My NX 300 beats my D7100 with kits lenses

[Nikonworks]

tecnoworld wrote:

I'd also be interested in some comparison shots. A friend of mine, living in another city, bought a nx300 after seeing mine. He used to have a nikon 7100 as well, but sold it before getting the nx300 so when I asked him to send me some comparison shots he was not able to do that.

He states that, based on his own experience, the nx300 is always better in jpg and comparable in raw. But I'd also like to see some side by side.

Hi.

I posted a pano from my NX 300 using OOC jpegs on another thread.

My D7100 would never have matched the detail, etc, of the NX300 Jpegs.

 

[tecnoworld]

I'm sure of that, since you are the second person that told me that. What I say it's that by seeing a side by side, also others will "believe", since it seems for them so unbeliavable that nx300 can be on par or better than the best cameras out there

 

[Adrian Van]

Nikonworks wrote:

tecnoworld wrote:

I'd also be interested in some comparison shots. A friend of mine, living in another city, bought a nx300 after seeing mine. He used to have a nikon 7100 as well, but sold it before getting the nx300 so when I asked him to send me some comparison shots he was not able to do that.

He states that, based on his own experience, the nx300 is always better in jpg and comparable in raw. But I'd also like to see some side by side.

Hi.

I posted a pano from my NX 300 using OOC jpegs on another thread.

My D7100 would never have matched the detail, etc, of the NX300 Jpegs.

If the sensor is the same in both cameras, the amount of detail available for image is determined by the quality of lens used, the jpeg processing in camera software, (and pulling more detail out in post processing can make a difference). Nikon cameras have defaults of lower sharpening, when can be increased as a default in camera. My D700 jpeg sharpening default in neutral was set at 2 out of 10, I increased to 3 and rest I apply sharpening in post software DXO. Some people reset in camera to 5 as new default, and do little post.

The post processing defaults of DXO optics pro which recognizes the camera body and lens used and applies sharpening automatically increases the amount of detail obtained. I see detail defined increases to my images for D300s and D700 and less noise. Lightroom can do similar. However, you can also increase sharpening in camera by increasing settings. Doing it in post, even for jpeg (or raw) minimizes the noise while sharpening. I often run jpegs through DXO.

Having top glass on Nikon APSC, my Nikon 16-85mm lens is far superior to the kit lens for sharpness. I have used both. Putting sharp primes like 35mm G or 50mm G or micro 60mm, also produce very sharp images and thus more detail obtained. (Or the bigger FX lens like 24-70, 24-120mm).

Saying that Samsung has more detail in jpegs OOC, over Nikon D7100, can be misleading. Using very high quality glass lens and increasing sharpness would probably make this statement not true, as the sensor is the same. Also, Nikon D7100 has no AA filter.

 

[marike6]

Nikonworks wrote:

tecnoworld wrote:

I'd also be interested in some comparison shots. A friend of mine, living in another city, bought a nx300 after seeing mine. He used to have a nikon 7100 as well, but sold it before getting the nx300 so when I asked him to send me some comparison shots he was not able to do that.

He states that, based on his own experience, the nx300 is always better in jpg and comparable in raw. But I'd also like to see some side by side.

Hi.

I posted a pano from my NX 300 using OOC jpegs on another thread.

So then you won't mind posting some OOC D7100. How long could it take, 5 minutes?

My D7100 would never have matched the detail, etc, of the NX300 Jpegs.

JPEGs? lol. What photographer spends this kind of money to shoot 8-bit JPEGs. RAW is the only important file format when judging digital cameras. And from what I can see in the DPR comparison, the D7100 in RAW looks significantly better than the NX210.

D7100 RAW comparison

The D7100 has not AA-filter softening the image, it has better high ISO ability, DR and color depth than the NX300 (See DxOMark sensor ratings). All the talk about touch AF, LiveView, JPEGs, is meaningless as the D7100 has a better AF system (derived from the D4), and better IQ.

But if you want to show everybody how much better the NX300 is than the D7100, take five minutes and point both cameras as something and post the results.

In photography, the talk in the world is meaningless without pictures. So let's see them.

I couldn't find one D7100 image in your gallery, so it would be most helpful for this thread, for people on the fence about these two cameras, to see some side-by-side images.

 

[marike6]

Nikonworks wrote:

marike6 wrote:

Nikonworks wrote:

marike6 wrote:

You don't say really tell us how the NX300 beats your D7100.

Have you read the thread?

In the original post, you don't even mention the D7100 except in the title.

The title explains exactly what I am posting about.

Sorry my post seems to offend you in some emotional way.

Many people tie up their ego with their cameras.

You didn't offend me. I don't own a D7100, so I have no idea what you are talking about regarding ego.

This is a shame and a waste of energy. A camera that serves me today, will likely be a bum tomorrow.

Sorry if the NX 300 pushed my D7100 out of my camera bag.

Actually as I posted before I got into NX due to a damaging fall to my D7100,

rather than spend money fixing the D7100 I decided to offset the NX system with the repair money.

So now your D7100 is damaged? Strange that you didn't mention in your original post (or anywhere else).

And you know, over and over I tell my self 'Boy, did I buy the right camera''.

Don't be offended, please.

Not offended, just amused. No offense, but my BS meter is extremely accurate.

I have nothing against Samsung cameras, but the next time you post start a thread with some wildly exaggerated title, perhaps you should stick to cameras that actually have some experience with, or that you can post images from.

But I'm glad you are happy with your NX300.

 

[tecnoworld]

The dxo mark results show that d7100, which is the best aps-c scoring camera, is a bit better than nx300 (by margins that, in the most extreme cases, are hardly noticeable).

If you consider that it's three times its weight and size and does not have all the features mentioned by the op, then you understand how a person having owned both could actually prefer samsung nx300 over nikon d7100 (which is nevertheless a gorgeous camera).

Anyway I'd like to see a side by side as well.

 

[Adrian Van]

tecnoworld wrote:

I see, also on other sites, how difficult it is, for many ppl, to accept that samsung could have produced a camera of this level that is on par or better, in many/all the fields, of cams from established brands, like canon, nikon, sony, panasonic, fuji, olympus and so on.

Of course they refuse to test nx300 and just state that's not good at all.

We are facing a small revolution here. In few years samsung could become a major force in high end amatour/pro photography and we'll be able to say that we realized this from the beginning.

Samsung has a camera smaller than D7100 with tilt screen with same Sony sensor of D7100.
This makes it an attractive alternative to buying an OMD or pen. But there are differences to these 2 cameras. One fits into the mirrorless system cameras and is enough for lots of peoples needs.

I prefer both a Nikon D300s and Olympus Pen for my needs and carry both at times, or one or the other.

Samsung has a good product regardless of comparing image quality for peoples needs.

 

[Adrian Van]

marike6 wrote:

Nikonworks wrote:

tecnoworld wrote:

I'd also be interested in some comparison shots. A friend of mine, living in another city, bought a nx300 after seeing mine. He used to have a nikon 7100 as well, but sold it before getting the nx300 so when I asked him to send me some comparison shots he was not able to do that.

He states that, based on his own experience, the nx300 is always better in jpg and comparable in raw. But I'd also like to see some side by side.

Hi.

I posted a pano from my NX 300 using OOC jpegs on another thread.

So then you won't mind posting some OOC D7100. How long could it take, 5 minutes?

My D7100 would never have matched the detail, etc, of the NX300 Jpegs.

JPEGs? lol. What photographer spends this kind of money to shoot 8-bit JPEGs. RAW is the only important file format when judging digital cameras. And from what I can see in the DPR comparison, the D7100 in RAW looks significantly better than the NX210.

D7100 RAW comparison

The D7100 has not AA-filter softening the image, it has better high ISO ability, DR and color depth than the NX300 (See DxOMark sensor ratings). All the talk about touch AF, LiveView, JPEGs, is meaningless as the D7100 has a better AF system (derived from the D4), and better IQ.

But if you want to show everybody how much better the NX300 is than the D7100, take five minutes and point both cameras as something and post the results.

In photography, the talk in the world is meaningless without pictures. So let's see them.

I couldn't find one D7100 image in your gallery, so it would be most helpful for this thread, for people on the fence about these two cameras, to see some side-by-side images.

I checked the raw link comparison from Dpreview above or here: D7100 RAW comparison

and for NX210 camera (NX300 not done yet), this one at least was outperformed in Raw and Jpeg by D7100, Pentax K5II, K30, and OMD EM5. Check out any fine line images (faces that are line drawings) in the test studio. These last 4 cameras (if you load them in tests) looked better for detail than NX210. Have they made any changes to NX300, we will not know until it is proven. 1600 iso for NX210 in Raw still held detail, was closer in detail, but jpeg was much less - from camera processing I imagine. Check it out. Quality of lens will also make a difference.

Regardless, users of smaller compact system cameras should just enjoy their systems, as the performance is satisfactory to their needs. Who is to say, what is most important to a user. Size of camera, convenience, speed of handling and features or the ultimate image quality or low light performance.

 

[tecnoworld]

According to dxo, nx300 is much better than nx210. I don't have the nx210, but have the nx200 and the 300 is about half to one stop better from iso 800 and above. At base iso it seems also to have more dr and better colors rendition. All that in raw, of course.

P.s. dpr samples with both nx200 and nx210 are quite bad and blurry, I never understood why.

 

[Adrian Van]

I checked the raw link comparison from Dpreview above or here: D7100 RAW comparison

and for NX210 camera (NX300 not done yet), this one at least was outperformed in Raw and Jpeg by D7100, Pentax K5II, K30, and OMD EM5. Check out any fine line images (faces that are line drawings) in the test studio. These last 4 cameras (if you load them in tests) looked better for detail than NX210. Have they made any changes to NX300, we will not know until it is proven. 1600 iso for NX210 in Raw still held detail, was closer in detail, but jpeg was much less - from camera processing I imagine. Check it out. Quality of lens will also make a difference.

Regardless, users of smaller compact system cameras should just enjoy their systems, as the performance is satisfactory to their needs. Who is to say, what is most important to a user. Size of camera, convenience, speed of handling and features or the ultimate image quality or low light performance.

I checked product detail information on Amazon on Samsung NX300 to see how different it is compared to NX210 (or D7100) and noticed the following which it features:

Scroll to bottom of page for NX300 product info.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-Compact-System-Camera-20-50mm/dp/B00BV515FW

Quote from the ad: "Worthy of professional photographers, but made for the enthusiast, the 20.3MP APS-C CMOS sensor—now with Phase detection AF—delivers high-quality images and lifelike colours with the highest resolution in its class. It's also ideal for out-focusing photography, thanks to a sensor that's the largest used in a mirrorless camera. The sensor, which measures 23.5mm x 15.7mm, collects the most light so you can create beautiful images without noise, even in low-lit situations."

Hybrid Phase AF / Contrast Detect AF sensor which is better than many of the m43 cameras as it does include Phase hybrid AF for faster shot to shot photos. Dpreview should test this camera for speed.

20 MP APS-C sensor - larger than m43 sensor - PDAF sensor (Who actually is making this sensor as it sounds like it works similar to 20MP Canon 70D sensor? Is it or am I wrong and just a coincidence?)

One can not rule out that the NX300 uses a different sensor than NX210 or are they the same? Anyone know? If it is different, than image quality could be indeed better than previous models.

 

[NewForce]

Common guys and gals (even if you're not don't be mad at me ok?),

Where has the good old days of photographers used to be seating, gathering together and keep jokings about each other supported camera and still LOL like there's no tomorrow?

In the good old days I''ve know, each of us still very much god friends together even after many bad comments about he or her camera choice.

Where has all that precious days gone?

I think I missed it...

I think I make a mistake for joining a camera (yes not photographer) forum...

I think I make a mistake for buying a new high performance Samsung MILC camera.

I think TIPA 2013 panel make a mistake by giving Samsung NX300 camera an award.

I think TIPA 2013 panel make a mistake by giving Nikon D7100 camera an award too.

I think I should quit camera forum that having brand conscious too. It make me feel frightening.

 

[MrFresno]

Nikonworks wrote:

P.S. And yes I will put my NX300's buffer shooting Raw+Jpeg against my D7100's buffer any day. My NX300 wins, period and goodbye.

5 Frame Raw Buffer is Horrible

Nikon D7100 raw buffer = 6 frames

NX300 raw buffer = 5 frames

NX300 loses. Period.

 

[Adrian Van]

I checked product detail information on Amazon on Samsung NX300 to see how different it is compared to NX210 (or D7100) and noticed the following which it features:

Scroll to bottom of page for NX300 product info.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-Compact-System-Camera-20-50mm/dp/B00BV515FW

Quote from the ad: "Worthy of professional photographers, but made for the enthusiast, the 20.3MP APS-C CMOS sensor—now with Phase detection AF—delivers high-quality images and lifelike colours with the highest resolution in its class. It's also ideal for out-focusing photography, thanks to a sensor that's the largest used in a mirrorless camera. The sensor, which measures 23.5mm x 15.7mm, collects the most light so you can create beautiful images without noise, even in low-lit situations."

Hybrid Phase AF / Contrast Detect AF sensor which is better than many of the m43 cameras as it does include Phase hybrid AF for faster shot to shot photos. Dpreview should test this camera for speed.

20 MP APS-C sensor - larger than m43 sensor - PDAF sensor (Who actually is making this sensor as it sounds like it works similar to 20MP Canon 70D sensor? Is it or am I wrong and just a coincidence?)

One can not rule out that the NX300 uses a different sensor than NX210 or are they the same? Anyone know? If it is different, than image quality could be indeed better than previous models.

After checking sites: To answer my own question, the sensors in Samsung and Canon 20MP camera are not the same although a couple of common characteristics in both. See link:

http://camerarocket.com/cameras/Samsung-NX300-vs-Canon-EOS-70D

- Pixel pitch is different from Samsung NX300 and Canon 70D. Samsung uses Phase detect on sensor in stilll photos, but contrast detect in video mode while Canon uses phase.
- This will help Samsung a lot in photo capture speed though, at 8.6 fps (Amazon ad), probably also in low light capture performance.
- Samsung could take video at 1920 x 1080 @ 60 fps (MPEG-4) while 70D at full HD at 30fps
- One of the sites suggested that the 20mp sensor of NX210 was different than the 20mp of NX300. ....

And as the sensor now has phase detect on sensor it is at least updated. See link for proof:
We could indeed see better image quality from a newer sensor as possibility. Again lens quality is a factor too. Certainly faster speed in still photography. Here is the link to show improvements of NX300 over NX210 overall....

http://camerarocket.com/cameras/Samsung-NX300-vs-Samsung-NX210

 

[TJL LTFF]

tecnoworld wrote:

According to dxo, nx300 is much better than nx210. I don't have the nx210, but have the nx200 and the 300 is about half to one stop better from iso 800 and above. At base iso it seems also to have more dr and better colors rendition. All that in raw, of course.

I'm not going to claim to know why the NX300 is technically and measurably better than the NX200. I just know for me it is a real step up in the pleasing results I see on the screen (camera & computer); how my software, LR4.4 handles the raws; and what I see in the results from the same old printer. For me no measurements are needed for this comparison. Though they are still fun to check out .

The NX200 I liked ok; but I'm really attached to the NX300.

 

[tecnoworld]

Hi Adrian, yes nx210 and nx300 have different sensors. Same mp count, but nx300 has a much better sensor:

Loading…

www.dxomark.com

 

[de_klaas]

Nikonworks wrote:

I knew it to be the case.

Cutting sentences in half usually doesn't make a reply stronger...

Are you suggesting that he D7110 is worse for event photographt than say a D70s or a S5pro?

Then why don't we all wrap this up, close-up shop and go home and close these forums as well.

Your words: "And telling us that the NX300 beats a D7100 in those areas is pretty much stating the obvious isn't it?

Nothing is obvious for those not familiar with the cameras mentioned.

But you don't have to actually handle a D7100 to know it doesn't have a tiltable LCD, fast Liveview focussing or touch AF.

And you overlooked the fact the NX 300 has the same size sensor as the D7100, and for my purposes stated above, more utility than my D7100.

I don't see what sensor size has to do with all of this, but you should realize that your purposes are very, very specific. You're not talking about event photography in general (although you do seem to suggest so) but about your specific shooting style. And it's great you've found a camera that suits your needs and gives you great iq but please don't suggest anything more than that.

 

[de_klaas]

tecnoworld wrote:

I see, also on other sites, how difficult it is, for many ppl, to accept that samsung could have produced a camera of this level that is on par or better, in many/all the fields, of cams from established brands, like canon, nikon, sony, panasonic, fuji, olympus and so on.

Of course they refuse to test nx300 and just state that's not good at all.

Tell me, how many people in this thread are actually saying that the NX300 is not a good camera? That's not what the discussion's about. Please quit the paranoia.

 

[de_klaas]

tecnoworld wrote:

According to dxo, nx300 is much better than nx210.

The NX20 (that's said to have the same sensor as the NX210) scores 75. The NX300 76.

Not really my definition of 'much better'...

 

[Greynerd]

Classic DPR put down line this one to anyone who likes inferior kit.

marike6 wrote:

But I'm glad you are happy with your NX300.

 

[tecnoworld]

Why looking at nx20 when nx210 is tested as well?

Loading…

www.dxomark.com

5 points difference, i.e 1/3 stop difference. Not much as well, but at these levels, these are the differences to be expected among different generations.

The k5 ii, one of the best aps-c scoring cam, has the same difference over the nx300, in dxo (but nx300 has 25% more mpixels).