This topic is in the 2013 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2013Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
p.53 #1Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
At this point, I don't see myself passing on this camera, unless they do something REALLY odd that nobody is expecting- it is Sony, after all! haha
I'll pay the early adopter tax, and then in a few months it'll be selling for $1500 new, but whatever. WANT THIS CAMERA
I'll pay the early adopter tax, and then in a few months it'll be selling for $1500 new, but whatever. WANT THIS CAMERA
Oct 12, 2013 at 11:19 AM
p.53 #2Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Probably one of the most revolutionary cameras of late.
At least I don't know any other FF mirrorles camera except a certain rangefinder camera brand.
At least I don't know any other FF mirrorles camera except a certain rangefinder camera brand.
Oct 12, 2013 at 12:06 PM
p.53 #3Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
sculptormic wrote:
Probably one of the most revolutionary cameras of late.
Shouldn't we wait and see what it actually is?
Probably one of the most revolutionary cameras of late.
Shouldn't we wait and see what it actually is?
Oct 12, 2013 at 12:32 PM
p.53 #4Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
ISO1600 wrote:
At this point, I don't see myself passing on this camera, unless they do something REALLY odd that nobody is expecting- it is Sony, after all! haha
You mean like leaf shutter in the lenses and no shutter in the camera?
Edit: Oh, and I'm totally with you. If they turn out to be reasonably good cameras regarding user interface and viewfinder, I'll get one in a heartbeat to use with all the nice lenses I have. Even if it does NOT work well with M lenses, there are still plenty of smallish MF SLR lenses that should work fine.
Edited on Oct 12, 2013 at 12:53 PM · View previous versions
At this point, I don't see myself passing on this camera, unless they do something REALLY odd that nobody is expecting- it is Sony, after all! haha
You mean like leaf shutter in the lenses and no shutter in the camera?
Edit: Oh, and I'm totally with you. If they turn out to be reasonably good cameras regarding user interface and viewfinder, I'll get one in a heartbeat to use with all the nice lenses I have. Even if it does NOT work well with M lenses, there are still plenty of smallish MF SLR lenses that should work fine.
Edited on Oct 12, 2013 at 12:53 PM · View previous versions
Oct 12, 2013 at 12:50 PM
p.53 #5Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Martin! Did it get too cold to bicycle? What are you using to make photos at the moment?
Oct 12, 2013 at 12:52 PM
p.53 #6Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
carstenw wrote:
Martin! Did it get too cold to bicycle? What are you using to make photos at the moment?
Cold? No, I did 40 kilometers today in +12°C and sunshine. I don't shoot very much, but I've picked up the D700 a couple of times lately. And the RX100 is with me everywhere, even if I seldom use it.
Martin! Did it get too cold to bicycle? What are you using to make photos at the moment?
Cold? No, I did 40 kilometers today in +12°C and sunshine.
I don't shoot very much, but I've picked up the D700 a couple of times lately. And the RX100 is with me everywhere, even if I seldom use it. Oct 12, 2013 at 12:56 PM
p.53 #7Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
hiepphotog wrote:
It's too cheap in fact. The smallest, lightest 36MP FF camera is priced at $2200? I hope they didn't cut too many corners to get there.
Frankly, all I need is a box with a mount on the front and that 36MP sensor at the rear that will accept any lens made. Everything else is gravy.
I'm sure the nicer version will show up next year with all the bells and whistles at a price closer to 3K. I'm actually very surprised Sony would release the stripped down versions first since I would think they might make more $$ doing it the opposite way around.
It's too cheap in fact. The smallest, lightest 36MP FF camera is priced at $2200? I hope they didn't cut too many corners to get there.
Frankly, all I need is a box with a mount on the front and that 36MP sensor at the rear that will accept any lens made. Everything else is gravy.
I'm sure the nicer version will show up next year with all the bells and whistles at a price closer to 3K. I'm actually very surprised Sony would release the stripped down versions first since I would think they might make more $$ doing it the opposite way around.
Oct 12, 2013 at 01:11 PM
p.53 #8Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Frankly, all I need is a box with a mount on the front and that 36MP sensor at the rear that will accept any lens made. Everything else is gravy.
+1 all this "it's ugly" stuff is silly beyond words.
As to which they should have released first, the FF which works with the 21ish RF lenses is the flag to plant ASAP.
If it really is as good or better than M240 in this respect, Sony has made fools out of all the rest in such an obvious way it will not soon be forgotten.
