Discussion in 'News and Rumors' started by bilzmale, Aug 20, 2011.
Read here to find the narrow winner.
I looked at all of these before my recent aquisition of NEX 3,...for a while it was 'touch and go' with the NX10/NX11.
Had teh reviewers conisidered the TRUE situation with the NEX it's difficult to see how that camera was not to come out head and shoulders better than the others. The NEX was marked down for poor menu/controls which can actually be radically improved and customised by use of the latest firmware such that menus don't really have to be used,...And, they criticised lack of lenses and adaptors when in fact masses of adaptors to fit just about any lens are available cheaply from ebay.
There is no objectively TRUE situation with the Nex or any other camera. I agree with you totally that the Nex controls get a bum rap - from FW 3 forward they could be customized in a way that made the important stuff VERY easy to access. But the lack of lenses and the size of lenses (particularly future lenses) is a very REAL issue for a lot of us. Its why I ultimately abandoned Nex despite its very real strengths - the sensor was great the and new ones look better still. But most of the target audience (for the article and I'd bet for the camera as well, is not primarily interested in adaptable legacy MF lenses. They have a place, a lot of enthusiasts love 'em, and the Nex works really well with them. But most people considering one of these four cameras is not considering it for use with manual focus lenses!
In terms of AF lenses, the only really compact lens, the 16, is not well regarded by those who focus on IQ. I personally was happy with it, but I'm happier yet with the variety of prime lenses available for m43 cameras. The coming Nex lenses look like they're gonna be big, particularly the good ones. The Zeiss 24 looks like a killer lens but I'd still rather shoot with something almost as good but lots smaller. Which is doable in the m43 format but evidently not in the Nex format with the larger sensor. The telephotos are really outsized for the body and Sony, maybe because of the criticism of the 16mm, doesn't seem inclined to sacrifice quality for size again and all of the lenses on the roadmap are bigger than I'd choose to shoot with a very compact body. If I'm gonna be shooting with lenses that big, I'll just go for a bigger body and go with an A77 or something similar.
The Nex is fine camera with some very real strengths and with some very real weaknesses, particularly for its target market. These camera are all about tradeoffs. I don't see anything irrational about the choice the article made and would have similarly understood ranking either the Nex or NX at the top of the list. You make it sound like a slam dunk and I just don't buy that at all.
Actually, you have given the NEX a better evaluation in a couple of paragraphs than they did! What I was gettign at was their using incorrect (or at least ignorance) info to 'score' the NEX lower whe all of those cameras have fairly glaring faults of design, including NEX.....
Im NOT a NEX 'enthusiast', and certainly not a target user since I view it as more of a small digital back than a camera,.......however, it HAS earned my respect quite quickly. I just find it annoying that 'reviews' such as are often the source of ill information.
What's the GF3 doing in there? I can't imagine it being on the same shortlist as the E-P3 for anyone, they're simply not aimed at the same user. Panasonic have models comparable to that Olympus, just as Olympus have models comparable to the GF3, surely the starting point for any comparative review is to start with comparative cameras!
I agree - I think they were just going with the newest available from each brand, although I don't know enough about Samsung to know where the NX11 falls. But the Nex, Pen, and GF3 were all the newest models released as of a couple of weeks ago. Now you could add the EPL3 and maybe the EPM1 to the list and hopefully there will be a Nex 7 before too long, but they probably didn't have access to any of these to include.
Separate names with a comma.