We're under attack!!!!! Sony NEX-7, A77, A65, NEX5N
- Thread starter HHL
- Start date
I can't speak for anyone else, but for me, I'm just short on time. I shot some NEX5N footy yesterday and last night that I'll be posting (hopefully tonight), but it's just a bit hard, when you work 2 jobs, and have 4 kids, and everything else in life.
I will tell you that I LOVE the NEX5N. The low light performance is STAGGERING. At ISO3200 the thing looks like ISO 800, maybe even ISO 400!! On my plasma, we watched last night's footy and we were FLOORED.
I have continued to shoot the HX9 and still love it too. The two compliment each other well. Together, they are my "studio-in-a-pocket" solution. Hopefully I'll get my stuff edited in time for posting tonight.
squig
Veteran
We're still waiting for the mods to give the NEX-5N a permanent home.
I still have a lot of testing to do but if all goes well the NEX-5N might be put into service on an upcoming project. I just attached my Z-finder to it with gaff and it works quite well. The 5N LCD is 16:9, a little wider and shorter than the Canon LCDs.
I still have a lot of testing to do but if all goes well the NEX-5N might be put into service on an upcoming project. I just attached my Z-finder to it with gaff and it works quite well. The 5N LCD is 16:9, a little wider and shorter than the Canon LCDs.
combatentropy
Veteran
Now we can shoot night for day.
I know right? Or shoot at night F4.0!!! Remember this is only F2.8!!! I easily could have shot F4.0...heh...funny stuff.
Oh ya...and for the record: I don't care what ANYONE says. Sony DID NOT include ISO6400 and up to protect FS100 sales from people who are buying THAT camera for low light shooting. As you can see....the heritage is CERTAINLY there. This thing is STUPID CLEAN as ISO3200!!! Mad love to DVXUsers everywhere!
i have the pal vesion, when i set the speed to 60 an any of the framerates, it has horizontal banding under flourescent lamp. im in philippines and an ntsc reguon. i cant see in the manual if the iso has smaller increment coz avalable iso are the follwin; 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200 UNDER VIDEO MODE.
I agrre that lowlite even at 3200 is very nice. Im still using the kit lens 18-55 and found to be usable in most conditions due to a very good lowlite performance of the cam. The 16mm lens that came with the cam also performs good. and found to be very usefull even in lowlite since the openning is 2.8.
John Caballero
Veteran
People really, really think they are going to have the same image quality from a $600.00 camera as from a $5000.00 one? Really, please, come back to reality!
NO. I agree that it will not. However....we have already learned that "low light" functionality is NOT the full expression of IQ, right? We all watched the Nikon D3s hand EVERY CAMERA IN THE WORLD their collective REAR-END when Zacuto did their first "Shootout." (On low light performance.) We also witnessed the FS100 out perform the F3 in low light (even though it is cheaper and it is the lesser/younger brother.)
Would we think that the HX9 would have 1080/60?.....When the F3 merely has 720/60?
So, I AM saying that low-light performance is "one of those things"....the lowly NEX5N may have potentially run side by side with the FS100 in low light performance, the same way that the GH2 runs side by side with the AF100 IN LOW LIGHT performance. Overall IQ and professional applications/functionality go to the "professional" siblings....but I'm telling you because I've seen it with my own eyes....this thing could have run with the FS100.....and if VK hacks it (I'm not holding my breath)....we may yet find out how right/wrong I am. Either way....this thing shoots CRAZY clean ISO3200!
Cheers John!
Impressive, right? I truly think that the NEX5N and the HX9 will rule the skies for some time to come! Cheers!
The "soft" that you are seeing here is the lens. This lens shoots soft in broad daylight. (Interestingly....this is why I LIKE this lens, I don't like the "overly sharpened" look....) NOT right or wrong....just a fact. Don't place the "soft" resolution on the sensor.
Coming from the GH2, I understand that it is sharper (resolves more detail) as a rule. No contest there, I agree. (I have seen the samples out there on the interwebs...)
If this shot as clean (in low light) as the FS100 at 3200, and that was the primary attraction to the FS100, (low light shooting), would it interest you that a cam that cost 1/5th as much could shoot 95% as good in low light? Maybe, maybe not (not saying which camp you would be from)....I'm merely saying that it is a logical point of view.
Cheers Sandro!
Fair enough! Thanks for your input. I really do think that everyone NEEDS to see this footy on a 50+inch plasma ISO3200. It truly is landmark! If you get a chance...take it and enjoy the ride. Thanks squig!
I was talking about the softness of the resolution, it's different.
I agree on everything. I still think they crippled all the new line products to protect THEIR higher end cameras. And sadly it's possibly be the best APS-C product we will ever get for the sub $1,5k range because it still resolves more details the previous Sony cameras and the current Canons. Canon will probably do the same to protect the rumored new video cameras (if true). I think the only hope stays in "photo-only" companies like Nikon? Anyway we'll see.
Could you provide the original file? I'd like to see how clean it looks on my big screen because the videos from my Canon 550d at 3200 don't look that clean like you described
Last edited:
I was talking about the softness of the resolution, it's different.
I agree on everything. I still think they crippled all the new line products to protect THEIR higher end cameras. And sadly it's possibly be the best APS-C product we will ever get for the sub $1,5k range because it still resolves more details the previous Sony cameras and the current Canons. Canon will probably do the same to protect the rumored new video cameras (if true). I think the only hope stays in "photo-only" companies like Nikon? Anyway we'll see.
Could you provide the original file? I'd like to see how clean it looks on my big screen because the videos from my Canon 550d at 3200 don't look that clean like you described
SURE! I'll just need to find a good option to do so. ...it will likely be this weekend before I get a chance to....but I'll give it a shot. Also....I'll just send one original file (straight from the cam) ...that way you don't get the compression from CS5 either. Cheers!