Just Posted: Updated Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison (Raw & JPEG): Digital Photography Review

Since the new images were shot under much lower lighting conditions, how can we compare these photos to other cameras shot with different light?
ie. the ISO 100 was 0.5 second exposure

also I notice that the "new" RAW SRW images have a dead/bad pixel 1/4 way down column 15 of the KODAK Gray Scale box.

This does not show up in your comparator, but can be seen when examining the downloaded SRW file for ISOs 100,200,800. (I did not check 400)
Note: this pizel does not appear in the ISO 1600 shot.

0 upvotes

It's simply a great sensor. Noise character is also very good leading to usable ISO3200. yes it has slightly more noise than 7D - but look at the crops - the new samsung has better micro-contrast. I'm confident that when carefully processed, ISO3200 images will be highly usable. Great lenses from Samsung too! I've been a NEX user since early 2011 but my NEX-5 sits in the dry cabinet all the time because of ugly lenses (maybe I got a soft 18-55, but that 16 makes me sick!). Yeah I used it a couple of times when I mount my M lenses on it. I hope NX20 will be even better due to VF, faster AF, etc..

1 upvote

Now with a new shot test, NX200's images looks even more sharper and crisp.

0 upvotes

i agree... i still have the old shots for comparison and the reshot images are much better. now the nx200 easily beats the lumix G3 with its 16MP.

0 upvotes

Very good RAW quality NX200! But 1600+ iso -- lot of noise.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

But to put it in perspective, it does look better than the a77's output (again, translucent mirror?). Disregarding the shadow areas, if you downsized the 20 mp image to match the 16 mp sensor's output (from the a580/D7000/K-5), it looks like a pretty close call.

1 upvote

This is fantastic news for those of us who want a truly compact, portable APS-C camera. I was torn between Sony and Samsung before, with Sony having the clearly superior sensor, but not having any decent pancake primes.

Now Samsung's sensor is on a par with Sony's, I can put an NX200 with 30mm pancake in my coat pocket, and get roughly equivalent quality to my DSLR everywhere I go.

5 upvotes

This is good news that we have options of choosing Samsung or sony for APS sensor mirrorless campera.

0 upvotes

Whether the NX200 sensor is marginally better or worse than the Sony one, the differences are so small that I would argue they are immaterial in real world use. Ease of use, speed and availability of nice lenses matter much more. The one aspect where the NX200 falls short is its inability to compress RAW files. So unless the Sony has a dramatically worse user experience, that pretty much settles it for me.

Disclaimer: I only shoot RAW :)

3 upvotes

Right, and they should use DNG too.

0 upvotes

Right. The sensors seem to be very close. So the much better NX lens lineup is making me tilt toward the NX side. If Sony had the lenses I needed, I would have already got a Sony. The monstrous RAW files are going to be an issue for sure. Though on the positive side this might compel me to do a better job at culling and only keeping those RAWs which are worth keeping :) Plus hoping that a good EVF will become an option in future.

1 upvote

Well well, let's see which sensor will chose Pentax for K5 replacement : Sony's 24 mp or they will return to Samsung and take this new 20mp one...
Just curious :)

0 upvotes

The better one obviously. :-)
I'm perfectly happy with K-5's IQ so I do not plan any replacement. Still I'd like to know what is the criteria for choice. Output speed, color fidelity, power consumption, DR, Hi iso noise, low ISO resolution...
And will Nikon follow again?

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Nikon is a bit different, their history with Sony sensors is much longer so I don't think so, but who knows...

0 upvotes

Nikon use Aptina for J1, not sure that Nikon will use new Sony sensor because they not yet bring camera with 24mp sensor from a77 and in the past Nikon bring camera with new sensor shortly after Sony.

1 upvote

I hope they will use Aptina also for their APS-C models, more competition will be good!

0 upvotes

I think that DPReview needs to use weaker USM settings. I just check those settings on and they did more than I like to my RAW files from Samsung NX100.

Also, what was the "detail" level setting?

0 upvotes

I believe that DPR are using the unsharp mask filter in Photoshop, and if so 100% at radius 0.6 is a fairly modest level - probably just enough to start to counteract the effects of the AA filter. I suspect you are looking at the RAW develop module in Lightroom which has different sharpening controls including the "detail" one you refer to. Fred

1 upvote

Fred Briggs:

Um, no I opened the Samsung NX100 RAW with PhotoShop CS5, then Adobe Camera RAW most definitely opens within PS CS5. I do not own LightRoom.

0 upvotes

Sorry - I should have mentioned that the Camera RAW module in PS is pretty much the same as that in Lightroom, but I have not had occasion to use it since LR was released. If you open the file with no sharpening in PS Camera Raw and then in PS on the top menu bar go to Filter - Sharpen - Unsharp Mask I believe you will be able to replicate the DPR settings. Fred

0 upvotes

Fred Briggs:

I did try to replicate the DPReview settings, though I used a RAW file from an NX100.

In the ACR Window n Photoshop CS5 the sharpening options read from top down:

Amount

Radius

Detail

Masking

I note that DPReview didn't give values for the last two on that list--"Detail" and "Masking". And I rarely push "Amount" up to 100, not from within Photoshop either.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

As I said before, if you want to replicate the DPR settings don't sharpen in ACR, instead set all sharpening in ACR to zero, and just use ACR to open the picture in PS. Once open in PS use the Filter - Sharpen - Unsharp Mask menu to do the sharpening. This will have amount, radius and threshold settings - you can leave the threshold setting at zero. This process is clearly stated by DPR at the top of this page just above the green writing. Fred

0 upvotes

Fred Briggs:

You're not getting my point, that's way more USM than I use almost ever in Photoshop or in ACR.

Once the ACR for these files is out of beta I'll get it and see what these files actually look like.

Also DPReview did not provide a number for the ACR "detail" setting.

That much ACR sharpening or Photoshop USM is going to make grain/noise standout.

I full well admit that I missed the exact point that DPReview was doing sharpening in Photoshop not ACR, however I don't really care my point still stands: That's too much sharpening for a test shot.

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

i downloaded nx200, 5n, a77 (nex7) iso1600 raw samples, they all look the same if you bring them to 24mp, sharpen each one and reduce chroma noise.

it seems that samsung is making big steps with all their products i think sony no longer has the image sensor advantage, i would say they are equal.
and i am not a samsung fanboy.. my first camera was a sony alpha 100, nikon d90, nikon d300 and now a smaller nx100 because it is more fun to carry around : )

4 upvotes

Indeed. Panasonic's new 16 MP sensor is pretty decent too. So, almost everyone is on par these days. Sony still has some lead in the low ISO dynamic range arena, but I'm sure all the manufacturers will get there sooner or later.

The main differentiation can only come from the lens line-up. And boy, Samsung has really nailed this one (compared to Sony and Panasonic) even though they are the new kid on the block. :)

3 upvotes

Vast majority of lenses that Samsung claimed will be released aren't even available in stores or even online.

M4/3 lens line-up is far superior, as they should since they had earlier start.

1 upvote

NorthwestF:

Not true in the USA, however there are some lenses that have been announced but not released/shipped yet.

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

NorthwestF is a troll. All Samsung's claimed lenses for 2011 have been released - USA and general rollout has been limited, but people have gotten them here and overseas.

0 upvotes

IMHO very good results...

4 upvotes

Some people compare this sensor to Sony. In my opinion to make such comparison it is very important to equalize the resolution of samples to get eny conlusoion.
Sony's sensors are 16 and 24 MP and NX200 has 20 MP so....

Generally results are similar probably my NX10 will be replaced by its succesor NX20 or maybe profi version NX1 who knows but...more important will be accesories and lens offer.
I still can't buy 16 mm/2,4 in my country.....
For m4/3 system in the shops is everything - cameras, lenses, EVF, flashes adapters etc. - why not for NX? Stupid lens hood for 30 mm i had to make by yourself!

0 upvotes

Hi Chris,
it is true that you cannot get almost anything to this camera in Poland while can do to Sony or Olympus systems. Thats a shame.

Whats more - Samsung websites in many coutries even do not show that there are so many lenses being made to this system, not mentioning other accessories. Polish site for exmple tries to convience us, that the dedicated case for EX1 will fit NX100... I'm serious! Viewfinders, some lenses, flashes you do not even know they exist fro that site.

With this way of marketing I cannot see a way for Samsug to be successful in the field of mirroless market.

I do not think, on the other hand, that we have to wonder if a sensor is 16, 20 or 24 mp because if you consider to buy a camera, you should not really wonder how many MPix it has, but how good pictures you can take with it, how easy it is to use, how expensive etc.

3 upvotes

Yes I agree.
What we are reading here it is nothing more as stupid "war"of marketing people.
They know that many people is not well known with digital cameras technical issues so they are posting whatever to point out "better" products.
IMO it is not enogh to sell the product - more important is to keep the customers satisfied - than tmaybe hey will buy newer models.
Not satisfied customer for sure will go out....

