terrycioni Posted June 14, 2013 Share #41 Posted June 14, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) the nex-7 is cute, but it isn't even in the same discussion as the M9. At least 5 reasons support this based on my extensive use of the nex-7 before selling it on ebay. 1. the auto focus is not accurate. it has a tendency to hop to a errant point of high contrast. ---Center Point AF and that applies to pretty much any digital camera for MOST situations, that is why it is available. It has bad contrast detection IQ. You'll find that this is a known fact if you search other camera forums. ---What are you talking about here. I am not sure what contrast detection IQ means. I will say this again - centre point af if that is what you are talking about. 2. lack of full frame makes a material difference ---The M9 sensor is full frame and the NEX 7 is APS-C - so what is your point. Bigger is not always better - if you seriously shot both cameras you would know this at this point. I would also suggest that the M9 SHOULD BE BETTER it cost about 5 x more than the NEX. I kept my M9/M8/M8.2 and my NEX 7. 3. the colors are not as pleasing as the ccd sensor of the M9 ---To bad then that the new M 240 is using a CMOS sensor and not a CCD. This is just plain silly. CMOS is here to stay - like it or not your choice. CCD is not better - just different than CMOS sensors but not all that different. Digital is digital. 4. the ergonomics of an nex-7 are clunky if one is used to the purist simplicity of an M ---"The Purist" life moves on, tech moves on, have a look around you - people are very happy using their iPhone as their only camera - yup requires a bit of a learning curve. A few minutes with the NEX and the interface is actually pretty good. 5. the lenses fitting the nex-7 aren't comparable to leica. ---I could spend some time listing the various adapters that make it very possible to use Leica lenses on the NEX. I do it all the time - I have a Fotodiox that is bang on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 14, 2013 Posted June 14, 2013 Hi terrycioni, Take a look here Sony NEX 7...no comparison. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
terrycioni Posted June 14, 2013 Share #42 Posted June 14, 2013 Exactly what I want - a camera that I can hook up to my nephew's Gameboy... You really do think you are the smartest guy in the room or in this case the forum. Sigh. Terry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iedei Posted June 14, 2013 Share #43 Posted June 14, 2013 Exactly what I want - a camera that I can hook up to my nephew's Gameboy... lol. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted June 14, 2013 Share #44 Posted June 14, 2013 ---I could spend some time listing the various adapters that make it very possible to use Leica lenses on the NEX. I do it all the time - I have a Fotodiox that is bang on. Originally Posted by A miller the nex-7 is cute, but it isn't even in the same discussion as the M9. At least 5 reasons support this based on my extensive use of the nex-7 before selling it on ebay. 1. the auto focus is not accurate. it has a tendency to hop to a errant point of high contrast. ---Center Point AF and that applies to pretty much any digital camera for MOST situations, that is why it is available. It has bad contrast detection IQ. You'll find that this is a known fact if you search other camera forums. ---What are you talking about here. I am not sure what contrast detection IQ means. I will say this again - centre point af if that is what you are talking about. 2. lack of full frame makes a material difference ---The M9 sensor is full frame and the NEX 7 is APS-C - so what is your point. Bigger is not always better - if you seriously shot both cameras you would know this at this point. I would also suggest that the M9 SHOULD BE BETTER it cost about 5 x more than the NEX. I kept my M9/M8/M8.2 and my NEX 7. 3. the colors are not as pleasing as the ccd sensor of the M9 ---To bad then that the new M 240 is using a CMOS sensor and not a CCD. This is just plain silly. CMOS is here to stay - like it or not your choice. CCD is not better - just different than CMOS sensors but not all that different. Digital is digital. 4. the ergonomics of an nex-7 are clunky if one is used to the purist simplicity of an M ---"The Purist" life moves on, tech moves on, have a look around you - people are very happy using their iPhone as their only camera - yup requires a bit of a learning curve. A few minutes with the NEX and the interface is actually pretty good. 5. the lenses fitting the nex-7 aren't comparable to leica. ************************************************************************************************* Hi Terry - My understanding of the topic of this thread is the comparison of the two cameras and the specific question of why one would want an nex-7 over a Leica M. The price differential is obvious, so I didn't address it. Rather, I shared my own extensive experience with e nex-7 during the few months that I owned it. 1. Not all contrast detection focusing functions work exactly the same across all cameras. I can't remember which forum is it since it was last year, but one of the major forums with a Sony sub-forum has lengthy discussion regarding how the contrast detection AF is one of if not the weakest aspects of the camera. This held true in my own experience. Too often when I selected a point of focus the camera focused on something else in the picture, and that something else typically had prominent contrast. The Olympus OMD and Fuji X-Pro 1 that I also briefly owned did not have this issue (although they each had their shortfalls, though I will avoid disgressing). If you don't recognize this as a shortfall in your camera, I am very happy for you and wish you a lot of fun with the camera. It is a great camera for what it is. The video is great, although the placement of the button was designed by a monkey. One can get used to the tri-wheel ergonomics, although after I bought my M9 when I went back to the nex-7 and tried to shoot manual I realized that it was less of a purist design that I had initially thought. For what it is worth, my overall assessment of the three camera in this category that I tried was that I liked the Fuji the best (with the latest firmware which improved the speed of AF). 2. As for the difference b/n the M9 FF and smaller nex-7 sensor, I conducted my own side-by-side controlled experiments and noticed a very meaningful difference in dynamic range. If I documented my methodology and results I could give Steve Huff a run for his money. 3. Clearly, not all CMOS sensors are equal. There is a reason why Leica had its own made by a European company and not an Asian company. (No offense to the Asians ) I am not asserting that the Sony CMOS, and all other cameras that use this same sensor, aren't any good and can't produce world class pictures. Post-processing is simply part of a professional digital photographer's job and we all know that it can do wonders. 4. The ergonomics of the nex-7 are good for a camera in its class and for people who shoot non-rangefinders. I am simply making the point that, in my experience, the nex-7 is more clunky to use in full manual mode vs the M9. 5. I have also tried using Leica glass on the nex-7 with an adapter. The need to rely on the focus peaking reduces the advanced speed and agility that this camera brings. And then there's the fact that CMOS sensor is inferior to the M9 sensor. In the end, I just didn't think it was worth it to downgrade speed and agility just to be able to use very expensive Leica glass. The Zeiss 35mm F1.8 that was made for this camera is plenty good and it isn't that expensive and you get the full functionality of the camera. So that would be my main lens if I had kept it. And the 18-200 lens (the one with active stabilization for video) is very impressive and useful. To sum up, I am happy that you like your nex-7 and wish you lots of continued enjoyment. I am simply sharing my experience and expressing my own viewpoint. If any my statements above seem that to be "matter of fact" (other than the weak contrast detection AF, which I feel strongly is a fact), please forgive me. Best, Adam Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted June 14, 2013 Share #45 Posted June 14, 2013 I certainly would expect a $8,000+ camera to do better in at least some aspects than an $800-$1100 camera. (Counting lens price.) On what percentage of your images this would show up or matter would depend on what you shoot and how much of a pixel peeper you are. On the other hand there is a lot that the Nex can do that the Leica can't. So those aspects can't be compared in any way. I haven't used the Nex 7 but the Nex 6 has PD AF on the imaging sensor and thus has faster AF. Also the Playmemory apps are applicable to the Nex 6 which has wifi and not the 7. https://www.playmemoriescameraapps.com/portal/index.php?setname=NEX-6 Rumors are that the 7 will be replaced or upgraded before too long. So your nephew outgrew the Gameboy and passed it on to you. As of now there is no way to connect a Nex with a Gameboy so you are out of luck on that Jaap. You'll just have to get by continuing to use the Gameboy camera you already have. However you can connect a Nex 6 with an iPad, iPhone, and Android tablet or phone in case you own one of those. This would provide a wireless "tethered" way of shooting. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/206375-sony-nex-7no-comparison/?do=findComment&comment=2348814'>More sharing options...
Ivan Muller Posted July 10, 2013 Share #46 Posted July 10, 2013 I've seen all the posts about Sony NEX v Leica M9..and after holding one for myself and seeing this video I cannot see the reason why you would want a Sony NEX over a Leica M9...too many buttons and dials...Leica simple and great images...enough said Also...why would you buy a camera from someone who makes Hifi equipment ... So now what would you do if your eyesight is failing, you love photography and you only have a 'normal' income and bank balance? I fit in all those categories and although I don't have a Nex 7, my friend has one...I am very impressed with the feel and grip of the camera, which is much better than my X1 for instance and its also far more responsive. And at only 2/3 of the price of an X and only a fraction of the price of any M... I just don't understand how having an extra few buttons to press, live view etc etc can influence ones vision. Or how the lack of a few buttons, its not as if the M, X and S doesn't have any, can somehow make one a 'better' photographer and 'improve' one's photography. Of course if you read the Leica website spiel one would be inclined to believe so but who believes any manufacturers own opinionof their products ? I have been using a Leica X1 for my personal photography the last 2 1/2 years. It was a very good camera and I made lots and lots of very satisfying images. About a month ago I got an Eos M, probably the furthest one can get from the Leica 'gestalt'... It has a touchscreen, af, almost no dials...the complete antithesis of a Leica... I can almost hear the whole forum groan and say 'juck', and I really dont have a problem with that but you know what, my vision hasn't changed nor has this ' toy-cellphone-ugly- Japanese-plastic' camera have had any negative bearing on the quality of my images or the ease with which I can capture them. All I notice is the faster AF and the much better image quality and the fact that my bank balance is still intact and that I didn't have to morgage my house for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted July 11, 2013 Share #47 Posted July 11, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I just don't understand how having an extra few buttons to press, live view etc etc can influence ones vision. Or how the lack of a few buttons, its not as if the M, X and S doesn't have any, can somehow make one a 'better' photographer and 'improve' one's photography. ... I count more controls, knobs, and buttons on the M with EVF (19) than on the Nex 7 (18) and the Nex 6 with 17. (Counting lens release and diopter, but not battery and card access.) And on the Sonys one button opens the flash and another controls the zoom - both are features lacking on the M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Muller Posted July 11, 2013 Share #48 Posted July 11, 2013 I count more controls, knobs, and buttons on the M with EVF (19) than on the Nex 7 (18) and the Nex 6 with 17. (Counting lens release and diopter, but not battery and card access.) And on the Sonys one button opens the flash and another controls the zoom - both are features lacking on the M. LOL just shows you the difference between perception and fact! As they say 'the truth will set you free' The Eos M has 7...or 12 depending on how you count! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnwolf Posted July 13, 2013 Share #49 Posted July 13, 2013 I don't get this aversion to buttons and dials and detailed menus. You don't HAVE TO use them. My Nex 7 has been set up the same pretty much from the beginning -- aperture priority, just like my M9. Except now I can switch to shutter priority and have auto ISO. My thumb falls perfectly to control everything essential. Very innovative and elegant, actually. Is this all so complex that educated grown-ups are flustered by it? John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_n Posted July 18, 2013 Share #50 Posted July 18, 2013 About 85% of my picture taking is B&W film and I use my Leicas and Rolleiflex for that and will continue to do so. I bought a Sony NEX-7 and a Novoflex adapter a year ago and use it for family snaps and suchlike, which is what I use color for. My Leica M lenses work perfectly on it and the IQ is excellent. The camera is simple to use and very easy to focus. But what I like most about it is that it's like my B&W cameras, it has worked reliably out of the box without any issues. No glitches, no incompatibilities and only one firmware upgrade during the year that I haven't bothered to download because I don't think it's necessary. It appears to be bulletproof, and since I can be a bit rough on my gear I really appreciate its durability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac22 Posted July 22, 2013 Share #51 Posted July 22, 2013 I've had my Nex 7 for a few weeks now, swapping between 28mm Elmarit, 35mm Voigty and a 50mm Cron. Once it's set up it's all very easy to produce excellent shots. My mint M8.2 seems destined for Ebay......... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
