Later NEX models I would like to see

[bfitzgerald]

I've seen some talk about a 4/3 sensor compact as well no idea if there is any truth to that, but there are alternatives sensor wise

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format

A 1" seems reasonable too. Depends on what you are looking for though. Yes they need to improve sensor tech but the day of the larger sensor for compact must surely be soon. Can't image them slapping 20 megapixels on a small sensor and calling that progress.

[agorabasta]

It's also possible to expose a smaller (like 2x crop 6Mp) sensor four or five times shifting it a half-pixel diagonally off centre. With the shift there's a resolution gain, without the shift there's an ISO expansion benefit.

But it would require a high-quality global electronic shutter and a very fast sensor readout...

[bakubo]

I look at some older cameras, such as the following, and it makes me wonder and think some of the things I have said so far in this thread. The first camera has a tiny FF 35mm f2.8 and the other two have tiny FF 28mm f2.8 lenses. Of course, these aren't zoom lenses, but my point is that you might look at FF AF 35mm f2.8 and 28mm f2.8 lenses (A-mount, Canon mount, etc.). They are much, much larger. I take that to mean a couple of things. With a non-interchangeable lens camera the diameter and distance to the sensor can be chosen by the designer so they are able to create smaller lenses. Also, that without the need for an interchangeable mount, AF mechanism, and aperture mechanism that is common and standard for many lenses and bodies the designer has more flexibility to make the size smaller. Thoughts?

[David Kilpatrick]

Take a look inside the GR-1 - the 28mm lens has a huge rear element close to the film. It is an extreme example of a short backfocus inverted telephoto.

Sony 16mm E-lens - examine closely. The mount is designed to make the optical unit look wider in diameter than it is. The 16mm is a retrofocus design with a small front element and larger rear group. The mounting is just, I guess, to keep it in (or out?) of proportion.

David

[Vidgamer]

It's also possible to expose a smaller (like 2x crop 6Mp) sensor four or five times shifting it a half-pixel diagonally off centre. With the shift there's a resolution gain, without the shift there's an ISO expansion benefit.

But it would require a high-quality global electronic shutter and a very fast sensor readout...

Even without any fancy shifting hardware, if you are hand-holding and take several photos, they can be merged at the sub-pixel level in software. So, you could do this now with any camera, if you need higher resolution. There's a software package that does this for about $100, whose name escapes me at the moment.

(In the future, you could see the possibility of doing this in-camera, similar to HHT or AWB modes!)

[David Kilpatrick]

The software is PhotoAcute:

http://www.photoacute.com/

David

[agorabasta]

That software is only good for the fairly static objects.

What I'm talking about is keeping the total exposure and readout of a few stacking parts at about the normal exposure period.
The benefits could be huge - you could have ISO as low as you please and/or control the real physical resolution of the sensor to get better high ISO, you could combine video frames of a multitude of shorter exposures achieving perfect motion smoothness... and tons more of imaginable stuff.

The fast sensor readout may really be the way to go for very real progress in the nearest future.

[Vidgamer]

Now if some really progressive camera company decided too use a rear illuminated CMOS sensor in an APS-C compact instead of the traditional 'getting long in the tooth' front illuminated CCD's /CMOS's then the poo might really hit the fan, THAT could mean a smaller lighter lens design altogether.

If it's still APS-C size, when how does that make the lens lighter? Or do you hope to get that much efficiency by using a slower lens?

Sony has already stated that the back-illumination is only useful for small sensors. They use it in the HX5V which is a 1/2.5" sensor, and claim a 2x efficiency. They don't even bother making it a 1/1.7" sensor, but if they did, they wouldn't get a 2x benefit, but that might make an interesting alternative, IMO. But by the time you get to APS-C size, there's almost no advantage to a backlit sensor. The sensel sizes increased, and the electronics did not, moving from the tiny sensor to the APS-C.

ps. Caught your post Peter, It probably doesn't matter if it's Sony or not who does it, I know Henry isn't particular about the brand and I don't particularly care either, it would only take one camera company to build a compact along those lines (and have them sell like hotcakes) for the other camera companies to be able to find the money too build one as well, regardless of previous vested interests.

I care who makes a camera. Sony, at least, tends to make the UIs fast and responsive with minimal shutter lag. Even lesser-expensive P&S cameras are fairly responsive. It's been a while since I went around looking at various P&S brands seriously, but I was surprised at how slow some of the nearly top-of-the-line P&S cameras felt in use. But maybe that's just me... I recall when Sigma came out with the DP1 and DP2 cameras, people complained about slowness, and in particular shutter lag. That is just about a deal-killer for me. Maybe it's not just me. And I kind of expected when Sigma came out with those models, that other manufacturers would get the idea, but it was a lot longer than I thought.

[Vidgamer]

David, yup, that's the one. It's just a tad more expensive than I can justify, but it is tempting.

That software is only good for the fairly static objects.

As long as it edits out ghosts (like AWB mode), it could still be useful in a variety of situations. Something like this software approach would be great for the iPhone, for example. Why this hasn't been done must be because of a patent or something, because it seems painfully obvious to me.

WAIT! They have it now. Look up "ClearCam" in the iTunes store. Awesome. Downloading it now..

What I'm talking about is keeping the total exposure and readout of a few stacking parts at about the normal exposure period.
The benefits could be huge - you could have ISO as low as you please and/or control the real physical resolution of the sensor to get better high ISO, you could combine video frames of a multitude of shorter exposures achieving perfect motion smoothness... and tons more of imaginable stuff.

The fast sensor readout may really be the way to go for very real progress in the nearest future.

I can see how that'd work. You have some great ideas and observations, as always. You might be curious about that iPhone app to see how close it is to your concept...

[alphaomega]

Just been to the Continent on a visit and just brought my LX2/3 (Ryanair 10Kg bag). Noticed a lot of high rise building and church tower cut-offs due to lack of EVF and too much sunshine. My sight is not what it used to be. Made me think that I should sell both and purchase a LX5 with optional EVF next year or (hold your breath) a NEX with EVF if this rumour on Sonyalpharumors.com has any traction

Months ago our sources told us that Sony were working on a new EVF for the NEX cameras. SO the following rumor found on getdpi cuold be true:
“Our local retailer (who has a great relationship with Sony and stocks their higher-end lenses like the 24-70 f/2.8, 85mm f/1.4 etc) states that a clip-on EVF is on the way for the NEX range shortly. A side effect is that one will not be able to use the EVF and the clip-on flash at the same time, since they share the same mounting spot. I think this might be interesting for folks who like to frame with a viewfinder than on the screen, and might save some battery power too.”

(Remember the Sony reps. huddle and denial that an EVF was on its way. Maybe they have spotted the obvious at long last. There is still time for a miracle).
I have firmly made up my mind that the LX2/3 will go within 6-8 months and be replaced with a similar size/quality camera and EVF. If Sony deliver the obvious (EVF for NEX5 or successor) that could be my camera. If not I will go for the LX5 plus EVF attachment as long as I get LX3 low ISO results. Time will show if Panasonic's new enthusiasm for higher ISO NR has killed the LX2/3 low ISO performance.

[bakubo]

It will be interesting to see if Sony comes out with an EVF accessory for the NEX 5/3. It certainly needs one.

[alphaomega]

Sonyalpharumors referred to the new E mount 18-200 and provided this Amazon link http://www.amazon.co.uk/s?ie=UTF8&x=0&r ... lias%3Daps
Frankly I would hate to hold this combination at full arms length in sunshine and trying to get a sharp image at 200 mm (300mm for APS-C). I think this further substantiates the need for Sony to come up with a suitable NEX type EVF. The problem could be that the NEX3/5 are not wired for such a device. I really believe that the lack of an EVF is a major drawback. How could they miss such an obvious requirement? Maybe the designers were too steeped in the P&S mentality. To me that is the major item future NEX models must provide either built in or optional. Furthermore, looking at the lens size in relation to the body I think that a more moderately sized 18-135mm F3.5-F5.6 would have been a better choice. Anyone needing longer reach could get this through an adapter and Alpha mount lenses.

[Vidgamer]

... I think this further substantiates the need for Sony to come up with a suitable NEX type EVF. The problem could be that the NEX3/5 are not wired for such a device. I really believe that the lack of an EVF is a major drawback.

Agorabasta suggested just using the HDMI port. This seems reasonable to me. If they could get it to work with eye-start, that would be even better.

Of course, I would expect an EVF add-on to be insanely expensive. Look at the cost of the simple OVF.

If they could have made an electronically controlled zooming OVF for that price, it would be compelling, though.

How could they miss such an obvious requirement? Maybe the designers were too steeped in the P&S mentality. To me that is the major item future NEX models must provide either built in or optional. Furthermore, looking at the lens size in relation to the body I think that a more moderately sized 18-135mm F3.5-F5.6 would have been a better choice. Anyone needing longer reach could get this through an adapter and Alpha mount lenses.

Or even an 18-105 would be good for the vast majority of use.

I agree -- the size of the 18-200 seems to go against the smallness of the Nex system. Even the 18-55 is pretty compact for what it is. I suspect that they don't expect the Nex 3/5 to be the primary use for the 18-200, although I am sure they'll enjoy the extra sales of sharing the mount.

[Wes Gibbon]

... looking at the lens size in relation to the body I think that a more moderately sized 18-135mm F3.5-F5.6 would have been a better choice. Anyone needing longer reach could get this through an adapter and Alpha mount lenses.

Perhaps the 18-200 was only seriously intended for the video camera, but as it's E-mount you can use it on a NEX3/5 if you want to. I expect there are more announcements to come regarding E-mount lenses. One would hope for a reasonably compact zoom with greater reach than the 18-55. Not that it is likely to help me, as I will probably just stick with my A900.

[David Kilpatrick]

How about a high quaity 2X front lens converter for the 18-55mm? They have gone that way for wide and fisheye. I can see one good reason to go that way for portrait (neat enough 36-110mm) - no lens change, no dust.

David