Sony NEX 5 vs Leica x1

[Guest stnami]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hmmn I haven't had a problem getting great results from either the nex or X1 the times that i have been able to get my grubby hands on them............... maybe some of you have forgotten how to take photographs. Your loss I guess.

[Dan States]

Is there another prime coming? The original 16mm had ridiculously bad sharpness falloff based on the images I saw. I would have thought it was a decentering problem but it was too uniform for that...and too consistent across lenses/users. The kit lens wnt too bad, nothing great..and slow.

 

Too bad they didn't announce better lenses, unless I missed it.

 

I've got the Nex 3 with 16mm. The lens is a pile of rubbish. Too bad because the camera is pretty darned good.

[phancj]

I've got the Nex 3 with 16mm. The lens is a pile of rubbish. Too bad because the camera is pretty darned good.

 

What I have been saying all along, thanks!

 

Too bad the firmware cannot fix crappy lens.

[Guest douglasf13]

Camera/lens tester, David Kilpatrick, would strongly disagree with many of the opinions of the 16mm. Sure, like with any lens, you have to learn how to deal with its shortcomings, but it is incredibly usable. Are you shooting landscapes at f2.8 or something? Read this entire thread (4 pages) before making more 16mm judgements. We have to remember this is a pancake wide angle, not a giant SLR lens. I have no problem with it at f8 in the corners when I compare it to anything else available for APS-C in that focal length.

 

Photoclubalpha • View topic - A77 - Nearly here

 

As for more NEX lenses, Sony announced their lens roadmap for the next 2 years at Photokina. That Zeiss is widely believed to be a 24mm f1.4 or f2.

 

Photokina 2010: Seven New Sony E-Mount Lenses Debut | Sony Insider

 

 

p.s. as usual, I think the X1 is a cool camera. I'm just trying to get people familiar with NEX.

[Guest X1s]

Camera/lens tester, David Kilpatrick, would strongly disagree with many of the opinions of the 16mm. Sure, like with any lens, you have to learn how to deal with its shortcomings, but it is incredibly usable. Are you shooting landscapes at f2.8 or something? Read this entire thread (4 pages) before making more 16mm judgements. We have to remember this is a pancake wide angle, not a giant SLR lens. I have no problem with it at f8 in the corners when I compare it to anything else available for APS-C in that focal length.

 

Photoclubalpha • View topic - A77 - Nearly here

 

As for more NEX lenses, Sony announced their lens roadmap for the next 2 years at Photokina. That Zeiss is widely believed to be a 24mm f1.4 or f2.

 

Photokina 2010: Seven New Sony E-Mount Lenses Debut | Sony Insider

 

 

douglasf15, yes great links!!, I'm considering the NEX5 with the intro of the new Zeiss (a) mount lens, I will wait of course till the tweaker's report on them first.

 

Gee, Sony seems to be moving in the rite direction!

 

 

emma

[Guest stnami]

I've got the Nex 3 with 16mm. The lens is a pile of rubbish

Most likely you are not using it to it's full potential nor have you found it's sweet spot

[Guest douglasf13]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've also found that, by removing a screw, I can use the Sony 16mm OVF's base plate as a cold shoe. Here it is with my Leitz 50mm Brightline finder:

 

 

[Dan States]

Camera/lens tester, David Kilpatrick, would strongly disagree with many of the opinions of the 16mm. Sure, like with any lens, you have to learn how to deal with its shortcomings, but it is incredibly usable. Are you shooting landscapes at f2.8 or something? Read this entire thread (4 pages) before making more 16mm judgements. We have to remember this is a pancake wide angle, not a giant SLR lens. I have no problem with it at f8 in the corners when I compare it to anything else available for APS-C in that focal length.

 

Photoclubalpha • View topic - A77 - Nearly here

 

As for more NEX lenses, Sony announced their lens roadmap for the next 2 years at Photokina. That Zeiss is widely believed to be a 24mm f1.4 or f2.

