Would it be insane to own both nex and alpha?

I Like your logic, Probably the a900 would be good to have as well for the portrait shot on the christmas card.
Dave

Maybe not insane, but maybe a little pointless and expensve. I'd just get a compact point and shoot for the days when I don't want to lug a DSLR around for serious photography.

dbose said:

I am seriously tempted to skip upgrading to the a77 and jump into NEX7. But my delemma is would the NEX7 with 18-50 and the new zoom (50-210?) render my a500 and 18-250, 50mm 1.4, and 17-50 2.8 tammy as expensive paper weights. I know about the adapter for a mount lenses and to me that set up seems a bit silly and pricy, I could see it if I were shooting with Ziess glass, but I'm not.

Is anyone here shooting with both systems? how is it working for you? would you do it the same again? Would it make more sense to own the 3 or 5 rather then the 7 if I keep the DSLR? Please let me know your thoughts

I keep going back and forth with this one. On one hand the a77 sounds like everything I've been waiting for since my now dead KM7D. But the portabillity and the fact that 90% of my snaps are candids, I find the NEX very attractive.

Click to expand...

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidhartstone

dbose said:

Thanks for your help. I know that along with your wildlife photography you also go to Disney alot. Do you tend to take your a550 or your nex there more? This is alot of the kind of photography I do (places we visit as a family) My main concern is of the CDAF keeping up with all the movement.

Click to expand...

I'll pretty much always bring both when I travel, be it Disney or more international - I find uses for both. But when I'm out with family or friends where photography isn't the sole purpose, or when I'm on a tour or going to dinners and such, that's the primary purpose for the NEX in my plans...it takes up less space on the dinner table, can squeeze more easily into busses and taxis, can be more easily hidden or protected in seedy areas, and doesn't turn me into the group pariah with the family, trailing behind them with a huge camera and bag of lenses begging them to stop for a lens change to get one more photo. If I'm out specifically for photography, or traveling solo, the DSLR will almost always come...but now the NEX can come too for a second body with a different focal length.

So far, the NEX has only been around for 2 Disney trips - in June, I brought it for the first time, and decided to take it with me exclusively on 2 out of 5 days, to really test out how I'd do with it alone. At the time, I had only the kit lens and brought 4 manual lenses along out of the 8 I had. And I found it handled fine and I really wasn't lacking for anything. But to be fair, I specifically planned which parks I'd bring it to, because I knew I'd likely want the DSLR at Animal Kingdom (for the long lens animal shots) and Epcot (for some wide angle shooting). In July, I was passing through Disney for a business trip, so since I was packing lightly and only hadone day (mostly night), I only brought the NEX and kit lens...I took hundreds of shots, all night, mostly handheld high ISO in twilight mode, plus a little tripod work for some light displays...had a great time, got great shots, and didn't feel like I was lacking for anything not having the DSLR.

As far as the CDAF keeping up, I wouldn't foresee any issues - it's plenty fast for regular snaps and any daytime lighting...the only place it's going to be noticeably slower is in lower light - but as usual, there are workarounds to help speed up the response time, like using spot focus and finding light sources to lock focus on then recomposing...or using DMF and manually fine-tuning the focus if off a bit. And of course, using older manual lenses, the focus is all yours - in daylight, I find peaking to be a wonderfulfocus tool and use it even for fast acquisition focus...if I have the time to sit and look for accuracy, I'll use the focus zoom function.

Hope that helps. I keep a specific NEX3 gallery of all shots I've posted with it...including the Disney stuff, some manual lens examples, scenics, etc...feel free to browse for ideas of how it works in different situations:
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg/sony_nex3

I'll be traveling next month to Quebec City, then through upper Quebec and Nova Scotia and New England for 2 weeks - so I should have some nice opportunities to give the NEX a workout - there will definitely be some times and places where I'll have both cameras, and some where I'll have only the NEX to travel a bit lighter. I'm looking forward to some fall scenery and old architecture for a change!

--
Justin
galleries: http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg

davidhbkk said:

Maybe not insane, but maybe a little pointless and expensve. I'd just get a compact point and shoot for the days when I don't want to lug a DSLR around for serious photography.

Click to expand...

The difference, and the nuance that makes it something to consider, is what about the days you don't want to lug a DSLR around (or shouldn't) but still want serious photography?

That was just the loophole that I wanted to fill between my DSLR and my compact P&S - there were times the DSLR was too bulky, not socially graceful, risky, or frowned upon by accompaniment, and yet times when the P&S was well beyond its capabilities. Being able to have something small enough to sit on a dinner table next to the bread bin without bothering anyone, or sit in a dinner jacket pocket, yet be capable of handheld ISO6400 shots of the gorgeous interior of the building in very low light...that's what something like the NEX is for.

Admittedly a small niche, and maybe one some don't need, but if you do, or think that might be nice to have, there are cameras to fill that niche!

--
Justin
galleries: http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg

I own an A700 and a NEX 5 and enjoy both in their own way. If I travel I take the NEX 5. If i visit my grandchildren and am going to do images of them or their sports I take the A700. If I take a walk in the woods or around a water area I take the A700 with a telephoto lens.

The only dedicated NEX lens I own is the 18-55. I use an EA 1 and the 35mm 1.8 SAM, the 50 SAM, and various manual Minolta MD lenses with the 24mm 2.8 being my favorite. With peaking you can manually focus those two SAM lenses very fast and very accurately. For some reason the peaking function seems more pronounced in these lenses than in the old Minolta's. The peaking colors stand out more.

I may buy the 70-210 for the NEX since it is a stabilized lens, but I'll have to see more images from it before I do.

I also plan to upgrade my A700 to the A77, but one thing I must mention from the OP's post...

Both the DSLR's as well as the NEX cameras are considered "Alpha's". The little "A" comes up every time you turn off a NEX.

different sized systems. I am also considering the NEX7, instead of an A65 (just sold an A700, and have an A33), or in addition to the A65.

Now, I have a m4/3 system (GF1 and GH2) that I use when I need more portability, and used it more often than my A700. If I don't get the NEX7 it would only be because I already have something in the same size category.

Being able to use your Sony lenses with the NEX7 (with the adapter) is another plus; I had to buy new lenses for my m4/3 system, although those lenses are much smaller than the Sony normal lenses.

I am not the only person like this; many, many forum members have more than one system. I also have a P&S (LX5) and a DP2. They all work together nicely.

no text

Great Info! thanks
dave

The fact Sony makes both the Nex 7 and A77 doesn't alter the fact they use two completely different lens systems and have two different stabilisation systems so to my eyes they are two completely different camera systems.

I can't imagine using my 70-300 G on a Nex via the adapter. Ditto any other lenses I own as it has got to be a compromise on handling, power consumption and of course there would not be any image stabilisation with those lenses.

Now given an A77 is a large camera I can see the attraction of a smaller high quality camera to carry around when you do not need that but because Sony came out with a completely different system in Nex why would I not consider any of the other completely different systems? There is no real advantage of going Nex if you are going to buy new lenses. You may as well buy new lenses from Oly or the rest to go with one of their cameras.

By this I mean if Sony had made the Nex compatible with A series lenses without an adapter and had given Nex in-body image stabilisation it would be very hard to justify going for any of the alternatives. The fact they didn't do this means in my opinion they opened themselves up to competition.

Anyone wanting a camera in this segment would be daft not to consider the alternatives. Especially as in the O/P's case they indicate they would get a new two lens set to use with the Nex rather than use the adapter and existing lenses. I would not advise anyone to limit ones search to Sony Nex just because they own a Sony d-slr because really that is irrelevant.

It may well be after comparing all the systems the Nex is preferred but at least that would be for objective reasons.

For myself I will be a d-slr user who would want a smaller camera to carry when not doing photography as a hobby, say out with the family on a day trip. So convenience would then play a big part and that kit standard zoom on a Nex is already huge when compared to the Oly EP equivalent. I'd be as likely to leave the Nex at home as the d-slr. A two lens kit emphasises the size difference even more and you could pocket a two lens Oly kit but with Nex you are back to toting gear again because the lenses are necessarily bigger. I just reckon Oly nailed the concept of mirror-less cameras whereas Sony is more of a an alternative to a d-slr as a system camera.

