Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 13, 2011, 1:09 PM   #21
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
PS those shots looks very soft.
They're unsharpened ISO 3200 images. Please feel free to share images from a camera this small using kit lenses at similar settings in that type of lighting if you think another camera can do better. ;-)
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2011, 1:09 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

yes, but they are not as soft like the 2 kit lenses. if you work form 100-1600, it is a better all around camera. The sony had the better iso prefomance, but there is nothing you can do about the kit lens, they are just soft. And there is not other lens option but the 800 dollar 18-200HD lens. Though it is nice, it is very expensive and it throws off the handling. Kinda like putting the panasonic 14-140HD on a gf1 or pen. Not very balanced.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2011, 1:14 PM   #23
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

IMO, the Samsung is pretty bad in the shadows, even at ISO 800 in broad daylight, much less ISO 1600+ in dim lighting. The sensor used in it just can't compete, and IMO, the images look way too much like a P&S model with the sharpening and contrast jacked up too far. It's lens selection is not exactly great either.

As for other lens offerings for the NEX models, you can use any of the Minolta or Sony lenses with built in motors (SSM and SAM lenses) via an Adapter and still have Autofocus and Aperture Control; and you can use any Minolta Autofocus Lens ever made via an adapter and still have aperture control if you don't mind manual focus.

Also, Sony will probably release a number of new AF lenses specifically designed for the NEX models this year (rumor has it that 7 new lenses are planned, but we'll have to wait and see what Sony has in mind).
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2011, 1:16 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

allot of review rate the gf1 a better camera then the high iso of the nex, because it is a better setup and form 100-800iso produces a better picture. I will still go with the nx100 over the nex because at least samsung uses good lenses. I will give up the 3200iso for good 100-1600iso performance for general uses with sharp photos.

Sony only does high iso better then all the other cameras in it's class. But that is just one aspect. the other 90 precent of the time, the soft image just do not match up with oly, panny, or the samsung because of the lenses.

I was hoping the nex was better then it is, I really like evil cameras.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC View Post
They're unsharpened ISO 3200 images. Please feel free to share images from a camera this small using kit lenses at similar settings in that type of lighting if you think another camera can do better. ;-)
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2011, 1:23 PM   #25
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Again, look at images with the aperture stopped down from wide open. Center sharpness is very good even wide open from the existing lenses. Stopped down some, the corners sharpen up, too.

Any choice is a tradeoff. If you want to shoot at higher ISO speeds often, nothing can touch the Sony NEX models for cameras that small.

Video isn't bad either (and you get Stereo Sound with the built in mics, with the ability to use external mics if desired).
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2011, 1:28 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

High iso with a small camera with great HD, I would go with a GH2. Looks pretty good for 3200iso, and dam good HD ability. Yes it is a bigger then the nex and more espensive but still smaller then a dslr. But with the HD lens for the sony, it is about the same price.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2011, 1:55 PM   #27
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

There are pros and cons to any of them. ;-)

Personally, I'd prefer a slightly larger camera versus any of the more "pocketable" models.

I'd suggest the OP try out cameras in a store to figure out what's more comfortable and go from there, deciding what features are more important for the types of shots being taken more often.

For example, I'd tend to want a camera that's going to do well at ISO 3200+ (ruling out most smaller models). But, others may be fine with a camera that does great up to ISO 800. No one model is perfect for all conditions.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 9:16 AM.