 

Photokina 2010: Seven New Sony E-Mount Lenses Debut | Sony Insider

 

 

p.s. as usual, I think the X1 is a cool camera. I'm just trying to get people familiar with NEX.

 

Thanks for posting that link. That gentleman needs his eyes examined. The 16mm lens has major color errors and astigmatism off center that can barely be cleaned up with the LR3 profiles and major post processing. The problem is that unlike most lenses that suffer from CA on highlights only, the 16 shows color errors on any complex surface, giving images a low level of clarity. At apertures wider than 6.3 it's just plain soft, and the out of focus rendition of objects in front of the plane of focus is disturbing. The attached image is a 100% crop of a raw file. Focus was done manually to verify accuracy. Notice the lack of clarity and color errors on the ridges and detail. The same scene shot with a Zeiss ZM and adapter is so sharp it hurts.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like (not love) my nex, but the sudden explosion of lens adapters for nearly anything under the sun tells two stories. One of a great new camera platform and the other of users who think their lens options are not good enough.

 

Best wishes

Dan

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!

[phancj]

Douglas,

 

a great photographer will be able to take fantastic pictures with the lousiest cameras, a lot of it has to do with how the camera is used. Unfortunately I am NOT a great photographer, not even close, so for me gear does matter (in the hope of making up for my incompetence whilst I learn).

 

Dont get me wrong, I DO like the idea of nex, interchangeable lens on APS-C sensor, tiny size. I do however think the lens suck like mad. My first few photos with it contrast with my first with the X1 are worlds apart, and I had 2 sony reps helping me do the settings as I asked for. They even conceded that the nex takes terrible photos compared to the X1, then went onto point out the price and even brand difference. Was hilarious.

 

Dan.

 

Thanks for the photo and your thoughts, they mirror my feelings about the E-mounts too.

 

But I am keeping an eye on the Zeiss E-mounts then the nex could become very attractive.

[Guest douglasf13]

I'm wondering if Dan has a particularly bad copy. I'd say this is totally acceptable for a 24mm equiv. lens:

 

16mm 2.8 is a fantastic lens (full size example)!: Sony NEX Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

[phancj]

I'm wondering if Dan has a particularly bad copy. I'd say this is totally acceptable for a 24mm equiv. lens:

 

16mm 2.8 is a fantastic lens (full size example)!: Sony NEX Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

 

Douglas,

 

No one doubts that any lens in the hands of a great photographer and PP expert can do wonders after all that corrections and PP to make the image fly. However, myself and many others prefer great pictures out of the camera, with minimum tweaking.

 

Personally I'll not want a camera where I cannot get at least passably good pictures for print straight out of camera (isnt that what a camera is supposed to do?). However, I also do tweaking for the shots I really like.

 

My experience of the nex pancake is consistent with Dan's. the images were distorted, not sharp, etc,etc. The sony salesmen were embarrassed themselves when they viewed the images vs that of the X1 on my laptop. They made no attempt to say it was a bad copy, merely conceded that the nex is not in the league of the X1.

[Dan States]

I'm wondering if Dan has a particularly bad copy. I'd say this is totally acceptable for a 24mm equiv. lens:

 

16mm 2.8 is a fantastic lens (full size example)!: Sony NEX Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

 

It could be a bad one, but it seems no worse than Dpreviews copy, so if nothing else their quality control is a mess and at least two of them are plinkers...mine and the test model DPRV used.

 

Dan

[Guest douglasf13]

Of course a 16mm pancake doesn't compete with a 24mm lens. The point is that it is actually pretty good for such a wide angle. The 16mm certainly gives acceptable shots out of camera. Have you ever even used a 24mm equivalent before?

 

Sony salesman and reps, like most reps and salesman, are suspect in knowledge and usually know only a fraction of what an average forum poster knows. I've practically given camera clinics every time I walk into some camera stores. I once had to explain to a Sony salesman the positives and negatives of the A900 in his own case.

 

The bottom line is that the X1 is well built with a great lens, and it is compact. The X1 also has mediocre AF, MF and the speed and LCD of the camera aren't exactly state of the art, and it all comes in at a little under $2k.

 

For $1850, I got a well built, although not quite Leica quality, NEX-5 with brand new 35/1.4, 50/1.5, 50/2.5 and 85/3.5 Voigtlander rangefinder lenses and a quite usable Sony 16mm lens. Plus it has much more modern electronics and a slightly better sensor.

 

Pick your poison.

[phancj]

Of course a 16mm pancake doesn't compete with a 24mm lens. The point is that it is actually pretty good for such a wide angle. The 16mm certainly gives acceptable shots out of camera. Have you ever even used a 24mm equivalent before?

 

Sony salesman and reps, like most reps and salesman, are suspect in knowledge and usually know only a fraction of what an average forum poster knows. I've practically given camera clinics every time I walk into some camera stores. I once had to explain to a Sony salesman the positives and negatives of the A900 in his own case.

 

The bottom line is that the X1 is well built with a great lens, and it is compact. The X1 also has mediocre AF, MF and the speed and LCD of the camera aren't exactly state of the art, and it all comes in at a little under $2k.

 

For $1850, I got a well built, although not quite Leica quality, NEX-5 with brand new 35/1.4, 50/1.5, 50/2.5 and 85/3.5 Voigtlander rangefinder lenses and a quite usable Sony 16mm lens. Plus it has much more modern electronics and a slightly better sensor.

 

Pick your poison.

 

Yes, the sony is better value.

 

The X1 has AF, which is very accurate though not the fastest. Using non E-mount lenses assures you lose AF totally, so I'd rather have slower and accurate AF than no AF at all, but I respect those who dont need AF.

 

Frankly if I wanted to do MF I'd rather go for an M8/9, much more pleasurable to use.

 

Personally I like something to work nicely out of the box, not buy this and that adaptor and use third party stuff, kinda mix and match. Some people like that DIY anyhow, certainly not me.

[Ecaton]

 

The bottom line is that the X1 is well built with a great lens, and it is compact. The X1 also has mediocre AF, MF and the speed and LCD of the camera aren't exactly state of the art, and it all comes in at a little under $2k.

 

For $1850, I got a well built, although not quite Leica quality, NEX-5 with brand new 35/1.4, 50/1.5, 50/2.5 and 85/3.5 Voigtlander rangefinder lenses and a quite usable Sony 16mm lens. Plus it has much more modern electronics and a slightly better sensor.

 

Pick your poison.

 

Enjoy your Nex. I have one too. It has a promising sensor, but the X1's is no slouch either. There is no "Sony Nex versus Leica X1", the sum of the X1 parts simply adds to a better, much more rounded and well balanced camera. X1 with excellent lens is jacket pocketable, the Nex with adapter and decent lens is not. M-lenses I enjoy most on lightboxes they perform best with, i.e. M-mount cameras, digital or film, preferrably Leicas.

Some buy a well balanced and nicely designed Porsche Boxster, others a screaming Mitsubishi Evo. The former order filet mignons and red wine, the latter tripple cheesburgers and a gallon of soda with lots and lots of ice for dinner. Both have fun. But some of the more mature Evo drivers can't stop envying the Boxster guys:p:p:p.

[Guest douglasf13]

Of course I'd prefer an M9 to the NEX-5, but that really isn't the question here. I'd say the M9 is more of a 911 Turbo, not the relatively affordable Boxster. In fact, I'd say the NEX-5 is the Boxster, since you get arguably competitive sensor performance to the M9 (DxO Mark) in a sleaker, cheaper package. That probably makes the X1 more like a Lotus. Small, high performance, flashy, but limited in use. I've nearly purchased the M9 on two separate occasions, but I held off...for now.

 

The NEX-5 is pocketable with the MS Optical Perar Triplet.

 

If Leica makes a new version of the X1 with a real MF focusing ring or faster AF, I'd probably buy one even though I primarily prefer the 50mm equivalent focal length, because it is a really cool camera in most respects.

[ptomsu]

I have a NEX 5 too with kit lens and 16 - this is a stunning performer for a really cheap price compared to the X1 and especially the M9.

 

I almost bought an M9 but then deferred because of the still high price and the limited high ISO capabilities - and yes, I know all the arguments against that because I am an M shooter since 25 years. But I will wait for an M10 which then hopefully will come with more resolution and much improved high ISO capabilities.

 

Now I know the IQ I get out of the M9 is for sure superior to the NEX 5 and also the IQ out of the X1 is better, but the issue is that the NEX 5 is pretty close already in terms of IQ, even if used with Sony lenses and not Leica M glass via an adapter.

 

I guess I will also wait for the X2, which I hope will overcome most of the limitations of the X1 like AF speed, useable MF mode and better high ISO.

 

For now the NEX 5 is exactly what I need for my daily P&S work. Hope Leica will do their job.

[LucisPictor]

I've got the Nex 3 with 16mm. The lens is a pile of rubbish. Too bad because the camera is pretty darned good.

 

That 16mm is the best wide angle lens that offers you the equivalent angle of an 24mm lens for reasonable money.

What would be the alternative?

 

Nikon 15mm f/3.5? Too bulky and too expensive.

Sigma 15mm f/2.8 EX? Too bulky and too expensive and no aperture control.

Sigma EX 15-30? Yeah, sure! (Way too bulky and no aperture control.)

Zenitar 16mm f/2.8? Too fishy.

Tokina TV 16mm F/1.6? Does not cover the NEX sensor (can hardly be used on µ4/3).

Voigtländer Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5? Too expensive and more than a stop slower. (I would love to have one, though.)

Leica Tri-Elmar 16-18-21? Sure, if I win the lottery...

[colonel]

I've also found that, by removing a screw, I can use the Sony 16mm OVF's base plate as a cold shoe. Here it is with my Leitz 50mm Brightline finder:

 

 

 

 

 

salivating over your setup mate

all looks beautiful

 

just bought my NEX5.

 

how is the V 35mm f2.5 vs the f1.5 (or is it a f1.4) ?

 

+ do you have a gallery I can look at ?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[gDallasK]

Enjoy your Nex. I have one too. It has a promising sensor, but the X1's is no slouch either. There is no "Sony Nex versus Leica X1", the sum of the X1 parts simply adds to a better, much more rounded and well balanced camera. X1 with excellent lens is jacket pocketable, the Nex with adapter and decent lens is not. M-lenses I enjoy most on lightboxes they perform best with, i.e. M-mount cameras, digital or film, preferrably Leicas.

Some buy a well balanced and nicely designed Porsche Boxster, others a screaming Mitsubishi Evo. The former order filet mignons and red wine, the latter tripple cheesburgers and a gallon of soda with lots and lots of ice for dinner. Both have fun. But some of the more mature Evo drivers can't stop envying the Boxster guys:p:p:p.

 

I also have a NEX and an X1 (and an M9).

 

But you are confusing form and function in your camera / car analogy. I have in the past owned several Porsches but now drive an Impreza (much better than an Evo). Despite my "maturity" - I'll be 60 this year - I don't envy the Boxster owners at all. In case of the Impreza most of the cost goes into the engineering not the marketing. So I wind up with a better, faster, more usable car and enough money still in my pocket to fund my Leica addiiction.

 

The NEX has a great sensor, uninspiring Sony lenses and - I have found - very poor ergonomics. The user interface (despite Sony's intent on making easy for P&S shooter to use) is not designed for quick, easy adjustment. The X1 follows the rangefinder design ethic quite closely - everything you need to do can be accomplished very quickly (except maybe autofocusing - bring on firmware v2.0!). And it is fitted with a lens of extremely high quality.

 

So, in the same way that the Impreza has an impressive history of motorsport achievement and the Boxster does not, the images from the X1 are testimony to its underlying functional and design integrity.