• The VERMONT eBook IS HERE! – Photography Travel Guides

  • PLEASE RESPECT COPYRIGHTS!!

    All Images and writing on this blog are copyrighted by Andy Richards. All rights are reserved. You may not, without my express, written permission, download, right click, or otherwise copy my images for any reason. Copying an image and putting it on your blog, website, or even as a screensaver on your computer is a breach of copyright, EVEN IF YOU ATTRIBUTE THE SOURCE! Please do not do so.
  • On This Blog:

  • Categories

  • Andy’s Photography Galleries

    Click Here To See My Gallery of Photographic Images

    LightCentric Photography

  • Andy's Flickr Photos

    SAINT MAARTEN CARIBBEAN 012220130001

    More Photos
  • Prior Posts

  • Posts By Date

    May 2013
    M T W T F S S
    « Apr    
     12345
    6789101112
    13141516171819
    20212223242526
    2728293031  

I might be in Love (Carl Zeiss 24mm 1.8 mini-review)

Carl Zeiss 24mm f1.8 lens for Sony NEX Image at f1.8 Copyright 2013  Andy Richards

Carl Zeiss 24mm f1.8 lens for Sony NEX
Image at f1.8
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

We have all read and heard by word of mouth, about the so-called “legendary” glass made by lensmakers, Leitz (Leica) and Carl Zeiss. (this is a gear-review and yet another gear-head blog. So for you artists, you may want to skip on and read this guy’s blog. :-) ).

 

For more than 35 years, I have shot various 35mm SLR/DSLR cameras and lenses. For the most part, I have found the better (“pro”) Nikon and Canon glass hard to beat, with good contrast, color, sharpness, and where applicable, bokeh. Occasionally, one of the third-party manufactures would rise to the top (I owned a Tokina ATX 300 f2.8 prime that I think goes head-to-head with its Nikon-equivalent; and a Sigma 14mm f2.8—likewise). But with the possible exception of my original Takumar 55m and 135mm lenses used with my Asihflex SLR, I have never owned (or even shot) any of the “legendary” glass.

All I can say is, “wow”!

I wasn’t born in Missouri (my younger sister was). But I lived there during my first 2 years of life (formative?). And I have always been “from Missouri” on these so-called “legendary” lenses. Could they really be that good? Could they really be that much better? The price tags certainly suggest that they “should be.” My friend and mentor, Ray Laskowitz, has been telling me how I would like the Zeiss glass and how I would probably relegate the other lenses I have already acquired for my Sony Nex-6 mirrorless camera to “paperweight” status. Since they weren’t particularly high-end (the Sigma 19 and 30 primes I reviewed recently), and not particularly expensive, I didn’t doubt that he was right—about their status.

These images are only “snapshots”

Carl Zeiss 24mm @f11 Copyright 2013  Andy Richardsd

Carl Zeiss 24mm @f11
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

Sigma 19mm @f3.2 Copyright 2013  Andy Richards

Sigma 19mm @f3.2
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards


But in spite of the “hype,” what I did not anticipate was my near-visceral reaction to seeing the Zeiss-rendered images on screen! All I can say is: “wow“! On most of the illustrative images here, I did nothing more than to adjust the contrast slightly in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR), and in only the case of the Redbud branch, selectively take the “brightness” down just a smidgeon. I also did moderate “capture” sharpening on all except the one labeled “unsharpened.” I have always been one to do some “cleanup” work in Photoshop and some selective sharpening and contrast adjustment and (yes, Al :-)  ), boost saturation in many instances.

With these images I am finding myself resisting any changes to color, saturation and for the most part contrast.  There was absolutely no saturation boost (other than the addition of some “local contrast” adjustment in ACR) to any of these images.  And, they are sharp! The raw, unsharpened image of the Bradford Pear branch illustrates that (remember, it is at f2.8 and was taken handheld).

Sigma 19mm f2.8 @f3.2 Copyright 2013  Andy Richards

Sigma 19mm f2.8 @f3.2
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

Equally impressive (and expected) is the soft, creamy bokeh of this lens. There is none of the unpleasant, circular out of focus areas I saw in the Sigma 30mm f2.8 when shot wide open. And, these images are pure snapshots. They are all handheld, taken quickly between trips to and from work during the week. I have spent but a few minutes with the lens, but cannot wait to get it out into the field and give it a real workout.

ZEISS_24_1.8_UNSHARPENED_DSC0287

Carl Zeiss 24mm @f1.8; UNSHARPENED
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

This lens is less than a week old to me, and yet, I am pretty sure I won’t take it off the camera very often. And, this is not even a “true” Carl Zeiss lens (though it is supposed to have all Zeiss optics). It is a co-venture with Sony and is marketed and badged as a Sony-Zeiss lens. It has the Sony e-mount and focuses fast and silently on the Nex-6. In ACR, the lens correction is found, not under the Zeiss category, but under the Sony category (threw me for a loop at first, until it dawned on me to search the database for Sony lenses).

I did not anticipate my near-visceral reaction to the Zeiss-rendered images

I have yet to do any “apples to apples” comparisons (if that is even possible). The images here are as close as I can get but are at least a week (maybe 2) apart and so the subjects have “moved on.” But it is enough to be convincing, in my judgment. In fairness, the Sigma image of the Bradford Pear is at f3.2 and the Zeiss, at f11 (I was out “snapshooting” and didn’t have the presence of mind to take an image at f11 with the Sigma. Maybe I will find the time later on to try some of those comparisons. But I don’t really think it’s necessary).

For anyone who, like me, thinks this is a first class lens worth splurging for, there is even better news. Zeiss announced this month that it will offer a series of lenses aimed squarely at the APS sized sensor, mirrorless, market (currently only for Fuji and Sony). These lenses will not be badged or co-ventured. They are pure Zeiss, but will be designed to mount on these cameras and be fully functional with the bodies, including AF. I am in, Zeiss!

The “Sigma Pair”; Sigma 19 and 30mm f2.8 for Sony NEX

Sigma 19mm f2.8 @ f8 Copyright 2013  Andy Richards

Sigma 19mm f2.8 @ f8
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

Recently, I have been happily blogging here about my newest “toy.” I don’t want anybody to get the wrong idea; I am totally committed to my (so-called) “full frame,” FX, 36mp Nikon D800 and my “pro” f2.8 Nikkor lenses. I am not abandoning them by any means.  I do, however, see their use becoming more “focused” (yes, pun intended :-) ). The “big gun” will still be carried into the field for serious landscape work and of course any of my limited wildlife and sports shooting. I will pack and carry it on my upcoming trip to the Mediterranean, but I see its use there more limited than originally thought.

There is more to the equation than sharpness

The NEX is just so beguiling. It is small and light, which is really nice, after carrying the DSLR around for so long (I can remember a time not so long ago when I actually favored the size and heft of the DSLR body). I spend a lot more time traveling these days. For just carrying around to many of the new places we visit, I can see the NEX being used much more conveniently–and more consistently.

But the proof is still in the image quality results. And for me, the jury is still out. I am “experimenting” with different lens combinations, and shooting scenarios. Nothing “scientific”; just kind of empirical experimenting. And, as such, after reading the reviews in a number of different places, and learning of the B&H deal to purchase the pair for $199, shortly after receiving my NEX,  I ordered up the Sigma f2.8 19 and 30mm e-mount lenses. For anyone who has ever purchased camera lenses, you know that is in “junk bond” range. But the reviews were mostly positive, so it seemed like it was worth taking a “flier.”

Why? There is, in my view, little not to like about the Sony 15-50 f3.5-5.6 lens I bought with the camera. The 35mm equivalent of this lens matches pretty much to my Nikkor 24-70 f2.8, but at 1/10 of its size and nearly weightless, it is very compact and easy to carry. It is reasonably sharp, renders good color and contrast. However, at its modest wide open aperture, there is little room for creativity. It should be a fine working lens for “reportage” style shooting (capturing the daytime cities, buildings, and activities). It appears to be at its sharpest right around the f8 range (though my non-scientific testing seems to tell me this isn’t a critical issue) and this will work for daytime shooting in most instances. But here was a reasonably inexpensive opportunity to try two fixed aperture f2.8, fixed lenses.

Sigma 19mm f2.8 @ f3.2 Copyright 2013  Andy Richards

Sigma 19mm f2.8 @ f3.2
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

The “pixel peepers” will immediately note that the Bradford Pear in bloom image; shot at a fairly wide avenue, suffers from many variations in sharpness at different depths of field.  I don’t find the result “bad,” but it is certainly not the kind of image quality I would expect from a higher end lens–at least not at a very close viewing distance.  The isolation shot of a shoot of blossoms is a perhaps less difficult test and shows the estimable capability of this inexpensive optic to create reasonably nice bokeh with decently sharp areas of an image even with relatively shallow depth of field.

Sigma 19mm f2.8 @f3.2 Copyright 2013  Andy Richards

Sigma 19mm f2.8 @f3.2
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

The low light capability of “fast” lenses is less of a factor today

Still, it’s hard to go wrong with these lenses for their modest cost. They are both about the same size and weight. Both are larger (nearly 2x as long as the 16-50) and therefore slightly less convenient, but not by much. They are still much smaller and lighter than their 35mm DSLR equivalents. They are not going to win any awards for build quality or beauty of construction. Externally, they are all-plastic, and I would guess they are plastic wherever metal or glass are not required. This makes them lightweight, but I would guess, not particularly durable. I hear stories about photojournalists and traveling photographers who beat up their equipment. If you are in this business, you probably won’t be using these lenses anyway. I have known others like me, who seem almost proud of the fact that they beat their equipment up. I am not in that camp. My father and grandfather were engineers and master craftsmen, and both taught me from an early age to appreciate and care for your tools. I “baby” my photographic equipment, and durability will probably not be an issue, unless it is just mechanical build quality (when I first moved to AF camera’s I owned a Ritz Camera Brand Quantaray zoom lens. I think it was one of the sharpest and nicest lenses I ever owned. But I took two of them back because the focusing motor/gear gave out within a year. Then I gave up).

All photographic gear is a compromise – no exceptions

I have read reviews (particularly on Amazon) about there being a “rattle” in the lens. If you rotate it lengthwise, you will feel a part that moves back and forth. I am told that this is part of the AF mechanism in the particular lens design. It doesn’t seem to affect the lens working or the images; so I am not bothered by it (particularly at a $99 price point). My friend, Kerry Liebowitz once said to me that “all photographic gear is a compromise—no exceptions.” Wise words. And for the rather modest cost of these lenses, I expect some compromise. I was not surprised at what I received (at this time, Sigma has completely re-designed both of these lenses, as well as bringing out some new offerings. I have not seen them. They are priced a twice the price of these 2 lenses, and I suspect the deal from B&H was tied to their knowledge that they were going to be older/discontinued models soon.  I expect that they will continue to be widely available on eBay and Amazon).

Over the nearly 40 years I have been photographing, the technology of lens manufacture has become so much better that the difference between a “cheap” lens and a very “expensive” lens is much less apparent. Indeed, there are those who assert that the $99 Sigma 30 is every bit as sharp as the $1100 Carl Zeiss e-mount lens. Maybe (though I have my doubts). But there is certainly more to this “equation” than sharpness. In my view the Sony 16-50 is sharp enough for everyday use and if that were the only factor, I wouldn’t ever take it off the camera. The low light capability of “faster” (wider aperture) lenses was once a much more important factor than it is today, in my view. With the NEX capability of acceptably low noise images at very high ISO settings, it becomes less important.

Sigma 30mm f2.8 @f9 Copyright 2013  Andy Richards

Sigma 30mm f2.8 @f9
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

The 19mm (roughly 28 mm at the 35mm-equivalent on the NEX’s “APS” sensor) produces about what you might expect from a $99 lens from Sigma. The image of the church does not seem to me to be any improvement in terms of sharpness, color or contrast than equivalent shots with the Sony 16-50 lens has produced. So I will need other factors to cause me to use it over the Sony.

It’s hard to go wrong with these lenses at their modest cost

Now, the elusive concept, bokeh, becomes a serious consideration. “Faster” lenses should afford the ability to use selective focus (by intentionally creating or leaving out of focus areas in the image) to make creative images. Indeed, it may well be the difference between “making” and “taking” photographs. The bokeh of both these lenses is “better” than the Sony 16-50 (which is to be expected, both from the fact of the wider aperture, and the fixed focal length). Is it good enough? I think a lot will depend on the image and the lighting. I think the bokeh on the 30mm (45 at 35mm equivalent) is marginally better than on the 19mm. I do see some (almost unpleasant) circular out of focus areas, though, on the daffodil images shot at large apertures. Still, the sampling is small, and I will continue to carry them and play with them.

Sigma 30mm f2.8 @f2.8 Copyright 2013  Andy Richards

Sigma 30mm f2.8 @f2.8
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

Would I recommend them? That’s a harder call; but probably. If your budget is tight, they are your “gateway” to e-mount, AF, relatively fast 2.8 fixed lenses for the NEX. If your budget isn’t tight, they are a pretty low-cost way of seeing what the NEX sensor will do with such lenses (unless, of course you have already budgeted for and will be able to immediately get the Zeiss lens). I suspect that I will eventually “replace” these lenses with something of higher quality, but time and experimentation will tell. I have the Carl Zeiss 24mm f1.8 e-mount lens for the NEX on the way.  This lens is actually badged as a “Sony” lens but is marketed as a co-designed Carl Zeiss Sonnar T lens.  I believe that what this means is that it is Zeiss glass (Sonnar optical design is patented Zeiss technology) and a Sony focusing motor and e-mount.  I’ll know more, of course, when I have it “in hand.”  I am looking forward to mounting it on the camera and seeing what the extra aperture will do and if that “legendary” Zeiss glass will really outshine the cheaper glass. I am also watching for reviews of the announced Sony 35mm, f1.8 e-mount later this year. Those could easily be replacements for these two lenses. I will surely be reporting back in over the next months on this subject.

“Playing with NIK”

Fisherman's Wharf, San Francisco Copyright 2011 Andy Richards

Fisherman’s Wharf, San Francisco
Copyright 2011 Andy Richards

My photographic imagery is 98% “traditional. I don’t generally experiment with special techniques. I try to portray what I “saw” in the field.  I don’t mean to say that this is the same thing as “reality.” Most of my landscape work is really intended to be art. I am not aware of any rule that says that photographic “seeing” in these conditions must match reality. Instead, I aim for what I saw in the field, or sometimes what I saw as a possibility in the field.

When I use the word “photorealistic” I mean what our eyes (and mind) might see, shown in a “traditional” photographic presentation

Nonetheless, I still believe 98% of the images I create are “photorealistic.” In other words, they are designed to look and appear as traditional photographic images.

High dynamic range (HDR) software is (or was, for a time) “all the rage” for some photographers. In my own view, it was more often than not, grossly overused and often produced garish results that the creator called “painterly.” My own very occasional use of HDR software (I prefer Photomatix) has been mostly for sophisticated blending of individual digital captures, with a goal of creating a “photorealistic” result. I blogged about this on 2 other occasions, first introducing the topic in my March, 2009 blog, “High Dynamic Range Photography,” and later “Managing Dynamic Range Digitally (a comparison of HDR conversion methods and software)” in September of 2010.

When I use the word “photorealistic” in this context, I don’t necessarily mean what was physically, electronically or chemically possible, but rather, what our eyes and minds might see, shown in a “traditional” photographic presentation.

I do appreciate that what many of us do, as photographers, is art. And art doesn’t have any pre-determined borders, in my view; even in a “traditional” photographic context. As such, I am not against trying new things in an effort to present an image in its best light.

Last month Google created an opportunity for owners of Nik products to “upgrade” to the entire suite. I took advantage. As I find time and opportunity, I have begun to explore some of the “preset” formulas in this set of plug-ins to Photoshop (and Light Room). The bread and butter parts of the suite for me have been Dfine noise-reduction software, Nik sharpener, and Viveza.

Fisherman's Wharf; San Francisco Copyright 2011  Andy Richards

Fisherman’s Wharf; San Francisco
Copyright 2011 Andy Richards

Color Efex Pro is also part of the suite. Color Efex Pro is essentially a set of preset filters. As such, I have used it only sparingly and only for a very small handful of the many filters available. The graduated neutral density filter is by far my favorite, and the one that gets the most use. It just does a better job in a very short time period than any blending I can do on my own (including the estimable counterpart in Adobe Camera Raw). But with the Nik U-point control points and a great deal of adjustability in how all of these filters are applied, it is a pretty diverse set of filters. I have generally eschewed the filter called “details enhancer.” This is partly because I have seen it overdone so much and it reminds me of the garish HDR images referred to above, and partly because I think the “structure” adjustment in Viveza 2 and in Nik Sharpener is so much better, and so much more subtle.

Art doesn’t have any borders, even in a traditional photographic context

But recently, I was working on the image here and decided I would take a test run though some of the Color Efex filters. Suddenly, I found an image that I thought the details enhancer filter was well suited for. You can see the difference in the before and after images here. The traditional photorealistic presentation, is, in my view, unremarkable. It just doesn’t seem to have any punch to it, either artistically or visually. But the moderate use of one of the preset details enhancer filters transforms this image into what appears to me to be like a nice oil painting.

Over time, I am certain to experiment more and more with some of the “artistic” options in the Nik software. I probably won’t often say this, but thank you Google for making this suite of software so attainable recently.

My Review of the Sony Nex-6

Barn Copyright 2013  Andy Richards

Barn
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

I have been casually watching and reading about mirrorless, interchangeable lens camera systems since they first came out, playing around with the Nikon 1 and the Sony Nex-3 at my local big box store. Especially when you travel, or attend public events or places, it is hard not to wish for a system which is compact, sheds the bulk and weight, and is less conspicuous. But for me, main negative has been that the small sensors simply haven’t been able to generate the image quality that we now take for granted in modern DSLR cameras. In July of 2011, I reviewed the Canon G-12, a part of the Canon G-series cameras that have been used by some pro’s as backup cameras. I purchased the G12 couple years back, wanting a compact camera for those times when the DSLR just wasn’t convenient or wasn’t going to work in the situation. Following my review, I cruised the Caribbean for a week and carried only the G-12. I thought it performed well for normal daytime lighting situations. Unfortunately, much of the imagery I seek is in low and other challenging light conditions and I found the the small sensor performance in low light/high ISO conditions to be essentially unacceptable. I think the G-12 at the time it was introduced was probably the best sensor of its size.

It’s hard not to wish for a system which is compact, sheds the bulk and weight, and is less conspicuous

About a year ago, I learned that the Sony Nex series of cameras used the same APS-size sensor that many DSLR cameras use (indeed, I am told it is an updated and improved version of the very same sensor found in the estimable Nikon D7000 — in fact, what I am reading is that, as good a performer in the low light, noise handling area as the D7000 is, the NEX sensor is noticeably better!). That information piqued my interest in a less “casual” way. I began to research this camera and ask questions. I looked at the NEX-5 at a camera show last Fall. My biggest concern back then was the “investment” in body, add-on viewfinder, and lenses. The Nex-3 and Nex-5 (their first offerings), had no viewfinder. For me, that is a deal-killer (see below). If you want a good quality viewfinder, it is an expensive add-on option to the 3 and 5 models (a very impressive little viewfinder, I might add). It just seemed to me that the combination, for a second, “walkaround” camera was too much of an “investment” for this hobby photographer. The Nex-7 added a very impressive OLED (“organic light emitting diode) viewfinder, and some more conventional control dials. Both the Nex-5 and 7 have “touch screen LCD’s on the back. The Nex-7 has a 24 megapixel sensor and a couple other software bells and whistles than the 6. Otherwise, the 6 and 7 appear to be functionally identical.

The Nex-6 appears to have hit the “sweet spot” for serious shooters

There appear to be other alternatives, including the “micro 4/3″ sensor, which is larger than the sensor found in the G-12 or the Nikon-1, and is reputed to be a “better” aspect ratio design for the smaller lenses that are made for these cameras.  My own research tells me that the APS sized sensor still has an edge over these smaller sensors.  There are also APS sensor mirrorless offerings from Fuji and Canon, Pentax, and Leica (and recently a wide angle, fixed lens model from Nikon).   Various factors ruled them out for me.   I will say that one disadvantage of the Sony system–at this point–is that they lag behind the others in variety of lens offerings.  But the Nex-6 has the very same sensor that Nikon puts in its D7000.  Together with ergonomics, price and some of the factors discussed below – this was the “deal-maker” for me.

The Nex-6 appears to have hit the “sweet spot” for serious shooters like me. Introduced with Sony’s newest “kit” lens, the 16-50 3.5 -5.6 in a very diminutive package, it has a 16 mp sensor, a retro-styled “mode dial” and dual control dials (top and back) much like those found on many current DSLR bodies. It has the same bright OLED viewfinder as the 7, and for the first time, a standard sized hot shoe (the 3,5, and 7 all have a Sony proprietary shoe that is not quite standard size). The controls appear logical and are nicely laid out. There are not so many of them that it is daunting to figure out how to fire up an use the camera immediately.  Importantly, I believe that with its ability to fit my Nikon lenses, it can now act as a backup to my D800 system in an emergency.  At the same time, I now have a camera that won’t sit in a bag and gather (expensive) dust while depreciating in value.

Here is my (non-exhaustive) roundup of the Nex-6′s most prominent features and some of my thoughts:

Available Documentation

In a word: Awful (this will most likely be my only really negative comment – and aside from the shipped documentation, is not a knock on the camera).

I am just asking that they cover the essential issues for the serious photographers to whom they clearly aimed this camera

The documentation that has shipped (both hard copy and the more modern PDF downloads from CD or the website) with almost any electronic for the last 20 years has been uniformly bad. That may be a good thing for the proliferation of writers and publishers that produce third party “missing manual” style books. But even the poorly written manuals that are in the box or available on the website usually give us at least the necessary information to understand how the basic functions work. The Nex documentation doesn’t—in my view—even do that. They have a plus-100 page downloadable manual and a similar “guide” (hard to tell any difference from my review). Neither of them logically explain anything more than the obvious (pointing out, e.g., where the power switch is; you know: the one that says both “on” and “off” on it? :-) ), and then delving, in a superficial way, into ample coverage and explanation of all the “gee whiz” special modes and jpeg-only, features. I am not saying they shouldn’t explain those features (this is likely a camera that will appeal to and be purchased by a broad spectrum of users). I am just asking that they cover the essential issues for the serious photographers they clearly aimed this camera at.

The Nex line is touted as a highly sophisticated compact camera, suitable even, for professional use (and indeed, I know of one very talented and experienced professional who uses them daily). One must-have feature for any serious photographer—in my view—is the ability to capture in raw format. Yet the 2 downloadable pdf manuals are completely silent about which features and functions work and which do not work when shooting raw. And, there is a dearth of third party reading at this point.  One third-party book (admittedly an older book by David Busch and Alexander White, covering the Nex 3 and 5) is hit or miss on the subject. The title of Jerod Foster’s “Sony NEX-6: From Snapshots To Great Shots” should have tipped me off that this wasn’t really a book about the camera – but I downloaded the Kindle version anyway– A disappointment.  I am not saying there isn’t a place for these books.  But they are all written, in my view, as if the purchaser just purchased his first ever digital camera (maybe even first ever camera that was a step above his cell phone).  And in these “series” books written by the same author, they contain 85% generic information about how digital cameras work, exposure, f-stops, rudimentary comments about raw, how autofocus works, etc. (I just finished another one on the Nikon D800.  The author just cut and pasted 1000′s of words from his other so-called “camera-specific” books. I have read 3 of his books now and the sense of deja vu is “deafening”).  Seriously?  The D800 or the Nex-6 is the “first” camera a purchaser buys to “learn” how to photograph?  I have my doubts.  There is a book slated for publication in September. I will look forward to obtaining a copy to see where the authors go.   I am still looking for a third party a book explaining the functions and features of the Nex-6. Magic Lantern, where are you? (rant over :-) )

General Ergonomics and Body

Several hackneyed sayings about “old dogs and new tricks” and “old habits and dying hard” come to mind here. But I am an “old-school” shooter (at least as old school as the 1970′s SLR shooters). I “grew up” with a TTL viewfinder, match-needle metering, manual focus lenses, and mechanical control dials on the camera body. The Nex-6 body was designed with that kind of “old school” in mind. The new top mode dial, (ala the similar controls on the later—venerable, but long-in-the-tooth—Canon G-series and the Nikon D7000 series), is a nice “comfort food” feature. It controls the so-called shooting mode (PASM, etc.), which are all menu functions on the other Nex cameras. Directly underneath it (mounted on the same axis and slightly larger in diameter) is a control dial. There is another control dial on the back. This is a lot like my Nikon layout (sans the front control dial), and thus familiar. I like that.

The Nex-6 body was designed with the “old school” shooter in mind

This camera, much like the Canon G-series did, feels comfortable in my hand. The right-hand grip is nice and the body has an almost leather texture. While some with larger hands may find the space between grip and lens tight, it is a tradeoff for the compact size of the camera that I think is worth while. The camera is just 2 1/2 inches deep from viewfinder to lens cap (with the 16-50 attached), 5 inches wide from d-ring to d-ring, and 2 3/4 inches high from the base to the top of the mode dial on the top right. It has a nice “heft” without being an anchor. The top control dial is easily reached and manipulated by the right thumb, as is the rear dial. This means with a little acclimation, you can make essential settings without taking your eye from the viewfinder.

Most compact cameras have been, it seems to me, designed toward the P&S consumer market. The early Nex series is certainly no exception. The 3 and 5 are completely menu driven and totally reliant on the rear LCD screen. An electronic viewfinder (EVF) is available as an (expensive) add on. The “flagship” 7 has the same built-in EVF that is now on the 6 and has two unlabeled control wheels on top of the body (in practice I am told it doesn’t take log to acclimate to their functions).

The Sony OLED EVF takes some getting used to, but I quickly grew to like it

EVF

I have shot with a viewfinder for 35 years. While there may be something to be said for getting out of the comfort zone, in this case, the viewfinder lets me isolate and “see” my image. So for me on all my cameras, lack of a viewfinder has been a deal killer. The Sony OLED EVF takes some getting used to, but I quickly grew to like it. Unlike the traditional “rangefinder” cameras that had a mechanically coupled, but compeletly separate viewfinder, the EVF is, in essence, a “live view” TTL finder.  No parallax issues and “what you see is what you get.”  I am not sure what the coverage is, but I am reasonably sure it is 100%.  The EVF is very bright and because it is not a traditional “optical”  TTL finder, it can have some unique and useful behavior. As you rotate the command dials and change either the aperture or the shutter speed, the image in the viewfinder actually grows brighter or dimmer as the exposure solution is changed!  You “see” the image come into an approximation of correct exposure. Very cool.

Another nice feature (becoming more the norm – the tech just keeps getting “smarter”) is the automatic setting that senses when you bring your eye up to the viewfinder and turns it on and the back LCD off. You can override this behavior and even turn the LCD off completely to save on battery drain.

You can also set up the viewfinder to display the important information, including a horizon level indicator and, if you wish, a real-time histogram. And, of course the viewfinder—like my DSLR—shows essential information, like exposure, shutter speed and f-stop settings.  I have set the horizon level indicator in my viewfinder and it–unlike the ones one the back LCD (my G12 had it), actually works pretty well in handheld shooting.

The potential for lens selection and use with this camera appears to have little limitation

Lens Selection

Here is where the Nex series gets interesting. The potential for lens selection and use with this camera appears to have little limitation. In order to have all the offered metering functions, auto-focus, and some of the added features, you will, of course, need to have lenses with the proprietary Sony e-mount (Sony also offers an adaptor for their DSLR-mount lenses that will allow essentially all the functions). Sony currently offers 13 different e-mount lenses (I have oft-noted that these equipment reviews are my empirical and practical observations and are anything but technical. There is an abundance of commentary on the relative sharpness and other characteristics of these lenses and I’ll leave you to your own research on that topic). My Nex-6 came with the “kit” SELP1650, 16-50 f3.6 – 6.5 zoom.

Sony 16-50 “kit” lens:    It’s all a matter of perspective (pun intended). Against my Nikkor 24-70 f2.8, the 18-55 lens that has shipped as the “kit” lens on the prior Nex-series bodies is small and light. But for a compact camera, it’s still a bit chunky and the heft is noticeable. The new 16-50 is downright diminutive. About a third the length of the 18-55, it is also much lighter, making the Nex a (barely) “pocketable” camera (think cargo or jacket pocket – not jeans pocket).

Critics say it is not a “sharp” lens (those same critics often also criticize the 18-55). Lets face it. Its a relatively wide range, variable aperure zoom, at a mid-price range. There are going to be some compromises. I don’t have an 18-55 copy, so I cannot do comparisons. But my results on the 16-50 seem pretty good to me.  The barn at the beginning of this post was taken handheld, all manual (except for AF) with specs of f16 and 1/100 second.  But, I wanted to see how it would perform at wider apertures, so I did some of my own unscientific tests.  My conclusions are that as a practical matter, the lens performs very well at almost its whole range of apertures in terms of sharpness for general photography.  I use ACR in Photoshop and routinely correct for lens aberations, using their built in database, which seems to do very well.  I will cover this lens in my next blog, as this one is already too long.

The filter size for this newer lens is an odd, 40.5mm. The only filter I generally use is a polarizer. They are surprisingly expensive for this size. I did learn in my research that because of the way AF is accomplished in these cameras, a circular polarizer is not necessary. I was able to find a B&W linear polarizing filter for a reasonable price.

Non-Sony Lenses: Here is the exciting part. For a relatively small cost, you can buy a third party adapter and use a huge selection of lenses from virtually any lens manufacturer. This is all done fully manual, but the bright EVF makes focusing easy.  One challenge appears to be that my newer Nikon lenses which do not have manual aperture rings, will not allow me to choose my aperture.  For the most part, in my likely emergency backup scenario, I will be looking for maximum DOF throughout, which is a good think, because the NEX appears to choose the smallest aperture, and require you to vary the shutter speed.  Wind, of course, may well be a concern.  When the series first came out the native “e-mount” lens selection was very small, including only 2 lenses. The Sony selection has grown to several and is likely to continue to grow. And even better, some other manufacturers are now making lenses in the e-mount, including Sigma, and excitingly, Zeiss. It can only get better.

Function button

At first, I was perplexed by this button. It doesn’t behave at all like I expected it to. On my Nikon DSLR bodies, there is a function button that you can assign certain features to. When you press it, it performs that single task (e.g., on mine, I have it shift from averaging type metering to spot metering. The documentation, once again, is hopelessly unclear. So, it took me a while to figure out that on the Sony Nex, the Function Button really acts more like a “quick menu” submenu button, bringing up a short list of settings changes.  Unfortunately, customization here appears limited.  I cannot have the “quick menu” list the functions I want it to.  I have choose from their options.  Maybe a firmware update, Sony?

