M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX

Started Aug 27, 2013 | Discussions
LTZ470
Forum ProPosts: 11,057Gear list
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to jagge, Aug 28, 2013

None of the Sony lens are in the same class as the m43 12-35, 35-100, 100-300, 75mm f/1.8, 12mm f/2 for size, quality and weight...I own the Nex-7 and several E-Mount lens, they reek of the cheap seats for sure, even the Nex-7 compared to Em-5, it just doesn't have it compared to EM5, great camera but m43's camera quality and build are a step above...

Shot the EM5 in the rain all day one day...you ain't gonna do that with a Nex...or you'll need a "nex"...next camera...

-- hide signature --

--Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Samaistuin
Regular MemberPosts: 396
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to Manip16, Aug 28, 2013

Manip16 wrote:

There's a reason an iPhone costs more than most consumer laptops even though it "does less."

Yeah, one is Apple, the others are not.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Photomonkey
Senior MemberPosts: 1,419Gear list
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to jagge, Aug 28, 2013

So... you want cheap. That's nice. Plenty of cheap stuff for you out there.

Small needs to be cheap? By that logic diamonds should be nearly free as should microprocessors. By the same token balloons should be expensive.

Apparently many see the value proposition to m43 that escapes you. For instance, the range and quality of lenses, and the features and construction of the bodies. While NEX cameras are good Sony are universally criticized for mediocre lens lineup.

OTOH you can wait a year and get the closeouts.

 Photomonkey's gear list:Photomonkey's gear list
Kodak Pixpro S-1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DT200
Contributing MemberPosts: 835
Like?
NEX is over priced compared to Micro43
In reply to ntsan, Aug 28, 2013

Olympus and Panasonic telephotos are both under $200.  The NEX 55-210 is $350.

The Olympus super-zoom is $599 the the cheapest NEX is $749.

Not to mention the NEX lenses have smaller apertures.   The market dictates the price.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dr_Jon
Senior MemberPosts: 1,613Gear list
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to mpgxsvcd, Aug 28, 2013

Since Canon make lots of money selling cameras while the m43 companies have been losing lots of money I think they are the ones doing well. (I have two m43 and one Canon camera BTW. The Canon has better IQ, but is FF. The GH3 is okay though.)

 Dr_Jon's gear list:Dr_Jon's gear list
Sony RX100 Fujifilm FinePix Real 3D W3 Canon EOS 5D Mark II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 +25 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
peevee1
Senior MemberPosts: 6,247Gear list
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to jagge, Aug 28, 2013

jagge wrote:

Hey

Did just see the announcements from Sony and have to say that the m43 system seems more and more overpriced compared to the NEX system. See the new nex5t a very competetive sensor, and the new entry level model, with a very capable sensor as well.

Compare that to the EP5 and the GX7. I know maybe not a completely fair comparisson but not far off, the prices are though.

You can always replace $700 (with kit zoom) Nex-5t with, I don't know, $500 GF6 or E-PL5 (or E-PL6 if it available in your country). Even $199 GX1 is not far off for a body.

And the cheap sigma primes are a super match for the aps-c sensor, not as much the m43.

Non-kit lens prices on m43 are insane. Well, NEX Zeiss 24mm is even more insane, significantly more.

I am a m43 supporter BUT I do think that it gets less and less competetive compared to nex.

Not every NEX, just NEX-6 which has become a very good value after prices fell below $800.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
peevee1
Senior MemberPosts: 6,247Gear list
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to mpgxsvcd, Aug 28, 2013

mpgxsvcd wrote:

The only company that doesn't compete very well right now is Canon.

In mirrorless? Nikon and Pentax do not compete well either. I think on Amazon US EOS M sells better than either despite being cr@p. If they release something with 70D OSPDAF, they will overcome both, AND Samsung, AND Fuji, and maybe even m43/NEX a little later.

In DSLRs? Canon not only competes but absolutely dominates, taking most of the market, most of both markets actually - pro AND amateur.

Do not underestimate power of their brand.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
peevee1
Senior MemberPosts: 6,247Gear list
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to Manip16, Aug 28, 2013

Manip16 wrote:

Smaller things cost more money.

BS. Most smaller things cost less money.

This is not new and shouldn't be surprising. There's a reason an iPhone costs more than most consumer laptops even though it "does less."

It DOES NOT COST more, it is priced higher. It's cost is less, its just its margins are higher.

Are you going to start comparing an iPhone and a laptop and say "the CPU on the laptop is faster, it has more RAM, it has more storage, the iPhone is overpriced!"

It is overpriced.

I cannot think of a single example in electronics where the smaller thing that does the same as the larger version costs LESS.

TVs. Smartphones. Cameras. Chips, including sensors, are quickly grow in cost when their size grows.

Well, m43 cameras are not even smaller.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
peevee1
Senior MemberPosts: 6,247Gear list
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to RichRMA, Aug 28, 2013

RichRMA wrote:

The only NEX with any kind of build quality and solid feature set is still the NEX 7 and it needs an updated sensor.

The sensor is fine, it needs weather sealing, fast AF and reasonably priced reasonably good reasonably small LENSES. The only such lens now it seems is Sony 50/1.8, the rest are either junk (16, 18-55, 16-50, even 30mm macro - neither long enough nor sharp enough to be really useful, and no OSS), overpriced (insanely overpriced 24/1.8 of course, 10-18, 16-70) or huge (55-210, 18-200, 18-105PZ), or BOTH junk and huge (18-200LE), or both overpriced and huge (18-200PZ), or don't exist (a lot).

Don't know how good 35/1.8 though.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
peevee1
Senior MemberPosts: 6,247Gear list
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to Dennis, Aug 28, 2013

Dennis wrote:


If you want to extend the argument, then it's fair to point out that NEX has nothing at all to compete with the excellent and fairly priced 45/1.8 and 75/1.8

No, 75/1.8 is NOT fairly priced, you can get plenty 85/1.8 covering twice the image circle at less than half the price. It is in fact one of the most overpriced m43 lenses, along with 12/2 and Pana 12-35 and 35-100 pair, at least at their prices on the US market.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JYPfoto
Regular MemberPosts: 347Gear list
Like?
Re: I don't think so...
In reply to papillon_65, Aug 28, 2013

The EOS M with 22 pancake is a fantastic camera if you can accept it shortcomings.  For shooting things that do not move its great, I've seen many terrific landscape and architecture shots with it.  What it does not do well is shoot moving objects.  The slow AF combined with the blackout time makes it shooting anything that moves a guessing game.  And while yes you can fit any EF lens on it, most of the time it makes it ridiculous and way too unbalanced.  I don't think you'll find a single EOS M user say with a straight face that the M can shoot moving subjects effectively.  There's a reason why its so loved now, because of the fire sale.  If they had just improved AF and kept it at $699-899 it wouldn't sell.

It remains to be seen if Canon will even fully support the M in the US.  It says something by them not releasing the 11-22 here.  A system is not a complete system if there's only 2 lenses that are natively available for it.

 JYPfoto's gear list:JYPfoto's gear list
Sony Alpha 7 II Sony FE 35mm F2.8
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dennis
Forum ProPosts: 14,119
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to peevee1, Aug 29, 2013

peevee1 wrote:

Dennis wrote:

If you want to extend the argument, then it's fair to point out that NEX has nothing at all to compete with the excellent and fairly priced 45/1.8 and 75/1.8

No, 75/1.8 is NOT fairly priced, you can get plenty 85/1.8 covering twice the image circle at less than half the price. It is in fact one of the most overpriced m43 lenses, along with 12/2 and Pana 12-35 and 35-100 pair, at least at their prices on the US market.

OK, you got me there ... in fact, it's possible that in evaluating the 45 & 75, I've drunk the kool-aid a little ... that is, I'm looking at $400 being reasonable as a "portrait prime" forgetting that 50/1.8s for larger sensors on other platforms cost much less.

In fact, I have the very excellent new Nikon 85/1.8 and it represents a tremendous bargain.  (I love the FOV on APS-C).

In the 75's favor, it might be sharper across the frame ?  (I haven't bothered trying to compare since there's really no point).  I'd guess it to be better built and more satisfying in use.  (The Nikon feels like a consumer grade lens, like the 35 & 50).  Not that I'd necessarily want to pay more for warm fuzzies like that.

Sony has nothing close for a good comparison in the NEX line, but Samsung has its 85/1.4 ... and now that I've just bothered to look, I'm shocked at its $800 price tag.  That's crazy !  Nikon & Sony 85/1.4s for DSLRs are in the $1400 range.

However, if you're specifically comparing m43 to NEX, then there is no fast tele for NEX, not even a fast portrait prime.  There's only the 50/1.8 which is good (maybe not 45/1.8 good) and stabilized for $350.  I suspect a longer portrait prime won't be as good a bargain as the Nikon 85/1.8.

- Dennis

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MiroM
Regular MemberPosts: 267Gear list
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to jagge, Aug 29, 2013

jagge wrote:

Hey

Did just see the announcements from Sony and have to say that the m43 system seems more and more overpriced compared to the NEX system. See the new nex5t a very competetive sensor, and the new entry level model, with a very capable sensor as well.

Compare that to the EP5 and the GX7. I know maybe not a completely fair comparisson but not far off, the prices are though.

And the cheap sigma primes are a super match for the aps-c sensor, not as much the m43.

I am a m43 supporter BUT I do think that it gets less and less competetive compared to nex.

Jakob

Sorry mate, for my needs Sony camera doesn't compare to m43, so I don't care about the Sony being cheaper, even if it was for free it wouldn't do what I want 100% of the time.

 MiroM's gear list:MiroM's gear list
Olympus XZ-2 iHS Olympus Stylus XZ-10 Nikon 1 V1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Abrak
Senior MemberPosts: 1,552
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to MiroM, Aug 29, 2013

I tend to agree that M43 is generally overpriced which is why it isnt more popular.

However, Nex doesnt represent a viable alternative. Its line up includes a whole range of drawbacks - some too expensive, too heavy, too slow and in other cases simply not available. Arguably the Sigmas are the exception but given they are the superstars of Nex while they hardly get a look in at M43 probably says a lot about the remains of the line up.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Optical1
Senior MemberPosts: 1,038Gear list
Like?
Re: I don't think so...
In reply to papillon_65, Aug 29, 2013

papillon_65 wrote:

honeyiscool wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

mpgxsvcd wrote:

The only company that doesn't compete very well right now is Canon.

Not when you can pick up an EOS-M and 22mm F2 for peanuts. The IQ is excellent and it will fit in a smallish pants pocket no problem. Not forgetting that you can buy an adaptor and use all your EF/S lenses on it. Canon also offer many more choices of decent lenses at low prices, for instance I picked up a 55-250mm lens for £109 and I'll take that lens over the m4/3's 40/45-150mm range lenses all day long, it's an amazing lens for the price. Then there's the G1-X, another superb camera for a very reasonable price now, beats any m4/3's camera and kit lens combination by a country mile.
There's definitely value in Canon if you know where to look. Like any manufacturer, wait for 9 months to a year and prices drop significantly, be an early adopter and pay through the nose.

667....neighbour of the beast.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

Terrible example. The only reason why Canon sells for that price is because they completely flopped and the EOS-M, excuse my language, sucks. Yes, I've used the EOS-M quite a bit. It is my girlfriend's camera. They put a good sensor in that thing and then forgot to actually build a camera around it. The focus is not only slow, it's inaccurate and the MF isn't very good, either. No wonder she reaches for my E-PM2 whenever there's a shot she needs to nail.

That's a matter of opinion of course. There are plenty of EOS-M user not having those problems, myself included, just check in the EOS-M forum. It's easy if you are struggling to focus, you just use the magnify option, not really that hard but most of the time it's no problem, all contrast detect systems struggle at times.

You can't use EOS-M as the example of something that's competitive when the only reason why it sells at the current price is because it's completely flopped and forced to take a 50-60% hit from its original sales price. Now, at $300-400 that you can get it for nowadays, it's actually not the most horrible way you could spend your money. However, had the EOS-M actually been a good camera, it would have stayed expensive.

It's not much different from many CSC camera's who's prices have also nosedived within the year. It also does something that has taken Olympus several years to crack, it also focuses EF lenses pretty decently and accurately.
That aside, consider this, Olympus are releasing the E-M1 and it will cost in the region of £1200 at least. Canon have already released the EOS 100D which you can get for a third of the price and it does most of what the E-M1 is reported to do - already. It has the advantages of both mirrorless and mirrored cameras and also has an ovf. It has dual focusing and can take a massive range of lenses as well as the newer STM lenses for video. They're not so dissimilar in many ways and if you're on a budget which one would you buy?

-- hide signature --

667....neighbour of the beast.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

How do you figure the 100D/SL1 has the advantages of a mirrorless camera?  It seems to be a cheap and simple  DLSR, cut and dry...

 Optical1's gear list:Optical1's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Ricoh GR Olympus OM-D E-M5 +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ulric
Senior MemberPosts: 2,635Gear list
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to Abrak, Aug 29, 2013

Abrak wrote:

I tend to agree that M43 is generally overpriced which is why it isnt more popular.

However, Nex doesnt represent a viable alternative. Its line up includes a whole range of drawbacks - some too expensive, too heavy, too slow and in other cases simply not available. Arguably the Sigmas are the exception but given they are the superstars of Nex while they hardly get a look in at M43 probably says a lot about the remains of the line up.

Agreed. I had a look yesterday at Sony's lens lineup for the NEX and it was something of a surprise how few there are and how limited the range is. If there are no lenses, do the bodies matter?

 Ulric's gear list:Ulric's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sean Nelson
Forum ProPosts: 10,534
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to Abrak, Aug 29, 2013

Abrak wrote:

However, Nex doesnt represent a viable alternative. Its line up includes a whole range of drawbacks - some too expensive, too heavy, too slow and in other cases simply not available.

Not to mention the NEX issues with moire and aliasing in video mode.  Too bad, because Sony's the only other camera maker who's consistently supporting 1080p60 video...

I wish Oly would get on the bandwagon.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
papillon_65
Forum ProPosts: 19,897Gear list
Like?
Re: I don't think so...
In reply to Optical1, Aug 29, 2013

Optical1 wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

honeyiscool wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

mpgxsvcd wrote:

The only company that doesn't compete very well right now is Canon.

Not when you can pick up an EOS-M and 22mm F2 for peanuts. The IQ is excellent and it will fit in a smallish pants pocket no problem. Not forgetting that you can buy an adaptor and use all your EF/S lenses on it. Canon also offer many more choices of decent lenses at low prices, for instance I picked up a 55-250mm lens for £109 and I'll take that lens over the m4/3's 40/45-150mm range lenses all day long, it's an amazing lens for the price. Then there's the G1-X, another superb camera for a very reasonable price now, beats any m4/3's camera and kit lens combination by a country mile.
There's definitely value in Canon if you know where to look. Like any manufacturer, wait for 9 months to a year and prices drop significantly, be an early adopter and pay through the nose.

667....neighbour of the beast.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

Terrible example. The only reason why Canon sells for that price is because they completely flopped and the EOS-M, excuse my language, sucks. Yes, I've used the EOS-M quite a bit. It is my girlfriend's camera. They put a good sensor in that thing and then forgot to actually build a camera around it. The focus is not only slow, it's inaccurate and the MF isn't very good, either. No wonder she reaches for my E-PM2 whenever there's a shot she needs to nail.

That's a matter of opinion of course. There are plenty of EOS-M user not having those problems, myself included, just check in the EOS-M forum. It's easy if you are struggling to focus, you just use the magnify option, not really that hard but most of the time it's no problem, all contrast detect systems struggle at times.

You can't use EOS-M as the example of something that's competitive when the only reason why it sells at the current price is because it's completely flopped and forced to take a 50-60% hit from its original sales price. Now, at $300-400 that you can get it for nowadays, it's actually not the most horrible way you could spend your money. However, had the EOS-M actually been a good camera, it would have stayed expensive.

It's not much different from many CSC camera's who's prices have also nosedived within the year. It also does something that has taken Olympus several years to crack, it also focuses EF lenses pretty decently and accurately.
That aside, consider this, Olympus are releasing the E-M1 and it will cost in the region of £1200 at least. Canon have already released the EOS 100D which you can get for a third of the price and it does most of what the E-M1 is reported to do - already. It has the advantages of both mirrorless and mirrored cameras and also has an ovf. It has dual focusing and can take a massive range of lenses as well as the newer STM lenses for video. They're not so dissimilar in many ways and if you're on a budget which one would you buy?

-- hide signature --

667....neighbour of the beast.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

How do you figure the 100D/SL1 has the advantages of a mirrorless camera? It seems to be a cheap and simple DLSR, cut and dry...

It's basically a combination of an EOS-M and DSLR, you get the excellent touch screen focusing and benefits of exposing using liveview and CDAF focusing, but you also get the pdaf focusing and ovf from a DSLR. It has the same LCD as the EOS-M (which is excellent) and an ovf which is as large as a mid range DSLR. To me it seems that the E-M1 is not offering a huge amount more for the price, except perhaps the 5 axis IBIS. The 100D is able to track and focus fast moving objects like other DSLR's and it's also able to have pinpoint accuracy like most CSC's cameras, to me it seems like a great hybrid offering that plenty of people seem to have missed. DPR gave it a gold award for a reason.

-- hide signature --

667....neighbour of the beast.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP1 Merrill Fujifilm XF1 Sigma DP3 Merrill Fujifilm FinePix X100 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
papillon_65
Forum ProPosts: 19,897Gear list
Like?
Re: I don't think so...
In reply to JYPfoto, Aug 29, 2013

JYPfoto wrote:

The EOS M with 22 pancake is a fantastic camera if you can accept it shortcomings. For shooting things that do not move its great, I've seen many terrific landscape and architecture shots with it. What it does not do well is shoot moving objects. The slow AF combined with the blackout time makes it shooting anything that moves a guessing game. And while yes you can fit any EF lens on it, most of the time it makes it ridiculous and way too unbalanced. I don't think you'll find a single EOS M user say with a straight face that the M can shoot moving subjects effectively. There's a reason why its so loved now, because of the fire sale. If they had just improved AF and kept it at $699-899 it wouldn't sell.

Its not ridiculous at all to fit the 35mm F2 or the 50mm F1.4 on it, it works very well and I never said the EOS-M was good for action, though it can be done, just like any other camera.

It remains to be seen if Canon will even fully support the M in the US. It says something by them not releasing the 11-22 here. A system is not a complete system if there's only 2 lenses that are natively available for it.

It says that most Americans are not really bothered by CSC's and prefer DSLR's, which is well known. However, the US isn't the world and there are for more lucrative markets for CSC's elsewhere, like Europe and Asia, where the EOS-M has sold in much larger quantities. Canon will obviously sell products where people will buy them and not waste time elsewhere, and up to now, it's hard to argue against their sales strategy.

-- hide signature --

667....neighbour of the beast.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP1 Merrill Fujifilm XF1 Sigma DP3 Merrill Fujifilm FinePix X100 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
goshigoo
Contributing MemberPosts: 736
Like?
Re: M43 seems more and more overpriced compared to NEX
In reply to peevee1, Aug 29, 2013

peevee1 wrote:

Dennis wrote:

If you want to extend the argument, then it's fair to point out that NEX has nothing at all to compete with the excellent and fairly priced 45/1.8 and 75/1.8

No, 75/1.8 is NOT fairly priced, you can get plenty 85/1.8 covering twice the image circle at less than half the price. It is in fact one of the most overpriced m43 lenses, along with 12/2 and Pana 12-35 and 35-100 pair, at least at their prices on the US market.

Totally agree on this; any m43 lens that are over 700 USD are definitely overpriced (12,12-35,35-100,7-14,75...)
but there are still many good lenses for us to choose (14,17,20,25,45 f/1.8, 100-300, 9-18, 14-42 II, 45-175, etc.)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads