This is Steve Huff's NEX 5N with one of the best lenses in the world. A full frame Leica 50 Summilux in M mount, which costs $5000. Does this combo look bigger than M43? Your physics is apparently flawed.
EP3 vs Nex7
- Thread starter julianseah99
- Start date
- Status
This is Steve Huff's NEX 5N with one of the best lenses in the world. A full frame Leica 50 Summilux in M mount, which costs $5000. Does this combo look bigger than M43? Your physics is apparently flawed.
My friend Agrivar is talking about native m43 body and lens vs Sony native e-mount body and lens.
Everyone has their preferences, for you, NEX is probably best in what it does, the rest of us in m43 side, we think our system serves our purpose and works well for what we want to use it for. I am happy with my E-PL2 and GH2 bodies plus native m43 lenses collection. I doubt I will ever buy a NEX body even if it has 60MP and does ISO1,000,000 at zero noise. It's just personal preference and I think people has to respect that.
Your friend Agrivar called us crazy Sony fanboys and tried to appeal to physics, so I had to get him off his high horse
The TS wanted us to debate M43 vs NEX, which is what I am doing. I don't think he hoped for an outpouring of subjective personal preferences on why M43 owners are so happy with their systems and will never buy anything else.
The TS wanted us to debate M43 vs NEX, which is what I am doing. I don't think he hoped for an outpouring of subjective personal preferences on why M43 owners are so happy with their systems and will never buy anything else.
This is a M43 forum, what else do people expect? I rest my case.
cannedpineapples
New Member
Silencerkw
Member
I only believe in one thing.
If no skill, even the best lens, best sensor, best camera body also cant help u
If got skill, any camera that u re comfortable with will let u take good pics
As for EP3 vs Nex7, my choice is simple. I will juz go for the cheaper one cos i believe in skill more than the camera
If no skill, even the best lens, best sensor, best camera body also cant help u
If got skill, any camera that u re comfortable with will let u take good pics
As for EP3 vs Nex7, my choice is simple. I will juz go for the cheaper one cos i believe in skill more than the camera
Haha, what else should TS expect? When you ask someone about something, it will definately be subjective no matter how objective the person tries to be. Look at it this way, we do not make decisions based on objective reasons alone. Sometimes, the objective reasons tell you that you should choose option A, but subjectively, you just DO NOT LIKE option A, maybe because of the way it looks or the way it feels, or the colour or whatever. In that situation, even if objectively, it is better, you will still not like it, buy it or use it. Different people make decisions differently. Some are more objective and some are less, but there is always a part of it that is subjective, and at the end of the day, it is often times, the subjective part that holds sway.
Agrivar
Senior Member
Yep 
. That's why I mentioned that a person can take good photos with an iPhone while another can take lousy ones with a Leica. Photography is an art. Which I'm still learning. But I really can't stand people who come in and say that blah blah blah, my 18-55 is same size as your camera's 14-42 etc etc. Which factually is untrue. He may take better photos then me. But if untruth is mentioned, I want to retify.
So my last post on this to all sony fanboys. I admit that as of today, the sony sensors are better than m4/3. But native lenses to native lenses, the NEX lenses will always be bigger due to physics.
. That's why I mentioned that a person can take good photos with an iPhone while another can take lousy ones with a Leica. Photography is an art. Which I'm still learning. But I really can't stand people who come in and say that blah blah blah, my 18-55 is same size as your camera's 14-42 etc etc. Which factually is untrue. He may take better photos then me. But if untruth is mentioned, I want to retify. So my last post on this to all sony fanboys. I admit that as of today, the sony sensors are better than m4/3. But native lenses to native lenses, the NEX lenses will always be bigger due to physics.
Bro, explain to me then why you said Sony E lenses will always be big and heavy because of physics. If a full frame Leica lens is small and compact on a NEX and works perfectly, why does physics prevent Sony from designing a similar lens.
Yep
So my last post on this to all sony fanboys. I admit that as of today, the sony sensors are better than m4/3. But native lenses to native lenses, the NEX lenses will always be bigger due to physics.
