NEX-7 Part 3: Compared to the Lumix GH2
Wednesday, January 11, 2012 at 18:07 ;)
As has become pretty clear by now, I'm gradually switching over to Sony NEX from the Panasonic Micro Four Thirds system which I've been using since late 2008. Over time, any user interface can become second nature as long as the designers haven't made any serious mistakes. Sony's interface isn't quite second nature yet and I still find myself comparing it to Panasonic's menus and controls that I've become so intimately familiar with over the years. Of course you would hope that after 12,000 photos any reasonably intelligent individual would have mastered the camera that he took them with. In this post I'll take a look at how someone who was so set in his ways is getting on with the user interface of the NEX-7. It's still early, so these are just my first impressions. I'll let the review sites handle the performance aspects of each camera.
;)
ERGONOMICS
Both cameras have substantial grips and are comfortable to hold with the right hand. The GH2 has a narrower grip but makes up for this by having a deeper body to wrap the palm of your hand around. I really like the continuous, wrap around grip of the NEX-7. There's more of a difference as you move around to the back of each camera. Sony has sacrificed part of the flexibility of the GH2's fully articulated screen in order to be able to move their tilting LCD all the way over to the left of the camera. This in turn leaves more room for your thumb to access the controls on the right side. As far as I'm concerned, that improves handling. It's also worth noting that on the NEX-7, unlike the GH2, all the camera's controls are within reach of your right thumb.
If you wear glasses, then I suspect that the GH2's EVF will be more comfortable. It's not a huge difference, but Panasonic's eye cup is larger and you don't have to press your eye into the rubber cup quite as forcefully in order to see the whole frame. Some have expressed concern about the NEX-7's asymmetrical viewfinder placement, but personally it doesn't feel unnatural to me at all. I'm quite happy though that my nose no longer collides with the screen when I lift the camera to my eye.
;)
CONTROLS
Is changing settings more efficient on one of the two cameras?I need to be able to change the things I use most often quickly, or risk missing a shot. For the rest, I'm willing to dig a little deeper into the menus, sometimes deep enough on the Sony that I'm gasping for air. As far as setting the 3 exposure variables of aperture, shutter speed (or exposure compensation depending on the shooting mode) and ISO, the Sony offers the most rational and efficient control by assigning one variable to each of the available wheels. On the Panasonic you have to dig around in a menu to select the sensitivity. The Panasonic makes up for this by having a few more dedicated switches and dials, but all of these settings can also be changed relatively efficiently with the Sony's customizable buttons and/or the Tri-Navi controls. I really the wish the NEX-7 offered the ability to save shooting settings as custom modes. Otherwise, changing common settings is efficient on both cameras.
;)
USE WITH MANUAL LENSES
The NEX-7 has the edge here for several reasons. First of all, the NEX-7 only requires one button press to engage the focus assist compared to activating and then confirming focus assist on the GH2. You can also tap the GH2's touch screen to enlarge a section, but I prefer manually focusing via the viewfinder. Compared to the GH2, the NEX-7 features a higher resolution viewfinder which makes it easier to see what part of an image is in focus. The NEX-7 can also make in-focus areas stand out by outlining areas of highest contrast in various, user selectable colours (focus peaking). The high quality EVF combined with focus peaking work well in making manually focusing lenses a more enjoyable and accurate process on the NEX-7.
A further advantage of the NEX-7 over the GH2 is that the camera will adjust the sensitivity automatically when a manual lens is mounted in shutter speed priority mode. This is perfect, allowing me to set the aperture on the lens barrel and the shutter speed on the camera while the NEX-7 selects the appropriate ISO value. The GH2 does not allow auto ISO in shutter speed priority with legacy glass. So if I want anything other than the default shutter speed the GH2 selects in aperture priority (1/125s), I have to constantly fiddle with the ISO as light levels change.
The NEX-7 is a near perfect platform for my Zeiss Biogon. I just have to be prepared to deal with softer corners and a slight magenta colour cast at large apertures. You would expect the same lens to be much better in the corners of the GH2's substantially smaller Micro Four Thirds sensor. But you'd be wrong. I've done some initial comparisons which show worse corners on the GH2 and the difference is surprisingly large. I'll post results once I have some better comparison photos. At the moment it seems as if the Biogon performs quite a bit better on the NEX-7 than it does on the GH2. Maybe not better than it does on the NEX-5N, but certainly better than on the GH2.
;)
DESIRABILITY & DURABILITY
The more I like a camera, the more I want to use it. As the most capable Micro Four Thirds camera, the GH2 was always more the camera that I needed rather than the camera that I wanted. It's lumps, humps, seams and projections are not particularly beautiful nor does its plastic body feel refined or luxurious in any way. It's a tool for taking photos and not that much more. It is a very reliable tool though, performing flawlessly under all kinds of conditions with never a hiccup or a software glitch. I have to give Panasonic credit for that.
The NEX-7, on the other hand, is more than just a tool for taking photos. Its minimalistic, beautifully crafted, metallic body is not only attractive to look at but also begs to be picked up. It was one of the first cameras in a long time that I wanted to own even before I knew what it could do (shame on me). Looks can be deceiving though; let's see if it survives what I have to throw at it as well as the GH2 did.
;)
CONCLUSION
Overall I'd say that, at least for my needs, the NEX-7 has the edge over the GH2 in terms of its ergonomics, controls and as a platform for using manual lenses. But the difference isn't so large and I doubt Panasonic has been asleep in the 16 months since the announcement of the GH2. In terms of the quality of its files, Sony's larger sensor will remain at an advantage. But that's nothing new, as you can always increase sensor size to improve image quality. You just have to be willing to accept the other compromises that strategy entails.
Reader Comments (14)
Nice comparison. One question - I noticed you use UV filters on your lenses. I know this could open up a can of worms, but any thoughts on them affecting the quality of your lens? Which filters do you use and why?
Thanks, Rishio. It's all right; I've never been one to shy away from controversial subjects, including the use of protective filters on lenses. Filters can and do impact the optical performance of a lens. I've used a good quality Hoya filter once which robbed me of 1/3 stop of light - and that was clean. Now I use only B+W UV-Haze MRC filters. If they have an impact optically, then it's so negligible that I can't tell the difference. With a filter, If I'm out in the drizzle or in dusty conditions, I can quickly wipe my lens free without worrying about scratching the front element. Now that would really degrade optical quality.
That said, I have a three and a half year old Lumix 7-14 which doesn't accept any filters. Despite intensive use in all the same conditions, the bulbous front element is still free of scratches. Now it could be that the 7-14 has a particularly scratch resistant front element, I've been lucky, or that I'm using filters for nothing. Take your pick ;-)
Hi Bjorn
I am sure the 24mm is optically a good lens as you and others have said before....But attached to the NEX7 it is just to large (and overpriced IMHO) for my pocket!
Thanks for the GH2/NEX7 comparison...It helps me and others visualize how they look side by side...Most appreciated.
Barry
Hi Barry, It is quite large isn't it!? The NEX's protruding lens mount makes it seem even larger. Thankfully though it's not heavy. Sure it would be better if the Zeiss 24/1.8 were smaller and less expensive. But as far as I'm concerned, only if that could be achieved without compromising its optical quality or its maximum aperture. The NEX sensors need good glass to get the most out of them.
Glad you like the side-by-side photos of the two cameras. The way I see it, Sony has set quite a high standard in terms of body design. But Panasonic has proven in the past that it is able to meet the challenge. Let's see if they do.
I think the rubber eyepiece hood on the NEX7 is also making it look larger (protruding) than perhaps it need be...Have you tried it without (or does to much extraneous light seep in from the sides being a spectacle wearer)?
On my 2 Leica M6's I had to have made up a special dioptre glass fitted into a leica blank eyepiece holder (made and cemented in at the opticans) which then screws back into the camera body...It saved on having to wear glasses all the time but needless to say was a very expensive solution!
I think your probably right your 24mm F1.8 is perhaps the best solution for now...It's fast and does not suffer corner softening as much as the 25/28mm ZM glass I believe on the NEX7.
How are you finding the TRI-NAVI controls?
I remember now, you're a Leica man. How can you stand shooting with anything else after that experience, hehe?
As far as I'm concerned, the Zeiss Biogon 35/2.0 performs extremely well on the NEX-7. Yes, there are some concessions but for me the excellent sharpness, contrast, colors and character over most of the image it produces outweigh those by far. I can't say which of the two Zeiss lenses I like better. Of course we all have different expectations and interests when it comes to taking photos.
I never take my glasses off when I'm taking photos using the EVF. I've tried it and find that too fiddly. Shooting without the rubber eye cup works quite well as long as it isn't very bright (not that we've had much of that). I still prefer leaving the cup on, even if I'd rather have a snap-on eye cup with a lower profile.
I don't want to make the mistake of commenting too much on the Tri-Navi controls until I'm thoroughly familiar with the camera. First impressions are that they wonderful; it's the first time that I have all 3 exposure controls on separate dials. But I'll report back when I've been able to figure out how to best customize the NEX-7 for my needs.
Was...How cruel.
Your right I can't stand it.
The CZ ZM range of lenses will happily satisfy my need from returning back to Leica M lenses.
However I have yet to find a Digital camera that I can honestly just sit back and say no more need to keep on upgrading (Mainly due to forever changing spoon fed electrical technology from the manufacturers).
Things were so much easier when film ruled the world...Leica M's (7 and below) were not totally dependent on a battery and the Sunny F16 rule was our brain for a light meter. Changing the film was a lot cheaper than keep changing your sensor (And camera).
Just out of interest have you ever tried going out and shooting for the day in manual mode and ignoring the inbuilt light meter - Just guess your exposures (Turn off the preview)...Its an interesting experiment in getting back to basics.
I think my hit rate would be close to zero if I turned off the preview and shot in manual. At times I'm still struggling to focus my Biogon correctly, never mind also having light metering thrown into the mix. You make a very interesting point about our reliance on automatic systems. I've found that since I started using the odd manual focus lens, I'm also becoming more aware of where my focus point is when using AF. It forces me to think about where my focus point is and why. That should, in theory at least, improve the quality of my photographs. I wouldn't be surprised if taking control of exposure will have a similar effect. It would only be very difficult to frame a photo without the use of either the EVF or the LCD.
I like your notion that changing film was a lot cheaper than changing sensors. My first camera was a Minolta X-700 SLR which I had for 12 years until it perished in a fall down the inside of a medieval tower. I doubt any of today's cameras stuffed full of delicate electronics would last that long, even if the technology didn't become obsolete. Still I wouldn't want to go back. The ability to be able to see the photo you've just taken has fundamentally changed the nature of photography by providing immediate feedback. I can analyze the image and, if the subject allows it, retake the photo if necessary.
That brings me back to digital cameras. It occurs to me that there's one camera that would allow you to gradually build up a set of CZ ZM and/or Voigtlander primes without any incompatibility problems or worries about investing in lenses that will become obsolete. That would be the Ricoh GXR with the M-mount module. I used it briefly last summer and was impressed. I ended up deciding for the Sony because I never intended to exclusively use manual focus lenses. The Ricoh GXR also has some AF modules, but I'm not going to invest in lenses that are paired with a sensor that will become obsolete in no time at all. But if you're only using the GXR with a set of 2 or 3 compact, M-mount primes, then it becomes an interesting proposition. Maybe a CV 15/4.5 and the CZ 25/2.0 to begin with. Of course there's no tilting screen, but there are always compromises.
Having owned a 10x8 Gandolfi (Established 1851 - About the oldest camera company in existence).
It was basically a Wooden box with bellows albeit beautifully crafted and even more expensive than a Leica M with a year or two waiting list back in the 80's!...That is indeed a camera that gets you back to basics!
Processing B/W film in Pyro and making 10x8 contact prints on Agfa Bromide, Kodak AZO Silver Chloride paper or making alternative process prints in Platinum-Palladium, Chrysotype Gold, Cyanotype, Argyrotype, Van Dyke Iron, Gum Bichromates + Bromoils (I have tried them all and more, truthfully) does me make me wonder why I ever turned to the darkside of digital photography!...Oh I just remembered it was the bloody weight of it all!
I can think of another make it begins with L. (But I wouldn't buy the lenses again...great quality but now well overpriced IMHO).
I did look at the GXR that is indeed a camera that would house the M mount lenses..But without trying to offend any of your readers - That thing is UGLY!
Strangely that is yet another camera I have owned a Minolta X700! Yes it was a black plastic box that did the trick although the silver ones were made of metal...I believe so were the earlier black ones, but my one was made from a very unsatisfying piece of plastic...I kept it about a month!
Yours must of been made from metal as it served you well.
Must go the Sun is beckoning.
BTW - Your English is excellent, that explains it living in Canada - In fact I think your English is better than mine!
Chat later
Share your problem with the weather in winter. I decided to use the lighting conditions and made a photoartbook of city at night using a tripod. The grey sky isn't visible and the artifical lights can create their own charm.
I also share your view on esthics. Do I have to be ashamed to say that I would have a hard time using the panasonic even IF it where the better camera? IQ of course should be the major deciding factor, but I find that if a camera is plain ugly, I just can't use it and have fun.
Cxspark, that's actually a very good idea to take advantage of the dark, dreary days of winter to do some night photography. I think I will follow your example instead of complaining about the weather.
No need to be ashamed to admit that you'd rather use an aesthetically pleasing camera. I'll pick up something I like more often than something I don't. And we're not only talking about cameras here ;-)
Barry, while we're on the topic of appearances, I don't particularly like the look of the GXR either, especially with the odd lump on the M-mount module.
Wow, you have an impressive range of experience with different camera types. Quite different to mine which started with what was indeed a metal bodied Minolta X700. Do you still have any old primes at all that you might be able to use on the NEX-5N with and adapter?
As to my English, I'm pleased to hear you say that. I've been living abroad so long that I'm beginning to doubt my proficiency in the English language.
I am afraid I sell all my cameras and lenses as I travel forward in time to fund the next lot of disposables!
That GXR just looks awkward and unbalanced to me...But I might grow to like it, as I can't admit to being that smitten with the Nex range of cameras when they first came out...who knows.
Yes, your English is very good.
I have had a lot of film cameras of many different varieties over the years but not so many digital.
Excluding phones...
Canon G2
Olympus Olympus C-8080wz
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1
Canon G9
Panasonic LX2
Panasonic LX3
Canon 5D
Panasonic GF1 x 2 No.
Panasonic GH2
Sony NEX5N
In that order if I remember correctly (I can't for now remember any others)....I am sure your list is much more longer and impressive.
Cheers Barry
I agree the GXR looks awkward. In terms of appearance, the NEX-7 is easily my favorite camera in a long time. Maybe ever. The other camera I really liked the look of was the Panasonic LX2/3, although it's design wasn't quite as clean as that of the NEX-7.
From your list, I see we went through a period of using the same cameras. My list is longer but certainly not more impressive. I've never used a full frame DSLR. Disposables? What has this world come to!? I sell everything as well to help fund the next greatest camera. Luckily I don't get attached to all that stuff.
Canon Powershot S-40
Panasonic FX7
Panasonic FZ5
Panasonic LX1
Sony A100
Ricoh GX100
Panasonic LX2
Nikon D300
Panasonic LX3
Panasonic G1
Panasonic GH1
Panasonic GF1
Panasonic GH2
Panasonic GF2
Sony NEX-5N
Sony NEX-7
There were also some cameras that I tested for short periods, but got rid of very quickly, like an Olympus E-PL1 and a Pentax K-7. For me, the CSC category has replaces both compact and DSLR cameras.