Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Please, support PV!
It allows to keep PV going, with more focus towards AI, but keeping be one of the few truly independent places.
Anyone switched to the NEX-7?
  • ShieldShield

    I have, for a few reasons. First of all I will easily admit the GH2 video is sharper and more detailed with less moire; even the unhacked GH2. But, I like the Sony colors better, the size of the NEX-7, the ability to get autofocus with the LA-EA2 adapter + Sony Alpha lenses, this combination gives me phase detection autofocus which is pretty cool. Also, I love the 60p for slowing it down to 24p and not having to use Twixtor.

    But don't sell your GH2's just yet - even with the Sony Zeiss 24mm F/1.8 I'm not getting the pleasing bokeh like I did with the Panasonic Summilux F/1.4. But the pictures are far, far better.

    So in my humble opinion, the GH2 is a 9/10 for video and 6/10 for stills. The NEX-7 is 7/10 video and 9/10 stills.

    If anyone cares.

  • 26 Replies sorted by
  • itimjimitimjim

    They're both that cheap, if I liked or had need, I would have both.

  • rikyxxxrikyxxx

    If canon/nikon FF cameras are 10/10 for stills, nex-7 is 8/10 and gh2 7/10 (I'm talking about IQ and RAW files).

    However I agree with @itimjim : have both :-)

  • ShieldShield

    @rikyxxx have you tried both?

  • rikyxxxrikyxxx

    No, that's why I said:

    I'm talking about IQ and RAW files

  • itimjimitimjim

    Not tried the NEX7, but the Canon 5D and II. I'm serious about micro budget film making, and tentative about photography. Therefore I'm not interested in 10/10 stills capability, I want 10/10 video, which the GH2 gives me,

  • brianlucebrianluce

    What exactly is meant by "stills"? Can the GH2 do it?

  • ShieldShield

    I wouldn't say the GH2 is a 10/10 for video, but it's close. Still blows out highlights, no focus peaking, no ability to adjust ISO during recording, no 1080p60.

  • ShieldShield

    @brianluce - Stills - photos. Of course the GH2 can take stills.

  • L1N3ARXL1N3ARX

    NEX-7 does have some nice potential, the footage itself is wonderful. Very sharp, clean and "sony"-like. Just like the FS100, the iq is great... but fails to look cinematic in any way.

    The 2 reasons I have a GH2: 1) many times my footage will come out looking like film after a little post, no other camera has gh2 motion / cadence characteristics that mimic film so well. 2) Vitaliy / Driftwood. The patches are bringing out absurd amounts of detail, and it never fails to impress. It's pretty hard to use anything else once you've tried a little "quantum crack".

  • Ian_TIan_T

    "quantum crack"???....hmm....seems like it's time for an intervention. :-)

  • ShieldShield

    Well, I shot this little clip of my son tonight, indoors, with the Sony 24mm F/1.8 in standard / autofocus mode. Not saying this is "cinema" like, but for what I shoot, which is mostly my kids, the NEX-7 works out well for me.

    http://www.goldcomics.com/incoming/school/Nicholas.mp4

    It's about 45 megs. Again, not up to GH2 detail level, but pretty good for me.

  • L1N3ARXL1N3ARX

    Well it doesn't have to be cinema at all. The nex7 is a fantastic camera, and "stills" wise, it blows gh2 right out of the water. It just so happens if you enjoy making narrative type films with an eye to achieving something that resembles film, it's probably the best bet.

  • martyamartya

    I use both. NEX7 is spectacular for images. But GH2 images with Oly 12mm; Pani 20, Pani 100-300, Oly 45 are 90-95% of NEX 7 if shot carefully. Focus on GH2 is often faster, and touch focus is better.

    Controls on GH2 more intuitive when shooting fast.

    (My business lets me use all these.)

    I also use G3 for pocket camera, which has crisper images and better color at times than GH2. Sony sometime over saturates where the G3 captures more accurate color.

    I got rid of all the SLR Nikons and Canons - and am more than happy with these.

    When everything lines up right, the NEX 7 is the first digital camera I have ever used that can beat film for a "film look".

  • brianlucebrianluce

    How can something like more like film that film itself?

  • martyamartya

    Good question. You have to see them side by side. The NEX 7 image can make a film image look "digital" because the NEX 7 can resolve detail better than many films, and the SONY color scheme can make it look as "natural" as film. It can't do this against black and white film shots - film wins over digital in black and white. But in color shots, especially nature, I've seen a lot of photographer colleagues react to the NEX 7 images in exactly the same way.

  • sohussohus

    @martya Please show us footage to make your point. Words are empty.

  • ttancredittancredi

    what about matching gh2 nex-7 footage. any problems? color-wise

  • brianlucebrianluce

    NEX 7 can resolve detail better than many films /////////// It can't even match 16mm in resolution.

  • itimjimitimjim

    I think he's on about stills.

  • brianlucebrianluce

    @itimjim OKay, I'm still not clear on this "Stills" mode that the GH2 and Nex7 allegedly have. Best I can figure it's some obscure feature that allows for a single frame grab of some sort.

  • itimjimitimjim

    :-)

  • MimirsanMimirsan

    Brianluce...being what most GH2 obsessed fanboys are best at...being a hater who feathers get ruffled when a different camera is praised.

  • brianlucebrianluce

    @Mimirsan, there's difference between a failed attempt at humor and fanboyism.

  • rockroadpixrockroadpix

    @brianluce -Someone's sarcasm detector is broke. :)

  • dark_fibredark_fibre

    @martya I know exactly what you are talking about..... The images from the sony nex 7 (& 5n) do seem to have an ability to (as Steve Huff describes "pop") or jump from the screen. They are dynamic without being oversaturated. I am new to this forum & will probably be shot down in flames, but I know what you are talking about

Add a Comment