Other manufacturers are now making lenses in the e-mount…It can only get better

Rear LCD Screen

The generous 3 inch by 1 3/4 inch rear LCD screen is bright and clear. It articulates some (not as much as on the 3 and 5, because the addition of the viewfinder interferes with that). But it does pull slightly away from the body and tilts to a horizontal position for those who use it. I can see its usefulness in my own shooting style in those rare occasions where I might want to hold the camera out away from me.

The 5 and 7 have touchscreen capability. That is a useful feature, especially when using the features that might require inputting information into the camera. This would be particularly true if using some of the camera’s WiFi features.

The Nex-6′s WiFi capability should be a big deal, but for now, it appears to be “DOA”

My only concern is that I am one of those guys who has a near “reverence” for the beauty and maintenance of my equipment. It is rare for me to have a scratch, ding or other imperfection on any of my gear (no matter how old), and that big, exposed screen makes me nervous. I have added a screen protector (but I generally hate the things as they are a pain to apply and rarely look good).

Battery Life

This is a mildly “disappointing” area.  Battery life could be better.  There are a lot of electronics going to suck life from the small battery.  The AF on these cameras is contrast-detect oriented and by their nature, they are pretty much constantly “searching” for focus when AF is on.  I like to use the “review” features on the back of the camera, and tend to leave them on at longer intervals than is necessarily recommended.  The bright EVF viewfinder no doubt uses some energy from the battery.  I am philosophical about this one.  A spare battery and and external charger (the camera does not ship with an external charger, btw), is relatively cheaply acquired.

WiFi

You may wonder why this is relegated to the bottom and I don’t give it much coverage. The Nex-6 is the first Nex body to ship with integrated WiFi capability. This should be a big deal! But for now, it appears to be DOA. The reason is that its implementation apparently is rivaled only by the Sony Documentation I bashed above. I still haven’t tried it, as it sounds like those who have, universally say it is wonky, doesn’t work well and is generally a PIA. I guess the good thing is that the capability is built in and one can only hope the subsequent software updates will make this pretty cool feature more workable and useful. I was pretty excited when I first read that I could use my iPhone as a remote shutter release and monitor!  I have enabled my Nex-6 with my iPhone 5, and have used it in my house as a remote.  Its pretty darn cool!  Once you figure out how to get the camera to “join” the network (it takes a master programmer – don’t expect any intelligible help from any of the available documention–you use a localWiFi connection, but once the camera logs on, it then names itself as a network and that is what you tell the iPhone to join), you will not only be able to use the phone as a remote shutter release, but the phone’s monitor becomes a live view monitor for the camera!  It was fun to play with and with my iPhone armed with a pdf manual, TPE, and GPS and Mapping software, you will have a pretty good accessory to the camera.  Lets hope they get this fixed—and right.

Things I would like to see added in new firmware or design:

Dedicated AF button: I use the back AF button on my DSLR bodies most of the time when doing landscape shooting (especially from a tripod). I turn off the AF activation from the shutter button. On the Nex-6, it seems like you could program it so when video is turned off, you could assign that function to the video button.

Custom Shooter Banks: the D800 (and other Nikon bodies) allow you to set up a couple (4 on the 800) custom shooter banks. I currently use only 2, a Landscape and an Action bank, but that would be a useful feature.

More Customization of the “Function” Button:  As I mentioned, I would like to be able to populate its short list with the functions I, in my own discretion, access the most

Tentative Conclusions:

Let me say that I love this camera–so far.  I think positives solidly outweigh the negatives.  It appears that it will be the answer to my desire for something more “usable” in conditions where setting up the “big guns” is simply not practical or convenient.  And, I think it really has some crossover potential, so that I will feel that I can achieve photographic goals with it even though I do not have immediate access to my D800.

I don’t have any illusions that it will become a “replacement” for my D800.  They are different tools for different purposes.  But it would not surprise me to see the Nex get more use on a regular basis than the D800.  My good friend, mentor, and pro photographer, Ray Laskowitz, made a very interesting, and I think apt observation.  He views the D800 the new “medium format,” in the sense that it creates such a massive megapixel image size (of course, the handling is the same as it always has been for an SLR camera).  The newer compact, APS sized sensors in these cameras like the Nex are making them essentially a more portable DSLR.   And rumors abound that there will be a (so-called) “full-frame” sensor compact in the not too distant future.  I don’t know whether I’ll consider that overkill or not.  Technology marches on.  The Nex is surely electronically equivalent to today’s DSLR models.  Imagery will, over time, tell.  I am looking forward to using it more and hopefully, from time to time, reporting back here.

Next week:  The included Sony 15-50 zoom lens.  Stay tuned …………………………..

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 333 other followers