Impressions of the NEX 5... plus Comparison with the Samsung NX10

[banana0ne]

???? I dun get what you are trying to say... ???

A drill cannot bore a hole with a dull drill bit. Same goes with a good drillbit that have a bad drill. Same with a good drill and bit without a good operator. Most of the times a good artist needs a good set of tools to get the effect he needs, no
matter how much it costs, where it is taken from, what the consistency etc.

Btw, I dun have any objections bout NEX, but I'm glad somebody made a comparison for us or those who is in the future will buy one to have a decision in purchasing or still need to hold on to their beloved pns'. Or go on straight to DSLR's.

This is my last reply on the matter sorry for hijacking the thread.

 

[Ouverture]

A drill cannot bore a hole with a dull drill bit. Same goes with a good drillbit that have a bad drill. Same with a good drill and bit without a good operator. Most of the times a good artist needs a good set of tools to get the effect he needs, no
matter how much it costs, where it is taken from, what the consistency etc.

Btw, I dun have any objections bout NEX, but I'm glad somebody made a comparison for us or those who is in the future will buy one to have a decision in purchasing or still need to hold on to their beloved pns'. Or go on straight to DSLR's.

This is my last reply on the matter sorry for hijacking the thread.

Thats a very good example u have quoted. Not to rub salt on the wound but i have always find tool is important for anyone that helps in your work. No doubt the person doing the job matters most.

Just like F1, give the driver the fastest car, any Good driver can be champion. But u give the champion driver a lousy car, he will struggle like hell.

 

[TME]

how about NEX-5 vs GF-1? Hope u could show us something that compares them.
Because I am thinking of getting the GF-1 but I like sony's design and 1.6 crop factor.

I'm confused, don't know which one to buy.

There really isn't much to choose from between the two beyond the physical form factor. The NEX5 is much smaller and that's about... if you're really look for a more versatile PnS, then either model is fine.

 

[banana0ne]

There really isn't much to choose from between the two beyond the physical form factor. The NEX5 is much smaller and that's about... if you're really look for a more versatile PnS, then either model is fine.

I guess the best selling point of having a NEX is having AF-on-the-fly when doing video plus small form factor which is good for those who don't want to lug on big heavy expensive gear.

 

[Ouverture]

I guess the best selling point of having a NEX is having AF-on-the-fly when doing video plus small form factor which is good for those who don't want to lug on big heavy expensive gear.

GF1 can also do continuous AF while videoing and it is as silent as well, though max at 720p, but seriously I dun find any difference when viewing on my PC the quality of 720p and 1080i.

What they claimed is that unless you view on a screen 42" or bigger than it's noticeable.

 

[TME]

GF1 can also do continuous AF while videoing and it is as silent as well, though max at 720p, but seriously I dun find any difference when viewing on my PC the quality of 720p and 1080i.

What they claimed is that unless you view on a screen 42" or bigger than it's noticeable.

720p = 1080i resolution wise they are the same... cos the 1080 is interlaced and the 720 is progressive... there are software available to interconvert the two... I'm disappopinted that it's 1080i and not 1080p that's available... perhaps there will be a stepup model with 1080p....

 

[LawrenceB]

i mean picture quality... hope TS can show some comparison like what he did with EP-2. Thanks

 

[tomcat]

i mean picture quality... hope TS can show some comparison like what he did with EP-2. Thanks

Like I said earlier, I can only do a comparison if I own the cameras. I don't have a GF-1 and so can't do a comparison of it with the NEX-5.

Such comparisons however only give an indication of the differences between the sensors and the specific lenses tested for the respective test camera. Your buying decision should not be just based on these comparison photos here.

Both the EP2 and GF-1 use the same sensor though the one in the GF-1 is known to have a weaker anti-aliasing filter and hence produces a sharper image but at the expense of more moire effects. Assuming the optical quality of the GF-1 14-45mm kit lens is about the same as that of the EP2 kit lens, the images would be slightly sharper than those posted here for the EP2.

Do note that the sensors of the EP2 and GF-1 have a tendency to clip or blow highlights. This was quite obvious in my initial test shots for the comparison, so much so that I had to dial down the exposure of the EP2 by -0.7EV. Otherwise the white desk chairs in the centre of the shot from the EP2 (and GF-1) would be one big white mess with little to no details. Reducing the exposure compensation could have resulted in the darker parts of the image to become somewhat underexposed in these test shots. The NEX-5 sensor does not have such a large tendency to blow highlights however.

In deciding on which camera to buy, you should look at the system and not just the camera and kit lens. Sony actually intended for the NEX system to be an advanced P&S camera. That it has the capability to change lenses is really incidental and a bonus. The Panasonic & Olympus m43 system and the Samsung NX system are however designed to be mirrorless DSLRs. Typical of a P&S camera, the NEX-5 has many 'fun' features which are not present in the m43 and NX camera systems and a very 'P&S' user menu system. Also, the NEX-5 has a very stylish design which might be very appealing to some users.

Notwithstanding this, I think that despite being masters in PR, Sony short-changed themselves by not providing a better spec'ed kit zoom lens with the NEX-5. Panasonic, Olympus and Samsung all made sure that the kit lens accompanying the cameras are optically very good and in doing so essentially avoided negative reviews of poor image quality. If only the kit lens of the NEX-5 was as good as those of the competitors, for me, the NEX-5 would be the camera to die for with all its unique features. Let's hope that Sony or other third party lens manufacturers like Tamron (rumored to be producing NEX lenses) would eventually come out with lenses with optical quality that would do justice to the NEX system.

 

[tomcat]

Some test shots at Orchard Road here...

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6225602#post6225602

 

[tangoinquestion]

Not sure if this is the right place to post these NEX-5 samples... mods, just let me know if this is the inappropriate place so I can remove... anyway, i joined a photoshoot last Sat to check if the NEX-5 (not the photographer which is a noob hehe) is up to task... all pics used iAuto mode, no flash, RAW-JPEG... i found the in-camera jpegs to be quite clean, but a bit flat (is it cam, glass, settings or just photog hehe)...

click-through for the bigger sizes:

 

[TME]

Hmm... nothing to do with the camera or output, just that your model is a little tense... the smile is a bit forced and the posture very rigid...

As for the photos colours - beautiful! Very nicely saturated and rich... skin tones also good... I like the gentle roll-off from light to dark... I think Sony has a winner here if they market it well...

 

[TME]

Do note that the sensors of the EP2 and GF-1 have a tendency to clip or blow highlights. This was quite obvious in my initial test shots for the comparison, so much so that I had to dial down the exposure of the EP2 by -0.7EV. Otherwise the white desk chairs in the centre of the shot from the EP2 (and GF-1) would be one big white mess with little to no details. Reducing the exposure compensation could have resulted in the darker parts of the image to become somewhat underexposed in these test shots. The NEX-5 sensor does not have such a large tendency to blow highlights however.

The way Sony sets up their cameras is to underexpose slightly... I have noticed it very often... It's built into the sensor ISO rating... that is even at the same ISO and shutter and aperture settings, the Sony pictures for the A900 are darker by at least 0.3 - 0.5 stops compared to it's competitors. Possibly, it's part of the DRO strategy... as a result the pictures tend to be noiser... I think has been noted quite often in the online community... and that's possibly why the deck chairs are not blown for the NEX5 shots.

 

[donut88]

The way Sony sets up their cameras is to underexpose slightly... I have noticed it very often... It's built into the sensor ISO rating... that is even at the same ISO and shutter and aperture settings, the Sony pictures for the A900 are darker by at least 0.3 - 0.5 stops compared to it's competitors. Possibly, it's part of the DRO strategy... as a result the pictures tend to be noiser... I think has been noted quite often in the online community... and that's possibly why the deck chairs are not blown for the NEX5 shots.

Yup, i agree totally. I also notice it... sony pics are abit darker. phew, i tot my cam got problem! :bsmilie:

another question i have

Why is the file size of the pics taken only 2 or 3 MB? my normal digi cam is usually 4 MB.

i already set the cam to FINE pic.

Is there something wrong?

 

[tangoinquestion]

Hmm... nothing to do with the camera or output, just that your model is a little tense... the smile is a bit forced and the posture very rigid...

As for the photos colours - beautiful! Very nicely saturated and rich... skin tones also good... I like the gentle roll-off from light to dark... I think Sony has a winner here if they market it well...

oh have other shots of her with more natural expressions, pose, etc... but strangely im more attracted to those in between moments or unusual facial expression dunno why lol (specially mid-blink or something hehe)

i was going to say they're very soft, but then i remembered since it iAuto mode, I think it locked on to the "Portrait" mode thereby making overall image soft... ill try to get some results using A mode, and mebbe crank up sharpness and see what the results will be. i do have the raw files from this shoot, but i know nuts about developing them hehe

 

[tangoinquestion]

The way Sony sets up their cameras is to underexpose slightly... I have noticed it very often... It's built into the sensor ISO rating... that is even at the same ISO and shutter and aperture settings, the Sony pictures for the A900 are darker by at least 0.3 - 0.5 stops compared to it's competitors. Possibly, it's part of the DRO strategy... as a result the pictures tend to be noiser... I think has been noted quite often in the online community... and that's possibly why the deck chairs are not blown for the NEX5 shots.

hmmm i noticed same behaviour with my old Minolta 5D... even with fast prime lenses, i noticed my output out of cam were darker than my canon friends/colleagues who were shooting at the same time

 

[mogwai]

using diff monitor,

1. Canon
2. Nikon
3. Sony

all the pics are taken at iso 12800 and bananaOne got all rite.

Hmm...I would've only gotten the Nikon right. Although small pic, but it's clean and I'm more familiar with Nikon 'colours'.

I confused the Sony and Canon ones at first glance but on hindsight, the difference is there.

Good sensor, good looks - perhaps a few more entry-level dslr owners will be swayed.

 

[tangoinquestion]

really loving the NEX-5... with my previous GF1+20mm/f1.7 combo, i always struggled to take pics of my little girl indoors (bad lighting)... now with the NEX-5+1855, i can get decent sharpness even at ISO 1600. here's a sample pic straight out of cam (no processing, only resized to 25%), click-through for bigger size:



In-cam settings:
Contrast -3
Saturation +1
Sharpness +1

EXIF:
Color Space: sRGB
Custom Rendered: Normal process
Exposure Bias Value: 0
Exposure Mode: Auto exposure
Exposure Program: Aperture priority
Exposure Time: 1 / 10
FNumber: 4.5
Focal Length: 35
ISO Speed Ratings: 1600
Metering Mode: Pattern
Scene Capture Type: Standard
White Balance: Auto white balance

 

[VisionTechnik]

720p = 1080i resolution wise they are the same... cos the 1080 is interlaced and the 720 is progressive... there are software available to interconvert the two... I'm disappopinted that it's 1080i and not 1080p that's available... perhaps there will be a stepup model with 1080p....

It's not the same. In terms of resolution 1080i is definitely higher. But it takes 2 frames to complete an image in video. So if the image is slow or still, you will not notice the difference in image quality to 1080p. But in sports, u will see 'jaggies' as one frame has a ball in one position and the next half a distance away. Resolution of 1080>720 be it i or p.

 

[dRebelXT]

For those desktop cameramen or the inanimate shooters...
not that i biased toward Sony camera or against others brand...since i had my own fair share of usage of the several brand ff cameras...i can safetly said that no cameras that are sure win in term of ergonomic and usage and depend on individual experience with their respective brand..i not surprised some will be biased...
here a pic of the shot taken from imaging rescource from nex5,5dmk2 and D700 not in order and stripped of their exif data
can anyone tell at what iso is the pics taken and from which camera?

must place the photos horizontally side by side. LCD monitors show different color between center and border. :think:

 

[Diavonex]

must place the photos horizontally side by side. LCD monitors show different color between center and border. :think:

I thought only CRT behaves that way because the 3 "guns" are position in the center.