|
Toolbox
|
|
|
Added by fishnose |
May 21
D4 lens tests
|
|
|
Added by derway |
May 20
Please test EXR modes on all fuji cameras that support it
|
|
|
Added by eireann |
May 19
AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II will be tested when
|
|
|
Added by eireann |
May 19
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED bad Chr aberration results
|
|
|
Added by koleh77 |
May 18
Re: A37
|
|
|
Added by koleh77 |
May 18
Re: Sony A57
|
|
|
Added by Bobo_SAN |
May 18
Re: A37
|

Ever since we tested the Sony SLT A77, we’ve been very curious to see how the soon-to-be released Sony NEX 7 would compare. And today we have the answer: as we expected, the absence of a mirror gives the NEX7 some advantages. Below is a detailed look.
The Sony NEX-7 has the same sensor as the Sony A77 and Sony A65, but it’s not a single-lens translucent (SLT) camera — that is, it doesn’t have a partially-translucent mirror — and that makes all the difference, because it doesn’t have to contend with mirror-related light loss. Let’s take a look at how the NEX-7 fares against different kinds of cameras, starting with its Sony SLT relatives.
Overall DxOMark scores show a difference of 3 points in favor of the NEX-7 (81) over the SLT A77 (78), even though the latter has a lower ISO sensitivity (ISO 50) than the NEX-7 (ISO 100).
In principle, lower ISO sensitivity means that the A77 should achieve better scores in low ISO categories such as color depth and landscape (as we explained when we compared the Sony A65 and A77).
So it is not surprising to see the A65 come in lower (at 74 points) than these other two cameras, given that it has no ISO 50 (advantage: A77) and a translucent mirror (advantage: NEX-7).
It’s a tie game among the best of the current APS-C sensors, whose DxOMark scores are all within a hair’s breadth of one another: 81 for the NEX-7, 82 for the K5, and 80 for the D7000.
We applaud the Sony for succeeding in matching its competitors’ image quality scores. This was not a foregone conclusion despite having a significantly higher resolution than either the Pentax and the Nikon, because of its smaller pixel pitch on a sensor of nearly identical surface size.
What’s more, the NEX-7’s minimum ISO of only 100 put it at a disadvantage compared to the K5’s ISO 80, and indeed the NEX-7’s low-light results are noticeably lower than its competitors’ (1016 points vs 1162 and 1165, respectively).
No surprises here: the NEX-7 is by far and away the leader with a DxOMark score of 81 points — 30 points ahead of the Olympus and 27 points ahead of the Nikon. All these cameras are ergonomically similar, compact and lightweight, but the NEX-7’s larger sensor gives it a clear advantage over its rivals.
In conclusion, the NEX-7 is a success in terms of sensor image quality. In light of its current results, it’s hard to resist thinking about the kinds of scores a future “NEX-X” could achieve were it to add ISO 50 to its mirror-free advantage.... and about the kind of score a full-frame DSLR would achieve with the same sensor technology as the Sony NEX 7 or Sony A77.
|
|
Added by tickle49 |
March 17
Full Frame Same Sensor Technology?
Your conclusion wonders "about the kind of score a full-frame DSLR would achieve with the same sensor technology as the Sony NEX 7". Is the Nikon D800 exactly that beast? When will you be testing this in comparison?
Reply |
|
|
Added by Stephen123 |
January 19
Pricing
I'm unclear why you list "Indicative price (USD)" as 1720 since this camera lists and sells for 1350 with the kit lens and 1200 without. I noticed you have a similar (though less extreme) discrepancy on the NEX 5N.
Reply |
|
|
Added by Viagra Berlusconi |
December 13, 2011
What is the body material of the NEX-7?
The specs list on dxomark contradicts the manufacturer's claims.
The (German) Sony web page says the NEX 7 has a "magnesium body", whereas dxomark describes the camera material as "Metal top plate, Polycarbonate". Which one is correct? Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
|
|
Added by evilthought |
December 16, 2011
Re: What is the body material of the NEX-7?
According to DPR
"The NEX-7's build quality is excellent - the metal-shelled body feels solid with no flexing or creaks, and the handgrip is covered with a thick rubberized coating" So it's metal with rubberized covered handgrip. Reply |
|
|
Added by cristifl |
December 03, 2011
Wrong picture
The picture is of a Sony NEX-5 launched last year (2010) and is smaller than the NEX-7.
Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
|
|
Added by Herve H |
December 10, 2011
Re: Wrong picture
Hi,
We have changed the picture in the review, thank you for pointing it out. Reply |
|
|
Added by Bumpy |
December 02, 2011
What about depth of field?
I love DxO mark reviews but there is one area I remain unenlightened (perhaps in both theory and practice).
My understanding is that lens diffraction will result in loss of detail (resolution) at f-stops higher than a mathematically determined point based on pixel pitch. If I've got things right an APS-C sensor at 16MP does not suffer diffraction until somewhere between F8 and F11, but at 24MP loss of detail begins somewhere between F5.6 and F8. A FullFrame sensor will, of course, do much better because pixel pitch is larger. I would *love* to see DxO mark test this. Seems simple (to my possibly challenged little mind), just shoot resolution chart at successive f-stops and record where diffraction kicks-in and limits or reduces resolution. Might be hard to normalize as a number and integrate into overall score, but immensely helpful as a photographer to know for each camera where stopping down begins to trade off not only longer exposure but also loss of detail [probably negating any actual DoF improvement]. I mention this here of course because the Nex-7 vs. Nex5-N is a good place to care [what I really want to know is whether I get equal DoF AND better resolution from the N7, or that (at some F-stop) my equal DoF comes at the price of resolution]. So if I do a lot of high f-stop work to maximize DoF perhaps the Nex-7 doesn't actually give me better resolution? Even more interesting to compare FF to APS-C to get a sense of how much more DoF the FF can capture.... Hope my post isn't too clueless. In any event keep up the terrific work - DxO is a fabulous resource! Cheers, Bumpy. Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
|
|
Added by ldgt |
December 03, 2011
Re: What about depth of field?Quote: In that aspect, the best possible sensor has only one pixel. Thus it does not lose any details regardless of f-stop. Only problem is, it had none details to start with. The same, but for lesser degree, goes for your comparison of 16 MP and 24 MP sensors. DXomark results already include diffraction, it would be difficult (and meaningless) to exclude it because they measure real lenses. If you need large DOF, and avoid diffraction limit at same time, TS lenses or TS adaptor result in a improvement. Picture stacking is another way. Pixel size, or sensor size has nothing to do with diffraction because it occurs within lens. Reply |
|
|
Added by appliance |
December 23, 2011
Re: What about depth of field?Quote: <div id="linkdxomark">This a comment for <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Database/Sony/NEX-7">this page on the website</a></div>I love DxO mark reviews but there is one area I remain unenlightened (perhaps in both theory and practice). My understanding is that lens diffraction will result in loss of detail (resolution) at f-stops higher than a mathematically determined point based on pixel pitch. If I've got things right an APS-C sensor at 16MP does not suffer diffraction until somewhere between F8 and F11, but at 24MP loss of detail begins somewhere between F5.6 and F8. A FullFrame sensor will, of course, do much better because pixel pitch is larger. I would *love* to see DxO mark test this. Seems simple (to my possibly challenged little mind), just shoot resolution chart at successive f-stops and record where diffraction kicks-in and limits or reduces resolution. Might be hard to normalize as a number and integrate into overall score, but immensely helpful as a photographer to know for each camera where stopping down begins to trade off not only longer exposure but also loss of detail [probably negating any actual DoF improvement]. I mention this here of course because the Nex-7 vs. Nex5-N is a good place to care [what I really want to know is whether I get equal DoF AND better resolution from the N7, or that (at some F-stop) my equal DoF comes at the price of resolution]. So if I do a lot of high f-stop work to maximize DoF perhaps the Nex-7 doesn't actually give me better resolution? Even more interesting to compare FF to APS-C to get a sense of how much more DoF the FF can capture.... Hope my post isn't too clueless. In any event keep up the terrific work - DxO is a fabulous resource! Cheers, Bumpy. Diffraction is a function of the shape and size of the lens aperture. It's relation to sensors is in terms of size: a smaller sensor has to be magnified more to create an equivalent sized image; thus the circle of confusion is also magnified. As far as I know it's not related to pixel pitch. Reply |
|
|
Added by Stephen123 |
December 28, 2011
Re: What about depth of field?
The circle of least confusion is the smallest spot that a lens can produce. Isn't the circle of least confusion effected by aperture? And doesn't it matter when it exceeds the pixel pitch? I think Bumpy has a good point.
Reply |
|
|
Added by iqrocks |
December 01, 2011
SLT A77 Firmware Update & Next 7
The firmware for the Sony SLT A77 was just upgraded and one of the alleged improvements is better image quality. Since the Sony NEX 7 uses the same sensor as that of the A77, is it safe to assume that Sony will apply the same update to the NEX 7? If so will DXOLabs re-test the camera?
It's impressive to see the IQ of the tiny and convenient NEX-7 be so close to that of my Nikon D3X. Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
|
|
Added by Herve H |
December 01, 2011
Re: SLT A77 Firmware Update & Next 7
Firmware updates usually improve processings, not the quality of the RAW signal, thus they have no influence on DxOMark measurements.
Reply |