camera (r)evolution

[nostatic]

For those who are into photography and gear, this is a pretty amazing time. Richard posted about his Sony NEX-3c previously, and Sony also makes the NEX-5n. I picked one up and have been shocked at how well this thing performs. In fact I sold my Canon 5D2 (full frame) and Canon glass. While I'm not saying the 5n is equivalent, frankly it is good enough and I like the colors out of the Sony better. Hi iso performance is just ridiculous with this thing and it is small. I like the Sony output so much I got an a77 for work and got my g/f an a65 to replace her Panasonic u4/3 system. The firmware on the a77/a65 needs an update as the high iso performance isn't quite there yet for the 24mp chip (yikes!), but that is rumored to be forthcoming.

With the 5n the lenses are metal, not plastic and very sleek/elegant. Very different from typical dSLR lenses which in the low end are plastic and can be cheap looking/feeling. I picked up the 55-210 which is really crisp for a relatively cheap lens. I have the 50/1.8 on order (which has image stablization) and there is a Zeiss 24/1.8 that is coming as well. Plus with an adapter you can run other Sony lenses or most anything else including Leica if you have them. The camera has peaking in the display so manual focus is stupid easy.

The a77/a65 use their clear mirror technology so you can get good AF while shooting video (at 1080p, multiple frame rates). And they use an electronic view finder that is 2.3M dots and is great, even for my aging eyes.






55-210 lens


crop from above

[porsche4life]

I'm curious to see what you think long term... I have been thinking I need to do something with my DSLR, upgrade, or get new glass, or something....

[lane912]

i was considering that camera but realy wanted to just have a nice point and shoot. so I opted for the lumix lx-5.
interested how the lens offering pans out. especialy third party like leica.

[nostatic]

They are making the 7n which is a little bigger and has the 24mp chip. I'm not interested in the higher resolution, but the form factor on the 7n looks to be potentially nicer. I just ordered the EVF for the 5n. It is the same as the one in the a77 and a65 (and will be built into the 7n). It automatically senses whether you're using the EVF or the LCD screen and switches automatically between them.

If Sony keeps making new E mount lenses, the NEX cameras will really take off. I have compared files from the 5n to the Canon, various u4/3 I've had, my point and shoot and my old Pentax. I prefer the 5n every time. The only downside is that the shake reduction isn't in the body but rather the lens has to have it. The kit zooms have it and the new 50/1.8 will, but the 16mm pancake, 30mm macro and 24mm Zeiss don't. The adapters are a big deal as I know guys that are using their legacy glass on the 5n and they are thrilled. The focus peaking (which pro-grade video cameras have had for years) makes manual lenses totally viable. So if you've got Leica M-glass around (or any good rangefinder glass) you can use the 5n. Lots of options.

Oh, and the 1080p video is gorgeous from any of them. This was the a77 using on-board sound. It was shot 1080p then I downrezzed and uploaded to youtube. The AF tracks while shooting.



this one was output HD: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIDzeDcvh9k

[Red88Carrera]

While those are some impressive photos, I have to say it's because of the lens, and not the 16Mpixel resolution of the camera.
Unless you are printing in very large format, the high Mpixel is of little value.
Here are a couple of shots I took with a 3.1Mpixel Minolta. It had a great lens.
I currently have a Canon SX30is with 14Mpixel, and 840mm zoom capability. I have yet to take a picture that even comes close to comparing to the Minolta 3.1.

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by lane912

i was considering that camera but realy wanted to just have a nice point and shoot. so I opted for the lumix lx-5.
interested how the lens offering pans out. especialy third party like leica.

I have (well, now selling) a DLux4, which is close to the LX-5 (previous Leica variant). While those are great point and shoots, the file quality between the two is significant, especially once you get over iso 800. The 5n can behave like a point and shoot - put it on full auto and snap away.

Here's a size comparison between the two. The first set is the kit 18-55 zoom (which is roughly equivalent to the Leica/Panasonic zoom range). The second is the 16mm pancake. Not the same function, but you can see that the size is pretty comparable. It almost fits into the same small case.

[motion]

Todd, I have the NEX-3C and continue to be blown away by this camera. You have a nice setup there!

