jenbenn: What you forgot to mention is that the 5D has vastly superior dynamic range in all shots. The highlights in the sony raws are all blown out while the canon retains considerably more detail.
BTW I own a 5d III and a Sony A7 (non-r). The canon consistantly delivers less noise and better dynamic range at all isos above 400. The exception being at iso 100 and iso200 where the sony has less shadow noise if you need to lift the shadows dramatically.
To complete this: Any test site (hint: DXO) rating the canon sensor far below the sony sensor, should start using their cameras to take photos instead of performing absurd measurebating tests which do not translate into real life.
The more I looked at the image compare from DPR and IR, the more I believe that DXO numbers are absolutely useless.
tkbslc: Obviously 409600 looks like junk, but up to 51200 and even 102400 look pretty usable. Probably 2 stops better than any other FF competitor.
Strange, I only see around half to one stop advantage, and you lose big time in the resolution. I think that is a trade off one must consider.
Eleson: One thing that become apparent is that the jpeg engine in A7s i really, really good. Take a look at ISO 102400 and compare to Df (or anything).
I can clearly see why some say "you need to shoot RAW".But then again, show a RAW picture that beats the out-of-camera jpeg from a7s @ redicilously high ISO's....
My opinion is if you shot FF, you want quality, so might as well spend a bit more time to get it, otherwise, why not just use apsc or m43.
steelhead3: Does Samsung have to copy Sony even down to the numbering system
If Sony had copy Samsung lens quality as well, I probably would not have switched from Nex to Samsung nx. BTW, the Samsung NX10 came out before the Nex 5.
Jogger: Interchangeable lenses for cameras with smaller than APSc sensors make no sense. You can get the upcoming Sony RX100m3 with 24-70/1.8-2.8 equiv. in a much smaller package.
From the RX100 samples, I don't really see better optics from Sony over the Samsung. I was fairly surprised by the IQ from the nx mini small sensor. I will pick one up for use with my D mount lens as soon as adapters came out.Judging from the IQ from the mini 9mm lens, I think it is as good if not better than the RX100 zoom. But that's a bit unfair since it a prime vs zoom lens.
darklamp: Tell me something it does that a Sony NEX with 18-55 doesn't for a tenth the price.
Ah, yes, it has a red dot.
And while that 18-55 may ( or may not be ) optically great, the reality is that correcting CA and distortion is the norm and accepted as quite reasonable.
Oddly no fast 50mm equivalent at launch and no 85mm equivalent at launch. Surely that's a minimum requirement for a serious camera ?
And they don't even include an M mount adapter for the price. That's cheeky. Who else will buy it apart from rabid M mount owners ? ( Oh, yeah, celebrities - I forgot ).
I can't take Leica seriously any more.
How long before we see the gold version ( or platinum ? ) and the snow leopard skin clad version with matching carry pouch ?
They don't make cameras any more, they make accessories for celebs.
Hmm, I had the Nex kit lens, it is part of the reason I use legacy lens and switch to another brand for AF. It's Leica, expect the price to be crazy.
CaseyComo: That's some aggressive noise reduction in low light.
Why not trying shooting raw, it came with a free Lightroom software!
SETI: Pictures looks a lil bit dull to me
I have a Sony Nex, Samsung nx300, and just got a Fuji X-E1. If you want very saturated color, Fuji is for you. But for me, I am trying to find ways to tone down the darn over saturated Fuji color which to me is a bit unnatural. Of the 3 cameras, I think Samsung has the most accurate color.
ProfHankD: Once again, Samsung has made a mutant Sony that in many ways is nicer. Basically, this is a Sony A3000++. Ok, the sensor probably isn't quite as good (although DxOMark shows Samsung isn't far behind the A3000), but Samsung actually makes pretty much everything in their cameras, and they're getting better at everything. They've got a long way to go to match an A7R, but I'll keep watching them....
Honestly, the only thing that's kept me from buying a Samsung camera is the slightly long flange distance and relatively poor availability of legacy lens adapters (e.g., no Lens Turbo) for NX. Then again, I own a Galaxy S3, so I guess I actually do own two Samsung cameras.... ;-)
All the legacy lens I used on the Nex I also use on the Samsung, except the C mount and M mount, but those lens are too expensive anyways. Here is a incomplete list of legacy mount you can use on NX: Canon - EF (and there is tons of adapter for EF), M39, M42, Minolta MD, Canon FD, Pentax PK, Nikon F, Olympus OM, Exakta, etc.I can even use the rare German Robot mount lens on my NX.
Tonio Loewald: Samsung is like the (1990s) Microsoft of hardware — in a good way. They produce a shoddy imitation v1 and then iterate until they get it right. With the new premium zoom they're actually making their rivals look stupid. Interesting times.
What does a better mount mean? Does produce better images?If you don't use Leica M mount lens, then that is no difference.I use tons of legacy glass on Nex before and now I use it on the Samsung.
ChuckTa: Correct me if I am wrong, but is the f2-2.8 zoom the largest aperture 3x zoom ever made? In any format? (except the TV zooms which are for very small size sensor)
Thanks for pointing out the olympus lens. Both are very heavy, even the 2.5x zoom 14-35mm is 900g, and that's for a m43 sensor. So I guess there is no f2 zoom for apsc up till now, and still not constant f2. Nevertheless, the NX starts at f2 and 3.1x zoom and weights in at 622g, that's not too bad.yabokkie is absolute light , but f2 is f2 and still gives a faster shutter. I actually had the big Tamron 28-75 f2.8 on the Nex, didn't like the rendering and color. Sold it.
Hmm.. I thought the Samsung NX10 was the first apsc mirrorless produced, even before the Nex 5. However, you are right about getting it right. Because I brought Nex 5 when it came out, I thought nothing of the samsung then. Now I also have a Samsung NX and I use it most of the time.
Correct me if I am wrong, but is the f2-2.8 zoom the largest aperture 3x zoom ever made? In any format? (except the TV zooms which are for very small size sensor)
migus: 111gr. 16-50 OIS is impressive, if the IQ is typical of Samsung's 20-50kit or their primes...!
Few years ago i've bought two NX100's just for their 20-50kit lenses; each costed ca. $250 with camera attached :-). Compared against nikon's 20 and 50 primes (the 'legends') and was often superior. And yet Samsung is rarely mentioned as camera maker...
Net: The pro version glass from Sammy may be great, but not investment grade - unless it becomes usable on Canon and Sony bodies. Personally I wish i could use the NX lenses on NEX bodies (i prefer their sensors and JPG engines) w/o major engineering, but this is a pipe dream.
I rather have a good IQ lens then a mediocre lens with OIS. I will take the NX 20-50mm anytime over my Sony Nex kit. That's all I can say.That is why I only use the Nex 5 with legacy lens. I leave the AF work to the Samsung.
Jorginho: Well it depends on how it will perform and, from various reports on Samsung cams, the Quality control is one thing to reckon with. zvarious reports about bad lenses are around. Even though there are not so many users of this system....But this is a very nice lens with very nice specs. I hope it performs well.
I have to say that 650 grams for a f2 to f2.8 is on the low side compared to other APs-c offerings that are nearly the same in F, but "only" offer f2.8. otoh: this weighs more than double and is quite a bit larger too than the Panasonic 12-35 f2.8. It is even quite a bit heavier than the 100-300 mm and 75-300 mm Olympus zooms for the mFt system. I have the 100-300 and it is as far as I am wiling to go even on the DSLR-like Gh2 body I have.So what is the advantage here, the incetive for APS-c users to get into the NX30-+ this lens? It is a bit difficult to see, at least for me.
But let's wait and see: for the Samsung users at least this is probably a very nice option to have!
The fact is if you want small lens, you got small lens. If you want quality, you got quality. You can choose. Unfortunately, we still live in the real world where laws of physics apply.The fact that there is even a f2 3x zoom is truly ground breaking and I believe first in the history of apsc lens. Where Sony innovates in sensor, Samsung does it in the lens.I think only Samsung dare to do it because of its huge financial resources, I don't think they'll make money on this lens, whatever the price, but it'll help the whole line of NX camera.
peevee1: f/2-f/2.8 sounds very nice and the formula everybody should use. Very nice upgrade from Samsung. Heavy like a brick for a mirrorless lens though. The small 16-50 finally puts it in a reasonamle competition with Sony E 16-50 and Panasonics 14-42 and 12-32 for small and light cameras - hopefully the 20-50 embarrassment will be forgotten like a bad dream.Great that they are still trying to compete.
That is true, but from an IQ perspective, I will quote photozone"We really liked the Samsung NX 20-50mm f/3.5-5.6 for various reasons. Optically it is among the best standard zoom lenses in the mirrorless system class that we've seen so far. "The lens quality is one of the main reason I switch from Nex to Samsung. I think they used some nice glass in that lens, I think the simpler design due to smaller range helps too.
D200_4me: World's smallest....until you put something you need on it....a lens ;-) Innovation is good and I welcome it, but I wish companies would quit screaming about how small their camera bodies are.
There is very true, and Sony is not known for making good small lens. Just take a look at the E 50/f1.8, it is probably the biggest 50mm apsc lens ever made.
supeyugin1: I believe those test from DxO are irrelevant for most people, as they will not buy Samsung based on the name. And it's good for Samsung users, as the prices are much lower than other systems, while the quality is higher. Please don't buy Samsung, it's a piece of junk!
HowaboutRAWAgree with you on the plasticky NX 20-50mm, really good for a kit. I was constantly surprise by the image quality I got from this little gem. For me, this is a must take lens for traveling. I am glad Samsung put the cost into the lens glass instead of lens body.Photozone review on this lens is right on.
supeyugin1Oh right, dah. Yes , bad Samsung NX, lens is terrible, don't make the mistake like me and get 4 of those bad bad NX lens. I am smart with my Sony Nex and only stick with the kit lens. Smart with Sony, yes.But I also made the mistake and just got the NX300. Darn, can't stop making those mistakes.
This is a 100% crop pic of the 20m sensor. Maybe you'll have a different opinion after you look at it.http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50661631