May 10, 2010 at 11:23 pm #1258790
Interesting offereing from Sony
APS-C sized sensor (larger than 4/3) 24mm thick body (just under 1 inch) 229g body only (8 oz) .
Did not see the weight of the pancake 24mm equivalent but that a;so looks small and light.
Details here :http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sonynex5/
Smaller and lighter than the rest.
I think that Sony just killed the Ricoh GRX/S10
Later on Sony will also have a dedicated AVCHD camcorder that will use the same sensor and the same NEX lenses as well as A lenses via an adaptor.
This will open up "pro" movie making (large sensor) to the keen amateur as well as indie productions.May 11, 2010 at 6:51 am #1608658
This looks promising, but CNET's video review brought up quite a few shortcomings. Hopefully there will be some improvements with firmware revisions. The burst panorama mode is a pretty nice feature.May 11, 2010 at 9:09 am #1608704
Rick DreherBPL Member
@halfturboLocale: Northernish California
I'll allow my pulse to rise if I start seeing "Zeiss" engraved on some of the system lenses.
Speaking of Ricoh, is that a shameless copying of their body-grip configuration or what?
RickMay 12, 2010 at 6:32 am #1609041
NEX 3 – $550
NEX 5 – $700
Add $50 for the 18-55mmMay 12, 2010 at 2:46 pm #1609191
This looks like a better choice for backpacking than a micro 4/3 system, due to the larger sensor.
Also, I believe that they announced adapters that will enable you to use the rest of the standard Alpha lens line on these little guys.May 12, 2010 at 3:08 pm #1609195
Mark RegaliaBPL Member
@markrLocale: Santa Cruz
I did a quick read of the dpreview article. The cameras fail a critical test for me. It has no optical viewfinder coupled with no built in image stabilization. I find the lack of both results in a much less usable camera. You have to hold the camera out in front of you to shoot, which makes it shake much worse. W/o image stabilization you have probably lost 2 f stops of usable sensitivity. At least for a shaky sort like me.
Also, being a older guy I have to wear reading glasses to use the view screen. I hate that.
Apparently they have some lenses with built in image stabilizing, but I rejected that approach years ago when I chose my first dSLR. It seemed the selection of lenses was always very weak and the cost very high.
Ironically I chose a Konica/Minola dSLR, which means I am now shooting with a Sony. I never thought Sony understood the market that well.
Too bad, I like the form factor.May 12, 2010 at 3:45 pm #1609210
It is a mini camera with a mini system..
There are only three lenses so far designed for it. The two zooms have a built in stabiliser , the 24mm equivalent does not, however not that important at that focal length.
I don't think that holding the camera against the face is any more stable than holding it at chest level having the arms resting against the chest, the way we used to shoot with TLR's (Rolleiflex)
But there is a market here for a hood to help minimising glare.
FrancoMay 12, 2010 at 4:07 pm #1609219
Mark RegaliaBPL Member
@markrLocale: Santa Cruz
I probably should have read a bit more thoroughly. Though, after using digital cameras with only a display and very poor optical viewfinders, going back to an SLR was shear joy. There is nothing that connects you to the act of taking a photo like having your eye up to a viewfinder, seeing the whole image, nothing but the image, and blocking out the distractions and glare.
I think you see an image that is closer to what the photo will be.
You are one with the camera, Grasshopper.May 12, 2010 at 4:24 pm #1609223
"There is nothing that connects you to the act of taking a photo like having your eye up to a viewfinder, seeing the whole image, nothing but the image, and blocking out the distractions and glare."
Viewfinder? Try a ground glass sometime ;)May 12, 2010 at 4:43 pm #1609227
Miguel ArboledaBPL Member
@butukiLocale: Kanto Plain, Japan
Viewfinder? Try a ground glass sometime ;)
Except you have to be standing on your head when you look at it! ;^P
Ah, I remember my Yashika Twin Reflex with a lot of fond memories…May 12, 2010 at 5:35 pm #1609238
I am aware of what you are talking about.
Provably the only decent photographs I have taken in 30 years have been with the Leica M6 and the Olympus OM1/2.
I liked the Minolta X700 too.
FrancoMay 12, 2010 at 11:06 pm #1609346
My Arca-Swiss monorail is the reason that I'm not a going to be an ultralight backpacker. :)May 13, 2010 at 6:33 am #1609383
Greg MihalikBPL Member
Because you are a lightweight backpacker, you Can take the Arca-Swiss.May 13, 2010 at 9:18 am #1609437
That's entirely true — actually the 4×5 is the reason that I'm going lightweight.
And as the owner and primary (read: only) photographer in White Crane Photography, that also means that backpacking is part of the job description ;)
This was, of course, part of the plan. Most people I know have it backward, thinking that I backpack because to photograph, but in reality it's the other way around. I suspect that there won't be a whole lot of people wondering "why?" around here.
:)May 23, 2010 at 9:47 am #1612764
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.