Later NEX models I would like to see

[bakubo]

Sounds pretty reasonable to me

That is what I was aiming for. Nothing outlandish or a long wish-list of features that are so specifically tailored to my own selfish wants that few others would be interested.

[bakubo]

When you stop and think about it, it's no wonder the camera manufacturers were happy too phase out the rangefinder/viewfinder and just rely on the rear screen, especially when it comes to large zoom ranges.

Yes, for some of the current digicams that have huge zoom ranges I agree with you. I would just like a carry-everywhere pocket camera with a larger sensor. I carry a digicam now that has a tiny sensor, but it also has IS, an OVF, a built-in flash, and a retractable 35-140mm (equivalent) f2.6-5.5 lens. Something sort of similar based on NEX that has somewhat similar specs (like what I described as the #1 camera in my OP) would be really great for my pocket. For a carry-everywhere pocket camera I don't want extra doo-dads such as an accessory EVF or separate flash. Self-contained and compact.

I think that lots of tiny sensor digicam users who want better IQ want exactly the same thing. Yeah, I know, some of them don't care about the OVF -- often because they have never used one or don't really realize when it works better than the LCD though. Anyway, I hope Sony comes out with one. Or, maybe it will be Canon or one of the other companies. Doesn't really matter much who does it.

[Greg Beetham]

I don't think it's dooable, if you had a 35-140 zoom f2.8-5.6 lens on an APS-C format sized sensor, I think the lens is going to be something like the size of the CZ16-80 or similar, and therefore no longer compact. The lens is eminently capable of being designed and built of course, no problem there, it just won't be small.
Greg

[Vidgamer]

When you stop and think about it, it's no wonder the camera manufacturers were happy too phase out the rangefinder/viewfinder and just rely on the rear screen, especially when it comes to large zoom ranges.

Yes, for some of the current digicams that have huge zoom ranges I agree with you. I would just like a carry-everywhere pocket camera with a larger sensor. I carry a digicam now that has a tiny sensor, but it also has IS, an OVF, a built-in flash, and a retractable 35-140mm (equivalent) f2.6-5.5 lens. Something sort of similar based on NEX that has somewhat similar specs (like what I described as the #1 camera in my OP) would be really great for my pocket. For a carry-everywhere pocket camera I don't want extra doo-dads such as an accessory EVF or separate flash. Self-contained and compact.

I think that lots of tiny sensor digicam users who want better IQ want exactly the same thing. Yeah, I know, some of them don't care about the OVF -- often because they have never used one or don't really realize when it works better than the LCD though. Anyway, I hope Sony comes out with one. Or, maybe it will be Canon or one of the other companies. Doesn't really matter much who does it.

So how is the OVF in your digicam? Sufficient? I had a Nikon digicam with a tiny OVF and a 3x zoom. I quickly learned to prefer the screen on the back. My next one was a Sony, and again with a tiny hard to use OVF with a 4x zoom. I learned techniques to stabilize myself and/or the camera.

Anyway, I don't think it's just Sony -- even my previous film camera had an unpleasant OVF, but it was a bit better than the digital cameras, from what I can recall. The camera manufacturers have been dumbing-down the OVFs for years. I went back to Mom's Trip 35, and that was a nice big OVF. They don't/won't make those anymore in a P&S type camera, I think. Although, having a fixed lens made it easier, I'm sure. The other cameras had to build in a mechanical zoom.

I was kind of surprised that Sigma went to the work of making a large-sensor fixed-lens camera and then didn't put an OVF on there. Although, it probably wouldn't work with their digital zoom, but I'm sure that would have been accepted....

So, I have given up on the idea that a decent OVF is going to happen. Maybe if they improve the EVF technology, that would be good. Now if they can stop putting a bump at the top of the camera....

[bakubo]

I don't think it's dooable, if you had a 35-140 zoom f2.8-5.6 lens on an APS-C format sized sensor, I think the lens is going to be something like the size of the CZ16-80 or similar, and therefore no longer compact. The lens is eminently capable of being designed and built of course, no problem there, it just won't be small.

Actually, I suggested an 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 on APS-C, not an 35-140mm f2.8-5.6. Take a look at my OP again.

[bakubo]

So how is the OVF in your digicam? Sufficient? I had a Nikon digicam with a tiny OVF and a 3x zoom. I quickly learned to prefer the screen on the back. My next one was a Sony, and again with a tiny hard to use OVF with a 4x zoom. I learned techniques to stabilize myself and/or the camera.

It is okay and sufficient. It shows about 80% and it is a reasonable size, but I am good at judging what it doesn't show. When the LCD is not appropriate the OVF works just fine. Would a 100% OVF and big be better? Sure, but do you really think you are going to get that in a compact camera? I doubt if it has ever existed in any ever made. You have to be realistic. You know what they say, don't make the perfect the enemy of the good.

Besides bright sun when the LCD doesn't work well at all it is sometimes not good at night or in the dark (theater, etc.). An LCD is terrible in dark environments where you shouldn't be rude to be illuminating everyone around you. It disturbs other people sometimes and also affects your eyes' dark adaptation. An LCD at night is not good, generally.

[Greg Beetham]

Actually, I suggested an 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 on APS-C, not an 35-140mm f2.8-5.6. Take a look at my OP again.

Uh oh, looks like one of those who said what when situations, yeah Henry, that's what I thought you said, and that's the one I thougt would be a plausable APS-C compact lens, originally, (the one I acknowledged in my first post), it's just that when you mentioned the 35-140 lens I thought you also referred back too the OP in that post as well, so I thought maybe you really were wanting a much bigger lens after all...if possible. Be that as it may, it always has a potential too get confusing when various format sizes are discussed at the same time with various lenses, there have been at least three formats so far in this discussion, (including the desired APS-C format) so I think I may have missunderstood the intent of the inclusion of the small format camera wtih the 35-140 lens, actually I'm still not sure, come to think of it.
Greg

[bakubo]

Uh oh, looks like one of those who said what when situations, yeah Henry, that's what I thought you said, and that's the one I thougt would be a plausable APS-C compact lens, originally, (the one I acknowledged in my first post), it's just that when you mentioned the 35-140 lens I thought you also referred back too the OP in that post as well, so I thought maybe you really were wanting a much bigger lens after all...if possible. Be that as it may, it always has a potential too get confusing when various format sizes are discussed at the same time with various lenses, there have been at least three formats so far in this discussion, (including the desired APS-C format) so I think I may have missunderstood the intent of the inclusion of the small format camera wtih the 35-140 lens, actually I'm still not sure, come to think of it.

No problem. I was just telling some of the basic specs of the digicam I currently keep in my pocket all the time. Yeah, all these different size sensors make talking about focal lengths a can of worms.

[Danjojo_Resurrected1]

I agree bakubo...even have some guys over at dpreview believing the aperture value of the mini cams will give them the same light as it will with larger sensor cameras

I would personally purchase a NEX-5 and a more digital rangefinder style NEX both if available. Hopefully they do better with the size of the higher spec'd NEX models and we see one with the features you want that is only a little larger than the NEX-3/5.

Poor man's pocketable Leica M9 with great HD video for those times times we want to capture the sound and essence of the environment a little more.

[KevinBarrett]

I wonder if the NEX mount would make it any easier to design a super-fast zoom lens for the APS sensor. There are some pretty neat lenses available to MFT, most notably the 14-35mm f/2 and 35-100mm f/2 zooms. Could we see something slightly more modest to give the system some real exclusive attraction, say, like a 16-50mm f/2-2.8?

[Danjojo_Resurrected1]

I believe so Kevin, I think there will be a relatively fast CZ zoom and "normal" focal length CZ prime coming soon. Just hope the prices are gentle

[Greg Beetham]

I doubt the prices will be overly gentle for a fastish G or Zeiss lens in APS-C format (on the e-mount), of the high quality Oly zooms that Kevin mentioned (might as well include yet another format with it's image circle requrements), the 35-100 f2 (70-200 equiv) is 1.65Kg (3.64lb) has a 77mm filter and is priced at over $2000 USD, the other, the 14-35 f2 (28-70 equiv) is similar, it also has a 77mm filter 0.9Kg (1.98lb) and a roughly similar price tag.
Pentax have an actual APS-C lens that is fast and has a decent wide angle to mini telephoto, the 16-50 f2.8 ED (24-75 equiv), but there again it has a 77mm filter and weighs 0.65Kg (1.32lb) and it's price is around $1500 USD.
The Pentax 18-55 (27-84.5 equiv) f3.5-5.6 is getting close to the lens originally proposed for an APS-C rangefinder type camera with high IQ, it has a 52mm filter and only weighs 230gm...if Sony wanted too they might/should be able to make a compact extending 'fixed' version of that lens, and still not make the camera overly bulky and heavy.
Greg

[bfitzgerald]

It's all down to marketing now for Sony and NEX. Time to wheel out Brian Smith and Nigel Barker to start raving about them

[Vidgamer]

It's all down to marketing now for Sony and NEX. Time to wheel out Brian Smith and Nigel Barker to start raving about them

Given the initial excitement over the cameras, maybe they won't need to.

[bakubo]

This morning I had a bit of a shock. I have been using Canon A-series digicams for the last 5-6 years. I had a Canon A70, then an A540, and then 2 years ago I got an A590 IS. I like them because they also have an OVF. The A590 IS has IS too. Well, I thought this morning that it is about time to get a new digicam to keep in my pocket all the time so I started checking to see what is available now. I figured I would start by looking at the current Canon A-series, but guess what? No more OVF. In fact, it looks like the last digicam they made with an OVF (a smaller OVF than the A-series) was the Canon SD1200 IS almost 1.5 years ago. It looks like the only digicam Canon makes now that still has an OVF is the Canon G10/G11. Too big and much too heavy as my go-everywhere pocket digicam. I then started looking at Sony, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, Fuji, Panasonic, etc. It looks to be the same everywhere. They were common just a few years ago.

The rear LCD is fine sometimes, but it has lots of problems. An OVF is fine sometimes, but it also has problems. Neither one is perfect. Having both though is a whole lot closer to perfect. Over the last few years the digicam makers have been pretty successful in training a new generation to not expect a good composing aid so now they accept having only the rear LCD. This is not good in my opinion, but it does bring a bit more money to the companies so they are happy.

By the way, most of the photos I have posted in my tiny sensor photo thread were taken with relatively cheap Canon A70, A540, and A590 IS digicams. Two or three of the photos are from the Minolta D7i. The ones I just posted were from the 2mp Olympus D-510Z:

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/forum/vie ... =17&t=4195