Interesting review of NEX-7

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Nov 23, 2011.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    RichA, Nov 23, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    >Ok, the reviewer is a kiss-ass for this camera, but...
    >...the camera seems hugely capable and controllable, but its Achilles
    >Heel is its noise. Even resized, its noise exceeds the more
    >"conservatively pixelled" NEX-5n. But for lower ISO, high resolution
    >work, it looks really good.
    >
    >http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/10/23/the-sony-nex-7-digital-camera-review-by-steve-huff/



    This guy writes some of the worst "reviews" I have ever seen.

    Perhaps he's hoping for a job at PopPhoto.
    Bruce, Nov 23, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Nov 23, 4:11 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    > RichA <> wrote:
    > >Ok, the reviewer is a kiss-ass for this camera, but...
    > >...the camera seems hugely capable and controllable, but its Achilles
    > >Heel is its noise.  Even resized, its noise exceeds the more
    > >"conservatively pixelled"  NEX-5n.  But for lower ISO, high resolution
    > >work, it looks really good.

    >
    > >http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/10/23/the-sony-nex-7-digital-camer...

    >
    > This guy writes some of the worst "reviews" I have ever seen.
    >
    > Perhaps he's hoping for a job at PopPhoto.


    Amateur Photographer scored it very highly as well, 90% on their
    scales, for what it's worth. But they glossed over the noise.
    RichA, Nov 23, 2011
    #3
  4. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    >On Nov 23, 4:11 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    >> RichA <> wrote:
    >> >Ok, the reviewer is a kiss-ass for this camera, but...
    >> >...the camera seems hugely capable and controllable, but its Achilles
    >> >Heel is its noise.  Even resized, its noise exceeds the more
    >> >"conservatively pixelled"  NEX-5n.  But for lower ISO, high resolution
    >> >work, it looks really good.

    >>
    >> >http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/10/23/the-sony-nex-7-digital-camer...

    >>
    >> This guy writes some of the worst "reviews" I have ever seen.
    >>
    >> Perhaps he's hoping for a job at PopPhoto.

    >
    >Amateur Photographer scored it very highly as well, 90% on their
    >scales, for what it's worth. But they glossed over the noise.



    On the contrary, they made sure that readers got to know about it.

    As usual, it will be left to Nikon to show how Sony sensors can be
    made to perform, with well controlled noise at much higher ISOs than
    Sony cameras fitted with the same sensor can manage.

    Pentax seems to manage noise from Sony sensors at least as well as
    Nikon. Why on earth can't Sony get this right?
    Bruce, Nov 23, 2011
    #4
  5. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Nov 23, 9:40 am, Bowser <> wrote:
    > On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 18:43:38 -0800 (PST), RichA <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >Ok, the reviewer is a kiss-ass for this camera, but...
    > >...the camera seems hugely capable and controllable, but its Achilles
    > >Heel is its noise.  Even resized, its noise exceeds the more
    > >"conservatively pixelled"  NEX-5n.  But for lower ISO, high resolution
    > >work, it looks really good.

    >
    > >http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/10/23/the-sony-nex-7-digital-camer...

    >
    > Right. But he loves his Oly m4/3 camera. Noise? What noise?
    >
    > Shamless shill...


    Well, I was able to see from the raw converted crops that the NEX-7 is
    clearly one stop noisier than the NEX-5. It's like Dpreview, you look
    at the images, hope they were taken correctly an deduce performance
    based on that, rather than their prose.
    RichA, Nov 23, 2011
    #5
  6. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    Rich <> wrote:
    >Bruce <> wrote in
    >news:eek::
    >> RichA <> wrote:
    >>>On Nov 23, 4:11 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    >>>> RichA <> wrote:
    >>>> >Ok, the reviewer is a kiss-ass for this camera, but...
    >>>> >...the camera seems hugely capable and controllable, but its
    >>>> >Achilles Heel is its noise.  Even resized, its noise exceeds the
    >>>> >more "conservatively pixelled"  NEX-5n.  But for lower ISO, high
    >>>> >resolution work, it looks really good.
    >>>>
    >>>> >http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/10/23/the-sony-nex-7-digital-came
    >>>> >r...
    >>>>
    >>>> This guy writes some of the worst "reviews" I have ever seen.
    >>>>
    >>>> Perhaps he's hoping for a job at PopPhoto.
    >>>
    >>>Amateur Photographer scored it very highly as well, 90% on their
    >>>scales, for what it's worth. But they glossed over the noise.

    >>
    >>
    >> On the contrary, they made sure that readers got to know about it.
    >>
    >> As usual, it will be left to Nikon to show how Sony sensors can be
    >> made to perform, with well controlled noise at much higher ISOs than
    >> Sony cameras fitted with the same sensor can manage.
    >>
    >> Pentax seems to manage noise from Sony sensors at least as well as
    >> Nikon. Why on earth can't Sony get this right?
    >>

    >
    >Some say however that Nikon images have a plasticity about them that
    >indicates manipulation post-sensor of the RAWs.



    And what do some say about Pentax? What's the gossip on Ricoh? Will
    their marriage last, or was it just a publicity stunt? And how many
    people agree that GXR is ugly and has a fat ass and a hideous family?

    Get the latest news here:
    http://www.tmz.com/

    ;-)
    Bruce, Nov 24, 2011
    #6
  7. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Nov 24, 6:38 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    > Rich <> wrote:
    > >Bruce <> wrote in
    > >news:eek::
    > >> RichA <> wrote:
    > >>>On Nov 23, 4:11 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    > >>>> RichA <> wrote:
    > >>>> >Ok, the reviewer is a kiss-ass for this camera, but...
    > >>>> >...the camera seems hugely capable and controllable, but its
    > >>>> >Achilles Heel is its noise.  Even resized, its noise exceeds the
    > >>>> >more "conservatively pixelled"  NEX-5n.  But for lower ISO, high
    > >>>> >resolution work, it looks really good.

    >
    > >>>> >http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/10/23/the-sony-nex-7-digital-came
    > >>>> >r...

    >
    > >>>> This guy writes some of the worst "reviews" I have ever seen.

    >
    > >>>> Perhaps he's hoping for a job at PopPhoto.

    >
    > >>>Amateur Photographer scored it very highly as well, 90% on their
    > >>>scales, for what it's worth.  But they glossed over the noise.

    >
    > >> On the contrary, they made sure that readers got to know about it.

    >
    > >> As usual, it will be left to Nikon to show how Sony sensors can be
    > >> made to perform, with well controlled noise at much higher ISOs than
    > >> Sony cameras fitted with the same sensor can manage.

    >
    > >> Pentax seems to manage noise from Sony sensors at least as well as
    > >> Nikon.  Why on earth can't Sony get this right?

    >
    > >Some say however that Nikon images have a plasticity about them that
    > >indicates manipulation post-sensor of the RAWs.

    >
    > And what do some say about Pentax?


    There are too few Pentax's out there to see any opinion trends.
    RichA, Nov 24, 2011
    #7
  8. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Nov 24, 3:37 am, Eric Stevens <> wrote:
    > On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 21:26:35 -0600, Rich <> wrote:
    > >Bruce <> wrote in
    > >news:eek::

    >
    > >> RichA <> wrote:
    > >>>On Nov 23, 4:11 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    > >>>> RichA <> wrote:
    > >>>> >Ok, the reviewer is a kiss-ass for this camera, but...
    > >>>> >...the camera seems hugely capable and controllable, but its
    > >>>> >Achilles Heel is its noise.  Even resized, its noise exceeds the
    > >>>> >more "conservatively pixelled"  NEX-5n.  But for lower ISO, high
    > >>>> >resolution work, it looks really good.

    >
    > >>>> >http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/10/23/the-sony-nex-7-digital-came
    > >>>> >r...

    >
    > >>>> This guy writes some of the worst "reviews" I have ever seen.

    >
    > >>>> Perhaps he's hoping for a job at PopPhoto.

    >
    > >>>Amateur Photographer scored it very highly as well, 90% on their
    > >>>scales, for what it's worth.  But they glossed over the noise.

    >
    > >> On the contrary, they made sure that readers got to know about it.

    >
    > >> As usual, it will be left to Nikon to show how Sony sensors can be
    > >> made to perform, with well controlled noise at much higher ISOs than
    > >> Sony cameras fitted with the same sensor can manage.

    >
    > >> Pentax seems to manage noise from Sony sensors at least as well as
    > >> Nikon.  Why on earth can't Sony get this right?

    >
    > >Some say however that Nikon images have a plasticity about them that
    > >indicates manipulation post-sensor of the RAWs.

    >
    >   ... whatever that means.


    I heard the refrain from Canon and Olympus owners around the time the
    D200 came out. It refers to a kind of processed look that seems to be
    present in images right down to ISO 100. Personally, the only time
    I've seen it was when looking at some entry-level Nikon JPEGs. This
    goes back to that idea that cameras, even when compared on as equal a
    footing as possible, output different images, even though we think of
    RAW as cleanest output from the sensor and camera, that a Bayer sensor
    is a Bayer sensor, a pixel is a pixel, etc.
    RichA, Nov 24, 2011
    #8
  9. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    RichA <> wrote:
    >On Nov 24, 3:37 am, Eric Stevens <> wrote:
    >> On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 21:26:35 -0600, Rich <> wrote:
    >> >Bruce <> wrote in
    >> >news:eek::

    >>
    >> >> RichA <> wrote:
    >> >>>On Nov 23, 4:11 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    >> >>>> RichA <> wrote:
    >> >>>> >Ok, the reviewer is a kiss-ass for this camera, but...
    >> >>>> >...the camera seems hugely capable and controllable, but its
    >> >>>> >Achilles Heel is its noise.  Even resized, its noise exceeds the
    >> >>>> >more "conservatively pixelled"  NEX-5n.  But for lower ISO, high
    >> >>>> >resolution work, it looks really good.

    >>
    >> >>>> >http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/10/23/the-sony-nex-7-digital-came
    >> >>>> >r...

    >>
    >> >>>> This guy writes some of the worst "reviews" I have ever seen.

    >>
    >> >>>> Perhaps he's hoping for a job at PopPhoto.

    >>
    >> >>>Amateur Photographer scored it very highly as well, 90% on their
    >> >>>scales, for what it's worth.  But they glossed over the noise.

    >>
    >> >> On the contrary, they made sure that readers got to know about it.

    >>
    >> >> As usual, it will be left to Nikon to show how Sony sensors can be
    >> >> made to perform, with well controlled noise at much higher ISOs than
    >> >> Sony cameras fitted with the same sensor can manage.

    >>
    >> >> Pentax seems to manage noise from Sony sensors at least as well as
    >> >> Nikon.  Why on earth can't Sony get this right?

    >>
    >> >Some say however that Nikon images have a plasticity about them that
    >> >indicates manipulation post-sensor of the RAWs.

    >>
    >>   ... whatever that means.

    >
    >I heard the refrain from Canon and Olympus owners around the time the
    >D200 came out. It refers to a kind of processed look that seems to be
    >present in images right down to ISO 100. Personally, the only time
    >I've seen it was when looking at some entry-level Nikon JPEGs. This
    >goes back to that idea that cameras, even when compared on as equal a
    >footing as possible, output different images, even though we think of
    >RAW as cleanest output from the sensor and camera, that a Bayer sensor
    >is a Bayer sensor, a pixel is a pixel, etc.



    There are huge differences between various anti-alias filters. For
    example, Canon's are stronger than Nikon's. That's a bit of a
    sweeping generalisation, because the 5D II has a much stronger AA
    filter than the 5D, and more recent Nikon DSLRs have much weaker AA
    filters than earlier Nikon DSLRs. even taking into account differences
    in pixel count.

    But I am surprised that anyone should accuse Nikon DSLRs of producing
    images with "plasticity" when people buy them because the current
    Nikon models tend to record and retain more detail than comparable
    DSLRs of other brands.
    Bruce, Nov 24, 2011
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. RichA
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    1,175
  2. Bruce

    Re: Sony NEX sales, question

    Bruce, Jun 6, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    351
    Bruce
    Jun 7, 2010
  3. dj_nme

    Re: Sony NEX sales, question

    dj_nme, Jun 7, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    519
    Peter
    Jun 8, 2010
  4. RichA
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    743
    John McWilliams
    Jun 13, 2010
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    347
Loading...

Share This Page