low light shot of Sony NEX-6 vs Fuji X100

Started Apr 11, 2013 | Discussions thread
Amamba
Contributing MemberPosts: 968Gear list
Like?
Re: low light shot of Sony NEX-6 vs Fuji X100
In reply to Herts_JoaTMoN, Apr 11, 2013

Sorry if I offended anybody. I was merely making a honest observation.

The kit lens may well be great in good light stopped down to f8 and in a particular relatively short focal range. Any lens that's not a complete turd should be great under ideal conditions. However, I would expect a really good lens to be good to great throughout most of it's aperture and focal range.  I am not comparing SEL1855 to any uber pricey Zeiss glass either. There's a number of DSLR lenses priced between $350 - $700 which deliver super sharp, high contrast results under most conditions. E.g the Tamron 17-50/2.8 which is only about $320 or so used (and can be had under $400 new if you're lucky). Or Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS which is about $600 new. Even Canon kit lens, 18-55 /3.5-5.6 IS, seems somewhat sharper. I am not saying SEL1855 is terrible, merely that it's not great. I assume this is a combination of trying to squeeze lots of range and function into a small size factor, and Sony's relative inexperience with photo lens design.

Now, the OP put a prime lens with great resolution on Fuji, and the kit lens with OK resolution on NEX, then proceeded to take photos in lighting conditions that pretty much exceed the kit lens' capability. The Sony kit lens, which is not as sharp as the prime to begin with, is near wide open at f5.6. That's about 1 full stop. The lens on Fuji, I assume, is 23 1/4 stopped down to f5.6. That's 4 full stops. On top of this, the Nex shot is underexposed (and I noticed that my F3 tends to do that as well).

So my point was, this test doesn't compare Sony NEX and Fuji X1 low light capabilities.

BTW, yesterday I did a number of shots in really low light using SEL5018 on NEX F3 vs Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS and Canon 85 1/8 (non-stabilized) on T4i. The auto exposure on Canon is way better, I had to dial in EC on NEX. And the noise reduction on Nex is overly aggressive and softens the photos. (I only looked at JPEGs). Nevertheless, the NEX consistently showed more detail, even when slightly underexposed. The shots with both primes wide open at 1.8 were about the same but it was extremely hard to get a sharp shot with non-stabilized Canon lens.

So my unscientific conclusion was, despite some deficiencies in metering, NEX has amazing low light capabilities, and coupled with right lens it would be a hard example to follow. But having the right lens is the key here.

 Amamba's gear list:Amamba's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha NEX-F3 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG Aspherical HSM Sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow