Teuthida
-
N.delaRua
Well-known
Sometimes reading comments on the interwebs reminds me of being 11 on the playground. A lot of childish comments in here blasting a guy who reviews cameras for fun.... You know you don't have to read a website if you don't want to, and you could do your own review if you want to waste your life. Or you could be grateful that there is some information at all about a product that you are clearly interested in....
Jesus. Grow up its a freaking camera, not the solution to world piece and its done by a guy with limited resources....
Jesus. Grow up its a freaking camera, not the solution to world piece and its done by a guy with limited resources....
bwcolor
Mentor
I Apologize for Starting This Thread
I Apologize for Starting This Thread
I'm sorry... I didn't realize that Steve Huff was actually Satan and that I was doing the work of the devil by posting his review. I didn't realize that he was a dirty rotten capitalist who shamelessly promotes his website and pushes gear for the industry. Worst of all, I didn't realize that his photos were offensive in that he hasn't any talent. I just didn't understand that some of you would go to a camera review expecting museum quality images.
I won't make this same mistake again. In the future, the only reviews that I post will be from perfect individuals with a divine mandate.
More seriously, I doubt that any of you will purchase a camera based upon one review. I'm thankful to Mr Huff and Sony for this early heads-up review. I've a pre-order in with a major vendor with a solid thirty day money back return policy. Really, it is only my review that counts and I don't want to get stuck with a camera that I don't want.
I Apologize for Starting This Thread
I'm sorry... I didn't realize that Steve Huff was actually Satan and that I was doing the work of the devil by posting his review. I didn't realize that he was a dirty rotten capitalist who shamelessly promotes his website and pushes gear for the industry. Worst of all, I didn't realize that his photos were offensive in that he hasn't any talent. I just didn't understand that some of you would go to a camera review expecting museum quality images.
I won't make this same mistake again. In the future, the only reviews that I post will be from perfect individuals with a divine mandate.
More seriously, I doubt that any of you will purchase a camera based upon one review. I'm thankful to Mr Huff and Sony for this early heads-up review. I've a pre-order in with a major vendor with a solid thirty day money back return policy. Really, it is only my review that counts and I don't want to get stuck with a camera that I don't want.
DamenS
Well-known
Adanac
Well-known
Guess we won't be seeing any more reviews then linked from you!
I'm thankful for Huff's review even if I didn't learn much more from it that I hadn't already gleaned from various sources. I've got a pre-order in as well, and hope it gets filled from the stock which is available. Consequently I'm interested in anyone's take on the camera good, bad, or bland. It's up to me to filter out what is important, to me.
Paddy C
Unused film collector
Wow...this thread has gone nuts.
1. Discussing Steve Huff's review is important in the broader context of journalism, professionalism and where both of those are going these days. Huff is a perfect example of what we might be left with a few years from now.
If you don't care about this, if you don't care about intelligent, thoughtful writing, fine. But I think people like Huff and Rockwell are worth a critical discussion.
The "don't read it if you don't like it" comments are nonsense.
2. This idea that "we" (as in the royal we) don't need more megapixels is a bit odd to me. Let me be blunt: I need more megapixels on a regular basis. Not for what I shoot (it's a hobby) but for what I need to go to print with. Sony has obviously made the NEX7 a "pro" specified camera. I think the gain in pixels over absolute high ISO performance is a fine trade-off.
1. Discussing Steve Huff's review is important in the broader context of journalism, professionalism and where both of those are going these days. Huff is a perfect example of what we might be left with a few years from now.
If you don't care about this, if you don't care about intelligent, thoughtful writing, fine. But I think people like Huff and Rockwell are worth a critical discussion.
The "don't read it if you don't like it" comments are nonsense.
2. This idea that "we" (as in the royal we) don't need more megapixels is a bit odd to me. Let me be blunt: I need more megapixels on a regular basis. Not for what I shoot (it's a hobby) but for what I need to go to print with. Sony has obviously made the NEX7 a "pro" specified camera. I think the gain in pixels over absolute high ISO performance is a fine trade-off.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
That's funny.
A man put out some effort to write a review, the least we can do is not to judge his character.
Although, if I were Sony's designer, I'd put more attention to this paragraph:
NEX-7 vs The Olympus E-P3 – The E-P3 focuses faser, has better lenses available, and has a cool retro design. In silver it’s simply beautiful. But it still has the same 12 MP sensor as the E-P1. The ISO noise is not far behind the NEX-7 at 1600 but the E-P3 does not have a built in EVF or a tilt able LCD. The 7 has a larger APS-C sensor, the E-P3 has a smaller 4/3 sensor. In all fairness the E-P3 is more fun to shoot and provides results that you just can not complain about. It has a cool factor and some serious mojo even with its limitations and I own it and am keeping it. BUT the NEX-7 is more serious with more potential. NEX has to win this if we are taking body to body. Lenses, Oly wins but then again, Leica glass just works better on bigger sensors, and the NEX-7 has the bigger sensor.
Not about the AF speed, that can be fixed with more tech which Sony have. But the perception that Pen cameras are "more fun to shoot" and "cool factor" which, is not an isolated opinion, by the way.
Comparison with M9 is moot, it's like comparing a Toyota and a Bugatti.
N.delaRua
Well-known
One can critically analyze a review, but this post has devolved into pure nonsense questioning all kinds of garbage about a guy on the internet.
Its a photography website. Its a fun website. It has lots of great post about rare lenses, guest articles, and personal posts. He has reviews but they are not technical.
All I know is the internet empowers the meek to talk a lot of trash about someone doing something productive and enjoyable.
Its a photography website. Its a fun website. It has lots of great post about rare lenses, guest articles, and personal posts. He has reviews but they are not technical.
All I know is the internet empowers the meek to talk a lot of trash about someone doing something productive and enjoyable.
leicashot
Well-known
If reviewing is so easy, i don't know why I'm not seeing more forum members here doing their own, competing against Steve. Should be an easy win right? Do you all realize how hard it is to go out and find new interesting pictures, review after review? If you want studio test samples, go to dpreview. Steve's reviews are based on 'real world', Steve's 'real world' photos that he likes to take. It's subjective yes, but he never claims to be otherwise and he never forces anyone to read them.
Thats the problem today with the internet> people are too quick to be negatively judgmental and criticize sitting behind the protection of their screen....but these haters are should realize their comments are not indicative of Steve's weakness, but they are merely just a reflection of their own insecurities.
The world and cyberworld would be a much happier place if people learnt to be happy and appreciative of what they have. If you want better reviews, write them yourself. Otherwise be appreciate enough to enjoy what reviews are available.
Thats the problem today with the internet> people are too quick to be negatively judgmental and criticize sitting behind the protection of their screen....but these haters are should realize their comments are not indicative of Steve's weakness, but they are merely just a reflection of their own insecurities.
The world and cyberworld would be a much happier place if people learnt to be happy and appreciative of what they have. If you want better reviews, write them yourself. Otherwise be appreciate enough to enjoy what reviews are available.
douglasf13
Well-known
Assuming same sensor technology, more megapixels does not equal more noise, if comparison images are printed or viewed at the same size. Of course, there is more noise at the pixel level with more megapixels, but that is for engineers to study, not photographers.
Personally, I'm thrilled to have the the same resolution as a D3x in the NEX-7, and, since the NEX-7 sensor is 3 years newer, it is likely to be nearly as good in IQ as the D3x, but in a small, cheap package.
Personally, I'm thrilled to have the the same resolution as a D3x in the NEX-7, and, since the NEX-7 sensor is 3 years newer, it is likely to be nearly as good in IQ as the D3x, but in a small, cheap package.
uhoh7
Mentor
I can't believe how touchy some folks are when some chide Steve.
He's not Satan, but he's not Jesus either
tough love is all it is..he's more likable than that other guy.....
Rock Huffwell.
Now him I really can't stand.
He's not Satan, but he's not Jesus either
tough love is all it is..he's more likable than that other guy.....
Rock Huffwell.
Now him I really can't stand.
ampguy
Mentor
interesting review, the more reviews the better. As was rumored, the high ISO is probably not as good as previous NEX models, they had to give that up for resolution.
That Zeiss 24/1.8 looks promising with close focus to 6", if there is little distortion. Will have to wait and see.
That Zeiss 24/1.8 looks promising with close focus to 6", if there is little distortion. Will have to wait and see.
rdeleskie
Well-known
Frankly, a lot of criticism I have seen directed at Huff, Rockwell, Kai over at digital rev, etc., seems to stem from sour grapes: somebody said something nasty about a camera I like (or they didn't sufficiently praise it), ergo they are a talentless hack writer/photographer on the take from some competing camera company. Oh and my dog can take better photos. The forums at dpreview are filled with this sort of thing.
In reality, all of these guys say more or less what everybody else says about a piece of given gear: they just try to do it in a more interesting fashion, using their particular schtick to stand out from the crowd. The majority of Rockwell's review of Nikon lenses and cameras are pretty close to what Tom Hogan has to say about them, for example, or even Bjorn Rorslett. Huff doesn't diverge from orthodoxy when he talks about Leica glass. I will be very surprised if dpreview (for example) says anything substantially different than Huff when they finally post their review of the NEX 7. They will just do it with more charts and 100% enlargements for pixel peepers.
Back to his NEX 7 review, it seems he found the camera exactly what one would expect it to be, which should be considered good news to those interested in the thing. At least he found no nasty surprises (M8) or eccentricities in its execution (X100).
In reality, all of these guys say more or less what everybody else says about a piece of given gear: they just try to do it in a more interesting fashion, using their particular schtick to stand out from the crowd. The majority of Rockwell's review of Nikon lenses and cameras are pretty close to what Tom Hogan has to say about them, for example, or even Bjorn Rorslett. Huff doesn't diverge from orthodoxy when he talks about Leica glass. I will be very surprised if dpreview (for example) says anything substantially different than Huff when they finally post their review of the NEX 7. They will just do it with more charts and 100% enlargements for pixel peepers.
Back to his NEX 7 review, it seems he found the camera exactly what one would expect it to be, which should be considered good news to those interested in the thing. At least he found no nasty surprises (M8) or eccentricities in its execution (X100).
Lss
Well-known
Considering that the focus peaking is one of the key new features of this camera, I am just surprised and somewhat disappointed he did not cover it. It did not even make it to the pro's and con's list. No good news, no bad news, no news.
bwcolor
Mentor
He will be reviewing various wide Leica 'M' lenses this week. I would think that focus peaking would come into play.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
My main criticism of Rockwell is that he is too full of himself. I mean, the man puts notices on his pages that you owe him $5 if you print out the page because he considers a printout an illegal copy. He's admittedly become quite good at being at the same time both combative and self-contradictory in order to drive up page hits and eventually Amazon clickthroughs.
My main criticism of Steve Huff is that he's a bad writer. I find his style extremely difficult and uninteresting to read and his arguments are often presented in an incoherent and half-baked way. Also I don't LIKE it when people capitalize every other WORD as if they were SHOUTING so that even a complete DORK can understand what GREAT stuff they are talking about. (In FORUMS you see that TOO - for an example, together w/excessive abbreviations b/c ppl R 2 lazy 2 spell out, see post #2 above). I guess people in general don't mind, but if you read stuff for a living you do begin to notice the difference between good and bad writing, and if I can choose where I read my reviews I prefer those where people care about their writing.
flyalf
Well-known
Second that. I simply cannot understand why anyone would be so negative in criticism.
I found the review useful and entertaining. I'm looking forward to people contributing with useful and productive information and opinions, in particular on the M glass /NEX 7 combination.
-
-
Last edited:
DamenS
Well-known
That's a great point. Anyone who ever criticises or complains about anything is clearly an unhappy, vindictive person who is leading us along the path towards a worse society. They are "haters" and their views are always worthless, cowardly (especially when they hide behind their screens or write in newspapers/journals etc) and counter-productive. The faults they see in others are only their own unacknowledged flaws - this is a basic psychological tenant. They should understand that the rest of the world is entirely above reproach and unable to be improved upon, that their opinions are not valid, and that they are awful people. If you want a better financial system/politician/doctor/lawyer/soldier/human rights advocate, you should become all of these things yourself. Otherwise be appreciative enough to enjoy those who do carry out such functions without providing your worthless comments on how they could be bettered. Steve does not have weaknesses and all the immature people on this forum should stop saying he does. Put up or shut up !
Pete B
Well-known
LOL
That's right! I only want to see a body of work over 2 or 3 years before I pre-order my digicam, and only from Doisneau or Vivian Maier.
Pete
Pete
daveywaugh
Blah
From 35mm it was always considered huge. I think most people would view the NEX (or equivilent) as being a '35mm replacement' so I feel the comment is valid. Agree that people use cameras in different ways, but I too would vote for 16mp instead of 24 - better compromise between reproduction size, DR quality, file size and sensitivity.