Life in the old dog yet?

salla30 · Feb 9, 2014

Hi

I am pondering whether to go for the A7 with kit lens or get the SEL 35F18 lens to breathe new life into my ageing Nex 5n, which just has not had a look in, since purchasing my RX100ii (fabulous camera). I do find, however, I don't take a lot of inside pics of family due to low light (old chalet, small windows, low ambient lighting) and noise apparent with the RX100ii, and the slower kit lens of the NEX 5n equally equates to a lot of noise when pushed to iso 3200.

It's a significant investment for me to consider the A7 (around 1700 chf) as opposed to the SEL lens (around 400 chf).

Question is, will I get similar performance from the A7 in low light using the kit lens or am i better off with the faster SEL lens on my NEX 5N? Will I be left wanting as regards reach?

I have an addition variable to consider; ie family issues (warranting spending so much on a new camera when there are obvious bills to pay, etc).

But the A7 is so tempting. So am seeking some pointers to help me decide if I will be happy with the Nex with fast prime or if the A7 is just a "must have" device!

Thanks in advance for all replies.

--

David,
Switzerland

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1145973943

Astrophotographer 10 · Feb 9, 2014

I have the A7r. I sold my Nikon D800e after I got it. I love it. My other camera is a Fuji XE1 and I have a Nex 6 as well. Neither can match the A7r. A7 would also be very very good and no fast lens is going to compensate for the full frame sensor. Its just fabulous.

Greg.

salla30 · Feb 9, 2014

Doh! Lol

confirming what I'd feared.

I can only think of one solution, give the wife an equal amount of money as a sweetener. I can see this is going to get expensive

GaryW · Feb 9, 2014

salla30 said:
Hi

I am pondering whether to go for the A7 with kit lens or get the SEL 35F18 lens to breathe new life into my ageing Nex 5n, which just has not had a look in, since purchasing my RX100ii (fabulous camera). I do find, however, I don't take a lot of inside pics of family due to low light (old chalet, small windows, low ambient lighting) and noise apparent with the RX100ii, and the slower kit lens of the NEX 5n equally equates to a lot of noise when pushed to iso 3200.

How are you viewing the photos? A few months ago I put together a photobook with 5 inch by 7 inch size pages, and you can't tell which photos used ISO 3200. Now, I often do process from RAW when I want a better result, and use a bit of noise reduction, but I don't overdo it (as it will reduce detail).

So, for one option, I'd say try using RAW+JPEG and when you need better results, process the RAW carefully, and you'll get more out of it. A good RAW processor is like a camera and lens upgrade!

Another thought is to get a big flash. Yeah, sometimes harsh flash seems ugly, with sharp shadows and dark backgrounds, but a good bounced flash fills in nicely. Alternatively, you can turn on more lights when taking photos.

But even with the built-in flash, I sometimes could improve results by adding a "softbox". (I had to rig it to stay on, as it was made for a DSLR flash.) So, you might experiment with inexpensive alternatives like that. I think there's a flash that fits the 5n that's only $150, so that would fit in your budget a lot easier -- easy to justify! ;-)

salla30 said:
It's a significant investment for me to consider the A7 (around 1700 chf) as opposed to the SEL lens (around 400 chf).

Question is, will I get similar performance from the A7 in low light using the kit lens or am i better off with the faster SEL lens on my NEX 5N? Will I be left wanting as regards reach?

I think the problem is the money constraint. Yeah the A7 is better overall, but if only using the kit lens on the A7 and compared to using a faster lens on the 5N, the difference is not going to be noticeable for what you're looking for. If you got the A7 it would be marginally better than what you have, and you still might feel a need to buy another lens or a flash or both.

A faster lens for the 5n is a good option, but a 35mm lens isn't a great angle for indoors, IMHO. It can be for photographing one person, but you can't capture a room. So, regarding reach, I guess it'll just depend. You could look at your existing photos and get an idea of what focal length you typically end up at. If 35mm works for you, all reports are that the Sony 35 is great.

I have used the Sigma 30mm/f2.8 indoors and it's better than the kit lens, but at f2.8 it's not as good with low light as the Sony 35. I used the Sigma in a party situation once, and even at f2.8, it was still too slow. (My friend with a FF DSLR and f2.8 zoom used a huge flash as well. So, even with an FF camera, it might be worth using a flash....) Anyway, I think the Sony would be a great option if you can get past the angle, but if the light is low enough it can still be an issue. But I think you'd still be ahead of an A7 with the kit lens.

salla30 said:
I have an addition variable to consider; ie family issues (warranting spending so much on a new camera when there are obvious bills to pay, etc).

But the A7 is so tempting. So am seeking some pointers to help me decide if I will be happy with the Nex with fast prime or if the A7 is just a "must have" device!

There's no doubt that the A7 is exciting, but once you get past that, you need to be practical. The APS-C Nex cameras are really good, so it's not like you can't get good results with them!

So, personally, my solution is to use RAW+JPEG and usually, this is good enough for smaller prints. If I need better quality, I would add a big flash as a first option for certain low-light situations, but when I'm out-and-about and don't want to use a big flash, I sometimes use my 16mm lens which isn't the best at f2.8. The Sony 20mm lens would also be an interesting option for wider angles. If I need more reach, I have a 50/1.7 that needs manual focus; the SEL 50 might be another option, but here again, I see this as needed only for certain events, not as a general-use lens. The 35 is at least flexible enough to be used in many situations, it's just that I found that personally I tend to not use the 35mm angle so much.

salla30 said:
Thanks in advance for all replies.

--

David,
Switzerland
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1145973943

salla30 · Feb 9, 2014

GaryW said:
salla30 said:

Hi

I am pondering whether to go for the A7 with kit lens or get the SEL 35F18 lens to breathe new life into my ageing Nex 5n, which just has not had a look in, since purchasing my RX100ii (fabulous camera). I do find, however, I don't take a lot of inside pics of family due to low light (old chalet, small windows, low ambient lighting) and noise apparent with the RX100ii, and the slower kit lens of the NEX 5n equally equates to a lot of noise when pushed to iso 3200.

Click to expand...

How are you viewing the photos? A few months ago I put together a photobook with 5 inch by 7 inch size pages, and you can't tell which photos used ISO 3200. Now, I often do process from RAW when I want a better result, and use a bit of noise reduction, but I don't overdo it (as it will reduce detail).

So, for one option, I'd say try using RAW+JPEG and when you need better results, process the RAW carefully, and you'll get more out of it. A good RAW processor is like a camera and lens upgrade!

Another thought is to get a big flash. Yeah, sometimes harsh flash seems ugly, with sharp shadows and dark backgrounds, but a good bounced flash fills in nicely. Alternatively, you can turn on more lights when taking photos. But even with the built-in flash, I sometimes could improve results by adding a "softbox". (I had to rig it to stay on, as it was made for a DSLR flash.) So, you might experiment with inexpensive alternatives like that. I think there's a flash that fits the 5n that's only $150, so that would fit in your budget a lot easier -- easy to justify! ;-)

Firstly, thank you for your studied replies!

I am viewing on 24inch HD monitor mostly and also on my HD laptop screen. I do notice the grain from my higher iso shots using the RX100ii for sure.

I am processing in LR all my images, I agree, it's like getting a new camera in itself

I would prefer not to use flash, but it's a prejudice i should maybe try to overcome !

GaryW said:
GaryW said:

It's a significant investment for me to consider the A7 (around 1700 chf) as opposed to the SEL lens (around 400 chf).

Question is, will I get similar performance from the A7 in low light using the kit lens or am i better off with the faster SEL lens on my NEX 5N? Will I be left wanting as regards reach?

Click to expand...

I think the problem is the money constraint. Yeah the A7 is better overall, but if only using the kit lens on the A7 and compared to using a faster lens on the 5N, the difference is not going to be noticeable for what you're looking for. If you got the A7 it would be marginally better than what you have, and you still might feel a need to buy another lens or a flash or both.

A faster lens for the 5n is a good option, but a 35mm lens isn't a great angle for indoors, IMHO. It can be for photographing one person, but you can't capture a room. So, regarding reach, I guess it'll just depend. You could look at your existing photos and get an idea of what focal length you typically end up at. If 35mm works for you, all reports are that the Sony 35 is great.

I have used the Sigma 30mm/f2.8 indoors and it's better than the kit lens, but at f2.8 it's not as good with low light as the Sony 35. I used the Sigma in a party situation once, and even at f2.8, it was still too slow. (My friend with a FF DSLR and f2.8 zoom used a huge flash as well. So, even with an FF camera, it might be worth using a flash....) Anyway, I think the Sony would be a great option if you can get past the angle, but if the light is low enough it can still be an issue. But I think you'd still be ahead of an A7 with the kit lens.

Most of my shots will be of my 6 year old son as we're messing around, and hopefully some good outdoor stuff, which is why Im thinking of the 35mm as a compromise.

GaryW said:
GaryW said:

I have an addition variable to consider; ie family issues (warranting spending so much on a new camera when there are obvious bills to pay, etc).

But the A7 is so tempting. So am seeking some pointers to help me decide if I will be happy with the Nex with fast prime or if the A7 is just a "must have" device!

Click to expand...

There's no doubt that the A7 is exciting, but once you get past that, you need to be practical. The APS-C Nex cameras are really good, so it's not like you can't get good results with them!

yeah! Its my thought too. Im thinking im going to need to invest another couple of grand in lenses for the A7 to see significant differences. I love the nex sensor. Its a really capable beast.

GaryW said:
So, personally, my solution is to use RAW+JPEG and usually, this is good enough for smaller prints. If I need better quality, I would add a big flash as a first option for certain low-light situations, but when I'm out-and-about and don't want to use a big flash, I sometimes use my 16mm lens which isn't the best at f2.8. The Sony 20mm lens would also be an interesting option for wider angles. If I need more reach, I have a 50/1.7 that needs manual focus; the SEL 50 might be another option, but here again, I see this as needed only for certain events, not as a general-use lens. The 35 is at least flexible enough to be used in many situations, it's just that I found that personally I tend to not use the 35mm angle so much.

Hmm, my head is now pointing me to the more sensible route. Thanks a lot!

GaryW said:
GaryW said:

Thanks in advance for all replies.

--

David,
Switzerland
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1145973943

Click to expand...

abortabort · Feb 9, 2014

salla30 said:
Hi

I am pondering whether to go for the A7 with kit lens or get the SEL 35F18 lens to breathe new life into my ageing Nex 5n, which just has not had a look in, since purchasing my RX100ii (fabulous camera). I do find, however, I don't take a lot of inside pics of family due to low light (old chalet, small windows, low ambient lighting) and noise apparent with the RX100ii, and the slower kit lens of the NEX 5n equally equates to a lot of noise when pushed to iso 3200.

It's a significant investment for me to consider the A7 (around 1700 chf) as opposed to the SEL lens (around 400 chf).

Question is, will I get similar performance from the A7 in low light using the kit lens or am i better off with the faster SEL lens on my NEX 5N? Will I be left wanting as regards reach?

I have an addition variable to consider; ie family issues (warranting spending so much on a new camera when there are obvious bills to pay, etc).

But the A7 is so tempting. So am seeking some pointers to help me decide if I will be happy with the Nex with fast prime or if the A7 is just a "must have" device!

Thanks in advance for all replies.

--

David,
Switzerland

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1145973943

I presume from your post that you are using the kit lens on your 5n?

If so the A7 with it's kit lens will give you about a 1 stop advantage due to the better performing sensor.

Going to a 2+ stop faster lens will obviously give you a 2 stop advantage on what you have now or a 1 stop advtange over the A7 + kit lens.

So it is largely better value to go the faster lens, but that doesn't consider the more advanced body and FF sensors ability to further take advantage on all lenses that it can use (but natives are largely rather expensive). Getting an LA-EA4 opens up more lens options again, a 50mm f1.4 for example will give you a whopping nearly 4 stops advantage over what you are usong at the minute. So it isnt that there is no advantage to going FF, just that it isn't a silver bullet and isn't going to give a massive improvement when paired with just the kit lens.

Mel Snyder · Feb 9, 2014

salla30 said:
Doh! Lol

confirming what I'd feared.

I can only think of one solution, give the wife an equal amount of money as a sweetener. I can see this is going to get expensive

salla30 · Feb 9, 2014

Now, that would be a REALLY expensive solution

tobias2003 · Feb 9, 2014

Keep the 5N! It has a fantastic sensor and going full frame does not mean that the kit lens of the A7 can compete with the 5N and a 35mm F1.8 lens.

I have all these items and I would prefer the NEX 5N + 35mm F1.8 over the A7 with kit lens any time!

In terms of noise, the A7 is only a little better than the 5N. It's not an entirely different world as I had hoped.

Keep the 5N, get the 35mm F1.8 lens, and when you have the chance, get the 50mm F1.8 lens too.

Cheers,

Tobias

salla30 · Feb 9, 2014

Well! That's an indictment if ever there was one

- thanks!

Actually these post are really helping me. I am veering toward the len option. I think i'll order one this week.

I went out for a walk jut now, kept my Nex 5n set at 35mm mostly. I can see it being limiting for some scenarios, BUT I am also keen to learn to think on my feet. Could be fun

And I can always use the new lens with an a7 if/when i get one, albeit heavily cropped. It'll give me a taste of ff "fast" lens action on a budget.

salla30 · Feb 9, 2014

abortabort said:
I presume from your post that you are using the kit lens on your 5n?

yes indeed

abortabort said:
If so the A7 with it's kit lens will give you about a 1 stop advantage due to the better performing sensor.

abortabort said:
Going to a 2+ stop faster lens will obviously give you a 2 stop advantage on what you have now or a 1 stop advtange over the A7 + kit lens.

thanks for this info. I was wondering about the A7 benefits with kit lens.

abortabort said:
So it is largely better value to go the faster lens, but that doesn't consider the more advanced body and FF sensors ability to further take advantage on all lenses that it can use (but natives are largely rather expensive). Getting an LA-EA4 opens up more lens options again, a 50mm f1.4 for example will give you a whopping nearly 4 stops advantage over what you are usong at the minute. So it isnt that there is no advantage to going FF, just that it isn't a silver bullet and isn't going to give a massive improvement when paired with just the kit lens.

thanks. I am definitely veering towards the upgrade path for the NEX 5N with the prime.

It's a sensible upgrade path.

Michael Everett · Feb 9, 2014

Another possibility, if you are willing to use MF, is to get a good legacy 50mm f1.4 lens and a lens turbo or speed booster. That would give you the 50mm equivalent somewhere around f1 or 1.2 or your 5n. I use that with my NEX 7 and it works beautifully. With a little practice with focus peaking MF is a real pleasure on the Nex's.

cxsparc · Feb 9, 2014

If you can live with the 35mm focal length, you get about 2 sops of light gain compared to the kit zoom at 18mm f3.5.

The 35 mm has the advantage of still having one stop more DOF than the A7 with a similar FF 55 mm lens. The A7 with kit is not a better alternative. I had this combination and also own a 5N with kit and SEL50f18 and lots of FD lenses. My findings: One stop lower noise, but also one stop lower DOF which may be critical when you try to get more than one person in focus indoors. Also, the AWB is better than the one on the 5N.

My favorite is the FD24/2.8 which I can shoot handheld at 1/30 sec, even though it lacks OSS and AF. Much superior edges compared to the 1855.

Using any lens on the 5N in lowlight, I would recommend to go into A-mode and select the lowest aperture manually. In P-Mode, the 5N sticks at f4 and 1/60 sec until AutoISO hits the limit at 3200. I also recommend to use +0.3 exposure compensation, and lastly use custom whitebalance using a "TEMPO", clean of course

. That gets rid of the 5Ns ghastly AWB for Glühlampe.

All this greatly improves the lowlight behaviour of the 5N and maybe it will suffice you then, or latest if you get the 35/1.8.

I write two lengthy essays on my thoughts about the A7 compared to the NEX on my blog, but don't want to spam your thread here.

Ds Chunnt scho guet

nannyg · Feb 9, 2014

salla30 said:
Hi

I am pondering whether to go for the A7 with kit lens or get the SEL 35F18 lens to breathe new life into my ageing Nex 5n, which just has not had a look in, since purchasing my RX100ii (fabulous camera). I do find, however, I don't take a lot of inside pics of family due to low light (old chalet, small windows, low ambient lighting) and noise apparent with the RX100ii, and the slower kit lens of the NEX 5n equally equates to a lot of noise when pushed to iso 3200.

It's a significant investment for me to consider the A7 (around 1700 chf) as opposed to the SEL lens (around 400 chf).

Question is, will I get similar performance from the A7 in low light using the kit lens or am i better off with the faster SEL lens on my NEX 5N? Will I be left wanting as regards reach?

I have an addition variable to consider; ie family issues (warranting spending so much on a new camera when there are obvious bills to pay, etc).

But the A7 is so tempting. So am seeking some pointers to help me decide if I will be happy with the Nex with fast prime or if the A7 is just a "must have" device!

Thanks in advance for all replies.

--

David,
Switzerland
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1145973943

There is no question the FF A7 will take fantastic, nearly noiseless indoor photos. But the problem is, using the kit lens, you will always know that you are handicapping that camera's potential. That will drive you crazy, and the only way to solve that problem is to buy three or four $1000 FF lenses for it. So now you're looking at $5000 down the road.

I still have my 5n and I just bought a used copy of the pricey sel1018 for it because I; 1) know that the camera is perfectly capable of still taking excellent photos and 2) I expect an updated 24MP e-mount coming soon will look appealing, too, and I can eventually use that lens on it, too, if I decide to "retire" the 5n.

Food for thought.

osv · Feb 9, 2014

nannyg said:
There is no question the FF A7 will take fantastic, nearly noiseless indoor photos. But the problem is, using the kit lens, you will always know that you are handicapping that camera's potential. That will drive you crazy, and the only way to solve that problem is to buy three or four $1000 FF lenses for it. So now you're looking at $5000 down the road.

rubbish... there is tons of legacy glass out there that is more than a match for the a7.

sell the crop camera while it's still worth something, or maybe use it as backup.

blue_skies · Feb 9, 2014

salla30 said:
Hi

I am pondering whether to go for the A7 with kit lens or get the SEL 35F18 lens to breathe new life into my ageing Nex 5n, which just has not had a look in, since purchasing my RX100ii (fabulous camera). I do find, however, I don't take a lot of inside pics of family due to low light (old chalet, small windows, low ambient lighting) and noise apparent with the RX100ii, and the slower kit lens of the NEX 5n equally equates to a lot of noise when pushed to iso 3200.

This is exactly the reason why I went to the A7, but in your case it is unclear if a faster lens would not solve your dilemma.

salla30 said:
It's a significant investment for me to consider the A7 (around 1700 chf) as opposed to the SEL lens (around 400 chf).

Question is, will I get similar performance from the A7 in low light using the kit lens or am i better off with the faster SEL lens on my NEX 5N? Will I be left wanting as regards reach?

You are better off with the 35mm/1.8 OSS lens versus the A7 with kit OSS lens.

salla30 said:
I have an addition variable to consider; ie family issues (warranting spending so much on a new camera when there are obvious bills to pay, etc).

Then it makes more sense to restrain oneself and be budget conscious.

salla30 said:
But the A7 is so tempting. So am seeking some pointers to help me decide if I will be happy with the Nex with fast prime or if the A7 is just a "must have" device!

How about the A7 with a fast prime? Where will it end?

salla30 said:
Thanks in advance for all replies.

--

David,
Switzerland
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/1145973943

salla30 · Feb 9, 2014

Thank you.

All good advise, taken with great appreciation

The majority of posters here are saying similar things; ie, A7+kits will not give me significant improvement (if any) over SEL 35F18 fitted to NEX 5N.

My head is ruling this decision; SEL it is

salla30 · Feb 9, 2014

thanks for the advice.

i think ill start off with 35mm sony prime; it is my first ever lens purchase, so it'll be an easy intro to the world of lenses

maybe then I can look further into adapters and such.

salla30 · Feb 10, 2014

cxsparc said:
If you can live with the 35mm focal length, you get about 2 sops of light gain compared to the kit zoom at 18mm f3.5.

The 35 mm has the advantage of still having one stop more DOF than the A7 with a similar FF 55 mm lens. The A7 with kit is not a better alternative. I had this combination and also own a 5N with kit and SEL50f18 and lots of FD lenses. My findings: One stop lower noise, but also one stop lower DOF which may be critical when you try to get more than one person in focus indoors. Also, the AWB is better than the one on the 5N.

cxsparc said:
My favorite is the FD24/2.8 which I can shoot handheld at 1/30 sec, even though it lacks OSS and AF. Much superior edges compared to the 1855.

thanks for this advice. I am pretty much sold on the prime lens option for the NEX 5n. Ill leave the A7 for another day (year?)

cxsparc said:
Using any lens on the 5N in lowlight, I would recommend to go into A-mode and select the lowest aperture manually. In P-Mode, the 5N sticks at f4 and 1/60 sec until AutoISO hits the limit at 3200. I also recommend to use +0.3 exposure compensation, and lastly use custom whitebalance using a "TEMPO", clean of course . That gets rid of the 5Ns ghastly AWB for Glühlampe.

All this greatly improves the lowlight behaviour of the 5N and maybe it will suffice you then, or latest if you get the 35/1.8.

I write two lengthy essays on my thoughts about the A7 compared to the NEX on my blog, but don't want to spam your thread here.

Please do send link for your blog essays , i would be interested. I shoot in manual so i don't have any problems with setting the right parameters.

I really do like the sensor on the 5n, but like you mention, I find the kit lens quite limiting both in aperture and edge blurring (noticeable even at screen view in some cases!). I reach for my RX100ii just too much for my liking!!

cxsparc said:
Ds Chunnt scho guet

salla30 · Feb 10, 2014

Thanks for both advices. My current thinking (and based a lot on what I have read from all the kind posters here), is that the nex is still worthy of a relatively small investment (ie the SEL 35F18).

I worked out, if i did go for the A7, i do think i would find the distortions apparent in the kit lens (ie edge distortions) upsetting , as this is one of the main reasons I don't use my NEX currently , favouring the overall much better RX100ii shots. And the previous poster is right, I will need to invest further in lenses (i have none), either dedicated or otherwise.

Further, I worked out the only way I can get this purchase past the family radar would be to offer my wife a similar amount to sweeten the deal; thus it becomes a huge relative expense :-(

I can slip a 400 chf lens under the radar quite happily.

I agree that the NEX is an ageing tech, but I do like the sensor ALOT. I would like to give it a further chance.

PS... I think I could use the NEX e mount lenses with the A7 at a pinch in the future? Albeit giving a 10mp image? Thus, to get me off the ground, I could consider the A7 with kit + the E mount fast prime as a "starter pack" - After all, I reduce all my images to 6mp for regular use.

Thanks again.

Life in the old dog yet?

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Active member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts