Papi61: It probably cost Canon $1k to make, so they have lots of room to deflate the price. Personally, I wouldn't buy it if they sold it for $2k. And it's not because I'm a Nikon shooter, but because the Samsung NX1 is so much better at 4k filming.
I was actually referring to camera size 4K recorder, but yeah if you are comfortable taking the $8k 2kg beast out on any lengthy trip to shot 4K and stills.
tom1234567: £2000 and they may sell not any better than the NX1Tom G
I have also heard that a Korean production is using the NX1 for TV dramas, and the Koreans are very very serious about their TV dramas.
Currently there are no Sony camera that record 4k internally. There is no reason to use Canon lens as the Samsung lens AF is much much faster and can rival the Canon 7Dmk2. For MF, there are tons of adapters that can be used by Samsung NX.
Surprise that DPR didn't mention the Samsung NX1 for 4K video.
DStudio: The camera looks fine. Perhaps still not getting as much out of their own sensors as Nikon and Pentax do, but good enough. Especially considering almost any lens can be mounted with image stabilization.
It's the lenses I'm not convinced about. I'm not sure these FE-mount lenses match up to their excellent A-mount counterparts - the 16-35 and 70-200/2.8 lenses. I realize these lenses cost a little less, but they're still expensive enough. And at f/4, they'd better cost less! But they should still come close in image quality, and I'm afraid they don't. This is unacceptable in my view, considering how great many of Sony's other lenses are.
It seems like they release an updated body about every six weeks. Perhaps it's time to let us know how serious they are about the FE mount by concentrating on producing lenses people will still want in 2020.
In DXO test, the Zeiss 16-35mm gets a 16mpix sharpness, exactly same as the FE 28-70 kit!! I am not sure why Zeiss allow Sony put their label on that lens, I am not saying that lens is bad, but I don' think it reaches the Zeiss name for quality.I am also very surprised to learn Sony did not fix the 11 bit raw problem, I was so eager to get Sony 2nd generation FF, but now I am not so sure.
nicolaiecostel: Will it properly focus now ? In the DPR review of the NX1, the tracking ability is only superficially tested in good light while TheCameraStore TV guys found it difficult to achieve perfect focus even in stills ..
I like to see some shots from Canon 7Dmk2 focusing on dripping water in a dark corner using a 85/1.4 lens.
mosc: You made a new 16-50 and it ISN'T a powerzoom pancake? You do realize the A2 is a compact body, right Fuji? Sigh.
I just compare the 2 images from ephotozine on the same object, NX3000 and Sony A5000 both having 20mp sensor.Both uses a "pancake" zoomhttp://www.magezinepublishing.com/equipment/images/equipment/NX3000-5523/highres/Samsung-NX3000-Macro-SAM_0019_1405950295.jpg
I don't think one can conclude the Olympus 12-24 is a better lens yet, DXO shows on EM1 it has sharpness of 9mp, not exactly very high as even the Samsung 18-55 kit is just one lower at 8mp.
Well, Samsung NX does offer a better quality 16-50mm power zoom while similar size as Sony's.
chocobanana: No OIS + 77mm filter thread make the purchase of this lens hard to justify at the offering price unless ultimate optical quality is what you want, and I'm pretty sure this Fujinon will deliver that.
I wouldn't be surprised if a 3rd party lens manufacturer would come up pretty soon with a more affordable lens with similar focal length and speed + WR + OIS + 72mm filter thread for the X mount. Now that would be interesting to see, a real complement for the 10-24 and the 50-140 lens!
Currently there is a NX 12-24mm f4-5.6 lens which is very good and sharp.Rumors there will be a S grade lens 11-24mm f2.8 OIS coming this year for the NX line.
Plastek: NX1 is seriously underwhelming considering all the hype around this camera.Lens is clearly crippling it, in terms of far corner sharpness even RX 100 mk III got higher resolution and less CA in RAWs, but even if you disregard this problem - it seems to produce some weird artefacts in blue and red colors.
Take a look here - all cameras got blue rings centered to the middle and NX1 got some weird ghosts centered to the top and left edge. Smells like Samsung is heavily cooking their RAWs.
I'd easily pick both: Pentax and Nikon over NX1. Both seem to retain more details in base and higher ISOs. Even with Pentax mushy reds in higher ISOs.
Did you actually check out studio images, look at the paragraphs and the pencil drawings, in some parts of the drawings the A7ii has terrible "moire" while NX1 shows clear lines. And remember the NX1 uses a zoom at the extreme tele end for the test while the A7ii uses a very sharp Zeiss prime. It's not hard to believe as the NX1 has 28mp without AA filter while A7ii is 24mp with AA filter. Note that I will be eventually getting either A7 or A7ii this year, hard to decide as I expect the A7ii to have some improvement of IQ over the A7.
I can't see it either. But I do see the NX1 out resolve all the APSC sensor. The NX1 also has better resolution than the Sony A7II sensor at iso3200 except at the extreme edge (due to NX1 test with the NX 16-50 zoom at the tele end vs the Zeiss Sonnar 55/f1.8 prime), that is pretty impressive if you ask me.
dennis tennis: Like most threads on DPR, this has degenerated into a spitting contest between 7Dmk2 vs A77mk2 fanboys. "What is it with boys with toys?"
