Recommend me a DSLR

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

The Sony Nex-5 seems destined to only use relatively small zooms, or prime lenses. Of which, the latter are few. The superzooms, and the telephoto zooms are likely going to upset the center of gravity of the cam.

Also. the kit prime lens is miserably slow compared to the Panasonic 20mm/f1.7 lens.

[aerius]

If you missed it, check out that particular review's look at the interface.

I read it, but it's hard to say how something will work out until I actually get my hands on it and try it out for myself. I'll have to wait till the local shops get one in stock so I can play with it and see if it does the things I need it to do.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Also. the kit prime lens is miserably slow compared to the Panasonic 20mm/f1.7 lens.

It's a 16 mm lens, that is 24 mm Full Frame equivalent on APS-C sensor. The Panasonic 20 mm lens is 40 mm FF equivalent. In other words, the Sony lens is a true wide angle whereas the Panasonic is a normal lens. If it's any good optically and not too expensive, I'd say that it would be pretty sweet even if it was f/4.

Then there is the fact that APS-C sensors capture more light than 4/3 sensors, which for a large degree compensates for the higher f-number of the lens in low light applications. It means that you can increase the sensitivity (ISO) and still get about the same signal to noise ratio as the 4/3 sensor camera. Because the difference of f/2.8 and f/1.7 is 1½ f-stops, but the APS-C sensor has only about 65% larger area, the Pana lens is still a bit better for low light, but not drastically. This of course assumes equivalent sensor technology, but since were are talking Sony and Panasonic here, there are unlikely to be huge differences in that department.

The above, by the way, also explains why the Olympus f/2.0 zooms for the FourThirds DSLRs are not quite as wonderful as one might think. In actuality they are only a little better than f/2.8 lenses for APS-C cameras and not at all better than f/2.8 lenses for Full Frame cameras. Unless we talk about weight and size, which is an altogether different matter.

That's that for digital today. Time to shoot some more film ASAP.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Also. the kit prime lens is miserably slow compared to the Panasonic 20mm/f1.7 lens.

It's a 16 mm lens, that is 24 mm Full Frame equivalent on APS-C sensor. The Panasonic 20 mm lens is 40 mm FF equivalent. In other words, the Sony lens is a true wide angle whereas the Panasonic is a normal lens. If it's any good optically and not too expensive, I'd say that it would be pretty sweet even if it was f/4.

There's a 14mm/f2.8 pancake from Panasonic coming this year. If one wants a really wide angle, there's always the option of the Panasonic 7-14mm/f4 (f4 continuous aperture!).

The above, by the way, also explains why the Olympus f/2.0 zooms for the FourThirds DSLRs are not quite as wonderful as one might think. In actuality they are only a little better than f/2.8 lenses for APS-C cameras and not at all better than f/2.8 lenses for Full Frame cameras. Unless we talk about weight and size, which is an altogether different matter.

Well, the weight and size is a big issue with 4/3. Otherwise, there's not much else going for it.

And of course film is better, which is why I'm mighty tempted to grab a Voigtlander Bessa rangefinder that goes for 500-600 USD thereabouts.

[phongn]

And of course film is better, which is why I'm mighty tempted to grab a Voigtlander Bessa rangefinder that goes for 500-600 USD thereabouts.

I thought about an R3A but managed to snag a CLE at an estate sale Pondering trading the 40/2 M-Rokkor for a 40/1.4 Nokton (I love speed ...)

The above, by the way, also explains why the Olympus f/2.0 zooms for the FourThirds DSLRs are not quite as wonderful as one might think. In actuality they are only a little better than f/2.8 lenses for APS-C cameras and not at all better than f/2.8 lenses for Full Frame cameras. Unless we talk about weight and size, which is an altogether different matter.

It's also a bit easier to make a smaller lens, and by all reports their Super High Grade series lenses really are excellent (even if f/2 is a bit of a marketing cheat, as you noted).

That's that for digital today. Time to shoot some more film ASAP.

Kodachrome for life2010 (well, and Provia for MF)

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

I thought about an R3A but managed to snag a CLE at an estate sale Pondering trading the 40/2 M-Rokkor for a 40/1.4 Nokton (I love speed ...)

How does the Minolta CLE compare against the R3A?

[RIPP_n_WIPE]

I've actually been considering getting a camera system myself. The two cameras I am thinking about are the Canon 5d mk2 (if I decide to go balls to walls with my money) or the Rebel T2i (budget option). Just out of curiosity does anyone have any experience with either of these cameras?

[Kenny_10_Bellys]

I used to have the older Canon 5, very nice. The big selling point was the full frame 35mm sensor, which you only get on higher end stuff. Most consumer DSLRs can match that sensor size, for all the megapixels they boast. The Rebel T2i gets some mixed reviews from what I've seen, a bit pricey and with a lot of pro features for a camera apparently meant to be in the entry level category. There' cheaper stuff out there that would be more user friendly I think.

[Rye]

I've actually been considering getting a camera system myself. The two cameras I am thinking about are the Canon 5d mk2 (if I decide to go balls to walls with my money) or the Rebel T2i (budget option). Just out of curiosity does anyone have any experience with either of these cameras?

Yeah, the 5d MkII is fucking amazing, especially in low light. I'd use it mainly for the HD video capabilities myself, where both it and the 7d excel due to the 35 mil sensor. Megapixels are bollocks, the sensor and lens are what make for awesome photos/video.

[phongn]

How does the Minolta CLE compare against the R3A?

Never handled an R3A, but the CLE is a gem.

Yeah, the 5d MkII is fucking amazing, especially in low light. I'd use it mainly for the HD video capabilities myself, where both it and the 7d excel due to the 35 mil sensor. Megapixels are bollocks, the sensor and lens are what make for awesome photos/video.

7D isn't full frame.

[RIPP_n_WIPE]

I've actually been considering getting a camera system myself. The two cameras I am thinking about are the Canon 5d mk2 (if I decide to go balls to walls with my money) or the Rebel T2i (budget option). Just out of curiosity does anyone have any experience with either of these cameras?

Yeah, the 5d MkII is fucking amazing, especially in low light. I'd use it mainly for the HD video capabilities myself, where both it and the 7d excel due to the 35 mil sensor. Megapixels are bollocks, the sensor and lens are what make for awesome photos/video.

Yeah that's what my thinking was. HD video and full frame. The 7D and the T2i are just too similar to get panties in a bunch and go with the more expensive camera (7D) which cost just as much as a brand new 5d mk2. Same sensor, same MP, same fps for HD video. The only major differences is the auto-focus, case weathering, viewfinder, and shutter life.

I just wish there were a firmware update or a third party firmware update that'd give the 5d mk2 60fps like the 7d. That seal the deal for me for sure.

[aerius]

New from Sony, the Alpha NEX series may be worth a consideration.

Damn that sucker's small. And it's got an APS-C size sensor. I'll be all over that camera as soon as they come out with some fast prime lenses. Hopefully it doesn't have some kind of mind blowing stupidity in the user interface to ruin it all.

I hate it when I'm right. My god, the user interface is beyond retarded. I have to go hunting several levels deep in the menu system just to change the ISO, this is something I can do with a single button press on a Canon point & shoot camera. And that's pretty much the way it is with all the other settings, everything is buried several layers deep in the menu system, and worse yet, the damn settings seem to be in some kind of random order, and on top of that they interact with and disable each other in unpredictable ways. It's impossible to use the camera in anything other than the fully automatic mode unless you have all day to twiddle through the retarded menus.

[Simplicius]

And what is the NEX-series' main market, exactly? You can't condemn a product for being designed to suit the market segment it's aimed at.

Hands-on

[aerius]

Sure, but the UI is bad even for a consumer camera. I can pick up any Canon, Nikon, or Fuji compact and easily work the menus to find the stuff I need. ISO is a direct button setting on all Canons and most other compacts, and the rest of the stuff like white balance is 1 level down in the menus. I can put the camera in full auto so it does everything or go to manual mode where everything is at most a single menu level down and easy to find & select. With the Sony, these settings are buried 2 or more levels down in the menu system.

The user is pretty much locked by default into the auto-everything mode. If he never intends to use manual controls or make adjustments to the settings, then fine, the camera will probably work great for him. But in my opinion, someone who buys a camera like this or the micro 4/3 cameras will likely want to work with manual settings & adjustments at some point and the Sony's retarded UI makes this incredibly frustrating.

[Simplicius]

I wish I remember where I read it - someone fiddling around with a NEX wrote that the cascading button functions kind of made sense from the perspective of a non-skilled user. I think the camera is designed for people who don't know and more importantly don't care what ISO, exposure comp., white balance, etc. are, so placing access to those things on a high level of the interface just makes them intrusive. I see the NEXes as kindergarten-level point and shoots with large sensors and interchangeable lenses, not as compact large-sensor cameras in the u4/3 vein. I think that shows through in the design (few external controls, prettified menus, basic settings buried in the UI), and more experienced users should go for cameras that were deigned with them in mind.

We might find later that the interface isn't particularly friendly to unskilled users, but that's completely separate.

[FSTargetDrone]

DP Review's preview of the NEX-5 is up.

[Marcus Aurelius]

I see the NEXes as kindergarten-level point and shoots with large sensors and interchangeable lenses, not as compact large-sensor cameras in the u4/3 vein. I think that shows through in the design (few external controls, prettified menus, basic settings buried in the UI), and more experienced users should go for cameras that were deigned with them in mind.

We might find later that the interface isn't particularly friendly to unskilled users, but that's completely separate.

The question is, though, how big can that market be? Most people who can't tell the difference between an f-stop and ISO setting want small, easily portable cameras. The NEX bodies may be small for interchangeable lens cameras, but they still have an APS-C size sensor and largish lenses associated with it, so the whole package even with a prime lens is going to be considerably larger than your run-of-the-mill digital compact, let alone an ultra-compact. Add a zoom, which most of the casual shooters will want anyways, and the package becomes even larger.

If casual shooters are Sony's primary market for the NEXes, I feel that the choice of an APS-C sensor was misguided. They should have gone for something considerably smaller, perhaps a 1" or even 2/3" sensor for their system. They could have easily done that, since Sony could have designed the sensor in-house, so the current non-availability of those sensor sizes on the market would not have been a problem. Compatibility with the Alpha mount should not have been an issue, since (D)SLR lenses are in practice manual focus only in mirrorless cameras1, and the target market probably does not care about lens compatibility in any case.

1 I know that Olympus PENs do AF with some 4/3 DLSR lenses, but it's slow and awkward, because the lenses are designed for phase detection AF.

[Simplicius]

I suppose there's a certain logic to the APS-C sensor, though. EOSHD talks about the NEX-7 which will be reportedly aimed at enthusiasts and will be given a better sensor, but is still a development of the NEX series. So if having big sensors in small cameras with interchangeable lenses is one of the things camera manufacturers are presently bragging about, and there are easy-mode and enthusiast models in the series, and there may be a little ongoing competition with Panasonic's new u4/3 offerings, it starts making sense for Sony to keep a large sensor size consistent through the NEX line-up.

Without mind-reading ability I'm shooting in the dark, but maybe not totally off-target.