NX system, NEX system, RX system and X system in relation to megapixels and ISO performance.

I just want to share my thoughts on the existing debacle on each system. though I may sound biased towards certain system, I believe I have some interesting personal points to consider, aside from the MP and ISO topic. these are based on my initial hands-on with each camera except for 2 upcoming ones which I'm going to mention as well.

I think most of you are pretty acquainted with the relationship between pixel pitch and noise performance as the general understanding is that the higher the MP, the higher the noise level.

this is partially true although there are some factors that could influence the amount of noise or detail rendered dependent on the processing software and hardware used on the camera. the question now is whether the MP race has reached it's peak or not. so far, it seems that it did at 20+MP.

so here are my observations:

NEX-7 - I had high hopes for this camera but eventually fell short of my expectations. the reasons of which is that although it is quite understandable that this is a 24MP camera which somehow push the limits of the APS-C sized sensor, the demands for a performance lens which could have utilized the 24MP capability has not been so promising with the lack of dedicated NEX lens. unless one is willing to use an FF or MF lens on it, but it does defeat the purpose of a new system, right?

NEX-5n - this one definitely took advantage of it's 16MP sensor which is as of the moment the sweet spot for NEX lens performance and ISO performance. although I'm in the disagreement that this camera is first class in ISO performance for APS-C as some have claimed considering the Fuji makes it laughable by harnessing their own camera sensor's full potential and not convincingly better than what is offered by others. also, the dilemma of delivering performance class native OEM lenses still hounds the system.

RX1 - the touted small heavyweight. now this what should had been the NEX-7. I'm impressed with it's IQ although I think it still uses the same sensor that was on the previous NEX models and being FF might have something to do with the improved ISO performance and bits of hardware and software tweaks. although the user interface is not the best and is horrendously annoying for me, the customization did help set things up on my most used or preferred control setup. for what it's worth, it does require a bit of time for that learning curve. I love the fact that it is a native 35mm lens on a native FF coverage. the AF and shutter is very silent, although the AF is not good in lowlight and not fast enough for action even with an impending firmware update (CDAF limitations for mirrorless). I also love the fact that the camera is small and light (though it can't be pocketed due to the the size of the 35mm lens).the focus peaking is quirky and not as good as the NEX models. now, if you think that you need the awesome IQ and lens performance combo at 24MP and the perfect fullframe coverage of the 35mm lens on a small package. this would be the ideal camera. however, is it worth it's $2,800? personally, Sony asked too much for it which is quite sad. considering it lacks a lot of other things such as notable features and performance flaws to warrant it's purchase. it's a great camera for what it can do, but highly overvalued of the things it is stripped off and doesn't have. Sony fanboys may call it a niche market, I call it BS especially what is offered by others nowadays and practically lacks the homerun aspect worth $2,800. take note, it's not alone in the compact market and surely FullFrame wont be for too long.

X100s - this upcoming camera's features that is lacking on the RX1 should pretty much explain how Sony overpriced it's RX camera a lot. the sensor used may not be different but the sensor quality by virtue of it's X-trans filter implementation pretty much makes the camera produce the best IQ out of the sensor. they practically utilized the sweet spot for APS-C which could be at 16MP and how they ultimately produced cleaner images without losing the much needed remaining details. but what makes the X100s stand out is it's hybrid viewfinder and the utilization of a PDAF (atlast) which would give a much faster and accurate AF, aside from the new upgrades that came along with the camera. with 1/4 of the overall cost of the RX1, you get a complete system with the same or better image quality and better performance and usability overall. the X-trans sensor made a world of difference for color depth and dynamic range, added the great implementation of handling noise.

NX200 - being of 20MP resolution seems to push the boundaries of lens image quality limitations especially for a small camera needing small performance class lens. I'm just glad that the existing NX lenses were still able to perform convincingly at such pixel level. the noise performance does lag behind but remember that the comparisons are mostly against lower resolution cameras, and also not as worse as the one on the NEX-7. the sensor is not really a concern here but more on the performance side of the camera. the most common problem that has plagued the mirrorless system is AF speed and accuracy. this camera has been plagued by lockdown time during processing possibly due to weaker processor and firmware implementation. although significantly improved, it would still need to perform better.

NX300 - upcoming NX camera. if this camera does possess a new and improved sensor implementation, I'm glad that they stopped at 20MP, especially if it is at the borderline of what could possibly be the limit for APS-C ISO performance and lens capacity. curiously enough that it seems to have a similar PDAF implementation on it's sensor as the X100s, although this is still suspect due to some initial reports. we'll see in a few months. if the sensor is about a stop less than the X100s, I'll be more than happy to pay for one at about half the cost of the X100s. it's still 20MP, so that one is something to consider at such a price level. who knows, this might be one of those cameras you can shoot at lowlight and do action shots. they could be using a different O/S program or firmware for their processor to improve performance or upgraded the hardware as well. hopefully, this camera no longer locks down during processing.

*off-topic

D5200 - I know this is a dslr camera, but an interesting note is that it utilizes a 24MP sensor which was reportedly slightly better than the ones on the D7000 and K-5. if that is true, then it seems that engineers have further pushed the limits of the APS-C sensor. however, this is very much debatable considering there are other observations or mixed reviews that the camera do indeed suffer from banding and chroma noise at low ISOs. we will see in a few months how this one progresses. another note, they say that the sensor is manufactured by Toshiba, which is a surprise. a first from what I read.

in summary,

I love the RX1. I love the size and the image quality. but find trouble loving it for $2,800 especially of the significant things that it lacks and I'm looking for a camera upgrade that would make it work it's size. don't like a DP1 type performance camera. I'll might get it for $1,800, close to the D600.

I love the X100s on paper. again the difference that I'm looking for is performance aspect which is somehow influence by the AF system and buffer as well. hopefully with a better processor. the upgrade to 16MP makes it perfect especially if the lens quality is up to it. X-Trans as I previously mentioned, makes a world of difference. at $1,300, is not even an issue.

I might consider the NX300 - depending on how good the performance would be. again, the sensor is not a major concern for me. at $750, that is cheap.