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by Red88Carrera

While those are some impressive photos, I have to say it's because of the lens, and not the 16Mpixel resolution of the camera.
Unless you are printing in very large format, the high Mpixel is of little value.
Here are a couple of shots I took with a 3.1Mpixel Minolta. It had a great lens.
I currently have a Canon SX30is with 14Mpixel, and 840mm zoom capability. I have yet to take a picture that even comes close to comparing to the Minolta 3.1.

I know the issues around mp. I actually prefer the 16mp to the 24mp - more isn't necessarily better. Right now 16mp seems to be a sweet spot for APS-C. Printing isn't the only benefit though - with more pixels you can crop and still have workable images.

That said, you also need to compare apples to apples. Your Canon is small sensor camera - 1/2.3". You have to compare not only the resolution but the size and pixel density. In general if you cram more pixels onto the same size sensor you're going to get noise issues. Here's a visual reference - not all 16mp chips are created equal.

[juan ruiz]

Nice info! Just last week I purchased a New DSL Nikon D3100, while I was at the store, I saw those new cameras, and they certainly look great. I almost purchased one but because is a fairly new product and I don't know much about them, I choose the Nikon.

Do you think I made a bad choice?

[matthew-s]

Originally Posted by nostatic

Nice Diagram. Is the "four-thirds" system the same things as micro-four-thirds? If not, which of the other boxes is Micro 4:3? I sort of have my eye on the Oly EP-3, as an upgrade from a Nikon D50.

[matthew-s]

Originally Posted by juan ruiz

Do you think I made a bad choice?

Nostatic should reply, but I believe the 3100 has received excellent reviews. I can't imagine it would ever be categorized as a "bad choice". I think the key consideration across the camera's discussed in this thread is form-factor. If you are OK with the DSLR body, then I think you did great.

[nostatic]

If you like the Nikon, then you made a good choice

The truth is that most cameras these days are soooo good that the gear isn't the issue. Nikon generally has very good AF and low light capabilities. If it does what you want, then shoot with it and be happy. I specifically was going for small form factor and was just shocked at the image quality.

The biggest issue these days is when you have invested in a system. For instance if you have a bunch of nice Canon lenses, then if you decide to switch to Nikon or Sony it's going to end up costing you a lot more than just the cost of the new camera. In my case I had three Canon lenses (and another two at work) but I was enamored enough with the Sony to sell everything off. Luckily I had glass that is fairly popular so it was an easy sale. I've already bought 3 of the E-mount lenses for the Sony, have one on order, and likely will end up with the other two primes at some point. I'm holding off buying any more A-mount glass for the a77 as that is for work and if I need other glass for work then I'll figure it out later. For now the g/f is happy with her 18-250 though I'm not

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by matthew-s

Nice Diagram. Is the "four-thirds" system the same things as micro-four-thirds? If not, which of the other boxes is Micro 4:3? I sort of have my eye on the Oly EP-3, as an upgrade from a Nikon D50.

Yes, same sensor. The micro vs regular is due to the lens mount, not the chip size.

I had an EP-1 when they first came out and like it a lot. In u4/3 there are some nice pancake lenses that make for a small setup (like the Panasonic 20/1.7).

[Bill Douglas]

While we are talking photography... I know nothing about photoshop but would like to buy second had (cheap) an early version, but one that I can do photoshop things, whatever they are, to my pics on my Vista computer. What versions should I look for? No movie editing or other stuff needed.

Happy Sony a290 guy here

[nostatic]

GIMP - GIMP - for Windows

[Bill Douglas]

Gimp, that could do the business. One of our team was talking the other day about raising the black content in pics to make them (showing my ignorance of photography) more impresssive or something.

[Bill Douglas]

Here is Toby, the ex-wild cat. Pic res reduced to 500kb taken on the Sony.

[mossguy]

Bill, that's a great picture and a beautiful cat!

[Bill Douglas]

Thanks A battle scared fella, but loves his new life.

[vash]

thanks for this thread. i have sold every high end film camera i own.

i am looking for a great digital. thought M-something..or that titanium Dlux..but that sony is looking pretty good.