Frankly, all I need is a box with a mount on the front and that 36MP sensor at the rear that will accept any lens made. Everything else is gravy.
+1 all this "it's ugly" stuff is silly beyond words.
As to which they should have released first, the FF which works with the 21ish RF lenses is the flag to plant ASAP.
If it really is as good or better than M240 in this respect, Sony has made fools out of all the rest in such an obvious way it will not soon be forgotten.
Oct 12, 2013 at 01:27 PM
p.53 #9Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Makten wrote:
You mean like leaf shutter in the lenses and no shutter in the camera?
Edit: Oh, and I'm totally with you. If they turn out to be reasonably good cameras regarding user interface and viewfinder, I'll get one in a heartbeat to use with all the nice lenses I have. Even if it does NOT work well with M lenses, there are still plenty of smallish MF SLR lenses that should work fine.
These are new sensors designed for the short flange distance.
Could be the other way around this time: Leica mount lenses work better as all the other wides in all other mounts.
ISO1600 wrote
At this point, I don't see myself passing on this camera, unless they do something REALLY odd that nobody is expecting- it is Sony, after all! haha Edit: Oh, and I'm totally with you. If they turn out to be reasonably good cameras regarding user interface and viewfinder, I'll get one in a heartbeat to use with all the nice lenses I have. Even if it does NOT work well with M lenses, there are still plenty of smallish MF SLR lenses that should work fine.
These are new sensors designed for the short flange distance.
Could be the other way around this time: Leica mount lenses work better as all the other wides in all other mounts.
Oct 12, 2013 at 01:45 PM
p.53 #10Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
uhoh7 wrote:
If it really is as good or better than M240 in this respect, Sony has made fools out of all the rest in such an obvious way it will not soon be forgotten.
I bet they've done it.
A smaller, cheaper (1/4th the price!) and much much faster focusing camera that can use M lenses
If it really is as good or better than M240 in this respect, Sony has made fools out of all the rest in such an obvious way it will not soon be forgotten.
I bet they've done it.
A smaller, cheaper (1/4th the price!) and much much faster focusing camera
that can use M lensesOct 12, 2013 at 03:10 PM
p.53 #11Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
uhoh7 wrote:
Nex-7 decent looks ruined by non-magnesium body. The Nex-5 is fine, but really silly with silver EVF attached-- and of course very clunky in that configuration.
for what it's worth, the 7 has a magnesium top and front just like the 5N does. are you sure you're not thinking of the 6?
fwiw, even with a cracked magnesium shell (i can see it really is metal
) my 7 feels a lot sturdier than my 5N.
both cameras look pretty ugly to me, though – too asymmetric. i think that asymmetry is beneficial for ergonomics though.
i'll wait till i see a real picture of the A7(r) to judge it.
Nex-7 decent looks ruined by non-magnesium body. The Nex-5 is fine, but really silly with silver EVF attached-- and of course very clunky in that configuration.
for what it's worth, the 7 has a magnesium top and front just like the 5N does. are you sure you're not thinking of the 6?
fwiw, even with a cracked magnesium shell (i can see it really is metal
) my 7 feels a lot sturdier than my 5N.both cameras look pretty ugly to me, though – too asymmetric. i think that asymmetry is beneficial for ergonomics though.
i'll wait till i see a real picture of the A7(r) to judge it.
Oct 12, 2013 at 03:16 PM
p.53 #12Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
hiepphotog wrote:
It's too cheap in fact. The smallest, lightest 36MP FF camera is priced at $2200? I hope they didn't cut too many corners to get there.
By comparison an NEX-5T sells for $548, the EVF $238.95. Total APS-C cost is $786.95. The latest SR rumor is $1,698 for the 24MP A7 and $2,198 for the 36MP A7R. These represent a $911.05 and $1,411.05 premium over the equivalent APS-C camera setup. I think that's fairly reasonable considering the mfg cost differential between a FF and APS-C sensor I think is somewhere around $300 - $400 last time I checked.
It's too cheap in fact. The smallest, lightest 36MP FF camera is priced at $2200? I hope they didn't cut too many corners to get there.
By comparison an NEX-5T sells for $548, the EVF $238.95. Total APS-C cost is $786.95. The latest SR rumor is $1,698 for the 24MP A7 and $2,198 for the 36MP A7R. These represent a $911.05 and $1,411.05 premium over the equivalent APS-C camera setup. I think that's fairly reasonable considering the mfg cost differential between a FF and APS-C sensor I think is somewhere around $300 - $400 last time I checked.
Oct 12, 2013 at 03:52 PM
p.53 #13Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
sculptormic wrote:
These are new sensors designed for the short flange distance.
Says the rumors. We don't know anything about that yet.
These are new sensors designed for the short flange distance.
Says the rumors. We don't know anything about that yet.
Oct 12, 2013 at 04:41 PM
p.53 #14Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
At these prices, I don't care if they are ugly. The only thing I am debating is which to buy, and whether to keep my APS-C NEX gear. I might hold onto the NEX-7 for zooms because of size. I'll probably sell off all my APS-C primes and speedbooster. I'm betting the difference between these two cameras will not simply be megapixels. High ISO and AF speed might make the A7 the superior camera. I don't have a high ISO fetish, but neither my NEX 7 nor D800E are exceptional at high ISO so I am leaning towards the A7.
Oct 12, 2013 at 05:27 PM
p.53 #15Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
sebboh wrote:
for what it's worth, the 7 has a magnesium top and front just like the 5N does. are you sure you're not thinking of the 6?
fwiw, even with a cracked magnesium shell (i can see it really is metal) my 7 feels a lot sturdier than my 5N.
both cameras look pretty ugly to me, though – too asymmetric. i think that asymmetry is beneficial for ergonomics though.
i'll wait till i see a real picture of the A7(r) to judge it.
Hyperbole on my part re the 7, sorry. I handled one last winter and would have sworn it was plastic, while the 5 outwardly seems and feels like metal.
I can't think of many really beautiful digitals. Though all the RF digitals, including rd-1, have nice look. The big DSLRs are not attractive to my eye, but its a matter of taste I guess.
uhoh7 wrote
Nex-7 decent looks ruined by non-magnesium body. The Nex-5 is fine, but really silly with silver EVF attached-- and of course very clunky in that configuration.fwiw, even with a cracked magnesium shell (i can see it really is metal
) my 7 feels a lot sturdier than my 5N.both cameras look pretty ugly to me, though – too asymmetric. i think that asymmetry is beneficial for ergonomics though.
i'll wait till i see a real picture of the A7(r) to judge it.
Hyperbole on my part re the 7, sorry. I handled one last winter and would have sworn it was plastic, while the 5 outwardly seems and feels like metal.
I can't think of many really beautiful digitals. Though all the RF digitals, including rd-1, have nice look. The big DSLRs are not attractive to my eye, but its a matter of taste I guess.
Oct 12, 2013 at 05:47 PM
p.53 #16Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
'I'm betting the difference between these two cameras will not simply be megapixels.'
+ one to that. I think the extra $ buys more than MPs too, of a technical nature.
'I don't have a high ISO fetish, but neither my NEX 7 nor D800E are exceptional at high ISO'
What is substantially better (D800e), up to its design ceiling of a true ISO 18000?
+ one to that. I think the extra $ buys more than MPs too, of a technical nature.
'I don't have a high ISO fetish, but neither my NEX 7 nor D800E are exceptional at high ISO'
What is substantially better (D800e), up to its design ceiling of a true ISO 18000?
Oct 12, 2013 at 06:41 PM
p.53 #17Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
philip_pj wrote:
'I'm betting the difference between these two cameras will not simply be megapixels.'
+ one to that. I think the extra $ buys more than MPs too, of a technical nature.
'I don't have a high ISO fetish, but neither my NEX 7 nor D800E are exceptional at high ISO'
What is substantially better (D800e), up to its design ceiling of a true ISO 18000?
This is a personal preference. I don't like taking either camera above 1600. I'd like to see improvements of maybe 1 stop better. These are supposedly new sensors from the one in the D600 and D800. Sony seems to make huge improvement jumps with every generation. I hope they can replicate the jump they made with the FF 24mp sensor from the original A900 to the RX1 in this new generation. Of course, every time they come out with a new camera, they always say it's a new sensor. The past improvements may have also come from software.
'I'm betting the difference between these two cameras will not simply be megapixels.'
+ one to that. I think the extra $ buys more than MPs too, of a technical nature.
'I don't have a high ISO fetish, but neither my NEX 7 nor D800E are exceptional at high ISO'
What is substantially better (D800e), up to its design ceiling of a true ISO 18000?
This is a personal preference. I don't like taking either camera above 1600. I'd like to see improvements of maybe 1 stop better. These are supposedly new sensors from the one in the D600 and D800. Sony seems to make huge improvement jumps with every generation. I hope they can replicate the jump they made with the FF 24mp sensor from the original A900 to the RX1 in this new generation. Of course, every time they come out with a new camera, they always say it's a new sensor. The past improvements may have also come from software.
Oct 12, 2013 at 09:21 PM
p.53 #18Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
philip_pj wrote:
'I'm betting the difference between these two cameras will not simply be megapixels.'
+ one to that. I think the extra $ buys more than MPs too, of a technical nature.
'I don't have a high ISO fetish, but neither my NEX 7 nor D800E are exceptional at high ISO'
What is substantially better (D800e), up to its design ceiling of a true ISO 18000?
5D2 and 5D3 outperform the D800 at ISO6400+ from what I have seen. That, of course, is my subjective opinion.
'I'm betting the difference between these two cameras will not simply be megapixels.'
+ one to that. I think the extra $ buys more than MPs too, of a technical nature.
'I don't have a high ISO fetish, but neither my NEX 7 nor D800E are exceptional at high ISO'
What is substantially better (D800e), up to its design ceiling of a true ISO 18000?
5D2 and 5D3 outperform the D800 at ISO6400+ from what I have seen. That, of course, is my subjective opinion.
Oct 12, 2013 at 09:31 PM
p.53 #19Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Here's a shot from my 6D at ISO 20000:
Obviously it looks bad if you pixel peep but the chroma noise is amazingly low and the grain looks reasonably film-like to me. On other sensors I default to B&W at very high ISO's but it isn't necessary here.
Canon decided to focus on high iso performance on their recent full frame bodies and it shows. Sony / Nikon tend to focus elsewhere (base iso / dynamic range) but if the ff nex is close to this it will be more than sufficient for my needs.
Obviously it looks bad if you pixel peep but the chroma noise is amazingly low and the grain looks reasonably film-like to me. On other sensors I default to B&W at very high ISO's but it isn't necessary here.
Canon decided to focus on high iso performance on their recent full frame bodies and it shows. Sony / Nikon tend to focus elsewhere (base iso / dynamic range) but if the ff nex is close to this it will be more than sufficient for my needs.
Oct 12, 2013 at 10:13 PM
p.53 #20Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
kezeka wrote:
+ one to that. I think the extra $ buys more than MPs too, of a technical nature.
'I don't have a high ISO fetish, but neither my NEX 7 nor D800E are exceptional at high ISO'
What is substantially better (D800e), up to its design ceiling of a true ISO 18000?5D2 and 5D3 outperform the D800 at ISO6400+ from what I have seen. That, of course, is my subjective opinion.
They slightly do.
But on the other hand, the D800 crushes and destroys the 5D2, 5D3, 6D and 1DX on lower ISO settings. The exmor sensor is also free from the ridiculous shadow banding, which has become like a "trademarked feature" on Canon's sensors.
It all depends on what you want.
* Slightly better high ISO = Go for Canon.
* Way way way better low ISO (awesome dynamic range for landscapes, e.t.c), and no banding = Go Nikon.
I'm a canonite btw. I have the 5D3, but I'd rip out the sensor and replace it with a D800 sensor if I could.
Edited on Oct 12, 2013 at 10:27 PM · View previous versions
philip_pj wrote
'I'm betting the difference between these two cameras will not simply be megapixels.'+ one to that. I think the extra $ buys more than MPs too, of a technical nature.
'I don't have a high ISO fetish, but neither my NEX 7 nor D800E are exceptional at high ISO'
What is substantially better (D800e), up to its design ceiling of a true ISO 18000?
They slightly do.
But on the other hand, the D800 crushes and destroys the 5D2, 5D3, 6D and 1DX on lower ISO settings. The exmor sensor is also free from the ridiculous shadow banding, which has become like a "trademarked feature" on Canon's sensors.
It all depends on what you want.
* Slightly better high ISO = Go for Canon.
* Way way way better low ISO (awesome dynamic range for landscapes, e.t.c), and no banding = Go Nikon.
I'm a canonite btw. I have the 5D3, but I'd rip out the sensor and replace it with a D800 sensor if I could.
Edited on Oct 12, 2013 at 10:27 PM · View previous versions
Oct 12, 2013 at 10:15 PM