Future Considerations: Speakers: (This was easy to decide on...)Front:2 NHT Classic Three (When the 1.8s finally give out)Rear: 2 NHT Classic Two
Current Line Up:NHT 1.8 (2)Verve Subwoofer (Dual 10' & 200w amp)2-Infinity 42.5i in Custom center channel box.
Current Camera Gear:Sony NEX-7Sony 18-200mm OSSSony 50mm F1.8 OSSSony HVL-F20AM
Previous Camera Gear: Canon T2i Canon 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USMCanon 270EX
Nikon D40Nikon 18-55 ED IINikon 55-200mm VRNikon 35mm F1.8Nikon SB-400
1/320 flash sync speed is nice, ISO 100 is nice to see again too.
Uwe Steinmueller: Why is the excellent Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM missing.
You just answered your own question. Everyone already knows that lens is excellent, some things a just a given. ;)
tkbslc: You know, for $500, including the pancake 24-75mm equivalent zoom, this would seem to be a very nice "premium compact" alternative.
Depends on your definition of "compact".http://camerasize.com/compact/#442.360,382.335,402.358,396,ha,t
Even compared with the diminutive Nikon S1, the NEX with it's much larger sensor *IS* compact. Not razor thin, but compact.
The NEX3n is a good, albiet late upgrade to the NEX3. NEX3n Pros:• 16mp vs 14mp sensor • 1080p vs 720p Video• 4fps vs 2.3fps• Battery life: 480 shots vs 330• Better Kit Lens » Wider 24mm Equiv FOV vs 28mm » Smaller and lighter. Makes the combo jacket pocketable.• Upgraded metering system (likely)• Built in Flash• Better Sensor means better High ISO and greater DR performance.• $100 less at launch - and with a better lens. Even less then the F3 which has been out a while now.
NEX3 Pros:• Accessory port• Higher Res LCD
This might make a great camera for my wife, she could use my 18-200 or 50mm but not have to be overwhelmed by the controls of the NEX7.
Sony posed this question: "Moving up from your fixed lens camera?" My wife likes the IQ my NEX7 gives, but doesn't want to mess with settings, the external flash, ... this just might be the perfect camera for her. She'll get excellent images and I won't have to spend a fortune.
boogieboogie: Pretty body but no apps, no touch screen, lower res screen and still no mode dial which is a shame.
Nowhere do I see the F3 as discontinued. So Sony is giving the consumers more options. Its positioned below the NEX-F3 on purpose. We'd all love a NEX7 at a NEX3 price, but it isn't ever going to happen. The NEX3 will do it's intended job as designed. Take great photos and video, while being simple and cheap.
 The inclusion of the zoom lever (nice feature, BTW) indicates this is not designed for the enthusiast, but for the compact shooter wanting better photo quality. The compact, "Auto" mode shooter will feel right at home - zoom with a lever, push the shutter button, result: better pictures because of the big APS-C sensor.
PaulRivers: That sounds really cool, but - has Sony come up with an f2.0 or better **compact** pancake lens **yet**? Like m43rds has, or the Canon mirrorless...
If they have, please post it, and I'll be wrong. But the lack of this kind of lens keeps making the NEX far less useful. Sure, they have a pancake f2.8 - but that's 2 stops behind the lx7, making the low light difference pretty small (especially when others *do* make a compact f2.0 lens). They make an f2.0 prime that's relatively huge for the NEX, negating the advantages of it's small size.
Still seems like the best low light camera with a large sensor is either the Canon EOS-M, or one of the m43rds with the f1.7 prime lens.
Probably sounded a bit harsh, but the reality is compacts can't match DSLRs, DSLT, or mirrorless cameras (pentax Q exceptioned). The X100(s) can, the G1X can, the Sony RX100 can (vs some) but those cameras have larger sensors (upto 23.7 x 15.7 mm - bigger even on the RX1), not the tiny 1/1.7" (7.44 x 5.58 mm) ones found in the advanced compacts.
what a joke. There's a reason why I haven't bought a compact camera in 7 years, with the few exceptions, namely the RX100, G1x, and a few LARGE sensor compact, they all look mediocre at best and terrible at even medium ISOs. Comparing images at Imaging Resource the Sony F3 at ISO 3200 looked tons better than LX7 did at ISO 800, only when I compared the F3 at ISO 6400 to the LX7 at ISO 800 did the LX7 look better in some areas. Nearly 3 stops difference! Just as striking is the difference an APS-C sensor makes over a fingernail sized sensor at Base ISO. The LX7 still has that watercolor effect, no sharpness. Whereas the F3 looks highly detailed and crisp. I'd happily take the NEX3n over any compact with a sensor smaller than the RX100. Biggest no brainer ever.
And as for the Canon EOS-M, it's too bad they couldn't have put a great sensor in it - it's bested in IQ by every Sony & most new Olympus and Panasonics as well. I'd take a NEX & 20mm F2.8 over the EOS-M with the 22mm F2.
But it's a step up to the NEX 3, not the NEX 6 or 7. It has more features, better IQ (likely), and better DR (likely) then the NEX3, and it's cheap. And it comes with a small light-weight zoom. Perfect for people looking for this class of camera.
Juraj Lacko: This could be so much better camera if they would put that 5r/6 sensor for lower noise and better AF and ISO 100. I would definitely buy it.and wouldn't mind to pay that extra few ££ for it. Well maybe next time they will do it right. 'Sigh'
It's another great 16mp Sensor from Sony, I have no doubt it'll do great at high ISOs, it'll probably be hard to tell an NEX6 and 3n picture apart.
They say sony's improved the sensor ove the F3, I personally thing the F3 looks as good or better than the NEX6 at ISO3200, so that's gotta be a plus if you shoot that high.
BobYIL: One thing is for sure: This 24MP Toshiba sensor exhibits better hi-ISO characteristics than the Sony 24MP (Nex-7) and very close to the one of the D600 (FF!). It seems so that below-$800-class too is under Nikon's dominance.. And for IQ, let's wait for the better sample pictures with primes for a sound evaluation..
Not with the JPEGs, the Nikon is smearing details even at mid ISOs, at high ISOs the NEX7 is still better. In RAW, the NEX7 gets noiser faster, but hold significantly more detail than the D5200, but it should, it cost a lot more. The Nikon sensor seems pretty good over all, but I can't measure up at low ISOs to the shear resolving power of the NEX7 sensor. Different leagues.
Mssimo: AF-S Nikkor 800mm f/5.6E FL ED VR(Not compatible with the D2 series, D1 series, D200, D100, D90, D80, D70 series, D3000, D60, D50, D40 series, 35mm film cameras)
Works with the Nikon 1 series......Score!!!
Wow and with that 2.7x crop factor that's....2700mm with the 1.25x extender. You no longer need to be in the same zip code to be a peeping tom.
Ergo607: Yet another kitlens... Where we waiting for that?
No of course not. But if it get the IQ back to the original 14-45mm, then why not. You've already got an F2.8 zoom if you want one, most consumers buy the kit lens with a body. So if this is an improved version of the 14-42 and will be bundled with future Panasonic bodies, then why not. I'm sure there is a few dozen other lenses here that people will want but why not make your basic lens offering better too; Start people out with higher quality images. I may be making some assumptions with this lens, but Panasonic has made good zooms in the past, I'm sure this one will be more than acceptable on G, GX, and GF series bodies.
This really is an excellent image.
Dinovo: All DSLR "Should" have a battery Grip option! Without it I'm not buying.
I purchase a grip for my T2i, decided it made the camera just too big and bulky. Later went with a NEX-7 - I wouldn't put a grip on it even if someone made a good one.
NowHearThis: Bigger, heavier, and more expensive than the Canon 70-200 f4. More expensive than the new Sigma 70-200 OS too. For $623.95 less you could get the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 OS with the supplied tripod collar. You could put the money you save towards a 1.4x converter and still save hundreds.
I'm sure it'll be a nice lens, but I was hoping for a bit less (size, weight, price).
I made multiple comparisons, 2 of the 3 were 70-200mm lenses (Canon/Sigma). I brought up the 50-150/2.8 because you only lose 50mm and save over $600 and have a faster lens. It's a valid comparison - yes I agree that TC's can lower the resolution at bit - but I didn't say you had to use it.
My point is this new Nikon is rather pricey for what you get - especially considering there are other options which could work for some.
Looks like a bad mating between an L120 and a V1.
cameramen: Where are the specifications?
Bigger, heavier, and more expensive than the Canon 70-200 f4. More expensive than the new Sigma 70-200 OS too. For $623.95 less you could get the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 OS with the supplied tripod collar. You could put the money you save towards a 1.4x converter and still save hundreds.
I really like my NEX-7.Way's to improve it would be:• Add built-in Wireless Flash Commander (via pop up flash).• 1/4000sec flash snyc.• Fully electronic shutter (silent operation, bracketing).• Faster AF for people wanting to shoot some sports.• IBIS (but still make OSS lenses) IBIS could turn on if camera doesn't detect OSS.• Touchscreen LCD.• 1/8000sec max shutter speed.• Selectable Grid lines: Golden selection, Golden Triangles, etc.• 720p @ 120 or 240fps.• Video crop as in Canon T3i.• A flash PC sync port (or a dirt cheap adapter).• 1/3rd stop ISO settings.• 10fps for minimum of 60 shots (6 sec).
Lastly a new lens to mount on it:16-200 F3.5-5.6 OSS (has to equal my 18-200 OSS in IQ - I have a great copy of that lens)
babamaru: Whats the point of having a small m43 camera if you are going to stick something like this to it?
not say'n it's better - but there is no comparison between these two in size.(FYI, The 45-200 is the same length as the 35-100)