03-12-2012, 08:43 AM
Well, possibly the corner issues were already present on the NEX 5.This is actually likely when looking at our Zeiss ZM tests and at the reports that came in from 5n users. The point is actually that there doesn't seem to be any progress here (the NX200 sensor is less suspicious just to mention).
The difference between the NEX 5 and 7 is hard to quantify because the results cannot be directly compared as we always point out. I did a reference test of the 30 on the NEX 5 and the corners seem to be slightly better at large apertures. On the 7 there was no obvious "scaling effect" similar to what we've seen on the DSLRs (although we are limited to "just" 16mp here). e.g. when we moved from the Nikon D200 (10mp) to the D7000 (16mp) the charts looked fairly the same but the LW/PHs were on a different levels - not totally in a linear way but roughly so. There will be limits to the scaling, of course, but things just don't fall apart out of nowhere. DSLR lenses will, of course, "behave" better on the 7 simply because of the bigger lens to sensor distance.
As pointed out by this guy here ...
[url="http://www.bmupix.com/journal/2012/1/7/nex-7-part-2-corner-performance-with-zeiss-biogon-t-35mm-f20.html"]http://www.bmupix.com/journal/2012/1/7/nex-7-part-2-corner-performance-with-zeiss-biogon-t-35mm-f20.html[/url]
... there is an obvious difference compared to the 5n and this is not just because we are talking about 16mp vs 24mp.
You may argue that this relates to "legacy" lenses only but in reality it is not quite as simple.
Here's another interesting NEX 7 review ... based on the Zeiss E 24 - go to the "testing the edges of the frame" chapter:
[url="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony_nex_7_rolling_review.shtml"]http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony_nex_7_rolling_review.shtml[/url]
The results at f/1.8 are downright poor here at large apertures - and this is hardly about the extreme corners here.
Now we don't know the validity of this field tests, again, but I think we got a trend here.
The difference between the NEX 5 and 7 is hard to quantify because the results cannot be directly compared as we always point out. I did a reference test of the 30 on the NEX 5 and the corners seem to be slightly better at large apertures. On the 7 there was no obvious "scaling effect" similar to what we've seen on the DSLRs (although we are limited to "just" 16mp here). e.g. when we moved from the Nikon D200 (10mp) to the D7000 (16mp) the charts looked fairly the same but the LW/PHs were on a different levels - not totally in a linear way but roughly so. There will be limits to the scaling, of course, but things just don't fall apart out of nowhere. DSLR lenses will, of course, "behave" better on the 7 simply because of the bigger lens to sensor distance.
As pointed out by this guy here ...
[url="http://www.bmupix.com/journal/2012/1/7/nex-7-part-2-corner-performance-with-zeiss-biogon-t-35mm-f20.html"]http://www.bmupix.com/journal/2012/1/7/nex-7-part-2-corner-performance-with-zeiss-biogon-t-35mm-f20.html[/url]
... there is an obvious difference compared to the 5n and this is not just because we are talking about 16mp vs 24mp.
You may argue that this relates to "legacy" lenses only but in reality it is not quite as simple.
Here's another interesting NEX 7 review ... based on the Zeiss E 24 - go to the "testing the edges of the frame" chapter:
[url="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony_nex_7_rolling_review.shtml"]http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sony_nex_7_rolling_review.shtml[/url]
The results at f/1.8 are downright poor here at large apertures - and this is hardly about the extreme corners here.
Now we don't know the validity of this field tests, again, but I think we got a trend here.