rallyfan: Why harass the three elderly women in Spain?
I think the world has gone a bit uptight if people start thinking that a random photo taken in a public place is "harassment", just because someone made you feel "uncomfortable." That's just the price you pay for living in a society with other people.
Sometimes, things happen that might make you feel "uncomfortable." Someone bumps into you while walking down the street. Or you have to cram into a crowded subway car. Or, God forbid, someone makes unsolicited eye contact with you! Yes, all these things have the potential to make someone feel "uncomfortable". Like I said, that's just the small price you pay for living in a society with other people. If you want to avoid any potential for feeling "uncomfortable" out in public, then just stay at home! But if you go out in public, you have to understand that you're out in public.
You're whining about a trivial first-world problem here. "Oh, no, someone made me feel uncomfortable because they took a photo!" Get over it.
Utterlyotter: Without doubt a brilliant camera.But don´t quite see the point of an apsc for FF-money and in a DSLR-sized body, sort of defeats the purpose imo. (Thats highly subjective of course)
But it´ll put some pressure on the competition, wich is good.
I still remember when people like yourself were calling auto exposure metering, auto focus, multiple focus points, focus tracking, and image stabilization lenses "gimmicks". People like yourself would say, "I don't need them! I don't care about all these gimmicks!" Of course, these are all things that we now take for granted, and use as valuable tools for photography. It just goes to show that a lot of new stuff is initially dismissed as a "gimmick" by the older, more conservative crowd; but today's "gimmick" usually becomes tomorrow's standard, expected feature.
keeponkeepingon: I think the title, "a class of it owns" just goes to show how dorked up the DPREVIEW sensor size based camera classification system is.
With the kit lens this is almost a $3000 camera. It should be compared to other $3000 cameras regardless of sensor size.
Also I don't see how any camera that has problems focusing in low light could be given a gold?
If I want a quick sunny day camera, I'll use my iPhone thank you very much.
What in the world are you smoking? LOL. The camera body alone sells for only $1300. It just happens to be available in a kit that includes a very high-end Samsung "S" lens, which is basically Samsung's equivalent to Canon's "L" lenses. Try to price out a weather sealed 16-50mm f/2-2.8 lens with ED glass and OIS in any other system! While we're at it, try pricing out the cost of a 15 fps DSLR with 4K video in any other system! A Canon 7D MKII with only 10 fps, no 4K video, no wifi, no articulating LCD, no touch screen, sells for $1700, quite a bit more than the $1300 selling price of the NX1.
Your overblown complaint about the "amazing" attention that dpreview is giving this camera (LOL!) just makes you sound really, really insecure. What's wrong with more competition in the marketplace? I use Canon EOS and I also use Samsung NX. Both have their pros and cons, which is why I use both. But I see the stuff coming from Samsung as being very exciting.
Is it really harassment? I don't see how a quick photo, on the street, in a public place, rises to the level of harassment.
@HFLM- the point is that you're getting 15fps in a $1300 camera. How much would you have to spend to get similar speed in a DSLR? As for 4K, again, it's something you're getting in a $1300 camera. It merely points to the considerable level of specs and technology that Samsung is willing to give you for such a low price. As for touch screen, time to get with the modern age! Touch screens are everywhere. I guess you're one of those people who thinks touch screens on smartphones are also a gimmick. I find touch focus to be the fastest way to manually tell the camera exactly where to focus. Great for when the camera is mounted on a tripod or table pod. It's also handy when the articulating screen is flipped out, like for low angle shooting or waist level shooting. And for video shooters, touch focus is a huge advantage! No need for any follow-focus or focus-pull contraptions on your lens! Touch focus is no gimmick. You just don't know how to use it, or understand how others use it.
realtrance: Years ago I was finally excited about digital photography.
Suffers from the same problem as computers: intentionally built-in obsolescence.
These days I just stick with my iPhone's camera and whatever results I happen to get. Every now and then I take out my Canon 1V body and remember how much better things once were, before it all went to overpriced, constantly obsoleted and thus crippled digital crap.
Yeah, the good old days when the maximum ISO color film I ever used was a whopping high ISO 800! And for higher ISO shooting, I'd use Ilford Delta 3200 black-and-white filme shot at ISO 1600, and images were so grainy it looked like images were composed of large grains of sand.
No thanks, I'll still take digital.
As for "obsolescence", I have an old Canon Rebel XT DSLR from 2008 that still shoots just fine. It may only be 8mp-- low by today's standards-- but it still takes great images, and I've printed up plenty of images that easily match or exceed the quality of film. And I'm not limited to 36 shots per roll, and no image review, like I am with film. I don't know what you mean by "crippled digital crap." Film was crippled in its own way (36 shots per roll, no image review, poor high ISO, high cost per shot, etc). I think a film camera is more "obsolete" than my old Rebel XT DSLR.
T3: Unlike all the cynics here, I don't think it's bad at all. If I were an RX100 owner, it's something I'd definitely consider. I just think a lot of people are making fun of it because the Hassy Stellars had come before it. But if the Hassy Stellars had never existed, and Fotodiox had introduced this $60 wooded grip for the RX100 all on their own, I think people would look at it differently. I think it's a nice way to add some visual character to a bland-looking RX100, while also adding a nice grip to it! I happen to like the look of wood, and it's a striking contrast to the camera body. Aside from the look of wood, I just like how wood feels, so I think it would be a nice grip to hold. Ultimately, I think that would be something that would make the grip worth having: being able to have the feel of a contoured wood grip under your fingers.
It's just a wooden grip, for crying out loud. LOL. What's all this non-sense about it being "tacky and "looks horrible" and "mis-match." I think some people just want cookie-cutter cameras that all look the same, and anything that remotely deviates from that stringent industrial aesthetic is deemed "tacky" and "horrible", LOL. God forbid anyone does anything to a camera that might add a bit of personality! "Wood on a camera! The horror!" Anything different seems downright offensive to you. Relax. It's just a harmless little wooden grip, and no one is going to force you to buy one.
You'd probably hate what I did to my Oly m4/3 camera: https://imageshack.com/i/64img9908copyj
I think it's fun and gives the camera some personality. You'd probably start hyperventilating with anger. LOL. I guess I'm just a little more flexible and light-hearted when it comes to my cameras.
It's a 15 frame-per-second APS-C camera that sells for $1300 and shoots 4K video. A Canon 7D MKII is 10 fps, sells for $1700, doesn't have an articulating LCD, no have a touch screen, no wifi, no 4K, and it's bigger and heavier.. So when you say "APS-C for FF money", you really ought to take into consideration the specs.
DotCom Editor: This is certain to make us all much better photographers.
No different from spending a little extra money on a nice camera strap. A camera strap won't make you a better photographer either. But that doesn't mean that it's still not worth having.
mediasorcerer: i think dark grey anodized aluminium might have been more aesthetically coherent but what would i know lol/
Its kind of an antithesis to the modern spartan appearance of the camera what say?
I actually like the aesthetic contrast that the wood adds. Love the visibility of the wood grain on the grip. Plus, I don't care for the feel of hard aluminum for grips. It just feels dull, cold, and dead. Wood feels nicer. I think this wooden Fotodiox grip would be more comfortable to hold than aluminum. More of an organic feel to it.
Unlike all the cynics here, I don't think it's bad at all. If I were an RX100 owner, it's something I'd definitely consider. I just think a lot of people are making fun of it because the Hassy Stellars had come before it. But if the Hassy Stellars had never existed, and Fotodiox had introduced this $60 wooded grip for the RX100 all on their own, I think people would look at it differently. I think it's a nice way to add some visual character to a bland-looking RX100, while also adding a nice grip to it! I happen to like the look of wood, and it's a striking contrast to the camera body. Aside from the look of wood, I just like how wood feels, so I think it would be a nice grip to hold. Ultimately, I think that would be something that would make the grip worth having: being able to have the feel of a contoured wood grip under your fingers.
I don't mind lenses that add their own unique character to an image, but $500 is a bit steep for such a lens. $250 list price would be more reasonable. $200 street price, then it becomes something that I might actually buy.
taktak91: Judging from the review, it's a very capable camera.Too bad it's not sold everywhere like other brands.I won't purchase a $2000+ camera if I can't see it in person first.
Sure, "nothing beats reality", which is why I buy on the internet with total confidence. I buy, it gets sent to me, I try, and if I don't like it I return it. I still think that's a better experience than going to a camera store to play with a camera for a few minutes.
Besides, I think it's only a matter of time before Samsung NX gets carried in camera stores. Either that, or the camera store you go to will end up closing its brick-and-mortar location! It's happening more and more every day. My local camera store, a very popular one, has seen their traffic decline so much that they now have shorter business hours, which makes it a pain to get there when they are open. Last time I went there, they had already closed up for the day. So I just got on my smartphone and ordered what I needed online.
S Severs: It looks like a nice product, but I have no confidence that a company with it's hands in all things electronic will still be in the camera business 5-10 years out, especially with the continued sales decline in the premium camera market. It's all about the glass in front and established 1st party camera companies still refine, innovate, and make new lenses, and have lens roadmaps. In addition other 2nd party manufacturers are making other innovative/responsive lenses for Canon, Nikon, and m4/3.
Actually, I think a company like Samsung is better positioned to weather the storm of "continued sales decline", because they are so diversified that they can still have excellent financial health in spite of declining camera sales. Samsung has invested heavily in their NX system, and it's really naive to think that they are going to pull the plug on it. I think they are in it for the long haul, and they know that they have the financial strength and diversification to cope with a shrinking camera market, while other companies will start to struggle financially because they are so heavily dependent on camera sales to pay the bills and pay for R&D.
GatanoII: If someone makes an NX to EF electronic adapter with AF, aperture and IS working (almost) as good as on a Canon camera this Samsung NX1 can make a difference in the market right now, i.e. sell a lot of pieces and force Canon to make something similar/better, sooner than later.
Otherwise, the huge difference in glass selection compared to Canon will still keep it in a much more limited market, the same way as Sony NEX mount cameras are adopted by many Canon users thanks to the NEX to EF adapter availability.
Why I compare it only to Canon? because it has the most selection of glass and can work easily once (and if) an electronic adapter is available.
One a tiny fraction of the market really needs a glass selection that goes beyond what Samsung currently offers and what Samsung has in the pipeline (for example, the 16-80mm f/4 OIS, 24mm f/1.4 ED, na d 11-24mm f/2.8 ED OIS due out this year). In addition, Samsung NX has lenses that the Canon EOS system doesn't offer, such as 16-50/2-2.8, and a wider selection of pancake lenses.
tom1234567: If you don't buy the S/lens no point in buying the camera.the other lens which are not S/ don't get good reviews.
I have not read a good review on any of the cheaper Lens for the NX1 in other words there CRAP
I would buy the camera but the S/lens are far to expensive,have to wait 6mths until the price drops or Pentax brings out something better than K3
I use both Samsung NX and Canon EOS DSLR. I find the Samsung lenses (none of which are S lenses) are comparable to the Canon lenses, if not better. I consider NX "S" lenses to be the marketing equivalent of Canon "L" lenses. The "S" lenses are the premium lenses. But it certainly doesn't mean that the non-"S" lenses are "crap", just like Canon's non-"L" lenses aren't "crap".
You seem out of touch. There are plenty of reviewers that people have come to know and trust. These reviewers come with experience and credibility. It's not a case of "who-the-heck-is-he". They often do extensive reviews based on field testing of the camera. I find that more informative than having a few minutes with a camera at a store. Plus, with today's internet commerce, millions of people buy things every day on the internet without seeing these things in person. So it's certainly not a rare activity. And today's modern internet commerce generally makes returns quite easy. It's not as if you have to keep something just because you bought it through the internet!
It sounds more like you have a chip on your shoulder, especially considering your final sentence: "this camera is so great that I should just shut up and go buy it, but I'll probably think otherwise after I see it in person." Seems like you've already made up your mind, even without seeing it in person, LOL!
I think every camera I've bought in the last 8 years, I've bought without seeing it in person first! LOL. Lately, I just rely on video reviews on Youtube and written online reviews. I think that's definitely going to become the norm for many cameras, especially as brick-and-mortar camera stores become increasingly rare.
Ramjager: Mmmm review conclusion..no so good for photographers wanting to use a large family of lenses..Isn't that entirely the point of owning an SLR body?Two lenses to pick from.Great camera if you don't want anything longer than 150mm.A good SLR is not just a good body but a suite of fine glass.When will reviewers finally wake up from the world of electrons and propaganda about sensors and phase detect rubbish to the fact glass is what makes great images.Try shooting an Eagle with your gold star Samsung..
"Two lenses to pick from?" Clearly, you have no idea what you are talking about. The Samsung NX system currently has 15 lenses. The longest NX lens goes to 200mm. And a 300mm f/2.8 OIS lens is on the way: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8526979986/first-images-from-upcoming-samsung-s-300mm-f-2-8-ed-ois
An additional three lenses (16-80mm f/4 OIS, 24mm f/1.4 ED, 11-24mm f/2.8 ED OIS) are scheduled to be released later this year.
I'm glad I started using the Samsung NX system last year. They are advancing their system at a rapid rate, and offering good value your money. Hope they keep it up!