RX Nex? Seriously?

For discussion of the E and FE mount mirrorless system
OneGuyKs
Grand Caliph
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:20 pm

RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby OneGuyKs » Wed Sep 11, 2013 3:33 am

Why on earth call ir RX Nex? Just call it full-frame Nex, as SAR has reported for months that at least 3 such cameras are in development.

This has nothing to do with RX series which are fixed lens cameras developed by cybershot department.

OneGuyKs
Grand Caliph
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:20 pm

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby OneGuyKs » Wed Sep 11, 2013 9:21 am

OneGuyKs wrote:Why on earth call ir RX Nex? Just call it full-frame Nex, as SAR has reported for months that at least 3 such cameras are in development.

This has nothing to do with RX series which are fixed lens cameras developed by cybershot department.



http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/three-e- ... -5-months/

User avatar
Greg Beetham
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6155
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby Greg Beetham » Wed Sep 11, 2013 2:45 pm

It’s still only a rumour despite the rating, there is nothing preventing Sony (judging by past behavior) from bringing out another mount more suited to FF sensors, one that supersedes the E-mount, say a larger diameter ‘R’ mount, relegating the E-mount to the back burner.
Within a few months people would forget about the old dinosaur E-mount as everyone clamors for the new FF R-mount (and accessories).
Or convexly they could bring the E-mount out in FF at high MP’s 36 or 40 and have on sensor stabilization at 24MP APS-H crop. And if they didn’t actually say so no one would know, you could still say it had a FF sensor, which indeed it would have.
Greg

David Kilpatrick
Site Admin
Posts: 6248
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
Location: Kelso, Scotland
Contact:

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby David Kilpatrick » Tue Oct 15, 2013 12:25 am

I guess you've all seen the pix now and realise it's an RX-NEX hybrid as I was originally told. Inter-department development - or hijacking of one department's ideas by another.

David

OneGuyKs
Grand Caliph
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:20 pm

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby OneGuyKs » Tue Oct 15, 2013 8:47 am

David Kilpatrick wrote:I guess you've all seen the pix now and realise it's an RX-NEX hybrid as I was originally told. Inter-department development - or hijacking of one department's ideas by another.


They did copy RX1 style, but the main speculation in your article that APSC Nex lenses won't work with the new camera was not true (hopefully it isn't true, but we won't know for 24 more hours).

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3638
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Tue Oct 15, 2013 11:24 am

Why would you want to use APS-C lenses on a FF body?
Unless you were in a tight corner I fail to see the logic.

Now folks might want to use FF lenses on an APS-C body I get that part.

OneGuyKs
Grand Caliph
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:20 pm

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby OneGuyKs » Tue Oct 15, 2013 5:16 pm

bfitzgerald wrote:Why would you want to use APS-C lenses on a FF body?
Unless you were in a tight corner I fail to see the logic.


Really? You fail to see logic that some of the smaller lenses that you own can still be used on your FF camera in crop mode?

APSC crop on 24 MP FF is still higher than 10 MP

User avatar
KevinBarrett
Emperor of a Minor Galaxy
Posts: 2562
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 5:32 pm
Location: Seattle, Washington, USA
Contact:

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby KevinBarrett » Sat Oct 19, 2013 7:31 am

bfitzgerald wrote:Why would you want to use APS-C lenses on a FF body?
Unless you were in a tight corner I fail to see the logic.

Now folks might want to use FF lenses on an APS-C body I get that part.


Many APS-C lenses give more coverage than their native format would utilize. Most have an image circle that would allow for a 1:1 aspect with the full height of the full-frame sensor.
Kevin Barrett
-- Photos --

agorabasta
Viceroy
Posts: 1198
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:41 pm

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby agorabasta » Sat Oct 19, 2013 1:07 pm

KevinBarrett wrote: Most have an image circle that would allow for a 1:1 aspect with the full height of the full-frame sensor.

In fact, all real (non-Canon) APSC lenses must cover full-height 1:1 FF crop simply because the FF height is only slightly greater than the APSC width, plus there's some extra APSC circle diameter margin to allow IS function, with both the IBIS/ILIS cases.

But there are some quite unfortunate exceptions, like the infamous 1680ZA that often can't properly cover the native APSC circle at the wide end due to poor design. And then there are the native Sony APSC E-mount lenses that all have a rectangular shade right after the rear element.
Furthermore, most of the APSC lens hoods won't allow the full lens image circle through - but that's a minor issue.

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3638
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Sat Oct 19, 2013 3:07 pm

Some APS-C lenses will cover more area, some might just pass for FF coverage at some focal lengths.
Still I think some won't do well at all, esp not as above 16-80mm, I can say right now forget about the 18-135mm for FF too, and other wider crop lenses are likely to not be usable. This is a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 on a FF body:

http://g1.img-dpreview.com/96C8C224E48A ... A2F600.jpg

So yeah forget about it.
Tele lenses should fare better, but then why would you be buying crop tele lenses anyway? Unless it's some kit job you got for a song.

Other point is, with the rather decent number of FF lenses around for A mount esp s/h Minolta gems (plenty of primes and some decent zooms) I can't see many using crop lenses that much. Once you open up the MF lenses around in fairly big numbers and some dirt cheap, the APS-C playing around doesn't see half as much fun as it might have been.

Maybe we should be asking ourselves if we even want or need FF anyway?
Remember DK's article from a few years back, maybe he'll do a new one to reflect this new a7 release.

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2008/10/1 ... alpha-900/

agorabasta
Viceroy
Posts: 1198
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:41 pm

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby agorabasta » Sat Oct 19, 2013 3:38 pm

bfitzgerald wrote: This is a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 on a FF body:

http://g1.img-dpreview.com/96C8C224E48A ... A2F600.jpg

The author left the hood on - quite dumb of him :lol:

OneGuyKs
Grand Caliph
Posts: 270
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:20 pm

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby OneGuyKs » Sat Oct 19, 2013 8:39 pm

The title: "Sony A7 merges NEX and RX lines"

is still misleading, Yes, A7 copies some of the external design from RX1, but it's still an E-mount camera.

RX1, RX10, RX100 are fixed lens cybershot cameras.

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3638
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Sat Oct 19, 2013 8:53 pm

agorabasta wrote:
bfitzgerald wrote: This is a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 on a FF body:

http://g1.img-dpreview.com/96C8C224E48A ... A2F600.jpg

The author left the hood on - quite dumb of him :lol:



Well I can vouch on my film 7's that mounting a 17-50mm Tamron shows the image circle very clearly at all focal lengths and apertures.
Same for the 18-135

35mm f1.8 does not but I'd be doubtful of it's FF performance as it has some vignetting on APS-C
The 18-70mm shows strong vignetting until about 28mm, I'd say from 35mm up it would work ok but why bother plenty of lenses dirt cheap that cover 35-70mm well I can think of 2 anyway ;-)

agorabasta
Viceroy
Posts: 1198
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:41 pm

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby agorabasta » Sat Oct 19, 2013 10:10 pm

Barry, having a good 1:1 crop out of an FF frame is a very nice thing, moreso if the viewfinder allows for such a crop framing. That's what I'm interested in.

But quite unfortunattely, the pixel density of even the a7r is far too low to ensure proper 'analogue' rendering of fine textures and edges. Though we shall see if blurring by the microlenses, as seen in the a7r, can really deliver. Btw, the D800e does not deliver in that particular respect.

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3638
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: RX Nex? Seriously?

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Sun Oct 20, 2013 2:54 pm

How much resolution do you need though?
50mp?

I don't doubt higher resolution sensors will turn up, I only hope they have the sense to offer smaller raw files aka Canon style.
Chewing through huge file sizes is going to be a chore for some types of shooting (ie low light)

I think even 24mp and 36mp is questionable for high ISO shooting.


Return to “Alpha E-Mount system”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests