MFT had a good run, Slaughtered by SONY NEX

[NuFonaut]

That´s not true. People always try to excuse the comparably bad high isos in the Gs by saying you have to go a stop higher. This is simply an invention. The difference to the Pens is 1/3 max as often pointed out by pros on here.

I never liked Sony and never bought one of their cameras but the NEX really seems astonishingly capable. I´m impressed.

Btw, those pictures above were taken from RAW, that´s why they differ.

Consideing the extra iso sensitivity of the GH1, ie at iso 800 on GH1 you need to be on iso1600 Sony and so on, now go use the comparitor on Image resource and the GH1 positively walks all over it, now consider this, the lens on the GH1 is the 14-140 zoom? and the lens on the Sony is either the 18-55 or the 16mm, either way the GH1 is in another league, the NR on some of those NEX shots is very destructive.

GH1 beats this thing off very easily.

--
What´s that noise?

From one of the Canon Forums:

'I just came back from my first holiday with the 5D II (I think my wife was there as well). '

 

[djrocks66]

Yeah $5,000 vs $700.00

I think Sony did a great job. I am all about the image you can get out of a camera and by the reviews of people that have actually used it it does that amazingly well even at Hi ISO. I welcome all the new cameras coming out. Bring them on.

Get a D3s.

--

 

[JortS29]

neither does dxo optics, the GH1 is as good iq wise as the NEX, but now lets look at the reality;

DXO hasn't tested the NEX sensor yet. While it is likely to be based on the sensor used in the A550, it seems to perform better than the A550 sensor too...

Besides that, nothing beats what your own eyes see after doing a conversion yourself. Equal shuttertimes, aperture and adjustment for equaling exposure in the converter means level playing field and correcting for differences in sensitivity.

 

[Dennis]

I'm a Sony Alpha user who's been waiting for this announcement before deciding on an EVIL camera.

And it looks like it's going to be m43.

With m43 I can get IBIS with an Oly if I choose. (And while I prefer the GF1, I'm seriously considering EPL1 for that feature).

The 20/1.7 is the lens ! It's all about lenses, and Sony's 16 is nice for some, but not for a carry-everywhere lens. The 18-55 is big. Neither lens looks stunning in tests.

Alpha compatibility is manual focus only, so the only real advantage there is backup for my DSLR - it's nothing I'd use on any regular basis. I'd thought that if it had AF with the SAM/SSM lenses, then the 30/2.8 and 50/1.8 SAM lenses might be interesing alternatives to the too-wide 16. But they're not stabilized, won't AF, and the adapter adds an inch to their length.

Probably the biggest turnoff is the interface. This is Sony bundling great technology into dumbed down cameras for soccer moms (not all soccer moms, just the ones who don't want to learn anything about photography .

I was hoping for a quiet shutter, too, but imaging-resource suggests it's not especially quiet.

Big advantages are that LCD and nice APS-C sensor.

Now ... EP1/EP2/EPL1/GF1 ?

• Dennis

--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com

 

[JortS29]

You'll look an idiot wth a NEX, it is quite honestly a design disaster.

Not planning to buy either, but I care less about what a camera looks like.
Both systems seem to have their strengths.

 

[nosenseofplace]

NEX 6400 ISO = MFT iso 800
NEX ISO 12.800 = MFT 1600 ISO

drunked ?? :-D wow you are so funny, you are making me laugh so strong today :-D
--
angel

 

[nosenseofplace]

wake up...how you know that the level of light they used is the same for photos taken months or years after?????? you are serious or just trolling????

--
angel

 

[John Carson]

I'm not sure how you know the origin of the images posted by the OP.

It's a comparison image that was posted a couple of minutes earlier by Oluv, who explained that he used DCRAW to level playing field as much as possible (altough no colour profile for the NEX yet).

OK. Thanks.

In any event, I don't think images lacking in appropriate noise reduction are very relevant for the purposes of comparing camera image quality (though they are of interest to sensor afficianados).

Don't agree. These days the best RAW converters also deliver the best quality a camera can deliver and a rather equal playing field (or as close as possible). DCRAW is one of them but LR3 and ACR6 are widely used examples of such converters too. Comparisons like these give an indication of how they compare in such a converter. As a (mostly) RAW shooter myself, I value those comparisons. Which doesn't mean I dismiss comparisons of in camera Jpegs though, since Jpegs have their place too.

My main objection is that such comparisons give an exaggerated sense of the absolute difference in image quality. Given that camera choice tends to involve tradeoffs, it is important for most buyers to get an impression of just how much image quality they are giving up for the sake of, say, a better video mode or superior ergonomics. These raw comparisons don't allow such a judgement.

--
john carson

 

[NuFonaut]

Haha, yeah, this really is ridiculous

NEX 6400 ISO = MFT iso 800
NEX ISO 12.800 = MFT 1600 ISO

drunked ?? :-D wow you are so funny, you are making me laugh so strong today :-D
--
angel

--
What´s that noise?

From one of the Canon Forums:

'I just came back from my first holiday with the 5D II (I think my wife was there as well). '

 

[rovingtim]

I don't dislike the Sony. My point is that all things must be considered. Focusing only on one aspect skews things.

For example, you said IQ is everything ... I guess you walk around with a 40mp Hass then do you?

 

[JortS29]

wake up...how you know that the level of light they used is the same for photos taken months or years after?????? you are serious or just trolling????

Thanks for the warm words, but if you had any clue how Imaging Resource take their studio shots (same setup for a few years, minor update a few years ago), then you wouldn't be asking these questions.

 

[JortS29]

My main objection is that such comparisons give an exaggerated sense of the absolute difference in image quality. Given that camera choice tends to involve tradeoffs, it is important for most buyers to get an impression of just how much image quality they are giving up for the sake of, say, a better video mode or superior ergonomics. These raw comparisons don't allow such a judgement.

Agree. I have no problem with comparisons like these as long as they are put into context. The OP obviously failed to do that with his choice of words.

 

[djrocks66]

You can have mine. I got it Friday for $474. You pay shipping and it is yours for that price.

I'm sure you've barely used it, and it's clearly worthless to you now... so please PM me your price

Cheers

Brian
--
Join our free worldwide support network here :
http://www.ukphotosafari.org/join-the-ukpsg/
UK, Peak District Local Olympus Safari Group : http://snipurl.com/bqtd7-ukpsg
Keep up with me here : http://twitter.com/alert_bri

--

 

[djrocks66]

No and if I had the money I wouldn't either. I am talking about cameras that I can actually afford. I got rid of my awesome Canon 40D with great lenses so I can get something smaller that would at least equal the I.Q. or get close. As much as I love the m 4/3rds cameras I haven't found one that can replace my 40D. To me there is no contest when it comes to composing an image with an Optical Viewfinder. Sony at least has this option. I would love to see someone actually use it and report on it. I do not want a Rebel or the likes because I have already been there. They are great cameras but I was excited for the smaller size of these cameras. Do not get me wrong, the M 4/3rds are great cameras. I am loving the E-P1. I just wished I would have kept the 40D and waited a little. I bought the E-P1 at full price and then a flash. I could have kept the 40D and bought a E-PL1 now at the cheaper price with the onboard flash and optional Viewfinder, and been pretty happy, except for the absence of the control wheels. If the E-P1 had a built in flash and a View Finder it would be the one for me. I am waiting for that one. Gotta go! Baby is crying!

I don't dislike the Sony. My point is that all things must be considered. Focusing only on one aspect skews things.

For example, you said IQ is everything ... I guess you walk around with a 40mp Hass then do you?

--

 

[Ednaz]

...slip the NEX into a pocket with a lens on it?

Even if it's a really big pocket?

I'm a DSLR and medium format digital shooter. I'm not looking to my m4/3 bodies to replace those formats, because not even APS images can match up to my D700 at pretty much any ISO other than base ISO, not to mention D3s images. I'm looking to my m4/3 body and lenses to give me a small kit I can slip into two jacket pockets.

The "review" said it very well. A great idea if you've got Alpha lenses and want to use them on a smaller body. Not such a great option, however, if you have full frame DSLR, which will give somewhat better file quality, or you need something pocketable. I've shot my GF1 with small Nikon primes on the front, and it is far from a compact camera once you start putting full size lenses on it. For me, the m4/3 is as much about lens size as anything else.

All the m4/3 fanboys made the same mistake when declaring the death of all point and shoots, of assuming that people only focus on one thing, file quality. Cameras are all packages of compromises, and you need to pick the compromises that fit your tastes, preferences, and situation.

Frankly, even the GF1 with a 20mm lens loses out to my G10 sometimes because it's just enough larger and just enough louder that it can't get the job done for me that I need sometimes.

 

[billzilla2000]

That ISO comparison is fake. With both cameras set to NR Low at 3200, the comparison looks MUCH different (even the E-PL1 w/ NR OFF, which the NEX cannot do, looks better than that faked pic).

 

[billzilla2000]

Like a spoiled kid with a new toy, trying to taunt others with it.

Amusingly, this child doesn't even HAVE said toy. It's a toy he thinks he might get and doesn't really even own - nor has even played with, himself.

The price of the toys and grammar may have advanced, but some people's emotional IQ remains at the playground level.

 

[billzilla2000]

How long do you intend to spend your days doing nothing (apparently) but taunting and slamming MFT owners?

Just curious.

 

[angeles]

I know what is coming next from MFT users,

• Denial (NEX is not good, comparison is fake)
• Anger (WHY SONY i just bought GF1....... )
• Bargaining (I think GF1 still got a better lens.....)
• Depression (but damn i want that crazy ISO and small camera)
• Acceptance (NEX is the new king preorder)

If i disagree with you it means I'm trolling? i OWN MFT camera but I'm not married to it you know

 

[jsis]

You know, for the "smug" factor that Olympus is an imaging company and you can afford more expensive things which equate to better photos. That goes to the owner of the 4/3 & m4/3 system by the way.