Those ultra-mysterious folks at Sony are finally starting to loosen their grip on info about the Japanese giant's
entry into the growing market for compact interchangeable lens cameras. Having already witnessed some of the
user interface and a few
prototype bodies, we're now seeing the first shots of these new shooters in the wild. Spotted in an Asian pub (what is it with drinking establishments and
hardware leaks?), the mirrorless NEX3 body reveals its name, an external flash attachment (with a proprietary connector, boo!), and a a chrome-finished 16mm F2.8 pancake lens. It doesn't look very pancakey to us, and indeed
Sony Alpha Rumors claim it's bigger than the nearest competitors from Olympus and Panasonic, but apparently that's because Sony has included optical image stabilization in the lens, perhaps a worthy trade-off. Both new models are expected to sport the 14 megapixel ExmorHD sensor, though the NEX5 will record 1080p video versus the NEX3's 720p. We're told to expect a May 11 announcement for the pair, with what's being described as "very aggressive" pricing relative to their
Micro Four Thirds competition. Let it be so.
posted April 26th 2010 4:58AM
Olympus has in-body stabilization, Panasonic puts in in some lenses, but not the pancake. That's why I bought the E-P2 with the Panasonic 20mm...best of both worlds. The build quality on the Sony lenses looks forged in truth, though.
What an awful shame they're not joining Olympus and Panasonic for a µ4:3 line of camera!
@peppo im glad they didn't, the image quality just isn't there for the m42
@peppo Sony uses a bigger sensor, and by that will have the edge in quality comparisons (less noise etc)
@moijk
Leaked again in alcohol places. Interesting, no one speaks of this, anyone read the news?
@peppo
why would you join the bandwagon if you have what it takes to be a stand out ?
@peppo i agree. I hope one of the big boys (canon/nikon) join for a micro4/3 master race!
@twellzer If and when Canon and Nikon come out with a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera they will both have their own proprietary lenses and accessories. There is no way they'll be paying Panasonic royalties for using the micro4/3 system.
@ehisforadam M43rds is an open system; There are no royalties.
Any word on how much these cameras going to cost?
@spy323 I'm sure they'll be “aspirationally priced” or whatever the marketers call it these days — i.e. expensive.
@spy323 Well, check the FourThirds form Pana and Oly and then add the name Sony to that.
"proprietary connector, boo!"
That was to be expected. Sony's even worse than apple when it comes to proprietary connectors.
Exciting stuff nonetheless. The more competition, the better.
@grandmainger
-If you know anything about the world of cameras, you'd realize it's full of proprietary tech.
- If you know anything about Sony in 2010, you'd realize that they use standardized solutions a LOT.
@grandmainger Don't blame Sony for that, it was made about 25 years ago by Minolta. So it is not as commonly used as the leica connector that everyone else have their own version of, but still isn't something Sony wipped up to be special.
This camera doesn't even look thick enough to use a non-proprietary connector. And what do people want to do, connect a standard flash? There goes the smallish form factor.
the lens is way too big for a pancake... this might be a deal breaker, whats the purpose of having one of those if u need a bag to carry it anyways?
Once again, Olympus leads and everyone else follows. It is so sad that Oly doesn't have more market share than it does. The big innovations in digital, Live View (Oly) and mirrorless (Panny) have both come from the 4/3rds format but it is not even close to the popularity of Canon/Nikon or even Sony Alpha.
@DrDr They came in without legacy needs to burden them, so... we get innovation such as in-body stabilization. But they therefore needed to produce a component library 'overnight'. Well they've had a few nights...and their lens selection is lacking in primes, lacking in specialty lenses (macro, tilt-shift, etc.) and fast-glass (aside from the two admittedly impressive 2.0 zooms and two teles).
With a smaller sensor they really needed to develop the fast glass to lessen the ISO advantage and the specialty lenses to expand their utility and relevance. They failed. The Noktor 0.95, but with more consistent bokeh, should have been their own development, right out the gate when the cameras first hit the street.
If anything, with their 'redo' opportunity--m43rds--we see an even slower timetable for lens releases, and nothing exceptional in sight. This is the new rangefinder, and they're botching it. What's a Leica without the lenses? (BTW you can buy adaptors--but this approach has both compromise and a lack of recognition/marketing from Panny and Oly.
That proprietary connector is gonna kill them.
@KingFaisal94 The worst part is that they replaced JPEG with ATRAC-G, and they are all saved to a UMD.
@KingFaisal94 I really doubt it. The UMD didn't.
@KingFaisal94 After beeing used in 25 years and featured on every Minolta camera after the 5000/7000/9000 series that came in 86 - and on every sony alpha camera, that iISO hotshoe isn't going to kill anything. Every flash for Sony uses it, every flash that is modern enough for digital made when Minolta made cameras will work. Every 3rd party flash from the same era will work. Every adapter etc will work.
Looks chunky but according to the info on alpharumors that the lens is 49mm dia, this should make the whole package just 5cm thick. Which would be thinner than any of the micro-four third cameras with their respective pancakes. For reference, the GF1 + 20mm is approx 60mm.
So no in-body stabilization? That's weird. In this case even if these cameras are compatible with Sony's "normal" lenses, that would be a big drawback.
And what is this 16mm? Crop factor?
@Atkins
24mm. It is about 1.5x
@DrDr Hmm. If the crop factor is 1.5x that makes it much more interesting than the FourThirds for me.
@Atkins This is a mirrorless camera, which hasn't got the same mirror box as the dslr alphas. That means the distance between the lens and the sensor is much smaller allowing for smaller lens designs. So using lenses, with adapters to get the right mount and register distance will fairly fast end up beeing unpropotional (Big lens on very small camera) - so I would suggest anyone to buy into the selection made for the camera and only if say high magnification is needed go for the bigger cousins for the dslrs.
+1
The 4/3 sensor is too small, end of story.
This shows promise.
@Mike V
Too small for what? Posters or something?
Care to elaborate?
@Mike V Seriously? You've shot with an EP-2? Short of a full-frame sensor, this can produce some of the best JPEGs straight out of camera that you will find, conventional mirror-box DSLRs included.
Too small so that you have to use a crazy wide lens all the time even to get even a normal shot.
Nothing to do with actual image quality, but more to do with perspective and "Look."
Sure Micro 4/3 is a bigger sensor than a point and shoot, but it's still 2x crop.
@Mike V
I love how brainwashed the Nikon/Canon crowd is... The crop factor is with respect to 35mm film. Therefore the image actually gets cropped (less light from the proper 35mm lens hits the sensor)... There's NO CROP on m43 system. The lenses are designed specifically for the sensor. The word "crop" doesn't make any sense. It's a sensor that is 20% smaller than canon's APSC. There's NO CROP. It'd be just as stupid as to call regular point-n-shoots as 20x crop.
And NO. a "24mm-equivalent" will be SMALLER than a true 24mm. Because 16mm is a REAL LIFE MEASUREMENT. And 16mm is less than 24mm, and the lens can be made that much smaller. It doesn't take a genius to figure this out.
@Atkins
I wonder if the people that argue about the 20% larger and 5 percent noisier, and 3 more lenses available.... if they ACTUALLY TAKE PICTURES, or if they just babble on and on about insignificant differences....
@pretol I don't know :) Personally I like the bigger sensor, because I shoot wide-angle. This 16mm would be 24mm (not the same with FourThirds). Also the whole Sony system seems cheaper. I am surprised they didn't put the stabilization in the body - it is Sony after all.
@Atkins
My point is that there's physical limitation relationship between a bigger sensor and shooting wide angle.
The simple problem comes from the fact that the way Nikon/Canon solved the problem of a different size sensor, is to use glass that is designed for 35mm film and adapting to smaller sensors. That's where terminology "crop" comes it. And that's why it's "difficult" to get wide angle with smaller sensors, is simply because you WERE STUCK using inappropriate glass designed for 35mm film. Until Canon redesigned their glass specifically for the aps-c, and now they have a lot of glass that starts at 18mm (which would have been unbelievable in the 35mm days to have such selection of 18mm glass). My point is that it DOES NOT matter how big your sensor is, you can ALWAYS design a lens for it, for any scenario. The question is lens availability. Given that this is a new system, there will not be much glass for it, BUT it's not because the sensor is smaller... it's simply because they haven't made it yet.
2.8? Booo!!! I want faster glass. I hope they have a 30mm f1.8 or f1.4 in the works.
Also, one thing that seems to be lost when they release these new mirrorless options is an ultrawide lens option. Of course, Sony hasn't released lenses I believe, but i am not holding my breath.
@LeeBongSmith
Totally agree!
16! we'll just have to wait and see how sharp that is.
NEX kind of sadly reminds me of their old P series.
This is the main problem with electronics company.
Soooooo, even with the technical know-how they've built up with in-body IS on their Alpha line, they decide to put IS in the lenses with this?
Clearly a sneaktastic way to overprice their lenses. And yeah, an f2.8 prime is.... suxxorz.
AUGH! In stabilization in the lens??!! In-body stabilization was 90% of the reason I bought into the Sony Alpha SLR line!! :(
Sony, every time they release something you just have to shake your head. They love their proprietary connections. Why didn't they just go with the micro4/3 standard is beyond me. I guess they want to make their own lens and sell it. If I was an informed consumer, I wouldn't buy something like that. Look at that pancake, it's more like a muffin...that thing is thick. So it got IS in it...that only expose it's next flaw...no in body image stabilization. And f2.8...that's like any other lens. How about something faster? That's why I bought a panasonic 20mm f1.7 for my EPL-1. It makes a lens with no IS have IS.
@nxp3
Sony has never even made a m4/3 sensor. Sony (and likely Canon/Nikon in the future) are bringing the larger, APS-C sized sensor to mirror-less, interchangeable lens cameras. APS-C sensors have lower noise and better DR than m4/3, and the crop factor is less, so we're talking D300s/A700/7D image quality in a compact.
As for the lens, it is wider than any prime available for m4/3, thus the size and f2.8. When a "standard" 35mm prime comes, it'll likely be smaller and faster than this 16mm that is a 24mm "equivalent."
The mount of NEX looks big enough that, maybe, someday Sony will bring fullframe compact, and that's the real dream.
@df1977
The lenses (of similar design) for smaller sensors will ALWAYS be smaller. It's simple geometry.
APS-C? A 16mm lens would be great for a wide-angle shooter like me if the sensor is indeed APS-C sized.
though i don't know what kind of camera is good, your information must be helpful to me, thank you.
http://www.wholesaleinc.net/ddv5500hd-digital-camera-8mp-30-lcd-screen-4x-digital-zoomlibattery_p294.html
http://www.wholesaleinc.net/rich-dvh595-hd7z-50mp-cmos-digital-camcorder-with-30-tft-lcd_p295.html