p.4 #1 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
I have been researching this very subject a lot recently, since I did switch from DSLR to.... film RF. IMHO, the Nex 7 is not the best choice for using RF lenses. It is actually a bad choice. The Ricoh GXR M is currently the best mirrorless option. If I wanted to stay with digital, this is what I would get, not the Nex 7.
p.4 #2 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Bifurcator wrote:
I love big cameras! You can give me yours if you like Mak. For me in those side by side shots the Nex looked so bad it just spoiled the shots! The 5D images made me go: Oooo, beautiful photography! The Nex ones made me go: Oh great, another snapshot from someone's vacation... next will be his kids standing in a row? The 5D ones have clearly resolved and distinct colors that really added depth to the shots. The Nex ones made mush of the colors and my eyes actually had difficulties distinguishing detail which made them look flat, confused, and weirdly saturated or overly saturated? The 5D shots delivered details that made me want to spend time looking at them. The Nex samples just kinda presented a dull scene fully consumed in a glance.
But anyway, I think where there is something to compare to side-by-side so to speak, then the importance of 100% crops is radically reduced. And really this thread and the comparisons in it seem to be about the overall resulting images and not specifically sharpness, micro-contrast, or CA which is where 100% crops are so useful. ...Show more →
I really, really don't understand why you are using an MFT camera. Get yourself a used 5D MkII and suddenly your view on "good lenses" will change, dramatically. There's no reason to use a smallish sensor if you can afford a large one (which I'm sure you could, considering your purchase of the CV 125).
By the way, I don't have any digital, large cameras anymore.
p.4 #3 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
edwardkaraa wrote:
I have been researching this very subject a lot recently, since I did switch from DSLR to.... film RF. IMHO, the Nex 7 is not the best choice for using RF lenses. It is actually a bad choice. The Ricoh GXR M is currently the best mirrorless option. If I wanted to stay with digital, this is what I would get, not the Nex 7.
p.4 #4 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
No more big digitals? You have to change your screen name to Maktwo then I think.
The reasons for me are two fold. The first is money. If I were rich I'd get the D700, the D4, the 1DX, the K5 and the 654D right now. And I would never even think about mirrorless cameras till I wanted to make a film production (movie) - and then it would be RED or above. But I'm not rich - not even close. I'm actually not far removed from homelessness.
The other reason is that I wanted to start a little lens business to try and put my kid through university (starting next year). Of my 4 boys one is a well rounded super-genius thirsting for knowledge and education. What other single camera can mount all formats? So the camera for me is a tool for examining the lenses I'm horse-trading. So I can say something honest and accurate about them to potential customers - even if it is only about their centers.
p.4 #5 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
FlyPenFly wrote:
The biggest weakness though, for NEX, adapter or not 5N or 7 or not, there just aren't fantastic wide angle solutions for it like a Leica 19mm or Zeiss 21mm. There are OK APS-C lenses but they don't have any magic.
I think you just named 2 good lenses for it. Your photos with the ZA 24 E are fantastic.
p.4 #6 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Let me remind us all that I chose the title "battle of the walkabouts", because I am not comparing the two systems for any and all purposes, but only for walkabout. Admittedly, this is one situation where the NEX shines, whereas, for example, a weight and bulk advantage wouldn't matter at all in a studio. But walkabout is how I do most of my shooting (as opposed to dedicated), and therefore highly relevant to me. And I know I am not alone in this, as quite a few of us take our cameras with us at all times, which qualifies as walkabout...
That said, I chose (by necessity, but still) a combo which was most unfavorable to the NEX (WA @ f:4.0), Vs most favorable to the Canon (the very latest ZE, a f:2.0 lens). Now that I have received my Zeiss ZM f:2.0, an apparently stellar lens, I shall redo a walkabout comparo with the 5D II and 50 Planar f:1.4. Then we can average out the IQ results between the two experiments.
