Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

For discussion of the E and FE mount mirrorless system
alphaomega
Viceroy
Posts: 1196
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:20 pm

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by alphaomega »

bfitzgerald wrote
would still grab an OVF camera and I miss not having a choice on that.
There are a couple of A550 cameras (body only) for sale on ebay at present including my copy.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SONY-ALPHA-A5 ... 1c3e00dde4
and my camera
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Sony-Alpha-A5 ... 27e0eda00e
Not a bad camera and no video.
classiccameras
Viceroy
Posts: 1044
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 9:33 am

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by classiccameras »

I'm inclined to agree with you re Nikon and Pentax, Canon seems to be the logical alternative from my point of view. I would however prefer IBIS rather than ILS which is why I included Pentax on my short list. The new Samsung NX30 looks like an interesting camera with probably a better EVF than Sony, high quality images but small lens range, although optically superior to most.

I still like my Sony 37/57 and I remain impressed with their IQ, I would hate to jump ship and find I had got a camera I was not so happy with, out of the frying pan into the fire so to speak.
At my level of photography, the Canon 600D or even a 60D would be the obvious choice, both very affordable now on the used market and a vast new and second hand lens selection. The 5D Mk 1/2/3 is way out of my budget.
I would much rather stay with APS-C cameras and I don't think I would want to return to 4/3.
After seeing my wife's pictures from her Canon G16 it makes a stronger case for me to change to Canon, they are stunning for a small sensor compact.
Vidgamer
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:37 am

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by Vidgamer »

bfitzgerald wrote:I'm not sure SLT has made any difference for Sony
I'm still of the view it's a compromise, the A57 is good and I like using it in most situations, but it's a bit of a pain in the rear end in harsh lighting, that is a major weakness.
Over the years, it has seemed to me that all cameras have compromises. You just have to figure out which compromises bother you less, and which advantages you want more.
I would still grab an OVF camera and I miss not having a choice on that.
The biggest gripe with Sony is they just don't seem to be in touch, they are almost indifferent to their users needs or desires.
How do they sell any cameras if they are so indifferent? At some point, the consumer has a bit of responsibility to realize that they have needs that are not being addressed.

Perhaps what is happening is that they are being responsive, just to other users more so than you. This doesn't mean that your desires or needs aren't inportant (at least to you), but perhaps they aren't as important as other features are tomore people, such as video.

I recall from threads years ago that there was a lot of disappointment with the direction things were going. There were those who said that stills cameras should be only for stills and no video polluting the design. And yet, the biggest feature I missed when I use a DSLR was.... video. It's not that I use it a lot, but it's nice to have for the occasions when something interesting happens, and sometimes you just need audio and/or video, and a still photo just wouldn't be enough.
Other than that, they have repeated some errors over and over again (dumbing down, not updating models in a timely manner)
They improved the bracketing on some models. At least in e-mount, they're "smarting up", with newer menus and more features in the settings, such as being able to set the upper limit to the ISO.
I don't see them having a big impact on the market, when I go out folks just kind of look at you in a very odd fashion for not using Canon. I don't mind myself couldn't care less, but they just don't have the respect some makers do. I mean all the brand stuff aside, if Sony were an amazing choice wouldn't more people be using them?

And not people like me looking for a bargain, I mean as a choice over other makers.
There's a strong incentive to stick with established brands. Canon and Nikon are it. I know two people who got Canon entry-level DSLRs last year, and I don't think they gave much thought to other brands; they certainly didn't ask me for my opinion, and they probably knew that I liked Sony. How does Sony break through that kind of brand recognition?

This is a larger topic, but I've seen it before when it comes to computers. When people don't really understand the details, they know they can trust an established brand.

I think Sony has come out with cameras that are largely better (in ways that are important, such as IQ) and/or cheaper, but they can't afford the large lens or dealer ecosystem, so they will always have limitations in some regard. So, they have to compete by differentiating their products, and keeping them price-competitive.
User avatar
bakubo
Tower of Babel
Posts: 5865
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Japan
Contact:

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by bakubo »

classiccameras wrote:I still like my Sony 37/57 and I remain impressed with their IQ, I would hate to jump ship and find I had got a camera I was not so happy with, out of the frying pan into the fire so to speak.
At my level of photography, the Canon 600D or even a 60D would be the obvious choice, both very affordable now on the used market and a vast new and second hand lens selection.
My A700, which I still have, was overall my favorite DSLR, but it had a defect that Sony couldn't fix that was very annoying while using that would sometimes result in missed shots. If not for that defect then I think I would still be pretty happy using it. I liked the IBIS and the other characteristics for my use were pretty good. The terrible noise in the red channel was a problem sometimes for photos that had blue sky though and I never found a good fix for it. I then got a Canon 60D (had owned the 30D and 300D previously). I found that in just about every way that I cared about the 60D was as good or better than the A700. I sure liked that camera. Best DSLR I had owned (Canon 300D, KM 7D, Canon 30D, A100, A700, 60D), but, and this is a big but for me, no IBIS. You either made a selection from the subset of lenses that had ILIS or did without. For travel with all kinds of lighting conditions and almost always handheld I had really grown to love IS since the KM 7D. Also, the ILIS lenses were often a bit bigger/heavier than the non-ILIS lenses. I made a thread with lots of great info about my experience with the 60D coming from the A700:

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/forum/vie ... =21&t=4730

If you don't care so much about having IS for every lens then the 60D is still a great choice, I think. My m4/3 gear is much better for my travel because of the size/weight and also the AF is so good, much better for my uses than the A700 or 60D. My E-M5 AF is so darn fast and very accurate, even at the widest focal lengths.
classiccameras wrote: I would much rather stay with APS-C cameras and I don't think I would want to return to 4/3.
After seeing my wife's pictures from her Canon G16 it makes a stronger case for me to change to Canon, they are stunning for a small sensor compact.
I sure do like my Canon G15 that I bought about a year ago for $385. Still use it a lot. The G16 which came out a few months later is almost the same as the G15, but they added wifi (which I don't care about) and some very minor tweaks. Sometimes you see a new G15 for much less than the G16. Personally, in that case I would just get the G15. If the price is close then might as well get the G16. I usually shoot raw, but sometimes shoot jpegs (with contrast, sharpening, etc. reduced) and do light post-processing on them in LR. The raw files are pretty big, so for some subjects I shoot jpeg and save space on my hard disks. I don't see it for my uses as a DSLR (or m4/3) replacement though. I created a thread with lots of good info on the G15 here and everything applies to the G16 also since it changed very little:

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/forum/vie ... f=3&t=7623
Vidgamer
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:37 am

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by Vidgamer »

bakubo wrote:....

If you don't care so much about having IS for every lens then the 60D is still a great choice, I think. My m4/3 gear is much better for my travel because of the size/weight and also the AF is so good, much better for my uses than the A700 or 60D. My E-M5 AF is so darn fast and very accurate, even at the widest focal lengths.

...
I think unless you have a specific need, the mirrorless cameras are often good enough. I know that there are those who have very specific needs that only a DSLR will fill, but sometimes they are also pretty obscure. (One example on DPR was shooting rodeo at night, and wanting to zoom in close and freeze the action. Well, even indoor basketball might be enough for some to justify something large and expensive.) The trick is balancing the various advantages and compromises to get something that works well enough for what you do.
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

I don't really see where mirrorless is more appealing for most users. Unless you are a travel photographer, then maybe
Not dismissing the offerings as there are some decent ones out there.
But it really boils down to

1: Want a smaller body (only really micro 4/3 has smaller lenses)
2: Might want to play with MF lenses off ebay for budget minded lens buyers

Outside of that (and A mount have quite a lot of s/h AF legacy lenses at good prices) I'm not sold on switching from DSLR to ILC
Maybe if ILC makers actually started to price their products at DSLR beating levels I could give them a thumbs up on that front.
User avatar
Greg Beetham
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6117
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by Greg Beetham »

I got this in my inbox,
Sony A6000 email.jpg
Sony A6000 email.jpg (136.57 KiB) Viewed 7659 times
A promotion of the Alpha 6000, which as I’ve said about the NEX before is of no use to me as none of my lenses fit directly on it. Maybe if it came with a free adaptor of your choice it might be interesting up to a point but even then once you start putting adaptors on in front of the small camera you are already losing the ‘small’ part of the deal, and lose IBIS as well. Not to mention the UI is from another planet.
I suppose you regain the small if you start with a couple of E-mount lenses as well as the body but then you are in effect switching systems, or adding a system to the one you already have, which I don’t see much point in doing as I don't hop on planes and the one I have can take photos quite ok, or it takes photos good enough to suit me.
Greg
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

Greg the words "free" and "Sony" rarely go together.
I said a while back Sony should bundle free flash adaptors with all their bodies, if Sony won't put a £25 flash adaptor in the box (which probably costs about £1 to make if not less) there isn't a lot of hope they'll put an A mount one in there!

I agree none of my lenses fit on an E mount body, so why would I bother to buy one?
Looking at the recent ho hum reviews some of the FE mount lenses have got (24-70mm f4 looks weak) I'm not sure Sony are on the right path here at all
They already had a system camera with a decent range of lenses..

And didn't really bother to develop that properly, why would anyone assume E Mount is destined for great things :roll:
User avatar
Greg Beetham
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6117
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by Greg Beetham »

If you can believe the link in Nord’s post (as he points out its April 1st) http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3648915 Sony is keen on doing yet more new stuff with a Foveon style imager at 54MP no less with a gazillion PDAF sensors and CDAF sensors as well in a proposed A91 and an A9 all to be revealed on May 1st …has it been six months since the fastest AF in the world A6000 was released?

I assume the A9 (if it’s real) would be an FE-mount so that would be a continuation of development along those lines, and therefore something to watch from a safe distance, unless it has some new larger lens-adaptor-mount of course, and that wouldn’t surprise me.

The other one sounds like it is going to be mirrorless and wear an A-mount, (again if true) and if so it remains to be seen how the backward compatibility stacks up, everyone who has invested lots of money in expensive A-mount lenses will be watching that one closely.
Greg
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

I put that down to an April fools joke :lol:
But hey maybe not!

I've no idea what Sony's plans are (I suspect they don't know either)
Anyway they'll have to come up with a better solution if they are thinking about E mount only with adaptors. For starters that bulky adaptor with the light sucking mirror isn't going to swing it, they would have to have an adaptor that drives AF on all lenses with no mirror

Some will point out that there are a few decent lenses out there, the 35mm f2.8 looks ok, yes it's WR. But how exciting is a slow prime with no IS and a price tag of £600+?
Unless they can come up with better pricing, and faster glass I very much doubt they will pull in a lot of users. They'll shift a few A7's no question, but people won't be buying Sony lenses much.
Wes Gibbon
Oligarch
Posts: 159
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:16 pm
Location: Peterborough, U.K.
Contact:

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by Wes Gibbon »

bfitzgerald wrote: the 35mm f2.8 looks ok, yes it's WR.
Forgive my ignorance, but what does WR stand for?
Vidgamer
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:37 am

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by Vidgamer »

bfitzgerald wrote:I don't really see where mirrorless is more appealing for most users. Unless you are a travel photographer, then maybe
Not dismissing the offerings as there are some decent ones out there.
But it really boils down to

1: Want a smaller body (only really micro 4/3 has smaller lenses)
As I pointed out in another thread, m43 lenses aren't necessarily much smaller, at least at wider angles, and particularly if you compare the entire system, including the camera. For tele lengths, sure, you can get much longer reach in a smaller package, although I'm not sure that it matters as much there to most people. For birding, m43 has a distinct advantage.

For bodies, Sony has really been able to keep the size down. The original Nex-5 really is a nice compact camera. It probably would have been a better travel camera with the 16-50 instead of the 18-55, but Sony got there eventually.

When you start comparing to A-mount, the E-mount cameras are much smaller and lighter. This is nice when lugging it around all day.

If you don't mind the larger cameras and lenses, then sure, stick with A-mount. I have long thought that the main advantage to mirrorless cameras was the size factor. Cost, in theory, should be less, although it seems to be priced about the same as DSLRs. Then again, what FF DSLR is priced as low as the A7? Perhaps the difference is that Canikon are willing to take less profit on entry-level DSLRs in order to get people into their system.
2: Might want to play with MF lenses off ebay for budget minded lens buyers
Before the SLT models, getting video from DSLRs was a problem, also solved by the Nex.
Outside of that (and A mount have quite a lot of s/h AF legacy lenses at good prices) I'm not sold on switching from DSLR to ILC
Maybe if ILC makers actually started to price their products at DSLR beating levels I could give them a thumbs up on that front.
Have you priced the A3000 lately? ;-)

Given all of the legacy glass, you can often find better deals with DSLRs, at least for Sony's models. I never bought one Sony-branded lens for A-mount. I'm not sure how that worked out well for Sony. :-) I bought Tamron and some used lenses, etc.

