Sony NEX 5 vs Leica x1

[h00ligan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This thread is starting to make my head hurt.

 

Genuinely I think anyone who thinks the nex with kit is as good as the x1 is not seeing the files I am. I do get that it can be better with good glass.

[phancj]

This thread is starting to make my head hurt.

 

Genuinely I think anyone who thinks the nex with kit is as good as the x1 is not seeing the files I am. I do get that it can be better with good glass.

 

I think so too, but thats the way things are. I think the nex is so-so now, but will get better with time, provided sony wants to put some muscle behind the E-mount lenses. Right now, I think the target audience is not people who wants ultimate image quality, but rather P&S upgraders. Thats why so many com[promises need be made, especially the loss of AF. Meanwhile, the X1 works reliably with AF, albeit a bit slow, but very accurate.

[leicanut2]

I like the panoramic pics that you can get with the Nex that would be the only reason I would buy one my son has a smaller sony that was 400 dollars and he gets great panoramic shots, he showed me some he took in Canada when he went to see the German heavy metal band Rammstein. very nice.

 

 

Jan

[h00ligan]

The hx5v. It's actually a really nice point and shoot based on my short time borrowing one. Not up to the lx/dlux for iq, but not terribly far off. Certainly good for 8x10 I'd guess.

[Guest douglasf13]

that he can compare pictures, simple no?

 

I have both, I have compared and without saying the X1 produces a better result than the Nex with the 16mm or with the kit-zoom.

 

The X1 with the M adapter and the 35mm Cron produces excellent result which can be compared with the X1, actually I see very little difference between the 2.

 

Yes, the Nex is fantastic, versatile and does great low-light shots.

 

The downside of the Nex is Manual focussing of the Cron, however you put it I think AF, even slow AF is better than focussing on an LCD.

 

The nex has a Flip LCD which I like, I wish the X1 would have that.

 

With the right lenses they are similarly good, and similarly priced as well... so it's all a matter of personal choice. Size-wise the X1 is compacter by a bit and fits into coat pockets easier than the Nex would.

 

They are 2 very different cameras producing the same results if with the nex you are prepared to pay extra for the adapter and lens, if you have a Leica lens already then it might be worth going for the Nex instead of X1.

 

X1 comes with Lightroom which is a premium.

 

You need a "good" adapter for the Nex which adds another 200$ or so, yes I have seen the cheaper ones, I have one, it won't focus at infinity.

 

Comparing Rolex-, and other exotically branded watches to a camera comparison is well ... you know not very to the point. Basically with a margin of x% you get what you pay for, one way or the other all depending on needs and wishes... and funds.

 

X1 is 1500€

 

Nex 3 is 700€ for the set

Adapter is 189€

24mm good quality lens is 700€ minimum

 

so the versatiliy of the Nex wins here, you can use different lenses.... but all at a pretty steep price pattern.

 

I have chosen the X1 for "nice photography" creating results I like, and the Nex for a (very good) point and shoot making use of a zoom lens which comes in handy for holiday shots and such, I find this combination perfect......

 

I pretty much agree with everything you've mentioned. Maybe comparing the X1 to a Rolex is a bit extreme, and it could be more applicable to the M9. One difference seems to be the prices where you're at. In the US, the X1 is $2000, and the NEX-5 with M lens adapter (plus the 16mm lens) will run you about $725 ($825 if you get the adapter you're talking about.) I own the NEX-5, and the total with my CV 35mm 1.4 Nokton added was about $1300. If I would have gone the Contax G route, the lens would have been in the $300 price range, and that would have kept me right at the $1000 mark. I'd certainly bet that if Sony decided to make a similar camera to the X1 with a fixed Zeiss lens, it would be more comparable in price to the DP2, rather than the X1. So, maybe the X1 is more like a Tag Heuer? I'm just kidding. I should have never gone down the analogy path in the first place!

 

In all honesty, the X1 and NEX-5 aren't really the same class of camera, so the comparison is really difficult. The X1 is more of a much better Sigma DP2.

[h00ligan]

For me, the question is no longer the nex, it's a 24 L lens on a 7d vs a slightly(I'm not a small guy) smaller combo. I wonder personally if I should get a really fast prime for the 7d for less $ on the 7d. In the x1 favor, at a party people ignore it. The nex isn't good enough with af lenses imho, but for the cash, it's tempting to go for something faster on a dslr. A prime on dslr is not all that much heavier and has the advantage of fast and closer af.....that said, the x1 is unique and renders a different type of file, from what I see.

 

Reading reading reading.

[phancj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For me, the question is no longer the nex, it's a 24 L lens on a 7d vs a slightly(I'm not a small guy) smaller combo. I wonder personally if I should get a really fast prime for the 7d for less $ on the 7d. In the x1 favor, at a party people ignore it. The nex isn't good enough with af lenses imho, but for the cash, it's tempting to go for something faster on a dslr. A prime on dslr is not all that much heavier and has the advantage of fast and closer af.....that said, the x1 is unique and renders a different type of file, from what I see.

