Nex 6

[paulpp]

So I'm waiting for the battery to charge in camera because the store was out of chargers, 280mins, hope the battery charge is faster or maybe cause its the first charge; and I'm reading the manual. It say's that when using the LCD you get approx 360 images but with the viewfinder only 270? is it a miss print or does the viewfinder draw more power?

The first charge also took a long time for me. My worry is the shorter time with the viewfinder hence my earlier post re power save

 

[Hiyawaan]

This thing is a power hog, I've never seen a battery go quite this quick, also how it hangs on the strap the evf is constantly switching on cause of my belly, so I figure I just switch it off, it seems to start up reasonably quick with the sigma primes. (any one notice how I have no intention of reducing the size of my belly?)

I got to say I wasn't overly impressed with the image data converter software so I got DXO optics pro 8 because CS5 doesn't support camera raw 7.1, much much better IMO.

I'm really diggin this camera!

I gotta add that live view is awesome too, never used it before.

My only regret is not getting this camera sooner.

 

[kxl]

... because CS5 doesn't support camera raw 7.1, much much better IMO.

What I do (and likely others with CS5 and the NEX6) is to convert the .ARW file to .DNG via the Adobe DNG converter, then bring in the .DNG file into CS5.
One more step, but cheaper than upgrading CS.

 

[Hiyawaan]

What I do (and likely others with CS5 and the NEX6) is to convert the .ARW file to .DNG via the Adobe DNG converter, then bring in the .DNG file into CS5.
One more step, but cheaper than upgrading CS.

Hi KXL,
I've never worked with DNG's, with the method you mentioned can you still work on the DNG with camera raw and still be lossless?

 

[MIkhail]

My experience is different; the 16 is an excellent lens in my view. True, the corners may not seem as sharp as the center at f2.8-f4, but that says more about the center than about the corners. The center is wicked sharp. At smaller apertures, corner sharpness catches up, exactly as you would need it in practical applications. Emphasis on the center when shooting at large aperture (e.g. portraits), emphasis even over the frame when shooting at small aperture (e.g. landscapes)..

Agree. It's perfectly acceptabe lens.

 

[kxl]

Hi KXL,
I've never worked with DNG's, with the method you mentioned can you still work on the DNG with camera raw and still be lossless?

When you convert the .ARW file using Adobe DNG converter, select the option "Do not use lossy compression." Upon conversion to .dng, you can open the file using Camera Raw like you would any other raw file.

 

[Hiyawaan]

Thx Kxl,
will check it out, but since I downloaded DXO don't think they'll except a return/refund, regardless it seems pretty cool.

 

[Jetexas]

I picked up the ECM-XYST1M stereo microphone.

It's passable for video interviews in quiet settings -- much better than the built-in mic and very portable for traveling light.

However, I still wish the NEX-6 had a mic input, so I didn't have to run off-camera mics to a separate recorder.

I also picked up Leica M, Canon FD, and Nikon adapters.

I have the 16-55 kit lens, but it doesn't get much use. It's ok, but as someone mentioned before, you get major distortion in the corners when shooting wide with it.

 

[Shac]

Hi KXL,
I've never worked with DNG's, with the method you mentioned can you still work on the DNG with camera raw and still be lossless?

Yes that's what I did until. I upgraded to CS6 - no problems

As to battery life - yes the nex's do use up a lot - while you can buy after-market batteries - check the specs - many work OK, but do not have the same specs and hence same battery power as the OEM batteries. That said you can buy a bunch of non-OEM's along with a charger - the batteries are ssmall and easy to carry along. I take my Nex with me on 7-8 day backpack trips with 3 batteries and so far have had power to spare.

Hawks Leica M adapter is well made and has the advantage of a helical to allow closer focusing - well worth the money.

Great cameras IMO

 

[Paddy C]

I've had a 5N for a year and half now and find it to be a great digital camera. A few complaints for sure but I really like it.

Last fall I bought the LAEA2 adapter to make use of Alpha mount lenses. I think this is a great accessory for the NEX system. It's given me a good macro (using the Minolta 50mm 2.8 macro) and a great portrait lens (using the cheap Sony 85 2.8). I'm looking at picking up some more old Minolta lenses to play around with.

One thing I've also wanted to try is mounting an old PC lens (Nikon or Canon) via adaptor and see what that turns out. Haven't wanted to part with the money yet but could be quite fun.

 

[vidgamer]

My experience is different; the 16 is an excellent lens in my view. True, the corners may not seem as sharp as the center at f2.8-f4, but that says more about the center than about the corners. The center is wicked sharp. At smaller apertures, corner sharpness catches up, exactly as you would need it in practical applications. Emphasis on the center when shooting at large aperture (e.g. portraits), emphasis even over the frame when shooting at small aperture (e.g. landscapes)..

The corners aren't as sharp, and there's extreme softness particularly at f2.8. As you stop down the aperture, that extreme softness is pushed further into the corners until you hardly notice it, and by f7.1, it's gone, at least on my lens. Not that the corners are ever super-sharp, but it's the blurry-softness that might distract. But most of the time, if I'm at f2.8, I have other problems (low light!), and soft corners just don't rank that high as a problem. Not to mention that unless it's really blurry, and you have a subject there, soft corners don't necessarily impact the photo, IMHO. Not to say that you couldn't possibly have a photo ruined by soft corners, but when it's typically grass, pavement, sky, etc., it just is hard to notice until you go hunting for it.

I have one photo that I printed at 8x10 that used f6.3 -- so how did the blurry corners look? Well, they were nonexistent after I was done cropping for the 8x10 ratio. The thing is, saying that there are "soft corners" doesn't describe how deep into the photo the effect goes.

But there are going to be those that won't find that acceptable. This is something each person is just going to have to work out for themselves. Meanwhile, the 16mm is the cheapest Sony-made Nex lens. I think it's a fun lens, and with the center-sharpness so high, I don't have a big problem with it. I know about the corners. I've had worse.