asoares Posted February 18, 2011 Author Share #21 Â Posted February 18, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) If you think the results are on the same level - dream on..... Â It depends "how many" levels are they apart... I can't test it myself but others did and it seems to me that the "levels" aren't so much apart... Then there's the price level: an used M8 costs at least 4 NEX5+16mm... Â regards, antonio Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 Hi asoares, Take a look here Switching a Leica X1 for a Leica Summicron 35/2+NEX5. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jsrockit Posted February 18, 2011 Share #22 Â Posted February 18, 2011 It is just that our skills have shifted - from the inside of our heads to the inside our cameras.... Â Come on... that's simply not true. No matter what type of automation you are using, you still have to use your head to frame the photo... or at least you should be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elbonedeedo Posted February 18, 2011 Share #23 Â Posted February 18, 2011 It depends "how many" levels are they apart... I can't test it myself but others did and it seems to me that the "levels" aren't so much apart... Then there's the price level: an used M8 costs at least 4 NEX5+16mm... Â regards, antonio I read that comparison over at Steve Huff's site a while back. You really don't think they're that far apart after looking at those pics? NEX is not in the same class IMHO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted February 18, 2011 Share #24 Â Posted February 18, 2011 The nex vs m8... Â There are clearly differences in sharpness, color, and contrast rendered by the different bodies.. the lack of aa on the m8 is readily apparent. Â The stevehuffphoto.com comparison showed the differences clearly. Â The colors and contrast are easily mitigated in post. Â The sharpness won't matter depending on workflow and print size. Â the question is one of preference to focus, longevity, and preference imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steinweg Posted February 18, 2011 Share #25 Â Posted February 18, 2011 Having owned both M8 and Nex+Cron, difference in IQ is significant Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigelb Posted February 18, 2011 Share #26  Posted February 18, 2011 Cost of used 2-3 year old M8 body at Ffordes UK - £1700 Price I paid for Nex 3 body at Cardiff Camera Centre - £179  Now I don't know about the OP, but I was not under the delusion that it would compare directly with the M8 or even the X1, but have been pleasantly surprised by the quality it is capable of. The Nex 3 with CV Skopar 25 f2.5 puts the Oly PL1 with 17 f2.8, which I owned a while ago for a short time, to shame. Results with a little PP and sharpening to are excellent, well within my requirements and not worth the extra £1521 - to me that is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asoares Posted February 19, 2011 Author Share #27  Posted February 19, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) The nex vs m8... There are clearly differences in sharpness, color, and contrast rendered by the different bodies.. the lack of aa on the m8 is readily apparent.  The stevehuffphoto.com comparison showed the differences clearly.  The colors and contrast are easily mitigated in post.  The sharpness won't matter depending on workflow and print size.  the question is one of preference to focus, longevity, and preference imo.  Although I couldn't experiment it myself, from the research I made in the several lists, and from your posts here, being more experienced than me with both cameras, I am aware of the better performance of the M8. But we must also consider that the better performance of the M8 is in certain comparison conditions. Also, as I mentioned before, we need to consider the particular goals of the camera use. Let me try to explain my rationale:  my photographic work is mainly on the street. I prefer wait-level finding than eye-level. This may sound odd but that's my way. The nex+cron is perfect for that. And I need to carry the camera always, so I need something light and small. street shooting and no AF? well... I am trying a more "reflexive" way of street shooting, not a Bresson's decisive moment (even him had not AF ).... great part of my work is shot at low ligh and at night in the city. The M8 is not an high ISO camera, from the reviews and opinions I read. I guess you agree that from 800 up the nex sensor performs better than the M8. I need to produce some big prints for exhibitions: the 4Mp + of the nex can give some advantage. besides this, as you and others mentioned, post-processing can greatly shorten the quality gap. why going for the leica instead of waiting for a high quality zeiss prime? That's the irrational part... Maybe in my subconscient I am waiting for an opportunity to get an used M9  regards, antonio Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted February 19, 2011 Share #28 Â Posted February 19, 2011 You really have to try the M8/9 for manual focus to see how deficient the nex is for MF. If MF is your thing I feel there's nothing like it. Being used to AF and having not used MF cameras for a long while I can safely say if given a choice I take RF over SLR MF implementation any time. It's just much clearer and more fun (at least in the wide to normal focal lengths which is what I tend to shoot). Â I am tempted to think the nex will be better for macro and tele ranges. Â IMO the nex photos are much more "digital" than the M8/9. PP may not be able to bridge this kind of IQ gap. To my eyes even the M8 CCD noise is pleasant as it is film-like, while noise from a cmos begs to be removed resulting in details lost. Â CJ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen.w Posted February 19, 2011 Share #29 Â Posted February 19, 2011 Nice setup, and nice library Did you know about the new Ricoh GXR M-mount module? Had I been in your position, I would have been tempted to wait for that. Much more of a photographer's camera than the NEX, imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted February 19, 2011 Share #30 Â Posted February 19, 2011 I couldnt agree more. The GXR is looking better with this module. Read about it just. it just seems better implemented somehow (at least from what I read). I may end up with a gxr and the module. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted February 19, 2011 Share #31 Â Posted February 19, 2011 Antonio, Â I think I wasn't clear. I was saying the file differences are there but for the most part eclipsed by whatever user preference is for the given device. I wasn't trying to be a know it all at all. Â Sorry for the confusion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asoares Posted February 20, 2011 Author Share #32  Posted February 20, 2011 Antonio, I think I wasn't clear. I was saying the file differences are there but for the most part eclipsed by whatever user preference is for the given device. I wasn't trying to be a know it all at all.  Sorry for the confusion.  Don't need to apologize Edward, I got your point of view which I mostly agree. I was trying to further explain to the thread the rationale of my decision that, in what concerns to photo gear, can't be reduced compare objective output file quality and objective handling quality. It's a multi-criteria decision (with some subjectivity...)  Regards, antonio myprivatelight.net Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.