filter. Would I be happier to learn that it hasn't got any, a la Leica? I rather think not...

  13. #13
    Senior Member douglasf13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, USA
    Posts
    1,965
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: NEX-C3 and NEX-5N

    Quote Originally Posted by philber View Post
    I am not sure I understand why a camera having an AA filter or not is good or bad news. After all,it is the pictures that matter. Either they have great detail, or they don't. If they do, does it matter why they do, and if they don't, does it matter that we know why they don't? My NEX 7 has stunning detail, yet it seems to have an AA filter. Would I be happier to learn that it hasn't got any, a la Leica? I rather think not...
    I believe the main thrust is that sensor toppings, like AA filters, can lead to more astigmatism with highly angled light rays as you go towards the edge of the sensor. The NEX-7 behaves oddly with some M lenses, and there are some claims that it could be better even with some SLR lenses. If the NEX-7 has a sensor topping that the C3 and 5N don't have, it's an interesting development.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •