EP3 vs Nex7
- Thread starter julianseah99
- Start date
- Status
The Nex 7 sure looks interesting specs wise. I think if you are planning to use legacy lenses with manual focus, it may be a good choice. The only thing is that it seems quite big. The whole idea with mirrorless is to reduce size and weight, otherwise, might as well stick to the dSLR.
Gulliver
Member
Oly5050 said:
Even by comparing image APSC is still superior compare to MFT. That is a fact. The only advantage of MFT is really size and size alone. Any optimisation that can be tweak electronically would be able to be figure out by Sony. But physics is physics, the MFT would always have a smaller lens footprint. No matter what kind of lens Sony comes out, it would not gain the size advantage. That is the reason I'm using MFT. And it seems that further miniaturisation is still possible in MFT. Take the latest Panny 14-42 lens.
No, 35mm film is about 6MP of resolution and medium format should be around 24MP. Your FULL HD 60 inch LED TV can display only 2MP (1920 x 1080) of resolution so if Ansel Adams had used my 3MP Canon Camcorder to shoot El Capitan for you, it would still have been perfect for your TV
But your great grandchildren won't be using a full HD TV. They will have this neural interface that plugs directly into their optic nerve
MichaelLee
Senior Member
No, 35mm film is about 6MP of resolution and medium format should be around 24MP. Your FULL HD 60 inch LED TV can display only 2MP (1920 x 1080) of resolution so if Ansel Adams had used my 3MP Canon Camcorder to shoot El Capitan for you, it would still have been perfect for your TV
But your great grandchildren won't be using a full HD TV. They will have this neural interface that plugs directly into their optic nerve
damn chiem, dun understand this. i am old man, 20 years ago and today, when i walk in to photography exhibition, none of the photo are shown on LED or TV. It is printed on real photo. let see another 20years, the photography exhibition would interface directly to own optic nerve.
Snapperbox
New Member
Gulliver said:
I would think so its not a limitation to come out with small lenses on apsc. If Samsung can have pancake lenses for their NX series and if Pentax can have small pancakes lenses as well, i dun see why its not possible.
My take is whether the manufacturer is willing to do the lens compensation on the lens itself or thru software processing in their cameras as we all know by having these smaller lenses means compromise would have to be made.
By the way, i keep seeing complaining abt lens size is the disadvantage of nex system, but as far as my eyes and hands can tell, their 18-55 is same size as panny current 14-42 and same length as olympus 14-42 when extended. Their 16mm pancake is smaller than 20/1.7 and weigh less as well.
The upcoming zeiss 24/1.8 is although longer (almost similar to 14-42) but its diameter is smaller and also weighs lighter than Leica 25/1.4 m4/3.
I just dun understand all the rants abt nex lenses size and weight.
Probably nex cameras are really small, thats why people hve impressions that their lenses are big.
Last edited:
Snapperbox, you are right. Most non-NEX owners don't realize how light the NEX lenses are even though they are not plastic. They also think they are oversized because the NEX body (especially C3) is so small. They criticise the modern NEX form as "ugly" and "unbalanced" because their own taste is for the retro look. In contrast, the camera is in use much more balanced than theirs.
Snapperbox
New Member
tsammyc said:
Yes. Just to be upfront in case i am being bombarded by people here. I myself is a GF3 user and do not hv any sony cameras, though i am very much tempted to get the nex7.
I really dun care how the camera looks, retro or not, most importantly it must produce the goods in image quality. If not it will just be another piece of tech gadget junk. A very good example is the legendary Fuji F31fd, it doesnt look good and its bulky for a pns, but i am sure the picture quality it produces is the undisputed king in pns segment, even until now.
As a MFT user for the past 2-3yrs, having owning EP1, GF1, i am kinda feeling lukewarm against this system now. To be honest, throughtout these 3yrs since the first G1 was launched, there isnt much development on the improvement on image quality, we are still seeing a 3yr old sensor bring used and tweaked endlessly on the cameras we see today, except for G3/GH2. Even with many lenses as many claimed, a lousy sensor will never make up for it, esp when the light goes down.
I would agree lenses are good and strong point of MFT but to be honest, other than a handful ones, which are really good quality ones and affordable to really own?
Sony within a span of just 1yr has made major leaps and bounds in their nex system, improving the image quality with every new cameras and giving better usability and features that would be helpful for those who really want to take good photos (built in evf and manual controls) and not features that are for fashion and almost useless (art filters, penpal, full hd which are worst quality than pns).
And for lenses, nex system will have 7 lenses by end of this yr, which in a span of 1yr has reached what Olympus did for 3yrs. Although many can argue that panny has their set of lenses too, but honestly, other than 20mm, leica 25 and macro, 12mm, 45mm, the rest are all overlapping each other in terms of focal length. So will u buy them all?
I am not trying to put down mFT, but just to speak from a point of view as a person who wish to take nicer photos, and not just by owning a tech gadget that get replaced every 6mths!!!
I hope everyone give their comments based on facts and not by hearsay or fanboy rant.
Every system has their good and bad. MFT might have slight advantage in terms of lenses as of now. But if they remain where they are in terms of usability and sensor development, Sony will very soon catch up and thrash them aside. We will see it soon by next year.
Last edited:
NEX 18-55 is not small. Just compare it to Oly 14-42 (non extended). Its non extended when moving around or kept in the bag right?
If you look at good performing AF, small, fast primes with focal lengths catered properly for the crop factor of the sensor format, m4/3 has come of age and is pretty well positioned.
In many cases the user select 2-3 primes with FL of his/her choice and that forms a very comprehensive travel kit.
Olympus 12mm[24mm] f2.0 130g 56 x 43 mm 46 mm
Olympus 17mm[34mm] f2.8 71g 57 x 22 mm 37 mm
Olympus 45mm[24mm] f1.8 116g 56 x 46 mm 37 mm
Panasonic 8mm[16mm] f3.5 165g 61 x 52 mm N/A
Panasonic 20mm[40mm] f1.7 100g 63 x 26 mm 46 mm
Panasonic 25mm[50mm] f1.4 200g 63 x 55 mm 46 mm
Panasonic 45mm[90mm] f2.8 225g 63 x 63 mm 46 mm
Sony 16mm[24mm] f2.8 74g 62 x 23 mm 49 mm
MichaelLee
Senior Member
good info. you forget to include panasonic 14mm f2.5 at 55g.
Why not also compare NEX 18-55 (194g) and the upcoming LUMIX G X VARIO PZ 14-42mm at only 95g ??
even the new NEX 55-210mm (effective range 82.5mm -315mm) at 345g vs G X Vario PZ 45-175mm at 210g ?
Snapperbox
New Member
pinholecam said:
Will that 4-5cm cost a lot of discomfort since you already intend to put it in a bag?
Unless you telling me you are going to squeeze the camera inside your pants pocket, then it will have impact for that 4-5cm diff.
Also when moving around, nex camera strap will make it a way that the camera always point downwards which is more compact than most cameras which pointing frontwards with lens sticking out like a dick.
Last edited:
Thing is I have a APSC DSLR lens collection and am not willing to build up a whole parallel M43 lens collection although I am willing to buy a one or two. So the solution is an adapter from M43 to DSLR lens, but then I can't take the loss in PQ and 2x crop factor if I'm using the same lens. So, solution is NEX with small body and DSLR sensor. Whatever I shoot with my SLR, its identical on the NEX whether crop factor or PQ.
Snapperbox
New Member
Why dun we also list out the sensor size comparison, DXOMark scores on DR, ISO, etc as well?
Its pointless to compare such minute difference in few millimeters and tens of grams here and there which IMO has no noticeable difference in real world usage.
What I am trying to tell is not to over-exaggerate the point that "WAH, NEX LENS ARE FXXKING BIG" to that extent that when comparing the real world item and specs, the difference is so little that one might forget which is which.
Although I agree the new X14-42mm is really small and compact, but I thought many of you here actually complained that it is not useful???
At least for my m4/3 needs as a 2nd system, yes, into the bemudas, into whatever space is in the diaper bag, wrap with socks if need be in the luggage.
But besides this, the lenses are high performance, small, fast, AF, primes that don't cost too much.
Btw, the small primes balance well on the body. They don't dangle down.
Snapperbox
New Member
tsammyc said:
Its going to be 2.5x crop sensor, smaller than MFT.
Snapperbox
New Member
pinholecam said:
Yes. I appreciate what MFT is now and know the lenses are of good quality, maybe not so for 14-42 to certain extent.
What i admire abt Sony is at least within short period of time, they can produce what people want and not what they seem right. It took olympus 3yrs to figure out people need built in flash, faster af and fast primes.
I don't know why you seem to be getting angry with the d* and bold text.
Bottom line. Small, good primes not available yet on nex.
Zoom options, look larger. M4/3 ones are collapsible to be small in carriage.
- Status
Similar threads
