Sony NEX-7 vs A900 JPEG and RAW comparison!
Photojottings (Click here) posted a very interesting JPEG and RAW comparison between the most requested Sony camera of the moment (the NEX-7) and the probably last full frame camera model with optical viewfinder (the A900). I am again surprised to see how well the NEX-7 holds up against a fullframe camera. You may would argue that the better JPEG performance has to do with the newer processor but looking at the RAW comparison at 6.400 ISO you easily can see the NEX-7 better color performance and only a slightly less resolution compared to the A900. I am sure the new 24 Megapixel sensor of the A99 will bring a quantum leap jump in terms of noise performance and per pixel resolution but APS-C sensors are always advantaged by the fact that they will get the newest technology advancements before FF. It’s on the low and mid level market where you make the big money, not in the pro market.
About the optical viewfinder and A900: The A900 is a great camera and I used it for some of my photographic works. While I am positively surprised by the NEX-7 electronic viewfinder I still miss that huge superb viewfinder of the A900. I know for sure that there will be no new OVF model any time soon from Sony but Fuji has shown us with the X PRO 1 that one technology doesn’t exclude the other. Don’t know if Sony engineers are reading me right now but they should take a look at Fuji’s approach 
—
Sony A900 search links at Amazon, B&H, Adorama, J&R, eBay.
NEX-7 search links at Amazon, B&H, Adorama, J&R, eBay.
Fuji X PRo 1 at Amazon (Click here). news at Fujirumors (Click here)
pancanikonpus
2 years ago |post it here
Q1 2012 Mirroress Summaries:
Sensor technology:
1) Fujifilm – X-Pro1 – 16MP APSC 6x6pxl,noAA (par with D700)
2) Sony – Nex7 – 24MP APSC
3) Samsung – NX200 – 20MP APSC
4) Nikon – NikonV1/J1 – 10MP CX
5) Panasonic – GH2/GX1 – 16MP M43 multi-aspect ratio
6) Olympus – EPL3/OME – 12MP 43/16MP M43 5way IS
7) Pentax – PentaxQ – compact & shift sensor
8) Canon/Ricoh – GX1 (compact DC)/GXR MA12 -irrelavant (disqualified)
Lenses Lineup
1) Panasonic – 25 f1.4, few X lenses OIS
2) Fujifilm – 18F2p, 35f1.4p, 60f2.4m (all metal built)
3) Samsung – 20f2.8p, 30f2p, 60f2.8m (is alot lenses)
4) Olympus – 25f2.8p, 30f3.5m, few zoom lenses
5) Nikon – 10f2.8, 1030f3.5, 2 zoom lenses
6) Pentax – 5Q lenses
7) Sony – 1855, 30f3.5m, 50f1.8O, 22210, z24f1.8 (1 pancake)
low light High ISO Performance: (Dxomark)
1) Fujifilm – X-Pro1 ??? (par with D700)
2) Sony – Nex7/5n – 1016/1079
3) Samsung – NX200 – ???
4) Nikon – Nikon1 – 346/372
5) Panasonic – GH2/GX1 – 655/701
6) Olympus – EPL3/OME – 499/??? (expected lose to nex7/5n)
7) Pentax – PentaxQ – 189
View Finder technology:
1) Fujifilm – XPro1 – EVF+OVF
2) Sony -Nex7 -EVF 2.4Mp
3) olympus – OME 1.44M
4) No need to mention for the rest
Video Recording Spec:
1) Sony – Nex7/5n AVCHD 2.0 1080p60 28Mbps
2) Panasonic – GH2 (hacked) -1080p60/50p/30p/24p25p 144Mbps
3) Nikon – Nikon1V -1080p60 and 1200fps Slomo in small resolution
4) Fujifilm/Samsung/Panasonic – XPro1/NX200/GX1 – 1080p24/30
Auto Focus/fps technology:
1) Sony – Nex7 -10fps 24MP -CDAF/PDAF with LE-EA2
2) Nikon – Nikon1V -CDAF+PDAF (small sensor tend to fast focus
3) Olympus – OME -hybird AF (fixed sensor AF)
4) The rest CDAF
Price wise (top most expensive)
1) Fujifilm -XPro1 $1699
2) Sony -Nex7/5n $1299/699 (nex7 no stock!)
3) Olympus -OMD $1199 price yet to annouce
4) Panasonic -Gh2 $975 with 14-42mm
5) Pentax -PentaxQ $799
6) Samsung -NX200 $899 with 18-55mm
7) Panasonic -GX1 $699
8) Nikon -Nikon1 $846 with 10-30mm
Wheelus
2 years ago |How about a size comparison.
Mr M
2 years ago |Informative comparison. The NEX 7 does holds well against A900 in high ISO. From the samples, the NEX 7 shows slightly more visible noise grains through.
On the OVF, while I agree that the pentaprism ovf is a class on its own. I am not so sure about the Xpro-1 until I can get a copy for testing.
Sony should continue to make quantum leap in EVF technology. Currently on the A77 and NEX5n evf, I am already not missing out much from my A850 ovf or the X100 hybrid ovf.
jack
2 years ago |WE WANT THE OVF ON THE FUTURE FF PLEEEEEEEASE MR SONY…
SonyA77
2 years ago |I don’t.
Gunnar
2 years ago |who is we
i guess a shrinking but very loud minority..
i don`t miss an OVF at all and don`t want it back at all, i prefer this new nightvision with all info`s in the Evf.. and there surely will be no hybrid viewfinder from Sony, as its all about reducing costs and adding a useless hole into the camera which lets you look at the side of your lens will surely not reduce costs
spn
2 years ago |have tried to use the evf in a dark situation? Or a studio situation with flash as the only light sorce?
Does not really work as good as it should!
Don
2 years ago |I have for long exposure shots.
I also used an OVF in the dark too: both don’t lend much difference in improved lighting and basically became a rangefinder situation. Neither improved the issue nor hindered it.
Just shrunk the f-stop, took preshots, and rolled with it.
prast
2 years ago |evf fanboy
Tom L.
2 years ago |+1, as long as Sony
continues to improve, I will be happy with EVF.
picadilli
2 years ago |ovf +10000000000000000
chlamchowder
2 years ago |I would still prefer an OVF (which has several important advantages), provided that the camera has live view so I’m still getting all the features of the EVF on the rear screen.
But back to the point (comparison): The NEX-7 holds up very well, considering that it’s a crop sensor camera with the same pixel count as the full frame sensor. The improvement in ISO performance when compared to the previous generation of sensors is promising.
JJ
2 years ago |I don´t, OVF is highly overrated.
Sergei
2 years ago |Fuji’s VF is not an SLR/SLT design. Sony gets video recording with AF and a working VF you can rest your camera with to balance hand held shooting. We either get complete optical awesomeness like in a900 and it’s vibrating action or a super silent and fast SLT or ,who knows, a mirrorles a99
doraemonboi
2 years ago |Actually, if I have enough money, I would get the NEX 7. It wins in some point.
1. Full HD video recording function
2. Resolution + Noise performance
3. Size
4. Feel and look
However, the A900 also win in some point.
1. Excellent OVF
2. Full frame (Can take wider photo)
3. Lenses
David
2 years ago |The NEX-7 looks amazing, but the A900 would still be my preferred choice
Ergonomics are great. Lens choice is better. They are the two big reasons.
And of course it is full frame, so my lenses aren’t only showing a cropped field of view. Thinner depth of field with the same framing gives you a look that you just can’t get on APS-C, no matter what lenses you use.
Vivek
2 years ago |I am still trying to figure out how an OVF or en EVF affects the image quality?!
SonyA77
2 years ago |Indeed, this puzzles me when people bang on about OVF vs. EVF. Other than framing and focus, how on Earth does what you see in the OVF/EVF affect the actual image produced by the camera?
The viewfinder doesn’t magically change the aperture/shutter/ISO values…
David
2 years ago |I guess some people (those who don’t understand exposure and metering) might get better images with an EVF straight out of camera
For those of us who DO understand our cameras, the images should be the same. Though I’d still appreciate extra input like grid lines, horizon level, a WB preview etc
Bengt Nyman
2 years ago |Only indirectly in that the EVF with real time WB preview, exposure preview and focus peeking lets you see exactly what your image is going to look like before you shoot it.
The EVF technology will leap frog photography.
