Juraj Lacko: All nice but samsung cameras have had always way too large RAW files. We will see its any better this time. Who wants to deal with 50MB files? Not me. The rest of the system would be ok
No, you have a out-dated information about RAW file size. Since NX300, the RAW file size reduced around 20~24 MB.
Jorginho: "response is phenomenal"
Now how did this happen all of a sudden. I don't believe a thing, although it is relative.
"First APS-c breaking 20 MPixel barrier"
Did he forget about the NEX7 APS-c which is 24 MP APS-c?
85mm is huge and not unlike some Sony's NEX lenses. At least this one delivers great IQ.
Simply, NEX-7 is not on the market yet.
Kuturgan: 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.
DPR mentioned they are studio samples and titled "Comparison". What should be based for this kind of comparison? Basic rule for any comparison is put the comparison in same conditions. How can this be titled comparison with unfocused shots with different kind of lenses? All u4/3 uses Olympus 50mm Macro, Pentax K-5 uses Pentax 50mm Macro. Even NX10 and NX100 used Pentax 50mm Macro with NX-K adapter. But, NX200 uses non-macro Pentax lens. Is this comparison for camera or lens, or what?
DPR mentioned they will retest and post samples again. We will see.
@Jon, Please go to DPR Samsung forum, you will see bunch of specific issues about the test.
Most significant mistake is NX200 samples have focused significantly at front.