Samsung introduces 10mm F3.5 Fisheye for NX

I agree with you all.
As for me, I'll stick with the NX20 until we see the NX310.
But I do wish there were third party manufacturers offering auto-focus lenses for NX. Not that I dislike my 30mm f2... I'd just like to have choice, like a 30mm f1.4, or a faster zoom.

The hussain bolt money was obviously well spent.

Pik--

Why with the recent firmware update the sensor in the NX100 is useable at ISO 3200?

And before the firmware, the NX100 already did excellent image quality. And that sensor is from 2009.

NB: One must shoot raw with NX cameras and extract in Adobe or other good extraction software, not Silkypix.

As another pointed out the 20MP sensor is newer. And plenty good.

Timmbits:

Sure the NX20 is a good camera, but it has big raw buffering problems that the NX10/100 and now the NX300 don't. No there is not a firmware fix for the NX20's buffering problems--there is a tiny improvement.

(I just discovered that the firmware updates for the NX100 give that body nearly the high ISO performance of the NX20, though I think the buffer on the NX100 is now a bit slower--not a real surprise--and still not the disaster of the NX20/200/210/1000.)

NX100 sensor is from 2008 (re-used sensor developed for K20D/GX20). Yea that actually makes it even better. :D

Right it's from 2008.

But you completely missed the point, the latest firmware for the NX100 increases the high ISO performance astoundingly. And there aren't the buffer problems of the NX200/20/210/1000.

Is the NX100's better than that in the NX20? Probably not, assuming one has the best firmware for the NX20. But again the NX100 doesn't have the buffering problems of the NX20. So yes the NX100 is "better" in some ways than the NX20. (Unless you were using "better" ironically.)

The only reason I prefer to take an NX100 body with me on long trips as my compact, is that it uses the same batteries as my NX11 and NX10. Other than that I would much rather take a later model compact shaped NX.

Timmbits:

Unlikely given how different the NX300 is from the NX210/200/20/1000.

My annoyance with the NX300, Samsung has removed the spinning back ring, and the manual focus assist bar option. Then the obvious missing option of an external EVF. Besides all that, it's fast, has a reasonably fast buffer when shooting raw, does good--not quite excellent--image quality through ISO 4000. Has a good touch screen interface. With those good NX lenses much to shame Sony and some to shame Fuji.

At least some studio comparisons!

;)

I have both the lenses you mention, I thought that sony had some decent lenses for nex, just that they a bit pricey.

timedrun--

If you own those lenses and the images are not sharp and great expressions of dynamic range and living colour, then something is defective in your examples. (That's shooting raw and extracting with Adobe).

HBR, I think you have got the impression that I am critical of these NX lenses, I am not. I own them and think they are amazing.

@ HowaboutRAW Good Samsung NX lenses (eg the 30mm and 85mm) come real close to Leica and Zeiss optical peformence. Can't say the same of Sony Nex lenses.
Broken record much??? prove would be nice.

time--

Got it.

No, Sony Nex lenses don't have a good reputation, there's a well thought of 50mm or something like that. And a good Zeiss.

Einstein--

Do you own either the Samsung NX lens or the Sony Nex lens?

My example (Korean made) of the 30mm lenses is extraordinary.

And I most certainly have owned and own Zeiss and Leica lenses.

Boerseuntjie:

The subject proves itself. I've used those lenses, own one, and have had/have Zeiss and Leicas.

How-raw. I see, the quoted text in your post is my glib attempt to point out that the purists are bound to slate the lens when it doesnt perform as quite as well as a lens five times the size of the samsung.

As i have said elsewhere, if i am going to carry a less useful to me lens such as a fisheye, it had better not take up too much space. The samsung looks nice and small. I certainly wouldnt want a great big fisheye taking up half my bag.

Downside of NX system is that Touit lens most likely wont be in this mount. :(

On other hand, not sure they are needed. :D

Got it! And edited it.

Mescalamba--

Good Samsung lenses already equal Zeiss.

@HowaboutRAW
So Optron-Tec Co Ltd who can't even speak or write English.
Not joking this is from their own site and I quote " Welcome to Optron-Tec and we hope you enjoy with our site. established in 1989 makes better lenses than Say Zeiss and Leica who has been making Optics for over 165 years.....LOL
You are smoking good stuff man please hook me up.
Again If you were a lab with scientific proof maybe I would listen but you sound like a Samsung Fanboy or even maybe a Samsung Rep, next you will tell me that a Kia Rio is faster than a Porsche 911....LOL
BTW you keep on saying "Good Samsung Lenses", well they do not make any lenses so stop saying they do.

Boerseuntjie:

Why are you bringing up this other company? (Also kind of xenophobic to imply that speaking English is necessary for good lens makers.)

And why are you saying, without any evidence, that Samsung doesn’t make lenses?

The fact of the matter is that many Samsung NX lenses are excellent, and nearly equal those of Zeiss and Leica, I know because I’ve owned and used those three brands.

There are some very good lab reports on the Samsung NX lenses, in particular Popular Photography–the US print magazine raved about the 85mm.

The problem with your claims, is that you have nothing to back them up. It’s not like someone is saying NX lenses are awful and don’t do well in the lab. While people who own/use the good ones are astounded. (But you don’t own/use Samsung NX lenses so you can’t really make claims.)

There’s no particular reason that Kia couldn’t start making better or faster cars than Porsche in some years time, though it’s unlikely given Hyundai’s focus.

Boerseuntjie:

Okay, I get it after some web research I established that you meant to say that Optron makes the NX system lenses for Samsung.

Fine, good examples of those lenses still challenge what Zeiss and Leica ship.

I will now restate the obvious point to anyone familiar with high quality camera optics. OptronTec makes lenses nearly equal to Leica and Zeiss lenses--for a still camera example seek out the Samsung NX system.

Here's the link you couldn't be bothered to find when composing your still inaccurate rant: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/32351875

Found that link long time ago.
Thanks for changing your broken record to Optron makes lenses nearly equal to Leica and Zeiss, I still think you are smoking good stuff but hey at least you are consistent...LOL
My rant as you say is not inaccurate, but a fact, something yours are lacking.

With fisheye lenses it's hard to define a FF equivalent due to the choices in the design of the fisheye. For instance Nikon has made both at 16/2.8 and 16/3.5 fisheye and even though they have the same focal length the f/2.8 covers 180 deg. while the f/3.5 version covers 170 degrees.

So it depends on entirely on the projection used in the design of the fisheye.

It also depends on the sensor format diagonal dimensions.

So, yes you are just dating yourself a bit. Everyone really should be talking diagonal Field of View (FOV) or something like that to have an equivalent between lenses.