MFT had a good run, Slaughtered by SONY NEX Locked

Started May 11, 2010 | Discussions
This thread is locked.
angeles
Regular MemberPosts: 415
MFT had a good run, Slaughtered by SONY NEX
May 11, 2010

Anyone wants used EPL1?

How can anyone justify MFT over NEX now?

The only reason people even care about MFT is because they offer decent Photo Quality in a smaller size than DSLR and here comes NEX cameras with BETTER and bigger sensor and smaller body than MFT

The Focus is faster than
Dymanic range/noise/iso is superior

Shot taking with 6400 ISO (heavily compressed JPEG btw)

NEX 6400 ISO = MFT iso 800
NEX ISO 12.800 = MFT 1600 ISO

It's not even funny
NEX Even out perform SONY A550 DSLR when it comes to ISO performance

Brian Mosley
Forum ProPosts: 20,404Gear list
I'll take your E-PL1...
In reply to angeles, May 11, 2010

I'm sure you've barely used it, and it's clearly worthless to you now... so please PM me your price

Cheers

Brian
--
Join our free worldwide support network here :
http://www.ukphotosafari.org/join-the-ukpsg/
UK, Peak District Local Olympus Safari Group : http://snipurl.com/bqtd7-ukpsg
Keep up with me here : http://twitter.com/alert_bri

 Brian Mosley's gear list:Brian Mosley's gear list
Olympus E-M1
angeles
Regular MemberPosts: 415
Re: MFT had a good run, Slaughtered by SONY NEX
In reply to angeles, May 11, 2010

Dpreview comment about NEX VS MFT in their Preview

NEX-5 advantages over GF1:

  • Smaller size

  • Larger sensor

  • 1080i AVCHD video recording

  • Higher resolution LCD screen (921k dots)

  • Screen can be tilted up to 80 degrees

  • Faster continuous shooting (albeit with focus locked)

  • Greater resolution sensor, higher maximum ISO (12,800)

jaja_m
Regular MemberPosts: 256
You need NOT to repost that repeatedly...
In reply to angeles, May 11, 2010

...and create new thread each of it in Sony SLR/MFT forum...

angeles wrote:

Dpreview comment about NEX VS MFT in their Preview

NEX-5 advantages over GF1:

  • Smaller size

  • Larger sensor

  • 1080i AVCHD video recording

  • Higher resolution LCD screen (921k dots)

  • Screen can be tilted up to 80 degrees

  • Faster continuous shooting (albeit with focus locked)

  • Greater resolution sensor, higher maximum ISO (12,800)

Plothole
Contributing MemberPosts: 800
Re: MFT had a good run, Slaughtered by SONY NEX
In reply to angeles, May 11, 2010

angeles wrote:

How can anyone justify MFT over NEX now?

Easy:

  • Proper hot shoe

  • Built in flash (except for the EP-1/EP-2)

  • In-Body stabilization (on the Olympus models)

  • EVFs, either optional or built in.

  • More dedicated controls.

  • Better backwards compatibility with available catalog of dSLR lenses. (though the NEX has an adapter for Alpha lenses, there is no autofocus support)

  • Established system.

  • Better tripod mount (see the preview)

John Carson
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,031Gear list
Fake photos?
In reply to angeles, May 11, 2010

angeles wrote:

Anyone wants used EPL1?

How can anyone justify MFT over NEX now?

These photos are apparently taken from Imaging Resource. The GH1 and EPL1 photos don't correspond to what I find on Imaging Resource (I haven't checked out the others). Below are the ones I found, contrasted to what has been presented:

-- hide signature --

john carson

 John Carson's gear list:John Carson's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS
Adventsam
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,983
Re: GH1 beats it hands down
In reply to angeles, May 11, 2010

Consideing the extra iso sensitivity of the GH1, ie at iso 800 on GH1 you need to be on iso1600 Sony and so on, now go use the comparitor on Image resource and the GH1 positively walks all over it, now consider this, the lens on the GH1 is the 14-140 zoom? and the lens on the Sony is either the 18-55 or the 16mm, either way the GH1 is in another league, the NR on some of those NEX shots is very destructive.

GH1 beats this thing off very easily.

ThorKre
Regular MemberPosts: 215
Lame attempt at viral marketing
In reply to angeles, May 11, 2010

Whatever you get paid for this, it's too much.

-- hide signature --

Regards
Thorsten

JortS29
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,781
Not fake. RAW conversions using DCRAW.
In reply to John Carson, May 11, 2010

The ones you posted look like in camera Jpegs, going by the lack of noise.

Jogger
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,380Gear list
funny...
In reply to Plothole, May 11, 2010

that image quality isnt one of your parameters for choosing a camera? ooh rock that tripod mount!

Plothole wrote:

angeles wrote:

How can anyone justify MFT over NEX now?

Easy:

  • Proper hot shoe

  • Built in flash (except for the EP-1/EP-2)

  • In-Body stabilization (on the Olympus models)

  • EVFs, either optional or built in.

  • More dedicated controls.

  • Better backwards compatibility with available catalog of dSLR lenses. (though the NEX has an adapter for Alpha lenses, there is no autofocus support)

  • Established system.

  • Better tripod mount (see the preview)

 Jogger's gear list:Jogger's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Nikon D700 Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +4 more
JortS29
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,781
Not quite...
In reply to Adventsam, May 11, 2010

Adventsam wrote:

Consideing the extra iso sensitivity of the GH1, ie at iso 800 on GH1 you need to be on iso1600 Sony and so on,

If you look at the shutterspeeds and aperture used, that was actually already taken into account.

Adventsam
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,983
Re: Not quite..., show me, I dont belive you?
In reply to JortS29, May 11, 2010

I dont think so.

JortS29
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,781
Re: Not quite..., show me, I dont belive you?
In reply to Adventsam, May 11, 2010

Adventsam wrote:

I dont think so.

Um, have a look at the RAW samples from Imaging Resource yourself if you don't believe me. Their Exif doesn't lie.

John Carson
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,031Gear list
Re: Not fake. RAW conversions using DCRAW.
In reply to JortS29, May 11, 2010

JortS29 wrote:

The ones you posted look like in camera Jpegs, going by the lack of noise.

Yes, they are in camera jpegs.

I'm not sure how you know the origin of the images posted by the OP. In any event, I don't think images lacking in appropriate noise reduction are very relevant for the purposes of comparing camera image quality (though they are of interest to sensor afficianados).

Still, the Sony (camera JPEG) photos on Imaging Resource are impressive. Sony has certainly thrown down the gauntlet to Panasonic/Olympus.

-- hide signature --

john carson

 John Carson's gear list:John Carson's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS
JortS29
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,781
Re: Not fake. RAW conversions using DCRAW.
In reply to John Carson, May 11, 2010

John Carson wrote:

JortS29 wrote:

The ones you posted look like in camera Jpegs, going by the lack of noise.

Yes, they are in camera jpegs.

I'm not sure how you know the origin of the images posted by the OP.

It's a comparison image that was posted a couple of minutes earlier by Oluv, who explained that he used DCRAW to level playing field as much as possible (altough no colour profile for the NEX yet).

In any event, I don't think images lacking in appropriate noise reduction are very relevant for the purposes of comparing camera image quality (though they are of interest to sensor afficianados).

Don't agree. These days the best RAW converters also deliver the best quality a camera can deliver and a rather equal playing field (or as close as possible). DCRAW is one of them but LR3 and ACR6 are widely used examples of such converters too. Comparisons like these give an indication of how they compare in such a converter. As a (mostly) RAW shooter myself, I value those comparisons. Which doesn't mean I dismiss comparisons of in camera Jpegs though, since Jpegs have their place too.

Adventsam
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,983
Re: Not quite..., show me, I dont belive you?
In reply to Adventsam, May 11, 2010

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/ (appareil1) 333%7C0 (appareil2) 337%7C0 (onglet) 0 (brand) Sony (brand2) Panasonic

Compare a55o with same sensor! GH1 is a lot more sensitive!

rovingtim
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,947
if high ISO is your only concern
In reply to angeles, May 11, 2010

Get a D3s.

JortS29
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,781
Re: Not quite..., show me, I dont belive you?
In reply to Adventsam, May 11, 2010

Adventsam wrote:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/ (appareil1) 333%7C0 (appareil2) 337%7C0 (onglet) 0 (brand) Sony (brand2) Panasonic

Compare a55o with same sensor! GH1 is a lot more sensitive!

Which you can even out in a RAW converter by adjusting the exposure after using similar shuttertimes and aperture. Besides that, a quick comparison of RAW files tells me the NEX5 shows less noise than the A550 too, hinting at improvements at sensor level aswell (probably based on the same sensor, but not the same sensor).

Adventsam
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,983
Re: Not quite..., show me, I dont belive you?
In reply to JortS29, May 11, 2010

neither does dxo optics, the GH1 is as good iq wise as the NEX, but now lets look at the reality;

GH1
Lenses; smaller, lighter, sharper, great selection
Design; functional, robust, built-in evf, hot shoe
Hybrid, video-still, 1080p, 720p

NEX
Lenses, selection may come but are big
Design, your having a laugh, poor, poor, non evf, stupid accessory connector.
Hybrid, video-still, 1080i only, hmm.

Overall, NEX , nil points, joke camera, hideous design, ugly and IQ well probaly very good but just look at that thing, embarrassing.

Adventsam
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,983
Re: Jort, buy a GH1, Be happy
In reply to JortS29, May 11, 2010

You'll look an idiot wth a NEX, it is quite honestly a design disaster.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads