Help me chose Nex5 or X100...

[karlori]

Hi,

Some time ago I have sold off all of my photography gear leaving me with just a paint job project M3 and a Nokton 50 1.5 ...
Now i had a 50D and 5dMkII and am interested in a APS-C camera... I would hate to have a full sized dslr and the price of "L" lenses.
My fav on the 35mm bodies was 35mm FOV, now what to do ? Do i take the NEX route and buy voigtlander lenses and some legacy ones, or do i buy the X100 and use it as is...
I have passed pages upon pages of online reviews and have no means of testing either cameras or handling them at all as no one carries them here...
Is the image quality difference really so different between the two ? I have so many questions i do not know where to start from... I like low and available light photography and really do not know what would be better a higher ISO performing camera or interchangeable lens one with wider apertures ...
Would like to hear from owners and people who tested both ...

Thanks in advance !

 

[Pablito]

They are totally different! And huge difference in price! I have handled the x100 and own the NEX. NEX has great low light performance. x100 has lovely viewfinder and also good low light performance. NEX kit lenses are lousy, especially the 16mm. You can buy NEX today, for the Fuji you will have to wait or over-pay. For me, neither of these could subsittute for DSLR, which is the bread & butter.

 

[Phantomas]

I've tried NEX5 and I would buy it and use it with an adapter and legacy lenses.
Except right now I'm waiting for NEX7 (with more manual controls).
When I first saw NEX5 I laughed. Then I held it and completely changed my mind. Great ergonomics. Loved the articulated screen (no need for a viewfinder for me as I can shoot it like TLR, more discretely).
My main reason for NEX is lens interchangeability, and it's 2-3 times cheaper. Otherwise X100 seems like a fine camera too.

 

[karlori]

They are totally different! And huge difference in price! I have handled the x100 and own the NEX. NEX has great low light performance. x100 has lovely viewfinder and also good low light performance. NEX kit lenses are lousy, especially the 16mm. You can buy NEX today, for the Fuji you will have to wait or over-pay. For me, neither of these could subsittute for DSLR, which is the bread & butter.

I can get both within a week so its not really a matter of availability, and having been an early adopter of the 50D i can vouch that the camera isn't close to bread & butter ... The X100 i could get for 1350€ and the NEX at the average retail price, when i do the math i can buy the NEX and a voigtlander lens.
How hard is it to use a MF lens and the camera on manual ? As I see and have read that there is no dedicated exposure buttons or wheels...😕

 

[douglasf13]

If you're a 35mm equivalent shooter, you'd probably want to wait for the Sony/Zeiss 24mm lens that is due for NEX this year, because most rangefinder lenses wider than 30mm have corner issues on NEX. I'm a 50mm equivalent shooter, so there are tons of great rangefinder options for NEX.

 

[douglasf13]

The NEX is fantastic for manual lens shooting. There is a button dedicated to manual focus magnification, and an expected firmware update is coming soon for focus peaking, which will be a game changer. I set my camera to M mode, and use the lens aperture ring for aperture control, the back dial for shutter speed, and the big C button for ISO. Works great.

 

[karlori]

Thanks for the quick responses, i think i am leaning towards the NEX, any point on holding out for the NEX 7 or should i go the NEX 5 route ? With the Voigtlander 35 mm 1.4 and 50 1.5 lenses ?

 

[Phantomas]

Naah, no point in holding out really, at least the next camera update is for NEX3, nothing concrete on NEX5 replacement. I'm only holding out because I don't NEED a compact digital right now. I'm observing what the industry will do in the next 12 months and then hopefully will have more to choose from. (M4/3 is also an option of course, but not for me, I have issues with such crop-sensors and the multiplier effect on legacy lenses).

BTW, the only negative thing I found on NEX5 (besides lack of controlls, that has been partially resolved by somewhat liberating firmware) is that it's surprisingly loud for a little fella. The shutter noise almost competes with DSLR!

(edit: you'll need a 24mm lens, not 35mm, in order to have a 35 equivalent).

 

[karlori]

I know about the lens but the 35mm is available from the same shop i would order the NEX and for a quite a decent price. I am currently without any gear except for the non operational M3 so any gear that is not a P&S would be great, im just not ready to take the plunge into the DSLR waters again...

 

[rxmd]

I think the most important thing of all is to take both cameras into your hands and see whether you like them. It's too easy to read what other people think of them, but what is important in the end is what YOU think of them.

If you think you might like one or the other, don't buy either until you've looked at both of them.

 

[karlori]

I think the most important thing of all is to take both cameras into your hands and see whether you like them. It's too easy to read what other people think of them, but what is important in the end is what YOU think of them.

If you think you might like one or the other, don't buy either until you've looked at both of them.

Thats the problem i can't at least not for a month or so... A family member is going to Germany and he will buy the camera i order but i can't really take a close look on any of them until the money is already out... I wish it was as easy as buying an M3 :bang:

 

[sper]

I love love love my X100. It's a photographers camera, where as the NEX CAN BE a photographers camera.

Both have great image quality, but NEX just sucks with the Sony junk glass. They seriously need a G or Zeiss lens for that system. Or maybe we all have it wrong and their market all this time has been cute japanese girls, and techy dads.

 

[jsrockit]

What do you prefer... a camera that has old school control dials, a great fixed fast 35mm equiv lens, an EVF/OVF built in, great old school feeling ergonomics, etc or one that has new school controls and menus, the ability to have true manual focus and interchangable lenses, consumer P&S ergonomics, etc. ?

