From Canon T3i to Nex-6. Am I giving up some image quality?

I've been dragging my T3i with the EFS 15-85 lens on vacations, but looking for something smaller, lighter, and eyeing a NEX series camera. About to pull a trigger on a NEX-6, but not sure what to expect when it comes to IQ. I don't shoot video, and I'm only concerned about still shots. I also realize the kit lens is just that, so really looking forward to a quality Zeiss zoom that is supposed to be released in near future. Anyone go from an entry DSLR to a NEX?

however, forget about AF quick enough to be adequate for some faster dynamic scenes if not evolving laterally to sensor's plane; also... high quality Zeiss-class AF zoom might be very, very long time to materialize if ever ?!

jpr2

--
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
Comments and critique are always welcome!
~

Well, I can safely say my NEX-7 blows my T2i away!

But unlike you, I got the NEX in large part to work with prime lenses more - particularly my old Nikkors, most of which work wonderfully. (As do the two native primes I've splurged on - Sigma 30 and Sony/Zeiss 24.)

Sony's official e-mount road map does promise a "high performance standard [G] zoom" - I'd be surprised if that were to never materialize. I wouldn't be surprised if you had to wait until the end of next year, maybe longer.

In the meantime, the kit zoom might hold you over - folks have posted some pretty nice shots taken with it.

ROTFL

You're right, and if/when that lens does materialize it's going to be an overpriced Sony lens with a Zeiss name attached to it.

It'll cost a fortune and won't hold a candle to a lens like the Canon 24-70 2.8L

I'm still amazed at the people who brag about the thousand dollar plus Sony/Zeiss 24mm. It's almost funny that the $200.00 Sigma 30mm lens is almost as good.

The NEX 6 is a great camera but any Canon DSLR (even an entry level model) will give you a "leg up" because of Canon's lens selection.

Sony should be ashamed that one of the most sought after and the least expensive NEX lens is made by Sigma.

this may help....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gW9alBidf3w

I agree; you will get portability with nex; but lens selection is not there and the e series lens are too expensive. But nex gives you the wonderful ability to use manual lenses

The number one here is ultimately the photographer. I will keep both the systems if I can afford/manage it

It's almost funny that you believe that.

--
60 of my favorite shots from 2012

now it's $150.

the photos posted from the 24mm just look great. And a recent thread pointed out the difficulty in finding a cheap24mm lens at f1.8 or thereabouts.

The Sigma is great, but it's f2.8. There are those for which that's not enough. For me, it's probably enough.

At this price, I'm requesting this as a Christmas gift. the availability of cheap lenses is a Nex advantage.

--
Gary W.

The biggest difference seems to be lens speed (2.8 vs 1.8). The 24mm lens isn't rated very high by professional reviewers and it's overpriced for what it is.

The 24mm has better build quality, than the inexpensive Sigma, and I'm not saying it's a bad lens but I don't think it's much more than adequate. Like many lenses, the faults are corrected by in-camera programs.

I apologize for saying this but I've been unimpressed by most of the pictures taken with the Sony/Zeiss that have been posted to this forum.

It's biggest advantage appears to be it's 1.8 maximum aperture.

and the whole enchilada is there----at a smaller package I'm finding it hard to take out my ZA 24/1.8 from my NEX-6. Can't wait to have a Zeiss that will be equivalent to my 85/1.2 LII.

Good luck with whatever decision you make.

I am extremely pleased by how well the NEX cameras perform. I dumped my Nikon D90 for the 5N and just got the NEX 6 to go along with it. If you don't mind using the camera in the manual mode you can attach almost any lens to the NEX via an adapter. I find that the 16-50 kit lens meets almost all my needs and rarely need to use the 55-210. I have a couple of older Pentax lenses, several Nikons, one or two Canons and I still go back to the kit lens for most of my shooting. The IQ at any ISO up to 6400 is equal to or better than most of the mid range dSLR cameras out there. It tickles me to see how many people buy a dSLR and never change lenses. If   you are not a pro then the NEX family of cameras should meet any need you might have except for some fast action sports. I did a whole travel vacation shooting from a moving vehicle with my 5N set on shutter priority and had no problems whatever.

--
Someone has to tell the emperor that he has no clothes

Even though I'm critical of the NEX lens selection, when compared to mature brands like Canon and Nikon, I agree 100% with what you've said.

I was disappointed with the 24mm Zeiss because of the value (optical quality) vs. price point and have probably been too outspoken on this issue. Just the same, I do think that the NEX cameras are excellent.

The 18-55 kit lens is a step above other 18-55 lenses and, like you, I use the kit lens more than I thought I would. I don't have the newer 16-50 lens but I'm sure it's also very good.

Like many people, I'm looking forward to Sony producing a fixed aperture moderate zoom lens.

I don't know if that will ever happen but if it does I'm afraid Sony will put the Zeiss label and a ridiculous price on it. I would guess close to the 2 thousand dollar price range.

My favorite general purpose lens for a DSLR is an older Sigma 28-70 2.8 EX.  I doubt we'll ever see anything like that from Sony but maybe Sigma will come up with something similar that's priced in the 7 to 8 hundred dollar range.

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_carl_zeiss_sonnar_t_e_24mm_f_1_8_za_review/sample_images/

I think this lens creates great color... I love the first sample image in the series.

Can't argue with the sample pictures or the review.

I just don't see $1100.00 worth of prime lens there BUT, I'll admit that I'm probably just too price conscious.

I think the colors / quality of the lens is superior to  Sigma based on these samples. Based on that they are charging a price premium. Expensive, yes, but same goes for Zeiss pro lenses for A Mount.

DPreview of NEX7: "It's no stretch to say that, at its best, the NEX-7 offers the finest still image quality of any APS-C camera, bar none".

Also such lens as Sony SEL 35 f1.8 OSS and 10-18 f4 OSS already available and according some user reports are quite good.

--
Anatoli

...the 10-18 is certainly much less than we did hope for looking at the early MTF plots , nothing to write home about, except [maybe] compactness and light weight, but... I wish they did lean more on IQ side, and much less on just smallness

jpr2

--
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
Comments and critique are always welcome!
~

hard not to agree on your points, except... perhaps the build quality - somehow it doesn't convey the ooomph I usually get from handling Zeiss lenses; it is hard to pinpoint, and yet it just doesn't have the usual Zeiss ultimate craftsmanship feeling - hopefully the triad of primes announced for the next Spring will be [much] better in this respect !!

jpr2

--
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/
Comments and critique are always welcome!
~

But size and weight differentiate the NEX line from the Canon/Nikon DSLR offerings. I would expect Sony to continue pursuing compactness because it's the right strategy for them. And it's winning.

Having said that, I do agree that Sony have overpriced their better E-mount lenses:

* The 24mm CZ is nice but not worth $1100.

* The new 10-18mm seems overpriced at $850 based on the first shots. That's double what I paid for my Sigma 10-20mm which is a very nice lens.

* $450 for a 35mm f/1.8 is over the top too. Heck, the equivalent Nikon (very decent) sells for less than half that.

L, Zeiss, G, all same thing right?

Large, expensive, fast L, and not what the OP is using, right?

For a different FL. The Sigma 30mm uses three a-spherical lenses in a slowish, 'natural' (to sensor size) FL design, and produced a very impressive little lens. The Sigma 19mm can't hold a candle next to the E24, except for the slightly wider angle of view.

The E24 is two full stops faster and this puts it into a different class. All fast, HQ 24mm lenses are pricey.

'bad' pictures with the E24 are mostly due to CA, which is related to the sensor itself, and WA fast lenses.

In Leica terms, you are comparing a summilux to an elmarit. Big price difference. Leica even slips a summicron in between the two. Fwiw, the Sigma 30 holds its own against an elmarit. The Sigma 19 does not. Whereas the E24 holds its own against a summilux.

Stopped down, all lenses shape up, even the kit lens is stellar at f/8 - who needs the Sigma then?

You can put Canon lenses on the Nex, but not the reverse. Then, isn't a Nex better? It obviously has more lens choices therefore. It is much smaller too, a plus that the OP values.

I don't subscribe to the more-is-better. I agree that you need a basic good lens, and a ubiquitous mainstream product is always preferred. Pros have different demands, but their numbers are smaller.

Most consumer DSLR owners barely venture past their original kit lens. For them trade offs are different. And price matters.

Says who? The E24 has been constantly sold out, as was the 18200 initially. Both very pricey.

If your only lens selection is the kit lens and the Sigmas, then you are missing out big time. At least get some legacy glass, and find out what the Nex can really do.

The most sought after lens will be the E35 1.8 OSS.

--
Cheers,
Henry