40mm f/2 Posted July 28, 2013 Share #52 Posted July 28, 2013 I like both my M9 and Nex-7. My comparison: Nex-7 postive: focusing macro and tele, good low light Nex-7 negative: no wide angle I like, bad UI which is menu driven - so slow and easy to touch the wrong bottom. So constantly some settings are wrong! M9: positive: easy to use, great with most wide angle lenses, good colors M9 negative: no real macro and tele, limited at low light and less than perfect DR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted July 31, 2013 Share #53 Posted July 31, 2013 I like both my M9 and Nex-7. My comparison:Nex-7 postive: focusing macro and tele, good low light Nex-7 negative: no wide angle I like, bad UI which is menu driven - so slow and easy to touch the wrong bottom. So constantly some settings are wrong! M9: positive: easy to use, great with most wide angle lenses, good colors M9 negative: no real macro and tele, limited at low light and less than perfect DR. I agree, M9 and NEX-7 complement each other very nicely. There is not a single camera with all the features I would like to use. So, I use more than one type of camera or for that matter lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iforum Posted July 31, 2013 Share #54 Posted July 31, 2013 I just completed presenting a 2 day workshop....... most had a swag of Leica lenses some owned up to 30. 3 m240s, a few m8 but 7 nex's ...........I was quite surprised, well flabbergasted most stated that sony was a better deal, great results, easy to use and left cash to buy more lenses. ps Mind you last time there was only one sony Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Martin Posted July 31, 2013 Share #55 Posted July 31, 2013 The full frame version will only increase that trend I think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iforum Posted July 31, 2013 Share #56 Posted July 31, 2013 It seems that not all are die hard Leica players only. Some of the participants were medium format hassie enthusiasts still shooting film alongside the NEX Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 31, 2013 Share #57 Posted July 31, 2013 I like both my M9 and Nex-7. My comparison:Nex-7 postive: focusing macro and tele, good low light Nex-7 negative: no wide angle I like, bad UI which is menu driven - so slow and easy to touch the wrong bottom. So constantly some settings are wrong! M9: positive: easy to use, great with most wide angle lenses, good colors M9 negative: no real macro and tele, limited at low light and less than perfect DR. So the M has scuppered the NEX as secondary camera? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglasf13 Posted August 6, 2013 Share #58 Posted August 6, 2013 I don't get this aversion to buttons and dials and detailed menus. You don't HAVE TO use them. My Nex 7 has been set up the same pretty much from the beginning -- aperture priority, just like my M9. Except now I can switch to shutter priority and have auto ISO. My thumb falls perfectly to control everything essential. Very innovative and elegant, actually. Is this all so complex that educated grown-ups are flustered by it? John I've never quite understood this, either. From M9 to Hasselblad to DSLR to my RX1, I've always shot my cameras relatively similarly in "M" or "A" mode, and it's easy to move back and forth between them. Slight changes in dials and whatnot are no big deal. The real difference is viewfinders, IMO, and, while I love using rangefinders, I also love using waist level finders, big TTT optical finders, external OVFs and even LCDs, so it's still all a bit overblown, IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
40mm f/2 Posted September 1, 2013 Share #59 Posted September 1, 2013 So the M has scuppered the NEX as secondary camera? No never but especially since 2 weeks. On a high Sierra trip I was fishing a little on a beautiful lake and I bent over with my case not closed and my MEM 90mm fell in the lake. I fished it out and than next the NEX fell in the lake. Result no water in the MEM - NEX 7 dead even it was less than a second. I assume complete loss. The reason I got the NEX was that I would be much more upset if that would have happened to my M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdriceman Posted September 14, 2013 Share #60 Posted September 14, 2013 Sony Alpha Rumors is reporting on a rumor of a hands on report of the soon to be announced (allegedly) Nex FF camera . Interesting note is that the Nex FF will be about 20% larger than the Nex 7. This would make its dimensions very close to those of the M240 (if it is proportionately 20% larger). Although the M would still likely be 1/2lb heavier, the rumors indicate that the new lenses will be bulkier than M lenses and comparatively slow. This really shouldn't be a surprise, but if you were hoping to replace your digital rangefinders with an RX1 ( or Nex7) sized interchangeable lens FF Nex, it appears that those hopes are fading. http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-first-short-nex-ff-system-hands-on-report-we-need-lenses/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.