People are talking about how the X100 is so much more expensive...but not when compared to the NEX5 body and a CV 35mm 1.4.

Also, you said you like 35mm lens FOV, but are going to go for 52.5mm and 75mm on the NEX?

It seems you really should be buying the X100 but are looking for an excuse to buy the Sony.

 

[karlori]

I've said that my current offerings of usable lenses at least for some time will be the 35 and 50 voigtlander lenses i do intend on getting a 24 mm lens from voigtlander or some other maker as soon as possible if i go the NEX route and then probably sell the 50mm lens... Buying lenses is infact building a system and probably defining what my future purchases will be... And I am not sure if I want to limit myself to one lens one camera or if i want to go deeper and have more expenses in a system i might not appreciate in the long run ...

 

[FalseDigital]

I vote for the X100. I got a chance to play with it before it's retail release. HOLY CRAP it feels amazing. For the first time shooting a digital camera I felt like I was shooting film. Also, I was pretty amazed at how high you could push the ISO without loss of quality. I went beyond 2000 in B/W and still got great results.

 

[jsrockit]

I've said that my current offerings of usable lenses at least for some time will be the 35 and 50 voigtlander lenses i do intend on getting a 24 mm lens from voigtlander or some other maker as soon as possible if i go the NEX route and then probably sell the 50mm lens... Buying lenses is infact building a system and probably defining what my future purchases will be... And I am not sure if I want to limit myself to one lens one camera or if i want to go deeper and have more expenses in a system i might not appreciate in the long run ...

So, then... haven't you answered your question? What made you think about the X100 then? Just curious. Either way, you'll get a tool that'll have decent quality.

 

[jsrockit]

Also, I was pretty amazed at how high you could push the ISO without loss of quality. I went beyond 2000 in B/W and still got great results.

The Sony NEX5 is the same way.

 

[Dante_Stella]

I own both an X100 and a NEX-5 - and I can actually comment firsthand.

1. The Sony "junk" glass is better than what people give it credit for - both within the limits of what it costs and in absolute terms.

2. A "junky" 18-55mm shot that actually gets focused in time is better than a superb Fujinon that could not lock on. You have no parallax, and you have face detection.

3. If you like turning rings, the Sony's MF capability is light years ahead of Fuji's - particularly with the 7x mag. This works with any lens, Sony or not, and you can instantly see focus shifts from aperture changes.

4. Having a zoom lens for video clips is big. Having a stabilized one is bigger. Has anyone mentioned the shotgun mike for the NEX?

I bought an NEX-5 around Christmas last year to screw around with while waiting for the X100 to arrive (I figured it would take 6 months, and I was almost right). When the X100 did arrive, it seemed that much less impressive - in fact, the only thing truly impressive about it was the OVF and the non-collapsing lens (the Sony also has one).

Dante

I love love love my X100. It's a photographers camera, where as the NEX CAN BE a photographers camera.

Both have great image quality, but NEX just sucks with the Sony junk glass. They seriously need a G or Zeiss lens for that system. Or maybe we all have it wrong and their market all this time has been cute japanese girls, and techy dads.

 

[pajamas]

Six months ago I had to decide between a GF1 and a Nex. I chose the GF1 due to the better lenses available for it. I was also wary of the Sony brand name for cameras.

Then in late March I got my hands on a X100 and took it on a trip with me together with my GF1. I ended up using the x100 most of the time on that trip. I really like the pictures coming out of it and amazed at the high usable ISO. I like the silent shutter. I like it's great looks. The OVF/EVF didn't do anything for me as I prefer the rear LCD (don't laugh). The biggest drawback is that I can't change lens on it.

But as soon as I got back from my trip I realized I wanted the Nex instead. LOL. With the Nex I will get my bigger sensor, I will get my folding LCD display for waist level shooting, and I get to be able to change lens on it. I have to give up on AF though as I will use legacy lens on it until something better comes along.

I am now waiting for the Nex-C3, and hunting down a CZ 50mm Sonnar. In the mean time I sold off my GF1 and in the process of selling off the x100 as well.

 

[MIkhail]

I own both an X100 and a NEX-5 - and I can actually comment firsthand.

1. The Sony "junk" glass is better than what people give it credit for - both within the limits of what it costs and in absolute terms.

2. A "junky" 18-55mm shot that actually gets focused in time is better than a superb Fujinon that could not lock on. You have no parallax, and you have face detection.

3. If you like turning rings, the Sony's MF capability is light years ahead of Fuji's - particularly with the 7x mag. This works with any lens, Sony or not, and you can instantly see focus shifts from aperture changes.

4. Having a zoom lens for video clips is big. Having a stabilized one is bigger. Has anyone mentioned the shotgun mike for the NEX?

I bought an NEX-5 around Christmas last year to screw around with while waiting for the X100 to arrive (I figured it would take 6 months, and I was almost right). When the X100 did arrive, it seemed that much less impressive - in fact, the only thing truly impressive about it was the OVF and the non-collapsing lens (the Sony also has one).

Dante

I can't agree more.
I got the kit with both lenses from Costco (while waiting for X100 as well) thinking that I will sell the lenses. I kept the lens instead. I was surprised to find that I use them more than I thought I would, and Leica-mount manual lenses- less than I thought. That's because while I see the difference in "draw" and such, the convenience and speed means more to me. I shoot RAW and correct distortions in Lightroom with one click of a button. They are sharp enough for me.
Where the hell this "junk lens" term comes from, I don't understand.