Camera Labs

If you have the money, I should consider other cameras if I were you, like Olympus dSLRs (they could be very small), and other ones.
The Sony lenses could not be used on the new NEX bodies, so you dont have to buy a Sony.

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies

Joris, I guess maybe it'll help to think of the NEX differently. It isn't a DSLR, so don't try to force it to be one. I'm kinda going through a similar process with the E-P1. I started using it like a DSLR, but I found embracing the "tricks and toys" can give better results more easily. I'll even admit to using auto mode!

Ruben, you CAN use Sony lenses on the NEX with the official adapter, although reports are the AF performance (speed) is rather bad though...

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.

Ruben, one of the reasons I consider the NEX over the other ones is the build quality of the lenses . I yet have to see any (Micro) Four Thirds lens (or any other kind of SLD/ILC/EVIL/...system) which offers a similarly beautiful design and wonderful build quality. ISO performance is superb as well.

There are a number lenses to be released next year and the year thereafter (7 if I remember correctly) too. Among them a Zeiss wide-angle prime (hoping for 35mm), a portrait lens and a 'G'-class standard zoom...the Carl Zeiss and G-lens should be on par with the highest end DSLR lenses out there, optically that is.

It would just be nice to have a camera that I can take with me more easily than a DSLR, while giving me the image quality I'm used to.

Don't plan on using my 70-400 on it obviously .

Perhaps I just suffer a bit from GAS .

_________________
Sony α77V/VG-C77AM/α350/18-70/70-400 G SSM/NEX-5/18-55 OSS/Lowepro Pro Trekker 600 AW/CompuTrekker AW/Nova 140 AW/Street & Field gear/Toploader Pro 75 AW. And a huge wishlist...

My photos on Flickr...

I have a Canon 5DII but bought the NEX-5 kit (18-55 & 16 mm) for hiking - small and light enough to carry in a hip bag. I shot a lot of video and my only complaint would be that attaching the external microphone is a bit fiddly. The programmable soft keys are useful, although I like to be able to quickly change from self-timer to single shot. I would also prefer that the camera defaulted to single shot rather than stay on self-timer when turned off then back on. Overall, the camera is a delight.

Amazing review! I have a few questions, though, about macro performance using the stock lenses. I noticed the macro in the gallery page, but could maybe someone expand a bit? Could you get closer? How does the 16mm lens fare (pretty crappily, from other review sites)?

Unlike most, I am upgrading from a point-and-shoot, my trusty Canon SD1100 now lost in the metro system of Istanbul. When I first used the NEX-3 at Best Buy, I stood for about 45 seconds trying to figure out how to zoom (if the camera even had it). I then realized it's on the lens barrel, lol. And here I was thinking the shutter noise was coming from the speaker....lol.

Anyways, I'm actually considering either the NEX-3 or the Powershot S95. The S95 is far more pocketable (like my SD1100) and about $150 cheaper, but the extra's in the NEX-3 seem worth it over the S95:

1. Image quality is pretty superior
2. Alignment in HDR
3. 720P video with AF, zoom, and now aperture control
4. Stronger bokeh
5. Longer battery life
6. Better screen (quality and feature-wise)
7. Sweep Panorama

I'll just say it now. I, being the amateur I am, do not find the idea of changing lens at all appealing. I just want to take a darn picture, not fiddling to take this lens off, trying to avoid dust getting into the sensor, putting the news lens on, and then finally taking the picture. So, I'm not very rich (this expense is gonna be pushing my limit!) and I'm not a fan of switching lenses, so I do not find myself purchasing the macro lens whenever it comes out in 2011.

So, my question becomes: how is the macro performance with the stock lenses? With my SD100is, I could get maybe 1" to 2" away and still get a great shot. Is this possible with the NEX-3 and stock lenses? The Sony site scared me, saying I need to be about a foot away! Is that, please, maybe just a conservative estimate?

Or there is another option. I get the body of the NEX-3 (somehow) and use the rest to buy a proper lens that can zoom and do macro?

Thanks for reading the long post.

~Ibrahim~

If you do some research and find that the lens can focus at 30cm or less, you will find that it has better macro capabilities than your compact.

I didnt expect to see that my 18-55 has better macro than my FZ28, which can focus at 1m @486mm.

Also, the S95 is a really diffrent camera than the NEX. Read Gordon's reviews carefully and maybe look at other cameras too! Panasonics LX3 is maybe one to consider, like other Panasonics Gordon reviewed.

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies

@Ruben

My SD1100IS specifications state a minimum focus distance of 3cm. The 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens states a minimum focus distance of 25cm. But, if I get you right, the 18-55mm lens will offer better macro capabilities? OK, well, that's great! [EDIT: I figured it out...you just zoom to 55mm and it "looks" like a macro, even though you're pretty far away]

Oh, I know the S95 is in a completely different field of cameras. However, the NEX series and the S95 seem to be marketed towards the same consumer: someone looking to step up from a P&S, but not all the way towards a dSLR. I think that is why Gordon included a NEX-3 comparison in his S95 review.

The LX-5 and the LX-3 are good cameras, but they fall into no-man's land: not too pocketable and not much better than the S95. That's where the NEX comes in: not too pocketable, but quite a bit better than the S95.

Well, thank you for clearing up the macro issue. However, it looks like there is no body-only option for the NEX-3 (from Sony, at least). Though, there is a deal for the NEX-3: $650 for the 16mm prime and the zoom....tempting.

~Ibrahim~

If you can get that kit, Id be happy!
But, you really have to think about it: Will the NEX be really better than the S95 for you?
Do you need that extra quality, or is the S95 just good enough?

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies

So, I compared the sample images of the Canon S95 and the Sony NEX-3/5.

The S95 seems to take more...eh...lower quality pictures when you look at the crops below each sample image. They're noisier, not as focused, and look like P&S images that have been merely enhanced. Really, it's the noise. They're noisier than the NEX images. Noise just ruins photographs (funny, but not really: before we went on vacation, I read that turning up your ISO would decrease your shutter speeds so no more blurry photos...so I did it and was so excited to take 1/200s and 1/500s images....except when I got back to the house and it looks liked it was snowing in every single picture.....lol).

The NEX images, however, seem to have the brightness on their images turned up. The S95 has better contrast in almost all of them except the last two indoor shots.

I'm not a professional photographer, but I love taking pictures. I really do! By the end of my time with the SD1100IS, I'd like to say I was pretty decent: I used AE and AF lock, I used Custom White Balance, I used Digital Macro; I knew how to take better pictures. The S95 just seems to be an evolution of my SD1100IS with a few new features: HDR, f/2, 720p video, and more manual control. However, will I be able to take less noisier shots and cooler perspectives (because of bigger aperture)? I don't know. But the NEX-3 gives me all that *and* noticeably better pictures, with less noise and with cooler perspective, if that makes sense. I tried a Rebel XS from my college...black actually looked black! No stupid noise. The NEX-3 should be far closer than the S95, I think, in that respect to the dSLR.

I don't think I'm gonna quit this photography business, so I assume I'd be buying cameras after the S95. But why take 1 step when you can take 3?

So, that's just the superior image quality. But, the NEX-3 has these, too:

2. Alignment in HDR [I individually bracketed 3 exposures, hand-held, and assembled the HDR image on my SD1100IS....came out aight]
3. 720P video with AF, zoom, and now aperture control [the S95 has video, but no manual controls...I recently starred in a mini-series and that was just shot with a dSLR (1080p), but I'm excited for the prospects!]
4. Stronger bokeh [I borrowed a Rebel dSLR from my college for a few days...man, they came out great. You can zoom all the way and no loss of quality...the S95, I fear, won't have that, but the NEX-3 will be far closer to the dSLR quality]
5. Longer battery life [the SD1100is lasted at least 350 shots and around two days of shooting...but the S95 seems to cut that a bit shorter]
6. Better screen (quality and feature-wise)
7. Sweep Panorama [the SD1100IS didn't have in-camera stitching, which was annoying, so this should be HUGE].

OK, maybe I won't realize every single little drop of the NEX-3's potential, but the S95 doesn't seem as big of a leap as I want, especially if I'm gonna be paying $400. Why not pay $150 more and get a really superior camera in every single way? All these premium compacts (S95, LX5, etc.) are better than P&S, but are they really a leap? They seem far closer to the P&S side than the dSLR side. Not true for the NEX-3.

Whew.

I mean,

Youre an amature photographer? Then I think I have to say that the NEX probably isnt the right camera for you.
Changing the WB could take much time, like changing the AF etc.
The noise is only visible at 100% zoomed in on you pc, you will never and never see that noise back in your photos. Only if you make a print of 2 meters you could see noise when 100 ISO is used. Please look at the G11 from Canon, I think it will serve you much better than the NEX'!

Also, have a look at (older) Olympus dSLRs, they are small and have exelent quality. Maybe you could find an E-420 or E-410 or E-520?

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies

Amateur, yes, but I want the power and quality of a dSLR. I don't "need" the NEX-3; I'm not trying to make a living out of taking pictures. I just want great looking pictures from a small camera.

The G11/E-420/E/-410/E-520 are all pretty large compared to the NEX-3. None of these will be pocketable. The NEX-3 isn't that pocketable, but the others will surely require a bag. NEX-3 vs E-410 sizeasy comparison.

Changing the white balance shouldn't take too long: it took maybe 4 steps on my SD1100IS. I think the NEX-3 is somewhere close to that and there are few times when I really need to set it to Custom White Balance. Auto is usually good.

That's why the NEX-3 is perfect. Great image quality, small size. About the noise: fine, let's say they have identical noise. What about everything else? Check my last post, I edited the list with pertinent information. All of that seems well worth the $150 extra. Any competitors with similar advantages over the S95 are plenty bigger.

~Ibrahim~

If you think it's worth the extra money, go for it! You wont regret.

But the G11 is smaller than the NEX series

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies

G11:

112 x 76 x 48 mm

NEX-3

117 x 63 x 33 (+ 60mm for zoom lens) mm

They're close.

I also realized I've been subtracting wrong. The NEX-3 with both lenses is $650 and the Canon S95 is $400...that's $250, not $150. Are the extra features worth $250? Oooh, that's a harder trade.

I'm heading to Best Buy again tomorrow; I can compare again. I think they have either a G12 or G11 there. To be truthful (I didn't want to mention it!), but in the store, I shot comparable shots with the S95 and the NEX-5, though that was in a super-bright storeroom.

~Ibrahim~

That's right, the G11 looks like to be bigger, but the lens on the NEX isnt that small.
As amateur you probably want to buy a used camera to find out if you maybe want to have the NEX or not?

I mean, if you can buy a used G-series or S-series from Canon for about $100-150 you can try out if you maybe like this sort of cameras.
If you dont like it, simple sell it again and buy that NEX! Selling cameras is (here, dont know if it's anywhere) easier than breathe.

Good luck!

_________________
Ruben

Panasonic DMC-FZ18, Panasonic DMC-FZ28, Canon G5, Canon 350D, Canon 50D + BG-E2N
Tamron 17-50 2.8, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM,
Canon 18-55 II plus lots of Minolta MD/M42 lenses and bodies

I can't believe I haven't said it: thank you for your help. This kind of dialectic is needed before a big purchase and I was just humming along without a thought. However, this discussion has definitely helped me figure out what exactly I want from my camera.

I tried out the S90. It was pretty good. I, though, wasn't a big fan of the Control Dial. But, I only used it for maybe 15 minutes, but I could see myself using it long-term without issue. However, the NEX-3 does all the S90/95 do, but quite better at it all. May I ask why you think the NEX-3 would be a worse camera than the S95 for me? If I buy the NEX-3, I will be satisfied forever and may not ever buy another camera until I'm old and hoary. But, if I get anything less than the NEX-3 (G11, S95, etc.), I will wonder what I missed out on and will probably want to get a dSLR or the successor the NEX-3. I tried out the NEX and S90 at the shop, as I mentioned. The NEX just seems far more professional.

And, I would be excited to take pictures with the NEX. With all the others, I know I'll just be getting similar pictures as to what I could before with a few improvements.

All right, I'll say it. I've been thinking it, but now the truth lets out: The G-series by Canon is too retro of a camera design than I like. In other words, it doesn't look visually appealing. I won't say the u-word, but it isn't too far removed.

I ran through my old shots. Most of them, I don't even zoom in. The pancake lens should serve decently well for me in most shots (except darned macro!).

Well, couldn't I purchase the NEX and then return it if I don't like? I mean, if the premium compacts don't work out (G-series, DMC-LX3/5, S-series), the next step is the NEX. If the NEX doesn't work, I can return it and explore the compacts.

It will be easier to return than sell. In the States, it's pretty hard to sell (especially if you live in a small town like mine) unless you go online. I've tried selling stuff in eBay: it's never particularly worked out.

OK, I know most of you this may be a dumb question, but red or black? Red looks cool, but I think it would standout a bit too much, yeah? Probably black, right?