Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Sony NEX-7 pre-production samples gallery

By dpreview staff on Sep 14, 2011 at 18:04 GMT
Buy on GearShop6 deals

Just Posted: Sony NEX-7 pre-production samples gallery. We've been shooting at the press launch of Sony's latest cameras, affording us a chance to shoot with a pre-production NEX-7. We've put together a samples gallery in a variety of lighting conditions, giving an idea of what the camera will be capable of. We've also tried its sweep-panorama mode in circumstances where conventional panorama shooting would have been challenging. We'll be adding to the gallery over the coming days.

Samples gallery

There are 20 images in the samples gallery. Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter / magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review), we do so in good faith, please don't abuse it.

Unless otherwise noted images taken with no particular settings at full resolution. Because our review images are now hosted on the 'galleries' section of dpreview.com, you can enjoy all of the new galleries functionality when browsing these samples.

Sony NEX-7 Preview Samples - Posted 14th September 2011
467
I own it
207
I want it
91
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Sony Alpha NEX-7

Comments

Total comments: 105
Jackie Q Acomson
By Jackie Q Acomson (Sep 21, 2011)

Sony is the leader in this EVIL camera market, especially when I have just seen Nikon V1 and J1.

0 upvotes
Steven
By Steven (Sep 16, 2011)

Some of these images are shot with the Zeiss 24mm. These are the only truly notable images in terms of quality. With a low ISO, these are truly fine. But the 18-55mm kit lens is purely mediocre.

0 upvotes
Sosua
By Sosua (Sep 16, 2011)

I don't see any images shot with the Zeiss there. All 18-55 / 55-210 or the Alpha 70-300 with adaptor.

0 upvotes
Steven
By Steven (Sep 16, 2011)

If you download the samples and open in Photoshop, then look at the File Info (camera data tab), you can see that all of the hot air balloon shots and the landscapes seen from the balloon as well as the sunset shot are all with a 24mm 1.8 lens--that's the Zeiss glass.

0 upvotes
Sosua
By Sosua (Sep 16, 2011)

Not that I can see from the EXIF in Bridge... you may be confusing them with the Engadget samples if you downloaded those as well - same media session with Balloon shots with the Zeiss.

0 upvotes
c7c
By c7c (Sep 15, 2011)

Am I right in saying that the Nex-7 shares the same sensor as the A-77? I was looking at the original shots from another gallery for the A-77 and was a bit taken aback by the purple fringing - take a look at the branches on the top right: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3202320681/download/1352335

I would like to see how the Nex-7 compares under similar shot conditions.

My overall feeling of this gallery is that all the Nex-7 shots are all a bit soft - I'd love to rule out the lenses in this gallery from the sensor equation. Can this sensor deliver 24MP? - I am certainly not looking at 24MP shots from what I can see (a sort of ghosting around every pixel). Maybe it is as others point out a jpg artifact or the lenses in use.

0 upvotes
c7c
By c7c (Sep 15, 2011)

Sorry top left in the original file download!

0 upvotes
Sosua
By Sosua (Sep 16, 2011)

That's a lens issue, not a sensor issue. Easily fixed in most RAW converters.

To really see pixel level detail on 24MP you'll need to use good glass, tripod, RAW and a decent workflow.

Not handheld preproduction jpegs.

0 upvotes
Michael Barkowski
By Michael Barkowski (Sep 15, 2011)

The real cost of 24 MP for a lot of people might be the post-processing requirements.

For example, to run DXO Film Pack 3 on images larger than 20 MP, they strongly recommend 64-bit Windows with 4 GB RAM or a Mac with 3 GB RAM.

1 upvote
Superka
By Superka (Sep 15, 2011)

Its really nice to see, how still much better my film camera is.

2 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Sep 15, 2011)

Lol, its funny how much true is that.. Those NEX-7 samples look like when compact camera is trying to look like APS-C camera.. wait it is APS-C.

Its horribly flat, noise even at base ISO.. overall looks very bad. Im sure RAW will look bit better.. but.

When I compare that to Leica M3 - 28mm APSH - Fuji 50 Velvia.. hem, with good scanner I think NEX 7 will be far far behind..

0 upvotes
aliminator
By aliminator (Sep 15, 2011)

Why do people think that 5N sensor is better than of Nex7? Why would Sony put an inferior sensor in the premium bodies - a77 and Nex7?

I think that the images look great even with the average 18-55 kit lens.

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Sep 15, 2011)

5N clean at most ISOs even at 100% look? Clean colors, not polluted by noise? Maybe?

0 upvotes
Sosua
By Sosua (Sep 16, 2011)

Hows the grain at 100% look with your Velvia 50 at 4200dpi?

Hows the dynamic range?

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Sep 16, 2011)

:D Yes, but grain on 50-100 ISO film doesnt kill colors. DR? Dunno, its not much but its enough for pretty much anything that would sane person used Velvia for. Film actually has kinda ok DR, if you got good scanner and some PP skills.

Otherwise, I guess this poor results of NEX-7 are due bad JPEG engine. Ive took a look on A77 RAWs and they look quite ok, so this wont be much worse, just JPEG engine of Sony is tragedy.

0 upvotes
Sosua
By Sosua (Sep 16, 2011)

Agreed - the NEX-7 will require good glass,technique RAW and processing...

I'm OK with that, some may not be I guess.

0 upvotes
Griffo 155
By Griffo 155 (Sep 15, 2011)

Well Im looking to upgrade from D200 Nikon and to be honest I'm fed up with all the heavy equipment I tend to lag around. Having recently bought the NEX3, with 16mm and 18-55mm lens it has rejuvenated my walkabout photography, and produces images as good as my D200. Im always sceptical about the increased pixel count and have been impressed by the new censors that shoot in low light at high ISO... Looking at the samples I agree another set of images showing 200, 400 and 800 iso capability would be nice to see, but having used the NEX3 realising there is a special need for a viewfinder this NEX7 has got a very large tick against it... In my experience so far I cannot fault this new concept of camera, Im looking forward to running my own tests (before buying), at a forth coming event. I think Sony have pushed the boundaries out and will continue to do so, which is all for the good of all us photographers...

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Sep 15, 2011)

Get 5N, add EVF when you need it or want it. Add SLT adapter if you will be in need for fast AF. Use just camera with pancake Sony, when you want light and small camera.

NEX 7 IQ wont be better than 5N, unless you like smoothing noise at base ISO and shooting pretty much only on that ISO.

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Sep 15, 2011)

The difference between the 2 seems to be in the order of half a stop. You might not like the pre production jpeg engines, in RAW there doesn't seem to be much between them. Nothing like your comments would suggest.

1 upvote
NorthwestF
By NorthwestF (Sep 15, 2011)

Ignorant crap that people like Mescalamba posts randomly makes almost all forums (not just camera related) useless for reliable info.

And there is no evidence that 5N sensor would be better than Nex-7 yet (I am certain it won't be when all is said and done).

0 upvotes
Griffo 155
By Griffo 155 (Sep 15, 2011)

Well mescalamba you certainly know how to open a hornets nest it's the same sensor and looking at the images supplied by dpreview they are very good and no doubt with all of us a little tinkering in post processing - as we all do! will only add to the final image and print... I think this camera is going to set the standard for all the othe major companies to aspire to... Please don't bring Leica and fujix100 into the argument - one is far too expensive and doesn't produce the qaulity that's it's film predecessors did the other is a fixed lens retro copy to mind a bit of a posers camera...

0 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (Sep 16, 2011)

Heh, I agree about X100. Not much about M9. Take a look on FM forums in Alt gear section and theres thread full of M9 photos.. especially photos from guy with nickname "denoir" are very interesting. :)

NEX-7 wont beat NEX-5N in SNR or DR. You will see that later. Sure those DPreview results are poor due JPEG engine, and pretty bad lens, but its still 24 mpix APS-C, which at current state of technology simply cant match previous generation of APS-C. It will be ok camera, maybe great from ergonomic point of view, but not much from sensor side of things..

0 upvotes
Ashley Pomeroy
By Ashley Pomeroy (Sep 15, 2011)

What with the free balloon trips, the seaside excursions, free lunches etc, and all the other stuff we don't see in front of the camera, I commend DPReview for remaining neutral. It would be so easy to tilt the reviews in a favourable direction; it's a natural human instinct to not want to appear ungrateful, and of course the flow of free balloon trips etc can always be turned off. And there are other sites who will be more than willing to bend the truth in exchange for free lunches etc, who will thrive if they do so. Yet DPReview keeps an objective tone, so well done.

0 upvotes
Low Budget Dave
By Low Budget Dave (Sep 15, 2011)

That is actually a good point. Some of your camera samples are from a guy walking around the city taking pictures of bicycles. Images of people having fun at the beach tend to grab the attention more.

When you give us image samples from Nikon, will it be puppies and children?

0 upvotes
putomax
By putomax (Sep 15, 2011)

yeahh, give us 200, 400, 800 and unhappiness!!
... or at least day to day routine. pls don't enjoy
your job or take free rides.

... my goodness, do we need something BIGGER
to rely on?

gashô

0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Sep 15, 2011)

Sony made no mistake when shooting a promo for the WX9 aboard sailboats racing off Cape Town. Who wouldn't like to be invited?

Do Mr. Bloom or other camera "celebrities" pay "out of pocket" to test cameras in Hawaii or wherever? Who underwrites all the "assignments" that result in photos or video with no other ostentible commercial aim? I suppose if someone fries an egg, it couid be qualified as "cooking instruction video."

The pic of the bike flat tire, or the bum on the park bench, can't complete. But, hey, maybe that's my bike, or maybe that bum's last mistake was to squander the rent check on a new camera!

0 upvotes
Low Budget Dave
By Low Budget Dave (Sep 15, 2011)

That would be a great web site: "Unhappy camera reviews." You could concentrate on cameras that you hate, and just publish pictures of people who hate their job. I bet Ricoh would sponsor it just to tick people off.

0 upvotes
Thomas Richter
By Thomas Richter (Sep 15, 2011)

I would like to see more "mid ISO" shots in all the sample galleries. ISOs between 400 and 1250 of low contrast scenes with fine details. Thus far most of the shots in most galleries are either ISO 100/200, or high ISO (1600+) with scenes that do not have much detail. Thus the interesting part is masked out. The ISO100 is always great and of ISO1600+ nobody expects exceptional detail and color differentiation. I'm looking for really clean ISO 800 in a crop camera and I suspect that's still not available (depending on personal expectations of clean-ness, of course).

2 upvotes
Arthur Winner
By Arthur Winner (Sep 15, 2011)

With Leica lenses, it's a second body.
I have no idea what the IQ would be like, but I think it could be worth a shot
Arthur

0 upvotes
Philgp
By Philgp (Sep 15, 2011)

I'm not sure if I'm missing something here ( I probably am), but would't the noisiness be offset if you took photos at a lower resolution setting in-camera, say, 16mp (resolution of Nex-5N)?

Or, alternatively, would the fact that there would be pixel overlapping mean that there would be distortions, if decreasing to anything larger than quarter the pixel count (to c. 6mp, half the pixels in each dimension), which would screw with the image really badly when viewed at 1:1, on the pixel level?

0 upvotes
Harry Lane
By Harry Lane (Sep 15, 2011)

you would still get the same noisy picture by lowering the resolution setting because you are effectively instructing the camera to use only a portion of its sensor

1 upvote
Philgp
By Philgp (Sep 15, 2011)

That doesn't make sense. If you have the camera set to take lower res, then the active area in the sensor is reduced? Not sure I follow your logic. Surely the active area of the sensor (the area the light falls on) will be the same, but there will be, say in the case of a 6mpx setting in a 24mpx camera, for simplicity's sake, a 2x2 area from which the imaging engine can take an average. Each 2x2 pixel area would be roughly as large as a pixel from a full-frame 8mpx camera, doesn't that scream "high image quality and noiselessness" to you?

0 upvotes
Harry Lane
By Harry Lane (Sep 15, 2011)

please order and read this book

http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Photography-Dummies-Julie-Adair/dp/0470250747/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1316071691&sr=8-2

0 upvotes
Philgp
By Philgp (Sep 15, 2011)

Or do you mean that at lower resolutions, the camera is instructing the sensor to take light data from fewer pixels into account? That would save on processing power (whether in-camera or in-computer) but it would be the same size file and the quality would be worse.

0 upvotes
Philgp
By Philgp (Sep 15, 2011)

Does that book go into the mechanics of how a camera of a given resolution chooses and processes data that is fed into a lower-resolution image?

0 upvotes
Low Budget Dave
By Low Budget Dave (Sep 15, 2011)

Some cameras use pixel binning, some don't. Cameras that employ the method can combine adjacent pixels to make a lower resolution picture with less noise. The cameras without the feature just use image compression, which reduces noise at the cost of detail. http://learn.hamamatsu.com/articles/binning.html

0 upvotes
Michael Barkowski
By Michael Barkowski (Sep 15, 2011)

I think if they had averaging of adjacent pixels to create a lower resolution image, they would claim it as a feature, like Fuji does with EXR cameras. Since they didn't mention it, it seems safe to assume that their lower resolution modes are like most cameras: simply throwing away pixels.

0 upvotes
Philgp
By Philgp (Sep 15, 2011)

Low Budget Dave,
Thanks for the constructive comment and the link. I had a quick look through the page, and it more or less sums up what I was trying to say. Interesting that not all cameras do this.

Michael Barkowski,
Regarding the probability that, had Sony developed this for NEX-7, they would have emphasised its inclusion a la Fuji, it certainly sounds plausible.

I suppose the best way to go about creating an ultra-low noise lo-res image from NEX-7 would be: working from the 24.3MP raw file, and developing to JPEG so it's exactly half the number of pixels in each dimension (ending up with c. 6MP JPEG. Quite lo-res, so wouldn't need much JPEG compression, result: few compresson artifacts).

I take it that, through that method, the image noise would be greatly reduced as all available data would be taken from the APS-C sensor (assuming the RAW>JPEG processing engine performed some description of pixel binning, which I take it is a sound assumption)

0 upvotes
Sosua
By Sosua (Sep 15, 2011)

Looks the part all things considered, i.e. - handheld, kit lenses, pre production jpegs, high ISO shots are all in very low light at borderline shutter speeds.

There is next to no point in comparing at a pixel level against 12mp cameras.

The NEX-7 should be very capable with some good manual glass, RAW and a good photographer.

Its not a point and shoot.

2 upvotes
Harry Lane
By Harry Lane (Sep 15, 2011)

Attaching good glass to the NEX-7 would be like carrying an elephant around, in that case you might as well bring a DSLR

1 upvote
Sosua
By Sosua (Sep 15, 2011)

I'm talking about Rangefinder glass - you can get great lenses from 12mm to 90mm plus from about 100grams...

An NEX-7 plus CV 35 1.4 weighs 500grams. My D7000 and 35 1.4 weighs about 1.35kg.

Quite a price for autofocus.

4 upvotes
Dave Oddie
By Dave Oddie (Sep 15, 2011)

If you want to use the Nex as a range-finder type camera with manual glass can't you do that on M 4/3 cameras as well yet at the same time benefit from the fact their AF lenses are also portable?

Even the kit lens on a Nex is too big for the body.

0 upvotes
Sosua
By Sosua (Sep 15, 2011)

Of course you can, but the issues lie with the M43 sensor and crop factor for legacy glass...

For AF lenses, yeah, M43 all the way.

1 upvote
Michael Barkowski
By Michael Barkowski (Sep 15, 2011)

AFAIK, an adapter for a manual rangefinder lens would not couple the lens's aperture lever to the camera in any way, so you would not be able to use all exposure modes, plus unless you're shooting wide open you will have a hard time even doing manual focus because it would be like focusing with depth-of-field preview on - the lens is stopped down during composition and focusing. Pentax's support of it's own legacy manual glass is far superior because of this.

1 upvote
Dave Oddie
By Dave Oddie (Sep 15, 2011)

What is the issue with M43 sensor and legacy glass? Do you mean the 2x as opposed to 1.5x crop? If so then it is an issue for both sensors and always has been in my opinion long before cameras like these came out.

When d-slrs first came out you lost all the wide-angles until makers started producing lenses designed for aps-c. The fact a 20mm legacy lens is 30mm equivalent f.o.v on a Nex or 40mm f.o.v on a M43 camera is a moot point. You still lost the 20mm f.o.v on both and I don't think you will find any rectilinear legacy 12mm or 10mm Leica lens which is what you need to get the f.o.v back.

For longer lenses where on m43 a 50mm becomes 100 f.o.v that is more useful but full frame lenses on aps-c have never scaled well to traditional focal lengths as 50 goes to 75, 85 to 127 and 100 to 150 and so on.

0 upvotes
bloodycape
By bloodycape (Sep 15, 2011)

These shots looks very nice, but I think 24mpx is hampering it a bit. I love the body, but from the preliminary comparisons I have seen between the NEX-5n vs the NEX-7 the 5n seems to be a bit better. Now only if Sony could bring out an NEX-7 but with the sensor of the NEX-5n, a lower price, and some zoom lenses more akin to the Panasonic X lenses, I think I would sell my G2 for it.

1 upvote
Harry Lane
By Harry Lane (Sep 15, 2011)

Sony crammed too many pixels into an aps-c sensor, too many artifacts present in high iso pictures, and the noise reduction algorithm is smearing fine detail. The quality of Canon T2i photos with its 18-55mm lens + 18mp aps-c sensor clearly trumps that of Sony with its 18-55mm lens +24mp aps-c sensor.
And the Canon combo is about $600 less than the Sony combo. Is the Sony combo worth the $600 premium? I don't think so.

3 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (Sep 15, 2011)

No, the quality is definitely better than Canon's 7D.

2 upvotes
Harry Lane
By Harry Lane (Sep 15, 2011)

In what way? The Nex-7 may have more resolution, but like I mentioned- too many artifacts at high iso and there is obvious noise reduction kicking in to smear fine detail.

0 upvotes
NorthwestF
By NorthwestF (Sep 15, 2011)

So does 7D at high ISO. Want to make a bet? Nex-7 RAW will score pretty close to A580/D7000 on dxomark. 7D is no where even close to that.

And since you mentioned price/performance and jpeg engine, have a look at $500 Nex-5n jpeg (which is a production model) and compare it to $1600 7D. Go to http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

4 upvotes
nofumble
By nofumble (Sep 15, 2011)

I do like the NEX7 picture of the lamp at ISO 1600. It is pretty smooth, better than my T2i I think.

0 upvotes
Harry Lane
By Harry Lane (Sep 15, 2011)

here is an ISO 1600 pic from the T2i for you to compare with - notice how smooth this picture is also

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/photos/226892/img_0649?inalbum=canon-eos-550d-review-samples

0 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (Sep 15, 2011)

You can't be really this dumb? The Nex photo is taken in much much darker (lower-light) situation. Look at the shutter speed and F-stop of Nex-7 lamp shot vs your T2i shot.

It's not even close.

In any case, Canon is 4 years behind in sensor technology. They haven't yet caught up to Sony's 12 MP CMOS sensor (such as in D90). This new sensor (without the pellicle mirror) will score at D7000/K-5 level (at least)

1 upvote
Superka
By Superka (Sep 15, 2011)

I''m completely agree with you. There is no true 24Mpx.

0 upvotes
Carlos Echenique
By Carlos Echenique (Sep 15, 2011)

People pay 6x as much for a Leica M9-P that can only get to ISO 2500, and the in-camera JPEG engine leaves a bit to be desired. These high-ISO shots look way better. Keeping in mind that this is pre-production, in-camera, yada, yada, yada, the NEX-7 looks to be a highly credible street shooter. Plus at 24 megapixels, this camera has encroached into medium format digital resolutions. I AM NOT saying this is as good as MFD! But, when viewing images at this resolution, pixel peeping does not cut it. Print the image big (20x30 minimum) to see how good it really is.

0 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Sep 15, 2011)

Very nice but I'd like to see this with a better lens. 24mp aps-c will favor lenses that can deliver sharp images at wider apertures. Small aperture softening (diffraction) will be quite apparent. I noticed softening with my old 6mp SLR when shooting smaller than f/8, so this camera will really show it.

0 upvotes
Stephen_C
By Stephen_C (Sep 15, 2011)

The photos are amazing given the size of the camera. I was wondering when Sony would start to pass up Canon in sensor quality. That day appears to have arrived. Canon had a big head start, but Sony is a much bigger company.

0 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Sep 15, 2011)

Sony moved ahead of Canon with their 16mp aps-c sensor that is amazing with noise performance. The difference is more than marginal.

2 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (Sep 15, 2011)

not to mention that even the 3-year old Sony's 12 MP CMOS sensor in D90/Kx was better than anything Canon ever did on APSC, even in 2011.

1 upvote
nofumble
By nofumble (Sep 15, 2011)

Not bad even at ISO 3200. I think it is better than my T2i. Extra pixel = shoot now then crop later.

0 upvotes
Superka
By Superka (Sep 15, 2011)

Samples are good. But I don't see all 24Mpx there. All the leaves are blurry mass, for example. I really think that 16 Mpx on APS-C is enough and everything more - just adds blurry pixels. 24Mpx are good for FullFrame.

1 upvote
ET2
By ET2 (Sep 15, 2011)

You don't see 24 MP, but I do, especially in that self-portrait photo.

1 upvote
putomax
By putomax (Sep 15, 2011)

not agreeing (can say that way?)
i do think is too much Mpx - i 'ld rather enjoy (even more) improvements dealing with low light
conditions and finer detail - sample 4 is crazy though. BUT who prints photos bigger than A3
nowadays? and if you interested in big prints or mind-blowing resolution this "creature" is probably
not for U. anyways, when U downscale the photos, specially at high isos, they look very fine,
better than canon 7d i.e. (jpeg 6400)

on the other hand i couldn't be more in tune with hammerheadfistpunch's comment
<Typical Sony look; rich and saturated but lacking authenticity.>
the light must have been very well spilled over the sensor... nevertheless i perceive it as something
... like if seeing through a contrasty plastic foil/wrap. i have sony and nikon.

bet video would be SUPERB
and raws mandatory (for raising back to life those very nice pics U all make :D)
finally - in nex series a body with - nice design; my taste 'course.
however NOT a camera i'ld buy

gashô

0 upvotes
benny_wong
By benny_wong (Sep 15, 2011)

dont say 16mp is enough on APS-C and 24mp is enough for FF, i m sure 5 yrs later APS-C will beyond 30mp and FF will beyond something like 40~50mp. people said 12mp was enough 5 yrs ago.

1 upvote
Superka
By Superka (Sep 15, 2011)

It cannot be true 30Mpx because of physics. I mean, technicaly Sony can produce it, but it won't give any details more. Becides, 12 Mpx is enough - even now people said this! Nikon d3, Fuji x100 for example. If you need a details - use LARGE FORMAT technics.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/superka_01/4191964674/sizes/o/in/photostream/

1 upvote
Superka
By Superka (Sep 15, 2011)

Portraits always looks with extra fine details, no matter how Mpx

0 upvotes
Michael Barkowski
By Michael Barkowski (Sep 15, 2011)

As long as the lenses are sharp enough for f/8 and wider, the 24 MP should be an advantage in decent lighting conditions. The lenses are a big if, though.

1 upvote
ray07
By ray07 (Sep 14, 2011)

Now no need bring the big monsters for travel.I satisfied the photo.

3 upvotes
R Valentino
By R Valentino (Sep 14, 2011)

Things look really good at ISO 100. By ISO 400 it looks like the typical point and shoot what with all the NR and detail smoothing. Might make a nice bright light or studio camera or a really expensive and much larger replacement for an ultra compact megazoom.

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Sep 14, 2011)

I remember people saying that about the A900 and A850. Only to realize later that with a converter like LR or ACR, they still beat the best crop cameras, even at high ISO.

4 upvotes
duartix
By duartix (Sep 14, 2011)

The best crop camera might be the NEX-5N and I can't see how the NEX-7 can beat it in IQ... most unfortunately! :(

0 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (Sep 15, 2011)

Nex-7 will for sure beat Nex-5n for detail/resolution at lower ISOs. At high ISO it's still up for debate till studio shots with production camera are posted.

1 upvote
liquidsquid
By liquidsquid (Sep 15, 2011)

Still, at the resolution of images it is taking, it has much more detail than say a 10mp or even a 12mp sensor would have. 1:1 sure, it is noisier, but I tend to not view my images that close.

0 upvotes
hammerheadfistpunch
By hammerheadfistpunch (Sep 14, 2011)

Typical Sony look; rich and saturated but lacking authenticity.

1 upvote
futile32
By futile32 (Sep 14, 2011)

interesting comment, not heard anyone convey this 'typical' point before?

As far as I've read, most commend Sony on their color accuracy. I guess I'll leave it to the reviewers to debt, but surprised by your comment none the less.

2 upvotes
Ran Plett
By Ran Plett (Sep 14, 2011)

Haha I love sample 9 :)

0 upvotes
massimo7272
By massimo7272 (Sep 14, 2011)

Too much noise reduction in camera.

At 3200 iso (sample 13) the IQ is terrible.

0 upvotes
NorthwestF
By NorthwestF (Sep 14, 2011)

Sample 13 looks pretty good for ISO 3200

0 upvotes
Ryan21
By Ryan21 (Sep 14, 2011)

Yeah I was going to say it looks dang good... Especially compared to my GF1... :)

0 upvotes
nilux
By nilux (Sep 15, 2011)

I wanted to like the NEX-7 but it looks poor. Even sample 20 which is only at ISO 1250 looks bad.

0 upvotes
Low Budget Dave
By Low Budget Dave (Sep 15, 2011)

I have to disagree. Sample 16 is at 6400 and the color is excellent. At 3200, sample 13 is has very good color, and only suffers from compression noise. Compare to the Panasonic G3, where the color is already flat at 1600. Sample 18 is at 16000, and is better than a Canon T3 at 6400

0 upvotes
Tom Davenport
By Tom Davenport (Sep 14, 2011)

Picked up a NEX C-3 on clearance to test out before investing in the NEX system. Very unimpressed after 2 weeks with the kit zoom. Pixel peep all you want at high ISO samples, until Sony offers up some lenses that are up to the task these newer bodies are just a waste of money IMO.

2 upvotes
Tom Davenport
By Tom Davenport (Sep 14, 2011)

Sorry, meant to say I picked up a NEX-3 on clearance (not the newer C3).

0 upvotes
NorthwestF
By NorthwestF (Sep 14, 2011)

Maybe you got a bad kit? DPR and photozone review shows the kit to be no worse than Canon/Nikon kit lenses.

As for more lenses

30mm macro,
50mm F1.8 stabilized,
24mm CZ
55-200 kit

all are scheduled to be released within the next 3 months.

1 upvote
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Sep 14, 2011)

I see only one good lens in their line-up and that is the Zeiss 24/1.8.

But it's so appealing that i might even consider a NEX-7 just for the awesome combo with that lens, and hope for the best. I bet the Zeiss will sell well so most likely there'll be more sooner or later.

0 upvotes
ARTASHES
By ARTASHES (Sep 14, 2011)

sample 5 9 and 14 guy and dog figur in imaging-resource samples to :o

0 upvotes
SDF
By SDF (Sep 14, 2011)

Wow! The samples are very good.

0 upvotes
Camp Freddy
By Camp Freddy (Sep 14, 2011)

Sony make the best APSC sensors in the world, but not the best lenses or it seems the best Jpeg engines. I am far from "wowed" by the results in the gallery for the price- not a lot of these images are at f4 but still lack sharpness. DR is difficult to judge but colour rendition and gradation / tonal depth seems nothing to write home about so far.

1 upvote
whtchocla7e
By whtchocla7e (Sep 14, 2011)

Looks better than my A700 at high ISO.
That's all I care about.

0 upvotes
BMWX5
By BMWX5 (Sep 14, 2011)

Sample4 - all of them, DP staff?, testing the new Nex 7 :). Very rich in color even the high ISOs.

0 upvotes
Managarm
By Managarm (Sep 14, 2011)

Well, ISO 6400 indeed doesn't look good in darkness - but what ISO 6400 ever did?
There is even some noise at ISO 100 visible on dark parts on sample 4 when zoomed in. I know the sensor can do a lot better. Guess the JPG engine/denoising algorithm is not the greatest.

Give us RAWs who needs JPGs anyway?

0 upvotes
Michael Barkowski
By Michael Barkowski (Sep 14, 2011)

"ISO 6400 indeed doesn't look good in darkness - but what ISO 6400 ever did?"

D700 ... for only $1000 more of course :)

1 upvote
plainwhite
By plainwhite (Sep 14, 2011)

Check out ISO 6400 on the X100!

0 upvotes
NorthwestF
By NorthwestF (Sep 14, 2011)

Nex-5n has better ISO 6400 than X1000 .. see it for yourself

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

0 upvotes
mediman30
By mediman30 (Sep 14, 2011)

Sony is making it difficult for me - NEX 7 or A77?!!!

3 upvotes
SDF
By SDF (Sep 14, 2011)

I'm on the same boat and leaning toward to NEX-7 now.

0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Sep 14, 2011)

Why not a NEX-5N? Is it worth the extra "scratch" for an EVF you might soon decide ain't so special?

0 upvotes
Combatmedic870
By Combatmedic870 (Sep 14, 2011)

I hate to break it too you, but 16 doesnt look all that good at all....

0 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Sep 14, 2011)

Who shoots flowers in the dark anyway ?

0 upvotes
Ashley Pomeroy
By Ashley Pomeroy (Sep 15, 2011)

You know, "who shoots flowers in the dark" would be a good name for a mid-60s romantic film starring Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton. Or Peter O'Toole and Audrey Hepburn.

0 upvotes
Eugenio Guarente
By Eugenio Guarente (Sep 14, 2011)

Very good quality!. Give a look to the Sample16 photo. that's ISO 6400. please, it's nighttime here!

1 upvote
M Lammerse
By M Lammerse (Sep 14, 2011)

Wow a balloon press tour! I wasn be able to do that during the presentations :)

0 upvotes
carlosdelbianco
By carlosdelbianco (Sep 14, 2011)

OK, I'm ready to buy it.

1 upvote
SDF
By SDF (Sep 14, 2011)

Me too but 2 more long months to go.

1 upvote
JoesPhotoDrivel
By JoesPhotoDrivel (Sep 14, 2011)

Pretty fine with lenses used. Sample 9 is interesting...I am happy that the next sample wasn't the surfer swallowing the dog's tongue as it looks like he was about to do!

1 upvote
Total comments: 105