But it is true, a larger sensor will in general, if all things taken into equal consideration eg. number of glass, glass arrangement design, features etc, a lens optimized for a larger sensor would always have to be larger. You can of course build a smaller and more compact lens for a larger sensor, but maybe you end up short changing what you potentially can get....maybe lens performance is affected, there may be vignetting, softness at the edges etc etc. Lens design and construction is actually a very complicated thing and to talk like these, its fun, but we are just kids playing on the beach. We do not fully understand it so at the end of the day, just judge by your photos. If u are happy with what you are shooting with, than thats fine. ALL of us, want to be cost effective. We want to get shots we are happy with in the smallest and lightest package possible. Unless of course, u need to impress people with a big camera, then that is another thing altogether.
This is Steve Huff's NEX 5N with one of the best lenses in the world. A full frame Leica 50 Summilux in M mount, which costs $5000. Does this combo look bigger than M43? Your physics is apparently flawed.
BTW, I have seen this lens. Believe, me, it is BIGGER and H E A V I E R than a micro 4/3 setup. I would not be happy carrying this setup around all day. And one more thing, focusing distance minimum is like 1 m!! And its manual focus, baby. You try manual focus on this....u think its easy. You need PERFECT eyesight. Hahah...this camera is not easy to use and carry around. But some people like it, but to each his own. Some people enjoy it more when they have to struggle to get a good photo. There is a sense of accomplishment and satisfaction when they finally get a photo that is in focus!
Last edited:
The way I look at it, its quite simple. M43 is a generation behind APS C, which is a generation behind full frame and this is in both sensor technology, autofocus speed and lenses. With the G3's 16MP sensor and the Panny Leica 1.4, M43 has probably reached the image quality of the majority of recently produced APS-C DSLRs. Similarly, with the 24MP sensor in the A77, APS C has probably reached the image quality of the current generation full frame DSLRs. But APS C and full frame technology are also evolving to higher levels and it is a never ending game.
APS C has started to downsize with cameras from Sony, Ricoh, Fuji and Samsung and they will get smaller. Full frame will downsize too. What I would love to see is M43 downsizing to the size of a LX5 or Pentax Q. Sure lots of people will then say that the M43 lenses look too big on a LX5 sized body but that's only until they design smaller M43 lenses and frankly cameras are not a fashion accessory to me.
In 2009, when I was still taking nice pictures with my camcorder's 3MP camera, a friend bought an EP-1. It kind of looked like an Olympus rangefinder I used in the 60s and 70s. While it looked somewhat nice and was well built, it had no viewfinder, focussed very slowly and didn't have a built in flash so I wrote it off. My 3MP Canon HV20 camcorder had an EVF, focussed instantly and had a flash, so it performed so much better. M43 has come a long way from there and the G3 I played with recently had excellent performance and had it been available earlier, I would have had no hesitation buying it. However, the APS-C world now throws out some fascinating new technology and I think that will be more fun exploring than M43 presently. However, if Panasonic manages to squeeze M43 into a LX3 sized body, I will be interested again.
APS C has started to downsize with cameras from Sony, Ricoh, Fuji and Samsung and they will get smaller. Full frame will downsize too. What I would love to see is M43 downsizing to the size of a LX5 or Pentax Q. Sure lots of people will then say that the M43 lenses look too big on a LX5 sized body but that's only until they design smaller M43 lenses and frankly cameras are not a fashion accessory to me.
In 2009, when I was still taking nice pictures with my camcorder's 3MP camera, a friend bought an EP-1. It kind of looked like an Olympus rangefinder I used in the 60s and 70s. While it looked somewhat nice and was well built, it had no viewfinder, focussed very slowly and didn't have a built in flash so I wrote it off. My 3MP Canon HV20 camcorder had an EVF, focussed instantly and had a flash, so it performed so much better. M43 has come a long way from there and the G3 I played with recently had excellent performance and had it been available earlier, I would have had no hesitation buying it. However, the APS-C world now throws out some fascinating new technology and I think that will be more fun exploring than M43 presently. However, if Panasonic manages to squeeze M43 into a LX3 sized body, I will be interested again.
That would be the E-PM1. Its nearly the same size as the XZ-1 if you throw on a m4/3 pancake lens. Pentax Q size would probably take another 5-10 years. Its just way too small for now and its got this minuscle sensor.
Anyway, m4/3 is generations ahead of APS-C and FF ok? The 4/3 philosophy and concept was so way ahead of its time. Yah u can say that in terms of sensor technology, it is a little behind, but hell, the philosophy is light years ahead. So is m4/3 concept ie. the mirrorless concept. Olympus guys already have that vision from 10 years ago and things are just starting to come together now. I think good things will come to us who wait. For now, our aim is to take photos. If the gear suits your need and you are able to do what you can with the gear, and you can afford it, that is enough. I find it too painful to spend like $2600 on a used full frame 5d MARK II, and then spend like another 1.5-2k for a decent L lens. Hell...cant afford it. So I just play around with m4/3 for now. Hahah.
Agrivar
Senior Member
tsammyc said:
You can do a google search. This has been debated on nex sites as well as dpr. Heres a shorter less technical answer for you
"The flange is only empty space so a lens would need to make up for the small registration distance. So sony could make any lens but you need to add the difference between the registration distance from nex to the other mount.
(X Flange - NEX flange) + lens length = lens length with same optical formula.
so a sony 30mm f2 based on Samsungs build would need to be 7.5mm longer. (25.5-18) + (22) = 29.5mm long
or Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.4. (27.8 - 18) + 29 = 38.8mm long
the advantage of the short flange is sony could make ultra wide lens smaller than other company, but because of the thickness of the sensors at the moment they do not handle off axis light well, so smaller lens have problems with corner sharpness, color bleed, and other optical issues. But I would take all those problems for a set of small lens (and mostly only seen in wide lens aka 16mm f2.8)."
http://www.talknex.com/f11/why-no-good-compact-nex-lenses-262/
Thanks for the link. Actually I do understand that the flange distance will be longer with APS C, so the lenses will be a few mm longer,but not necessarily larger in circumference. The performance of the Leica Summilux (at Steve Huff's site) does indicate that you can get a pretty compact lens onto a mirrorless APSC camera. Remember that the Leica M lenses are full frame lenses too, so my point is that a very compact design, close to M43, is quite possible with APSC mirrorless. It's probably that Sony hasn't acquired the technology or patents to do it yet. That the compact Leica M lenses work on the NEX well is proof that its not an issue of physics. However, they are the most expensive lenses around...
julianseah99
Member
:embrass::sweat:
TS paiseh. Didn't intend this to be a sony vs oly bashing thread. I thank all for their inputs and the technical references. IQ is important to me since I was a 7D user, in this respect the Nex 7 does pip the EPL-3. The ergonomics of the EPL-3 however is unmatched. While I was used to havin 18-200mm lens as a permanent fixture on my 7D, I didn't appreciate the weight. So even if the Nex 7 is kinda clunky, it is still liberating. What a quandary. I may very well get a EPL-3 first to meet my holiday plans at the end of the year, don't wanna chance Sony's Nov launch delaying...and see if the Nex 7 lives up to its hype after I'm back.
TS paiseh. Didn't intend this to be a sony vs oly bashing thread. I thank all for their inputs and the technical references. IQ is important to me since I was a 7D user, in this respect the Nex 7 does pip the EPL-3. The ergonomics of the EPL-3 however is unmatched. While I was used to havin 18-200mm lens as a permanent fixture on my 7D, I didn't appreciate the weight. So even if the Nex 7 is kinda clunky, it is still liberating. What a quandary. I may very well get a EPL-3 first to meet my holiday plans at the end of the year, don't wanna chance Sony's Nov launch delaying...and see if the Nex 7 lives up to its hype after I'm back.
Actually its quite a civil discussion on the pros n cons of each system. Juz tat there is some disagreement. I dun thk anyone is bashing here but just voicing their beliefs m personal recommendations. U listen to ur frens talk, its the same thing. Sometimes in their talk they have to say the cons to illustrate the pros. I dun c any problem.
Interesting thread and debate. Cool guys.
My impression of Sony and Olympus are as follows:
Olympus
1. Innovation and features
2. Classic look
3. Fun camera
4. Better handling
5. Weak sensor
6. Lack of 4/3 backward usability
7. Much software optimisation done
8. Canon, Nikon or Pentax? What? Olympus?
Sony
1. Futuristic look
2. Great Sensor
3. Its a Sony (mass market appeal), things do go somewhere in terms of sales figure to support future development.
4. No Panasonic BS with sensor supply.
My impression of Sony and Olympus are as follows:
Olympus
1. Innovation and features
2. Classic look
3. Fun camera
4. Better handling
5. Weak sensor
6. Lack of 4/3 backward usability
7. Much software optimisation done
8. Canon, Nikon or Pentax? What? Olympus?
Sony
1. Futuristic look
2. Great Sensor
3. Its a Sony (mass market appeal), things do go somewhere in terms of sales figure to support future development.
4. No Panasonic BS with sensor supply.
- Status
Similar threads
