Jogger: I could see these doing well in Walmart, Target, Staples, or Radioshack. There is a place for cheap off-brand, products like this. And, in many places around the world, American nameplates are still well regarded; e.g. Buick is considered a luxury brand in China.
Most likely Walgreens and CVS. Fry's is too good for that.
AlpCns2: Interesting camera. The optics are already known to be excellent to extraordinary. The sensors and resulting files are rich and beautiful according to several pros. Quite tempting, actually. And their prices are right, too.
Samsung 45/1.8 is superb, it's probably better than 85/1.4
brownie314: This is a very interesting camera. Lots of features that are not included on other cameras. And if this thing comes in at the right price, this could be the steal of the century. If Samsung can package this body with the new 16-50 'pro' lens for less than $1200 - SOLD! I also like that they have some pancake lenses in useful ranges (they have a 30mm f/2 pancake - very nice).
Most likely you will be looking at $1800-2000 range with that lens.
supeyugin1: The best mirrorless system in the world! Bravo Samsung!
Sony is out of question. Subpar or too expensive lenses (and too big). Fuji - nice bodies and lenses, but too big/expensive, slow AF. m43 - best selection of lenses, nice bodies, but smaller sensor, and too expensive for high end bodies/lenses. I'd say Samsung is the best compromise. Good selection of quality lenses, good bodies, now with NX30, excellent prices (when on sale, which is often).
Who is the best?
JEROME NOLAS: Whining again! If this lens is from CaNikon, there would be already 2000+ comments about the greatest lens on earth, but it's "only" Samsung, right? Get real and buy Samsung!!!
No other mirrorless system has 16-50/2.0-2.8 equivalent, while in DSLR world everybody has 16-XX/2.8 lens.
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.
@groucher. On par with Sony kit lenses? You gotta be kidding! It's much better than Sony kits, on par with Fuji 18-55/2.8-4
It's not getting there, it's already there.
The best mirrorless system in the world! Bravo Samsung!
I'm speechless! Wow! It's a dream camera and lens!
panoptic: If it's important to you, only one camera (LX7) has a 24mm wide end, actually goes to 22mm in 16x9 mode.
There is also Samsung EX2F which also starts at 24mm, but it's not mentioned here for some reason.
jcmarfilph: Is does appear that iPhone 5s mid-ISO is as horrible as high ISO of the other 3 phones in the Studio Comparison low-light comparison.
No, they are still shooting with iPhone and thinking it's the best.
iphone users don't care.
You should have compared it to the Galaxy S4 zoom, instead of Canon S120.
yonsarh: I would get a7 instead.
Hasselblad Solar is even better!
Boerseuntjie: Does Samsung still make cameras?...LOL, they should stick to washing machines and phones
Panasonic makes vacuum cleaners, and they suck!
Boerseuntjie: I can't wait for Samsung to shoot themselves in the foot when they finally abandon Android for their Tizen Os and I will watch them fall from their high horse...LOLhttp://www.androidauthority.com/first-tizen-smartphone-release-315838/
Tizen is already used in NX300 and NX2000. It's just a variant of Linux, like Android.
Trollshavethebestcandy: Kudos to Pentax for both lenses. The Q has the same advantage as M43 and that is small lenses. It is a bit odd to make it $500 but maybe not so outrageously so considering Fuji will have an ultra wide zoom in a few months for $800 (yes the Fuji will have a greater output) but I don't know what the margin on this is considering R&D ect and small market but they are brave to put out a risky product and reward the owners of their midget system. Perhaps we will see a few more Q bodies in the future especially with advancing technology. Perhaps in a couple years their tiny sensor can get closer to more peoples photographic needs. Lets remember this is a TINY lens and that is the niche. Compare to M43 ultra wide zoom for a comparison. Bravo for bravery and keeping with the ethos and concept.
Yes, the price is high, but it has 3 aspherical and 3 ED elements. Comparable lenses from Nikon, Samsung, Panasonic, Olympus, Sony and Canon cost more (except for Nikon and Canon). Canon and Sony has no ED elements at all. The prices are Nikon $500, Canon $480, Samsung $560, Sony $850, Olympus $700, Panasonic $900.
It available for preorder for $500. A bit too expensive.
LENS MOUNT: PENTAX QFOCAL LENGTH (Q, Q10): 3.8-5.9mm (35mm equiv. 21-32.5mm)FOCAL LENGTH (Q7): 3.8-5.9mm (35mm equiv. 17.5-27mm)APERTURE: f/3.7-f/4MIN APERTURE: f/8LENS CONSTRUCTION: 10 elements in 8 groupsANGLE OF VIEW (Q, Q10): 67° - 92°ANGLE OF VIEW (Q7): 77° - 102°MIN FOCUSING DISTANCE: 0.82’ (0.25m)MAX MAGNIFICATION: 0.03XFILTER DIAMETER: 49mmDIAPHRAGM CONTROL: Fully AutomaticNUMBER OF APERTURE BLADES: n/aLENS APERTURE RING: n/aTRIPOD ADAPTER: n/aHOOD: PH-RBF49 (optional)OBJECTIVE CAP: O-LC49 (included)CASE: n/aMAX DIAMETER x MIN LENGTH: 2.1” x 1.5” (54 x 38mm)WEIGHT (W/O HOOD): 2.6 oz (75g)
neo_nights: Honest question: I know that smartphones don't give a lot of control, thus making the test scenes a little hard to even them out. But there are some apps out there that at least let you choose ISO. It's really unfair to compare a "high ISO" of 400 against a high ISO of 1600 (Galaxy 4).
So why don't you use an app and at least use same ISO for all the smartphones?
iPhone users don't need exposure compensation, because Apple thinks they are dumb.