 

Reading reading reading.

 

Hey Edward, if you start looking at DSLRs you are really opening a can of worms! Haha! If you look at the more compact DSLRs, there are good offerings from Nikon, Sony, Canon, the 7D is still fairly large...

 

I think we are looking at real portability here, the X1 cuts it, the Nex with pancake qualifies, for many even the mfts are too large with lenses.

 

Nevertheless in real life use each has its own applications. For the DSLR, I use it at work and people are generally impressed with big cameras, big lenses and big flash, so even though I know I can get a better portrait with my X1, I need the certain ommph factor haha. If I bring out the X1 to take a portrait poeple may think it is a joke:D. For macro I need the DSLR too.

 

For travel, everyday shooting even landscape I find the X1 exhilarating to use, tiny to fit in my little belt case and takes great pictures comparable to relatively huge DSLRs.

[jsrockit]

In the x1 favor, at a party people ignore it.

 

Where I live, people never ignore the camera. There is always someone who asks about it. I think it is too pretty to ignore.

[Guest douglasf13]

For me, the question is no longer the nex, it's a 24 L lens on a 7d vs a slightly(I'm not a small guy) smaller combo. I wonder personally if I should get a really fast prime for the 7d for less $ on the 7d. In the x1 favor, at a party people ignore it. The nex isn't good enough with af lenses imho, but for the cash, it's tempting to go for something faster on a dslr. A prime on dslr is not all that much heavier and has the advantage of fast and closer af.....that said, the x1 is unique and renders a different type of file, from what I see.

 

Reading reading reading.

 

There is a world of difference between the size of the NEX-5 and a DSLR. I generally only shoot a 50mm equivalent on my DSLRs, and all of them, from my smaller aps-c cameras to my A900, call attention to themselves. The NEX-5 is so small that most don't even see I'm holding the camera, and the lens is th only noticeable part. Plus, the tilt up LCD lets you shoot it at waistlevel like an old Rollei, so you don't draw attention by bringing it up to your face (I shot like this nearly all of the time.)

[barjohn]

I have been off on vacation having fun and shooting pictures for my ads. Last night I shot a couple of quick low light ISO 6400 shots and some ISO 4000 shots. Below is one out of the camera plus a 100% crop. This was shot with a Leica 40/2 cron at f2. While it may have been a bit of an exaggeration to say it looks like ISO 400, I think you will agree it is pretty good for ISO 6400.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[barjohn]

Although these images do not look the same after posting as before, here is the same image shot at ISO 200 and ISO 4000 using the Leica 40/2 cron at f2.8. Followed by a 100% crop of each.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[h00ligan]

My point with the dslr comment is only that for most money is a real concern. If they are vested in a system, the price of the x1 would readily buy the top tier lens of their choice (prime) and then some.

 

The more I use my 7d, the less invasive I find it. I am quite sure though that it will never be as blending as the x1.

 

My relationship with the x1 continues to be love/hate tbh. It's great on some fronts, and awful on others... and expensive for what it is.

 

Unfortunately right now I can't say 'go ahead, buy that m9 and noctilux' maybe in a few months when things pick back up a bit. It would solve my issues

 

seriously though, back to the x1.. it really does do fantastically for a camera which for all intents and purposes fits in a large pocket..but if you don't wear a jacket most of the time (Arizona) it's a lot less appealing (when you have to carry a bag anyway).

 

A lot of people say.. oh i'm leaving xyz super heavy canon gear or nikon gear and it sucks.. stop comparing the x1 to a dslr and pro zoom. It's still obviously smaller, but for those who have to carry a bag even with the x1 I'm not sure it matters that much tbh.

 

Most able bodied people find the limitation to be dimensions not weight, that I get. However in my case I carry a '3 million dollar home' which can either fit the x1 or the 7d with prime, the weight is irrelevant.

 

Perhaps when the time arrives and 12 oz is noticeable, I'll get it more. but anyone knocking the canon L line should reconsider their opinion in mine. Even if the x1 is 3 lbs lighter, it's three pounds. Maybe something huge when traveling 2/3 of the year or when I am 65...at 34, not so much.

 

If I were back in NYC (2 years ago) I'd have a rangefinder I think.

[h00ligan]

There is a world of difference between the size of the NEX-5 and a DSLR. I generally only shoot a 50mm equivalent on my DSLRs, and all of them, from my smaller aps-c cameras to my A900, call attention to themselves. The NEX-5 is so small that most don't even see I'm holding the camera, and the lens is th only noticeable part. Plus, the tilt up LCD lets you shoot it at waistlevel like an old Rollei, so you don't draw attention by bringing it up to your face (I shot like this nearly all of the time.)

 

Waist level for me is chest height for many (well maybe not that high.. but pretty far off). If I hold something by my sternum it's not far off from people's faces (I'm 6'5") so that's a relatively interesting point. Thanks.

 

Usually I have to really get down a bit to take shots of most people.

[Danielsan]

for me a small and light bag is indeed a difference compared to a big and heavy bag on a trip.The other think is the look of a DSLR, i feel kind of weird when taking pictures on a party or birthday with a DSLR, The X1 has pretty much the same size as most other pocket cams out there more or less. I will not look like a super pro photo guy when taking pictures at a party and thats also very important for me, kind of understatement because most ppl i know dont even know Leica. I own other pocket cams but the small sensor dont allow good IQ especially in low light. Thats why i want a DSLR in disguise as a pocket cam

 

 

To the picture above, im sure the NEX5 can do great pictures at low light with a good lens, why not? I think the sensor size of both is the same.

[barjohn]

My point in the above pictures was not that the lens would make that much difference, but rather the fact that the inherent newer and better sensor combined with the "Anti-motion blurr" mode in its firmware allows for very good quality fast shutter speed high ISO images. The high ISO shots are shot at that ISO as a series of X shots and combined in camera into a single image. They are shot at a high shutter speed despite the low light level. For example above, the ISO 4000 shot was shot at f2.8 at 1/250 versus the ISO 200 shot at f2.0 at 1/40th. Yet the difference in image quality is small.

[phancj]

Although these images do not look the same after posting as before, here is the same image shot at ISO 200 and ISO 4000 using the Leica 40/2 cron at f2.8. Followed by a 100% crop of each.

 

hey John,

 

No offense and just being honest, the iso 6400 shot is okay but nothing superb or remotely close to 400 IMHO:)

 

Also, the iso 200 shots was passable in terms of IQ but certainly not WOW impressive, and will not make me shell out that kind of dole for the lens and then forgo AF on the nex.

 

Just my opinion of course, and granted that the image quality may not be the best after posting.

[barjohn]

phnacj,

 

I hope a quick snap taken of my desk and bookcase are not taken as indicative of camera IQ when PP is virtually zero other than color balancing and reducing for web. However, I challenge you to produce equal or better ISO 4000 or 6400 IQ with the X1 under similar conditions. After heavily reducing and compressing the files from approximately 4MB to 400KB, loading them up to the web site resulted in 64KB compressed files. Obviously something gets lost in that process. It may be something I am doing wrong.

[Guest douglasf13]

Waist level for me is chest height for many (well maybe not that high.. but pretty far off). If I hold something by my sternum it's not far off from people's faces (I'm 6'5") so that's a relatively interesting point. Thanks.

 

Usually I have to really get down a bit to take shots of most people.

 

I tend to hold the camera anywhere between my waist and sternum, depending on the shot. You should try the waist sometime. Getting the camera below head level can be flattering for full length people pics.

[phancj]

My point with the dslr comment is only that for most money is a real concern. If they are vested in a system, the price of the x1 would readily buy the top tier lens of their choice (prime) and then some.

 

The more I use my 7d, the less invasive I find it. I am quite sure though that it will never be as blending as the x1.

 

My relationship with the x1 continues to be love/hate tbh. It's great on some fronts, and awful on others... and expensive for what it is.

 

Unfortunately right now I can't say 'go ahead, buy that m9 and noctilux' maybe in a few months when things pick back up a bit. It would solve my issues

 

seriously though, back to the x1.. it really does do fantastically for a camera which for all intents and purposes fits in a large pocket..but if you don't wear a jacket most of the time (Arizona) it's a lot less appealing (when you have to carry a bag anyway).

 

A lot of people say.. oh i'm leaving xyz super heavy canon gear or nikon gear and it sucks.. stop comparing the x1 to a dslr and pro zoom. It's still obviously smaller, but for those who have to carry a bag even with the x1 I'm not sure it matters that much tbh.

 

Most able bodied people find the limitation to be dimensions not weight, that I get. However in my case I carry a '3 million dollar home' which can either fit the x1 or the 7d with prime, the weight is irrelevant.

 

Perhaps when the time arrives and 12 oz is noticeable, I'll get it more. but anyone knocking the canon L line should reconsider their opinion in mine. Even if the x1 is 3 lbs lighter, it's three pounds. Maybe something huge when traveling 2/3 of the year or when I am 65...at 34, not so much.

 

If I were back in NYC (2 years ago) I'd have a rangefinder I think.

 

I use a belt pouch and it is perfect. Almost the exact size as the X1. Frankly I think there is even a big difference in size between MFTs and the X1. Portability is key i deciding how often I bring my camera. No camera no pictures??

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[barjohn]

I don't know if this will be any better. I am trying by exporting at 900 pixels wide and around 160KB to see if ti makes any difference.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!