Thanks sebboh and TMaG82. I guess I'll skip the external flash. After some more testing today, I feel confident the built in flash covers all my needs. I've never needed to use a flash outdoors, so that's not an issue.
I bought a NEX 5N a month ago and don't like it....
Background: I started a couple of years ago with a Canon 400D and kitlens. I really enjoyed taking pictures and soon moved to a 5D and L stuff. 35mm F1.4 and 24-105 were my favorites. After a joyfull 2 years my shooting time reduced itself to some trips and vacation. It started to annoy me to always pack that weight and size with me. So I sold all my stuff and bought a 550D and 15-85. I really like that combo but I was always intrigued by NEX size cameras. I would love an even smaller, lighter and more stealthy setup than the 550D. So I bought the Nex 5N.
Because of the weather and short days, I've only experienced the Nex indoor and during snow periods. Main thing is that the Auto White Balance s*cks in these conditions and the colors are not my cup of tea. I'm a jpg kind of guy, so I don't have the experience nor the pleasure of editing pictures. Today I received the 16mm and surprise surprise it's not all that sharp . Another dissapointment. I was normally taking the NEX kit with me for my vacation to Cuba, but I think I'll take my 550D.
I just needed to vent about this, because I really was hoping this system was magical .
I love the pictures I see here on this forum and have a big respect for your guys.
I bought a NEX 5N a month ago and don't like it....
Background: I started a couple of years ago with a Canon 400D and kitlens. I really enjoyed taking pictures and soon moved to a 5D and L stuff. 35mm F1.4 and 24-105 were my favorites. After a joyfull 2 years my shooting time reduced itself to some trips and vacation. It started to annoy me to always pack that weight and size with me. So I sold all my stuff and bought a 550D and 15-85. I really like that combo but I was always intrigued by NEX size cameras. I would love an even smaller, lighter and more stealthy setup than the 550D. So I bought the Nex 5N.
Because of the weather and short days, I've only experienced the Nex indoor and during snow periods. Main thing is that the Auto White Balance s*cks in these conditions and the colors are not my cup of tea. I'm a jpg kind of guy, so I don't have the experience nor the pleasure of editing pictures. Today I received the 16mm and surprise surprise it's not all that sharp . Another dissapointment. I was normally taking the NEX kit with me for my vacation to Cuba, but I think I'll take my 550D.
I just needed to vent about this, because I really was hoping this system was magical .
I love the pictures I see here on this forum and have a big respect for your guys. ...Show more →
your experience doesn't sound that surprising. if your a jpeg only guy i would go with an olympus or fuji mirrorless camera. i've never liked what i see from NEX jpegs unless i'm shooting high contrast b&w (on the other hand i definitely prefer the sony raw files). i've never had a camera that could get decent white balance indoors, if you shoot jpeg i think your going to have to set white balance manually no matter what camera you shoot.
with regard to the sony 16mm. it should be very sharp in the center from f/4 on, but the corners will never get super sharp. i stop down to f/11 if i need acceptable corner sharpness and even then they're kinda weak. if it doesn't look sharp in the center i would check that you are getting correct focus (my copy doesn't seem terribly accurate in AF) and return it if it still isn't sharp in the center.
Take your 5N to the camera store and try out the Sigma 19 & 30.
There will be some Zeiss lenses next year that could be awesome.
Dawud wrote:
I bought a NEX 5N a month ago and don't like it....
Because of the weather and short days, I've only experienced the Nex indoor and during snow periods. Main thing is that the Auto White Balance s*cks in these conditions and the colors are not my cup of tea. I'm a jpg kind of guy, so I don't have the experience nor the pleasure of editing pictures.
I just needed to vent about this, because I really was hoping this system was magical .
I love the pictures I see here on this forum and have a big respect for your guys. ...Show more →
If you want magical, jpg only shooting is handcuffing yourself at the beginning of the process.
I haven't shot jpg in a long time, and I doubt I ever will(other than for jpg only modes), the extra detail and bit-depth plus white balance flexibility, are just too important to me.
And as a bonus when new raw conversion software is released, I can redevelop the picture, it's like going back in time and giving yourself a camera from the future.
Sony JPEG's suck, if you're a JPEG shooter get an 16MP Olympus m43 camera (OM-D or one of its smaller siblings) and be prepared to be amazed.
Note I say this as a dedicated Sony shooter. You can get amazing colour from the Sony's, but it requires a RAW workflow (or shooting film. Provia and Velvia with Sony and Minolta glass is amazing)
Dawud wrote:
I just needed to vent about this, because I really was hoping this system was magical .
I love the pictures I see here on this forum and have a big respect for your guys.
Sony JPEG processing isn't too good so usually I normally shoot just in RAW. The best results I've gotten out of the system usually involves adapting legacy lenses like the Contax G lenses. However, the few good native Sony lenses I have like the 24 f1.8 and 50mm f1.8 are good performers. The Sigma 19mm and 30mm f2.8 are also good choices.
sebboh wrote:
your experience doesn't sound that surprising. if your a jpeg only guy i would go with an olympus or fuji mirrorless camera. i've never liked what i see from NEX jpegs unless i'm shooting high contrast b&w (on the other hand i definitely prefer the sony raw files). i've never had a camera that could get decent white balance indoors, if you shoot jpeg i think your going to have to set white balance manually no matter what camera you shoot.
with regard to the sony 16mm. it should be very sharp in the center from f/4 on, but the corners will never get super sharp. i stop down to f/11 if i need acceptable corner sharpness and even then they're kinda weak. if it doesn't look sharp in the center i would check that you are getting correct focus (my copy doesn't seem terribly accurate in AF) and return it if it still isn't sharp in the center....Show more →
I like the white balance my canon gives me. Yes, it's a very bit to yellow, but I like the warmer feeling.
