sper
Well-known
So I'm spending a week with an NEX 3 and the 18-55 (borrowed from my job at B&H). After one night with this camera I can tell it's great. I loved it in low light, and it's automatic flash pictures were great. I found it totally usable at 6400, I don't know about a large print, but worlds beyond what I expected.
The only thing I have to complain about is the lens, and lens selection. 18-55 ƒ3.5-5.6? Really? If I wanted this basic slow zoom I could have bought a Nikon or Canon. And with only one prime, plus nobody making E lenses yet, it's almost like they're TELLING us to adapt M lenses. I'm not usually a distortion snob but man, at 18mm this lens might as well be a reverse fisheye. Don't bother taking pictures of signs buildings, they'll look a little pudgy.
I haven't been too bothered by the design. It's annoying to have to go into the menu to change ISO but the M8 was like that. I've adapted fairly quickly to it.
What I love is how discrete it is. So far my most discrete subway/street camera is my Motorola Droid with the Vignette App, just pretend you're playing Angry Birds! (and no, I'm not kidding, I actually think this is a great camera if you accept cell phone image quality). But with the waist level shooting and goofy design I can quite easily grab shots I would otherwise no too shy to get, and the image quality is better than what I've seen from a m43rds camera. I find anything resembling a DSLR to be like wearing orange hunting garb in most peoples eyes.
Anyways my only question is have you folks found it to be worth it adapting your M lenses? I've got CV 50mm 1.5, 28mm ƒ2, and 21mm ƒ4. Those coupled with either the Sony 16 or zoom could be all I need. But is the quality there with the adaptors? It seems like it is from what I've seen online but i'd love some opinions on that.
I'll post more pictures through the week, as I plan on having this camera in my bag at all times.
Oh yes, before I buy, is the NEX-5 worth it? I have a 5D2 for 1080P and honestly I don't care about video too much. Any other differences?
The only thing I have to complain about is the lens, and lens selection. 18-55 ƒ3.5-5.6? Really? If I wanted this basic slow zoom I could have bought a Nikon or Canon. And with only one prime, plus nobody making E lenses yet, it's almost like they're TELLING us to adapt M lenses. I'm not usually a distortion snob but man, at 18mm this lens might as well be a reverse fisheye. Don't bother taking pictures of signs buildings, they'll look a little pudgy.
I haven't been too bothered by the design. It's annoying to have to go into the menu to change ISO but the M8 was like that. I've adapted fairly quickly to it.
What I love is how discrete it is. So far my most discrete subway/street camera is my Motorola Droid with the Vignette App, just pretend you're playing Angry Birds! (and no, I'm not kidding, I actually think this is a great camera if you accept cell phone image quality). But with the waist level shooting and goofy design I can quite easily grab shots I would otherwise no too shy to get, and the image quality is better than what I've seen from a m43rds camera. I find anything resembling a DSLR to be like wearing orange hunting garb in most peoples eyes.
Anyways my only question is have you folks found it to be worth it adapting your M lenses? I've got CV 50mm 1.5, 28mm ƒ2, and 21mm ƒ4. Those coupled with either the Sony 16 or zoom could be all I need. But is the quality there with the adaptors? It seems like it is from what I've seen online but i'd love some opinions on that.
I'll post more pictures through the week, as I plan on having this camera in my bag at all times.
Oh yes, before I buy, is the NEX-5 worth it? I have a 5D2 for 1080P and honestly I don't care about video too much. Any other differences?
