Interesting discussion on NEX Flange back -- issue or not?

Interesting bit on sonyalpharumors.com.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/zeis...enses-tested-on-the-nex-5-photozone/#comments

Read the comments, too. There are interesting layers to this. It will be interesting to see how the new bodies work out.

I think there are two issues -- getting closer AND going wider (because of the larger sensor). I guess also digital is more susceptible to this issue than film was, which might explain why Canon hasn't released a compact mirrorless, like I dearly want them to (that, and not wanting to kill off their DSLR business, but it seems the engineering is more than just simple. Could you imaging the angle of incidence in trying to cover a 2X larger sensor than the m43 sensor, with a short flange back, if the NEX is having issues?

The discussions on sonyalpharumors, and then the link through there to a Fred Miranda discussion were interesting reads, and the jury still seems out.

p.s. -- this bit does some nice explaining http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1030741/1#9793822. It is interesting to learn that Leica does in-camera software correction! I didn't know that.
__________________

 

Yes, but the M9 has a short flange back distance, and has these issues, which they developed both the sensor AND software to correct. 1) Does the NEX sensor have these corrections (seems the NEX3C has improved over the NEX 3 and 5, and 2) is there software correction in camera (obviously not, given that the camera is dumb to the lens).

Given the weak NEX native lenses (currently), I personally am wondering about trying a NEX 3C w/M mount lenses (as many say the NEX is a "digital back") but there are definitely issues with that approach, and this is a fascinating thread for debating gear heads (like me!).

native lenses will be even more a challenge, of course, but there the NEX "knows" the lens and could apply SW correction.