Real-world test: Going pro with the Samsung NX1

bigger being the operative word, as for lenses-huge lol,
sony knows the benefits too, especially when it comes to size, but, what would they know?
to qualify my statement, i will say this cam has some gr8 specs and features nonetheless, but, i still feel they missed the point of mirrorless csc when they designed this cam/

in a huge way too-and that > is the essence of the fail, in my op/

i dont need to overlook the benefits when using something else,
i can have all those benefits and the size reduction too, or is this concept at variance with your samsung marketing strategy?

Well, sort of...

...but they also hint at the very good quality of the Samsung S lenses, especially the 50-150mm...

...and this is something which is also true - because (beside the NX1) I also have that lens and I'm still amazed by its optical and mechanical quality...

...so, it may have taken additional 10 seconds, to add, that they also like, the S lenses, very much. :-)

And A7-II does 15fps @28MP and 4K video? Why anyone needs 1DX or D4 then, which lacks IBIS, has lower MP, much heavier and much, much more expensive? :D

The closest comparison is Canon's 7D mk2 @ 1649 (APS-C and 10fps) and I think NX1 is priced quite right.

Well,now you compare something different.

I said, that the Samsung lens are (optically) at least in the same ballpark, like the Sony, or even the Zeiss lenses.

And this is the case.

They resolve higher - especially in the corners of the frame...

...and they resolve higher than the APS counterparts and not only higher than some FF lenses.

I only showed those examples, because they prove my claim, that Samsung lenses are optically better than Sony / Zeiss lenses.

That comparing FF lp/mm to APS lp/mm and different pixel size etc. also plays a role for the overall performance in conjunction with the sensor behind is another case and not applicable to the comparison with the APS lenses from Sony and Zeiss in my example.

The DxO value for the 85mm Samsung lens would be even better, if taken into account, that it was tested in conjunction with a 20 MP sensor and not with a 24MP sensor, like the Sony.
Thus the Samsung would have probably a 16MP sharpness equivalent instead of a 14MP.

Nothing new...

...I have proven my claim with examples, because others had their doubts.

You raise another discussion, which is not wrong, but just another discussion to a related, but not to the same theme.
If you want to discuss this, we can meet in the Samsung forum.

But I think, we won't disagree that much, on the theme you raised...
...as long as you realize, that your theme is not the same that was formerly discussed here.

I don't have to convince you, especially not because:

35 mm lens for landscape shots...

...says it all... :-D

...and if you are stitching a panorama, you can throw almost the half of the image circle away, because otherwise, the stitched panorama would look strange.

Look at this example (12-24mm Samsung lens at 15mm setting):

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/4164548502/photos/2368724/nx1000_15mm_-23mm-10mp-adobergb

-

Please keep the hot air inside...
...because it is cold outside. ;-)

This will pull your socks off:

NX1 @ ISO25600 DNG+RAWTherapee

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/4164548502/photos/3083806/nx1-iso25600-advent

...with naked skin! ;-D

@Everlast - Do you have a Nikon D800, D810, and D750? Have you had your hands on these cameras, it so, how many shots have you taken with each? What was the extent of your test? What is the extent of your expertise with the D800?

Do you know why I am considering Samsung NX1? Do you know my background in and knowledge of Photography?

I did not say I was going to buy the Samsung NX1, I was going to consider that camera but I was not getting it blindly. After posting, I research the NX1 and concluded it does not meet my criteria.

The D810 lacks ONE feature that is very important to me, hence, I will not get one D810.

@Howabout - High ISO is NOT important to me. The H1 (ISO 25,600) is more than adequate for the type of photography I do.
I have NOT use any Samsung camera, hence, I cannot compare Samsung lens against Nikkor lenses. Are you saying you have Samsung NX1 and Samsung 16~50mm f/2.0-2.8 lens? To make comparison, do you also have a Nikon DX body, say D90, D300, D7100 and a Nikkor lenses? I also have Nikon DX body and few DX lenses which I use for my everyday camera. For serious photography, I use the Nikon D800 and appropriate lens for the type of photography.

I am NOT interested in Video capability of my DSLR. I use dedicated Video camera for any video I take.

The feature you brought-up that seem important to you is of no interest to me. I am sure you are enjoying you photography activities.

@ecube
I did not tell you to buy D810, but that this ponzi NX1 is worse in every aspect than any Nikon FF camera, apart from niche features like 4K video and probably one or two other small things. There's just no competition, and you shouldn't expect Nikon top gear performance from this NX1 (its getting over-hyped on several websites, which I suspect is Samsung's Christmas marketing campaign).

As for me, I moved from Nikon (5 years ago) to Pentax (K5, for compactness/portability and the unique Limited lens series) and then two years later downsized again to mirror-less cameras completely as I can always have one with me and that they improved significantly in the last two years. Still cant match DSLRs, apart from image quality in static situations (e.g. some Sony FF and APSC). I have been tempted on a few occasions to get a DSLR (D810, D750, K5 II, K3) but managed to hold off and in 2-3 years time mirorr-less performance will be pretty close.

Good for you. - - - Howabout. You seem to have everything and know everything.
Nice to hear you are enjoying yourself.

Everlast - Sorry for snipping at you.
Of course I am NOT expecting Samsung NX1 to perform as well as Nikon D800. I am, however, impressed by the touch screen interfaces. I like the features shown in the video. After reading the the specs, I decided that is not the type of "everyday camera" for me.

FYI, I have been in photography close to 60 years. I MADE a working camera when I was 11 years old and a microscope at age 12. I was a manager at Polaroid Lab at age 22 (shortly after earning BS in Electrical & Mechanical Engineering). As a hobby, I used to repair watches and camera, design and machine lens adapters, i.e. Leica lens to Canon and Nikon. If you are using Pentax, I am sure you are getting great results. I too had the original Pentax in the early 1960s. Switch to Nikon for the ease of changing lenses and the interchangeable penta prism heads.

Frankly, all SLR are basically the same. While I prefer Nikon and Nikkor lenses, I am not a gear head not a Nikon fan-boy

Serious Sam,

No, DXO lens scores are not total garbage. However the lens scoring can only say if a lens is good, can't say if it's extraordinary. (The sensor scores are garbage.)

Ken Rockwell posts over saturated digital jpegs.

His film stuff is better, when posted as jpegs.

I stand by my point--particularly since Canikon can't come close to decent Leica and Zeiss lenses, and I'm plenty familiar with very good Leica and Zeiss lenses.

@Serious Sam - ha ha ha ha . . . so you had the unenviable displeasure of discourse with Howaboutraw. I have ignored his comments for almost a year now but sometimes, it can't be helped.
In my opinion, he seem to project himself as a maven and omniscient. He reminds me of one of a technician who used to cool the building with his self-generated breeze. That technician tried to dazzle me with his brilliance by baffling me with his BS. Read Howabout's reply to my questions regarding his experience with lenses . . . a classic dilution of grandeur.

Thanks for the heads-up

ecube:

You do realize that above about ISO 400 the D800 has big dynamic range problems that are easy to see? The D810 doesn't have this problem, nor almost all NX cameras. (Though the NX1 is an undermined quantity right now.)

@ecube

Agree with you on the touch interface. This feature combine with wireless on sensor that are equal or larger than m43 exists in Panasonic, Olympus, Sony and Samsung (and 1 Canon). I guess Samsung's experience in phone and tablet help a lot and from the video its just so sleek. I only dream if Fuji or Sony has such interface.

I wonder if it has a feature that you can tap and focus then tap again to take a shot.

helt:

Colour, and some have the sharpness.

DXO lens scores aren't real helpful.

Both Nikon and Canon can make sharp lenses, neither Nikon or Canon's best lenses have anything close to the good colour of Leica or Zeiss lenses, whereas very good Samsung lenses do.

Clearly all three, and there are differences, know something about color that Canikon does not. No Fuji lenses don't equal Leica and Zeiss lenses either, but good Fuji lenses are a good bit better than Canikons.

DXO likes lens sharpness scoring, since it's easy to rate.

@Howabout - I stand corrected if my observation is off. Are you British? Not that it matters.

Why do you change the subject when your allegations are debunked?
In my case, why bring-up YOUR perceived DR problem on the D800 above ISO 400? Do you OWN a D800? If you do, then you simply are IGNORANT on the proper use of the D800. I have shoot using ALL the ISO setting (L1-100~6400-H2) and NEVER experience the DR problem you imagine. Naturally, there are lighting conditions that requires adjusting the Active D-Lighting and HDR settings. But since you did not bring that up, I can only surmise that you do not have D800 or if you do, you are totally clueless in the proper use of D800.

More likely than not, you are regurgitating something you heard or read. It seems to me that you are trying very hard to impress me (us) with your limited knowledge.

ecube:

My points haven't been debunked, at least here.

Many people have reported the DR problem with the D800, and it's easy to see.

I have plenty of access to a D800, and this is an easily repeatable problem, that you are ignorant of it is your problem, not mine.

Sorry, but I've experienced this problem, also best to turn off Active D--it messes with ISO performance.

Keep digging yourself in deeper.

Howabout -why not admit that you are making-up stories. You do NOT have a D800 yet, you try to impress me of your knowledge. You simply do not have the intelligence to admit your ignorance. Having access and owning are two different animal. Yes, D800 is NOT easy to use, It is not for am matures like you, that is the reason why you have problems with it.

Now, I am sure you do not know what you are talking about at all the topics you have participated. Do me a favor please, stop bothering me.

ecube:

Why would I lie to suit your ends?

If you’re not particularly familiar with the D800, I suggest you familiarize yourself with the camera since you own one.

HDR is a multi-exposure function and has nothing to do with this dynamic range problem above base ISO.

This is a well known problem with the D800, it is not, for example, a problem with the Nikon Df.

By denying this issue, one that also exists with the Sony A7R, you’re not doing yourself many favors.

Real simple, the colours look washed out above base ISO and you can’t fix it. Shoot the same scene with a Df and get better results. Or use a D610 or even now a D810.

Keep on digging yourself in deeper.

HOWABOUT - PLEASE STOP!
Just because you do not know how to use a camera you do NOT have does not mean there is a problem with the camera. Stop trying to impress me. I have forgotten more about photography than you will ever know. Good riddance

I don't know about the NX2 specifically, but the mirroless batteries I have seen (EM5, A7, XT1) tend to be smaller then DSLR batteries e.g the ENEL15 and whatever the beast is that goes in a D3.

So there is a minor financial cost penalty, and you have to change batteries a little more often.

It's really not a significant issue if you get benefit from all of the other things that mirrorless can do that DSLRs can't.

Must be better than my Sony A7S .....because they don't complain about it.

What if you adapt lenses that is very common with mirrorless models. The sensor won't cover the image circle then.

Adrien S:

Such a full framed mirrorless would need new lenses. And that requires a huge investment. There aren't many native lenses for the Sony A7. (Or this mirrorless could be as deep as an 35mm SLR and then use 35mm SLR lenses--not available for Samsung of course.)

"No magnification factor" means no magnification in FF terms.

AFAIK the term full frame was a Canon marketing ploy

Akpinxit - actually the use of the phrase "Full frame" is not universally used in the digital photo community to denoate 135/35x24mm/FX sized sensors.

Some in the community don't like and avoid using that term in that manner.
As dark good and myself (in our own ways) are pointing out.

The 35x24mm is not the be all and end all - there are bigger and better formats with thinner DOF and greater light collecting surface area.

Remember historically 35mm is a toy format. Real photographers used 4x5 etc.

Howaboutraw and adrien S
a 135 version of the NX1 could presumably use existing APS-C lenses wiyth an adaptor - a teleconverror essentially.

That would be an easy way for the mirrroless companies to move into 135 format sensors or possibly larger while still allowing their existing lenses to be used, though they'd lose a stop or two of light and probably some IQ.

The other alternative of course is to make a protocol adapter and allow the use of other manufacturers 135 format lenses.

What would be really cool is if some players created a consortium like the 4/3 consortium and standardised a 135 lens mount and protocol. That would allow them to leverage each others lenses and make a nice healhty eco system.
It worked well for M43.

jtan163:

How would that work? Such an adapter would have to expand the lens' image circle, and that would entail all sorts of trouble.

Adrien - my understanding is you should wait for the Sony A9. FF sensor, AND should have better than A6000 AF speed (and also probably burst rate). The A9 should be what you are looking for. But honestly - I don't know why you NEED a FF body. But anyway that is my 2c.

Brownie314, it is simply a matter of depth of field. I'm thinking about portraits, but also of certain occasions when the shallower is the better.
I don't always need an 85mm F1.2 or the rare 200mm F1.8, but when I do, I need these on a big sensor. And when I don't want a shallow DoF, I can always narrow the aperture. The opposite doesn't work properly on an APS-C.
I'd also say sharpness, but I think this is quite irrelevant given how well those new bodies seem to perform.

howaboutraw - I think that is essentially what a teleoconverter is.
I.e. takes a small part of an images and expands it accross rhe sensor.

Or think about an enlarger in film printing.

jtan:

I think it's possible and will also cause a mess.

Teleconverters are a bit different.

Adrien S. - Do you really NEED the few millimeters of DOF that a 200 f/1.8 gives you for portraits? I think Samsung has a very fine 85/1.4 lens. If you can't make a nice portrait with that lens you might be in the wrong business.

Point is I'm right. "Full frame" is a meaningless term these days. CHANGE THE LINGO. It's stupid!

I think cropping with NX1 is very safe now. very much FF.

Good point... BarnET

@serious sam:
18 too long, ditto any 16 or 17 not wide as 15. (sigma has no STM)
18-35: too long on wide and too short on tele as a zoom
Canon didn't make their EF-S 15-85 for nothing (not particularly fast; has USM but not STM, but covers more than FF 24-70 fov)
Samsung didn't make their 16-50 for nothing
both cover the highly desired 24 ff.eq.fov (anything longer on the wide end is optically low end, like kit lens)

@BarnET: you haven't seen much.
besides, too few FF do 10fps
never presume 10fps is only for sports/action/wildlife 'tele-only' shooting
plenty do up close wider shooting

the point of my observation is how appealing the 7DMkII (or NX1) can be for FF shooters wanting similar 10fps (or 15fps) and similar fov without needing to go heavier FF pro-body (Canon 1DX/Nikon D4s) ... and drawbacks of lower res

if I don't care about high fps, then I would opt for 6D for best IQ in low light.

fyi:
Samsung's: 16-50mm f2.0-2.8 (for NX1 APSC 1.5x crop):
ff.eq.fov: 24-75mm
ff.eq.dof: f3-4.2

Sigma's: 18-35mm f1.8
1.5x: 27-52.5mm f2.7 ff.eq.(fov.dof)
1.6x: 29-56mm f2.9 ff.eq.(fov.dof)

i know not many fullframes shoot 10 fps.
But read my post again.
You don't need 10 fps when shooting landscapes.
It is useful for sports where no one use a wide-angle lens.

you said 18-35mm with a 7dmk2 which is basicly a stupid combination sinc the sensor isn't that good for landscapes and the lens isn't that good for sports.

I think BarnET is right. Wide angle (most likely landscape) lens on a 10fps crop camera doesn't make a lot of sense. I too have never seen anyone shoot sports with a wide angle lens. For wide angle, landscape type stuff - go with a FF option, like an A7R.

@BarnET:
I make no mention of needing 10fps for landscapes (just you)
I make no mention of needing/using wide for sports (just you)
I make no mention of needing 10fps and wide in one particular kind of shooting (just you)
I make no mention of wanting/needing 18-35, which isn't particularly wide (just you) for landscapes (just you) or sports (again, just you)

I specifically mentioned APSC Canon EOS 7DMkII 20.1mp 10fps could appeal to FF shooters where shallowest dof and highest fps exist but at the expense of lower res on pricier heavier pro-bodies (like Canon 1DX or Nikon D4s)

While at the same time appeal to APSC shooters, with more modest budget, get an IQ that can fare quite well in low light rival with higher res than either 1DX (or D4s) lower-res dSLRs.

A great balance of both, such that decent low light landscapes or astrophotography (optional) to rival 6D (or 5DMkIII)
e.g.
http://www.clarkvision.com/reviews/evaluation-canon-7dii/

makes great sense 7DMkII is all round dSLR

@brownie314:
Sony 24mp FF or 24mp APSC (mirrorless or not)
are fine in very good light (great for landscapes)
but as Sony's venture into low light, their Noise AND NR is notoriously the worst, even if used in Nikons:
Take your pick:
1) Sony NR with uneven "zombie-scar" artifacts
2) Nikon NR with "rainbow" artifacts
Preferrable is neither with aesthetically acceptable neutral looking "digital grain" (in worse case scenario; requiring least pp fixing) as offered by Canon (ideal for presentation even w/o pp)

Keep in mind, wide (like in landscapes) plus higher res-most important for detail of the finest and FAINTEST details (tele obviously adds reach of magnification = given on APSC vs FF).
Lower-res loses in both wide and tele scenarios when competing with higher-res.

For me, I specialize in wide low-light landscape portraiture, so 10fps not needed except in tele low light wildlife bif, etc (sports/action)

It opens the door for bif beyond daylight to venture into dusk/dawn/night, etc

jennyrae - I wonder what's the problem with RX1? I'm using it and loving it....

Hi Jenny, I am asking this question as someone who is really watching out for the NX1. I know Samsung Offers some lenses which Sony Doesn't have. But for where there are corresponding Sony Lenses, are Samsung Lenses better?

@JunzInc

There are many criteria and some are very personal when considering a lens good.

For instance one would say a 2.8 zoom is a must and for me no simply because the weight of most 2.8 zoom.

It is not everything but you can start with DXOmark and also google the specific lens that you are interested and see what people say about it.

@jennyrae

I've wrote about this in the Sony A7 ii thread, in short and in my opinion I think it may be financially difficult for a company to do both (Body and optics) at the same time. Samsung would have the finance ability to do it, whether it will be successful is yet to see.

@calte, I have no problem with RX1. sorry for not making clear explanation but to be more clear, when Sony releases an RX2, I want it really improved over the RX1 and not an incremental change like what they do with RX1** series of cameras. the only thing I wished was improved on RX1 is AF performance. but I say it is better overall than either A7 and A7R which were a mess. so hopefully Sony will not release an RX1 II camera with minimal improvement. I not willing to spend money on similar camera at premium price similar to launch price of original.

@jennyrae

If that is a problem for you then you can almost stop buying cameras full stop.

Everyone has been doing this Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Sony...... and from $300 to $6000 camera. It really depends on how the manufacturer names it and how you define as "really improved" For example RX100 M3 is "really improved" in my opinion. EVF, faster lens, better controls.....etc. Sony could have name it RX110, RX200....etc

A7 has its problem, hand down. But many can't argue with two fact:
1. They bring a interchangeable FF at a unbelievable size at an affordable price.
2. They change the product/price cycle of FF camera and kick canikon out of their dreamland in FF, will at least Nikon. Canon can just there and rotten to its dead with that arrogance of them.

@serious sam, what Sony did right with RX1 is opposite of A7. all they have to do is make RX1 an ILC. but they did not. they make it bigger, clunky and perform worse than RX1. even my RX1 holds more value than the A7 this day. that's how bad A7 is and it did not matter if it offer ILC function.

if they have time to make new sensor, I think using the same body of RX1 and making it ILC should not be a problem.

I use my RX1, but it still does not replace either my 6D and 7D where I need them to perform. and Sony knows exactly where they need to work on. they need to show the goods first. other than that, no complaints on the sensor.

Usee, thx for the info.

Bottom line, so many were holding their breath on the high ISO JPEG's (RAWs were not so much an issue of concern - NX high ISO RAWs have been okay in other NX models). It seems NX1 is noticeably better than NX30 at high ISO.

That's actually very funny!

I'm going to get some gravy and turkey.... talk amongst yourselves.

;-)

Well, not everywhere on the whole world is (today) Thanksgiving day...

...and I thought it was already (yesterday) on thursday?

However - Enjoy!

Ever hear of leftovers? And yes, I know.

If you celebrate a holiday where you're from, and comment about it here, I'll keep quiet and appreciate that you are enjoying your own holiday.

Boy this pumpkin pie is great!

I thought you were eating?

...yes I heard of leftovers in the shelves of camera dealer, who have no Samsung cameras in their store.

Oops, I hope you spilled nothing?

@Usee No need to get defensive. People are just relaying their experience of looking for the Samsung cameras.

The shop in question had Nikon, Canon, Sony, Sigma, Leica and the usual smaller cameras. I did see a Samsung in the glass cabinet a while back, but not this time. Hence my question to the manager.

I'd like to see the camera in the video myself at some stage.

Eric, I'm not defensive, I'm amused, especially now, as you mention Sigma in the store...

...I'm a Sigma owner since 8 years and the stores in my town had the same excuse, to have no Sigma cameras in their shelves...

The funny thing is, that I had (sooner, or later) problems with all of my Sigma cameras...

...so, that I could meanwhile understand why they had no Sigma cameras in their shelves.

So no Nikon (dust issue), no Canon (focus issues, AF banding issue, etc).... what can they carry then?

@nerd2 You do know that these are complex electronic devices? There isn't a complex device anywhere on the planet without some problems from time to time. Even NASA with their billions couldn't make a once-off working-out-of-the-box Hubble telescope - it needed repairs ;)

My guess (as I can't speak for stores) is that they weigh up the costs involved in handling returns on different brands. The Nikon, Canon and Sony models sell well enough, with a well established repairs/returns procedure, to make the difference. Samsung are new to the Pro game.

Samsung has no choice: they have to make their name as a camera manufacturer. For choosing another name is already too late. It also takes time. It may take 10 years and outstanding products. This is the first one, a really founding one.

@ Usee

Whether we like it or not, high end market is dominated by Canon and Nikon. Many people take Samsung as a joke when it goes to the camera world. If Samsung is willing to be taken seriously, it needs to sacrifice some profits in favor of being recognized first. Sony, for instance, did such a thing when it entered the video game industry. They actually didn't profit at all at the beginning just to put SEGA and Nintendo in the corner. Now, they are pretty much dominant in that area too. IMHO, this is the very strategy that Samsung should follow otherwise I do not see them become a serious player in this game. Having watched the DPR field test of this camera, I checked other sources and found the camera to my liking but when I checked its price at amazon.de, I thoroughly changed my mind. If I'm supposed to pay 1700 euros, I will spend it on the D750 or A7II.

@ Usee

For a person like me, it is a big money and I have saved a lot to get a semi pro camera. It is illogical to expect me (people) to spend such a big money on a camera made by a company that has just started the game and you do not know its future policy. It is not me (people) who ruin a good product, it is Samsung policy that want to get a profit like Canon and Nikon make without realizing that they have long history here and for better or worse people trust them. Switching systems is an expensive practice. Samsung needs to encourage people to jump on its wagon. IMHO, Samsung would be better off dropping price real soon, before all new adapters choose between D750, 7DMKII, A7II.

Samsung does not have the full range of lenses, especially telephotos, to be attractive to sports and wildlife photographers. If it had a fully compatible Nikon F mount, I would have already ordered one and wouldn't be complaining about no D400.

"I really like that situation around Samsung's cameras because I plan to buy NX1 substantially cheaper than today. What's not good for Samsung is good for his customers."

Me too. If Fuji doesn't release a _significantly_ higher-Mpixel rangerfinder (no mini-DSLR shape for me) body with seamless 4K video, I may decide to wait for the inevitable NX1 price drop and get this for, if nothing else, landscape & video. So far, all their cameras (not only the budget ones - the NX Mini and the NXx000 series) underwent some VERY heavy price drops.

@Jerome,

if one cannot compare and calculate, it is a real miss, isn't it?

You can buy that camera for 1500.- € without lens.

I know, but 16-50 f2.8 would be cheper, lighter...that's all.

Many fans of Nikon used to express their surprise that Canon a well-known manufacturer of photocopiers, manufactures cameras too.