This is a gear forum, I thought that is what we do. Can I add Samsung NX1 to the mix?
SulfurousBeast: Did I say this already...? Canon which had missed the boat 3 years ago had one good (and last may be...) to catch up, but stumbled woefully short on this one. I was patient for 5 years not making a jump however irrresitable it was becoming. Now it is all clear... Time to jump. Just an enthusiast but still with about $6k worth Canon gear....Craigslist is calling....to be honest, would have stayed if it had the D7100 sensor, video not crippled, rather one that takes advantage of the dual pixel AF and a touch screen. So close, but still Canon chose to play the dirty game with its APSC customers.
Wedded? Couldn't you just sell the equipment and move on. Esp for some people, where some of the lens are rarely used after purchase.
Serious Sam: Oh dear…… What a total different reception when compare to the D750. I have read about ⅓ of the comments and how different the comments are. Fanboys fighting, product and brand bashing, reviewer criticism. Compare to most of the comments on the D750 when the majority is just happy to see a solid good product.
Lets start with DPR, I think the only mistake they have done is not comparing 7D2 with A77M2. These two are (imo) the only two current model that can compare head to head. Many requested this before but the DPR team seems to have ignored this. VERY DISAPPOINTING!!
I do love the test DPR do with the EV pushing of the RAW files. It shows what I had been saying for a long time that when you rate noise performance, you have to look at the RAW file (except Fuji). If ones RAW file is junk, you will end up with junk.
Pls add Samsung NX1 to the test. From the various reviews of the NX1, I can tell the NX1 both IQ and video are at the top of the APSC class. So I am more interested in the AF comparison,esp AF tracking. I have seem review saying high focus rate using 15fps, I would like to see DPR confirm that or otherwise. Samsung does a good job of firmware upgrade so maybe can wait for further tweak of firmware first before the test.
le_alain: A firmware update for the A7, to have A7II improva AF will be welcome.
You are taking it too literally, it just mean that Sony is not the best in handing out firmware upgrade. They don't do a very good job of keeping the old customers happy compare to other brands.
I just got a RX100, while search for firmware to upgrade, I found this joke. The firmware upgrade for RX100 is RX100 mk2 and mk3. This is how Sony works, just get a new camera, unless there is some serious screw up. I have got much better firmware upgrade experience from Samsung and Fuji.
Aroart: Check out Sony a 5100,, it beats all these cameras in cleanet high iso.. See for your self it was even better than the a6000,,, yea yea I know its the same sencer.. A5100 also has a realy nice video newer codec than a6000...
You might want to change your monitor, A5100 and A6000 has the exact same sensor and the studio image looks the same. The studio image also show the NX1 28mp BSI has the highest resolution with around 1/2 stop better noise than the A6000, Fuji XT1 has the cleanest high iso but also the lowest resolution (not yet adjust for Fuji overstate iso)
shutterbud: The Nikon 1 was included but the Sony A6000 was not? That is wrong. The Nikon 1 is a compact camera; a vastly overpriced compact camera which produces compact camera IQ. The A6000 produces images on a par with anything short of full-frame and handles well. Its ommision is a huge oversight. Small, fast, light-weight and fantastic IQ is the very definition of the enthusiast mirrorless camera category. NX1? Nikon 1? I don't think so. I very nearly bought the GH4 but it was too much money for a DSLR with a shrunken sensor. Unless one is invested heavily in lenses or has decided to get good at video, it makes a lot more sense to buy a D5300 or K3 and decent lens instead. DPR is definitely getting confused. As to the category system, I agree it is messed up. It should be "What can I get for X dollars?" or "How much must I spend to do this?" Not "Does it have a mirror?"
The A6000 uses 15 cross-type AF points vs NX1 153 cross-type points ( 7Dmk2 has 65 points). A6000 burst is 11 fps vs NX1 15 fps. The higher cost of NX1 is due to its enthusiast nature and is actually price lower than GH4.I would agree the A6000 is good value however, but for me, I will wait for the Samsung NX400 with the same 28mp BSI sensor, which I think is best in class.
Adrian Van: I would have put the XT1 as number 1 and EM1 as second or close to first. XT1 may edge for APSC sensor overall image quality and low noise in low light, however the lens range available on Olympus EM1 is extensive and can produce great images and great colour images out of camera. GH4, if looking at video would be the number one, but image quality I would put Fuji and Olympus ahead in their great out of camera jpegs, useful to the general consumer or enthusiast not always wanting to process Raw for personal photos. Sony should have been in this list, and although Nikon has great cameras in its DSLRs as does Canon, they really need to develop a mirrorless with a larger sensor as the 1 sensor cannot match the quality of any of the others. Sony has some impressive cameras out this year, one should have been on this list. My thoughts anyway. Yours may vary.
The Fuji XT1 or Samsung NX1 will produce better stills than the GH4/EM1 m43 sensor.
I believe the Samsung NX1 IQ has surpass the Sony A6000. Base on DPR, the NX1 has the best APSC IQ right now, you can check in the DPR image compare, look at iso 3200 raw (note NX1 use a zoom vs A6000 Zeiss prime). The Video is also better than GH4, do a search on youtube.I think "enthusiast" is define more by function rather size or even IQ. The A6000 might belong to the compact "enthusiast" and will probably be at the top (or at least until the Samsung NX400 came out :-)