Jump to content

Looking for a companion camera to the M9?


Robmoores1

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply
You must have some HUGE pockets.........

With 120mm length the Nex-7 is shorter than the Leica X1 (124mm) if i'm not wrong.

Same length as the Leica CL (120mm) by the way. But the latter is higher (76 vs 67mm).

My dear Digilux 1 is beaten hands down (127 x 83 vs 120 x 67).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Holy Moly
The Nex-7 is a true pocketable camera thanks to its built-in EVF though. I will wait and see how it handles wides when it is launched actually. I see no reason why it cannot achieve what the Nex-5N seems able to do already.

 

The pixel size of a NEX7 is 3.9µm an Oly E_PL3 has 3.75 µm.

 

The NEX5 has a size of 4.8 µm.

 

The difference between the sensors of Oly and NEX7 is only 0.15 µm in favor of Sony.

When we compare the surface of both, the m4/3 is 13 x 17,3 and Sony 7 is 15,7 x 23,7.

 

We made in the past the experience that wide and ultra wides on the m4/3 deliver soft edges and certain casts, even the sensor is smaller compare to APS-C.

 

For me it's clear that the NEX7 sensor might be very good with the best glass from the E-line but with wides and ultra wides with Leica M specifications this would be a waste of time and money.

 

The Sony lens correction in the camera works only with Sony lenses, third party lenses are not electrically connected and there are no look up tables with correction datas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Holy Moly
This does not explain why the Nex-5N seems to perform well with 21 and 28mm lenses. Why would not the Nex-7 do the same? I will wait and see what the real thing can achieve before concluding personally.

 

 

 

4.8 ./. 3.9

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The only companion to a 9 thousand dollar camera... is another 9 thousand dollar camera.

 

In other words, a 1000 dollar camera can never 'be' a companion, nor a comparison.

[...]

 

You made my day.

 

Why don't we all go just a tiny bit further OT and discuss choosing a mistress?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you much but i can't seem to find out occurences of vignetting or light fall-off in this article, and only one of color shift caused by the steep angle of incidence of the rays through M lenses. Now with the same lens, that angle is the same on Nex-7 & Nex-5N cameras isn't it. Am i missing something here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Holy Moly

The angle of light at the borders and the smaller 'opening' of the pixel of the NEX7 makes it more difficult to get a 'clean' amount of light into the photosites near the borders.

 

Oly tried to eliminate this by the telecentric design of lenses and lightpath. Small pixels are hit with an uncritical angle of light. The M design is totally contrary.

 

The larger pixels of the 5n collect more light than the smaller ones of the NEX7. The resolution is lower but light fall off and casts are not visible. No secrets at all I think.

 

Remember the phenomenon with the M9 and 18mm or longer. The M9 has bigger photosites but the distance from the middle of the sensor to the edges is bigger compare to APS-C or the Crop 1.33 from the M8. With the given angle to the corners the camera needs internal corrections.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes i understand this but as an old R-D1 owner i know that good 21, 24 & 28mm lenses can work with APS-C sensors deprived of the most efficient offset microlenses. It is then difficult to believe than a modern camera like the Nex-7 cannot do better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Holy Moly
Yes i understand this but as an old R-D1 owner i know that good 21, 24 & 28mm lenses can work with APS-C sensors deprived of the most efficient offset microlenses. It is then difficult to believe than a modern camera like the Nex-7 cannot do better.

 

The pixel size of the D70 sensor for the Epson is 7.8 µm. The resolution is 6.1 MP compare to 24 MP. Now it's clear?

 

Here is a comparison chart:

 

DigitalDingus Reference: Imager Sizes, Pixel Sizes, and Resolution

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is clear for you but not for me sorry. As i understand it the effect of offset microlenses if stronger than pixel size on vignetting and color shifts actually. Those of the Nex-5N seem to be efficient so far so i would be surprised if the Nex-7 is significantly inferior from this standpoint. Now you might be perfectly right and i'm not a techy at all unfortunately so i'll just wait and see what the Nex-7 can achieve before concluding personally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Holy Moly

Amateur Photographer (UK):

 

"Sony has confirmed that it has postponed, indefinitely, the European launch of its NEX-7 camera"

 

statement printed in the magazine, not online released.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, looking again at Steve Huff's wide Leica images, the issue only really shows at 24 and wider. I was planning on using my 35 & 28 lenses on the Nex.

 

The big issue now, is when the Nex 7 gets released ...

 

On another issue, I was looking at the Novoflex website; particularly the mounting brackets. At risk of sounding like Rip, I'm tempted to set up a helmet mount, with a Nex-7 and a Summicron 28. It will only give me a 42 full frame equivalent, but using the video function, I might get some nice paragliding and cycling footage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Size, portability, ease of use, and cost all play a role when choosing but perhaps the most critical factor should be image quality. Figure when you might be using it and not the M9: for example, family snaps, parties, a rugged hike where you don't want to risk damaging thousands of dollars of gear.

 

I have been very impressed with the D-Lux 5. IQ is excellent at lower ISOs. It also performs well indoors -- its LCD with live view is better than the M9's limited LCD.

 

I would also be very interested in Leica's upcoming interchangeable lens compact camera, but that will probably be a year away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All very true, David.

 

For me the main criterion is to offer something different to what I get from the M9; so size, acceptable high ISO, cheaper, a remote and video, with good image quality are appealing, with the use of my existing lenses are the main appeal.

 

When I bought the M9, spent a lot of time thinking about the camera. Now that I have a nice clutch of lenses, the focus of my attention has changed (pardon the pun). Getting the most use out of the lenses is what is driving this vague consideration, and being able to take a camera into places where the M9 is too big, heavy and expensive (like my cycling trip down the Bridge to Nowhere. So, cameras like the D-Lux 5 really have less interest.

 

I guess the benchmark will be the new Leica EVIL, but it will be very expensive, compared to the Sony. The Ricoh doesn't really appeal - modules etc. I want to keep to simplicity. The Nex with an adapter is just another body. If it starts looking like another system or an entirely new camera, rather than expanding the use of my M lenses, I'll lose interest.

 

Actually, I'm losing interest already with the Nex-7 looking more distant ... I might just ask Greg from Photo & Video to keep me informed, and leave it at that.

 

Cheers

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...