Sony NEX-6: Initial Impression - Part V: Image Quality

Continued from Part IV.

Any one who owns a NEX-5N will pretty much knows what kind of image quality can be expected from the NEX-6.  The image sensor on the NEX-6 is based on the one from NEX-5N, with the exception of on-sensor phase detect pixels. In theory, these phase detect pixels should count as dead pixels since they don't produce picture elements and have to be mapped out in firmware when picture is created, just like mapping out dead pixels.  

I was very happy with the image quality of the NEX-5N.  Superb dynamic range and very good high ISO quality. The only thing I didn't like much, was the jpeg from the camera. It just wasn't anywhere as good as what can be obtained from RAW conversion. The NEX-6, however, has a very good jpeg engine. If you shoot only jpeg, you will be very pleased. The colour fidelity is improved and noise/compression artifacts have been mostly eliminated in low ISO. Comparing NEX-6 jpegs to my 5D classic jpegs, I still see some difference, that the Canon is slightly better, but not by much.

Even though the camera can shoot to ISO 25600, I wouldn't bother with anything higher 6400.  I would be comfortable with ISO 3200 and use ISO 6400 if I have to, but anything over that, is basically for marketing claims.  Sure you can make pictures with it, especially with black & white, but the noise level would be too much, and details too little.

I can't claim the NEX-6 has the best image quality of all mirrorless cameras, because I haven't used the others, but it's better than any Canon Rebel/60D/7D can produce. It's good enough for me.

Elevator on Skylon Tower - NEX-6 & Minolta RF Rokkor-X 250mm f5.6, ISO 800.

NEX-5 Back to Sony for Repair

Actually, there is nothing really wrong with my NEX-5, in terms of operations and functionality.  It's purely a cosmetic problem: the anti-reflective coating on the rear LCD has all but rubbed off except near the center of the screen.  It looks really disgusting when the screen is turned off although it's not as bad when it's on.  I don't think it's acceptable that the coating comes off so easily.  Sony should either provide a glass cover for the LCD screen or make the coating stay on more permanently.

At the moment, I don't know if it's even covered under warranty until the technician has a look at it.  This is the first time I have had to use Sony's customer service and so far it's been very positive.  The reception and the facility is excellent (although it's hard to find the customer service department.)  I was quoted a turn around time of 1 to 10 business days, depending on availability of parts.  This is a far cry from the Canon service when I regularly had to waiting at least two weeks and most often four weeks.

When the screen is fixed, I will put on a screen protector first thing.

On a side note, I have been really going gaga over the NEX-7.  Today I read the image comparison of the A65 (version 1.02 firmware) versus the the A850 on a Chinese site and I am really impressed with the high ISO performance of the 24MP APS-C sensor on the A65 (and the A77, NEX-7).  Too bad these are all jpg images but the improvement is like night and day in terms of noise reduction, especially chroma noise.  Given the translucent mirror that causes a 1/3 EV light loss on the A65, the NEX-7 image should actually be marginally better.  If the final image quality of the NEX-7 is similar to what I see on the A65, I will not hesitate to buy NEX-7 as soon as it hits the dealers' shelves.

Skylon Tower in the distance, Niagara Falls -- Sony NEX-5 & 18-55mm kit lens.