
|
Re: NEX-7 vs. Contax T2
In reply to KM Legacy,
3 months ago
|
KM Legacy wrote:
The Contax T2 had a 38mm Sonnar (not 35mm). The Contax T3 with a 35mm/f2.8 Sonnar was even better. In its day, some called it the best hiker's camera ever. To get equivalent optical quality, Sony now asks us to pay over $1K for a bulkier 24mm Zeiss Sonnar. There were other compact FF 35mm film cameras of superb IQ, like the Nikon 35Ti and Konica Hexar. In the digital era, we had to wait decades for high-IQ, large-sensor non-SLR cameras, while the industry fed us either 1) gargantuan DSLRs with little APS-C sensors, or 2) P&S cameras with sensors the size of a fingernail.
We need to demand mirrorless cameras with sensors at least as good as those in the best DSLRs, plus top-notch, state-of-the-art lenses, not junky "kit zooms" and "superzooms."
I don't trust anyone who claims T3 lens is better than T2's, and anyone should not. Check Flickr yourself, you'll find they are completely different animals. Actually many prefer T2 38 than T3 35. The weakness of T2 is AF and the size.
| Post (hide subjects) | Posted by | When | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8 months ago | 2 | ||
| 8 months ago | |||
| 8 months ago | |||
| 3 months ago | 1 | ||
| 8 months ago | 2 | ||
| 8 months ago | |||
| 3 months ago | |||
| 3 months ago | |||
| 1 month ago | |||
| 2 months ago | |||
| 1 month ago |