Any news on a new release soon?

I hate the optical viewfinder on the nex 5n. Maybe should compete with canon to get a better system for that, or just sub that out to Nikon or canon. Wow

justanothaguy wrote in post #14353704
You should consider a 5D MkII when I got one there was a huge difference in ISO performance... not to mention dynamic range and the colors the mkII produces.... the only thing that makes me want the mkIII is the af system

When I use my t3i now after having used the mkii quite a bit it makes the t3i feel toy like

I'm seeing about a 1 stop ISO difference between the 5dmk2 and 550D, so I'm not so sure that would be considered "Huge".

Here is some good ISO comparisons by thedigitalpicture. Once again, shows about a stop improvement over the Canon T2i.

http://thedigitalpictu​re.com …al-SLR-Camera-Review.aspx


Speaking of Sony, the new Nikon D800 vs. the 5dmk3... Well, there's no comparison. The mk3 wins hands down after ISO-800, and there is a "Huge" difference. I figure that's to be expected because the more pixels you have the more noise.

davidc502 wrote in post #14356136
I'm seeing about a 1 stop ISO difference between the 5dmk2 and 550D, so I'm not so sure that would be considered "Huge".

Here is some good ISO comparisons by thedigitalpicture. Once again, shows about a stop improvement over the Canon T2i.

http://thedigitalpictu​re.com …al-SLR-Camera-Review.aspx


Speaking of Sony, the new Nikon D800 vs. the 5dmk3... Well, there's no comparison. The mk3 wins hands down after ISO-800, and there is a "Huge" difference. I figure that's to be expected because the more pixels you have the more noise.

Thanks for posting that review...those noise levels are more on the line of what I see in the T3i. I have not read a review on the noise for the D800...but what you say sounds right.

Before every thinks I said Canon is about to close their doors....I am not. I do still think they are behind in the high ISO race with their competition. Thats all. I KNOW they have as much on the ball as Sony...or more. I am ready for them to reward their buyers with better low light performance.

Dean - what sort of low light work are you doing that this an issue for you? And again I ask, are you seeing this with 100% crops or with real world prints and viewing?

vorlon1 wrote in post #14355365
If you go to DPreview you can set an ISO comparison with multiple cameras. Here is what 6400 looks like. To my feeble eyes the Canon's don't look so bad in comparison to the sony.

All this is doing is comparing the in-built noise-reduction for the different cameras.

sapearl wrote in post #14356891
Dean - what sort of low light work are you doing that this an issue for you? And again I ask, are you seeing this with 100% crops or with real world prints and viewing?

I am just a hobbyist. The low light pics I have taken with the T3i ( above 800 ISO ) are just noisy to my eye. The same low light pics taken with the Sony were VERY clean. In fact so clean I would TRY to get bad noise and could not. I sold the Sony Nex5n I had in favor of the T3i. Two reasons I kept the T3i was lens selection and the Nex5n's ELECTRONIC ( the optical is bad IMHO ) viewfinder looked like I was going to break it off getting into and out of the bag. It is purchased separately and screws on the top. The low light shots taken with the Sony were nothing short of fantastic. It was so small it did feel like a toy but the body was solid and well built. If the Canon L lens were made so an adapter could be used ( which from what I have read they are the only ones that can not ) I would use the L glass with the Sony. Thats how good I think that camera is. I would say the video was a reason I went with Canon as well but Sony's video is as good. That IS the reason I discounted the Nikon so quickly...their video.

I am starting to really regret selling the Sony. If Canon can't do something in the next year or so I think I will repurchase the Nex5n ( its better at high ISO than the Nex7 ) and keep it just for such times that it outshines the T3i. I just would RATHER have ONE body. The T3i does great in bright daylight so paying extra for the EVF for the Sony would not be necessary. ( they cost $350 extra or so. ) But then I'm back to having different Len's, batteries, chargers, ect...

It might be useful for you to post comparison pictures (if you have any available) of the Nex5n vs. the T3i. I ask because looking at the samples from Vorlon1 I don't see any glaring differences between the Sony and Canon - certainly nothing to justify the superlatives you are giving to the Sony vs. the scorn for the T3i. And as I said above it looks like the Sony has its NR cranked up higher than Canon as there is a bit less detail to go with the slightly lower noise.

Dean_Fuller wrote in post #14360019
I am just a hobbyist. The low light pics I have taken with the T3i ( above 800 ISO ) are just noisy to my eye. ...............If the Canon L lens were made so an adapter could be used ( which from what I have read they are the only ones that can not ) I would use the L glass with the Sony. Thats how good I think that camera is. I would say the video was a reason I went with Canon as well but Sony's video is as good. That IS the reason I discounted the Nikon so quickly...their video.

I am starting to really regret selling the Sony. If Canon can't do something in the next year or so I think I will repurchase the Nex5n ( its better at high ISO than the Nex7 ) and keep it just for such times that it outshines the T3i. ........

Dean, there is a company called Fotodiox that makes lens adapters for a variety of body/lens combinations. They do produce a Canon Lens to Sony adapter:

http://www.fotodiox.co​m …_info.php?produ​cts_id=641

Here are some of the specs:

Adapter Type - Canon EOS Lenses to Sony Alpha NEX E-Mount
(digital body) Infinity Focus - Yes
Material of Construction - Brass with Stainless Steel Finishing
AE priority - Yes
Metering - Stop-down metering
Built-In Tripod Mount - Yes
Manufacturer

The down side is that according to the site you don't get full automation for the lenses. It's the old style stop down metering that we "enjoyed" from the '60's through '70's. Also, AF will not work. So it's a tradeoff between lack of convenience and not having "L" lenses.

Why not pick up a used 5DII as those prices will be coming down? And as JR suggested above it may be helpful to post some comparison shots for analysis. How do you process your photos?

And there is this one that allows Aperture control but manual focus only though:

http://www.metabones.c​om/sony/buy-eos-nex-adapter

Here are comparisons from RAW files with no NR. First is 3200, then 6400.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/64775760@N07/7​132697957/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/64775760@N07/7​132697963/

THANKS ! I had not found that adapter. I think I will pic up another NEX5n to use in low light. I feel better now.

I looked back on my hard drive for Nex5n low light pics I had taken but sadly I did not save them as they were just test shots. If I get another soon I could post them then if anyone is interested.

From my own experience first hand I really question those readings.

Anyway...i will be getting another Nex5n with an adapter and be able to use my L len's in low light. Thanks all for the help.

Dean_Fuller wrote in post #14361067
I looked back on my hard drive for Nex5n low light pics I had taken but sadly I did not save them as they were just test shots. If I get another soon I could post them then if anyone is interested.

Glad you made your decision, but have to question basing it on test shots?

Regardless, I think a lot of people would like to see your results so please do share.

Well, sure we all have to go by our own experience. I'm just posting findings from a reputable site, and I am not advocating for any particular camera.