Previous news story    Next news story

DxOMark investigates Samsung NX cameras and lenses

By dpreview staff on Jul 12, 2013 at 11:21 GMT

Our friends and collaborators over at DxOMark have been investigating Samsung's NX system, and have recently published reviews of the NX210 and NX300 cameras, alongside an article covering how the company's lenses measure up in comparison to those from the Sony NEX system. Other reviews on the site this week include lens tests on Nikon super-telephoto primes, an assessment of the Sony RX100 II's new back-illuminated CMOS sensor, and the first installment of a multi-part article looking into which lenses score best on the Canon EOS 6D. Click the links below to find out more.

1012
I own it
225
I want it
31
I had it
Discuss in the forums
8
I own it
6
I want it
2
I had it
Discuss in the forums
101
I own it
27
I want it
13
I had it
Discuss in the forums
514
I own it
339
I want it
92
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 56
Timmbits
By Timmbits (9 months ago)

DXOmark contradict themselves, when they state, at the end of the article, that the nx210 is the same as the nx200 except for the addition of wifi. When you look at DXOmark's evaluations of the nx20 (same generation as nx210), you can see significant improvements in IQ over the nx200 generation. So either these guys produce inconsistent and unreliable testing, or they can't make up their mind what they are talking about. I guess you can't expect a programmer-culture to be mechanically-savvy. (ie: logic skills and mechanical skills aren't the same - "mechanical" includes all that is physical, not just mechanical, whereas logic skills are more in the flow of information but typically lack skills in physics and mechanics).

1 upvote
supeyugin1
By supeyugin1 (9 months ago)

There are so many Samsung haters here. I wonder why?
But it looks like everybody likes Sony, Fuji and Nokia. I also wonder why?

1 upvote
Timmbits
By Timmbits (9 months ago)

After this comparison, one would think that we can all rest assured that Samsung and Sony are pretty close in IQ and all would bury the hatchet!

We could all quit quibbling, now that we can choose based on our personal preferences such as ergonomics, interface, controls, speed, preferred lens availability, features, and of course price... and know that whichever we choose, we'll have an image quality that is just fine!

1 upvote
flipmac
By flipmac (9 months ago)

Interesting scores, which shows the NX lenses are basically as good, and in some cases better, than the Nikon/Canon (closest) equivalent.

E.g.

The macro (19 pts) has a higher score (with better sharpness) than the Canon 60/2.8 (18 pts).

The 45/1.8 has a score (22 pts), higher than the Canikon 50/1.8 (both 19 pts); again with better sharpness.

At 21 pts, the 30/2 is lower than the Nikon 35/1.8G (22 pts) but better than the Canon 35/2 (17 pts on a 7D); but the Samsung is a pancake, so it's pretty impressive.

It seems Canon needs to make more EF-S. Anyway, those Samsung lenses looks good.

1 upvote
radissimo
By radissimo (9 months ago)

Samsung problems in MY VIEW:
1) flange distance -too short for Leica M lenses
2) poor distributors- its a fraction of their income- less attention then real phot companies
3) lenses not made by 3rd party (look at the Fuji)
4) high ISO not great initially-e.g sensors were behind when they started (look at the SONY)

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

In what why is it impossible, with an adapter, to mount M lenses on NX bodies? It's not. So M mount lenses can't be mounted directly to the NX bodies, can M mount lenses be mounted directly to the Sony Nex bodies?

Sony wasn't a "real photo company" until recently.

NX cameras (including the NX100) are plenty good at high ISO. Try shooting raw and extracting in ACR.

Quote: "lenses not made by a 3rd party (look at Fuji)" What earth does this mean? The Samsung lenses are indeed made by a 3rd party--Optron. Then why bring up Fuji--good Optron lenses already equal or beat good, optically, Fuji lenses.

0 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (9 months ago)

1) Nobody Cares about Samsung so why would they make adapters?
2) Poor Distributors, true only Best buy and other crap electronics shop sells them not to mention they have to throw in a Samsung Galaxy 6" Tab to sell these cameras.
3) will agree they have some 3rd party support.
4) Their sensors barley beats a Panasonic M4/3 or come close to NEX, not to mention nobody wants their sensors, Pentax learned quick that they were not good ;)
Your claim that Sony is not a real photo company until recently is ignorant not to mention stupid claim since Sony is one of the pioneers of digital photography.
In August, 1981, Sony released the Sony Mavica electronic still camera, the camera which was the first commercial electronic camera.
Bottom line is Sony innovates Samsung copies, big difference.
When will you learn that your stupid claims just make you look dumb?

Comment edited 6 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Arup65
By Arup65 (9 months ago)

SONY has been making professional video equipment since seventies and most studios use them. Its true they entered photo realm recently but do bear in mind that they also acquired Minolta who made some of the most pioneering cameras including world's first AF and of course, superb lenses, some in conjunction with Leica so SONY is a true phtography company whereas Samsung isn't.

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

Boerseuntjie:

I have a Nikon F mount to Samsung NX body adapter, works just fine.

In the US good specialty camera stores do indeed sell Samsung cameras, finding display models was a problem last year, not any more. In the US, I’ve never seen a Samsung camera in a Best Buy–it’s not a particularly good store in the US. It’s sort of okay if you need a new TV or want to look at say the new fast tablet from Samsung.

In the US retailers do NOT throw in a free tablet with purchase of an NX camera.

Samsung makes excellent sensors for the NX bodies, the one for the NX20/200 is better at high ISOs than the one Sony uses in the Nex 7. The excellent native lens selection for the Samsung NX system helps here. All of the NX system sensors are usable at ISOs beyond where the new Olympus and Panasonic M43 system cameras have trouble.

continues:

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

Yes Sony released a digital camera in the 1980s, though I think it was later. However until Sony got a hold of Konica Minolta, Sony was not a serious still camera maker. Sony was a serious sensor maker years ago, so no dispute there. Sony would do well to copy the excellent optics of many Optron lenses. Now that Sony owns part of Olympus, Sony could also get some lessons about lens design and building from that company. Good Olympus lenses also put ostensibly good Nikon and Canon lenses to shame.

Except for sensors, there hasn’t been a lot of innovation coming out of Sony in years. Their last big invention, and it’s really big, was the lithium ion battery–like 20 years ago.

0 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (9 months ago)

I have news for you, but those Optron-tec lenses don't stack up that high and are mostly comparable to Sigma or even some of those bad NEX lenses and at least Sony knows how to design lenses, can't say the same about Samsung.
Please name one thing Samsung has invented, you can not because there is none.
Sony has been the leader in innovation for the past 60 years Samsung has been the copy master for the last 8 years.
Samsung sensor match and beat NEX-7 in what Galaxy? Samsung's Galaxy maybe, anyway Sony has made sensors that are rated the best in the world.
Nikon D800 is a good example of that, so unless Samsung actually gets serious about photography instead of bringing out mediocre android cameras they will always just be a last place camera manufactures, they should stick to cell phones were they seem to be getting a lot of hype.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (9 months ago)

One thing they are very good at is stealing even their CEO knows that.
http://www.businessinsider.com/samsungs-billionaire-ceo-may-drive-a-stolen-15-million-ferrari-2012-8

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

Boerseuntjie:

Optron makes excellent lenses; your evidence free assertions to the contrary don’t mean much to me because as I’ve said again and again: I’ve owned/own plus used both excellent Leica and Zeiss lenses. And only two camera lens manufactures make lenses that come close to the optical quality of Leica and Zeiss. One is Optron, the lens makers for the Samsung NX cameras. The other is NOT Sigma, nor Fuji. (You don’t even appear to have read the DXO scoring, sure it’s limited in value, but even that affirms the high optical quality of the Samsung NX 85mm F1.4 lens.)

Why are you bringing up the Samsung Galaxy? I specifically said that I was comparing the sensor in the NX20 to that in the Nex 7. The one in the Samsung (not a Galaxy) is excellent and better at high ISO shooting than the Sony.

Who cares if Samsung uses Sony sensors in a phone, nothing to do with the point about the excellent Optron lenses, nor the excellent APSC sensors from Samsung.

continues:

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

Not particularly germane to Samsung, because Samsung doesn’t make “full frame” sensors, but the Sony sensor in the Nikon D800 has typical colour banding problems at higher ISOs. It’s okay, but it’s over reach for pixel cramming. Luckily for Nikon they can rely on the good manual focus Zeiss lenses which vastly out perform “ED” Nikon lenses; that will help with high ISO problems. Nikon/Renesas would be best to work on a new sensor for the say the D900 at about 20MP, though that would cut into D4 sales.

Except for sensors, no Sony has not been particularly innovative in the last 15 years. Shipped some nice still cameras though. The gimbaled prosumer video cameras are an interesting approach to stabilization. But they use not great “Zeiss” lenses.

I like the Toshiba sensor in D7100, that gives Samsung and Sony motivation to improve their respective APSC sensors.

Instead of making boring unsupported claims, try using a Samsung NX body and the 85mm F1.4 lens.

continues, page3

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

Are you saying the Samsung executive stole the car, or bought a stolen car? You realize there’s a bit of a difference? Anyhow, as you say: It’s Optron making the NX system lenses.

I realize that it’s just wasted effort to respond to you, because you’re lazy and just spout things–without letting facts get in your way.

1 upvote
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (9 months ago)

Maybe if you stop spewing junk out of your mouth you would have learned that Sony and Toshiba are working together on all kinds of stuff and Toshiba sensors are a joined venture between the two companies lined out in the agreement they signed to work together because Sony can't keep up with global demand for sensors.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Toshiba-and-Sony-Can-Get-Along-Work-on-45nm-Cell-Processor-93948.shtml

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Display

Here is a fact, the NX 85mm is no better that the Sony NEX 50mm and get over it.

Comment edited 6 times, last edit 14 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

Boerseuntjie

News to me that Sony had a hand in the Toshiba sensor in the D7100. But I won’t rule it out, though it’s funny that Sony acting as Toshiba in your view would ship competition for the 24MP APSC sensor in the Nex 7+A77.

It is very unlikely that the 50mm Nex lens is anywhere near the optical quality of the Samsung NX 85 1.4 lens. However I’ve not shot with that Sony lens, so I’d not be so silly as to say that Nex system lens is not very good, but it would need to be very very Zeiss good to match the optical quality of the Samsung.

continues:

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

And I have yet to see a Sony, Canon, or Nikon lens that can come close to a good Zeiss. While the Samsung 85mm does.

I see that you can’t deal with the point that the Samsung CEO may have possession of a 40 year old car stolen by someone else years ago. Keep making up distractions from the main point: Optron makes lenses that put Sony, Canon and Nikon to shame.

You’re right Sony makes decent sensors, but so does Toshiba and Samsung, and Renesas.

0 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (9 months ago)

Hey Jack, you keep on believing in your dream world.
If you want to see a stellar 85mm Lens look at the Zeiss branded Sony 85mm not your plastic fantastic NX lens, You are delusional to think it's that good, I'm not saying it's a bad lens just not that good.
And I will comment on the car thing, even if he did not know that it was a stolen car when he bought it, he does now and he has no plans on returning it or acknowledging it, so that makes him a thief in my eyes.
There is a saying you can lead the Donkey to water but you can't make him drink, so with that I'm done talking to you keep on drinking the Samsung Kool-Aid.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

Boerseuntjie:

News to me that the mind of the Samsung CEO regarding the ostensibly stolen car is spelled out in the link. A lot of other people seem to have sold/owned that car in the last 40 years, what about their monies and those transactions? Also of course at that level, one would need to prove that the item really was stolen, before anybody would consider giving it up. So you're a bit confused about the definition of "thief". The guy who owned the car 40 years ago, could be lying today.

Now, no one disputes that there are indeed nice Zeiss lenses, I’ve owned four, and rented a couple of others. And the Samsung NX 85mm 1.4 is very close optically to those various Zeiss lenses I’ve owned/own/rented. (The build quality of the Samsung is excellent too.) So instead of making up things about the Samsung 85mm lens, try it.

Again and again you just assume I’ve never used good Zeiss lenses. And again and again you’re wrong. (Same applies to Leica M lenses.)

continues:

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

That wiki link is about a joint Sony/Toshiba DISPLAY venture, not sensors. That’s a really sloppy “mistake” on your part.

And sorry but a Google search of “Sony Toshiba Sensor” only yields a press release about Sony buying senor making equipment owned by Toshiba back in 2011.

Nothing current about joint plans or effors. So looks like Toshiba started up its operations again.

You also need to stop acting like Sony is the only way to use a Zeiss lens on a DSLR.

0 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (9 months ago)

Hey Idiot, Panasonic and Fuji has worked together on sensors development Sony and Aptina has sighed agreements to share Sensor patents
Sony has bought Sensor manufacturing plants from Toshiba so they can keep up with production. These chips might say Toshiba but they are Sony

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201012/10-165E/

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

Boerseuntjie:

That's right I acknowledged that Sony bought some equipment from Toshiba in 2010. That's very different than a joint effort that you assert is going on today, sans any evidence.

You also still posted a link about displays instead of sensors. Try starting with that mistake. It's pretty big and will stick with you.

I don't care that other companies develop sensors jointly. And I never claimed everything is done independently by each sensor company. I claimed, accurately, that there's no obvious public evidence of Sony+Toshiba doing sensors together in 2013.

What you've posted doesn't invalidate my point at all. If your attempts are going to be so weakly supported, why bother?

0 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (9 months ago)

Yes I have no evidence of Toshiba making sensors for Sony just like you have no evidence of Samsung Lenses being better than Nikon and Canon ;)
And well you might think that Toshiba sensor is good but there is a lot of people that say it's not, I can't care less what sensors Nikon puts in their cameras, all I know it will never be a Samsung one...LOL

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

Boerseuntjie:

I have plenty of evidence that Samsung uses excellent lenses for the NX system; there’s my eyes, there’s what you always ignore: I own/owned excellent Zeiss lenses. Ostensibly good Nikon lenses can’t touch Zeiss.

Then there’s the silly DXO scoring and the extraordinary review of the Samsung NX 85mm F1.4 in Popular Photography the magazine. (Sadly for you they just reviewed the NX300 really well too.)

That’s all very real, and some of it is a reality you can share/check easily.

Your claims about Toshiba and Sony in a joint sensor venture remain unsubstantiated. (They’re not out of the question, just undocumented.) Still not bothering to deal with reading “display” for “sensor” I see.

The big problem for your claims is that you haven’t used good Samsung NX lenses and I have.

1 upvote
Timmbits
By Timmbits (9 months ago)

@radissimo: flange distance too short? really?
samsung's flange distance is 25.5mm (1") while Sony and Fuji are around 19mm.
you obviously have no experience with adapters.

@Boerseuntjie: if you looked at the tests, you wouldn't make such myopic statements. next time, before embarrassing yourself, research facts first.

1 upvote
supeyugin1
By supeyugin1 (9 months ago)

I believe those test from DxO are irrelevant for most people, as they will not buy Samsung based on the name. And it's good for Samsung users, as the prices are much lower than other systems, while the quality is higher.
Please don't buy Samsung, it's a piece of junk!

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
ChuckTa
By ChuckTa (9 months ago)

I find it strange that you can say " while the quality is high" then follow by "it's a piece of junk!"
I have a Sony Nex 5 and brought a Samsung NX100 for cheap for my wife. I was so impressed with the NX100 image quality (at low ISO), I upgraded to NX200 and the Nex goes to my wife (but she prefer small DC. Oh well.) I rarely use the Nex now. I guess I am just a "junkie" .
I can posted some old test photo between the Nex 5 and NX100 if you want. Samsung is no more a junk than the Sony Nex is.
I would agree don't buy it based on the name, buy it based on the quality. I would strongly suggest try it out first before stating options like that. I did.

4 upvotes
ChuckTa
By ChuckTa (9 months ago)

This is a 100% crop pic of the 20m sensor. Maybe you'll have a different opinion after you look at it.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50661631

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

C

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
supeyugin1
By supeyugin1 (9 months ago)

Chuck, I have NX100 and NX20, 16, 20, 30, 45, 85, 20-50 and 50-200 lenses. The less people buy Samsung, the better for us.

0 upvotes
groucher
By groucher (9 months ago)

Very true. I picked up an NX100 for next to nothing. Its plastic looks don't inspire a lot of confidence but the 20-50 kit lens and IQ are pretty spectacular.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

supeyugin1--

All true to a point, but if few buy Samsung NX series cameras and lenses, Samsung has less motivation to say ship the NX30. (Or for that matter to fix the optical quality of the not stellar 50mm-200mm zoom--either the 20mm or the 16mm isn't great either, but I don't remember which one that I tried out.)

And I read your original post apprehending the irony.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

goucher--

Just a word don't let anybody fool you into getting the 18-55 OIS NX lens, it's not optically as good as the 20-50mm.

1 upvote
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (9 months ago)

So HowaboutRAW do you still think that NX 85mm lens is the best lens ever? ,it's about as good as the NEX 50mm ;) , still going to state Optron-tec Lenses is better than Nikon, Canon, Leica?

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

Boerseuntjie–

You really need to stop lying about what I’ve claimed about good Samsung lens.

I never wrote they are the “best ever”, and it’s really stupid on your part to keep trying to put words into my writings.

As I’ve pointed out before DXO scores are of limited value. As is well proven every time they score a very good Zeiss lens, they rarely see it as better than similar Nikons or Canons. When anybody with decent vision can see that the results are significantly better than what Nikon does.

However yes, that 85mm F1.4 Samsung is easily optically better than similar Nikons and Canons, no that Samsung lens is not better than similar Zeiss lenses; that’s your delusion about my claims.

It’s really pretty simple, and you can make all of the claims you want, but I’ve used it, and used/own+own similar Zeisses+Leicas. While you have no experience with good Samsung lenses.

So try paying attention instead of just making things up.

0 upvotes
ChuckTa
By ChuckTa (9 months ago)

supeyugin1
Oh right, dah. Yes , bad Samsung NX, lens is terrible, don't make the mistake like me and get 4 of those bad bad NX lens. I am smart with my Sony Nex and only stick with the kit lens. Smart with Sony, yes.
But I also made the mistake and just got the NX300. Darn, can't stop making those mistakes.

0 upvotes
ChuckTa
By ChuckTa (9 months ago)

HowaboutRAW
Agree with you on the plasticky NX 20-50mm, really good for a kit. I was constantly surprise by the image quality I got from this little gem. For me, this is a must take lens for traveling. I am glad Samsung put the cost into the lens glass instead of lens body.
Photozone review on this lens is right on.

0 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (9 months ago)

re OP
that is not quite right.
true, if the samsung name gets more recognition, the prices will rise... if that is at all possible in a world of competition and plummeting costs of technology - but on the other hand producing in higher volumes is exactly what makes prices plummet...
so you have to have higher sales if you want steeper discounts. well, sort of... it's a catch-22

0 upvotes
Tonio Loewald
By Tonio Loewald (9 months ago)

The real question is lens/camera combination. What these results show is that Samsung has caught up in sensor technology (which, given it was lagging by a generate or two a few years ago, is impressive). Samsung's remaining problems are the lack of a halo product and the lack of a recognized lens brand.

I played with some of these cameras in a local Best Buy and they feel good in hand and are very responsive. But there was no sign of a non-kit lens.

3 upvotes
AndricD
By AndricD (9 months ago)

Samsung has a decent range of lenses generally well prices and good quality - DX0 has also tested the primes http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Samsung-NX-prime-lens-reviews-five-models-measured/Conclusion

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

Tonion Loewald--

Best Buy is a mostly crap US retailer. It's particularly bad at stocking things like lenses other than whatever the kit lens is.

Did you ask at that particular Best Buy to see say all sorts of lenses for the Olympus and Panasonic mirrorless bodies? And did they say, "come over to the Olympus section at the counter, and we can show you all the M43 lenses for those bodies"?

Somehow I'm betting unlikely.

So what does your point have to do with the optical quality of Samsung (really Optron) NX system lenses? The kit 20mm-50mm is optically excellent.

Not sure what "halo" means in this usage. Could be stand out, I guess. Well those stand out offerings from Samsung for the NX system would be many of the fixed NX lenses, the sensors are excellent too.

1 upvote
ChuckTa
By ChuckTa (9 months ago)

I think it is better to look at the facts. Samsung's first sensor (nx100) was used in the Pentax dlsr, this is around the time when Nex 5 came out. And I don't see anybody complaining about Pentax image quality (except maybe in the really high ISO). So it is actually not lagging behind 2 years, it is just not as good in the high iso.
I have an Nex 5 and had NX100 (upgrade to NX200), my opinion is at low ISO, the Samsung NX100 image quality is better than the Nex 5. Unfortunately, this is something that a DxO number can not show.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

ChuckTa–

To bad you don’t have that NX100 anymore, the body firmware update from Dec 2012 vastly increases the high ISO capacity–shooting raw and extracting in ACR. (Warning it slows the buffer a bit.)

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (9 months ago)

I don't think any of these can be called good,
by which I mean "can compete with 35mm format."

never the less these are no worse than Japanese. mirrorless is the future that established Japanese makers do not want to face. because it opens a new world for many new comers to join, Koreans, Chinese, and maybe even German (not rubbish brands like Leica or Zeiss, but their real talent to actually design and make cameras and lenses).

2 upvotes
viking79
By viking79 (9 months ago)

Sure it can compete with 135 format full frame, well enough that my full frame camera sits at home most of the time when I take my NX300 and few small lenses as I don't like carrying that large beast. Image quality wise the APS-C can do good enough. With say my 16mm f/2.4, 30mm f/2., and 45mm f/1.8 I get nearly identical performance to my full frame with a 24-70mm f/2.8. Only thing I use the full frame for is for events where I need the camera performance and some added high ISO performance is nice to reduce flash power required.

4 upvotes
TimT999
By TimT999 (9 months ago)

Viking, I'm not sure which full frame you are comparing the Samsung to. But when I dial in the Samsung against the Canon 5D III in the DP comparison tool, the IQ is not even close.

Compare the two in jpg and the Samsung 210 image turns to mush above ISO 800. Even in raw the Samsung image is unusable by 3200 -- essentially the same IQ as the Mark 5 III has at 128,000.

The Samsung can't begin to compete with any of the better full frame cameras out there. And as the DP review points out, it isn't even competing with the better crop DSLRs at the higher ISOs.

I don't know about you, but I use 3200 and 6400 a fair amount for indoor/night shooting (and get great results with the Mark 5) so for me the Samsung is a non-starter.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (9 months ago)

NX should be able to compete with 35mm format with lenses specifically designed for NX. actually NX got a slightly upper hand in that its equivalent flange-back is about 39mm, shorter than 44mm of EF mount (it's about 70mm for APS-C DSLRs, why we should abandon them).

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

TimT999--

Just to be clear you don't own a Samsung NX body, nor the Samsung 85mm F1.4 NX lens, right? You're simply doing a slide rule of the DXO scores?

3 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (9 months ago)

If I thought about some camera quite visibly better than NX300, then most likely A99, D600.

In certain aspects 5DMK3 is actually worse. It has 1 eV less (means 2x less data) of DR than NX300. Quite visibly worse colors. Only thing better is SNR/noise. Which comes at expense of those colors and details.

And thats FF. Comparing APS-C any kind to FF isnt fair.. soo lets take something similar from Canon, shall we?

Canon 700D costs about same as NX300, so whats better in 700D than in NX300?

Except fact that 700D should do reasonably well in C-AF, absolutely nothing. 700D is in every aspect worse than NX300.

That actually isnt that big achievement for Samsung, its rather fail from Canon, cause they still recycle that ages old sensor. Truth to be told, Samsung 20 MPix sensor isnt newest either. Yet its better.

To cut it short, in case you are Canon APS-C shooter and you dont need AF-C, you can aswell move to Samsung. You will only gain.

4 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (9 months ago)

Yea and Samsung doesnt band in shadows on base ISO..

0 upvotes
TimT999
By TimT999 (9 months ago)

Actually Howabout, your assumption is incorrect. I was looking at the actual test images here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/samsung-nx210/5
and here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/samsung-nx210/6
and then dialing in the Canon 5D III to compare both at different ISO levels.

I suggest you look those images yourself to see how a full frame compares with the Samsung -- especially at higher ISOs. I think you'll agree that at 1600 and 3200 ISOs the Samsung JPGs just turn into mush.

I agree with Mescalamba that it's ridiculous to compare the Samsung with a full frame. And that's why my initial response was to Viking, who says that the camera DOES compete with a full framer. Comparisons of the Samsung with APS-C cameras are totally appropriate since they are similarly priced. But let's not pretend that the IQ is the same as a full frame.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

Tim–

Okay you looked at test images, who cares? You still don’t own an NX body and don’t own nor, as best I can tell, have ever shot with either an NX body or the NX 85mm F1.4 lens. (And note assuming that you don’t “own” was one of my original points that you ignored.)

So no I don’t take your claims seriously. Now if you want to get several raws shot with that lens and say any NX body, download those raws, extract in ACR, and then print. Go to town.

You’re making general claims based on really limited data. It’s a lazy way of doing things.

Thank you for your suggestion about what I should look at, however I’ve shot with the NX 85mm F1.4 lens and it’s as optically good as the “full frame” Japanese Zeiss that I’ve owned/own and used over the last 12 years. (No ostensibly good Nikon lenses just aren’t there optically--not even close.)

1 upvote
AndricD
By AndricD (9 months ago)

timt999 - I believe the pancakes were shot with the nx20 not the nx300 which has a significantly better jpg engine. prior to nx300 samsungs jpg seriously sucked at higher iso. raws wee always good and nx300 have a better high iso response by a significant margine.
I can't comment on ff vs nx300 as lack the experience.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (9 months ago)

TimT999---

Also you're looking jpegs, are you joking? No one paying attention to image quality from a camera able to record raw ever looks at jpegs.

(The quality of the jpeg recording firmware is a completely different question.)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
tecnoworld
By tecnoworld (9 months ago)

We are talking about that test here:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51777845

and here:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51751880

2 upvotes
Total comments: 56