sebboh wrote:
no macro test for the macros?

there's a fair bit of purple fringing on the vivitar at wide apertures...
winter is coming. so i might also find time for an macro macro test

anyway, here is the 24mm comparison:

If you guys are interested in the 35mm f1.8 OSS for the NEX, there's a review up a ephotozine.com.

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/sony-e-35mm-f-1-8-oss-lens-review-20665

jonrock wrote:
If you guys are interested in the 35mm f1.8 OSS for the NEX, there's a review up a ephotozine.com.

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/sony-e-35mm-f-1-8-oss-lens-review-20665

looks pretty solid, i do kinda like the idea of having a stabilized lens...

sebboh wrote:
jonrock wrote:
If you guys are interested in the 35mm f1.8 OSS for the NEX, there's a review up a ephotozine.com.

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/sony-e-35mm-f-1-8-oss-lens-review-20665

looks pretty solid, i do kinda like the idea of having a stabilized lens...

It looks decent though I'm curious to see how it compares to the Zeiss 32mm f1.8 that's supposed to come out later on in 2013.

jonrock wrote:


It looks decent though I'm curious to see how it compares to the Zeiss 32mm f1.8 that's supposed to come out later on in 2013.

Yep, I'm waiting to see how this one performs too. It doesn't seem like much, but I actually will prefer the 32mm FOV to the 35. I do notice a difference in framing between my Pentax 31/1.8 and my CV 35/1.2.

Yeah, I'm pretty torn. If the Zeiss lens is going to cost twice as much, not have OSS, and potentially not be supported by the on-sensor PDAF, it's going to have to be spectacular quality-wise. On the other hand, while there are no obvious flaws in these samples from the Sony 35/1.8, I can't say the rendering is particularly speaking to me either. It doesn't seem to have much 3D pop.

I'm sort of wishfully hoping that the Contax G autofocus adapter will allow me to use the Planar 35/2 instead of any of those two as an autofocus lens… Here's hope!

xbarcelo wrote:
I'm sort of wishfully hoping that the Contax G autofocus adapter will allow me to use the Planar 35/2 instead of any of those two as an autofocus lens… Here's hope!

while i do really like the look of the g35 from f/4 to f/11, i'm sure the new sony and zeiss will be sharper everywhere.

I don't doubt it, but when I want sharp, I'll use the Contax G 28 2,8…

xbarcelo wrote:
I don't doubt it, but when I want sharp, I'll use the Contax G 28 2,8…

fair enough, i just prefer the g28 in all regards including focal length and don't really like the way the g35 looks wide open in most situations. everybody has their preferences.

Indeed. I'm quite the opposite. I'm not sure why, but I prefer how the planar draws… I know I'm in the minority here, because it seems that everybody else swears by the 28.

Anyone had chance to play with NEX-6 extensively? It actually just landed in the shops here in Japan and I had a fiddle around with one. Sadly, I didn't have any adapted lenses with me so the test was pretty much pointless...:/

Nevermind.

Krosavcheg wrote:
Anyone had chance to play with NEX-6 extensively? It actually just landed in the shops here in Japan and I had a fiddle around with one. Sadly, I didn't have any adapted lenses with me so the test was pretty much pointless...:/
mine should arrive at the end of the month, if you have any special questions just ask and i will try to answear them as fast as possible.

Phillip

Krosavcheg wrote:
Anyone had chance to play with NEX-6 extensively? It actually just landed in the shops here in Japan and I had a fiddle around with one. Sadly, I didn't have any adapted lenses with me so the test was pretty much pointless...:/

I own one, but haven't had a NEX before, so my comments might be more for NEX cameras in general.

Compared to my 300D though, it's amazing. Main complaint is lack of control over the dials. Also, the grip is good but not great, but I can't imagine it's much different than some of the other NEX grips. It feels ungainly and uncomfortable with a Rokkor 58/1.2 but heavenly with a G 45, probably like the other NEXes.

Haven't used wireless yet (haven't had a need to) but I suppose today or sometime I'll start playing around with that. Images look fantastic, but when shooting on a cloudy day on default metering all my images are 1-2 stops underexposed. I do prefer that to the opposite problem. Also, there's still noise at ISO 100 even when properly exposed.

Other than that, it's a pleasure to use and feels great dangling from my neck. Not much to say about it really. It does everything I want a camera to do and does it in a small package. I though the EVF would annoy me but I love it. Not as good as, say, an OM-1 viewfinder, but far, far better than the Rebel optical viewfinders.

Also, I will say, I never thought I wanted a touchscreen, and the NEX interface is actually pretty clean and does well without one, but it would be even better with a touchscreen. I wish it had one.

Anyone see a decent review of the SEL1018?

Shipping now, I guess

225 grams I'm drooling

uhoh7, where ya been? Haven't seen you over at MF Lenses in a while.

I finally purhased a NEX-5N a few months back to use exclusively with MF lenses. I expected good performance, but what has really amazed me is how that camera has given new life to some of my lenses. Actually, I believe all of my lenses perform better, but the biggest surprice was the performance of my Vivitar Series 1 lenses, which previously exhibited lots of CA and were very soft at full aperture. I'm not able to shoot they at fully open with great sharpness and rarely need to correct for CA. These two recent shots were both taken with my Series 1 135/2.3 fully open with no post camera CA correction:

Philip, Adam..thank you very much!
I am interested in dynamic range, IQ and high ISO performances mainly. If I ever take a plunge to get one I will probably stick it on full manual and be done with it...
Menus are indeed fiddly, but I think it's acceptable. Planning to have it as a travel camera and for street photography mainly.

woodrim wrote:
uhoh7, where ya been? Haven't seen you over at MF Lenses in a while.

I finally purhased a NEX-5N a few months back to use exclusively with MF lenses. I expected good performance, but what has really amazed me is how that camera has given new life to some of my lenses. Actually, I believe all of my lenses perform better, but the biggest surprice was the performance of my Vivitar Series 1 lenses, which previously exhibited lots of CA and were very soft at full aperture. I'm not able to shoot they at fully open with great sharpness and rarely need to correct for CA. These two recent shots were both taken with my Series 1 135/2.3 fully open with no post camera CA correction:


Wonderful shots. I became too controversial over there that's ok no hard feelings here, I'm often too plain spoken. I learned a tremendous bunch and loved the place. Once I declared Leica glass really was fantastic, well...that is not the place for such opinion. Then you are comparing 1024s on god knows what monitors, so it gets silly.

Glad you are enjoying the nex, I hope we will have a full frame version besides the vg900 soon.

Krosavcheg wrote:
Philip, Adam..thank you very much!
I am interested in dynamic range, IQ and high ISO performances mainly. If I ever take a plunge to get one I will probably stick it on full manual and be done with it...
Menus are indeed fiddly, but I think it's acceptable. Planning to have it as a travel camera and for street photography mainly.

I can only compare with my 300D. Still, the images respond quite well to pushing and pulling. There is noise at base ISO, but not beyond what might be expected.

Dynamic range: Again, can't compare to other NEXes. But it's beyond what my 300D could handle. It's probably very comparable to the other NEXes, from what I've seen. Skies still get patchy when overexposed in high contrast scenes, but for me it handles them better than my old Rebel. I'd happily accept an improvement in this area, but I assume it is at least as good as most other APS-Cs.

Image quality: No complaints. I've only shot in mostly overcast conditions, but so far (converting to DNG to use in LR3) I've been pleased with the colors. That was a concern of mine when buying a NEX but so far I've found the raw files easy to work with to get what you want.

I haven't shot at anything above ISO 1600 (which I found good), but the viewfinder gets significantly less pleasant in low-lighting situations.