The Nex turned my pictures into something blue. If I change the white balance to "shade" I get a better pictues, but the people have yellow faces then . I don't feel like taking a white balance card with me and shoot that first before taking an other picture
I've only done a quick check with the 16mm, I'll need to test it a bit more.
LightShow wrote:
Take your 5N to the camera store and try out the Sigma 19 & 30.
There will be some Zeiss lenses next year that could be awesome.
If you want magical, jpg only shooting is handcuffing yourself at the beginning of the process.
I haven't shot jpg in a long time, and I doubt I ever will(other than for jpg only modes), the extra detail and bit-depth plus white balance flexibility, are just too important to me.
And as a bonus when new raw conversion software is released, I can redevelop the picture, it's like going back in time and giving yourself a camera from the future. ...Show more →
I would love the Zeiss, but it's currently really out of my budget. I don't want magical pictures, I want a great system. Small, light and compact. If the Canon EOS M would focus properly, I would get that. I tried the EOS M, but it's AF is really rubbisch.
mawz wrote:
Sony JPEG's suck, if you're a JPEG shooter get an 16MP Olympus m43 camera (OM-D or one of its smaller siblings) and be prepared to be amazed. Note I say this as a dedicated Sony shooter. You can get amazing colour from the Sony's, but it requires a RAW workflow (or shooting film. Provia and Velvia with Sony and Minolta glass is amazing)
Tomorrow or on monday the OM-D will arive in our mailbox. My girlfriend bought it together with the 20mm F1.7. I'm looking forward to testing it.
jonrock wrote:
Sony JPEG processing isn't too good so usually I normally shoot just in RAW. The best results I've gotten out of the system usually involves adapting legacy lenses like the Contax G lenses. However, the few good native Sony lenses I have like the 24 f1.8 and 50mm f1.8 are good performers. The Sigma 19mm and 30mm f2.8 are also good choices.
Hey gang. I've been kicking around the idea of selling my 5D and Canon lenses (24L II, 35L, 135L) and moving to just my NEX. 35mm is my 'normal' so the 5D + 35L has been a great combination for me. The 24 is nice when I'm shooting urban stuff in tight spaces, and the 135 has been a great portrait lens, despite it being the least used I'll probably miss it the most... Canon really got it right with that lens.
Anyway... currently I own the following CV lenses:
- 15/4.5
- 35/2.5
- 40/1.4
- 90/3.5
I would plan to sell the 15 and 35 and pick up the Sony-Zeiss 24/1.8 and the Sony 10-18. These two lenses will cover most of what I shoot. I've never been super thrilled with what I've seen from the 24/1.8 ...but it fills the 35mm gap I've been missing for so long.
For awhile I had my heart set on an A99, and the performance sure doesn't disappoint, but I've been questioning whether I *need* a FF sensor anymore, and if I even want an SLR. I think the answer to that first question is "no". The current Sony APS-C sensors offer great performance, it will never be as good as the current FF, but it's been plenty good enough for me so far. The lens lineup has been improving, and will only get better as Zeiss roll out their new stuff. As to the second question, I'm not sure if I would miss my SLR. If I had to pick only one system it would be the NEX due to its smaller size and weight *for the gear I use*.
I thought I would see if anyone wants to weigh in. Anyone else considered going from an SLR to NEX only, or have you already moved past considering it and just done it?
Jacob D wrote:
I thought I would see if anyone wants to weigh in. Anyone else considered going from an SLR to NEX only, or have you already moved past considering it and just done it?
I believe Makten went from a Nikon D700 to NEX 5N only and then back to a D700.
So far I've stayed with my 5D+Contax lineup but I would like to have live view and a more modern sensor would be welcome too. Maybe I'll buy a used NEX 5N some time to see how I like it.
Jacob, most of the images I've seen you post are stopped down, in which case your plan makes a lot of sense. The only question is if you would miss the shallow DoF of the 35L, which I don't think you'll quite duplicate with the 24/1.8. That's the only reason I've been thinking about adding a FF SLR.
The 5N vs. any SLR is definitely a different experience. I'm sort of partial to TLR ergonomics, and in some strange way, the 5N feels similar (the way I normally handle it). The more I use it, the less I use my 5D. I wear glasses too, so a view finder has never been my best friend.
Al, most of the images you've seen me post are here in the Alt forum probably, thus posted with my 5N and mostly slow lenses. I have (not recently) posted in the people forum where I use the 35L much more for family photojournalistic type of shots. Sometimes I like the shallow DOF, but more often than not I'd prefer a little more DOF to be honest. Taking a photo of 2 kids in poor lighting and keeping them both in focus at f1.4 is pretty tough to do... this is part of what started me thinking about making some changes.
. Another dissapointment. I was normally taking the NEX kit with me for my vacation to Cuba, but I think I'll take my 550D.