Sony NEX3 and NEX5 EVIL cameras with new E-mount

[PCB_RF]

Like I said, these evaluations are all personal. Your categories of small, medium and behemoth are right for you, but they're not right for me.

I can fit a G1 w/17mm in a small handlebar bag on my bicycle. With room for a couple of energy bars and a multi-tool. If I leave out the multi-tool I can fit the 14-42 zoom. Doesn't effect the handling---both size and weight matter. The D5000/35 combo won't fit in the bag, but I can fit the G1 and two lenses.

I can stick the G1/17 in a small fanny pack. The D5000/35 would take a medium bag. The medium bag would fit the G1 and two lenses. And the G1 kit would still weigh less.

I have a Fuji F30, and an F200EXR, and a Panny LX3. They are all pocketable, but none of them match m4/3 output and performance for me. I hate using them outdoors because I can't see the screen. I can't control depth of field. The only thing I can do is fit them in a smaller space, which doesn't matter, since the G1/17 is small enough for me.

And I'm not alone. One in five interchangeable-lens cameras purchased in some large markets today are m4/3. I don't think all those people are buying them because they think m4/3 is retro chic. I think many are buying them because they want to upgrade from p&s but think the D30000/Rebel XS/etc are too darned big. If there was no m4/3 maybe they'd buy the DSLR, but maybe they'd stick with their p&s. People are funny that way.

The big question Sony brings with the NEX series is whether consumers looking for compact interchangeable-lens cameras will buy a NEX instead of m4/3. Will it eat into m4/3 share? Entry-level DSLR share? Both?

And what do Nikon/Canon have in the wings, if anything?

Things are getting interesting!

 

[gavinlg]

And what do Nikon/Canon have in the wings, if anything?

Things are getting interesting!

Indeed - when Nikon and Canon release their mirrorless offerings things will really get interesting.

 

[Paddy C]

If you haven't already, check out the image samples posted so far by all the camera review sites from the sony nex cameras. Check them out full size, taken by both the 16mm and the zoom, and note how soft and crappy the corners are, how much CA high contrast edges have. From the samples posted so far, the lens quality of the sony E series lenses looks pretty average.

I noticed this right away. On some of the images you see wicked smearing, distortion, and colour shift in the corners. To me, totally unacceptable levels.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not sure what people are seeing in these images.

 

[NickTrop]

@Fdigital... The 5D, tho small for a full frame, is not the size of a D40 or D60. Take away the giant zoom lens, and replace it with a prime 1/3 the size and shrink the body down a bit, then you have a fair comparison. Both too big for the pocket, both fine on a wrist strap, size difference doesn't matter as a practical matter. The 4/3 "cheats" too by not having frivolous things like an optical viewfinder or flash. So, the Oly is smaller but at the expense of a smaller sensor (and all the compromises that go along with it), no optical viewfinder and no flash. Engineering genius! The D5000 is fine on a wrist strap, no problem, as are all the latest compact DSLRs that have optical vfs and flash - scuse the "hump", I know it messes up the lines. True, at lower ISOs, at F4, F5.6 I'm sure both cameras have fine output, perhaps indistinguishable. But don't tell me they're the same at 1600 or above, please. Can you get DoF effects with the Oly like you can with the Canon? No. Not even the same as APS-C. As for DxO? I'll still stick with their testing regardless of anomolies that have been detected. It's simply not enough to substantiate your claim. Again, if their testing was worthless then optics companies wouldn't be buying their software to test their optics. It's really the only objective resource available for comparing cameras.

 

[gavinlg]

I'm aware of what you're saying, but you're over exaggerating the differences. With the panasonic 20mm 1.7 it's actually pretty easy to get a small DOF wide open even with 3/4 body length portraits. It's also a superb lens.

The e-lp1 has both an electronic viewfinder with a view larger than a d60/d40 OVF, and an in-built flash. It's impossible to have a traditional style optical viewfinder in a mirrorless camera, because there is no mirror - hardly a design decision.

The olympus cameras like the e-lp1 and e-p1/e-p2 aren't as good as the 5d at iso1600, They CAN however shoot at f1.7 at iso 800 with the use of the on-sensor image stabiliser and get similar results. And iso 800 is great quality on m4/3.

 

[semilog]

Essentially all modern cameras with 4/3 or APS-C sensors are superb, and the practical IQ differences between the cameras and the sensors are much less than most forumites seem to concede. Choose your cameras based on the lenses you want to use, and on the ergonomics.

If you need to work in lower light, get a 5D or D700 or (maybe) an M9. Use fast glass, or a tripod.

If you want most of your pictures to look good as out-of-camera JPEGs, some cameras really are better.

None of this is rocket science (well, sensor design is).

 

[Matus]

Fdigital, that size comparison reminds me a comparison of compact film SLR and 6x7 SLR. And the numebrs are comparable - 4/3 is 4 times smaller (area wise) as FX in the 5D, 6x7 film is about 4x large than 35mm film frame.

But the wrong part in that comparison is that the EP-1 sports SLOW 3.5 - 5.6 zoom lens while the canon has fast 2.8 zoom on it.

Back to new sony cameras - if they turn to be good enough I could finally dump my old Minolta 7D. Digital is at the end of my photographic interests, but still that end has a lot of use 😉

But I do agree that lenses should be either small or fast :angel:

 

[Andy Kibber]

But I do agree that lenses should be either small or fast :angel:

Preferably both? 🙂

 

[antiquark]

Another question about the NEX: why is the lens mount so wide? Check out this table:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_mount#List_of_lens_mounts

The E-mount is wider at 46mm than either the Nikon F or Leica M mounts (44mm). Yet the NEX sensor is smaller.

Makes no sense to me.

 

[semilog]

Preferably both? 🙂

And they should have high resolution, great control of aberrations, low flare, no distortion, superb rendition, lightning-fast autofocus, buttery manual focus, weather sealing, and a manual aperture ring. Oh, and they should be cheap.

 

[hkrz]

Oh, and they should be cheap.

Wrong!!! Should come free with the body!!!:angel:

 

[Miserere]

Another question about the NEX: why is the lens mount so wide? Check out this table:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lens_mount#List_of_lens_mounts

The E-mount is wider at 46mm than either the Nikon F or Leica M mounts (44mm). Yet the NEX sensor is smaller.

Makes no sense to me.

That's a good question, and one my e-friend Richard Harris asked himself too (he's an Alpha shooter). Check out this pic he made:

​

If I had to guess, I'd say Sony are covering their arses and looking to the future, making sure they don't shoot themselves in the foot if a FF MILC ever becomes viable. Or maybe they have one in the works already... Anybody want to start a new rumour? 😛

.
​

 

[Andy Kibber]

And they should have high resolution, great control of aberrations, low flare, no distortion, superb rendition, lightning-fast autofocus, buttery manual focus, weather sealing, and a manual aperture ring. Oh, and they should be cheap.

Exactly! And they should some kind of system that allows them to be mounted on any current or future camera. Not too much to ask, I'd say.

 

[semilog]

Exactly! And they should some kind of system that allows them to be mounted on any current or future camera. Not too much to ask, I'd say.

And view camera movements. Don't forget that the image circle has to cover view camera movements. 😱

 

[antiquark]

If I had to guess, I'd say Sony are covering their arses and looking to the future, making sure they don't shoot themselves in the foot if a FF MILC ever becomes viable.
​

Good theory and diagram, it seems very plausible!

 

[Kevin]

I wonder how well m-mount lenses will perform adapted to this camera.

 

[dnk512]

This camera is so thin that it should be possible to design an adapter for film-rangefinder-lenses and integrate a true prism rangefinder that sits on the top of the camera. Integrate it so the use of the lens is the same as when mounted on to true rangefinder cameras.

 

[ampguy]

anyone want to go into the lens adapter business??

 

[ethics_gradient]

That's a good question, and one my e-friend Richard Harris asked himself too (he's an Alpha shooter). Check out this pic he made:

​

If I had to guess, I'd say Sony are covering their arses and looking to the future, making sure they don't shoot themselves in the foot if a FF MILC ever becomes viable. Or maybe they have one in the works already... Anybody want to start a new rumour? 😛

.
​

Is there much of a point, though? The lenses they're making in E-mount almost certainly don't have that big of an image circle, so why bother with backward compatibility? Given how much Sony loves introducing proprietary standards, I'd think they'd jump at the chance to create a third, incompatible lens mount for a future full-frame EVIL camera.

 

[dnk512]

If you make $$$ from my idea, I want 'honorary' mention 🙂