OVF cameras will become hollow collectors items as their lenses are sought out for use on EVF cameras.
conny
2 years ago |+1
i absolutely second that. In fact the EVF really made me using M mode on my A77 on a more regular basis (i never used it before to be honest) , it’s nice to adjust everything while you’re watching the “results” on your EVF.
Nord
2 years ago |OVF has infinite resolution, infinite frames per second, no lag, no visual clutter and uses no battery power.
Spoon
2 years ago |Here we go again, the “infinite resolution” nonsense.
There are many limiting factor to the resolution
A) the lens (also a limititation for the EVF)
B) the optical path to the eyepiece
C) the optical eyepiece
D) the eye
The last three limit the visual resolution a LOT. To the point where you see nowhere near the current pixel level (say 24MP), where an EVF can.
Pebble
2 years ago |I have a difficult time to manual focus my Sony R1 (live view) when the diafragm is > F8, because of the large DOF, which is not very pleasant. Did Sony solve this problem with the A77?
David
2 years ago |Focus peaking.
ronnbot
2 years ago |I guess you only ever use full auto mode because what you see on the finder will obviously affect how you change the camera’s settings, which eventually would result in a good/bad photo.
As others have said, EVF will show the affects of exposure setting changes on the fly: ISO, WB, metering mode, exposure compensation and so on.
Although OVF can’t do that, no EVF (yet) can beat it in terms of resolution and responsiveness. That is why you need zoom modes and focus peaking on EVF to aid MF, but using them can delay the shooter and sometimes doesn’t help. E.g. focus peaking doesn’t really work when the subject doesn’t have sharp edges. The split focusing screen in the OVF (if the (D)SLR supports) is way more efective. But worse of all, the lag and long blackout time of EVFs can mean missed shots.
Steve Jones
2 years ago |I can’t say I perceive any great difference in the RAW colour performance. However, it’s about time that people learnt that (in general) the way colour is rendered is 99% and artefact of the RAW conversion, in camera or not, and not due to the sensor. Colour sensitivity can vary to some extent with the density of the bayer pattern filters, but it’s unlikely you’ll see much effect here. Possibly some trade-off between noise in colour channels. However, the vast majority of any difference is down to the rendering, not the sensor (at least not for “traditional” Bayer pattern.
Of course a sensor with worse noise performance and DR will suffer on colour too (in the sense of noise in the colour channels), but that’s a rather different issue.
Bengt Nyman
2 years ago |Agreed. The Fuji X-Pro1 randomized color filter arrangement, eliminating the need for an AA filter should be another step toward high IQ photography.
David
2 years ago |Yup.
Import the same raw file into Lightroom, Adobe Camera RAW and the (useless) Sony software.
You have three different looking images, with different colours, different shadow detail, different noise and different noise reduction.
fwiw, I think Lightroom does the best job. The noise reduction works well and looks like a fine grain rather than blotchy spodges of textureless garbage that the Sony IDC software makes.
Atlasman
2 years ago |Fuji’s hybrid viewfinder is only a bridge until they can deliver an EVF that can do it all.
Sony should focus on improving their EVF technology.
And Sony, PLEASE bring out a full-frame mirrorless.
Gunnar
2 years ago |you mean it is a good bridge because it combines a crappy and not see through lens OVF with a quite bad EVF?
Atlasman
2 years ago |Gunnar
Is that how it reads to you?
Gunnar
2 years ago |oops.. no i was in overdrive i guess
sorry
loki
2 years ago |There are phisical facts that turn nex 7 under a900 and other all full frames
Bigger sensor give ALWAYS better Deep of field and thic cant be changed… ..hopefully i can shoot with my large format camera and not with crap aps-c
rodrix
2 years ago |But why sony (aka playstation) alpha nex suck a lot?
SRL
2 years ago |I’m not seeing much anymore about the a77 and how it compares to other cameras.
I have heard is that the NEX-7 produces better images than the a77
Is this true?
EddyH
2 years ago |You can check it yourself: http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
Spoon
2 years ago |I have heard the NEX7 doesn’t have a pellicle mirror, is this true?
Do peope really read reviews or specsheets before jumping into these forums?
Basically the NEX 7 has about half a stop less noise, due to the lack of a pellicle mirror and a bit more per pixel sharpness but more moire and stairstepping due to a lighter AA filter.
In the field though, the faster PDAF focusing from the A77 means it can get shots (or sharper shots) the NEX 7 has trouble with. Such as for moving objects where fast or follow focus is critical.
Rob
2 years ago |I’m primarily interested in stills IQ, and if there isn’t a substantial improvement over my 850, I won’t be buying anything new.
c.d.embrey
2 years ago |Comment deleted.
ben
2 years ago |I just want Sony to give me my A99 now!!!
c.d.embrey
2 years ago |Full frame is dying. In a couple of more generations the FF Pro DSLR will be no more. If a FF provides no benefit why carry the excess weight? BTW Zeiss makes an 8mm T2.8 (12mm FF equiv.) cine lens that cover Super35/APS-C. So wide angle lenses can be made for crop cameras.
In the 1940s most Photo Journalists used 4×5 Press cameras and now PJs are winning awards for photos shot with an iPhone. In the 1990s top Wedding Photographers were shooting Medium Format, but not anymore. Commercial shooters are embracing the small mirrorless for some jobs, within a very few years it will be for all jobs. Time marches on!
Denis
2 years ago |strong drugs, where did you buy it?
z
2 years ago |“why carry the excess weight? BTW Zeiss makes an 8mm T2.8″
That “APS-C-only” lens weight 2 frickin kilos!(4.4lbs)
Today’s lowest tech is always better than yesterday’s highest. Some people understand that, some apparently not.
c.d.embrey
2 years ago |It weighs what it weighs because it’s a cine lens. All cine primes are built to the same size, etc to make switching lenses quicker, i.e. common front diameter, follow focus rings, etc. A 8mm Super35 lens should weigh no more than an 85mm L Canon lens 8-0.
I’ve been making my living with a camera for a long time, and this is my take on where things are headed.
Frank Withers
2 years ago |You have completely discounted the advantages of a physically larger sensor. My guess is you are not aware of them. Why do you think commercial work is mostly shot with Phase Ones and other medium-large format digital backs? Depth, depth, and more depth. With respect, your view is very uneducated.
c.d.embrey
2 years ago |I don’t think that you read what I wrote. You are replying to what you think I said.
“In the 1940s most Photo Journalists used 4×5 Press cameras and now PJs are winning awards for photos shot with an iPhone.”
Damon Winter won 3rd place in the “Photo of the Year” with an iPhone http://www.poyi.org/68/17/third_01.php
“In the 1990s top Wedding Photographers were shooting Medium Format, but not anymore.”
Do you dispute that ???
“Commercial shooters are embracing the small mirrorless for some jobs, within a very few years it will be for all jobs.”
Juergen Teller shoots everything with a Contax G2 (with on camera flash) and Kodak Portra 400. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S97y0oR0jL0 Do think that when/if Teller switches to Digital he will buy a Phase One or a Fuji X-1Pro ???
Terry Richardson uses a Nikon D3x with on camera flash. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WbInDsWeT0&feature=fvst Mr. Richardson used a Yashica T4 P&S film camera in the 1990s. He uses a Panasonic GF! for some of his personal work. I wouldn’t be surprised to see him go mirrorless in a few years.
AFAIK Benjamin Kanarek is still shooting with a Pentax DSLR http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRzgc7QFUv8 Wounder if he’ll use one of the new Pentax K-mount mirrorless when they are available?
Read what Krk Tuck says about useing a Nikon V1 on a job. http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011/12/small-sensor-systems-practical.html
Yes I’m aware of PHYSICALLY LARGER SENSORS. I can call my local pro camera/lighting/grip rental house and get one with no problem.
I use a Tilt and Shift lens for my Table Top advertising shots. It’s no problem to get a Tilt adapter for a Sony Nex, but no-one makes a T&S adapter. Guess I’ll get one custom made. The big problem is that I like to shoot tethered to Capture One, and and you can’t do that with Sony.
Always use the right tool for the job. Sometimes it’s a MFD and sometimes it’s APS-C or m4/3 — maybe even a Nikon V1.
z
2 years ago |What I’m saying is that it weight 2 frickin kilos! Do you stuff dead weight in cine lenses? In fact, 50mm cine is a lot frickin lighter while exactly the same size. It’s heavy glass inside that!
Paul Hedderly
2 years ago |I think you’re kind of right there. Except there will be a market for FF and MF for a long time because of the lower noise and greater depth of field advantages. But things are moving down the scale thats true.
Denis
2 years ago |Old 5D still helps to get better pictures than top APS-C DSLRs (especially at wide angle).
Rob
2 years ago |Mark Dubovoy would disagree. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/understanding-series/everything_matters__it_is_all_about_the_small_details.shtml
c.d.embrey
2 years ago |How many people do you know that own an Alpa and a Phase One back ??? Or even know anything about a Rodenstock 60 mm APO HR.
How many covers for national/international magazines are shot with this camera every month ??? How many advertising campaigns are shot with this camera ??? There is no need of this quality on the printed page,
This isn’t a real world camera for very many photographers.
BTW it won’t fit in my pocket and it doesn’t have a pancake lens
ronnbot
2 years ago |“BTW it won’t fit in my pocket and it doesn’t have a pancake lens? ”
Does a NEX-7 + 24/1.8? Oh forgot, there is actually a NEX pancake. I guess the 16/2.8 is good enough for you.
c.d.embrey
2 years ago |Did you have trouble understanding my sarcasm, that’s what the smiley
is for.
I couldn’t care less if a camera fits in my pocket, but a lot of people complain, both here and on other forums, about mirrorless cameras not fitting in their pockets. And a lack of pancake lenses. Personally I prefer Waffle Lenses
D.Ortego
2 years ago |Just for the heck of it:
I started playing more seriously with a film EOS in 1985 and moved to a Leica M8 in 2008 but I didn’t really like the rangefinder style. Then I got stupid and bought a Leica P&S (Panasonic/Lumix) which was not bad although it was really boring. Then I wanted the X100 and got tired of waiting so then I wanted the A77 …but got tired of waiting some more.
So THEN I wanted a NEX7 …but got tired of waiting again. So, I finally found a camera that Sony wanted to sell and ACTUALLY had, and that was the A900 w/135 lens. Finally, I’m happy and it truly was a blessing in disguise.
pancanikonpus
2 years ago |I not understand why you need to wait so long since you does not need HD video, you just can simply pick the a850 or a900…
but person like me which is very like video, i have to continue wait on a77/nex7.
Clyde
2 years ago |Processing is everything.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonynex7/page27.asp
Set the DPreview for 6400 RAW and compare NEX-7 against a900, 5DII, M9 and you’ll see a different story.
Spoon
2 years ago |For one because Dpreview forgot to turn off the RAW NR from the A900.
Second because Dpreview turned off the colour NR in ACR, which no one in their right mind really does and it’s not really a level playing field as ACR applies different amounts of chroma NR under the hood/ as a starting point too.
Third because the physical exposures are different (the NEX 7 received less light).
So yeah, a story can be cooked in different ways. That doesn’t make the test in the article above less true though.
Daemonius
2 years ago |Sony A900 might have sucessor, but it will be much more expensive. Kinda dSLR flagship. Problem is that manufacturing that big pentaprism is really expensive, not mentioning how much accuracy you need for whole assembly. A850 is just “recycling” parts that didnt work out that perfect as needed for A900 (btw. great move from Sony).
If they do it, it will be probably as expensive as 1D-X (I guess they wont reach nutty price of Nikons).
peter marcellin
2 years ago |Is there any news regarding the new A9X CAMERA?
I will be changing from Canon to Sony as soon as this
new camera hit the market.
Gabrys
2 years ago |Comparison of ISO 6400 is wrong. True extent of ISO of A900 is between 200-3200. ISO 100 and ISO 6400 are software. True ISO extent for NEX7 is wider.
You cannot compare real sensitivity and fake, software.
Spoon
2 years ago |Ofcourse you can and digital amplification is hardly fake if done well (results count), which has been displayed ad nauseam. From what I’ve seen, the Nex 7 actually shifts from analogue to digital gain before the A900 does.
D.Ortego
2 years ago |Clearly, the NEX7 is a very nice camera and I wanted one. Now that I have the A900 w/135 lens I’m not wishing I opted for the NEX, although I would have saved a bundle. Of the few hundred files I already shot with the 900, I’m pleased to say that a handful look pretty darn nice. I’m sure the NEX7 would have been just fine if all I wanted was a smaller and lighter body.