Kuturgan

Kuturgan

Lives in France Grenoble, France
Joined on Jun 13, 2011

Comments

Total: 86, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous2345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

photo nuts: Looks good, similar to Sony NEX 5N and Panasonic G3. Samsung seems to implement mandatory in-camera RAW NR at ISO 6400, images are significantly softer than those at lower ISO levels.

They are not softer, just out of focus.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 9, 2011 at 09:53 UTC
In reply to:

ageha: Wow, at high ISO even the E-P3 shows more details.

It's a joke?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 9, 2011 at 09:49 UTC
In reply to:

rsf3127: Worse than NEX 5N and more expensive. No thanks.

What is the price of 50 F1.8?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 9, 2011 at 00:21 UTC
In reply to:

rsf3127: Worse than NEX 5N and more expensive. No thanks.

I don't see any problem with that.
Did you see color rendition on the palette?

Direct link | Posted on Nov 9, 2011 at 00:08 UTC
In reply to:

rsf3127: Worse than NEX 5N and more expensive. No thanks.

Where NX200 is worse then NEX5n?
You must joking.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 9, 2011 at 00:02 UTC
In reply to:

Jarda_Houdek: Great, now Samsung is up to something. Pair this with good Pentax or Nikon jpeg engine and this is THE next generation sensor for DSLRs. Who needs Sony now?

Nikon and Pentax sucks in the market of EVIL cameras.
So if what we see is true then Samsung will be a leader in this market very soon.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2011 at 23:42 UTC
In reply to:

kwojdyna: Great sensor what you can see in RAW mode. TERRIBLE processing in JPEG mode (look higher ISOs at coins or cotton balls...)

This great sensor had been put in a camera that is a major step back compared to NX100.

It's maybe phisically better made, but lacks "AE lock" and direct "Whie Balance" buttons present in NX100 (needless to say how USEFUL they WERE). Now we can see that also picture processing is MUCH WORSE than in it's predecessor.

NX100 was something - VERY ergonomic (except of the flash which was a bad mistake) with much better sensor than any m43, what gave great RAWs, and acceptable JPEGs.

NX200 has only some minor advantages compared to it when we talk about a chance of getting great everyday pictures (what it is designed for, I guess) -flash, 20MP RAWs and nice feel in hands - and GREAT DISADVANTAGES.

Just think - in everyday photography - you do not shot RAWs. You need good JPEGs and "WB" + "AE lock" funcs quickly accessible. This camera DOES NOT offer any of these!

"Just think - in everyday photography - you do not shot RAWs."

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2011 at 23:33 UTC
In reply to:

chlamchowder: Agreed - image quality is very nice. It seems less noisy than the a77 (but the translucent mirror probably contributes to that).

Is it just me, or do the raws at really high ISOs (6400, 12800) look noise reduced?

I have no ISO obsession. For the most important is the colors. And what I see is really good.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2011 at 23:32 UTC
In reply to:

kwojdyna: Great sensor what you can see in RAW mode. TERRIBLE processing in JPEG mode (look higher ISOs at coins or cotton balls...)

This great sensor had been put in a camera that is a major step back compared to NX100.

It's maybe phisically better made, but lacks "AE lock" and direct "Whie Balance" buttons present in NX100 (needless to say how USEFUL they WERE). Now we can see that also picture processing is MUCH WORSE than in it's predecessor.

NX100 was something - VERY ergonomic (except of the flash which was a bad mistake) with much better sensor than any m43, what gave great RAWs, and acceptable JPEGs.

NX200 has only some minor advantages compared to it when we talk about a chance of getting great everyday pictures (what it is designed for, I guess) -flash, 20MP RAWs and nice feel in hands - and GREAT DISADVANTAGES.

Just think - in everyday photography - you do not shot RAWs. You need good JPEGs and "WB" + "AE lock" funcs quickly accessible. This camera DOES NOT offer any of these!

Oh, please stop. If you shoot just jpeg than why you stick with EVIL cameras? Take a P&S.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2011 at 23:28 UTC
In reply to:

chlamchowder: Agreed - image quality is very nice. It seems less noisy than the a77 (but the translucent mirror probably contributes to that).

Is it just me, or do the raws at really high ISOs (6400, 12800) look noise reduced?

As for me, I never use ISO6400. I rarely go up to 1600.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2011 at 22:55 UTC
In reply to:

Kuturgan: It seems like there is a focus problem with NX200 shot. The Queen is out of focus.

The palette of colors on the right side is just WONDERFUL!!! Even better than EP-3.
Just look at RAW image, NX200 outperforms all other cameras including NEX, EP-3!!!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2011 at 22:34 UTC
In reply to:

CyberGene: Something's very wrong with the sharpness of the playing card in the middle of the frame (for example the lower queen's head). It was either misfocused or the lens is soft. Strangely, there's no problem with the sharpness in any other part of the picture... Was that card vibrating or something? :)

This lens 60mm can't be soft. Because the test shot is 3D, I guess is is a focus issue! On the image with NX200 the Queen is surely out of focus.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2011 at 22:30 UTC

It seems like there is a focus problem with NX200 shot. The Queen is out of focus.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 8, 2011 at 22:22 UTC as 42nd comment | 5 replies
On Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG article (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

RLPhotoAndImaging: This is a new camera? Horrible!

It can be explained by the test mistake.
I'm sure Dpreview will make a new fair test asap.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2011 at 19:50 UTC
On Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG article (108 comments in total)

As I see there are a lot of issues and mistakes with NX200 test. We don't know if they were intentional or accidental though.
It's a shame and ridiculous that, considered as a serious digital camera review, Dpreview produces such a mistakes (only!) with Samsung cameras (NX10 and NX200).
Dpreview must make a new and fair test with NX200, and delete erroneous one, and make an official statement about that mistake.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 5, 2011 at 19:49 UTC as 1st comment | 7 replies
On Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG article (108 comments in total)

I'm sure that Dpreview did some mistake when shot with NX200. On the other forums NX200 looks really better (actually more than one stop for ISO) and sharper than NX100. At low ISO (till 1600) NX200 looks even sharper than NEX-5n (based on raw files).
I hope Dpreview will make over NX200 test and will as well show images from RAW files.
For me RAW image is the best indicator of camera performance, cause I almost always shoot RAW.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 3, 2011 at 21:33 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply
On Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG article (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

Uri Ben: The 200 is really bad ( !!!) on high ISO ( even at not so high - 800 ) while the NEX 5n is no less then excellent all over the scale !!! - I was waiting a long time for the 200, Not any more ... I ll buy the 5n or will wait for the NEX 7.

Go ahead sony fanboy.
NX200 is better than NEX-5n till ISO1600. I never use ISO more than 1600 so for Samsung did a great job! If we consider as well a high MP (20vs16) NX200 is just fantastic!!!

Direct link | Posted on Nov 2, 2011 at 09:10 UTC
On Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG article (108 comments in total)
In reply to:

random78: Thanks for posting these! But definitely looking forward to the RAW files as well. NX200 clearly has less noise than NX100 in these JPEGS samples but at the same time it has the softest outputs of all the 4 cameras. It is hard to say whether the softness is due to lack of sharpening or due to aggressive noise reduction or both. Either way we are likely to see more noise with the sharpened images. Keeping the fingers crossed on the RAW quality. Not expecting it to match the latest 16MP sony but a clear improvement over NX100 and matching the last-gen Sony/Canon sensors would be good :)

I think the soft image of NX200 can be explained by not the best lens 18-55mm which was used during the test. Samsung's 20-50mm and 30mm pancake outperforms competitors by sharpness. So I suggest to Dpreview to use in their test 20-50mm or 30mm lenses. They are really cool and come with the camera kit.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 2, 2011 at 09:06 UTC
On Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG article (108 comments in total)

I found NX200's ISO performance is almost better than EP-3 and NEX-5n till ISO1600.
It is more than enough for me because I rarely use even ISO1600.
For me NX200 outperforms other sony and M4/3 EVIL cameras.
I'm totally satisfied with what I see.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 2, 2011 at 09:01 UTC as 18th comment | 3 replies
On Just Posted: Sony NEX-7 Hands-on Video Preview article (82 comments in total)

No lens? I pass up.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 14, 2011 at 20:48 UTC as 49th comment
Total: 86, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous2345Next ›Last »