Why is my NEX not as good as RX100 or even LX5?

Started Jun 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
KennyXL Contributing Member • Posts: 787
Re: Why is my NEX not as good as RX100 or even LX5?

gstefane wrote:

even from this "crop" which we don't see much, I find the 3n better than the LX5...

I assume you're referring to his example specifically and not your personal experience since you mention his "crop".  I looked at the 3N to LX5 comparison and the LX5, in his example, is indeed better.  There are more defined edges and resolution.  Furthermore, the shadow detail is better preserved on the LX5.  Now, this is just comparing the image I see above.  I have the NEX 6 which is comparable in image quality to the 3N and it definitely looks better than any Panasonic P&S I've ever owned (which is a handful with the most recent purchase being about 1.5 years ago so we're not talking ancient history).  If I had to guess, he may have an especially bad or damaged copy of the kit lens.  Or maybe he was zoomed closer in on the LX5 and he scaled them to be the field of view which meant the 3N had fewer effective pixels for the same point of view.  I don't know the conditions he set up his test, but that image above definitely has the LX5 acquitting itself better than the 3N.

 KennyXL's gear list:KennyXL's gear list
Sony RX100 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow