Steve:

Attached find a few shots and the settings used. What do you see, do they show clear to you, etc. Are these pictures as clear and sharp as I could expect? There are a few variations to the "A" setting used on the camera and they are so marked on the grid.

 

Attached find a few shots and the settings used. What do you see, do they show clear to you, etc. Are these pictures as clear and sharp as I could expect? There are a few variations to the "A" setting used on the camera and they are so marked on the grid.

Thanks

Rickster

 

Attached find a few shots and the settings used. What do you see, do they show clear to you, etc. Are these pictures as clear and sharp as I could expect? There are a few variations to the "A" setting used on the camera and they are so marked on the grid.

Attached find a few shots and the settings used. What do you see, do they show clear to you, etc. Are these pictures as clear and sharp as I could expect? There are a few variations to the "A" setting used on the camera and they are so marked on the grid.

Attached find a few shots and the settings used. What do you see, do they show clear to you, etc. Are these pictures as clear and sharp as I could expect? There are a few variations to the "A" setting used on the camera and they are so marked on the grid.

Attached find a few shots and the settings used. What do you see, do they show clear to you, etc. Are these pictures as clear and sharp as I could expect? There are a few variations to the "A" setting used on the camera and they are so marked on the grid.

Attached find a few shots and the settings used. What do you see, do they show clear to you, etc. Are these pictures as clear and sharp as I could expect? There are a few variations to the "A" setting used on the camera and they are so marked on the grid.

Attached find a few shots and the settings used. What do you see, do they show clear to you, etc. Are these pictures as clear and sharp as I could expect? There are a few variations to the "A" setting used on the camera and they are so marked on the grid.

Attached find a few shots and the settings used. What do you see, do they show clear to you, etc. Are these pictures as clear and sharp as I could expect? There are a few variations to the "A" setting used on the camera and they are so marked on the grid.

Attached find a few shots and the settings used. What do you see, do they show clear to you, etc. Are these pictures as clear and sharp as I could expect? There are a few variations to the "A" setting used on the camera and they are so marked on the grid.

Attached find a few shots and the settings used. What do you see, do they show clear to you, etc. Are these pictures as clear and sharp as I could expect? There are a few variations to the "A" setting used on the camera and they are so marked on the grid.

Attached find a few shots and the settings used. What do you see, do they show clear to you, etc. Are these pictures as clear and sharp as I could expect? There are a few variations to the "A" setting used on the camera and they are so marked on the grid.

 

Hi Rick -

I totally missed your spreadsheet.. never had anyone do that before.. :)

Are you outputting these via Lightroom? It looks like you have "minimize exfil data" checked in the export dialog box.

Usually, when you send a picture in for discussion/evaluation.. you leave the exfil intact, photographers know where to look.. :)

Looking at the spreadsheet data.. I'm disappointed with the focus. It's close, but it still appears there's some camera shake the more than adequate shutter speeds isn't compensating for, or you might have missed the focus..

If you try the tripod method it should tell you for sure.

Keep asking questions.. :)

Steve

 

Steve,

I’ve been looking over the pre-release stuff for the new Sony NEX-5N and NEX-7. I like the OLED EVF and the bracket shooting. Maybe you could give us your take on them in your next article. Hope you are enjoying your part of the USA.

Bryan

Hello Bryan –

I bought one of the first batch of NEX-5’s in Thailand, and then the first 16mm.. and I enjoyed it a lot until I received my Fuji x100 and was reminded of what I’d been missing.

What was missing was a photographers interface, optical viewfinder, exceptional lens, and low light capability.

Sony’s NEX-5n and NEX-7 have improved their interface, but it’s still what I call a point and shoot interface. Sony knows most of the buyers of this camera will just put it in Auto and forget it has other modes, but they still need to support advanced users. Before they did this poorly, the new cameras do it much better.

But the Fuji x100 provides an interface not unlike old style SLR’s which were probably the apex of user interfaces for real photographers.. especially when you consider back then all cameras were manual focus and manual exposure. If you’re the sort of person who mostly uses Auto modes you’ll love the NEX series. If you often use aperture priority or manual modes.. not so much.

EVF’s have greatly improved, and I had a chance to do a hands on with a NEX-7.. and they’ve improved even more.  The x100 has an excellent EVF mode as well. I suppose you can get used to an EVF, many do, but I’ll always find an optical superior in speed (no lag) and more comfortable with its natural view.  Though, I do enjoy EVF’s that basically ‘preview’ your exposure settings as you change them but before you shoot.  Very handy at times.  And Sony’s articulating LCD for live view allows perspectives you won’t get with a optical viewfinder (from the hip, up close where you normally can’t get your head but your hands fit, low to the ground without having to lay on it). Still, if I could choose.. I’d choose an optical viewfinder despite the benefits of both the EVF and articulating LCD.

Lenses.. Sony’s 16mm and 18-55mm.. are both good lenses.  Yet, I didn’t feel they were up to the sensor in the original NEX-5, so they’ll certainly be limited in the NEX-7.  But.. if you want to spend the money..  Sony will be offering Zeiss lenses in several focal lengths.  I’d consider these a must have.

Low light..  This remains to be seen and will become known in the first reviews.  The Fuji x100 surprised me greatly by being better in low light than my Canon 5d Mark II. DxO scores show the 5d Mark II’s sensor ‘slightly’ superior, but not by as much as you’d think a full frame sensor should be better.  Meanwhile the original NEX-5 wasn’t in the same league. Soon, we’ll see how the NEX-5n/7 compares with low light..

Many people want a zoom lens, so for these people the NEX is a no-brainer over the Fuji x100.  The problem is, Sony’s zooms aren’t nearly as good as the x100’s 35mm equiv prime.. Others will be convinced the need the 24mp sensor of the NEX-7, that it will allow for things the x100’s 12mp sensor can’t give them. My guess is they’d be wrong in 95% of their instances.

What it comes down to is your personal style.  I really recommend borrowing or renting the NEX-7 and its closest competition.. and living with them for at least a few days.  At the same time we live in great times and we have a lot of great choices.. the NEX-5n/7 are certainly two of them.

I hope this verbosity is somehow helpful.. 

Steve

Please submit your questions to info@BangkokImages.com   All questions will be answered and most will show up in the weekly column.