Backlash?
I was under the impression that there are a variety of camera types to suit various users? Seems to have been that way for some time now.
I can see the point about Samsung and their NX models, they have some pancake lenses which are obviously small (pancakes seem to be a logical move for these camera types)
When you move to other types of lenses zooms for example and fast primes such as the new Samsung 85mm f/1.4 ED SSA..it's far from small and looks completely at odds with a small body concept. I can completely buy into the small body pancake take makes sense. When you start to use other lenses it's a lot less appealing.
Problem for NEX is currently they just don't have the lenses to back it up, or course you can fit other lenses and fire away
I don't think DSLR's are that big I was trying a K-5 a few weeks ago and it's really rather compact. Not all DSLR's are full frame pro level Canon monster big/heavy
No problems with the choice aspect here, but I believe there are limits to small size and that is driven by the need to hold a camera in your hands. It would be a very strange thing to suggest all cameras need to be really small. Having held an A55 Sony SLT I can happily say the body is too small for me, with cramped controls. In this case smaller size= handling compromises.
Personally I see the ILC market as driven more by the desire to mount some older bargain glass on a body without any major hassles. I'm not sure that the lens ranges, nor other accessories will ever truly be a viable option for some DSLR users. Possibly a mistake to suggest ILC's will dominate the market, they have a place no question.
I'd know which I'd rather use for a wedding a DSLR is the obvious choice, I can't see how a NEX-7 would be a better choice for that. Let's not forget at current prices you can get a very decent DSLR and a pretty good lens for less than a NEX 7 just the body only. I'm standing by my offset micro lenses argument though without it these models will never really offer the kind of compact optics that a rangefinder does, bar doing a pancake for primes which can involve compromises in design too.
That's my point. There is finally a variety of camera types for various types of users, and now many of us aren't being forced to choose between some big, black blob of a DSLR. Even compared to the smallest DSLRs, NEX cameras are much smaller in 2 of 3 dimensions with native lenses, and the weight difference is even more noticeable. Of course, I bought a range of ZM lenses to use on the 5N, so my setup is smaller in 3 of 3 dimensions, but the vast majority of users still use native NEX lenses, and there is still a considerable size and weight difference between NEX and any DSLR.
I hold a camera by cradling under the lens, so camera body size doesn't make a huge difference for me, although I do use a leather half case on the 5N, which makes the grip about the same size as the NEX-7.
Of course, there are sport, wedding, etc. shooters that shouldn't use NEX Personally, although I'm only 34 years old, I've shot all cameras the same since high school (A or M mode,) and I don't often change a bunch of settings or operate the camera like a high powered weapon, so I don't need a ton of real estate for 25 buttons and special features. In fact, manual focus is so easy and enjoyable on NEX that I've sold off my A100, A700 and A900, as I found that I just wasn't using them anymore, because the 5N is just so much ore convenient to bring along for my kind of shooting. When I don't care about camera size, I'll just bring my Hasselblad along.
As for micro lenses, the main issue is actually in the sensor toppings. Removing the AA filter gets you a long way. Most current DSLR cameras already have a much better fill factor than the M9 with incident light angles, and the M9's IR filter is still thicker, too. Removing the AA filter and using software correction are the main advantages of the M9, in this regard. The new Ricoh GXR M mount is also very good with wide angle rangefinder lenses.
p.s. The funny thing is, I actually bought the A900 for the opposite reason. Getting a 135 sensor in a camera body not much bigger than my aps-c DSLRs was a no brainer, and the A900 wasn't really a noticeable change in weight or packable size. To me, many aps-c DSLRs are in no man's land, because they have the small sensor in a relatively large body. I would only buy a DSLR again if it is a 135 sensor in a small body (like K-5 size,) which should be doable by some maker.