Tariq, I have used numerous DSLRs, including smaller crops, like Canon 550D and 600D. The bulk and weight difference between it with good glass and a NEX 7 plus RF is glaringly obvious. If you stretch that to multiple lenses, the difference only gets larger. That, unlike our preferences or priorities, is not personal or subjective. It is a fact. The only way you can get a DSLR to be compact is to use compact lenses, like Pentax pancakes, or Canon 35mm f:2.0, but then the shooting experience and IQ are not the same as 5D II plus Zeiss
p.4 #7 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
The best non-Leica digital for M lenses is likely a combo of the GXR's sensor tech and menus with the Nex-7's body and pixel count, to me, although I may also not want to loose the tilt EVF. In the meantime, I'm sticking with the 5N, which is kind of the half way point between the two.
My 5N and 4 primes fit in a very small bag that would have a hard time handling my A900 and one lens, because of the depth. I can also toss in my old Nex-5 into the bag for backup, if need be.
p.s. as I've mentioned before, a nice leather half-case goes a LONG way in improving the feel and handling of the 5N.
p.4 #8 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
OP - what I like about your comparison is exactly that you are balancing out the same compromises that many of us are grappling with.
That said, I too am suprised to see how the 5D2 fared against the 7. You are giving good justification to those of us that want to keep our FF kit alongside the NEX system.
p.4 #10 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
douglasf13 wrote:
The best non-Leica digital for M lenses is likely a combo of the GXR's sensor tech and menus with the Nex-7's body and pixel count, to me, although I may also not want to loose the tilt EVF. In the meantime, I'm sticking with the 5N, which is kind of the half way point between the two.
I would agree with that. The Nex 7 main weakness is the GXR main forte. Namely the AA filter and non shifted micro lenses, causing the severe color shift and corner blur on many RF lenses. For everything else, I would certainly favor the Nex 7.
p.4 #12 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
For me, even with moderately sized SLR lenses, the NEX-7 is far more compact and convenient as a casual use camera. It's not an SLR replacement, but it's very capable.
I took mine along last night when shooting a friend's band (mostly with a D700), and shot the NEX a bit. Here are two quick shots at ISO 3200, with a Canon FDn 100/2. It's an elegant little combo that is less than half the size and weight of a similar FOV on an FX camera.
The second shot is about a stop overexposed, so it's more indicative of noise performance at ISO 1600 -- but I still can't resist the temptation to show a 100% crop. Neither are great photographs, but they do show what the camera can do.
p.4 #13 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
philber wrote:
Tariq, I have used numerous DSLRs, including smaller crops, like Canon 550D and 600D. The bulk and weight difference between it with good glass and a NEX 7 plus RF is glaringly obvious. If you stretch that to multiple lenses, the difference only gets larger. That, unlike our preferences or priorities, is not personal or subjective. It is a fact. The only way you can get a DSLR to be compact is to use compact lenses, like Pentax pancakes, or Canon 35mm f:2.0, but then the shooting experience and IQ are not the same as 5D II plus Zeiss
I totally agree with what you write above but I was not referring to NEX-7 + rangefinder lenses, nor was the post I was addressing. I was simply suggesting that NEX-7 + thick adapter for SLR wide lenses + larger SLR lenses seriously eats into the small/ compact advantage supposedly gained with going to the NEX in the first place. Those SLR NEX adapters are quite thick in length. The Leica R and Contax NEX adapters I have are around the same length as many rangefinder lenses alone. Attach one of these to the NEX and then add an SLR wide and you have a very long appendage on the front, probably not so much shorter than the same lens attached to a DSLR.
p.4 #14 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
What bugs me about the image quality difference, is that I don't see a significant difference between the NEX 7 and the 5D II in controlled studio comparisons, like imaging resource and dpreview. Depending on where you look, what lens is used, the accuracy of focus and so on, the NEX 7 even sometimes comes out ahead. And in all cases you have to look hard at 100% view even to see that kind of difference we see here at web size.
p.4 #15 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
IMO, at least at ISOs under 800 or so, there doesn't seem to be much except the specific rendering styles of some lenses that work better on FF than crop.