Looking at new-lens prices for DSLR lenses, except for very limited models (like 50mm), things seem pretty expensive. For other brands, you might be forced into buying new lenses as the screw-drive might not be supported.

So, I'm not sure that it's as simple as insisting that prices be lowered. It's unrealistic to expect Sony to price new E-mount lenses to compete with used A-mount lenses. And yet, they did provide adapters so you can buy and use those if you wish.
Vidgamer
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:37 am

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by Vidgamer »

Greg Beetham wrote:...
The other one sounds like it is going to be mirrorless and wear an A-mount, (again if true) and if so it remains to be seen how the backward compatibility stacks up, everyone who has invested lots of money in expensive A-mount lenses will be watching that one closely.
Greg
It seems pretty obvious to me -- if Sony improves the on-sensor PDAF enough to be as good as traditional PDAF, they can finally drop the mirror. This simplifies the design of the camera, saving money.

Despite claims that Sony has no plans for the future, I suspect that this has been their goal for years. SLT was just a necessary first-step in this direction.

I guess we'll have to see.
Vidgamer
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:37 am

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by Vidgamer »

bfitzgerald wrote:Greg the words "free" and "Sony" rarely go together.
I said a while back Sony should bundle free flash adaptors with all their bodies, if Sony won't put a £25 flash adaptor in the box (which probably costs about £1 to make if not less) there isn't a lot of hope they'll put an A mount one in there!
Why do you keep thinking about buying E-mount? I thought you didn't need the small size and want to keep using your A-mount lenses? Sony is happy to keep selling you A-mount cameras.
I agree none of my lenses fit on an E mount body, so why would I bother to buy one?
Do you feel like you're being forced to buy one? Don't want one, don't get one. At least you can fit your A-mount lenses on with an adapter, unlike other mirrorless camera brands. Options are good...
Looking at the recent ho hum reviews some of the FE mount lenses have got (24-70mm f4 looks weak) I'm not sure Sony are on the right path here at all
They already had a system camera with a decent range of lenses..

And didn't really bother to develop that properly, why would anyone assume E Mount is destined for great things :roll:
Minolta had an even longer time to develop "properly" and still couldn't break through. There's really nothing Sony could do in making a camera copying Canikon that can get people to buy Sony instead of Canikon; competing head-on didn't work before and still doesn't.

Well, scoff at E-mount if that helps you feel better, but it actually is a good working system, even if it is not a DSLR replacement for some. For most people, it will do everything that is needed for a camera system.

FE is expensive, but it's obviously aimed at a premium market. If on a budget and you want FF, maybe A-mount is the way to go, at least if you have a stack of legacy lenses. By the way, can they resolve 24mp or even 36mp? Probably most of the primes but I bet most of the zooms fall short.
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Nex-7 vs OM-D. A personal take

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

Vidgamer wrote: Why do you keep thinking about buying E-mount? I thought you didn't need the small size and want to keep using your A-mount lenses? Sony is happy to keep selling you A-mount cameras.

FE is expensive, but it's obviously aimed at a premium market. If on a budget and you want FF, maybe A-mount is the way to go, at least if you have a stack of legacy lenses. By the way, can they resolve 24mp or even 36mp? Probably most of the primes but I bet most of the zooms fall short.

Ok let's start at the top.
Sony want to keep selling me A mount bodies..right like what?
An A58 that does nothing better than my A57 (again the classic always upgrade not downgrade new models mistake again and again - first seen with the A230)
The A77 is only worth a look for me if the price dumps down a bit more, A65 isn't really cheap enough to bother with (it's priced too near to the A77)

There are a few bits on the A77 that might be useful AF fine tune and GPS and better build/dual dials..but the price has to be right (it's an older model)
And I'm def not in the market for lashing out the £1800 on the A99

So the choices are quite limited for A Mount users right now, that's because Sony don't really have a proper range of models, and they're out of date on a couple. Most of the time I think about a second hand body (that's not exactly going to make Sony much money)

I'm quite happy with the lenses I have, no doubt some of the lenses might struggle at higher resolution..some would likely do well enough.
Pretty pleased I never invested a huge sum in some of the premium offerings, whilst lenses tend to hold their value fairly well..with an uncertain future I won't take a huge bath if things turn sour.

Sony's a jack of all master of none, that's their problem. Try this..not working, oh let's try something else, then try something else
Persistence reaps rewards, that's my take
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests