-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
New rumour on FF NEX
- Thread starter Keit ll
- Start date
-
- Tags
- sony alpha nex-7
Good points Henry.
But...
The EP5 has 5-axis ibis as well, and the body seems more compact than the OM5., and also it's not bigger than the EP3 I believe.
On SAR it was rumored that the next 7 would be slightly thicker, meaning the signature exposed flange of the NEX cameras for the first time will be recessed into the body. Also the grip would be slightly bigger. A similar body for the FF NEX could potentially make the impossible possible, fitting IBIS into the camera ;-)
...but yeh, I can barely believe it if Sony pulls this off!
Btw ur hybrid camera suggestion sounds a little like the rumored ILC3000 E-mount cam in dslr body...
But...
The EP5 has 5-axis ibis as well, and the body seems more compact than the OM5., and also it's not bigger than the EP3 I believe.
On SAR it was rumored that the next 7 would be slightly thicker, meaning the signature exposed flange of the NEX cameras for the first time will be recessed into the body. Also the grip would be slightly bigger. A similar body for the FF NEX could potentially make the impossible possible, fitting IBIS into the camera ;-)
...but yeh, I can barely believe it if Sony pulls this off!
Btw ur hybrid camera suggestion sounds a little like the rumored ILC3000 E-mount cam in dslr body...
At a rumored price of $3K, the FF NEX would not be a lower-end line; it would be more expensive than today's FF SLT A99. Again going by SAR rumors, the FF NEX will be introduced along with a couple of Zeiss lenses. Zeiss has never made an OIS lens, and hopefully never will. That means that the FF NEX will either have IBIS or be unstabilized (unless OIS non-Zeiss lenses become available). Will people really buy a $3K camera plus maybe $1K or more lens with no stabilization today?
Uh, the vast majority of Nikon and Canon primes (not to mention the high-end ones) are unstabilized. The RX1 is unstabilized. The Leicas are unstabilized.
Every single MF camera is unstabilized.
OTOH, most point-and-shoots are stabilized. As are most basic kit zooms.
Stabilization is more-often-than-not used as a crutch for slow zooms. Aside from the only two camera lines with IBIS today (Sony Alpha and Olympus m43), its implementation in the NEX in fast primes is almost unique. I seriously don't understand how so many of you make it into the deal-breaker that it isn't for everybody else with the vast majority of serious cameras out there.
Last edited:
blue_skies
Forum Pro
The Sony FF RX-1 has a Zeiss lens and has no IS, neither OIS nor IBIS, and also lists at $2,800. Add a viewfinder and you pay quite a bit more (but you do get a lens).
I guess Sony has sold more than a few of those ... so the answer to your question has to be YES.
And I remember that AF accuracy was the biggest complaint on the RX-1 - I have heard few complaining about lack of IS...
Fwiw, a Nex-7 body lists at $1,100, ie. the same price as the SLT A77 body, but the SLT A77 body is now discounted from $1,100 to $900. (The Nex-7 gives you a discount allowance for a bundle).
The list price of a FF SLT A99 body only is also at $2.800, so having the same price for a FF Nex-9 body would follow the pricing of the A77 vs Nex-7. Nex cameras rely on OIS.
Basically, it seems that Sony is pricing SLT cameras and Nex cameras price identical, with the SLT offering you more functionality than the Nex.
Also, those with a Nex and the $1k E24Z lens have no IS at all either. I have not heard people complaining about this either. Perhaps it is bad for video, and you may want a tripod for certain shots, but otherwise you are fine.
I find it hard to make a case for lenses that are shorter than 75mm FF Equiv, especially when shooting subjects: at 1/FL (FF) you are about at the minimum shutter speed - why would you want to shoot people at 1/30 or 1/15, even if you can? It will all turn into a blurry mess anyway.
Flip this around - if you are shooting shorter than 75mm FF Equiv, why worry about IS? And if you do, get an OIS lens, or an IBIS camera. It does not disqualify an FF Nex in my opinion.
V
vladi1234567
Guest
I have a Nikon dslr, and four primes - 35, 50, 85 and 180 2.8. None of them are stabilized, and not once have I needed it. I use 180 2.8 handheld with no issues. All I need from FF Nex is fast focus and decent battery life - all other rumored specs are fine by me. I would have bought rx1 - if it had ospdaf of good quality. So I'm waiting for rx2 or ff nex - whichever comes first!
Sean_Jayhawk
Veteran Member
I still have my 5N, but I really just use my newer 6D these days. I keep an eye on FF NEX rumors. I am not interested in stabilization in the body, but one of the main reasons I left was for AF speed (and it's also a reason I did not stick with the RX1 after buying it). If Sony can improve the speed AF locks on subjects (e.g., kids) then I will most certainly sell off my Canon equipment and shift back to Sony.
pede59
Senior Member
martindesu
Senior Member
I think Henry sums it up nicely here.
IBIS is nice, sure, but I didn't miss it with my 24/1.8 on NEX and don't miss it at all on my RX1.
When I had my 18-200LE, OSS was nice for a few shots, but if there was lots of movement or action, I wouldn't have wanted it anyway.
IBIS is nice, sure, but I didn't miss it with my 24/1.8 on NEX and don't miss it at all on my RX1.
When I had my 18-200LE, OSS was nice for a few shots, but if there was lots of movement or action, I wouldn't have wanted it anyway.
blue_skies
Forum Pro
captura
Forum Pro
captura
Forum Pro
Your 5-axis stabilization unit is out of an E-M5. The newer E-P5 has this miniaturized so the camera does not need the hump.
captura
Forum Pro
Again, this guy telling Sony what to put on cameras. (
Whenever you hear this guy making statements like that what he really means is that he posted something on an internet forum. He has no connection to Sony and has never "urged" Sony to do anything ..
Ha ! When I first saw your post nothing showed then I noticed that you were ignored & had to allow your message to be shown so you must have annoyed me in the past , I wonder why ?
You are right I have no direct connection with Sony but as an interested consumer I have certainly given them advice & on more than one occasion they have taken it. You need to understand English comprehension in order to correctly interpret what is written , I never have claimed to be part of Sony but if you think that Sony & other manufacturers don't keenly follow forums then you are grossly mistaken. There are Sony reps participating on this forum ......
My previous posts are available to view if you want to go back over the past 12 years or so. I previously posted under the user name of Keith-C but lost this connection due to a computer failure & period of inactivity. You will discover, amongst other things , that I urged Sony to produce a micro APS-C & posted an image of what I envisaged the camera to look like.
Here is one post but there are many others... This was not the earliest post but they are very time consuming to track down.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/33055343
Here is another post
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/33082928
Last edited:
Just because you posted something on an internet forum, like thousands of other people on the same topic and then a product or a firmware was later released in future that matched that description, that doesn't mean it was *your* advice in particular.
Do you seriously think Sony would have no released still cameras with video capability if you had not posted about it on an internet forum?
If I were to constantly claim that Obama administration took my advice on some policy decision because I (along with millions of other people) posted about it on the internet, that would be stupid way to describe what happened.
You have constantly claimed that you have been "advising" Sony, and they have been following your advice. What you really mean is that you posted something on the internet, along with hundreds of other people on different forums and professional review sites, and either by sheer luck or huge customer demand Sony released something similar.
You have no connection to Sony, and you have never advised Sony directly on any topic. Lets be clear about that.
I have occasionally seen low level sales person from Sony (but even that is not regular poster), but there is no proof any senior Sony engineer or decision maker is a regular participant on this forum.
Last edited:
Lightshow
Veteran Member
Just thought that I would throw this into the debate
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/0...xis-stabilization-16MP-BSI-CMOS-25-400mm-zoom
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/0...xis-stabilization-16MP-BSI-CMOS-25-400mm-zoom
NEXFULLFRAME
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 283
- Reaction score
- 105
I really don't understand the fascination with IBIS and OSS for a stills camera. My preference would be a smaller, simpler camera with less things to go wrong. Many RX1s have been returned due to lens decentering issues which shows just how critical the alignment tolerances are. Much better to have that stuff rigid and all locked down.
