Rumor: Full Frame Sony NEX Cameras Coming in About 1 Year

[RAWFA]

Lucille, I mean this in the best way possible and I don´t mean to come up as impolite or aggressive (that is not my intention at all and I know how things can get distorted online) but when you make a statement like that what it tells me is that you´ve never actually looked up any reviews or samples on the SB. There are a ton of reviews that show that the SB REALLY delivers what it promises. Get DPI forum has a large thread full of amazing samples. I´ve posted a quick comparison to the MarkII and some samples here at the forum. I´m sure the NEX FF will be an amazing camera, but independently of you liking the concept of a full frame e-mount camera better than using an ad-hock solution like the SB, the later is here now and I wouldn´t attest to it´s quality unless it really worked (like MANY others who have been using this incredible tool have attested).

 

[RAWFA]

Optically it should work just like that. It kind of makes existing full frame lens behave same way in smaller sensor. SB isn't perfect and you lose bigger sensor real estate (full frame 16 MP won't show as much noise as 16 MP APS-C sensor or 32 MP FF sensor will allow much larger enlargement).

Locally Canon 6D sells for 1700 euros. There are lots of lenses for it. If full frame Nex is more expensive than that it will have hard time competing.

On the other hand the SB gives you 1 full extra f stop.

I totally agree with the second paragraph though. I think that if you look at the Canon 6D it´s a real bargain compared to the A99. Sony has to realize that when they come up with their FF NEX...but sadly I don´t think they will (I say that based on the RX1 price).

 

[Lucille]

Lucille, I mean this in the best way possible and I don´t mean to come up as impolite or aggressive (that is not my intention at all and I know how things can get distorted online) but when you make a statement like that what it tells me is that you´ve never actually looked up any reviews or samples on the SB. There are a ton of reviews that show that the SB REALLY delivers what it promises. Get DPI forum has a large thread full of amazing samples. I´ve posted a quick comparison to the MarkII and some samples here at the forum. I´m sure the NEX FF will be an amazing camera, but independently of you liking the concept of a full frame e-mount camera better than using an ad-hock solution like the SB, the later is here now and I wouldn´t attest to it´s quality unless it really worked (like MANY others who have been using this incredible tool have attested).

Well I have much to learn, but the few samples I have seen, the SB doesn't have that ff isolation/3d pop, such as what I have seen, such as this, shot with my Rx1.

DSC-RX1    35.0 mm f/2.0    35mm    f/2.0    1/800s    ISO 80

But I am here to learn, if a SB gives that look, I am in, I just bought a Sony Nex camera, it is charging.

 

[xXx1]

On the other hand the SB gives you 1 full extra f stop.

I totally agree with the second paragraph though. I think that if you look at the Canon 6D it´s a real bargain compared to the A99. Sony has to realize that when they come up with their FF NEX...but sadly I don´t think they will (I say that based on the RX1 price).

What I meant is that you will have same optical performance like depth of field and field of view. Basically the images between ff sensor without SB and ASP-C sensor with SB should be identical when lens aperture and focus are same. That of course demands that effective aperture is a stop faster and focal length is reduced accordingly. I think that this is extremely great thing. Far better than full frame as I think that ASP-C is big enough for me but I will gain a stop with exposure. (Btw., this is how those P&S with small sensors and big aperture work.) Samyang 85mm/1.4 seems very attractive to me at the moment. I think that there will be more of these speed boosters soon and prices will drop.

Sony isn't a camera company like Canon is. That 6D will hook lots of photographers to Canon for years. As it is 1000 euros cheaper than A99 (you can get some pretty good optical class with that kind of money) it is cheap. Both bodies are probably good enough for everything.

 

[RAWFA]

Lucille, I really like your photo.

Here is a picture I´ve taken with the NEX7 + speedbooter + Canon 28mm 1.8. I wasn´t as close to my subject as you were to yours, but I´ll try to get another sample

   ---            

 

[Lucille]

Lucille, I really like your photo.

Here is a picture I´ve taken with the NEX7 + speedbooter + Canon 28mm 1.8. I wasn´t as close to my subject as you were to yours, but I´ll try to get another sample

View attachment 4673

And I don't see that full frame signature here, that subject/background isolation. Not like I would with the Rx1, even if the subject is farther away. I do look forward to more samples, as again, if the SB does this, I'll surely get one.

Here is that FF signature that I love, that subject/background isolation, shot with my Sony Rx1 and the wonderful Zeiss Sonnar.

DSC-RX1    35.0 mm f/2.0    35mm    f/2.0    1/250s    ISO 2000

 

[RAWFA]

I don´t think it´s really a fair comparison as the RX1 has a 35mm lens and I was using a 28mm. There is a BIG difference between these 2 focal lengths when you´re talking about background isolation. Since all I have is a 28mm, a 50mm and an 85mm I´m afraid any comparison I may show is pointless.

Check my thread right here https://www.talkemount.com/f12/speedbooster-vs-markii-3164/ . These is a side by side comparison with the Canon 5D MarkII (full frame) in low light (it´s on the first page by the end...shots of a guitar). Background separation is the same using the same lens on the NEX7 and on the 5D.

 

[Lucille]

I don´t think it´s really a fair comparison as the RX1 has a 35mm lens and I was using a 28mm. There is a BIG difference between these 2 focal lengths when you´re talking about background isolation. Since all I have is a 28mm, a 50mm and an 85mm I´m afraid any comparison I may show is pointless.

Check my thread right here https://www.talkemount.com/f12/speedbooster-vs-markii-3164/ . These is a side by side comparison with the Canon 5D MarkII (full frame) in low light (it´s on the first page by the end...shots of a guitar). Background separation is the same using the same lens on the NEX7 and on the 5D.

I looked at all the images In your thread, and I do sorta see that FF look in some of them, not to the extent of the Rx1, which has me spoiled, but enough to be intrigued by the speedbooster.

When I look at your 'Model' shots (which I like btw, heh, nice model), Being spoiled by the Rx1, I don't see a FF look, as I know how the Rx1 would render in this setting, the Nex 7 gives bokeh, but not so much for subject/background separation/isolation creating that 3d pop that come from a large FF sensor.

 

[serhan]

RX1 has an excellent 35mm lens. Again 3D pop is more related to the lens and also the focal length/aperture. If you want to check more images:
Metabones Speed Booster - FM Forums

There is also new mini M coming, whether it will be full frame vs crop is the question:
New Leica Mini M camera coming on June 11 | Leica News & Rumors

 

[xXx1]

As RX1 has got 35 mm f:2 objective you need similar for SB comparisons. 28 mm and 2.8 will produce much larger DOF. From 2 meters 28/2.8 will produce DOF of 0.89 m and 35/2.0 0.39 m. That is huge difference. You would get DOF of 0.43 m with 50 mm/2.0 at 3 meters.

 

[Lucille]

RX1 has an excellent 35mm lens. Again 3D pop is more related to the lens and also the focal length/aperture. If you want to check more images:
Metabones Speed Booster - FM Forums

There is also new mini M coming, whether it will be full frame vs crop is the question:
New Leica Mini M camera coming on June 11 | Leica News & Rumors

Maybe I am clearly misunderstanding what a Speed Booster is suppose to be doing, because if it is suppose to come off as a full frame image, I just don't see it. In this thread you linked I see nice pleasing bokeh, but I don't see the FF subject/isolation separation that I have been talking about.
I just wouldn't look at any of those images and conclude they where shot with a FF body like I would these from my Rx1:

DSC-RX1    35.0 mm f/2.0    35mm    f/2.0    1/125s    ISO 250

DSC-RX1    35.0 mm f/2.0    35mm    f/2.0    1/400s    ISO 800

DSC-RX1    35.0 mm f/2.0    35mm    f/2.0    1/400s    ISO 800

DSC-RX1    35.0 mm f/2.0    35mm    f/2.0    1/125s    ISO 200

DSC-RX1    35.0 mm f/2.0    35mm    f/2.0    1/160s    ISO 250

 

[Lucille]

BTW the images I am showing, I would fully expect a FF Nex camera to be able to produce, and that is also to say, from what I am seeing, I don't believe a NEX 7 with a speedbooster can.

 

[Bugleone]

Very interesting thread.......

The "FF pop" appears to be just differential focussing combined with a lack of depth of field...?? ie,...because the image is mostly slightly soft the car details that were focussed apear to "pop" and this give a degree of 'depth' or "3d" look.....

For many years I was a Rollieflex user,...this is a film camera making square images 56mmx56mm,...the standard lens is 80mm focal length and depth of field is always at a premium. Rollieflex's are famous for the 'look' of the images and I now realise this "FFpop" is mainly what it is.

Would it not be better to 'test' a digital 'FF' camera by size of print (at least that's the only reason I can see to want one!)....There are other contenders for image quality than the very expensive RX-1,...the Sigma 'Merrills' give better image quality at vastly less cost. Once Sigma make and interchangeable lens DP 'Merrill' I shall leave NEX to Mr Sony.....

 

[Deadbear77]

Ok so what is this considered? Just shallow depth of field? How would a full frame shoot this any different?

   ---            

 

[Lucille]

Ok so what is this considered? Just shallow depth of field? How would a full frame shoot this any different?

That is nice Bokeh, the Rx1 would have more separation of what is in focus to the out of focus background. For example, here is a shot of me, using my Rx100, taken by
my Rx1, this shot has wonderful Bokeh, but notice my head and shoulders, nice sharpness and rendering against the oof background and not really blending in, creating that 3d pop
subject/background Isolation. Bokeh which is the quality of oof blur is one thing, subject isolation/seperation is another, and it is this isolation/seperation that catches my eye and screams FF image. I didn't really see this with my Canon 40d, T2i, T4i, my Sony A65, My Olympus Omd and E-pl1's all using fast high quality glass.


But this look took me by storm with the Rx1, image after image after image, it is there, because it is FF.

DSC-RX1    35.0 mm f/2.0    35mm    f/2.8    1/50s    ISO 125

 

[Poki]

Nice car shots Lucile!

To the point: Full Frame has a certain look over APS-C, just as the latter has a certain advantage over 1 inch sensors. But I - personally - just don't see the advantage. Sure, for portrait and street photographers, having a better 3D pop (which no APS-C camera currently is able to achieve as well as some of the better ff cameras with certain lenses) is a good thing. For me as a landscape photographer, the only advantage would be a *slightly* higher dynamic range, which isn't worth the additional price, size and weight for me. Of course there could be a resolution advantage, but as long as we're speaking of 24 MP ff sensors and 24 MP APS-C sensors, resolution with diffraction limited lenses is exactly the same.

And don't forget that medium format, again, has a much nicer look than 35mm cameras. So whatever you buy, there's always something better out there.

 

[Bimjo]

I see what you are talking about, but the "3D pop" or whatever is not a function of a full frame vs: a aps-c sensor. It is solely a product of the lens, distance to the subject, depth of field, and distance between the subject and the background.

While it may be easier to achieve with a full frame sensor, it certainly isn't restricted to a full frame sensor.

 

[Lucille]

I see what you are talking about, but the "3D pop" or whatever is not a function of a full frame vs: a aps-c sensor. It is solely a product of the lens, distance to the subject, depth of field, and distance between the subject and the background.

While it may be easier to achieve with a full frame sensor, it certainly isn't restricted to a full frame sensor.

Well I don't want to make a list of camera bodys and prime lenses that have failed to create that look for me, some have come somewhat close, but with the FF Sony it is simply a matter of clicking the shutter button.

 

[serhan]

I think it is the microcontrast of Zeiss lenses, here is one with nex-5n and zeiss 100 macroplanar, from dpreview:

Which mount for Zeiss Makro Planar 100mm/f2?: Sony NEX Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

It is more with the Zeiss lenses, eg I remember with one with nex + zeiss 50mm 1.5 sonnar also. It is not full frame either. You can check the new coming Zeiss Touit lenses instead of the speed booster.

 

[Lucille]

Here are some shots I did last weekend with people in them, look closely at the people, and you can see this background separation, nothing fancy was done here to get this look, I failed to get this with my Sony A65 and Zeiss 35mm, my Canons, Olympus, ect. Now I don't want to sound like I am saying its impossible, I am not a very good photographer and merely a newbie to it, I am sure many of you more talented folks can come a lot closer then I can with a APS-C sensor, but with the Sony Rx1, all you do is press the shutter, and these pop out.

DSC-RX1    35.0 mm f/2.0    35mm    f/2.2    1/2000s    ISO 50

DSC-RX1    35.0 mm f/2.0    35mm    f/2.5    1/2000s    ISO 50

DSC-RX1    35.0 mm f/2.0    35mm    f/2.8    1/2000s    ISO 50

DSC-RX1    35.0 mm f/2.0    35mm    f/2.0    1/640s    ISO 50