Photoclubalpha

The SAR chap is getting more and more exited about rumoured Sony release of two NEX FF cameras. Latest they will look like Olymups OMD. However the interesting bit relates to sensor sizes and potential customers.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-chea ... has-36-mp/
So his Class 5 rumour relates to a "cheap" model with 24Mp and "expensive" at 36Mp. So who will buy these cameras with the shortage of NEX dedicated FF lenses?
Assuming a flood of any FF lens to FF NEX adapters hitting the shelves shortly after release I can imaging Canon FF lens owners wanting 36Mp and buying and Nikon owners who cannot afford or carry a heavy D800 might also feel tempted. Maybe also users of a variety of lenses with different mounts might be interested. Pick any lens you need for a shoot and bring suitable adapters for my NEX FF.
About resulting image quality there is an interesting write-up at LensRentals.com on the quality issues they have detected
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/09 ... s-adapters

Even photographers who use adapters are often adapting a larger format lens to a smaller format camera (Leica full-frame lens to Micro 4/3 or APS-C camera, for example). Assuming the lens is higher quality than a native lens they would otherwise be shooting, they might be perfectly happy. Still, I should point out that I only tested these 35mm lenses out to +/- 12 degrees (their field of view is actually +/- 30 degrees). Even on a Micro 4/3 camera, the lens would have a field of view of +/- 15 degrees what we see here at 12 degrees should be noticeable.

In the examples above, though, center resolution is pretty much unchanged, it’s only when you get away from center that you start to see issues. So someone shooting portraits and centered subjects is unlikely to notice an issue. A landscape photographer, though, would likely see some problems along the edges of the image.

Putting a great lens on your camera via an adapter might still be better than an average native-mount lens. On the other hand, that great lens certainly wouldn’t be as good as it would be on its native-mount camera.

Will be interesting to see how this release plays out.

I have some doubts as to if an OM-D style body would appeal to users, but that's only going on comments I've read on SAR.
He's confirmed there is no IBIS, that scrubs it off the list instantly for some potential buyers

What matters most is price, if they have 2 models the 36mp one won't be cheap (will have no impact on the DSLR world at all but might appeal to "me want budget leica RF camera" niche users) If they are to have any chance at all with the 24mp model it's going to have to be priced below the Canikon FF offerings.

And it probably won't be.
If there ever was a chance to make a more affordable FF camera, this is it big time with production costs significantly lower on a NEX body this is a golden chance to "wow people " at least on price/sensor size.
If the 24mp NEX came in at £999, it would cause a storm just on that alone..

Other than that it's going to be a long while to get those native NEX FF Lenses out there

I'm interested to know why they may look similar to the Olympus OM-D, Olympus have an excuse, Legacy, Sony don't unless they are going to re model an old Minolta body.

Sony must have read Barry Fitzgerald's comments above on the pricing as they have hastily fed a rumour through SAR/sarc off.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-a7-p ... f-cameras/

The image on top shows you the two cheapest Full Frame Cameras on market, the Canon 6D (Around $1,900 now at Amazon) and the Nikon D600 (also around $1,900). According to sources the new cheapest FF camera on market will be the soon to be announced “Sony A7“. Body only will be priced around 1600-1700 Euro/Dollars and there will be a kit option with the 28-70mm lens for less than 2000 Euro/Dollars. I will get the 100% final price soon.

UPDATE: While the A7 with 24MP is priced well below the $2000 mark the A7r with 36MP will be priced above $2,000!

Personnally I would wait and see if this is true. In any event I have no interest in FF cameras at this juncture. All my current cameras A580/A550/NEX-6/NEX-5N and RX100 can deliver what I require as long as I select the right camera as appropriate for the objrct I want to depict.

Well there would be little point in having 2 really expensive NEX FF bodies.
I'm sure one will be priced "at a more reasonable level" but I think it a tad unlikely Canon and Nikon users will dump their mounts in big numbers to buy one.

There is a market for this, no question. But it's not going to have any effect on the top 2 makers for many reasons.
The big mistake is trying to do affordable with E mount, and not A mount, that's my take.

I'm confused.

So let's say Sony releases a 24Mp FF short registration / cell phone UI camera (let's call it NEX-FF for the time being) with ILIS 28-70 native lens for $1999.99

What's the draw for people who don't know about or care about using non-native FF manual focus lenses?

For a-mount users: Is the IQ expected to be better than the A99 (with a real UI) and fast PDAF + bells and whistles and adapterless ability to use many different new and second hand a-mount lenses, all of which are stabilized on the A99, but not on the NEX-FF. And that sub $2000 price just went over $2k when they have to add on an a-mount to e??? adapter and more $ to get fast PDAF. And once you add the adapter + a-mount lens, the size difference advantage (to some a disadvantage*) of the NEX goes away. * I have the NEX-7 that I use with legacy manual focus lenses and find it very cramped and uncomfortable compared with my A700 and A100.

Are Canikon users dying to pay $1700 + adapter to get the ability to use their lenses unstabilized?

Are there really enough legacy lens users who want to buy a NEX-FF to make this worthwhile for Sony? Or is this (assuming rumor is real) just another Sony A230/A330 (expensive) marketing test?

What's the draw for the general FF market?

tom

There is no real draw, it's just an experiment.
The general Full frame pull is partly marketing, and some reality.

I know some APS-C users who desire or have gone FF because they wanted: better IQ, shallower DOF, be able to use their FF Lenses as intended, and better low light. FF will always have some attraction for people as those points are valid and yes that is a general FF appeal.
On the other hand the actual benefits of FF v APS-C cost wise are quite poor really. Yes you get all that but is it worth the fairly big outlay to get there? In the case of the A99 most will say no it's not worth 3-4x the cost of an APS-C body.

Canikon have it a bit better as they have more affordable bodies, but again the gap/benefits/cost of APS-C to FF isn't worth it for most (at this time)
In the case of NEX we will have to wait and see what these bodies are offering in terms of design and functionality. But you are correct relatively few FF Canikon users are going to consider a FF NEX, unless they have specific needs such as more compact bodies/travel etc etc.

FF NEX Isn't likely to appeal to many a Mount users either if there is no IBIS, it might to some but with a costly adaptor and more bulk less so.
The problem with NEX is just as Phil Askey said years ago.."small bodies with not that small lenses"

Situation will only be worse with FF NEX lenses, those Zeiss lenses are not small and are not suited to a small handling body (maybe one reason an OM-D type body is on the cards?)
Until these ILC makers work out that they are targeting an entirely different customer than the average DSLR user, then they will continue to live in a bubble devoid of what's really going on.

There is nothing wrong with making FF cameras, they do have some appeal and some benefits. It's about making the right FF cameras for the market at appropriate price points. Anyway I think most A mount users find FF too expensive right now, and largely irrelevant for their needs. After looking at the A99 price fiasco it convinced me of the huge cost savings staying with APS-C, which is probably good enough for many people anyway. Unless this NEX turns up at a super low price point it's not going to generate much interest bara niche market or those who want bragging rights to FF

twm47099 wrote:I'm confused.

So let's say Sony releases a 24Mp FF short registration / cell phone UI camera (let's call it NEX-FF for the time being) with ILIS 28-70 native lens for $1999.99

What's the draw for people who don't know about or care about using non-native FF manual focus lenses?

For a-mount users: Is the IQ expected to be better than the A99 (with a real UI) and fast PDAF + bells and whistles and adapterless ability to use many different new and second hand a-mount lenses, all of which are stabilized on the A99, but not on the NEX-FF. And that sub $2000 price just went over $2k when they have to add on an a-mount to e??? adapter and more $ to get fast PDAF. And once you add the adapter + a-mount lens, the size difference advantage (to some a disadvantage*) of the NEX goes away. * I have the NEX-7 that I use with legacy manual focus lenses and find it very cramped and uncomfortable compared with my A700 and A100.

Are Canikon users dying to pay $1700 + adapter to get the ability to use their lenses unstabilized?

Are there really enough legacy lens users who want to buy a NEX-FF to make this worthwhile for Sony? Or is this (assuming rumor is real) just another Sony A230/A330 (expensive) marketing test?

What's the draw for the general FF market?

tom

Tom, I started getting confused from the time people were calling out for a FF NEX. All your points are valid and I think you could also throw in edge of field and corner performance issues with a lot of lenses as well, it’s going to be interesting though.
It’s all about stirring up some interest I think and hopefully people will take notice and maybe Sony will sell some cameras, despite the lack of a clear purpose, without any native lenses to call its own…so far.
Greg

bfitzgerald wrote:There is no real draw, it's just an experiment.
The general Full frame pull is partly marketing, and some reality.

I know some APS-C users who desire or have gone FF because they wanted: better IQ, shallower DOF, be able to use their FF Lenses as intended, and better low light. FF will always have some attraction for people as those points are valid and yes that is a general FF appeal.

Yes, there is a small niche market.

On the other hand the actual benefits of FF v APS-C cost wise are quite poor really. Yes you get all that but is it worth the fairly big outlay to get there? In the case of the A99 most will say no it's not worth 3-4x the cost of an APS-C body.

I agree. As you move up the scale, it's a case of diminishing returns. When you move up from 1/2.5" sensors, anything is going to look a lot better, particularly in poor light. But, you could say that moving from m43 to APS-C is not a huge jump. What's great is that there's almost no price-penalty for going with APS-C. You can get a Nex for the same price as competitors with smaller sensors.

Sure, I'll take FF for free, but at the prices that are still going around, forget it. Really, the Nex sets the IQ bar high anyway. For those who feel that they want/need FF, they can feel free to pay the premium. I don't mind.

Canikon have it a bit better as they have more affordable bodies, but again the gap/benefits/cost of APS-C to FF isn't worth it for most (at this time)
In the case of NEX we will have to wait and see what these bodies are offering in terms of design and functionality. But you are correct relatively few FF Canikon users are going to consider a FF NEX, unless they have specific needs such as more compact bodies/travel etc etc.

Well, sure. If the goal is to steal away existing FF DSLR users, you have to give them something compelling to pull them away. I think this is a very valid strategy, though. I have a friend with a FF Nikon and huge f2.8 lens who would consider a Nex (even APS-C) for more casual and travel use.

FF NEX Isn't likely to appeal to many a Mount users either if there is no IBIS, it might to some but with a costly adaptor and more bulk less so.
The problem with NEX is just as Phil Askey said years ago.."small bodies with not that small lenses"

Eh, it was a bit of a stretch then, and maybe less so now. (The 16-50 is very compact, and if anything, it seems too small on the Nex-6.) Somehow both the camera and lenses like the 18-55 are smaller than my DSLR equivalents (particularly when factoring the adapter to make up the registration distance). Maybe that's just me and other people have DSLRs with only pancake lenses (which would be come normal-sized once adding the adapter for the Nex). Sure, the 18-55 looks a bit big sticking out from such a small camera, but it's partially because it's such a small camera! Put something like the Sigma 30mm on it, and it looks quite normal, like rangefinders of the past. Then again, the Sigma doesn't have OSS. What do you want? A large sensor, tiny lenses, OSS, and keep the quality up? Oh, and a cheap price.

You have options with the different brands; each are going to have their plusses and minuses.

Situation will only be worse with FF NEX lenses, those Zeiss lenses are not small and are not suited to a small handling body (maybe one reason an OM-D type body is on the cards?)

Which Zeiss lenses? The Touits? They are probably fine for a small Nex body. I suppose it comes down to personal preference. Anyway, the 24-70 isn't a big range, and it will be interesting to see how small it can be made.

Until these ILC makers work out that they are targeting an entirely different customer than the average DSLR user, then they will continue to live in a bubble devoid of what's really going on.

Sometimes, particularly with the ILC cameras, I think there's been a bit of throw stuff at the wall and see what sticks. With the release of the A3000, Sony must think people like the DSLR ergonomics.

There is nothing wrong with making FF cameras, they do have some appeal and some benefits. It's about making the right FF cameras for the market at appropriate price points. Anyway I think most A mount users find FF too expensive right now, and largely irrelevant for their needs. After looking at the A99 price fiasco it convinced me of the huge cost savings staying with APS-C, which is probably good enough for many people anyway. Unless this NEX turns up at a super low price point it's not going to generate much interest bara niche market or those who want bragging rights to FF

What A99 price fiasco? I haven't been watching since the days of the A900, which at the time seemed to really undercut the competition, then they did it again with the A850.

But of course, most people are going to stick with smaller sensors. There's not a strong need for most of us to go FF. I think it's a bit silly myself.

Even the DSLR users (primarily over on DPR), to justify their need for FF, they cite things like photographing nighttime rodeo, and need low-noise. Ok, I could go up a stop in ISO and have more noise, but no, that would not be tolerable. And of course, no OSS/IBIS means that you might have more shake late at night. So, no doubt, there are other combinations that are going to have an advantage in certain situations, but still, it strikes me as an unusual case.

Anyway, I agree with you that FF is not interesting to me, not at this kind of pricing.

twm47099 wrote:I'm confused.

So let's say Sony releases a 24Mp FF short registration / cell phone UI camera

OK, I get it, you don't like the Nex UI! You are not alone. It's not so bad, but I could give them recommendations for improvements.....

(let's call it NEX-FF for the time being) with ILIS 28-70 native lens for $1999.99

What's the draw for people who don't know about or care about using non-native FF manual focus lenses?

Similar for people who bought the RX-1? If you want an FF sensor for maximum quality in a small package. A 28-70 would make a nice range for a travel camera.

For a-mount users: Is the IQ expected to be better than the A99 (with a real UI) and fast PDAF + bells and whistles and adapterless ability to use many different new and second hand a-mount lenses, all of which are stabilized on the A99, but not on the NEX-FF. And that sub $2000 price just went over $2k when they have to add on an a-mount to e??? adapter and more $ to get fast PDAF. And once you add the adapter + a-mount lens, the size difference advantage (to some a disadvantage*) of the NEX goes away. * I have the NEX-7 that I use with legacy manual focus lenses and find it very cramped and uncomfortable compared with my A700 and A100.

There may not be any advantage over an A99, unless you're interested in legacy primes or smaller sized cameras.

Are Canikon users dying to pay $1700 + adapter to get the ability to use their lenses unstabilized?

Are there really enough legacy lens users who want to buy a NEX-FF to make this worthwhile for Sony? Or is this (assuming rumor is real) just another Sony A230/A330 (expensive) marketing test?

What's the draw for the general FF market?

tom

Are you saying that if you want FF, then you only want a large DSLR? If that's true, then you're right, there's no market here. But it sounds to me that you're making a DSLR vs. ILC comparison more than APS-C vs. FF.

For myself, disregarding the arguments about FF, I've been waiting a long time for a "larger" sensor camera in a reasonably-sized package. I was excited when the Nex appeared, and I appreciate being able to maintain the quality I had in a DSLR. Maybe there are high-end users who feel similarly.

So, there probably is a market, if small.

Vidgamer wrote:

twm47099 wrote:I'm confused.

So let's say Sony releases a 24Mp FF short registration / cell phone UI camera

OK, I get it, you don't like the Nex UI! You are not alone. It's not so bad, but I could give them recommendations for improvements.....

(let's call it NEX-FF for the time being) with ILIS 28-70 native lens for $1999.99

What's the draw for people who don't know about or care about using non-native FF manual focus lenses?

Similar for people who bought the RX-1? If you want an FF sensor for maximum quality in a small package. A 28-70 would make a nice range for a travel camera.

For a-mount users: Is the IQ expected to be better than the A99 (with a real UI) and fast PDAF + bells and whistles and adapterless ability to use many different new and second hand a-mount lenses, all of which are stabilized on the A99, but not on the NEX-FF. And that sub $2000 price just went over $2k when they have to add on an a-mount to e??? adapter and more $ to get fast PDAF. And once you add the adapter + a-mount lens, the size difference advantage (to some a disadvantage*) of the NEX goes away. * I have the NEX-7 that I use with legacy manual focus lenses and find it very cramped and uncomfortable compared with my A700 and A100.

There may not be any advantage over an A99, unless you're interested in legacy primes or smaller sized cameras.

Are Canikon users dying to pay $1700 + adapter to get the ability to use their lenses unstabilized?

Are there really enough legacy lens users who want to buy a NEX-FF to make this worthwhile for Sony? Or is this (assuming rumor is real) just another Sony A230/A330 (expensive) marketing test?

What's the draw for the general FF market?

tom

Are you saying that if you want FF, then you only want a large DSLR? If that's true, then you're right, there's no market here. But it sounds to me that you're making a DSLR vs. ILC comparison more than APS-C vs. FF.

For myself, disregarding the arguments about FF, I've been waiting a long time for a "larger" sensor camera in a reasonably-sized package. I was excited when the Nex appeared, and I appreciate being able to maintain the quality I had in a DSLR. Maybe there are high-end users who feel similarly.

So, there probably is a market, if small.

When I wrote my post I was thinking from the POV of a legacy glass user, even though I was asking about the draw of a NEX-FF for adapterless users. Your post brought me back to the point - those who will use FF NEX e-mount glass on the NEX-FF.

But first a rant regarding your comment on the FF size cameras. I agree 100%. While there is some need for a larger DSLR (of any format) compared with a 35mm film camera. I believe that a lot of "FF must be big and heavy" is simply because big & heavy has always been the mark of "QUALITY" in cameras.

One thing I dislike about my KM7D and Sony A700 is that they are so much heavier than my Maxxum7 film camera (perfect size and weight), not to mention my Maxxum XTsi film camera (smallest comfortable size with carry all day and night weight.) Both were full frame cameras, but the quality cameras were the maxxum 9 (big & heavy), EOS 1V and EOS 3 (big & heavy), and the Nikon ?? (big & heavy). So when companies started making low resolution DSLRs that cost more than those quality film cameras they had to make sure they exuded quality, i.e. make them big & heavy. So now even with higher IQ cameras quality still means big & heavy.

Now back to my original point:
Assuming that the NEX-FF uses the current e-mount and short registration distance, I'll be very interested to see how the IQ away from the APS-C sized image circle will hold up. Will it have the quality that FF users will expect? Will it require special lens designs (reducing the compatibility with legacy glass, and possibly reducing the focal lengths/speeds of future compatible native lenses)? One of the reasons I accepted going from 35mm film to APS-C was that Minolta tended to cheat on the front diameter of their lenses causing a number of otherwise excellent lenses to vignette when using a hood or filter. Using those FF lenses on APS-C cameras solved that problem and also increased the image corner quality of my lower quality lenses. I expect (but would like to be proven wrong) that a NEX-FF won't just bring those problems back (although some vignetting should be curable by camera firmware) but make them worse.

Tom

To touch on a few areas.
No it's not going to be easy with a FF NEX on an optical level, they do have the benefit of software for corrections, and we will assume they will have to use a sensor with special micro lenses to ease issues. Vignetting can be an issue on FF even DSLR's, putting an optic that close to a sensor is a challenge esp a FF one.

The FF aspect is quite interesting because the APS-C v FF is quite an important area for many makers. There is a certain "prestige" associated with full frame, right or wrong I know a number of people and talk to quite a few and there is without doubt an element of "you're only really serious about photography is you are using FF gear"

I spoke to one photographer who worked for a paper and straight out asked him why he was using FF and not a crop body. I got a reply about "you get a real wide angle with FF" which is to a point true (though you can get UWA on crop bodies too) for a moment I though he meant you get less distortion with FF WA, but he was using a 24-105mm L lens, which is well known for hefty distortion! I'm sure I'm not the only one who has run across a blog or video featuring a keen American "soccer mom" who's started to take up photography...

And they rush out and go FF, with some meaty L lenses to back that aspiration up...mostly because nobody will take them seriously with a crop camera and a Tamron lens There has always been a gear aspiration element to photography and we all like to use "decent stuff" but you'd be surprised at the number of people who are quite new or green with photography and they load up their visa card in an epic fashion to get the "street cred" Same for lenses a friend of mine thinking about a 70-200mm lens for his Canon (and I gave him the rundown on the various options and I've used a few of them), the salesman's pitch is straight in at the 70-200mm f2.8 L IS II and "you'll always be thinking/wanting this lens so don't bother with the f4 or the f2.8 non IS"

I know of a few other folks who purchased L lenses openly admitting they did so not for the lenses themselves, but to look more "serious" I don't want people laughing at me with a non L lens, was one comment I heard. Marketing has a huge effect on people and they see photographers with meaty big FF bodies, and white lenses and they want to be the same.

Point of this is, whilst I can see the reason for a FF NEX to a degree (for some people), I know deep down that camera makers will never be able to sell people "just small" cameras. A FF NEX might be a potent camera for some folks, but it's never going to have the pull of a FF Canon with a white lens on it. I'm not saying I agree or even aspire to that, because I think we're all experienced enough to know what's important or not. But being out and about I see this thinking engrained in people in a very big way. You could quite happily use a micro 4/3 camera for serious work, but do you want to turn up to a wedding with a small camera, when some folks will be there with big beefy ones?

There is a lot of psychology with the photography business, even Sony themselves gave the new 70-400mm G a white paint job because the silver one didn't look as good. We have to try to understand the way things work here, that's why I'm not entirely sure a FF NEX is going to be a runway success for Sony. A FF Canon DSLR (or any FF DSLR) is to a point an object of desire for many, a NEX is just a NEX and it's not a head turner or "Pro" enough looking.

It looks as if "predictions" will soon be replaced with "reality". SAR chap getting quite exited about a possible release of a slew of Sony FF NEX type stuff 16 October.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-sony ... cotber-16/
He even believes that he knows what is coming to a Sony store near you shortly:

We already know what’s coming:
Sony A7 24MP E-mount FF camera
Sony A7R 36MP E-mount FF camera
Sony RX10 camera with fixed ultrazoom
Zeiss FE 24-70mm f/4.0 OSS
Sony G 28-70mm f/3.5-5.6
Zeiss FE 35mm f/2.8
Zeiss FE 55mm f/1.8
Zeiss FE 70-200mm f/4.0 OSS
and obviously many many many accessories…

Quite a mouthful to keep folks going. I understand that one of the accessories will be a converter of a sort to use Alpha FF lenses.
I imagine a flood of converters from China as well in the "keel water" to allow other fittings to be used. Whatever you may say about Sony, if this comes true at least they are trying. I believe he stated earlier there will be focus peaking so that focus with third party lenses will be slick.
Not for me though. I am asking for that upgraded NEX-6 with 20Mp sensor and improved EVF. Apparently Sony are not listening.

I'll be shocked and amazed if all of that is released soon.

I would expect Sony to update the 6 at some point. Maybe they think it has another year in it? Usually the better models have a longer lifespan and the entry level ones get replaced each year.

I can feel it creeping up on me ... I want a FF Nex

The 70-200 f4 sounds particularly interesting.

I'm in the grip of rampant consumerism, and there is no hope.