peterwr: "Based around the same 28MP BSI-CMOS sensor as the flagship NX1..."
But lacking a viewfinder. On that basis alone, I can't see them getting many takers, unless those takers have generations-old, second-body DSLRs.
Yeah back when I first bought my mirrorless I came within an inch of getting an NX20. Decided not to because it looked too much like the DSLR I was trying to get away from, the video was mediocre, and because back then they didn't have a collapsible kit zoom.
I see the NX30 got bulkier too, so I hope the NX40 doesn't expand on that. Could do with some styling magic, they look too much like budget SLR's. Also, that NX30 size & form-factor with no thumb control dial? They put one on the NX500 so hopefully...
Lee Jay: Ditch an optical viewfinder for no viewfinder? I wouldn't ditch an optical viewfinder for the best EVF in the world, much less no viewfinder at all.
Lee, given that this camera doesn't even have an EVF I'm not sure why you've picked this moment in time to pick several arguments about OVF vs EVF. Given that you have no interest in discussing (which would involve being open to the other side) I'm not even entirely clear on why you are posting, except perhaps for the thrill of telling everyone they are wrong?
Yeah I've heard good things about Samsung lenses, just doesn't seem to come up much.
Bit of a shame. They badly need a more exciting mid-range prosumer body to get the masses talking.
Randy Veeman: Nanobytes was correct. DxO rates the NX1/NX500 higher than the Sony A6000 sensor. DxO rates the Samsung higher at Color Depth, Dynamic Range, and Low light ISO - a clean sweep!Maybe it is the compressed RAW. I don't think DxO accounts for the banding in the Sony sensor. Nikon also has several APSC cameras with sensors rating higher than the Sony included the old D5200.
Randy, I'd like to know where you heard Sony lost money on APSC, because I'm not sure they've ever disclosed that information. Unless you work for Sony's accountants I think that is purely speculation?
The A6000 is the best selling mirrorless consistently, the fact is Sony could charge an extra $100 and still shift them, and since they aren't pushing lenses I don't think it makes any sense to suggest it is a loss-leader. It is a plastic body with a sensor with a very well established fab manufacturing line, a cheap EVF and an old LCD and a pastic-fantastic kit zoom. They can churn them out for not much more money than a compact. Given the low price I'm absolutely certain they turn a profit, even if it is just $10 per unit, because why not? They could wack another $50 on there and it would still cost less than an XT10, EM10, and beat them on specs (for the casual consumer).
Bizarre thing to suggest frankly.
Joe Ogiba: It's funny seeing DSLR fanboys talking shi* about mirrorless cameras. They think the huge flipping mirror DSLR is the future. Wrong, the DSLR is the buggy whip of cameras. I bet the top people at DPR know that but they depend on the aging DSLR sheep for view count. The A7r II, A7s II , NX1 etc are the future.
They have many more advantages than just that, and it isn't very hard to find out what those are with a quick Google search, but if you're perfectly happy it's slightly moot.
At this point all I'm really saying is all of us who love EVF aren't somehow flawed practitioners who 'aren't doing it right', there are legitimate pros and far more of them than you give credit.
Spongemac: EVF is useful tool to have in some situations. To me, a flippy screen is more useful. Esp when i need to shoot creatively or at lower level like with kids. One can only get so low with a camera stuck to face.
There are lots of cameras with tilty screens and an EVF. The only position you lose is self-portrait, which I agree can be nice to have while travelling. You can certainly get low for shooting kids or plants/insects/macro with an XT1 or A6000 tilty screen.
That's a lovely example, but quite niche.
Your assertion that it is 'never a problem' might perhaps be tempered by saying 'never a problem for me'. The growing market for mirrorless shows that many people do like an EVF.
As for missing the shot, it depends completely on the situation. If I'm shooting a rowing race, following the boats in a speed-boat going over rough water, and suddenly want to check that I'm getting all 9 crew guys in my DOF, pressing the review button twice takes only a second and I can keep the camera pointing in the right direction.
To be honest I lose interest pretty quickly when someone says that one option is straight up the only way worth considering. I get why people like OVF's but I don't get why others full-on dogmatically despise EVF's.
The other night I was in a bar with a D810 shooting portraits at F1.8 and honestly I'd have killed for an EVF with gain and focus peaking.
I think 'knowing nothing about the NX system' is a huge problem for Samsung in general. I follow several photography sites and never hear anything about Samsung lenses. Not sure exactly who's fault that is.
@Lee Jay, have you tried the one in the XT-1?
What I will say about OVF - after using an EVF I really find OVF difficult for night and low-light shooting. Even with a 0.94x pentaprism, after dark I'd rather have an EVF showing me what my photo will look like with my exposure settings. If I am manual focusing to get an eye in perfect focus, no way am I going to be able to do that in the dark, while and EVF with focus peaking makes it pretty easy.
For me the OVF-purist argument about 'real world vision' falls down because the EVF is showing you what your photo will look like, which can be more useful.
If you are shooting sport or fast wildlife, being able to review your photo to check something without ever having to take your eye away and recompose is invaluable.
What I'd say to people like you is that there ARE real-world advantages, the EVF isn't just a gizmo that fixes a problem that didn't exist.
Gazeomon: Use the NX500 since April as a travel camera and street shooter. Fantastic when paired with decent lenses like the 30mm f/2. On par or better with the best APSC cameras on the market. I also shoot Pentax and Nikon.
I did specifically acknowledge exceptions.
Occasionally I'm happy to put a prime on the A5000 and just use that out and about, so I myself am a sort-of exception, but I wouldn't want it as my only camera.
99% of the people I've seen with compact EVF-less cameras have been using the kit zoom.
aftab: Desperate move.Samsung makes good cameras, but that's not enough to unseat DSLR or other mirrorless. Hardly anyone takes them seriously as a camera maker.
Fair point Howabout RAW,
I'm pretty certain the Rokinon 12mm will be my next lens, I just don't know what mount it will be!
FodgeandDurn: IF YOUR CAMERA HAD AN EVF MAYBE YOU WOULD GET SOMEWHERE WITH THAT.
Phew, sorry for the caps everyone.
The camera burst speed is different from the buffer depth. Buffer depth refers to how long it can shoot continuously. The Samsung buffer fills quickly, whereas the A7rII and A7r can shoot for longer, albeit slower.
a sharp pancake 30mm F2 that costs £150 is a very very tempting lens. That is the sort of lens that would tempt me to get a mid-range body. If that mid-range body had an EVF, that is (I really would like to stop saying that but Jesus I wish it had an EVF).
You are obviously an exception, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say that I don't think most people who are in the market for great primes are also people who want an evf-less camera. Most people looking for an EVF-less camera are either after a second body, or a better P&S with a kit zoom. I don't think Samsung have very much cohesion in their overall camera strategy.
I'm not sure I'd call it 'desperate' either. Everyone has to break in somehow. Of course I think they could do that with better product design.. but as for taking them seriously, I think the NX1 made a lot of people take them very seriously, people are just waiting to see whether they can keep the system running.
A sexier NX1 body, and an NX500 with an EVF (seriously the best selling mirrorless in the West is the A6000 and they came within a millimeter of making a better camera) and I think Samsung would do extremely well for themselves.
It would also help if they could get Sigma/Tamron/Samyang involved...
That said I've got a D80 somewhere.. and I'd happily swap using my A5000 for an NX500, very similar form factor but immensely better performance.
IF YOUR CAMERA HAD AN EVF MAYBE YOU WOULD GET SOMEWHERE WITH THAT.
TN Args: Let's hope the camera isn't as 'me too' as the lens spec. OTOH introducing a new camera and making it a DSLR instead of mirrorless is about as 'me too' as one can get. Like introducing a 'new' TV with a CRT.
I've been using EVF for several years, last week I did some shooting with a Nikon OVF in low light.. honestly I couldn't see a damn thing. Not sure why people still rate them so highly - go on a night shoot with a good modern EVF and you might be converted. Fine during daylight though, so I'll still be looking at Pentax's new camera very closely.
FodgeandDurn: One totally incidental thing I found interesting, is that the Pentax K3ii using pixel shift renders the 'bearings' text in similar clarity than the A7rii.
Not making a terribly important point here, but I hadn't previously noticed that the feature was quite so impressive.
Of course, and you still won't get the same dynamic range perhaps (although in a 100+mb file perhaps you get more).
Even with the limitations it is still interesting for someone without $3000 to spend.
Where I want resolution most is in wide angle landscapes, where it is cool to zoom in and look around, and maybe get a detailed print. Less interested in crazy detail on moving subjects, or portraits where half the shot is probably soft anyway.
kewlguy: Should have been called a Tamtax or Penron lens.
Marksphoto: 2.8 is old news, give us 2.0 and you have a deal.
Perhaps Sigma will release the 24-35 2.0 for Pentax. Not too heavy, but fairly expensive.