Nikon 5100 vs Nex 5n

[HSakols]

Hi,
I mainly use a Nikon d300 with the 17-55 2.8 lens for my landscape work.  Much of my photography is done on backpack trips and I'm finding my set-up is probably much heavier than it has to be.  I generally don't print larger than 14x21 so having a gazillion megapixels is probably not an issue.  The two lighter alternatives that I'm looking at are the Nikon 5100 with the light 18-55 kit lens and the Sony NEX 5n with the kit lens.  Yes the NEX is the smallest, but the Nikon 5100 is significantly smaller and lighter than my current set up.  It appears to me that the limiting factor of both of these systems are the lenses.  I imagine they are fairly similar in regards to optical quality.  I am  also interested in the NEX 7 with 18-200 but at about $2000 it seems a bit pricey and I question what real advantage I would get other than getting a better built camera.  Also if a Nikon d400 DX ever comes out, I will probably eventually upgrade, but who knows when or if that will ever happen.  Once again, I want comparable performance of my current set up but in a lighter package.  What are your thoughts?

you can see what I like to do at www.yosemitecollection.com

[John Nollendorfs]

Hugh:
I've been using the D5100 with the "kit" lens since it was introduced in April last year. It's a delight of a camera with many bells and whistles, and menues. It has the same sensor as the D7000, but in a much smaller, lighter body. And it has a wonderful articulating viewer on the back--that is  probably the best defining feature of this camera! Using live view, you can take pictures from the ground level or high over head and see what you are framing. (depending on ambient light levels washing out the display)

I just ran  some lens tests comparing several legacy lenses I use, and found that the "cheap kit lens" is actually quite good. Compared favorably  to my 60mm Micro Nikkor, which definitely showed better internal contrast, and very slightly sharper looking. An older fx, 24-85 f3.5-4.5, no longer made, proved significantly poorer in resolution--this was considered a fairly sharp lens 10 years ago.

One negative, on the D5100, it does not autofocus with older D lenses, nor does it have an internal focusing motors for lenses requiring that.

 On the plus side, it does have a built in intervalometer, so you can easily do time lapse cloud  photography! Delight of a camera to use, overall, but you do have to get used to the menues for accessing it's many features.

I have not used the Nex 5n, but as I understand, the electronic eye level view finder is an expensive extra you need to buy. The D5100 is a bit bulkier from the looks of it, but if you have existing compatible Nikon glass, it should be a no brainer.

[John Camp]

This may be a completely bigoted reply on my part, as I have not used (but have handled) a NEX; but to me, the camera is a gadget, attractive to gadget fans, but in terms of serious photography, somewhat combining the worst of possible worlds. The body is small, but the lenses will be the same size (and generally of lesser quality) as your D300 lenses. Furthermore, you will be restricted to using the LCD display or spending more for an electronic viewfinder, and electronic viewfinders are all (and may always be) inferior to optical viewfinders. The only reason to have an electronic viewfinder, at least for now, is for compactness, not for viewing quality.

I have m4/3 Panasonic cameras (a GH3 and two Gx1s) and the nasty little secret about this kind of camera is the the LCDs are *very often* unusable as viewfinders, especially outdoors. I have the optional viewfinders on both of my Gx1s. I'd hoped to buy only one, and switch back and forth when necessary, but I've found that it's necessary so often, that I finally bought a second one.

BUT, the advantage of the m4/3 cameras is size -- and Olympus and Panasonic have done a good job in providing smaller lenses, too. So, when I'm traveling, I can effectively take along a two-camera system in a carry-on briefcase. You can't reliably do that with any of the APS-C systems, including the NEX, because the lenses are too big. (I recently traveled from Los Angeles to Santa Fe on a regional jet, and they were gate-checking anything larger than a small back-pack, and *everything* with wheels. Never gave my m4/3 bag a second look.)

Assuming that you don't want to downsize everything, I really think that the Nikon 5100 would be a good choice -- or, since the D300 is much more protected in terms of body armor, just stay with that. It's a great camera, I doubt you'd notice the difference in weight. (Though the 5100 has a better sensor.)

The NEX, IMHO, would be a great camera for street photography, where you're trying to be a little discreet, and you're basically shooting with a small prime lens, and maybe have a second prime in a jacket pocket. But if you're going to work with a fairly large lens, like your zoom, the few extra ounces in a body won't make any difference, and you have the benefit of that optical viewfinder...plus the advantages of being in the Nikon system.

One other thought: the new Canon compact? Small, light, big sensor, zoom lens, no dust worries? Could be worth a look. 

[AlfSollund]

The great advantage of NEX is that its more of a digital back that can be used on several lenses such as all old SLR, Leica, etc....And even the Nikon lenses. If you buy Nikon you are limited to Nikon lenses only and you are tied to Nikon system.

So invest in good glass (Nikon or Leica or other) and purchase a inexpensive NEX as a intermediate solution allowing you to keep your glass.

[theguywitha645d]

What about the new Olympus OM-D with the new zoom. It would be very compact and weatherproof.

[mhespenheide]

Hugh,

I do a lot of hiking and backpacking and often wish for something lighter.  I haven't used or tested either camera, but one of the concerns holding me back from mirrorless cameras in general is their battery life.  If you turn off chimping or set the display to a short time, you can often squeeze more days out of a dSLR than you might think.  I worry about the battery drain from the mirrorless cameras every time you want to compose or focus, since you're powering a display just to "look through" the lens.  Something to think about.

I have heard, anecdotally, that the nikon kit lens is a good value both in terms of monetary cost and weight.

For myself, my main camera is a Sony 850, but on longer backpacks I'll sometimes use a small Canon dSLR.  I have stitched panoramics from the Canon that hold up very nicely at 16x60".  Here's one from the bottom of the Grand Canyon: Granite Rapids.  I need to figure out a better way to sharpen for web display, but it holds up very nicely in the print.

[viewfinder]

I got rid of my pentax system last year and changed to NEX 3 cameras,....I won't be going back, and have been very pleased with the change, minus a coupld of issues.   The NEX (compared to DSLR) is half the size,....half the cost,...half the weight,...half the complexity,....twice the image quality,...twice the facility,....twice the image making tool.

By means of cheap adaptors from ebay I use my Canon FD lenses and also pentax 'K' primes....as well as the 'kit' lens from Sony which is excellent by the way, provided one keeps it on f8.

The three 'issues' to overcome are the lack of eyelevel finder, battery consumption and Sony 'daddy'....

I use a magnifying viewer to effectively turn the screen into a v/f, and have come to like this solution,...I will continue with it when I eventually change to another model.    By far trhe worst problem is the battery consumption,.....I only get about 70 RAW files with one battery charge and considerably less when using flash or having to frequently look at the captures.

Other than this, it's a very nice camera to use and carry about,..VERY intuitive once customised to ones preferances and the image quality is excellent in 20x16 inch prints (the largest that I have printed to so far).......recently had two 20x16's in exhibition and they drew many nice comments and several sales.

[HSakols]

Thanks for all the replies.  Yes, battery consumption is an important issue and an area where my d300 really shines.  Well off I go for another two nights where I will be fine with one battery and a backup just in case.  I can't believe I used to haul a Bronica SQa with 3 lenses for up to a week at a time.  Hope everyone finds good light over the weekend.

Hugh

[John Nollendorfs]

Hugh:
On the D5100 I easily can get 500 or more shots on a charge. It all depends on how much you review the shots, or use Live view. Most of the time I keep the display turned in to protect it, and also conserve batteries. If you keep the display turned in most of the time you can probably easily get 800 or more shots on a charge.

[RobSaecker]

For what it's worth, I was unimpressed with the quality of the kit lens on my D5000. I ended up never using it unless I absolutely had to have AF, as most of my other lenses didn't AF on that body. Maybe I had a bad copy, but I was happy to see that lens go when I sold the camera.

[Tord S Eriksson]

The wife and I are stalwart Pentax K-5 users, but we find that other cameras that perform just as well (except as very high ISO), and weigh less:

The NEX-5N with a Zeiss 1.8/24 on, is my favourite just now, a camera system weighing in about a pound (half a kilogram), and it does excellent panormas, even with the camera vertical! Add the Sony E16 lens to the package, and you have a complete APS-C camera setup that weighs just a little more, with a quality that astounds me again, and again. With a cheap K Mount adapter we've tried some Pentax FA lenses, and a very old Pentax-M 400mm (and a 2X converter), with impressive results.

My wife has just the E18-200 zoom on her 5N, which is an amazing lens: Not the fastest out of the blocks, but sharp from one end to the other. It was designed for the pro NEX movie cameras, and she is very pleased with it - seems the 5N and that lens together produces an amazing percentage of hits, focus almost always spot on, although, occasionally, the camera chooses a too low shutter speed for perfect results.

But the NEX-5N isn't rugged, and not intended for abuse, like the OM-D hopefully is (if we can believe the advertising guys it will be). Nor is the NEX-5N very discreet, as its shutter is LOUD! And the viewfinder is VERY hard to find (I searched the globe till I found one, but I haven't found a second for my wife). The excellent Zeiss 1.8/24 is sold out, for months to come, according to Steve Huff. Only problem I have with the Zeiss is that it doesn't come with anti-shake (nor does the E16), so you have to keep your shutter speed in mind!

But there is another rugged guy on the block, weighing about a kilo, with three lenses, two of which by SLR Gear.com pronounced as among the better there are, for any size of camera (the third haven't been tested, yet).

It is small & quiet, and with an adapter you can use any Nikon lens you can imagine on it (with auto-focus and anti-shake fully functional, in most cases), and it has already proved popular with the long lens guys -  seen birds being photographed with 300-600mm zooms (that, in FX/FF terms, means 810-1620mm - to that you can add a converter, or two - the sky is the limit!), with excellent results, as long as you're VERY steady!

I gave one of these marvels to my wife, but she has since opted for the OM-D.

I'm talking about the magnesium-bodied, fairly heavy (half a serious DSLR in weight), supersmooth Nikon V1. This camera, with a screw-on Canon 250D close-up lens (you need a stepping ring, of course), is a complete camera system, covering everything but the very wide (the 10/2.8 prime is very much a 'normal' lens and there isn't anything wider, yet). Adding a TF1 adapter you can use (almost) any Nikon lens you can think of on the V1, and the results can be amazing - I've just tried a few lenses (as I wrote, I'm a Pentax guy), like the old 80-200/4 that Ken rockwell calls the sharpest tele zoom Nikon ever have made! Like this picture:

[Tord S Eriksson]

I really think the NEX-5N is a champion in many ways, not least if you keep under ISO 5600! The Pentax K-5, that I normally use, has, much of the time, been replaced by my NEX-5N, and the Nikon V1, both with their advantages, and disadvantages: The NEX-5N is lighter, and can a few tricks more (like 3D panorama). But the Nikon V1, with the 10, 10-30, 30-110mm lenses are a complete camera systems that can handle anything, but really wide angles, and focal lengths (in 35mm terms), over 300mm. For really wide shots I prefer using the NEX, in sweep panorama, in vertical mode. Impressive, to say the least!