Sony NEX-7... Canon.... Wake Up!

Croasdail wrote in post #14473295
"Those burst specs are misleading because the NEX cannot focus between shots. That makes such bursts useless for most sports."

Not sure where this comes from but yes, it does have subject tracking in burst mode. It is only 10 shots, but it had not problems tacking my son doing jumps on his dirt bike. Would I use it as a primary sports camera - nope. As a part time shooters camera to get juniors soccer game - absolutely up to the task. Quality glass is the biggest problem here, not focus tracking.

Jeffrey, your comparing my usual sports kit that cost over 15k, something the average shooter should never spend for just for fun shots, and a camera that is only $1,300. Lets me a little more reasonable here. If you compare it to something like an XXXD Canon with a 70-300 canon lens - you would be really hard pressed to find a difference, and yes, the Sony will do the 10 frames RAW with no issue... where the xxxD will have issues. Lets talk apples to apples here. Not many people normal people are going to want to drop 5-15k on gear to get their kids T-Ball game - or at least they shouldn't.

The difference here is I am more than willing to pocket the NEX when I head out to field for my kids games. I can capture good enough shots, and 1080P at 60 fps video. I will be more than glad to bring this to each and every game. Halling a 1D with a 400 2.8 or 300 2.8 just isn't going to happen for most.

good point, I have an XXXd model and shoot outdoor sports and get plenty of keepers. I was wondering if these mirror-less cameras could keep up with the sports action.

Croasdail wrote in post #14473295
Not sure where this comes from but yes, it does have subject tracking in burst mode. It is only 10 shots, but it had not problems tacking my son doing jumps on his dirt bike..

DPReview says you can only get 10 fps with focus locked on the first shot and no VF between shots. In my mind that is not very usable.

To get something more like dSLR function the NEX is limited to 3.7 fps which is comparable with a Rebel.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #14473430
I would love a Canon equivelent, if they would give us the AF adapter like Sony has for it's full line of AF lenses.

You can't actually use this with EF lenses, adapters exist, but you will not be able to adjust the aperture. I can manually focus, this is not problem but we need to be able to adjust aperture. That one aspect really renders the idea moot. Too bad, if this weren't the case, I'd get this Sony.

It's tempting to get one and mate it to some of the old MF lenses though with manual aperture rings, it would make it a very affordable system.

I was the same but there is one that has reverse engineered the Canon electronics and will allow you to electronically adjust the aperture, use the IS and even has a tripod mount to boot - shame its nearly $400 (and demand is outstripping supply so I'm on the waiting list):

http://www.metabones.c​om …virtuemart_cate​gory_id=13

There are adapter out the that have mechanical apertures but I dont know how that will affect the images (having the aperture in a different place in the lens chain). There are also ones with a tripod mount but none that I can find that combine them all like this one - thats probably why its 400 bucks.

EDIT: reading it again, it even has a "wide-open" button to allow for easier manual focusing. I must admit it is slightly annoying having to dial wide-open to MF and then dial down to take the shot because on the Sony "DoF preview" is always on! ;-P

JeffreyG wrote in post #14473133
The NEX line is interesting, but it really does not have the features of a 1D.

I should think not given the price difference! Mirrorless cameras do however offer one feature that I now find to be completely, totally, and utterly indispensable: live view with CDAF systems designed specifically for it, and in some models, articulated screens with near instantaneous touchscreen activated focus point selection, focus acquisition, and shutter release. Those are features that I would not be without on future cameras and are a lot of the reason why all my EOS gear is about to be sold.

Canon...wake up, indeed!

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #14473430
I would love a Canon equivelent, if they would give us the AF adapter like Sony has for it's full line of AF lenses.

You can't actually use this with EF lenses, adapters exist, but you will not be able to adjust the aperture. I can manually focus, this is not problem but we need to be able to adjust aperture. That one aspect really renders the idea moot. Too bad, if this weren't the case, I'd get this Sony.

It's tempting to get one and mate it to some of the old MF lenses though with manual aperture rings, it would make it a very affordable system.

I'd be interested to see how popular it is to use EF lenses on a theoretical Canon mirrorless camera. In Micro Four Thirds there was a brief interest in adapting Four Thirds lenses in the beginning, but as the native lens line-up filled out it seemed to die quite quickly. It's not just the mismatch in size between lens and body but the very slow autofocus of a lens designed for PDAF. The use of an adapter with Sony SLT-type translucent mirror and PDAF is the only way that I can see it being popular. A lens worth a few thousand dollars doesn't seem so good when it has dog-slow autofocus using CDAF.

My only interest in a mirrorless Canon system is if they release a good range of native lenses to go with it and in a timely manner.

JeffreyG, I know you have been around here for a lifetime, tut the notion that you need 10 fps to get sports shots really is silly. For those of us who have been around for ever, we know that great sports shots were captured before there was even autowinders on film cameras.... have captured fantastic images with lowly cameras like the 10D, 20D, and 5D which didn't come close to 1D fps speeds.

This is the exact problem I have with "equipment" focused forums, where somehow the idea is that you can buy your way into great shots. Even if DPReviews numbers are true, the idea that 10 fps versus the claimed 4 fps to get little Sally of Jimmy playing soccer is silly. Focus speed versus fps will make that difference. SHutter lag will make a difference. You glass used will impact image quality. FPS does nothing to capture a better image.... it just create a crowd of spray and pray shooters.

Last case and point. In division 1 basketball, a good majority of the published images have been captured with strobes. Even with that fastest cycling heads, your going to get 1 or 2 fps... if your lucky. And yet, those images are everywhere.

Technique - not FPS is the determining factor.

Croasdail wrote in post #14475968
JeffreyG, I know you have been around here for a lifetime, tut the notion that you need 10 fps to get sports shots really is silly. Last case and point. In division 1 basketball, a good majority of the published images have been captured with strobes. Even with that fastest cycling heads, your going to get 1 or 2 fps... if your lucky. And yet, those images are everywhere.

Technique - not FPS is the determining factor.

True enough. Even when I shoot bursts, I usually wind up binning everything after the first shot. Most sports shooting, timing will serve one better than a fast burst.

Still, there are a few instances when the timing is in doubt and a burst is actually better.

But in this thread all I was responding to was the wonderment that the 'lowly' NEX-7 offers this incredible burst rate equal to very high end dSLRs. The facts as reported by DPReview and others is that this is not the case. The high speed bursts of these cameras are only in very crippled modes that make the burst of even less use than the burst in a dSLR.

What usually pisses me off shooting a 10 fps burst on the 1D4 is when I see the perfect moment in the viewfinder between shots. Then I know I missed it. At least the NEX-7 spares you this as you lose the VF for the whole sequence. You get to wait until you get home to find out you missed it.

Understood..... what cracks me up was I think there was some camera - maybe a Fuji or something like that which had a claimed 60 fps. Can you imagine culling through those to find the right image. I would never get anything submitted. I periodically go through my old library stuff and look at some of the shots and go "and I kept this why?".

As we speak (ok type) right now I am backing up to a new 3 TB drive.... 10 hours and counting. More is not always better.

But yes, 1D isn't going anywhere.... but for the average shooter, could very well be good enough for 80% of the shooting parents out there. For a travel camera... it pretty much gets close to the mark for me. Just hate starting yet a 3rd kit of camera gear. I shoot Nikon too.... and their mirrorless is total.... well.... if you can't say anything nice... don't say it.

^^It was the Nikon 1. 60fps for up to 1/2 second with fixed focus and exposure.

A little post mortem on the conversation with the conversation between Jeffrey and myself. So to see what the camera really could do, I took the camera out to my 10 year old sons last game - just to see how well it really could do. I used it with the kit lens, all that I have, to see how well it did.

First thing I did was go to custom mode, and put it into sports mode. I then moved the shutter release into high speed shot mode - and as Jeffrey said - it flashed up a message that all settings would be based on the first frame exposure settings, meaning if you are panning with a shot and went from sun to shaded area, it would not compensate for it. Using the slower high speed mode it would compensate for these changes. Being here in the south, in spring, in the evening, we had these very conditions. And yes, in a few sequences, it did not change the exposure through the sequence and some ended up being under exposed. Shooting RAW, this wasn't too big of an issue, though I hate post processing images. And honestly, my 1D has the same issue. It is because of that when I shoot for money, I am shooting manual exposure control even with the 1D.

As to focus tracking, seeing how the little lens when full extended is shooting at f5.6, the depth of field is so great it really doesn't matter, when shooting little dudes and dudettes. Perhaps if you were shooting pro level athletes, this could be an issue... but then again you wouldn't be using a NEX-7 for that.

Bottom line, it did the job just fine. DOF was too deep, that is the lenses fault -and a fast option would be nice to have. It was that deep DOF field though that made it not make a difference that it probably hadn't refocused during the sequence. If subject moves too much, simply lift, require, and keep shooting. The buffer cleared really fast. As something "near" pocketable to play with at your kids game, it is more than capable of capturing that shot you really want. I question if it is really 10 fps... felt more like 7-8. But for my kids game, it was for more enjoyable than wrangling 20 pounds of gear around.

I will try to post a sample sequence. Last thing, while it does have a live viewable screen in back, I still find myself using the viewfinder most of the time. Just feels more natural. That said, being able to tilt the screen out and shoot from nearly ground level... that was pretty cool. Felt unnatural for me, but was cool none-the-less.

I wouldn't buy a MFT for fast FPS. I haven't seen the Sony or any for that matter and just asked about the high FPS as to it having to be turned on/set in a menu or simply once it powered on it was capable of shooting those high FPS, etc..

I think there are times when (like Croasdail) mentioned that you don't want to lug around the heavy stuff.. I agree. That's why these new MFT's are really appealing as far as IQ, fast AF, faster powering up, etc.

Each day since my last post I can't make the decision to sell my 7D. Having it gripped it's obviously big. Shooting the 5d3 no gripped is nice to shoot. I have to make a decision as to sell and go forward with a MTF and have that and the 5d3 to shoot.

The Sony is great with awesome reviews. I think I may wait for Canon if they make an announcement in the next few weeks or maybe go with the Olympus. Ok I'm done..

I'm thinking about getting a NEX just for videos. My friend has a NEX-5 and he loves it. Just wish they had faster lenses, but that's what my 5D is for.

Joe Ravenstein wrote in post #14458554
Due to the worst customer service next to Attila the huns I will never give any $$$ to Sony for any of their products. I feel I need to sterilize my finger tips just from typing that brands name.

Oh come on! Tell us how you REALLY feel!

A couple of weeks into it with the NEX, and I have to say that the lack of affordable good glass is a real issue. The little pancake wide is no where to be found. The travel oriented 18-200 lenses are all at a steep premium to their standard format siblings. I still very happy with image quality, but the lens problem is a real issue. I am traveling to Spain on business next week, and I have no real lens options.

This could be an issue.

There are Sigma 19 and Sigma 30 f/2.8.