Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Non Rangefinder Cameras > CSC : Digital Compact System Cameras - > Sony NEX / Full Frame Alpha non DSLR Cameras

Sony NEX / Full Frame Alpha non DSLR Cameras Sony does a lot of things well. Naming their cameras so the nomenclature makes sense is not one of them. The NEX series has now become the Alpha NEX series, not to be confused with their Alpha DSLRs. Huh ? IS the person who misnamed the Leica M10 the Leica M240 now working for Sony? The new full frame Alpha 7/7r are incredibly successful. I wonder how long it will take the other manufacturers to make their version of the 7/7r full frame cameras.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

USD 600 camera worthy of a USD 5400 lens? – Resolution (NEX-5N with Leica glass)
Old 02-13-2012   #1
flyalf
Registered User
 
flyalf is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Norway, Tromsø
Posts: 190
USD 600 camera worthy of a USD 5400 lens? – Resolution (NEX-5N with Leica glass)

Hi,

I have made a little comparison by NEX-5N of Leica WATE@18mm versus the kit zoom E 18-55/3,5-5,6.

Yeah, yeah, I know. Unfair comparison. But I wanted to see how big a difference the Leica glass makes.

Please feel free to ignore, or read more on:

http://flyalf.wordpress.com/2012/02/...rsus-kit-zoom/

This small comparison has confirmed me of the value of using money on lenses. The Leica WATE on 18mm is surprisingly much sharper than the inexpensive Sone E kit zoom at same focal length. Actually the Leica is better at edge sharpness fully open (f/4.0) than the Sony at its optimum (around f/8), and approximately the same sharpness of the least resolution part of Leica as the highest resolution of the Sony (edge sharpness at Leica/4.0 = centre sharpness of Sony/8.0).
Please also remember that this comparison is resolution only, and that bokeh, distortion, flare and ghost have not been compared. Yet.
__________________
Regards, Alf Sollund, Tromsø, Norway
------------------------------------
http://alfsollund.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2012   #2
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,574
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyalf View Post
Hi,

The Leica WATE on 18mm is surprisingly much sharper than the inexpensive Sone E kit zoom at same focal length.
This is a surprise? This result was clear soon after the original nex-5 was releassed and M adapters available, more than 18 months ago.

The WATE is also wonderful on the nex-7.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2012   #3
craygc
Registered User
 
craygc's Avatar
 
craygc is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Singapore - > Indonesia
Age: 54
Posts: 990
Honestly, the kit lenses are terrible. I use them for kids photos as the autofocus helps but beyond that, not at all

This is the Nex 5n and the Leica 90mm SAA @ f/4 and minimum focus


These are with the 21mm Asph Elmarit






Use the viewfinder with all of them...
__________________
Craig Cooper
Indonesia
Photo Stream
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2012   #4
flyalf
Registered User
 
flyalf is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Norway, Tromsø
Posts: 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post
This is a surprise? This result was clear soon after the original nex-5 was releassed and M adapters available, more than 18 months ago.

The WATE is also wonderful on the nex-7.
Your welcome.
__________________
Regards, Alf Sollund, Tromsø, Norway
------------------------------------
http://alfsollund.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2012   #5
Bugleone
Registered User
 
Bugleone is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 93
Strangely enough, i see this the other way around,...how fantastically does the inexpensive and small kit zoom chase afte the vastly more expensive Leica lens!

While you can of course see a difference (bit 'off' in one could not!),..the difference is NOT FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS different,......the centre crops at f8 are NOT massively different in my eyes, for example look at the weatherboarding strips on the building in ffront,...it's vitually the same in both crops and NOT the massive difference one might expect given the huge price differential.

Also,...craygc,..the kit lens is NOT "terrible",....it's actually a bit of a triumph given it's type and low cost. When i started to use teh NEX 3 with kit lens I expected little as i mainly wanted to use my Canon FD and pentax K glass,...however, I found the kit lens to be far better than some lenses I have used (over the last 30 years) costing far more.

Provided one keeps the lit lens on f8 then one has a very nice little 'set of focal lengths' in a very small package that perfroms really well in most circumstances where f8 is usable. I currently have two 20x16 inch prints in an exhibition, both made with NEX3 and lit lens here is one which staggered me when the girls were pulling it off the printer with it's high quality, especially since I was formerly a medium & large format film user;

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2012   #6
OwenStegemann
Registered User
 
OwenStegemann's Avatar
 
OwenStegemann is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Oakland, CA.
Posts: 84
5000 dollars could buy you one hell of a vacation.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2012   #7
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 14,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by OwenStegemann View Post
5000 dollars could buy you one hell of a vacation.
It could, but vacations last a few weeks, while a lens can last a lifetime.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2012   #8
flyalf
Registered User
 
flyalf is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Norway, Tromsø
Posts: 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bugleone View Post
Strangely enough, i see this the other way around,...how fantastically does the inexpensive and small kit zoom chase afte the vastly more expensive Leica lens!
Thanks for new perspective, its up to the viewer to decide. So my printed conclusion is of course my personal subjective opinion.

The small kit zoom is ok when it comes to sharpness, but Im a bit bothered by the high amount of distortion, and will try to check flare&ghost. For normal photographing of people neither of this will be any issues?
__________________
Regards, Alf Sollund, Tromsø, Norway
------------------------------------
http://alfsollund.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2012   #9
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 35
Posts: 3,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
It could, but vacations last a few weeks, while a lens can last a lifetime.
+1 for the vacation, memories can last a lifetime too, I don't think any of my photos would be improved by a $5k lens vs. a $500 one.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2012   #10
segedi
RFicianado
 
segedi's Avatar
 
segedi is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,015
I use the kit zoom mainly for videos. And it works very well for that. I find the corners kind of mushy with wide open legacy lenses which is a bit disappointing. But the Ricoh GXR works well for that.
__________________
-----------------------

Segedi.com

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Wate=???????????????
Old 02-14-2012   #11
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,010
Wate=???????????????

I am totally in the dark about the meaning of WATE. What does it stand for? Should I have known?

Raid


Quote:
Originally Posted by flyalf View Post
Hi,

I have made a little comparison by NEX-5N of Leica WATE@18mm versus the kit zoom E 18-55/3,5-5,6.

Yeah, yeah, I know. Unfair comparison. But I wanted to see how big a difference the Leica glass makes.

Please feel free to ignore, or read more on:

http://flyalf.wordpress.com/2012/02/...rsus-kit-zoom/

This small comparison has confirmed me of the value of using money on lenses. The Leica WATE on 18mm is surprisingly much sharper than the inexpensive Sone E kit zoom at same focal length. Actually the Leica is better at edge sharpness fully open (f/4.0) than the Sony at its optimum (around f/8), and approximately the same sharpness of the least resolution part of Leica as the highest resolution of the Sony (edge sharpness at Leica/4.0 = centre sharpness of Sony/8.0).
Please also remember that this comparison is resolution only, and that bokeh, distortion, flare and ghost have not been compared. Yet.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2012   #12
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 46
Posts: 3,892
Hello Raid

WATE is an acronym from Leica for their Wide Angle Tri Elmar lens.

I can't imagine spending $5000 on such a lens but, I'm not wide angle users so much.
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2012   #13
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 46
Posts: 3,892
I just looked at your comparison. It's fun but not surprising. Sort of like comparing a base model Kia SUV to a fully loaded Porsche Cayenne.
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2012   #14
kanzlr
Hexaneur
 
kanzlr's Avatar
 
kanzlr is offline
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Vienna (Austria)
Age: 33
Posts: 942
indeed. and really, only the corners are substantially better with the WATE.
If you shoot architecture or landscapes, that's (somewhat) important. Otherwise it isn't.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2012   #15
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by f16sunshine View Post
Hello Raid

WATE is an acronym from Leica for their Wide Angle Tri Elmar lens.

I can't imagine spending $5000 on such a lens but, I'm not wide angle users so much.
Thank you, for the explanation, Andy. I did not the menaing of WATE.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2012   #16
CK Dexter Haven
Registered User
 
CK Dexter Haven is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave lackey View Post
A lens is always money well spent...you get it back and usually more when you decide to sell it. A vacation....well, you get memories that fade and photos taken with lesser lenses.

I would forego the vacation for a year or so and get the lens for future vacations. That is if I had money for either.
Photos taken with "lesser lenses" are still photos you don't have if you forego the travel.

And, i still don't know what it means to be a "lesser lens." If no one tells you what lens was used to make a photograph, is there still such a thing as a "lesser lens?" Is every photograph, throughout the whole of history, a "lesser" image because it wasn't made with the most recent Leica glass?

If so, 96.3% of working/published/exhibited photographers are somehow fooling themselves.

If you need a $5,000 lens, something's wrong.

Smiley face, smiley face, etc., etc.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2012   #17
shadowfox
Personal Photography
 
shadowfox's Avatar
 
shadowfox is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
It could, but vacations last a few weeks, while a lens can last a lifetime.
To me, no lens is worth equal to a vacation.
__________________
Have a good light,
Will


  Reply With Quote

Old 02-14-2012   #18
Justin Smith
Registered User
 
Justin Smith is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowfox View Post
To me, no lens is worth equal to a vacation.
I totally agree!!!
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2012   #19
Speedfreak
-
 
Speedfreak is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 224
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowfox View Post
To me, no lens is worth equal to a vacation.
Hm... A Noctilux vs one week with drunken apes on Mallorca? Thank you, I´ll take the Noct.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2012   #20
zvos1
Registered User
 
zvos1's Avatar
 
zvos1 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Down Under
Posts: 282
That Sony sensor in 5n is worthy of any lens...
__________________
Of course it's all luck. - HCB

M4 and some digital stuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2012   #21
emraphoto
Registered User
 
emraphoto's Avatar
 
emraphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
It could, but vacations last a few weeks, while a lens can last a lifetime.
most of my trips last a lifetime
__________________
www.jdensky.com
twitter - @eastofadelaide
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2012   #22
rdeleskie
Registered User
 
rdeleskie is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 213
I enjoyed the test, thanks for posting the results. What I found interesting is how well the WATE held up in the corners compared to the kit lens (I'm specifically talking about the results wide open at 18mm). From what I have read about the NEX5N, I would have expected the reverse: the kit lens performing well in the corners because of sensor optimization, the WATE less so.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2012   #23
Speedfreak
-
 
Speedfreak is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 224
Thanks for the comparison. Not that the WATE would be anywhere in my league of budget, but at least I know what I am missing.

Even though Leica glass may be priced like luxury, these lenses will still be awesome in 30 years. The Sony kit looks and feels like a disposable in comparison.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2012   #24
shadowfox
Personal Photography
 
shadowfox's Avatar
 
shadowfox is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedfreak View Post
Hm... A Noctilux vs one week with drunken apes on Mallorca? Thank you, I´ll take the Noct.
It's good that *that particular* idea of a vacation never entered my mind

My idea of a vacation is a week off work, traveling with my family.

That wins over any lenses, especially a Noctilux.
__________________
Have a good light,
Will


  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2012   #25
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,574
Quote:
Originally Posted by craygc View Post
Honestly, the kit lenses are terrible. ..
Nice shots. The kit lenses are not terrible. Your lenses are fantastic.

The sony kit lenses are much harder to use than, say, a 28 cron on the nex.

The focus is all over the place. Sharpness varies wildly with aperture and zoom.

Try the 1855 between 24 and 28 at f/5.6 and confirm your focus. It's pretty good. The 55210 is not bad at all 75-135. The 16 is strong close in and will surprise you even in landscapes sometimes.

That said, I almost never use them

RF glass and MF glass of all description is too fun.

1937 zeiss 50/1.5
I don't have a WATE, but I do have a sigma 8-16:

and i guess more to the point, a zm18

philber at FM turned me on to the zm18, a WATE for mortal bank accounts and one of the sharpest wides on the nex sensor.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 15:55.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.