philber
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
I have just received my 5N, after two weeks of shooting a C3, and a year owning a NEX 5, and here is how they stack up. No pics, because my NEX 5 is gone, and I don't yet have LR support for the 5N.
Here are some basic indications, IQ wise. The new bodies are a significant improvement over the previous generation, without a doubt. Using LR 3.5 RC for the RAWs, the C3 has lots more detail than the 5 had, and nicer colours and contrast.
When I had the 5, it was a acceptable back-up body for my 5D, which sometimes surprised me by how good it actually was. Clean pictures, and nice colours were the strong suit. Light metering was the obvious weak point, as it could easily be significantly off, especially in high contrast backlit shots.
Compared to this, the 3 is not only better than the 5, it also betters my large Canon 5D II when it comes to colours and at least equals it for detail and noise. Were it not for the crop factor, the lack of acceptable rangefinder wide angles, and grain at ISO 200, I would call it outright superior to the 5DII in IQ. Whew!
Now, based only on JPEGs, the 5N is not the same as a C3 (unlike the previous generation when 3 and 5 were the same, IQ-wise). The llight metering cannot be fooled like the C3's, and that is a big plus. The grain that was annoying on 100% magnification of both 5 and C3 at ISO 200 (but not visible in print, even in A3+) seems to be gone, and that gives the pictures even more detail and a cleaner look.
More info on IQ will have to wait for LR RAW support.
Regarding the bodies, I really liked to format of the NEX, and was among those that the UI did not delight, but did not drive crazy either. The C3 will be familiar territory. Sony cleaned up an annoying feature, which was that on the 5, I often pushed the video recording button by mistake. This is now much less likely. OTOH, flipping the mirro up, which I do all the time (I shoot from the waist 95% of the time) was really easy with the 5, and significantly less so with the C3. It is better with the 5N.
The 5N UI, with its touch screen, is easier to use, but a bit more complex to learn because it has one more device. The logic, though, isn't the same as the C3's, which is puzzling. And Sony have managed to make the "display pictures" button smaller and less easy to use. What must they have been thinking, as it is used so often? My on/off switch is also very stiff indeed, and unpleasant. I also wonder why the MF on the 5N assist magnifies to 9x instead of the previous 14x on the 5 and C3.
The 5 suffered from a major problem, wide angle rangefinders (anything wider than 35mm) produced massive colour shift and corner mush. The C3 is much better in this regard, with the same Contax G28 being unusable on the 5 and useable on the C3. It seems a bit better yet on the 5N, and there are reports that the Zeiss ZM 18 is hassle-free, which I will know next week.
Overall, the 5 exceeded my expectations in its time. With good glass (Zeiss ZM), it could really shine and pull more weight than such a small camera has any right to; A game changer IMHO.
The C3 again exceeds my expectations, in that it mercilessly shows how much technology has advanced in 3 years, the age of my 5D II, and a bit over a year, the age of the NEX 5.
The 5N seems to be a true halfway house between the C3 and the. Slightly larger, better electronics, the possibility to support a viewfinder, and great IQ.
I am waiting for the NEX 7 with baited breath!
|
