Sony NEX5 Thoughts?

cstmar01

So I know there are some people here who are into DSLR's and what not. I saw this product the other day and thought it was a nice camera and boasted that it was DSLR quality but in a compact size. I was looking at getting a new camera and would like something more along the lines of a DSLR, but didn't want to have something I would have to spend hours trying to figure out.

Anyone have or suggest this camera or something like it? You can pick it up stock with the 18-55mm lens for like 650.00.

Not sure if there is something comparable in that range in DSLR that would be better.

I want something that I can switch lens out for different types of photos but something that is of good quality but not going to have to lug around a huge bag for all the time when traveling.

AsSiMiLaTeD

I don't know that camera in particular, but am not a big fan of the Sony cameras.

I can personally recommend Nikon or Canon. I'm a Nikon guy myself but the Canons are well regarded as well. The ergonomics are great on the Nikon and they're not hard to use at all, they can be as easy or complex as you want.

maximillian

^ +1. I would think that there are far more new and used Nikon and Canon lenses out there than Sony. From reading the review on dpreview it seems like this camera has some lag and delays with autofocus and repeated shots (non-continuous). This is where conventional DSLRs are much better and why I prefer them. I haven't read in depth but it looks like this camera is somewhere in between a POS and a DSLR in performance.

newrival

The review mentioned by max: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/

The fact is that this is not a DSLR it's a micro four thirds. DSLR has some advantages, but so do these. No internal moving parts for example. Theres no mirror or prism so that will cut down on a camera body rebuild after 20k exposures. Additionally, the form factor of a micro 4/3 cant be touched by the smallest of DSLR's.

Mounting them on tripods however is difficult due to the heavy lens on a tiny lightweight body. It also doesnt have a standard hot shoe or a viewfinder.

I got to try this camera out and enjoyed the pics, although I did prefer the Panasonic Lumix G-2. I just love those Leica lenses.

newrival

to be fair here are the pros and cons from dp review:

Conclusion - Pros

Small, innovative designs that are still comfortable to hold
High resolution sensor with excellent High ISO performance (in PASM modes)
Good JPEG output quality
Great build quality (particularly NEX-5)
Metal barrelled lenses feel impressive compared to peers
Tiltable high-resolution screen
Point-and-shoot interface that provides optional control of aperture
Interesting extra features such as in-camera HDR and sweep panorama
Good, clear live view magnification (particularly useful for using non e-mount lenses)
High quality video mode
Built-in user guide (Shooting Tips)

Conclusion - Cons

High ISO capability (a major advantage of its large sensor) unavailable in iAuto mode
Constant overexposure of images wastes highlight capabilities (and no exposure compensation to correct it in iAuto mode)
Consumes battery quickly if you use the screen a lot between shots
Poor shot-to-shot times (if you want to see a post-shot review image)
'Bkground Defocus' feature can encourage the use of the wrong settings
Screw-on flash awkward to attach
Screen can be difficult to see in bright light (particularly because it picks up smears easily)
Auto HDR mode only available in PASM modes
Live histogram unavailable when making exposure changes
Cheapest bundle (which provides only the 16mm lens) is not a good combination for beginners

maximillian

Agreed. This camera has its place as I mentioned above (POS = PNS, sorry about the Freudian slip). The original poster mentioned DSLR's so I took the view that that's what they wanted. These cameras try to gain some advantages of DSLR's while trying to hold on to some of the advantages of PNS cameras. It fills a market niche, and it seems to be a nice camera.

cokewithvanilla

I have some expereince w/ canon and nikon SLRS and I would say that they both have their characteristics, I wouldn't say either manufacturer has a camera that 'takes a better picture' .... to a certain extent, I think the lenses will have more to do with that than the camera it self. Like a few people mentioned above, I would stick with canon/nikon if only for availability of lenses.

I would suggest finding something that fits your needs. Buy something with only the features you need/want. If you cannot/will not carry around an SLR, why bother looking at them? You probably won't get SLR quality pictures from a nonslr camera, but if you always carry this camera with you and get more/better pictures because of it... well, then you've found a winner.

I have not reviewed the specs, but the glaring problem with this camera, to me, is that if you want 'slr quality', that means a nice big lens... which is probably the part of the camera that makes it the hardest to carry. A point and shoot strapped with an SLR lens is gonna be a PITA to carry, maybe not to the point of an SLR, but pretty close. When you carry your camera in a bag, mainly you either want to protect it, or you want to carry extra lenses... both of those things are not addressed by slimming down the camera.

here's a review with side by side pictures... if you were considered about 'quality'

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/NEX5/NEX5RAW.HTM

praedet

I have a Panasonic GH2, moved from a Nikon D90. Here is my take on these cameras...

First, the Nex-5 uses the larger APS sensor, so it is the SAME sensor as in the SONY DSLRs. On the other hand, my Panasonic uses a smaller 4/3rds sensor. At the face of it, that means the Sony will take low light photos better and might have an increase in dynamic range. In reality, the Sony system is nice, but there lenses SUCK, and you are limited to 3 as of now. If you go with a micro 4/3rds camera by Panasonic or Olympus, you have access to at least 20 native lenses, and then there are cheap adapters to use lots of others. My camera is 90% of the still picture capability of the D90, 1/2 or less the weight with a lens, and about 200% better at video...