jaapv Posted November 16, 2011 Share #61 Posted November 16, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think that the first decent EVF ever built on the NEX7 is the deciding factor. Image quality is not an interesting subject any more. Nex, Fuji, all of them are ample. For better IQ one needs to look at cameras in a higher bracket, Nikon D3x, Canon 1Dx, Leica M9 etc... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 16, 2011 Posted November 16, 2011 Hi jaapv, Take a look here Why the NEX-7 makes M8 a tough call. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
gyoung Posted November 16, 2011 Share #62 Posted November 16, 2011 If the focus shifts as you stop down, the only way to make it a 'thing of the past' would be to focus at the aperture you are going to use, and focussing stopped down is lerss accurate than at full aperture, so you might miss the critical point. I doubt you can win with focus shift really Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 16, 2011 Share #63 Posted November 16, 2011 But with an EVF/live view you can focus stopped down. Even must stop down for non-native lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted November 16, 2011 Share #64 Posted November 16, 2011 The evf will brighten the image given by a stopped down lens, it doesn't do anything about the increased depth of field and focus due to the smaller aperture which makes focussing through the lens less easy and less accurate. I have a G1 which I use with M and NIKON lenses, Gerry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianv Posted November 16, 2011 Share #65 Posted November 16, 2011 Live-view gets very noisy on my EP-2 when stopping down to F8 or so. Similar to a viewfinder of an SLR using stopped-down mode. It is also hard to get critical focus when stopped down. With an RF: if you use a particular lens enough, and "Mentally map out" the focus shift- offset the RF split-image to compensate. For example, with a 5cm F1.5 Sonnar at F4- focus shifts to the rear of what the RF indicates. Leave the RF image offset slightly on the close-side. With a little practice, it works. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 16, 2011 Share #66 Posted November 16, 2011 If you are in bright light, using the EVF with a stopped down lens will not be noisy or have some other kind of problem. It is dependent on the total amount of light hitting the sensor, not the f stop alone. If you are shooting in low light are you that likely to be stopped down very much and also working quickly handheld? (Maybe with flash.) In any case, we don't know how noisy the Nex7 EVF will be in such a situation. But when I played with one indoors at the Javitts center using the basic f3.5-5.6 zoom it looked incredibly good. Consider that if people are happy with the sharpness and noise characteristics on this 24MP cropped sensor and their full frame lenses of any brand... then a similar full frame sensor would be around 56 megapixels. So that seems to me to be where full frame cameras could be with existing sensor technology. And when we are pushing lenses to this kind of limit, we probably will need to focus stopped down to the taking aperture via live view for the most critical situations. (It may even require 10X magnified live view.) In general, seeing the effects of depth of field is a plus in my opinion but is not always necessary either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanzlr Posted November 16, 2011 Share #67 Posted November 16, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Oh we know. It is the Same evf as used in the A77 and 5N. At least on the 5n it works perfectly well stopped down to f8 in daylight. A 50mm is easy to focus by eye at f4. And if you are not sure or don't trust the focus peaking, just hit the MF button for a zoom in, focus, half press the shutter to Zoom out and shoot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 16, 2011 Share #68 Posted November 16, 2011 Consider that if people are happy with the sharpness and noise characteristics on this 24MP cropped sensor and their full frame lenses of any brand... then a similar full frame sensor would be around 56 megapixels. So that seems to me to be where full frame cameras could be with existing sensor technology. And when we are pushing lenses to this kind of limit, we probably will need to focus stopped down to the taking aperture via live view for the most critical situations. Such resolutions remain theoretical unless one uses the very best lenses that exist. Lesser glass will never match it. Reason why the top long glass of Leica should really shine. If it is photographically meaningful is another matter. According to Zeiss the maximum resolution that is needed is 40 LP/mm. Here we are talking at least 150. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 16, 2011 Share #69 Posted November 16, 2011 The evf will brighten the image given by a stopped down lens, it doesn't do anything about the increased depth of field and focus due to the smaller aperture which makes focussing through the lens less easy and less accurate.I have a G1 which I use with M and NIKON lenses, Gerry Yes- and as DOF increases focus shift becomes less and less relevant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 16, 2011 Share #70 Posted November 16, 2011 Such resolutions remain theoretical unless one uses the very best lenses that exist. Lesser glass will never match it. Reason why the top long glass of Leica should really shine. If it is photographically meaningful is another matter. According to Zeiss the maximum resolution that is needed is 40 LP/mm. Here we are talking at least 150. I can't say for sure but was simply pointing out what these 24MP sensors are "expecting" from a current lens. If the cheap kit zooms actually can show a difference at 24MP than at 16MP, then something is going on. And this should be pretty easy to test. I do believe this is not too important for many photographers or many photographs. But for my commercial work of interiors and exteriors, I would go for additional resolution if it is available. As for the viewfinder, if Leica incorporated Sony's latest EVF into a full frame 24-56MP mirrorless body, I think many R lens owners would be pretty satisfied. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 16, 2011 Share #71 Posted November 16, 2011 Problem - the silicon carrier on the Exmor sensor is too thin to make into full frame at the present time. And I have afeeling that is the sensor that would please most of us best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 16, 2011 Share #72 Posted November 16, 2011 I can't say for sure but was simply pointing out what these 24MP sensors are "expecting" from a current lens. If the cheap kit zooms actually can show a difference at 24MP than at 16MP, then something is going on. And this should be pretty easy to test. I do believe this is not too important for many photographers or many photographs. But for my commercial work of interiors and exteriors, I would go for additional resolution if it is available. As for the viewfinder, if Leica incorporated Sony's latest EVF into a full frame 24-56MP mirrorless body, I think many R lens owners would be pretty satisfied. Even a mediocre CD will sound better on a top-end hifi system. But you need a direct cut vinyl record to make it really sing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 16, 2011 Share #73 Posted November 16, 2011 Even a mediocre CD will sound better on a top-end hifi system. But you need a direct cut vinyl record to make it really sing. Music reproduction is pretty subjective. Lens resolution (and overall lens+camera reproduction) is pretty easy to test objectively in order to see if the lenses keep pace with the sensors. If a number of lenses can keep up with 24MPs on an APS (maybe only when stopped down some,) then 56MP on a full frame sensor is not stretching my imagination at all. Without testing, one can't arbitrarily say if even a well designed Leica M lens, that is intended for full frame, when used on an APS camera, will always outperform a lens that is specifically designed for the smaller APS format. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 16, 2011 Share #74 Posted November 16, 2011 I have a feeling we agree completely. Unless something even better comes along by next spring I will be trying out my lenses on this thing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sp12 Posted November 17, 2011 Share #75 Posted November 17, 2011 Because it lets me set exposures faster than with any handheld computer around. Because it has the worlds best manual focussing aid, one can have, that let me focus on moving subjects with superfast lenses more reliable than with any other manual focus enabled camera. Because it has it's essential controls in exactly the same places, like the other cameras, I use my Leica lenses on. Points 1, 2, & 3 are wrong. Of course, the NEX-7 is clearly not a Leica, and frankly shouldn't even be compared to one because it's not a Leica. It's like trying to compare a Dell to an Apple -- the Apple is superior in every way, regardless of specs, reviews, or price. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 17, 2011 Share #76 Posted November 17, 2011 Points 1, 2, & 3 are wrong. Of course, the NEX-7 is clearly not a Leica, and frankly shouldn't even be compared to one because it's not a Leica. It's like trying to compare a Dell to an Apple -- the Apple is superior in every way, regardless of specs, reviews, or price. Is this your idea of a persuasive argument? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted November 17, 2011 Share #77 Posted November 17, 2011 Points 1, 2, & 3 are wrong. They are not, which is the whole point of photographers preferring, to use their spec inferior relic Leica M over much better automatic gadgets. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 17, 2011 Share #78 Posted November 17, 2011 They are not, which is the whole point of photographers preferring, to use their spec inferior relic Leica M over much better automatic gadgets. I think he was being sarcastic so I won't bite either way. All I will say is I was very impressed with the Nex 7 and it seems to me that it is technologically at least a couple of generations ahead of the M8. As for usability - that is a personal choice but I'd have no problems using either camera quickly and efficiently. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kafenio Posted November 18, 2011 Share #79 Posted November 18, 2011 Played around with the nex 7 yesterday. It's too slow to replace the m8 or a DSLR but image quality, build quality and evf / monitor are superb. Thinking about getting it as a spare/complement to the m8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 18, 2011 Share #80 Posted November 18, 2011 What is slow exactly? If it is only the AF that is fine with me - I don't want it anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.