Meanwhile Canon and Nikon are pulling OSS out of their top end zooms. The 1/FL shutter-speed rule works for handheld shooting and for wide/normal lenses the subject blurs before the camera does.
The desire for IS depends on the type of shooting. IS does not help when shooting moving subjects but that only forms a small part of my particular photography.
In low light & poor light ( I am in the UK !) IS is very useful as it allows for more aperture control & minimises the need for very large apertures which have DOF issues. I am getting older & find that IS increases my success rate. Bumping up ISO can help to get faster shutter speeds but higher ISO's significantly increases noise & the need for Noise Reduction particularly in the NEX 7.
IS has been around for a long time now , I first used it in a Minolta 7i & subsequently in a KM A2 & Minolta 5D & Sony A900 & it generally noticeable when it has accidentally been left off. I don't have Parkinson's ,as one well known member here suggested , but am quite ready to admit that perhaps I am a little shaky at times.
IS is available in a great many lenses but fewer manufacturers have successfully implemented IBIS in camera bodies. It is available still in Sony Alpha DSLRs including the flagship A99 but , it is said , Sony left it out of the specification of the NEX series preferring to have lens based IS (ILIS) as that reduces sensor over-heating & provides a steady VF image.
It is also claimed that IBIS would make NEX camera bodies too deep but it would only add a few mm to depth & be well worth it in my opinion. Many Americans avoid the NEX because they consider it too small & that it looks fragile so opinions are divided on the issue of size.
Some users are positively opposed to IBIS or ILIS but are reluctant to say why but claim that it can cause image deterioration but that has never been my experience & in any case it can always be switched off.
One great benefit of IBIS is that it would stabilise older legacy lenses which never had ILIS. These lenses are very popular with NEX users & I cannot see how their use would be adversely affected by the use of IBIS , on the contrary it would greatly enhance their use. Some cynics say this why Sony don't have it as it would prevent the sales of their own lenses but would Sony be so self-interested ?
Sony have used this capability to use legacy lenses via an adapter as a positive USP.
--
Keith C
In low light & poor light ( I am in the UK !) IS is very useful as it allows for more aperture control & minimises the need for very large apertures which have DOF issues. I am getting older & find that IS increases my success rate. Bumping up ISO can help to get faster shutter speeds but higher ISO's significantly increases noise & the need for Noise Reduction particularly in the NEX 7.
IS has been around for a long time now , I first used it in a Minolta 7i & subsequently in a KM A2 & Minolta 5D & Sony A900 & it generally noticeable when it has accidentally been left off. I don't have Parkinson's ,as one well known member here suggested , but am quite ready to admit that perhaps I am a little shaky at times.
IS is available in a great many lenses but fewer manufacturers have successfully implemented IBIS in camera bodies. It is available still in Sony Alpha DSLRs including the flagship A99 but , it is said , Sony left it out of the specification of the NEX series preferring to have lens based IS (ILIS) as that reduces sensor over-heating & provides a steady VF image.
It is also claimed that IBIS would make NEX camera bodies too deep but it would only add a few mm to depth & be well worth it in my opinion. Many Americans avoid the NEX because they consider it too small & that it looks fragile so opinions are divided on the issue of size.
Some users are positively opposed to IBIS or ILIS but are reluctant to say why but claim that it can cause image deterioration but that has never been my experience & in any case it can always be switched off.
One great benefit of IBIS is that it would stabilise older legacy lenses which never had ILIS. These lenses are very popular with NEX users & I cannot see how their use would be adversely affected by the use of IBIS , on the contrary it would greatly enhance their use. Some cynics say this why Sony don't have it as it would prevent the sales of their own lenses but would Sony be so self-interested ?
Sony have used this capability to use legacy lenses via an adapter as a positive USP.--
Keith C
Last edited:
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum