Which nex is better 6 or 7

Started Apr 1, 2013 | Discussions
nzmacro
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,729Gear list
Like?
Re: Which nex is better 6 or 7
In reply to mustafa604, Apr 2, 2013

mustafa604 wrote:

is it true that nex cameras are not good for fast moving things?

Probably not the best with AF, but throw on a manual focus legacy lens with focus peaking and the question becomes, are you fast enough

Sorry, sick sense of humour

Danny.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mustafa604
Regular MemberPosts: 156
Like?
Re: Which nex is better 6 or 7
In reply to nzmacro, Apr 2, 2013

mustafa604 wrote:

is it true that nex cameras are not good for fast moving things?

Probably not the best with AF, but throw on a manual focus legacy lens with focus peaking and the question becomes, are you fast enough

Sorry, sick sense of humour

Danny.

-- hide signature --

Haha. Legacy glass like which ones? Any?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
D Cox
Senior MemberPosts: 6,865
Like?
Re: Which nex is better 6 or 7
In reply to SQLGuy, Apr 2, 2013

SQLGuy wrote:

mustafa604 wrote:

Thanks for respone. do u think the prices will go down by may? or just buy it now?

If Sony announces the 7N in time for you to buy a 7, there will probably be deals on 7's. Don't know whether that will impact 6 prices or not. I'd say to try to hold out 'til the beginning of May to see what happens on this front.

However, you should not take a brand new camera on a trip. Give yourself at least three weeks to get to know it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nzmacro
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,729Gear list
Like?
Re: Which nex is better 6 or 7
In reply to mustafa604, Apr 2, 2013

mustafa604 wrote:

mustafa604 wrote:

is it true that nex cameras are not good for fast moving things?

Probably not the best with AF, but throw on a manual focus legacy lens with focus peaking and the question becomes, are you fast enough

Sorry, sick sense of humour

Danny.

-- hide signature --

Haha. Legacy glass like which ones? Any?

I use fairly long fast lenses, but you might be surprised at how well focus peaking works with legacy lenses. You won't want to use what I use unless you are heavily into bird shots.

If you use the LEA-2 adaptor with the NEX, you can use any of the Sony DSLR lenses and it turns them into PDAF on the NEX. Thats pretty quick, but not exactly cheap either.

Once you decide what you want to go with, then you can look at a few other options. I wouldn't recommend NEX to anyone for the MF legacy lenses available. It might suit a few of us, but not the majority I would guess.

If I didn't need to crop as much as I do, I would happy with the 6. As it is, I'm more than happy with the 7. The difference is and why i don't respond to these questions much, is that I only need a box that goes click !! and the NEX does that very well with excellent IQ.

All the best and its not easy I know

Danny.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
BRUCEK56
Contributing MemberPosts: 788Gear list
Like?
Re: Really
In reply to Clayton1985, Apr 2, 2013

Clayton1985 wrote:

I know the high ISO performance is similar but I do find the NEX 6 to be more enjoyable to use at high ISO with less effort.  No matter how you view the images - on camera, before PP, on screen, etc they appear to have less noise than the 7.   In the end this is more perception than reality but it still makes a little bit of a difference to me.   If I were choosing between the 6 and 7 and planned to shoot at ISO1600 or 3200 most of the time I would choose the 6.

Hi,

You are absolutely correct. I would say the biggest surprise I saw in DPreviews review of the Nex 6 was how much better the 3200 iso was in RAW than the Nex 5n which everyone was saying was better than the 6. Just put the square over the "star" in the robot in the comparisons.

The Nex 6 is cleaner than both the 5n and 7. I know people say "just downsize the Nex 7 image to 16 megapixels and they are equal" The Nex 6 would still be cleaner but that is not the point. How many people who actually use the Nex 7 downsize their images?....they don't!

If you want the 24 megapixels in the Nex 7 you will get more noise than the 5n or 6 for the way you use the camera. What is the point of having the 8 megapixels advantage of the Nex 7 if you are going to downsize it?

Also I think the auto iso of 3200 is extremely important. I find almost every time when I am bouncing the flash indoors the iso is at 3200. I still prefer to clean up the raw file than have the direct flash look.

What I find a bit humorous is how many people with the Nex 7 were bashing the Nex 6 when it came out by calling it's PDAF autofocus, wifi, 3200 auto iso etc as "gimmicky"............yet all those "features" WILL be included in the new 7n!..........plus others.