0 upvotes

I was checking the result on full screen mode and I am seeing most of the test being focused on the bottle of Bailey instead of the Queen. I was wondering why is there that softness, and now I no longer wonder. Its not softness, its out of focus.

BTW, put the comparison on for Sony A77, NEX-5N and Panasonic G3 and the result is rather revealing ( on RAW )

0 upvotes

I suspect that the white cross is the focus target, and that this is well in front of the playing card and actually almost level with the Baileys bottle. I think it is directly above the central part of the incline with the horizontal lines which seems to be marked with the focal plane. If so the focus looks accurate but the card is probably too far behind the focal plane to appear sharp even at f/8.

It is difficult to be sure without a picture of the test setup taken from above. Perhaps DPR could oblige with one and stop some of the pointless speculation about focus errors! Fred

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I guess so, I suppose DPR should go back and re check many of their studio test. I am seeing plenty with the focus on the Queen , not the white cross, and obviously with different lens used, the DOF is showing the difference there too. Some, like the Nikon V1 with its 10mm lens and its inherent DOF is showing a lot more acute capture on some of the test subjects mainly due to the DOF , where other might shown less due to that

0 upvotes

the test scene is designed so that all the areas we look at are in the same plane of focus. I'll write an article describing it in more detail, but for now here's something from the day we launched it http://www.dpreview.com/news/0910/09101404newbox.asp

1 upvote

DPREVIEW WRITES:

Quote start:
Note: After further analysis we have identified an issue with image softness which appears to affect images shot at a narrow range of shutter speeds from our test sample of the NX200. This issue has affected the image quality of our ISO 400 sample images. Pending further testing and consultation with Samsung we have therefore deleted ISO 400 temporarily from our comparison tool. We will publish an update as soon as possible.
Quote End:

I wonder why they don´t see the same issue with the ISO800 wich is softer than 1600 and even 3200.

0 upvotes

Maybe it has something to do with image stabilization. I recall hearing somewhere (don't quote me) about the Pentax K-7 suffering from a slight blur issue in very strange scenarios at a certain shutter speed. Some people attributed it to the stabilization system.

Just speculating, but maybe the stabilization wasn't turned off (or was turned off but the lens elements weren't locked down) and they happened to land with the worst shutter speed possible (with respect to the stabilization system's refresh rate or some other characteristic) at ISO 400.

0 upvotes

Resolution seems ok, but even in raw (!) there is a reddish color cast??

1 upvote

iso3200 raw is better than of nex-5n ... but jpeg conversions really sucks...great sensor i'm seeing here.

2 upvotes

I prefer nex5n, Samsung has some hot pixels especially at 3200, more red-cast noise while Sony preserves better the colors, still great improvement over 14mp sensor

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

The "watch" in the NX200 1600 ISO image is sharper than that for the 800 ISO image.

0 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

It's a joke?

3 upvotes

No, it does.

0 upvotes

Don't lie, we are not blind.

0 upvotes

This is ridiculous. Samsung has hardly any sales of its mirrorless cameras compared to Sony and yet they have put together a fairly comprehensive lens line up for its mirrorless cameras.

Sony has seen good success with its NEX cameras but it has hardly anything to show at all in its system. Just a few mediocre zoom lenses. The 30mm macro and 50mm f1.8 lens is probably the only two decent lenses in the system. The 24mm Zeiss lens is obviously good but IMO too expensive.

Sony is really missing the whole game by delaying on rolling out some noteworthy lenses.

9 upvotes

Perhaps some people stayed away from Samsung in the past because they felt that they could get better image quality in low light with other systems (with Sony sensors).

Maybe the better IQ of the NX200 will change that.

3 upvotes

I've just placed my pre-order with B&H for the NX 200 + the 30mm pancake. That seems like a lightweight and compact combo. Sony's cameras look good but I don't like their lenses.

2 upvotes

Samsungs 30mm f2 lens is an awesome lens - compact, fast, sharp and close to normal FOV. And best of all it doesn't cost the earth.

Sony's 24mm f1.8 is no doubt a wider lens and a slightly faster lens which is also very sharp but its significantly larger and significantly more expensive. Even though I am a Sony user I don't find the NEX lenses very appealing. IMO Samsung is currently the system to beat. m43 is also very good and all but I feel those smaller sensors give up too much dynamic range compared to modern APS-C sensors like those of the NEX and the Samsung.

0 upvotes

Am I the only one here who sees excessive sharpening with the NEX 5N images? Everything is detailed, but in an "enhanced" sort of way (compare to low ISO images).

Another question: Is the NX200 JPEG noise reduction adjustable? I think half the problem is the default settings have somewhat excessive NR.

The DOF issue is yet another issue. I do think the f settings on the lenses should be identical, if possible. (The shallow DOF suggests a lower f value being used.) I think using a "poster" like what's done on imaging-resource.com provides a more level playing field.

Speaking of imaging-resource, I await its images there for the NX200. I just think that site has more-reliable test samples.

0 upvotes

Great, when can we download these RAWs?

Also why is the entire DPReview website no longer viewable with Firefox 3.6 (yes, still supported)? Nothing has changed about my connection or settings, so DPReview has done something to mess up.

0 upvotes

Download works with Firefox7 on my system.
Why do you use such an old Version?

4 upvotes

Old? It has been released in january 2010, not old at all... Mozilla just jumped on the wagon of google to release as much high number they can to seem up-to-date
3.6 jan 2010
4.0 march 2011
5.0 june 2011
5.0.1 july 2011
6.0 august 2011
6.0.1 august 2011
6.0.2 september 2011
7.0 september 2011
7.0.1 september 2011
8.0 november 2011

They are plain crazy... 2 major releases in one month?!?!

BTW, I am on 3.6 and have no problems at all.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting

1 upvote

Michael_13:

Download was not the problem the problem was the entire website would not open with Firefox 3.6 (well it asked me to signin).

It's fixed now. I run a lot of java suppression ad-ons.

0 upvotes

Izu:

Right, but Firefox 4, 5 and 6 all sucked. 7 seemed okay, but I went back to 3.6.23.

I'll give 8 a try.

0 upvotes

First of all, thanks to the dpreview team for taking the time and effort to get these test shots right.

The NX200 sensor is definitely competitive with other compact system cameras based on these new sample images. You can nitpick the details, but I think that in real-world shooting this camera will produce excellent results. For those of us who like Samsung's usability and lenses, the NX200 is looking like a nice option.

4 upvotes

"You can nitpick the details, but I think that in real-world shooting this camera will produce excellent results."

Yup, the RAW results aren't bad at all - it's only at 6400 and, particularly, 12800 that the NEX5n is clearly better. I only hope Sammy, some day, fixes the dreadful JPEG engine - now, it seems to be completely useless at and over ISO 800, making "classic" P&S usage (taking high-quality shots while on outing) impossible.

1 upvote

... and it's way better than the 24 Mpixel A77 on and over ISO800...

3 upvotes

for all of you who threw a whine storm when I remarked 'it takes more than spotty jpegs to account for the NX200 poor high ISO', I rest my case.

1 upvote

I am not sure what you mean because the high ISO performance seems excellent in RAW - competitive with the best of the APS-C sensors despite the fact that it has higher resolution

3 upvotes

Except for shadows, the part that tends to be rather important in low light. See the black box, lots of read noise = limited DR too.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I guess we'll have to wait and see how much highlight room there is in the raw files. If there's plenty of room to pull back an overexposed image, the shadow noise can be mitigated by overexposing slightly.

0 upvotes

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.

0 upvotes

They are not softer, just out of focus.

2 upvotes

To anybody that use this comparison tool - remember - shots taken by different cameras are taken with various lenses too. This means different DOF at each picture! So BEFORE you come to WRONG conclusion that any camera is not sharp, please look at the samples and think WHICH objects WERE IN FOCUS first. And then compare ONLY the objects that were focused by the camera.

The other important thing is when you CONCENTRATE on focused objects ONLY to wonder how image processing of a camera works (sharpening, anti-aliasing etc.) For example - JPEGs from this camera look very unnatural, just terrible. The higher ISO, the worse.

The good point is to replace small sensor Olympus in default choice with same size sensor as others Nikon D3100, which is probably a best candidate for reference APS format camera available in this comparison. I suggest to forget the lenses' DOF factor and conentrate only at focused areas. Compare colour strings, cottton balls, coins etc.at 4 cameras. Isn't it enough?

1 upvote

You are right, but please dont assume that those who are pointing out some issues in the samples dont understand all of this :) There were some real issues with one or more of the samples. In fact dpreview has already pulled out the ISO 400 shot which was the most torublesome. So please dont automatically assume that others dont udnerstand what you understand :)

1 upvote

Please do not feel bad because of my remark. It was directed ONLY to those who do not understand that matter :) And I think all the remarks about the playing card's problem are explainable on my post's basis.

And yes, I did not pay too much attention to ISO 400, you're right, there's something odd in

0 upvotes

I think DPR did as good a job as possible getting this focused on their target at center. It does show the rather narrow DoF of the lens, so you can't really take the playing card as 'proof of clarity'...

The NEX cameras aren't all super sharp on the card, either.

1 upvote

All truth!

0 upvotes

DPR, can you say anything about RAW file size from the Sammy?

I heard one NX200 tester relating that 80 shots in RAW have filled a 4GB card. That makes it 50MB per RAW on average.

Considering the relatively poor JPEG quality and obscenely large RAW files, I'm not even sure what to think about the new generation of the Samsung cameras. Normally I'm at about 200 shots per outing with a camera - but with 50MB per RAW, even a 8GB card will not be able to hold all the shots.

0 upvotes

You can download RAW files using the links provided if you're curious :)

1 upvote

That's one failure by Samsung... 40GB uncompressed RAW. They don't apparently have the ability to do on the fly compression in camera, whether that's due to lack of software engineering or a slow engine, they don't have it. You'll need a 16GB card.

0 upvotes

Barney Britton:

Then why does it say "downloadable jpegs"?

0 upvotes

@Barney, thanks - I completely forgot about it. So 50MB they are...

P.S. 7-zip compressed the RAWs to ~27MB.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

The RAWs look great overall, but what the heck is going on with that playing card?

0 upvotes

The playing card is just out of focus because lens' limited DOF (deepth of field).

1 upvote

I don't see how the depth of field would cause that shooting at f8 when none of the other cameras show that softness shooting at f8

0 upvotes

It is easy to understand if you consider that the bigger "telephoto" you use, the shallower DoF you get at the same aperture.

The other thing is when you take different lenses, they noticeably differ in DoF. For example - take 2 standard Nikkors 50mm - 1.4 and 1.8 - you will see how they differ - the brighter lens and expensive has a way shallower DoF than the darker, cheap lens.

Please note, that DPR used long tele as for APS sensor format (60 mm is like 90mm in FullFrame) and an expensive one - they are usually brighter and better made than the cheap ones, but suffer from shallow DoF

0 upvotes

Just in case anyone had the same problem of not being able to see the new jpgs and RAWs as I did - I found I needed to clear my browser cache before the new pics and the RAW drop-down would appear. If in doubt, the new pics are numbered in the 9000 range and the old ones were 7000. Fred

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

I currently own a Canon 5DII and Samsung NX10. I've just used the comparator to compare the NX200 with the 5DII at ISO 3200 and I'm shocked by how close they are.

I've loaded the RAW derived JPGs into Lightroom and set the color and luminance noise reduction settings to 25, and the sharpening also to 25 for both pictures.

With a little tweaking of colour temps the pictures look very similar. There is a little more noise in the NX200 shot, but it's only really visible at 100% and the detail levels look to be very much the same - seems the new Samsung sensor really delivers on resolution, even at high ISO.

Overall this seems like real progress, so I'm looking forward to the NX20 which I assume will use the same sensor.

Fred

4 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

Where NX200 is worse then NEX5n?
You must joking.

7 upvotes

The ISO with the least RAW NR applied (and subsequently the most detail too...): 3200.
Also notice deep shadows in the little black box with threads. Shows less overall noise and certainly less read (shadow) noise for the 5N.

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting

1 upvote

I think the problem is in both lenses' DOF - some areas shot by NX200 are just not sharp - when you compare pictures taken by different lenses you have to look only at areas in focus. Some do not know that and probably this is why they come to wrong conclusions.

Of course, it applies to RAWs in this case, because JPEGs from NX200 are worst than anything I have looked in last several months. NEX-5N JPGs are not even old Nikon's D90, but still great compared to NX200. Just look on it's Noise Reduction - just awful!

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

Colour rendition from a converted RAW file mostly means Adobe profiling. Hard to put much weight to that....

0 upvotes

Hmm high ISO results are farily close to 5N. Seems slightly better than 5N at some places and slightly worse at others. Overall fairly comparable. And off course NX200 has a higher resolution sensor. Plus NX system has a number of nice pancakes, which makes it a more attractive system for those who need AF lenses. 5N is off course great for those playing with MF lenses. Also you have to factor lenses into the cost as well. For example NX system has a nice 30mm f2 lens to use as a normal lens for $300. For sony the only option is the 24mm 1.8 for $1K. 5N is by all means a very nice camera, but I think NX200 is also a very attractive choice

2 upvotes

You're forgetting the Sony E 50 F1.8 with optical stabilization.

0 upvotes

What is the price of 50 F1.8?

0 upvotes

$300 at B&H.

0 upvotes

50mm 1.8 is not a normal lens on NEX, more like a short telephoto. But yes 50mm OSS is an exception in the otherwise not so great NEX lineup. I am hoping Sony will improve the lineup but we dont know how much time it will take. Plus the shorter registration distance of NEX might not allow making pancake lenses of the sort that samsung system has - including the 30mm, 20mm and 16mm. There is even a rumor for an upcoming 50mm pancake! Anyways I dont want to sound like a Samsung fanboy - I dont even own an NX camera yet :) but seriously thinking picking up an NX200 after seeing these results!

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting

1 upvote

The only thing samsung has is lots of cheap lenses, unless the NX200 tanks in price down to below C3 territory, as lets be fair those cameras are a far similar comparison than the much superior 5N and its great EVF and video, it is dead. Like Sony has to sell by its own merit, Samsung doesn't have leagues of fanboys to snap up any mediocre effort like olympus, nikon and panasonic do. NX10 remains their best camera, two generations later they are no further than they were.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Troj is our resident Sony fanboy, so we needn't worry about his analysis being unbiased. The NX200 appears to give up a little noise to the 5N at 3200, but retains a bit more detail with higher pixel count and with a smidge of chroma NR will probably turn out an image equal to or better than the NEX. The 60mm used here has a very narrow focal range - the back is clearly out - just concentrate on items within the focal plane, as DPR suggests. It has nothing to do with the camera lacking clarity. Also, the Sony E 50mm has been delayed and is certainly not a pancake. Quality of glass also remains to be seen.

1 upvote

Fanboy SensitiveBill jumps to the gun again. ;)
5 minutes after I mentioned the RAW issues, Dpreview already pulled the ISO 400 shot. The focus doesn't shift between 800 and 3200, yet there's still a difference in favor of the latter.
And if you never see low light, the higher shadow noise isn't going to bother you, but higher read noise also means limited DR. Start pushing these shadows the slightest bit and you know what I'm talking about.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Wow! Much better than the NX-100. Still not as good as the NEX-5n, what with noticeably higher color noise, but still more than competitive. I'm still not terribly interested in the system, but at least I'm no longer repulsed.

0 upvotes

You must be meaning RAWs, because JPEGs from NX200 look obviously much worse than from NX100.

I was also repulsed by NX100 look, before I saw samples from it (just compare JPEG engine of NX100 with some expensive Sony DSLRs) and it's price lower than some toyish point'n'shoot cameras. Regards, Karol

0 upvotes

Oh yes, I should have specified. I always mean RAW. JPEG isn't what the camera is producing, it's Samsung's interpretation of what the camera is producing.

That said, I'm puzzled. The NX200's JPEGs are noticeably better than the NX100.

Moreover, the JPEG engine of Sony cameras is just laughably bad. It's barely worth mentioning Sony's rendered images.

1 upvote

I do not know which aspect you mean, but what deals with JPEG noise reduction algorithms, NX200 has the worst I have seen during last several months in large sensor cameras segment, of course. It is comparable to P&S cameras, actually I think my wife's pocket Fujifilm F200EXR can do better...

0 upvotes

I likewise do not know which aspect of the images you are deriding. The color, the sharpness, and the contrast are very similar between the 100 and the 200. Noise levels and detail at high ISO are significantly better for the 200 than the 100.

0 upvotes

We must have seen different pictures, because when I look at the details from both cameras in JPEG mode (look at the details of the coins or banknotes and cotton balls), the sharpening filter in NX200 makes it look as seen through soap on glass.

0 upvotes

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?

0 upvotes

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.

1 upvote

I agree with "Nikon JPEG engine" but why Pentax? I do not know - I am a Pentax person, I had even the LX before "digital era", but decided to switch to Nikon when I saw DPReview JPEG samples of Pentax K-5 which is regarded to be a greatest digital Pentax so far. RAWs from K-5 - yes yes yes, but JPEGs? - Samsung NX100 gives much better ones, not to mention Nikon D90 or D3100 even (why D7000 is worse is another good question...). Do you know any Pentax DSLR with good JPEG engine?

0 upvotes

The K-5. I own it. The JPG is great. Maybe not in the DPR samples but the K-5 allows the jpg sharpening, colors, curves and anything to be tweaked infinitely and saved into presets. And NR is as good as it gets - removes color noise well, leaves some luminace noise and quite a lot of details. I couldn't be happier.
And if I do not like the jpg shot I just did, I simply press two buttons and save it as a dng raw.
K-5 is the best camera so far, at least for me.

1 upvote

Thanks for opinion - I only saw DPR K-5 samples so far and was trully repulsed. Maybe I should have checked it somewhere else before I got rid of all my Pentax lenses... Yet - still waiting for GOOD (better than Sony's) Pentax Full Frame !

0 upvotes

Whatever you say guys, this is exactly what we were expecting from Samsung. A sensor worth their bodies. Amongst all the bodies I compared it to, it held very well until ISO3200. I don't like the cooked RAWS from ISO6400 on, but I don't need it either. Only Nex 5N surpass it, so I'm more than happy with it. I think I'm revising my decision to buy GX1. NX200 with 16mm and 30mm prime is very tempting. In fact, even 20-50 zoom is gorgeous, a lot better than the images I see out of 14-42 Panasonic X zoom, and the 20-50 is even shorter than Olympus 14-42 collapsible zoom. Samung are on a winning road.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

4 upvotes

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!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 13 minutes after posting

1 upvote

And by the way - it is a way more expensive than NX100.

I bought NX100 as a great additional camera to my basic, unbeatable so far, Nikon D700. What I can see here now, I would never replace it with NX200.

So Samsung, better read our comments and make NX300 with this sensor, buttons from NX100 and JPEG processing as in Nikon D700 (or D90 even) as soon as possible.

Otherwise you will not succeed as you did not so far in the field of interchangeable lens cameras.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

"just JPEGs" - where did I say so?

0 upvotes

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

1 upvote

Yes - I use my cameras not only to prove how big an artist I am, but also to shoot my kids at the playground, views from a bicycle etc. This is what JPEG mode is made for (even in Nikon D700 has it), not to mention cheap EVIL cameras. P&S offer a way worse quality in JPEG mode - why would I use it?

1 upvote

It is expensive, no doubt, but it's not a step back from the NX100 unless you mean available EVF (which was not very good and nobody bought it). Otherwise, the NX200 is an upgrade all around.

Anyone who pays the $$$ for a Mirrorless or DSLR camera and shoots exclusively JPEG has a screw loose, IMO, but that's me.

0 upvotes

It is a downgrade in all points I have mentioned.

And if some people do not shoot JPEGs at all - good for them - but id does not mean comparison of JPEGs is not important. I do not why some of you try to persuade everybody that if they shoot JPEGs, they must be not to smart in photography.

0 upvotes

I just rememberd- does DPR know yet what the effective ISOs are for the NX200? Like for the NX10, its labeled 3200 was effectively lower, and resulted in slower shutter speeds. Is the NX200's effective ISOs also lower than the labeled?

0 upvotes

Weirdest RAW NR.... ever. At ISO 400 it applies more(!) NR than at ISO 3200. Check the face just right of the Martini bottle. The amount of NR goes up and down as you move up the scale... like the tide!
The highest 2 ISO's look like out of camera jpegs, so much NR smearing.
-
Shame really as at the ISO's where NR is the lowest, show that they have improved a bit. Only the read noise (see black box with threads) is still relatively high.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Hmm it does not seem like NR in ISO 400. The ISO 400 shot seems to suffer from slight motion blur or something of the sorts. As anothes poster said below, look at the red text and it has the distinct feeling of being motion-blurred

1 upvote

True or not, ISO 800 looks much softer than the 2 ISO's above it too, almost as bad as ISO 400 did before it was pulled.

0 upvotes

Hi

I agree that something looks odd.

The ISO 400 and 800 RAW images looks softer than the 1600. That cant be right !

But i looks like the sensor shines in RAW.

0 upvotes

Not bad !!! it will it will probably have less DR than Sony's sensors but I have to admit that I am surprised (shame that there is NR above 3200 ISO)

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Yeah, it's exactly what I'm seeing, but until ISO 3200, it's gorgeous, a lot better than sony 24 MP sensor. I think Samsung stopped at the right limit. For DR, see the white to black scale, the last grades of black still have some kind of separation, which is not the case for G3, Sony alpha 77, NX100, E-P3 ... Only Nex 5N does a little better. I'm really surprised but the godness of RAWS compared to JPEGS.

1 upvote

You're looking at a curve applied by Adobe and metering, not DR. The DR of all these cameras far exceeds what can be displayed on your screen in one image.
And when comparing to the A77 sensor, take into account the half a stop light loss from the mirror and the fact Dpreview appears to have given the NX200 2/3 of a stop more light for a given ISO, on top of that.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

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?

0 upvotes

noise reduced? as in samsung applied NR even on the raw file? Hm...I thought it was kind of weird how strangely the IQ shifted from 6400 to 12800. 6400 seemed fine to me, but 12800 looked like a glob of paint exploded on the sensor or something. Not really sure how to explain it, but I guess it's just the sensor's limit.

0 upvotes

but ultimately, the RAW files are very nice. from 6400 and below, I'd say the nx200's sensor is on par or beats the 5N's sensor! Although 6400 and up is still Sony's triumph.

1 upvote

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

2 upvotes

Don't confuse NR with sensor quality. Look at the fine detail smearing at ISO 6400 and 12800. The 5N doesn't do that.

2 upvotes

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

1 upvote

Looks like samsung has a great sensor.

4 upvotes

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

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

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!!!

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

1 upvote

We're using a 60mm lens - you can expect slightly different depth of field compared to a 50mm on the same format sensor. The target plane of focus (the main image area) is what you need to look at.

2 upvotes

Not sure what you mean by main image area, but the white cross appears to be the focus target so am I right to assume this is in the intended plane of focus. However, without a view of the scene from above it is difficult to see where this cross sits within the overall depth of the scene. Fred

0 upvotes

Barney, thanks for posting these! Thats very useful!!.

However there is definitely something wrong with the ISO 400 RAW shot. The blur on the red text in that shot does not al all look like due to being out of focus or due to noise reduction. It basically looks like a slight motion blur or something of that sort. Dont know what it is, but it is not right

0 upvotes

Barney, the depth of field with the same object size should be very close, and can not explain the big difference on the Queen image. Since with 60mm lens, the NX200 are further away from the object, which would give more DOF, although 60mm at F8 would have less DOF than 50mm F8. These two effects can cancel each other.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

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? :)

0 upvotes

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.

2 upvotes

whoo! thanks for redoing these samples and adding RAW files, even if they are beta (hopefully when the real support comes the beta ones will be replaced?)

EDIT
Actually...on actually looking at the samples, while some problems have been resolved, new ones seem to have surfaced. The detail retention is definitely better than before, and whatever gross smearing was there is now gone. However, at iSO 400 and possibly some other ISOs, there almost seems to be motion blur, or peculiar out of focus bits. For instance, the text on the red paper between the two faces seems to be a bit blurred somehow at ISO400 and appear worse than the NX100's, despite other ISOs showing up better than the NX100 (like ISO100). And the black and white checker squares on the upper right and left are now worse than before- perhaps a trait of the 60mm lens, but it also could be from whatever was causing this weird blurring, which inevitably could also be of the lens

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

And again, I'm not a professional with a trained eye, and I don't know the specific jargon to describe what I'm seeing, so sorry if I'm pointing out something stupid. But yeah, that's what I see.

0 upvotes

I want to buy NX200, but I really can't until they fix this raw file size. I traveled for 2 week, and took 3500 photos with. I do not want to take a truck load of high speed SD cards.

0 upvotes

Then take a netbook. No excuse for Samsung's lack of RAW compression, but a practical solution to your problem.

0 upvotes


Just posted: Our Samsung NX200 in-depth review Feb 28, 2012	Just Posted: Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison for JPEG Nov 1, 2011	Just posted: Hands-on video of the Samsung NX200 Sep 3, 2011	Just Posted: Samsung NX200 hands-on preview Sep 1, 2011

	Olympus PEN E-P5 May 10, 2013
	Samsung NX2000 May 1, 2013
	Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX50V Apr 24, 2013
	Panasonic Lumix DMC-G6 Apr 24, 2013
	Panasonic Lumix DMC-LF1 Apr 24, 2013
	Ricoh GR Apr 17, 2013
	Samsung NX1100 Apr 11, 2013
	Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF6 Apr 9, 2013
	Fujifilm FinePix S8400W Mar 22, 2013
	Fujifilm FinePix XP200 Mar 22, 2013

Recommended Photoshop Alternatives?	102
Are we fooling ourselves?	83
From first effort at street.	69
Not completely satisfied with my X100S	58
Sold my RX100 - this is why	58
All this Adobe flaming	55
A99 Short Film "Survival of the Fittest" Hi-ISO	53
24mp sensor for m43? 3.2micron pixel pitch!	51
M43 and DOF with a fast lens	49
Primes vs Zooms	49
Anybody out there who does not use Photoshop ...	44
When I increase the aperture my screen goes ...	42
Nikon 1 lens road map...anyone?	37
Who own the copyright and why?	37
Alternative to Adobe software	36
Nikor 24-120 F4	34
K511s + 60-250 lens.	31
Tempted by the price of the SAMYANG 14mm f2.8 ...	31
A question for Great Bustard...	30
Colors in B/W!!!...	30

Your email address:
Your name:

Just Posted: Updated Samsung NX200 Studio Comparison (Raw & JPEG)

Samsung NX200

Comments