July 19th, 2012, 03:18 PM
|
|
|
I agree with you that the big issue with NEX is that is seems to be lacking in lenses - in quantity and quality.
But there is really a size difference. Grams add up and there is even a bigger difference in volume. You can measure against the 25/1.4, but that is one of the chunkier m4/3 lenses.
We have had this discussion way too many time, I know. I will say, though, that I am always checking out NEX (and interested in the Canon also)... just hasn't made sense for me to invest in a body, before the lenses are there (especially since the new body versions come out every year).
Quote:
Originally Posted by troll
I'm not sure what you mean exactly about "too big lenses".. Zeiss 24 1.8 is 224g, just 24 extra grams compared to Panasonic 25/1.4. Sony 50/1.8 is 202g which is 86 grams heavier than Olympus 45/1.8, but Sony's got OIS... Sony 18-55 is 194g which is the same as Panasonic 14-45, and Sony 55-210 is 343g, which is in between the heavier Panasonic 45-200 and lighter 45-175. Sony's NEX camera with in-built viewfinder is lighter than anything in mft range (with EVF).
Basically you can have a camera (NEX-7) with 2 primes (24, 50) and 2 zooms (18-55, 55-210) weighing ~ the same as an mft camera with built-in EVF with two primes (25, 45) and 2 zooms (14-45, 45-175/200). Yet with Sony you get better image quality, but the size and weight are roughly the same.
The problem of NEX system is the lack of lenses, not the size and weight.
|
|
18Thanks