-- hide signature --

BRUCEK56

 BRUCEK56's gear list:BRUCEK56's gear list
Canon EOS-1D X Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG Aspherical HSM Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
wblink
Regular MemberPosts: 186Gear list
Like?
Re: Which nex is better 6 or 7
In reply to mustafa604, Apr 2, 2013

I bought a NEX-7, was diissapointed with the purple coloured corners, difficulty in using the "TriNavi" (That must be me, accustomed to DLRS's)) and went for the NEX-6. Happy with NO COLOUR cast, like the apps (wifi), same awesome evf.

Some difficulties: had to buy an external battery loader and , oops that's all.

-- hide signature --

Willem.
Sony NEX-6

 wblink's gear list:wblink's gear list
Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye Carl Zeiss Touit 2.8/12 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
joe talks photography
Regular MemberPosts: 247Gear list
Like?
Re: Which nex is better 6 or 7
In reply to mustafa604, Apr 2, 2013

mustafa604 wrote:

joe talks photography wrote:

mustafa604 wrote:

so here is a thing. i dont leave my trip till may 21st do i wait to buy one of these cameras maybe it will go cheaper or buy it now and use my d90 till than even i dont like it.

since my wife has the 5r with 18-55. should i get the 6 wth 16-50 or body only? or if i get the 7 i might get the body only since my wife already has the 18-55 lens.

When I was going to buy the Nex 6 it was with the 16-50...a great buy. The 18-55 (sad but true) is not particularly good in general and doesn't really help the Nex 7 produce great image quality that it is capable of. The 16-50 appears to be able to do better with the 7 but you would have to pick it up separately. Having said all of this, given your wife's kit, you would do well to get the Nex 6 with the 16-50 and then add the Sigma 19 and 30 2.8 (these are very inexpensive and offer really good image quality/sharpness) of get these two lenses with the Nex 7 body.

-- hide signature --

Joe

Thanks for respone. do u think the prices will go down by may? or just buy it now?

price drop just took place a few days ago. I don't know for sure but seems improbable they will drop very quickly.

-- hide signature --

Joe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
joe talks photography
Regular MemberPosts: 247Gear list
Like?
Re: Which nex is better 6 or 7
In reply to wblink, Apr 2, 2013

wblink wrote:

I bought a NEX-7, was diissapointed with the purple coloured corners, difficulty in using the "TriNavi" (That must be me, accustomed to DLRS's)) and went for the NEX-6. Happy with NO COLOUR cast, like the apps (wifi), same awesome evf.

Some difficulties: had to buy an external battery loader and , oops that's all.

-- hide signature --

Willem.
Sony NEX-6

is the purple corners a byproduct of using with other than Sony lenses?

I am shooting 98% black & white so won't be an issue!

-- hide signature --

Joe

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
edwardaneal
Senior MemberPosts: 9,101Gear list
Like?
Re: Really
In reply to BRUCEK56, Apr 2, 2013

BRUCEK56 wrote:

Clayton1985 wrote:

I know the high ISO performance is similar but I do find the NEX 6 to be more enjoyable to use at high ISO with less effort.  No matter how you view the images - on camera, before PP, on screen, etc they appear to have less noise than the 7.   In the end this is more perception than reality but it still makes a little bit of a difference to me.   If I were choosing between the 6 and 7 and planned to shoot at ISO1600 or 3200 most of the time I would choose the 6.

Hi,

You are absolutely correct. I would say the biggest surprise I saw in DPreviews review of the Nex 6 was how much better the 3200 iso was in RAW than the Nex 5n which everyone was saying was better than the 6. Just put the square over the "star" in the robot in the comparisons.

The Nex 6 is cleaner than both the 5n and 7. I know people say "just downsize the Nex 7 image to 16 megapixels and they are equal" The Nex 6 would still be cleaner but that is not the point. How many people who actually use the Nex 7 downsize their images?....they don't!

you dont get it - most people do down size without even knowing it - if you view the images on your monitor filling the screen, the NEX-7 image is downsized compared to the NEX-6 image. because when both images fill the screen the NEX-7 image has more pixels per inch than you will get with the NEX-6 image

The same is true when printing - if you take a NEX-6 image and print it at the same size as an image from a NEX-7 you will have more pixels per inch in the print in the NEX-7 print

you dont have to physically convert the NEX-7 image to 16mp to downsize it, just using the image at the same size gets you the same result - and most people do in fact use their images at the same size by simply viewing them on a screen that is the same size or printing them at the same size

the only time you are not downsizing your images is when you are viewing them at 100% and most people only do that when they are editing them and want to view only a small portion of the image they are working on

here go read this right here about 1/4th of the way down they do a noise comparison of the NEX-5n and NEX-7 and they do it both full size and at equal size and this is their conclusion

"But, and it's a very big but, now go to the top of the samples where the NEX-7 files have been downsampled to the same size as the NEX-5n. What you'll see, or at least what I and several other photographers to whom I've shown these agree on, is that the differences are reduced to a quibble, even at 100% on screen. In prints or any non-pixel-peeping use of the images, there is really little to choose between them, except maybe at ISO 12,800 where the 5n has a slight advantage on screen, if not in real-world prints. Like I said – a quibble.

What this means is that in practical terms, the NEX-7 gives the photographer the choice of higher resolution and larger prints, or comparable resolution and comparable noise characteristics when compared to the NEX-5n, and both are presented at the same size. I should add parenthetically then in real-world photography, when shooting raw and doing a bit of NR in Lightroom, all ISOs up to and including 3200 are completely usable for most any purpose."

If you want the 24 megapixels in the Nex 7 you will get more noise than the 5n or 6 for the way you use the camera. What is the point of having the 8 megapixels advantage of the Nex 7 if you are going to downsize it?

Also I think the auto iso of 3200 is extremely important. I find almost every time when I am bouncing the flash indoors the iso is at 3200. I still prefer to clean up the raw file than have the direct flash look.

What I find a bit humorous is how many people with the Nex 7 were bashing the Nex 6 when it came out by calling it's PDAF autofocus, wifi, 3200 auto iso etc as "gimmicky"............yet all those "features" WILL be included in the new 7n!..........plus others.

-- hide signature --

BRUCEK56

-- hide signature --

NEX-7 & Sigma 30mm f/2.8
NEX-5 & 18-55 OSS
HVL-F20AM Flash
And a spare black 18-55

 edwardaneal's gear list:edwardaneal's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sigma 60mm F2.8 DN Carl Zeiss Touit 1.8/32
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
The Lotus Eater
Regular MemberPosts: 316Gear list
Like?
Re: Really
In reply to edwardaneal, Apr 2, 2013

I don't think anyone here has mentioned Quick-navi, which is a big plus point in favour of the NEX-6.

It enables quick access to all the important settings - I don't think I could live without it. It was a major omission on all Alpha cameras following the A700/900, up until the A99.

 The Lotus Eater's gear list:The Lotus Eater's gear list
Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 Sony SLT-A77 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
blue_skies
Senior MemberPosts: 6,697Gear list
Like?
Re: Really
In reply to edwardaneal, Apr 2, 2013

edwardaneal wrote:

BRUCEK56 wrote:

Clayton1985 wrote:

I know the high ISO performance is similar but I do find the NEX 6 to be more enjoyable to use at high ISO with less effort.  No matter how you view the images - on camera, before PP, on screen, etc they appear to have less noise than the 7.   In the end this is more perception than reality but it still makes a little bit of a difference to me.   If I were choosing between the 6 and 7 and planned to shoot at ISO1600 or 3200 most of the time I would choose the 6.

Hi,

You are absolutely correct. I would say the biggest surprise I saw in DPreviews review of the Nex 6 was how much better the 3200 iso was in RAW than the Nex 5n which everyone was saying was better than the 6. Just put the square over the "star" in the robot in the comparisons.

The Nex 6 is cleaner than both the 5n and 7. I know people say "just downsize the Nex 7 image to 16 megapixels and they are equal" The Nex 6 would still be cleaner but that is not the point. How many people who actually use the Nex 7 downsize their images?....they don't!

you dont get it - most people do down size without even knowing it - if you view the images on your monitor filling the screen, the NEX-7 image is downsized compared to the NEX-6 image. because when both images fill the screen the NEX-7 image has more pixels per inch than you will get with the NEX-6 image

The same is true when printing - if you take a NEX-6 image and print it at the same size as an image from a NEX-7 you will have more pixels per inch in the print in the NEX-7 print

you dont have to physically convert the NEX-7 image to 16mp to downsize it, just using the image at the same size gets you the same result - and most people do in fact use their images at the same size by simply viewing them on a screen that is the same size or printing them at the same size

the only time you are not downsizing your images is when you are viewing them at 100% and most people only do that when they are editing them and want to view only a small portion of the image they are working on

here go read this right here about 1/4th of the way down they do a noise comparison of the NEX-5n and NEX-7 and they do it both full size and at equal size and this is their conclusion

"But, and it's a very big but, now go to the top of the samples where the NEX-7 files have been downsampled to the same size as the NEX-5n. What you'll see, or at least what I and several other photographers to whom I've shown these agree on, is that the differences are reduced to a quibble, even at 100% on screen. In prints or any non-pixel-peeping use of the images, there is really little to choose between them, except maybe at ISO 12,800 where the 5n has a slight advantage on screen, if not in real-world prints. Like I said – a quibble.

What this means is that in practical terms, the NEX-7 gives the photographer the choice of higher resolution and larger prints, or comparable resolution and comparable noise characteristics when compared to the NEX-5n, and both are presented at the same size. I should add parenthetically then in real-world photography, when shooting raw and doing a bit of NR in Lightroom, all ISOs up to and including 3200 are completely usable for most any purpose."

If you want the 24 megapixels in the Nex 7 you will get more noise than the 5n or 6 for the way you use the camera. What is the point of having the 8 megapixels advantage of the Nex 7 if you are going to downsize it?

Also I think the auto iso of 3200 is extremely important. I find almost every time when I am bouncing the flash indoors the iso is at 3200. I still prefer to clean up the raw file than have the direct flash look.

What I find a bit humorous is how many people with the Nex 7 were bashing the Nex 6 when it came out by calling it's PDAF autofocus, wifi, 3200 auto iso etc as "gimmicky"............yet all those "features" WILL be included in the new 7n!..........plus others.

-- hide signature --

BRUCEK56

-- hide signature --

NEX-7 & Sigma 30mm f/2.8
NEX-5 & 18-55 OSS
HVL-F20AM Flash
And a spare black 18-55

The practical limitation with the Nex-7 is that ISO 3200 is not accessible from the autoISO settings. Which means that you either have to accept ISO 1600 as your max, or handle ISO levels manually.

I find, on the Nex-6 and Nex-5N, that the extra stop that ISO 3200 gives can be a big difference for low light results.

Generally, I don't like using ISO 1600, but there are conditions where it is warranted.

On the Nex-7 I am far more inclined to switch to JPG and use HHT and AMB than I am on the Nex-5N and Nex-6.

I agree that after down-sampling (I actively converted the Nex-7 images to 16Mp), the results between Nex-5N and Nex-7 are indistinguishable AT LOWER ISO. But at max ISO, I often have a full stop of difference between the two cameras (no, I do not use ISO 3200 on the Nex-7).

Some have mentioned that a 16Mp downsampled Nex-7 is sharper than a 16Mp Nex-5N image, but I have not been able to validate this yet - to me, the two images, both at 16Mp, look identical.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sony a6000 +30 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JPG
JPG
Senior MemberPosts: 1,203
Like?
Re: Which nex is better 6 or 7
In reply to mustafa604, Apr 2, 2013

Steve Huff thinks the 6 is what the 7 should have been, however, after reading the review of the 6 on this website, I'm glad I got the 7 and I am certainly not going to get the 6's 16-50mm kit zoom.  I can cope with the longer kit lense of 7.  I guess what it all boils down to is what you get used to.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
edwardaneal
Senior MemberPosts: 9,101Gear list
Like?
hey Henry
In reply to blue_skies, Apr 2, 2013

blue_skies wrote:

The practical limitation with the Nex-7 is that ISO 3200 is not accessible from the autoISO settings. Which means that you either have to accept ISO 1600 as your max, or handle ISO levels manually.

I find, on the Nex-6 and Nex-5N, that the extra stop that ISO 3200 gives can be a big difference for low light results.

Generally, I don't like using ISO 1600, but there are conditions where it is warranted.

On the Nex-7 I am far more inclined to switch to JPG and use HHT and AMB than I am on the Nex-5N and Nex-6.

I agree that after down-sampling (I actively converted the Nex-7 images to 16Mp), the results between Nex-5N and Nex-7 are indistinguishable AT LOWER ISO. But at max ISO, I often have a full stop of difference between the two cameras (no, I do not use ISO 3200 on the Nex-7).

Some have mentioned that a 16Mp downsampled Nex-7 is sharper than a 16Mp Nex-5N image, but I have not been able to validate this yet - to me, the two images, both at 16Mp, look identical.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

hey if ISO 3200 is something you use enough that you need it in auto ISO then we clearly have very different shooting styles - I have to hunt for a long time to find many images shot at ISO 3200 in my libraries - for me the vast majority of my images are shot well below ISO 1600 and when I do venture higher I tend to be to the point where HHT is warranted.

For my kind of shooting the 22% increase in linear resolution of the NEX-7 is far more needed than having ISO 3200 as a part of auto ISO. I carry a single prime when I shoot - the 30mm sigma - and having that extra bit of crop-ability means much more to me than the slight burden of having to manually set my ISO if I need 3200

But what the heck - we are all different - as such we have different priorities

-- hide signature --

NEX-7 & Sigma 30mm f/2.8
NEX-5 & 18-55 OSS
HVL-F20AM Flash
And a spare black 18-55

 edwardaneal's gear list:edwardaneal's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sigma 60mm F2.8 DN Carl Zeiss Touit 1.8/32
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nzmacro
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,729Gear list
Like?
Subjective on what you take
In reply to BRUCEK56, Apr 2, 2013

BRUCEK56 wrote:

Clayton1985 wrote:

I know the high ISO performance is similar but I do find the NEX 6 to be more enjoyable to use at high ISO with less effort.  No matter how you view the images - on camera, before PP, on screen, etc they appear to have less noise than the 7.   In the end this is more perception than reality but it still makes a little bit of a difference to me.   If I were choosing between the 6 and 7 and planned to shoot at ISO1600 or 3200 most of the time I would choose the 6.

Hi,

You are absolutely correct. I would say the biggest surprise I saw in DPreviews review of the Nex 6 was how much better the 3200 iso was in RAW than the Nex 5n which everyone was saying was better than the 6. Just put the square over the "star" in the robot in the comparisons.

The Nex 6 is cleaner than both the 5n and 7. I know people say "just downsize the Nex 7 image to 16 megapixels and they are equal" The Nex 6 would still be cleaner but that is not the point. How many people who actually use the Nex 7 downsize their images?....they don't!

If you want the 24 megapixels in the Nex 7 you will get more noise than the 5n or 6 for the way you use the camera. What is the point of having the 8 megapixels advantage of the Nex 7 if you are going to downsize it?

Also I think the auto iso of 3200 is extremely important. I find almost every time when I am bouncing the flash indoors the iso is at 3200. I still prefer to clean up the raw file than have the direct flash look.

What I find a bit humorous is how many people with the Nex 7 were bashing the Nex 6 when it came out by calling it's PDAF autofocus, wifi, 3200 auto iso etc as "gimmicky"............yet all those "features" WILL be included in the new 7n!..........plus others.

-- hide signature --

BRUCEK56

The most important thing you have said in there is "I"

For me "I" have never used the NEX-7 over ISO 400. 95% would be ISO 100 and 200..... what noise ?? ISO 3200, gees its hard to take a bird shot at night time and my lenses are not locked on F/32 !!.

So its subjective to what you want and take. Anything over ISO 400 I would never use, you might and thats all fine, a lot of people do use ISO 1600 - 3200 I'm sure, but I have a feeling a lot don't.

I crop heavily often which is like resizing and at ISO 100 - 200, no problem and I get to see a lot of sharp details with those crops at ISO 100.

All the best and I think its important to remember, we don't all need high ISO's and on the NEX-7 at low ISO's, next to no noise.

Danny.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tqlla
Senior MemberPosts: 1,350Gear list
Like?
Re: Subjective on what you take
In reply to nzmacro, Apr 2, 2013

I like the Nex7 because it can use the F20am, rather than that terrible F20m flash

 tqlla's gear list:tqlla's gear list
Sony Alpha DSLR-A850 Sony SLT-A77 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha NEX-3N Sony 50mm F1.4 +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
blue_skies
Senior MemberPosts: 6,697Gear list
Like?
Re: hey Henry
In reply to edwardaneal, Apr 2, 2013

edwardaneal wrote:

blue_skies wrote:

The practical limitation with the Nex-7 is that ISO 3200 is not accessible from the autoISO settings. Which means that you either have to accept ISO 1600 as your max, or handle ISO levels manually.

I find, on the Nex-6 and Nex-5N, that the extra stop that ISO 3200 gives can be a big difference for low light results.

Generally, I don't like using ISO 1600, but there are conditions where it is warranted.

On the Nex-7 I am far more inclined to switch to JPG and use HHT and AMB than I am on the Nex-5N and Nex-6.

I agree that after down-sampling (I actively converted the Nex-7 images to 16Mp), the results between Nex-5N and Nex-7 are indistinguishable AT LOWER ISO. But at max ISO, I often have a full stop of difference between the two cameras (no, I do not use ISO 3200 on the Nex-7).

Some have mentioned that a 16Mp downsampled Nex-7 is sharper than a 16Mp Nex-5N image, but I have not been able to validate this yet - to me, the two images, both at 16Mp, look identical.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

hey if ISO 3200 is something you use enough that you need it in auto ISO then we clearly have very different shooting styles - I have to hunt for a long time to find many images shot at ISO 3200 in my libraries - for me the vast majority of my images are shot well below ISO 1600 and when I do venture higher I tend to be to the point where HHT is warranted.

For my kind of shooting the 22% increase in linear resolution of the NEX-7 is far more needed than having ISO 3200 as a part of auto ISO. I carry a single prime when I shoot - the 30mm sigma - and having that extra bit of crop-ability means much more to me than the slight burden of having to manually set my ISO if I need 3200

But what the heck - we are all different - as such we have different priorities

-- hide signature --

NEX-7 & Sigma 30mm f/2.8
NEX-5 & 18-55 OSS
HVL-F20AM Flash
And a spare black 18-55

I do prefer flash and/or ISO sub 1600, but try social settings in the evening (low light) where you don't want to, or cannot, take out the flash.

I try keeping the shutter at or above 1/60th, with people, is a minimum, I actually prefer faster.

ISO 3200 allows more DOF than ISO 1600 - often an issue when people are not 'ligned up' for a photo shoot.

Are these 'publishable' pictures? No way, these are merely friends and family snapshots. But, compared to P&S and cell-phone images, the Nex images are a lot better...

I like controlling Aperture and Speed, and let ISO be set by the camera. This way, I get the DOF and sharpness (speed) that I am comfortable with.

For non people, I like HHT, it yields reasonable images, but with people it is too 'noisy'.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sony a6000 +30 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cptrios
Senior MemberPosts: 1,347
Like?
Re: Subjective on what you take
In reply to tqlla, Apr 2, 2013

I was firmly in the NEX-7 camp until I learned that the NEX-6 had a second control wheel under the mode dial. I still think Tri-Navi is better, but two wheels is very decent and narrows the gap between the two considerably.

In my opinion, you buy the 7 if:

• You want 3 control wheels

• You want that extra 8mp

• You don't have any of the type of lenses that'll have color-cast issues

• You want the best available EVF

And the 6 if:

• You want to use certain wide RF lenses (and a couple of native E-mounts as well) without color cast

• You want wifi and apps

• You need a mode dial

• You want to spend a bit less money

• You want the slightly faster AF, with the big difference being the theoretical improved speed of the upcoming LA-EA3 adapter that will get you decent AF without sticking a translucent mirror in the way

I don't consider high ISO to be a deciding factor at all between these two, as up until 12800 images from both will look basically the same at any reasonable display size.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
C D
C D
Senior MemberPosts: 1,021
Like?
Re: Subjective on what you take
In reply to cptrios, Apr 3, 2013

Which E mount lenses have a color cast on the NEX 7?

-- hide signature --

C D
Toronto, Canada

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
z36qc
Regular MemberPosts: 146Gear list
Like?
Re: Subjective on what you take
In reply to cptrios, Apr 3, 2013

cptrios wrote:

I was firmly in the NEX-7 camp until I learned that the NEX-6 had a second control wheel under the mode dial. I still think Tri-Navi is better, but two wheels is very decent and narrows the gap between the two considerably.

In my opinion, you buy the 7 if:

• You want 3 control wheels

• You want that extra 8mp

• You don't have any of the type of lenses that'll have color-cast issues

• You want the best available EVF

And the 6 if:

• You want to use certain wide RF lenses (and a couple of native E-mounts as well) without color cast

• You want wifi and apps

• You need a mode dial

• You want to spend a bit less money

• You want the slightly faster AF, with the big difference being the theoretical improved speed of the upcoming LA-EA3 adapter that will get you decent AF without sticking a translucent mirror in the way

I don't consider high ISO to be a deciding factor at all between these two, as up until 12800 images from both will look basically the same at any reasonable dis

And the 7 has a MAGENSIUM body  vs  6's  PLASTIC  body !!!!!

 z36qc's gear list:z36qc's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony SLT-A77 Sony SLT-A99 Sony a6000
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads