Nex Cameras as reviewed by DPReview

[pakodominguez]

The problem with interfaces (mix of buttons and graphic things...) is not how good, bad, easy, complicated, savvy or newbie oriented it is, but how fast and well you can learn how to use it. That's beyond ergonomics and it's call heuristic.

The Dimage 7/A series was a great example: lots of intimidating buttons, but after a week using it, everybody (newbies included) loved this cameras.

I agree, Pako. I too had a Dimage A1; it took a while to learn, but I loved it. There are signs that this may also be true about the NEX UI: not the easiest UI to learn, but very fast & fun once learned. As you say, we'll know soon.

True enough Pako. Apparently the UI was designed by the Sony Phone team which explains a lot! Personally I think these cameras will be a hit for the normal consumer. Even if they don't get new lenses, most likely they're busy enjoying the better image quality of the sensor than their old p&s. I found a NEX-5 demontration by Sony on Youtube here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slNiltQiS5c In it the guy gives a quick overview of the menus which I found quite interesting! Can't wait to get my NEX-5 in silver now!

I had the chance to play with a NEX5 at the SonyStyle store in Madison AVE (NYC) today (more here:http://www.photoclubalpha.com/forum/vie ... 467#p40467 ). I think the Interface is not that horrible, au contraire. It is not what a savvy or experienced photographer will expect but unless you are gauche and non technology friendly, it is as easy as a smarphone -I hope they'll bring "apps for that"!

[bakubo]

Been looking for this document for a few weeks. Basically this is the linchpin research that started a whole new era for of gorilla internet marketing.

http://ebusiness.mit.edu/research/paper ... Forums.pdf

This was eventually refined by this student who then became a prof somewhere else. basically they can calculate how much and what kind of influense they can use to manipulate a forum to gain the desired outcome. the Author goes by Chris now.

I beleive the Sony forums were an attempt by Sony to mitigate the damge DPR forums could do, as the research says the more real users with postivive stories there are the less harmfull the poisoning can be.

A company like amazon whouldn't be interested in forums unless there was a way they could make real money on them .. thats all I'm saying.

Very interesting! Thanks for posting this.

[bakubo]

It was sincere, without people in opposition I wouldn't have a way to spread the gospel Being serious, because you don't agree with every thing I say but you do so intelligently, some just turn to smart ass comments and parrot dpreview staff.

Like all of us, I am imperfect, but I try to keep things civil, sometimes even insert a bit of humor, even when I disagree with someone. After 10 years posting, off and on, on dpreview I don't have much I regret posting. Haven't been banned yet.

Something I hope you will acknowledge about my post that I linked to above is that I only discussed the downsides for me. I didn't bash NEX (although I can certainly do that too if I choose with only the dpreview moderators to answer to if I do, not other posters on the forum). I just explained why I wouldn't be buying the current versions. I explicitly stated that I could see why others do like it. If I had said I really wanted to get one, but I couldn't figure out how to get around the problems I saw, then I can understand you and bongo and maybe some others stepping in and trying to convince me I am wrong and that there are some easy, good workarounds. I never said that though. Some of the responses over there were hilarious. Seriously suggesting a different kind of reading glasses, surgery (which are ineffective), and other Rube Goldberg kludges or worse when there are other cameras that don't have any of the shortcomings for me and don't need the kludges. It was giving me some real laughs. I figured the posters were either getting paid by Sony or had gone off the deep end of true religious, non-thinking devotion.

[Danjojo_Resurrected1]

I think it is completely justified and indeed good for you to post how you feel, definitely if you have certain eye conditions it is only possible to be happy with certain cameras. I have problems some times when my contacts are acting up, often I wear just one for the next day or so because my eye became irritated (could just by some eye-glasses but I make things hard on my self).

Your self, WaltKnapp, and I think a few others did a good job explaining why it isn't suitable for you own personal use/purchase. I just get floored with laughter by some others though who think there is a some problems with the cameras that would not really exist in actual use. Mostly the headliner ISO adjustment issue but some others as well.

Nobody can really argue with people who have been into photography as long as you guys when it comes to what works for you, that would be just as ridiculous as the sort of stuff I've been complaining about. You gentlemen have the experience and results that show through.

People making blanket statements that the camera is a failure or too crippled though, that is incorrect and I feel I should point it out when possible so new guys might give it a fair shake if it seems it might be what they are looking for. Hopefully some people saw my posts more as trying to create balance than an effort to sell cameras for Sony. I definitely would never see a penny from it or receive any other type of compensation.

[bakubo]

I think it is completely justified and indeed good for you to post how you feel, definitely if you have certain eye conditions it is only possible to be happy with certain cameras.

My eye condition, presbyopia, is actually quite common in people over 40. From wikipedia:

"Similar to grey hair and wrinkles, presbyopia is a symptom caused by the natural course of aging. The first symptoms (described below) are usually first noticed between the ages of 40-50. The ability to focus on near objects declines throughout life, from an accommodation of about 20 dioptres (ability to focus at 50 mm away) in a child, to 10 dioptres at 25 (100 mm), and levels off at 0.5 to 1 dioptre at age 60 (ability to focus down to 1-2 meters only)."

People making blanket statements that the camera is a failure or too crippled though, that is incorrect and I feel I should point it out when possible so new guys might give it a fair shake if it seems it might be what they are looking for. Hopefully some people saw my posts more as trying to create balance than an effort to sell cameras for Sony. I definitely would never see a penny from it or receive any other type of compensation.

I not only agree with that, I encourage it, and have done it myself pretty often. Correcting misunderstandings, misinformation, and sometimes downright lies is a good deed. For example, for several years I have tried to correct some of the bad info about in-body and in-lens image stabilization.

Summary of in-body vs. in-lens IS advantages & disadvantages:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read. ... e=24966312

Speculations, marketing spin, hopes, fears, etc.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read. ... e=24966357

[Vidgamer]

.... They recommend to consumers but obviously have no clue what the consumers actually want. TONS of people would like some thing better than a compact provides but are intimidated by size, price, many buttons, etc. and Sony finally addressed it better than anybody else in a long time. To discard all of that over a few UI dislikes or perceived issues is quite ridiculous.
....

I like to hear complaints about auto mode. Who cares if some one isn't intersted in what the aperture is and just wants to use auto mode? But the Nex goes much farther than auto. The camera should cover a wide potential audience.

I read an interesting analogy recently on a different subject. At first, all automobiles were basically trucks. After a while, more comfortable cars were made. Luxuries added, such as not needing to hand crank to start. Meanwhile, trucks are still available to do the big hauling.

Making something easier and simpler doesn't mean it's being crippled or dumbed down, and if you need a dslr, you can still use one.

[Vidgamer]

Been looking for this document for a few weeks. Basically this is the linchpin research that started a whole new era for of gorilla internet marketing.
....
I beleive the Sony forums were an attempt by Sony to mitigate the damge DPR forums could do, as the research says the more real users with postivive stories there are the less harmfull the poisoning can be.

Do you mean the Backstage thing?

Does that mean that they lost the guerrilla marketing battle?

Or do you think the DPR staff thought Dandojo was a Sony plant and took offense to it even though Amazon wanted to help Sony? I'm really consused.

A company like amazon whouldn't be interested in forums unless there was a way they could make real money on them .. thats all I'm saying.

I figured it was mostly ads. How does kicking off Sony Nex fans make money?

[Greg Beetham]

Henry, question without notice,
you listed as one of the con's of the NEX for you as, the rear screen is the only means of user control, no evf/ovf availability for general use, in bright sunlight the rear screen only, being problematic (I tend too agree btw, sunlight near/in the tropics can be very bright in the summer if there is no cloud cover). As you carry a pocket P&S around habitually, do you have/use any workaround for this using that, or do you choose your moments/locations/composures etc.
If I catch the P&S bug...kaf kaf, I'll need to know what too expect and what to do about it, I know they don't do RAW, use rotten AA batteries, take forever to do anything, don't like too go above ISO400 and use little memory flakes that would blow off the table in a stiff breeze...but apart from that, the latest good ones might well be actually quite ok, for all I know.
Greg

[bakubo]

Henry, question without notice,
you listed as one of the con's of the NEX for you as, the rear screen is the only means of user control, no evf/ovf availability for general use, in bright sunlight the rear screen only, being problematic (I tend too agree btw, sunlight near/in the tropics can be very bright in the summer if there is no cloud cover). As you carry a pocket P&S around habitually, do you have/use any workaround for this using that, or do you choose your moments/locations/composures etc.
If I catch the P&S bug...kaf kaf, I'll need to know what too expect and what to do about it, I know they don't do RAW, use rotten AA batteries, take forever to do anything, don't like too go above ISO400 and use little memory flakes that would blow off the table in a stiff breeze...but apart from that, the latest good ones might well be actually quite ok, for all I know.

All of the digicams I have ever bought -- 5 so far -- have all had an OVF. There are fewer and fewer of those around though so that's a problem. The companies want to get rid of any kind of vf since it costs more and by eliminating it they can make more profit. They are little by little training a whole new generation of people to have no experience with a vf so those people will be happy to just use the LCD -- even when the LCD is almost useless (in bright sun, etc.).

[Javelin]

I read an interesting analogy recently on a different subject. At first, all automobiles were basically trucks. After a while, more comfortable cars were made. Luxuries added, such as not needing to hand crank to start. Meanwhile, trucks are still available to do the big hauling.

Making something easier and simpler doesn't mean it's being crippled or dumbed down, and if you need a dslr, you can still use one.

But it does and your truck analogy is a good one. Some places I go I need a 4x4 with high clearance and steep approach and departure angles and lots of power. in the 70's you could buy this truck off the lot. they've been gradually whittled away until the 90's when you people started rolling them over on highways and geting the lawyers all stired up now I can't buy one because there all 100k. I have to buy old junk because it's too expensive to buy new to rub the sides flat on trees and knock the stupid plastic bumpers off. I used to be able to pull plugs out of the floor and hose the interiors out when they got muddy. This voids the warranty... I asked... Sure now they sell more of them at much higher, CD included, leather seats and elecronic gadget, prices. but theres so few that will buy the one I want they don't build em.

Every time there are advancements to make a product fit a mass market someone is left behind.

[pakodominguez]

I read an interesting analogy recently on a different subject. At first, all automobiles were basically trucks. After a while, more comfortable cars were made. Luxuries added, such as not needing to hand crank to start. Meanwhile, trucks are still available to do the big hauling.

Making something easier and simpler doesn't mean it's being crippled or dumbed down, and if you need a dslr, you can still use one.

But it does and your truck analogy is a good one. Some places I go I need a 4x4 with high clearance and steep approach ...

Every time there are advancements to make a product fit a mass market someone is left behind.

Well, a Range Rover was intended as a "gentle farmer vehicle" (basically a truck for farmers with a little more money) and now is a luxurious car that can do everything that you ask it to do -if you can afford the price! Like an A900 by example

I wanted a NEX-like camera for a while because I love the A850 for work, but for everyday stuff or even for traveling, it is too big. The A2 is a wonderful camera up to 200 ASA and is not really pocketable. I bought and tried a couple of P&S but the quality is not what I expect and no RAW.

Now, if they can fix the wireless flash on it... until then I thin I'll buy a couple of LED light like this http://www.adorama.com/FPVL30L.html for stills and motion.

[pakodominguez]

That's the potential hazard alright, just because the average Joe now can have the resolving power of a DSLR in a mini camera doesn't necessarily translate into better photos, it's quite possible of course,

And? So what if every photo is poorly composed from a particular user? It still sounds to me like the elite class not wanting the commoners to have the capability of having better photos. What individuals do or not do with it is their problem, but at least give people the ability to move up from blurry photos. Give them a fighting chance!

This is an old discussion...

I recall going for a trial with a wedding studio in Paris. I always worked with a 35mm camera on what now we call "photojournalistic style" , but this people work with Mamiyas or Bronicas 4.5*6. The first approach was interesting, until I realized they use medium format just in order to have a bigger camera than the bride's cousin. They barely care about quality and used to buy the less expensive film they could get.

I did buy the 24-70 f2.8 because, even if I was fine with the 28-75 f2.8, the Zeiss label stop people asking me why I shot with Sony and no Canon as any other Pro (first, I'm not just another "Canon guy" and second, you can not fit this beauty on a CaNikon).

I don't think anybody will take better pictures because they buy a bigger or powerful camera. the only way to get better pictures is by taking more and more pictures. The excitement of having a new fancy camera will probably motivate the new owner to get out and take more pics -the launching time for the NEX cameras is also interesting because is Summertime in the northern hemisphere and people who can afford it will be able to afford holidays too

Regards

[Greg Beetham]

Ha of course Henry, I was forgetting the rangefinder type, my bad, I have been growing accustomed to observing people holding little cameras out in front and gazing at the rear screen, is that the same as accepting that that is normal? I guess it must be..
Greg

ps. I agree with you Javelin, if Toyota still made or re-introduced the Landcruiser model that I own I bet it would sell like hot cakes in the outback, the current model with it's aircon, fancy paint job and plush interior is far removed from what it was originally intended for, and with a price tag too suit. Even though the current one is still a decent off roader, it's too poofy, after shelling out all that moola one would be frightened to get a scratch on the duco.

[Greg Beetham]

This is an old discussion...

I recall going for a trial with a wedding studio in Paris. I always worked with a 35mm camera on what now we call "photojournalistic style" , but this people work with Mamiyas or Bronicas 4.5*6. The first approach was interesting, until I realized they use medium format just in order to have a bigger camera than the bride's cousin. They barely care about quality and used to buy the less expensive film they could get.

I did buy the 24-70 f2.8 because, even if I was fine with the 28-75 f2.8, the Zeiss label stop people asking me why I shot with Sony and no Canon as any other Pro (first, I'm not just another "Canon guy" and second, you can not fit this beauty on a CaNikon).
Good plan
I don't think anybody will take better pictures because they buy a bigger or powerful camera. the only way to get better pictures is by taking more and more pictures. The excitement of having a new fancy camera will probably motivate the new owner to get out and take more pics -the launching time for the NEX cameras is also interesting because is Summertime in the northern hemisphere and people who can afford it will be able to afford holidays too

Regards

I remember lusting after MF with a passion, there were a couple of photographers back then who used too shoot birds with MF (in a way that MF was good at, prearranged set piece photography and lighting at the nest, with a specially constructed hide, capturing the parents and chicks being fed), the results were far superior too what 35mm could do, with the detail/density that MF could produce. I eventually did get a camera, but never quite made it too the nest finding and hide stage, you really need a team effort on that, one person doesn't stand much chance of pulling it off, and none of my friends were dedicated enough to the idea too help. So I often ended up trying to use the camera for things it was not very good at, attempted family candids for example, the results were worse than if I’d used 35mm. Some things it could do well, portraiture, still life and scenes were good, and taking a few shots at the odd wedding, but my keeper rate at that was low, mostly. All in all I don’t think that having a superior picture taking machine made me take better photos ALL the time…now-days you can just about do everything that a MF camera can do with an A900/A850, and much, much easier for the photographer as well.
Greg

[Dusty]

I recall going for a trial with a wedding studio in Paris. I always worked with a 35mm camera on what now we call "photojournalistic style" , but this people work with Mamiyas or Bronicas 4.5*6. The first approach was interesting, until I realized they use medium format just in order to have a bigger camera than the bride's cousin. They barely care about quality and used to buy the less expensive film they could get.

I did buy the 24-70 f2.8 because, even if I was fine with the 28-75 f2.8, the Zeiss label stop people asking me why I shot with Sony and no Canon as any other Pro (first, I'm not just another "Canon guy" and second, you can not fit this beauty on a CaNikon).

I don't think anybody will take better pictures because they buy a bigger or powerful camera. the only way to get better pictures is by taking more and more pictures. The excitement of having a new fancy camera will probably motivate the new owner to get out and take more pics -the launching time for the NEX cameras is also interesting because is Summertime in the northern hemisphere and people who can afford it will be able to afford holidays too

Regards

Pako,

The reason most people used MF cameras at weddings was 2: The MF format has a much larger area 6x6 giving 4.16 times the negative size, and 4.5x6 giving 3.125 times the negative size. This equates to better enlargements, just as more MPs do in digital.

The second reason (for those of us who went square) was that we didn't have to pre-suppose just how a couple wanted their enlargements formatted - vertical or horizontal. Even the simple bridesmaids and groomsmen walking down the aisle, which you would *think* should be verticals, some will want horizontal to show that "Uncle Billy really did come", or other strange reasons.

Yes, some may have thought that cheaper film and a larger negative means I can get away with cutting corners, but remember that 35mm film was never pro film until the quality of film greatly improved. You wouldn't want to blow up too many 1930 era Kodachromes - even if it was only ISO 8!

When I went to a 4x5 view camera WOW! When you hold up a negative and can identify individuals from you family reunion group shop, you're floored! So size DOES matter. When I see some pro doing a wedding in 8MP, I wonder how the shots will turn out. Sure, today's film will allow good quality photos on 35mm, but mistakes are more easily corrected on bigger film. (Crooked/tilted, too far away, caught something/someone in the frame that needs to be cropped out, etc).

The photographer IS the most important part of taking pictures, but give me an a900 and you a 3MP P&S, and you'd be hard pressed to ever get a better result than me that's printable at 8x10.

Dusty