mackigator
Well-known
http://cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Alpha_NEX_3_5/high_ISO_noise.shtml
The NEX5 does very well in this comparison.
The NEX5 does very well in this comparison.
ampguy
Veteran
Yes, impressive!
FrankS
Registered User
snip:
The NEX-5 under-exposed this shot for the region we wanted to crop, so we applied +1EV compensation for the sequence below. The image above was taken with the Sony Alpha NEX-5 at 200 ISO with an exposure of 1/3 (following +1EV compensation) and the lens set to 20mm f5.6; the original Large Fine JPEG measured 4.5MB. The exposures from the D90 and E-P2 below have no compensation applied as their default metering delivered images which matched the desired subject brightness.
This makes me feel uncomfortable with the results.
The NEX-5 under-exposed this shot for the region we wanted to crop, so we applied +1EV compensation for the sequence below. The image above was taken with the Sony Alpha NEX-5 at 200 ISO with an exposure of 1/3 (following +1EV compensation) and the lens set to 20mm f5.6; the original Large Fine JPEG measured 4.5MB. The exposures from the D90 and E-P2 below have no compensation applied as their default metering delivered images which matched the desired subject brightness.
This makes me feel uncomfortable with the results.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
This is not a surprise to anyone who's been paying attention to the sensor wars.
The current Sony APS-C sensor, used in the NEX, Sony D-5000, Pentax K-x, etc., appears to have leapfrogged the field in DR and high-ISO performance, and it approaches the performance we'd normally associate with much larger pixel sizes (Nikon D700, etc.). It's a remarkable achievement.
Only with the 7D is Canon starting to catch up to Sony. Canon appears to be a year behind Sony. Panasonic and Samsung appear to be another 6 months or so behind Canon.
Falk Lumo was probably the first (outside of the camera companies) to fully appreciate, and report, just how good this generation of Sony sensors really is.
The current Sony APS-C sensor, used in the NEX, Sony D-5000, Pentax K-x, etc., appears to have leapfrogged the field in DR and high-ISO performance, and it approaches the performance we'd normally associate with much larger pixel sizes (Nikon D700, etc.). It's a remarkable achievement.
Only with the 7D is Canon starting to catch up to Sony. Canon appears to be a year behind Sony. Panasonic and Samsung appear to be another 6 months or so behind Canon.
Falk Lumo was probably the first (outside of the camera companies) to fully appreciate, and report, just how good this generation of Sony sensors really is.
Frank Petronio
Well-known
Aren't they all pretty darn good at Base ISO? It's the high ISO stuff that makes it an interesting camera....
ampguy
Veteran
Hi Semilog
Hi Semilog
Wow, I'm glad there's something that we agree on!
I fully agree with you that the Sony sensors in the NEX appear to be outstanding, maybe even better than the one in my ~2006 M8.
I'm surprised that D90 didn't fare better, but I guess its technology for the sensor is getting a bit long in the tooth.
Hi Semilog
Wow, I'm glad there's something that we agree on!
I fully agree with you that the Sony sensors in the NEX appear to be outstanding, maybe even better than the one in my ~2006 M8.
I'm surprised that D90 didn't fare better, but I guess its technology for the sensor is getting a bit long in the tooth.
Andy Kibber
Well-known
Now you've made me feel bad. I do a lot of shooting with the D90's older brother -- the D80!
ampguy
Veteran
hmm
hmm
meters between different vendors and even different models within a vendors lineup will differ, so I'm not sure how else the tests should have been performed.
I wouldn't want to see one camera tested with over or under exposed images.
I guess the tester could have under-exposed both the 4/3 and the D90 by -1 or whatever was needed to make the images equal, but then all 3 of the images would be underexposed -1, so I think they did the right thing, at least +/- 1/3rd EV in for that scene.
I think the tester should have explained the metering difference though. For exmaple, in that particular type of scene, does the NEX generally underexpose at the meter setting used?
The sensor data implies it has good DR, so maybe they're being overly conservative about blowing highlights and brought over stuff from the P&S metering into the NEX?
Clearly these first generation NEX models will be improved upon.
hmm
meters between different vendors and even different models within a vendors lineup will differ, so I'm not sure how else the tests should have been performed.
I wouldn't want to see one camera tested with over or under exposed images.
I guess the tester could have under-exposed both the 4/3 and the D90 by -1 or whatever was needed to make the images equal, but then all 3 of the images would be underexposed -1, so I think they did the right thing, at least +/- 1/3rd EV in for that scene.
I think the tester should have explained the metering difference though. For exmaple, in that particular type of scene, does the NEX generally underexpose at the meter setting used?
The sensor data implies it has good DR, so maybe they're being overly conservative about blowing highlights and brought over stuff from the P&S metering into the NEX?
Clearly these first generation NEX models will be improved upon.
ampguy
Veteran
well
well
The first photo magazine I always check out at the newstands, a nature photo magazine, always has great photos from D70s, and D80s, along with film.
well
The first photo magazine I always check out at the newstands, a nature photo magazine, always has great photos from D70s, and D80s, along with film.
Now you've made me feel bad. I do a lot of shooting with the D90's older brother -- the D80!