It looks like Sony's having a field day right now in Japan, making its official reveal of the
NEX3 and NEX5 cameras, the
"ultra-compact" DSLRs with interchangeable lenses we saw back at PMA. The presentation is going on as we speak, and the rumor sites seem to suggest
Digital Photography School posted (and subsequently pulled) a review of the NEX3.
Quesabesde, however, still has its preview of the not-quite-
Micro Four Thirds shooters live, and is also listing some specs and prices. First with the technical details: the NEX3 has a 14.2 megapixel sensor, support for Memory Stick and SDXC media, 720p / 30fps video, and an articulating 2.95-inch LCD. The NEX5 boasts AVCHD 1080i video, and we're not sure yet as to other differences between the pair. As for pricing, the bodies on their lonesome appear to be worth about €250 and €350, respectively -- that's $320 and $448 in US currency. Throw in a 16mm f2.8 lens for €250 and you're now looking at a minimum of €500 (or $640) to join the fray. The kits are said to be going on sale in June. Sony's official site hasn't updated yet, but with any luck we'll get the legit scoop in very short time.
Update: Sony
made it official, says a firmware update will be released this summer to capture stereoscopic 3D sweep panoramas.
[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]
posted May 10th 2010 8:24PM
Man the price for the body is actually much lower than I expected. I would think if you wait a while you could easily get a good lens and body combo for around $400-450, which is damn good.
If looks could kill..
And also, who says "not-quite-Micro Four Thirds"...? This is APS-C...a LARGER sensor than Micro4/3s...and has an actual 3:2 aspect ratio...
Nexus one is right
Want +1
This is not a DSLR. Stop saying these things are.
@spin cycle
Nope...it's a mirrorless, AWESOME digital camera...also know as MADC...But it does have the same sensor as a DSLR, and similar lens...although not sure how the motor would work, whether it's inbody or on the lense...
@spin cycle
OK...seriously, it is called a Mirror-Less Interchangeable Lens Camera...
@kapanak
Unfortunately there really is no definitive name for this type of camera yet. "Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens" is popular on some forums, but for obvious reasons it seems unlikely that the industry would want to market their cameras as "EVIL".
It's really a DSL, but unfortunately that abbrevation already has meaning.
This is digital and single-lens; the only thing missing is the reflex.
Hmmmm...no front dial. That could be a problem.
And I said this before but it's worth saying again, f/2.8 is too slow!!!!!
Price ain't bad, though.
I would think you could get faster lens once more accessories and lenses show up/
F/2.8 ain't bad for a 24mm-equivalent. A wider aperture at this focal length and mounting distance might run into issues with the digital sensor's limited angle of incidence. And it would certainly increase the cost of the lens.
@LeeBongSmith
Uh.. what?
For a 16mm lens, an f/2.8 is excellent. In fact, for a lens that wide, you really aren't going to find lenses that much faster.
The Canon 14mm f/2.8L is $2,000, and there is a reason for that, the wider you get, the more edge distortion you are going to get, increasing aperture will exacerbate those effects.
One of the best lenses on the market right now is the Nikkor 14-24mm F/2.8, which is another ~$2k lens. The reason why its such a gem is that it keeps image distortion at a minimum even though its incredibly wide.
The problem with amateur photographers these days is that they expect every lens to be f/1.4-f/1.8, because their cheap 50mm is that speed, even though on most APS-C dSLRs that 50mm lens is 75-80mm due to the crop factor. The reality is that different focal lengths have different ideal apertures, and they behave differently in terms of dof. What is more important then maximum aperture size is what aperture you get optimum sharpness.
@Temple
Which is why instead of a 16mm f2.8, they should have made a 30mm f/1.8 r f/2 which would have been a "normal" lens on a 1.6 crop.
Hell, even a 24mm f/2 would be better.
@LeeBongSmith
Who says they won't release a such a lens later on?
Both existing mirror-less systems have a fast normal. So producing a fairly wide angle prime first arguably helps to distinguish Sony somewhat.
This is awesome. I already have an a700 with 7 different lenses. One of these would be an excellent backup in case something with my a700 went wrong, or at least another body that my wife could use with the glass I already bought. The real question is how does it perform in low light.
@blogwhitesitescom Judging by the only 12800 sample, pretty well :) Or at least I hope so.
I remain skeptical.
This whole big-sensor-tiny-camera thing only has merit when the lens is equally slim, i.e. the pancake kit lens offered by most such systems, damning you to 40mm FOV and F2.8 for eternity.
For everything else you'd be better off with a dSLR: optical viewfinder, better ergonomics, cheaper, wider selection of lenses...
Throw some small wide angle prime lenses into the mix, though, and I might change my mind. Add a fast (f/1.8 or better) normal and we can start talking...
That isn't the only merit. Shrinking the distance between mount and sensor has a clear benefit to wide angle lenses. This is especially emphasized by the two ultrawide zooms currently available for the µ4:3, which are easily dwarfed by their dSLR cousins.
Panasonic's 20mm (eq. 40mm, which is essentially normal) pancake is actually f1.7. And they have another 14mm f2.8 pancake in development. For Sony you've got the aforementioned 16mm (eq. 24mm) f/2.8.
@bebop
optical viewfinder is SMALLER on an entry level SLR than it is on a lumix g1. Nobody is damned to a 40mm-equiv and f/2.8 Lens selection is not great, but you can find anything from 14mm-400mm-equiv. for m43 system.
It's a common misconception that because the sensor is smaller it's more difficult to get wider lenses. It's simply not true. It was only "true" for Nikon/Canon because their old lenses were "cropped" on apsc sensors. The problem with the new formats is simply that lens selection is not quite there yet. It's not an engineering problem, it's strictly a marketing problem.
Where the freak is the panasonic lx4??!!!
THAT IS THE CAMERA TO WAIT FOR.
@ROMANESQ
lx3 had a sensor that was about 1/9 the size of the sensor in this camera... Different league, to say the least... This is a direct competitor to the m43 system.
(engadget is screwing up my posts...argghh)
@ROMANESQ
Panasonic has the G2 and GF1, which are micro-FourThirds sensors that are meant to compete with this. However, the $320 price point is very surprising.
@Temple
Well this is Sony we're talking about. They could be planning to sell the hardware at an initial loss in a bid to gain marketshare.
lx3 had a sensor that was about 1/9 the size of the sensor in this camera... Different league, to say the least... This is a direct competitor to the m43 system.
lx3 had a sensor that was about 1/9 the size of the sensor in this camera... Different league, to say the least... This is a direct competitor to the m43 system.
This actually looks quite interesting. I would love to have 1 small, portable camera that can interchange lenses depending on if I want to put it in my pocket or take long distance photographs.
Anyone know why Sony keeps using 1080i instead of 1080p? I thought 1080p was much better for motion, is this true? If so, I guess I had better wait for the Samsung tl350, despite its lackluster zoom.
they remind me to the good old f300 and f700 series ...
Is the sensor based on the same size as micro four thirds cameras?
@taciturnforsale
No. It's an APS-C sensor. Roughly 50% larger than the one µ4:3 cameras use.
OK so those who are demanding a f1.4 lens on a camera this inexpensive are just day dreaming. I am still learning about lens' and focal lengths, etc. From what I am able to understand in my limited knowledge is that how good a camera is actually depends on how well they are able to take sharp images with slower lens'.
If camera A can take a photo as sharp or sharper with a f2.8 lens than camera B with a f1.4 lens then I'll pay more for camera A and not have to worry as much about lens speed rather than lens quality when looking for one.
Oh and being able to go with a slower lens will also save me money and allow me to buy more.
Please correct me if I am mistaken here.
Just because the camera body is inexpensive, that doesn't mean every lens for it has to be.
Most lenses are sharper when stopped done. Which means that a f/1.4 lens set to f/2.8 will often be sharper than an f/2.8 lens with its aperture wide open. Also while an f1.4 lens may not be the sharpest wide open, at the same time that extra speed makes it easier to get my shutter speed up in less than ideal lighting situations. Motion blur is usually more noticeable than a little softness in the corners.
Nice, drool-worthy hardware, but I don't see this competing with m4/3. m4/3 is all about control and giving you SLR-like control in a small package.
This is more like a SLR-quality but with point-n-shoot control.
@sibyy The quality seems awesome considering this preview:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/NEX5/NEX5A.HTM
At least on par with the FourThirds. But I am worried about the lack of controls too (check what they say in the preview).
Mark me as interested to see more. Been living with Point and Shoots for a long time and they get the job done in most cases, but I have been thinking about jumping into something with Interchangeable lenses. This is piquing my interest.
Sony stores in glasgow are stating 16th June ast the release date for the Sony Nex-5