madmaxmedia
Veteran
- Location
- Los Angeles
I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels the same way! Sony NEX RAW's are wonderful, the JPEG's are not (as wonderful.) I mean they're obviously not horrible, but with such good sensor performance why hinder the images with such NR? The great thing about the Oly M 4/3 is that NR is widely adjustable by the user (I find low to be perfect for me.)
The Sony lens lineup also does not happen to line up with my personal needs. The 16mm pancake is close but not quite there, the new Zeiss will be way beyond my budget. I'll probably end up with the Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 for my E-P1 down the road (and aided by IBIS.) The Oly sensor is totally outclassed by the Sony NEX sensor, but the M 4/3 wins for me in other areas. Why can't someone design an entire system around my exact needs?
The Sony lens lineup also does not happen to line up with my personal needs. The 16mm pancake is close but not quite there, the new Zeiss will be way beyond my budget. I'll probably end up with the Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 for my E-P1 down the road (and aided by IBIS.) The Oly sensor is totally outclassed by the Sony NEX sensor, but the M 4/3 wins for me in other areas. Why can't someone design an entire system around my exact needs?
Interfaces always is a subjective thing. Now as I am a jpeg shooter, the iq has two sides. Raw level sony wins. I still prefer oly jpegs. If sony can get rid of the destructive nr, then the system for me becomes more palatteable.
In terms of taking off, mft is doing great in asia. The reason its not here is because of bad marketing and distribution. Casual buyers will buy sony as a name over a better product.