This thread has inspired me though to go try my Zeiss 21mm F2.8 on my NEX-7 and see what happens. The weather is clearing up.
p.4 #16 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Smiert Spionam wrote:
The second shot is about a stop overexposed, so it's more indicative of noise performance at ISO 1600 -- but I still can't resist the temptation to show a 100% crop. Neither are great photographs, but they do show what the camera can do.
p.4 #17 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
philber wrote:
Let me remind us all that I chose the title "battle of the walkabouts", because I am not comparing the two systems for any and all purposes, but only for walkabout. Admittedly, this is one situation where the NEX shines, whereas, for example, a weight and bulk advantage wouldn't matter at all in a studio. But walkabout is how I do most of my shooting (as opposed to dedicated), and therefore highly relevant to me. And I know I am not alone in this, as quite a few of us take our cameras with us at all times, which qualifies as walkabout...
That said, I chose (by necessity, but still) a combo which was most unfavorable to the NEX (WA @ f:4.0), Vs most favorable to the Canon (the very latest ZE, a f:2.0 lens). Now that I have received my Zeiss ZM f:2.0, an apparently stellar lens, I shall redo a walkabout comparo with the 5D II and 50 Planar f:1.4. Then we can average out the IQ results between the two experiments. ...Show more →
Sure, understood. But you also have to consider that there are those among us who are not weight-wimps (no pointed derrogitives intended) and don't even notice a few hundred grams either way. I mean you're talking to some people (takes a bow) who carry the nFD 300/2.8 L with them everywhere they go and consider that a perfectly acceptable "walk-around" solution. I did that for about 6 or 7 weeks while getting to know it. So to me (and I surely can't be alone in this!) the carry difference between the 5d2 and the nex is negligible. I don't mean to change anyone else's opinions; only to point out it's subjective nature.
p.4 #18 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
While I can benchpress 225lbs all day and am outrageously fit, I find carrying a lot of gear just gets in the way of the fun of shooting. It's annoying and all that bulk makes it awkward to try interesting angles or positions.
If you're traveling and planning to do a lot of photography and hiking, forget it, it's really a not fun experience.
p.4 #19 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
Bifurcator wrote:
Sure, understood. But you also have to consider that there are those among us who are not weight-wimps (no pointed derrogitives intended) and don't even notice a few hundred grams either way. I mean you're talking to some people (takes a bow) who carry the nFD 300/2.8 L with them everywhere they go and consider that a perfectly acceptable "walk-around" solution. I did that for about 6 or 7 weeks while getting to know it. So to me (and I surely can't be alone in this!) the carry difference between the 5d2 and the nex is negligible. I don't mean to change anyone else's opinions; only to point out it's subjective nature.
And on the other side, you have me, and I most likely 10-rep your DL pr, and I still prefer to keep everything I carry as light as possible. Meaning that I carry an ipad instead of a laptop, a nex-7 instead of a d700, a 35/1.2 instead of a sigma 50/1.4. Being bogged down by heavy gear is hard if you want to live an active life style. Especially if you travel without a car.
p.4 #20 · Battle of the walkabouts: NEX 7 faces off with 5D II....
FlyPenFly wrote:
While I can benchpress 225lbs all day and am outrageously fit, I find carrying a lot of gear just gets in the way of the fun of shooting. It's annoying and all that bulk makes it awkward to try interesting angles or positions.
If you're traveling and planning to do a lot of photography and hiking, forget it, it's really a not fun experience.
Just think of all the stuff Ansel Adams used to carry around with him. We're all girlie-men in comparison.
You can give me yours if you like Mak. 
For me in those side by side shots the Nex looked so bad it just spoiled the shots! The 5D images made me go: Oooo, beautiful photography! The Nex ones made me go: Oh great, another snapshot from someone's vacation... next will be his kids standing in a row? The 5D ones have clearly resolved and distinct colors that really added depth to the shots. The Nex ones made mush of the colors and my eyes actually had difficulties distinguishing detail which made them look
