Would you buy a full frame NEX and why?

[eleskin]

I would buy a full frame version of the NEX 7 in a heartbeat. It should be the same size as the Fuji X-Pro 1 if I were to design it. Price should be around $2000 or so. There is alot of legacy glass out there and Sony needs to build up product lines based on what they inherited from Minolta. Sony can reproduce some of Minolta's finest lenses in new mounts. The cost to Sony can be kept down in that they already have the lens designs from Minolta and only need to ramp up production.

For M glass owners, this would be wonderful news. At $2K or so, many thousands of Leica M lens owners would buy such a camera without question. For some, it would be their first digital camera for M lenses because such a camera would be vastly more affordable that Leica's offerings.

For those who do not own Leica lenses, this is still great news in that such a camera could mount ANY lens ever made for the 35mm and smaller format. A truly universal camera body, a first in the industry!

So the ball is in Sony's court, and the money to be made is waiting for them if they bould a full frame NEX!

 

[keytarjunkie]

It's not going to happen, because every E-mount lens they've made so far only covers APS-C.

Sorry for killing your dreams. One day in the distance future, we'll get a small mirrorless full-frame camera for less than the M9.

 

[EdwardKaraa]

I would buy almost any FF mirrorless that takes M lenses, Nex or not.

 

[Eric T]

No. Full frame is no longer necessary. Example: Fuji X-Pro1.

 

[celluloidprop]

Love when threads like this get started and 'designers' throw out the price it has to come in at. A price that is always absurdly low.

There's one mirrorless full-frame body on the market. It starts at $7k. That should tell you something.

 

[muser53]

In a heartbeat but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[jarski]

One day in the distance future, we'll get a small mirrorless full-frame camera for less than the M9.

or maybe in a less than a month.

 

[bowieknife]

great idea ! the M9 is way overpriced, and the M10 will be even more overpriced- but Sony is cashstrapped and anyway more consumer than pro oriented- FF Nex won't come soon

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

Before their present woes, I would have agreed that a FF Nex was a logical step. Somehow, I don't see them spending scarce resources on a niche market.

On the other hand, like Apple, it's never safe to predict what Sony will try next.

 

[sleepyhead]

Love when threads like this get started and 'designers' throw out the price it has to come in at. A price that is always absurdly low.

There's one mirrorless full-frame body on the market. It starts at $7k. That should tell you something.

Yes, it tells me that a non-Leica built one could probably be about half that amount.

 

[redisburning]

the M9 is not a mirrorless camera in the same way a NEX is.

A nex has no RF cam and no complicated optical viewfinder to build around.

A fullframe mirrorless camera with just an lcd, I would think 2,000 should be doable. Make the EVF an attachment though. I think that to focus, do focus peaking but instead of making it red or bright white when it's out of focus make it very slightly hazy so that the in focus area POPS.

 

[Traut]

No. Full frame is no longer necessary. Example: Fuji X-Pro1.

I agree totally. FF is only a relative measurement. It's only important in preserving FOV of legacy glass.

In a not directly related though the X2 should be an interesting product as well.

 

[celluloidprop]

A fullframe mirrorless camera with just an lcd, I would think 2,000 should be doable.

Why is that? When you factor in all the extra engineering (shorter lens to sensor distance in mirrorless than SLR presents a number of problems), why is $1000 less than a current-generation full-frame DSLR "doable"?

There are RF cams and excellent RF viewfinders in cameras that retail for $700 right now - how does that account for the cost?

 

[EdwardKaraa]

I agree totally. FF is only a relative measurement. It's only important in preserving FOV of legacy glass.

In a not directly related though the X2 should be an interesting product as well.

APSC has too much DOF in my opinion. I prefer FF.

 

[EdwardKaraa]

the M9 is not a mirrorless camera in the same way a NEX is.

A nex has no RF cam and no complicated optical viewfinder to build around.

A fullframe mirrorless camera with just an lcd, I would think 2,000 should be doable. Make the EVF an attachment though. I think that to focus, do focus peaking but instead of making it red or bright white when it's out of focus make it very slightly hazy so that the in focus area POPS.

I agree about the external EVF. The one in the Nex 7 has several issues that are better addressed by the external EVF of the Nex 5N and the GXR. I don't know about the pricing though. 2K sounds too close to the current crop sensor models. Unless Sony has no plans to start making money 😀

For me, the most important factor is the sensor itself. It needs to be AA filter free, and should have no corner issues with M glass.

 

[Pete B]

Post removed because I was wrong.
Pete

 

[redisburning]

Why is that? When you factor in all the extra engineering (shorter lens to sensor distance in mirrorless than SLR presents a number of problems), why is $1000 less than a current-generation full-frame DSLR "doable"?

There are RF cams and excellent RF viewfinders in cameras that retail for $700 right now - how does that account for the cost?

I think it would cost 2k to make. How much it would actually sell for I don't know.

 

[eleskin]

Great responses to this thread. Thanks!

Great responses to this thread. Thanks!

Thanks to all of you who responded to my thread! Lots of great comments and insight. I would say we would all like to see a camera like this made, even if our views on weather it is possible, price, etc differ. I will stick my neck out and predict Ricoh may be the one who may make a full frame module for the next GRX. I also predict Ricoh has taken note of what Sony has done and will include an EVF in the next camera.

Getting back to Sony: there have been rumors floating around that Sony has produced a NEX type body full frame, but it is still being tested.

I am sure all of you hope the above is true.

 

[douglasf13]

This statement is incorrect but is often touted. FOV is not the only important consideration. Images taken with a 35mm lens on an aps-c sensor (50mm equivalent) will be less foreshortened than images taken by a 50mm on 35mm format. This is the whole point. This is why medium format is still valid. This is why large format is still valid. Also, there are depth of field considerations. Field of view is irrelevant.
Pete

I think you misunderstood the point. When starting a new digital ecosystem, sensor size decisions aren't constrained to legacy/vintage lens lineups like they are for DSLR/rangefinder lens users who want their lenses to maintain the same equivalent field of view that they're used to. In essence, the current NEX cameras are considered "full frame," because the entire NEX lens lineup is built for aps-c.

We have Canon GX1, Nikon J1, m4/3, aps-c, etc. Asking when a 35mm NEX camera is coming is really no different than asking when a m4/3 camera will have an aps-c sensor...except that Sony does have a range of 35mm a-mount lenses to adapt, so they could combine the two into a hybrid system, as has been rumored. Sony could make the NEX-7 body a little larger with a 35mm sensor and AF motor, and then add an extension tube/adapter to fit a-mount lenses. E-mount lenses could fit without the adapter and the camera would automatically crop the images. Either way, I don't expect great M lens capability. I've been enjoying using Sony's made-for-aspc e-mount lenses lately, and I'm not sure I'd want to use larger SLR lenses for the sake of full frame. Granted, it could be fun with Leica R lenses.

As for price, Sony made the 35mm A850 for $1999 two years ago, so I don't think that price would be ridiculous for a FF NEX.

As for DOF field, it really only affects the far end of the scale, when comparing aps-c to 35mm. I'm not sure I've ever thought a shot of mine was ruined because I shot it at f2.8 rather than f2, which is about the difference between the two formats.

 

[craygc]

It'll happen once the APS-C mirrorless market plateaus off and manufacturers look for the next wave of generating enthusiasm in the must have crowd.

As much as I'll concur that APS-C is more than sufficient for image quality in the small format arena, it does nothing for my ability to use Leica glass for the AoV I purchased it for - and as much as I know the manufacturers couldn't care less, its my only criteria for consideration. I'll also guarantee when it does happen, the price will be an order of magnitude below the ridiculous prices Leica expects - yeah, I prefer the rangefinder for focusing but I can live without it for the current cost. One other point I'll make after some experience; I would always take the separate external electronic viewfinder that pivots over the build in one (ie. NEX 5n vs 7) any day. That range of adjustment for viewing is just invaluable in use.