M8 user: high hopes for NEX-7!

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by efix

Since I first read about the new focus peaking feature in the NEX-C3 and NEX-5N cameras, I was absolutely hooked by that idea and started wondering if this might actually be the 21st century re-interpretation of rangefinder photography -- a quick, easy and reliable way to manually focus a lens.

I suggest you try it out before you go on rhapsodizing about it like that.

[Kent]

Originally Posted by rxmd

I suggest you try it out before you go on rhapsodizing about it like that.

The focus peaking feature works well! You need to adjust it to the right settings for each scenario, though.

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by Kent

The focus peaking feature works well! You need to adjust it to the right settings for each scenario, though.

Yeah, well, it works better with longer lenses and fast lenses and wide open, and not so well with wideangles and slow lenses and lenses stopped down - just as you'd expect.

It's a decent focusing aid for some situations, but calling it "the 21st century re-interpretation of rangefinder photography" is indicative of (a) that the user hasn't tried it, at least not with a wideangle, and (b) that the user has read a lot of it online, but not those where people say how they went back to 7x magnification for focusing after trying it.

[Kent]

Everybody as he likes. I know that some went back to the magnification, I prefer the peaking mode.

[Lss]

Originally Posted by Kent

I know that some went back to the magnification, I prefer the peaking mode.

Can you please share some information on the focal lengths and apertures you use, your usual subject distances, and the type of photography you do? At least I am very interested in hearing what people have found works and what doesn't.

[eleskin]

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/1...and-fuji-x100/
Check out Steve Huff's pics from the NEX 7
It seems the X100 has much better files in terms of image quality than the NEX 7. I know what my M8 can and cannot do and from these samples, the X100 and my M8 files look much better. I can also say Fuji's next X series camera, if it can take M lenses, has a similar layout to the x100, and has a sensor like the X100, and is as large as APS H which is what the M8 is, it will be a no brainer for me to get one. As for the NEX 7, I will sit on the sidelines until I see more comprehensive tests with Leica M mount lenses.

[uhoh7]

Originally Posted by eleskin

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/1...and-fuji-x100/
Check out Steve Huff's pics from the NEX 7
It seems the X100 has much better files in terms of image quality than the NEX 7. I know what my M8 can and cannot do and from these samples, the X100 and my M8 files look much better. I can also say Fuji's next X series camera, if it can take M lenses, has a similar layout to the x100, and has a sensor like the X100, and is as large as APS H which is what the M8 is, it will be a no brainer for me to get one. As for the NEX 7, I will sit on the sidelines until I see more comprehensive tests with Leica M mount lenses.

Have fun on the sidelines

"I have also been shooting the X100 more and have to say that in regards to OOC color with JPEGS, I prefer the X100. But I have yet to tweak any Sony RAW files so we shall see. Still, the NEX-7 has been doing no wrong (almost)."
from your link

I hope fuji does create a nex killer, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Reading about users experience with the x100, it seems that camera is well, not perfected.

I have seen some great shots from it of course, but one lens and AF ?

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by uhoh7

I hope fuji does create a nex killer, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Reading about users experience with the x100, it seems that camera is well, not perfected.

See, that is the issue...you've only read about it. Many people who actually use it love it.

[boffen]

If I was into Leica for the image quality I'd be interested in the NEX-7. I don't really care that much about image quality (I shoot 35mm and scan with a flatbed) though. The rangefinder and optical viewfinder is the most important part of my Leica, and the latter is the sole reason why I became interested in the Fuji X100.

I'd much rather use a Bessa R with a lens with the optical qualities of CaNikon's cheapest primes than a NEX-7 with a Noctilux (that is unless I could sell them and buy something else).

[rdeleskie]

I've been shooting with a NEX 5N. The peaking feature is brilliant for manual focus. In cases where it doesn't work (as described above), you can zoom in. I haven't shot with anything wider than an 18 and haven't shot any charts to test for critical focus, but so far I'd say it's the best implementation of manual focus confirmation I've used on a non-rangefinder digital camera.

I still prefer using an optical rangefinder for a number of reasons, but let's not kid ourselves: there are cases where an RF is troublesome for achieving focus (confusing background patterns, lack of discernible edges, a flared RF, etc.). No system is perfect and so much depends on the photographer's experience with and knowledge of their gear.

All this said, my only word of advice to those considering the NEX7 as a replacement or substitute for a M8 or M9 is that as exciting as the Sony camera looks, it isn't a rangefinder and if you really want the rangefinder experience you need, well, a rangefinder camera. There is more to shooting with a Leica than just using the amazing lenses.

Ultimately it's not about what's better, but what one prefers.

[Teuthida]

Originally Posted by eleskin

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/1...and-fuji-x100/
Check out Steve Huff's pics from the NEX 7
It seems the X100 has much better files in terms of image quality than the NEX 7. I know what my M8 can and cannot do and from these samples, the X100 and my M8 files look much better. I can also say Fuji's next X series camera, if it can take M lenses, has a similar layout to the x100, and has a sensor like the X100, and is as large as APS H which is what the M8 is, it will be a no brainer for me to get one. As for the NEX 7, I will sit on the sidelines until I see more comprehensive tests with Leica M mount lenses.

With all due respect, the idea that you could assess Respective image quality of cameras via jpgs posted to the web is absurd.

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by rxmd

Yeah, well, it works better with longer lenses and fast lenses and wide open, and not so well with wideangles and slow lenses and lenses stopped down - just as you'd expect.

It's a decent focusing aid for some situations, but calling it "the 21st century re-interpretation of rangefinder photography" is indicative of (a) that the user hasn't tried it, at least not with a wideangle, and (b) that the user has read a lot of it online, but not those where people say how they went back to 7x magnification for focusing after trying it.

I've used it with all types of lenses, and, after some practice and settings adjustments, I find it no less dependable than rangefinder focusing. Really, NEX manual focusing is the best of both worlds. Peaking is among the best manual focusing methods for quick or moving scenarios that I've tried, and focus magnification is even better for static situations.

I'd say any speed/accuracy advantage that a rangefinder focusing system has over peaking is negated by the need to focus then recompose. I think focus peaking and rangefinder focusing are pretty competitive with each other.

[bwcolor]

I returned my 5N. NEX 7 on order, but I'm not as excited as before. Most of my objections to the 5N should be resolved with the Tri-Nav and EVF, but I could not manage with RAW -> DNG -> Aperture to get skin tones looking non-plastic. I'm hoping that a better raw converter takes care of that issue.

Thumbs up on focus peaking. It isn't perfect, but my main issue with peaking was the lack of EVF when shooting in the sun.

[photografity]

Originally Posted by rdeleskie

I've been shooting with a NEX 5N. The peaking feature is brilliant for manual focus. In cases where it doesn't work (as described above), you can zoom in. I haven't shot with anything wider than an 18 and haven't shot any charts to test for critical focus, but so far I'd say it's the best implementation of manual focus confirmation I've used on a non-rangefinder digital camera.

I still prefer using an optical rangefinder for a number of reasons, but let's not kid ourselves: there are cases where an RF is troublesome for achieving focus (confusing background patterns, lack of discernible edges, a flared RF, etc.). No system is perfect and so much depends on the photographer's experience with and knowledge of their gear.

All this said, my only word of advice to those considering the NEX7 as a replacement or substitute for a M8 or M9 is that as exciting as the Sony camera looks, it isn't a rangefinder and if you really want the rangefinder experience you need, well, a rangefinder camera. There is more to shooting with a Leica than just using the amazing lenses.

Ultimately it's not about what's better, but what one prefers.

Agreed, I am using a R-D1 along with a Nex-3, the R-D1 wins in low light & in some cases more accurate with fast lenses wide open

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by bwcolor

I returned my 5N. NEX 7 on order, but I'm not as excited as before. Most of my objections to the 5N should be resolved with the Tri-Nav and EVF, but I could not manage with RAW -> DNG -> Aperture to get skin tones looking non-plastic. I'm hoping that a better raw converter takes care of that issue.

Thumbs up on focus peaking. It isn't perfect, but my main issue with peaking was the lack of EVF when shooting in the sun.

If you can deal with the slow pace of its workflow, I can highly recommend Raw Photo Processor for Sony files. I import everything into Lightroom for cataloguing, but I export the conversations themselves out of LR3 and into RPP. Plus, the demoisacing is much better than just about anything out there. The amount of extra detail with no sharpening is almost like seemingly removing the AA filter.

[bwcolor]

I've no objection to RPP, if I can get a better result. After all, I shoot mostly film/scan..etc. So, any digital routine should be pretty simple.
Thanks..

[douglasf13]

Originally Posted by bwcolor

I've no objection to RPP, if I can get a better result. After all, I shoot mostly film/scan..etc. So, any digital routine should be pretty simple.
Thanks..

Sure thing. It's free, too, although you have to make a small donation to unlock a few things in it. I can particularly recommend the film simulations, and be sure and read the FAQ on the website.

[uhoh7]

Originally Posted by jsrockit

See, that is the issue...you've only read about it. Many people who actually use it love it.

First, I was trying to be clear about that. If you love the x100, more power to you, and anyone else.

No doubt it can produce great images.

I'm just saying holding your breath for the m-mount x100+, you might miss out on some fun.

You could always resell the nex-7 when Fuji steps up.

That's my plan anyway.

[Kent]

Originally Posted by Lss

Can you please share some information on the focal lengths and apertures you use, your usual subject distances, and the type of photography you do? At least I am very interested in hearing what people have found works and what doesn't.

Oh that would be a long list. (20mm, 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 45mm, 50mm, 55mm, 75mm, 85mm, 90mm...)

The FL that I use perhaps the most with manual lenses on my NEX are 50mm at f/1.4 to f/2.8 and in "portrait" distance, levels "low", colour yellow.

[lemalk]

Does anyone here have any real-life experience with focusing these Sonys (peaking effect or not) in very low light? It's the reason I love the rangefinder - even in almost no light you can still focus very accurately. No SLR I've shot with is as good in this regard (although the EVF in my E-P2 gets close).