I am sure someone will say the Nex has a far better sensor and I am sure it does but don't forget for me I would have a camera like this as a d-slr alternative, would be shooting in good light so 12mp and good Oly jpegs are more than enough.

No doubt this will be considered sacrilege on a Sony forum but I am trying to illustrate the thought process you go through when considering things from first principles and not buying a Nex because you already own a Sony d-slr.

It actually takes pictures better than your A700. I think the deciding factor would be having a viewfinder. The 5N offers better iso due to the larger pixels, but that might not matter much to you for travel photography when you are probably outdoors most of the time, but you have to be comfortable using an LCD only with no viewfinder, otherwise you'll end up buying the external viewfinder for an extra 400, where you would've been better off getting the 7 in the first place. Also, not sure you want both your systems to have 24MP and all your files to be very large, travel sometimes allows you to take more fun non-professional pix and you might not want to fill up your hard drive with those large files. I have an a900, a55 and NEX 5, would love to switch my 5 to a 5n, don't think I'll get the 7 except maybe after 2 years when I feel like I'm done with the 5. I'm waiting to see what comes out in 2012, imagine a FF NEX!

dbose said:

I am seriously tempted to skip upgrading to the a77 and jump into NEX7. But my delemma is would the NEX7 with 18-50 and the new zoom (50-210?) render my a500 and 18-250, 50mm 1.4, and 17-50 2.8 tammy as expensive paper weights. I know about the adapter for a mount lenses and to me that set up seems a bit silly and pricy, I could see it if I were shooting with Ziess glass, but I'm not.

Is anyone here shooting with both systems? how is it working for you? would you do it the same again? Would it make more sense to own the 3 or 5 rather then the 7 if I keep the DSLR? Please let me know your thoughts

I keep going back and forth with this one. On one hand the a77 sounds like everything I've been waiting for since my now dead KM7D. But the portabillity and the fact that 90% of my snaps are candids, I find the NEX very attractive.

Click to expand...

if ur contemplating on the nex..then go nex5N ( u can get an EVF and still get a better IQ for less the buck)

either way the nex's are not as durable as the A77 is out to be...nor as quick as she is with her probably snap on focus .

i am still pondering on the same issue as i own A580 ..and very tempted by the nex5N..but i first want to wait and see some actual full production version of the A77 at work b4 i decide ...and one of the nex7.

Food for thought, The APS-c size sensor does matter to me for greater control DOF but I haven't had any hands on comparisons to M4/3 size sensors, just P&S.
Thanks
Dave

Well, whatever. Sounds like you've made up your mind and now you want the forum to provide you with some justification to assuage your nagging sense of unease about purchasing yet another toy that you don't really need. It's your money. You have my blessing.

zackiedawg said:

The difference, and the nuance that makes it something to consider, is what about the days you don't want to lug a DSLR around (or shouldn't) but still want serious photography?

That was just the loophole that I wanted to fill between my DSLR and my compact P&S - there were times the DSLR was too bulky, not socially graceful, risky, or frowned upon by accompaniment, and yet times when the P&S was well beyond its capabilities. Being able to have something small enough to sit on a dinner table next to the bread bin without bothering anyone, or sit in a dinner jacket pocket, yet be capable of handheld ISO6400 shots of the gorgeous interior of the building in very low light...that's what something like the NEX is for.

Admittedly a small niche, and maybe one some don't need, but if you do, or think that might be nice to have, there are cameras to fill that niche!

--
Justin
galleries: http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg

Click to expand...

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidhartstone

davidhbkk said:

Well, whatever. Sounds like you've made up your mind and now you want the forum to provide you with some justification to assuage your nagging sense of unease about purchasing yet another toy that you don't really need. It's your money. You have my blessing.

Click to expand...

Nah...just thought you might appreciate an explanation of some of the reasons people might buy them. I guess not, which is fine too. I need no justification - I could care less. I don't NEED any cameras at all - I buy them because I like them and enjoy them. ALL my cameras are toys I don't need. It's my money, but not really - I buy my cameras on income from my cameras, so they're a self-paying hobby. And if everyone on earth hated a camera, and I liked it, I'd be the lone sale of that product on earth. But I'm getting into explanations of things that might border on discourse, and you don't appear to like that, so I'll curtail it now.

--
Justin
galleries: http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg