Judging by the A77 performance, it looks like the NEX-7 should be similar to the NEX-5n in performance when output to the same size, and the NEX-7 has the obvious advantage of more resolution, so it looks like a net gain for the NEX-7. We'll see.
philber wrote:
I did just that, and came up with relatively little. Yes, the 7 can shoot 3 fps Vs the 2.3 of the 5N, which suggests greater computing power. Yes, it can do another half-stop in high ISOs. But that in itself doesn't amount to much is the IQ isn't better than the 5N's. In 6 weeks, we will know, and I will compare a 7 to my 5N. Until then, I take what is published on the basis of JPEGs from pre-produciton cameras with a large grain of salt.
Ergonomics is very different. Doesn't it matter to you?
Yakim Peled wrote:
Ergonomics is very different. Doesn't it matter to you?
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
If you're planning on primarily being a viewfinder user, I agree that the NEX-7's ergonomics are superior. If you're planning on primarily shooting with the LCD (such as at waist-level), I'm starting to feel that Sony's decision not to include a touchscreen on the NEX-7 was a significant oversight. It may seem gimmicky, but I find using the touchscreen to select which area to zoom in on during MF assist to be a major convenience, particularly since if you shoot at waist level, the other buttons aren't that accessible. My process generally is to focus approximately with peaking, tap the touchscreen to zoom in on an area, and then tweak the focus with MF assist.
The touch screen is also useful for selecting AF points, but I don't shoot AF that often.
douglasf13 wrote:
Judging by the A77 performance, it looks like the NEX-7 should be similar to the NEX-5n in performance when output to the same size, and the NEX-7 has the obvious advantage of more resolution, so it looks like a net gain for the NEX-7. We'll see.
douglasf13 wrote:
Judging by the A77 performance, it looks like the NEX-7 should be similar to the NEX-5n in performance when output to the same size, and the NEX-7 has the obvious advantage of more resolution, so it looks like a net gain for the NEX-7. We'll see.
But if you have to output to the same size then is there a resolution advantage?
You will likely be able to enjoy the the resolution advantage at base-to-low ISO where the noise is not great enough to eliminate the detail. At higher ISOs the noise will eat the extra detail and you will get about the same effective resolution / detail as the lower MP sensor (while spending more card space). So whether the sensor provides any advantage or not will depend on your intended uses.
curious80 wrote:
But if you have to output to the same size then is there a resolution advantage?
You will likely be able to enjoy the the resolution advantage at base-to-low ISO where the noise is not great enough to eliminate the detail. At higher ISOs the noise will eat the extra detail and you will get about the same effective resolution / detail as the lower MP sensor (while spending more card space). So whether the sensor provides any advantage or not will depend on your intended uses.
Well, if you are _only_ going to shoot iso 3200 and up, I suggest waiting for a d800 or 5d mkIII anyway
Off course Well personally I don't need 24MP ever, so doesn't really matter to me anyway. I suspect that the resolution advantage will be gone by ISO 400-800, which is not necessarily a problem as things like landscapes etc where people often need very high resolution tend to be shot at low ISO anyway.
In practical, everyday use - going by the DPreview raw sample comparisons I posted - I do not see a clear resolution advantage of the Sony APS 24MP sensor over the APS 16MP sensor. With most native lenses, I don't think it's going to be there. With a few really good alt lenses used in certain situations and at low ISO, it may turn out to be noticeable/ useful. At even moderately high ISO's such as curious80 suggests - 400/800 - I suspect there will be no resolution advantage at all. Even the older FF 24MP Sony's will offer more still - cleaner base ISO's (and thats at a base ISO of 200), about one stop advantage in noise at higher ISO's (ironic as these cameras where always dogged for poor higher ISO performance) and ultimately, higher practical/ useable resolution. I think it's clear that the APS 24MP sensor underperforms the three year old FF 24MP sensor in most practical applications. Really should not be that surprising I suppose given the sensor size difference and higher lens quality requirements of the smaller sensor.
curious80 wrote:
Off course Well personally I don't need 24MP ever, so doesn't really matter to me anyway. I suspect that the resolution advantage will be gone by ISO 400-800, which is not necessarily a problem as things like landscapes etc where people often need very high resolution tend to be shot at low ISO anyway.
Right. I usually shoot at 100-200 ISO, so there will be an advantage to the NEX-7 for me. And if it only as good as the NEX-5N at 3200 ISO that's fine too, I still have an advantage at low ISO and in terms of the controls and functionality of the camera.
I guess my thinking differs here to most; I tend to shoot handheld just about all the time, most of which is in dimmer circumstances; however, I seldom find the higher ISO a real concern, maybe partly because noise free images would not make or break the type of shooting I do.
When I get caught in the pixel peeping spiral I often find in forums I tend to remember what I used to work with in film and all of a sudden I get a lot of appreciation for my current gear.
High ISO is like the MP race: there's never an end to it.
The fact is that the majority of users will typically shoot near base ISO anyway so the NEX-7 would (on paper) have an advantage. All the posted images I have seen to date should certainly not be used to make a decision on whether or not to buy this camera. We need some real testing, with good glass, by real users, and under controlled test conditions. I truly do expect good things from this camera and feel it won't disappoint. Time will tell....
I have quite a few keepers in the ISO 1000 to 2000 range. That is the only way to shoot in places that tolerate cameras, but neither flash nor tripods, such as churches, palaces and museums. And that is when using f:1.4 glass as well.
alwang wrote:
My process generally is to focus approximately with peaking, tap the touchscreen to zoom in on an area, and then tweak the focus with MF assist.
Thanks for the tip! I didn't realize it was possible. Great!!!
