Reading mode: Light Dark

Samsung's NX announcement is nothing but FUD

Go to last post
ljmac said:
Just saying something doesn't make it so. There is a lot of evidence
to suggest that Samsung is spreading FUD; where is the evidence that
I am (apart from the fact that I'm just a forum poster, and Samsung
is a multinational company with a huge PR budget)?
Click to expand...
 
ljmac said:
Just saying something doesn't make it so. There is a lot of evidence
to suggest that Samsung is spreading FUD; where is the evidence that
I am (apart from the fact that I'm just a forum poster, and Samsung
is a multinational company with a huge PR budget)?
Click to expand...
===========

This is a lot of fanboy/cheerleader stuff.

Panasonic got their camera out, and the second model as well.

Samsung saw an opening to compete, and seeing no other competitors, took it. Only large-volume low-cost producers can dive into an entirely new format. Samsung is a major producer of consumer electronics; and they have the resources to do it.

No one knows exactly what Samsung has. Originally they spoke of a 2010 release, and now moved it up. They have the expertise in engineering to do it. They've been looking for bigger market share since the Pentax deal, and that deal got them lenses and a 14 MP sensor sale. The PK market won't do it for Samsung. They're doing well with cell-phone cameras and some compacts; but those won't carry the profits that interchangeable lenses will.

Samsung has made an announcement for later in 2009; and the industry now expects them to deliver. Pentax has some stuff in DSLR's, but was not ready for this show - so they brought out the megazoom. Pentax should show more in June; but it'll be rehashes of what's already there in components.

There's marketing, and there's reality. Samsung has several months yet to make their case by showing a production unit. If it arrives, they won't have a range of lenses - that range is filling out now for Panny, and they look really nice from the specs.

Plenty of room for two in this niche - and I want the choice. I'd prefer the APS-C sensor; so I hope that Samsung delivers. If someone is satisfied with 4/3, they have the Lumix. The contest, if there is one, will be in features, engineering and packaging - the first-look Samsung does look a bit bland, but they have time to fix that.

In ANY of these brand-oriented forums I don't expect objectivity; but some reality would be nice.

http://www.1001noisycameras.com/2009/02/samsung-wins-over-the-uk-market-for-2008.html

Samsung's hefty goal is to become the #1 market share leader in the world. Their evil plans for world domination got a step closer to fruition today as Amateur Photographeur UK reports that Samsung has indeed won the UK market for 2008 - they were the #1 market share leader with 16.2% of the market. They were also #1 in the last two months of 2008, which is of course the busy holiday shopping season.
 
ljmac said:
And a larger sensor - especially a 3:2 sensor - means larger lenses,
and size really matters in this market. Or alternatively, they could
just throw the quality out the window. Either way, NX loses.
Click to expand...
You mean like the 1.3x sensor in the Leica M series. Just flipp'n huge, huh.

--
-
Greg

http://www.spanielsport.com/
 
ljmac said:
Just saying something doesn't make it so. There is a lot of evidence
to suggest that Samsung is spreading FUD; where is the evidence that
I am (apart from the fact that I'm just a forum poster, and Samsung
is a multinational company with a huge PR budget)?
Click to expand...
=====

To me, the Samsung looks much better in 2-tone; and there are lenses:

http://www.focus-numerique.com/news_id-1228.html
 
ljmac said:
They announce this mock-up without any details of lens compatibility
(or anything of substance at all actually) just before PMA, yet they
won't be displaying it? I strongly suspect they created this mock-up
in Photoshop - I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't even physically
exist!
Click to expand...
There's been a lot of bad mouthing that Olympus hasn't produced anything but a mockup either, but first of all Olympus co-developed Micro Four Thirds with Panasonic, so Oly's efforts are in the G1 as well.

As for the Oly mockup itself, Oly produces mockups for people to see and get feedback from...the Olydak (the predecessor of the E-1) for example was shown at one of these shows (and online), and people said it was too big with the permanently attached grip, and Oly listened. When working on an E-1 successor Oly showed two different body mockups and listened to hear what people thought about the different designs. Last year Oly showed the mockup of their m43 concept and presumably they listened to what people liked and disliked about it (and liked and disliked about the G1 format too).

Samsung on the other hand seems to be just showing images of their "mockup" just to show they aren't far behind Olympus, but my money is that Olympus already has a working prototype while Samsung just has images of a mockup.
 
if they already have a working prototype then they missed the boat not showing it off - I am a bit disappointed - I think this is world economic poker and Olympus just blinked .

http://www.kurthbousman.com
 
4/3rds will always allow considerably smaller lenses than APS-C - it's simple common sense, just as a larger sensor will always allow better noise/DR performance, all other things being equal. In this market though, the former means a lot more than the latter.

Leica has had to go to heroic lengths to correct the edge issues with their lenses on digital, and they aren't entirely effective either.
 
Anyone can do that. Samsung have provided NO TECHNICAL DETAILS of their system whatsoever, or compatibility information. Does that tell you it is anywhere near close to finished? I don't think they even have a working prototype.
 
There's a whole world of difference between what Oly was doing with their mock-ups and what Samsung is doing with their's.
 
ljmac said:
Anyone can do that. Samsung have provided NO TECHNICAL DETAILS of
their system whatsoever, or compatibility information. Does that tell
you it is anywhere near close to finished? I don't think they even
have a working prototype.
Click to expand...
======

Pentax offered no information on the new megazoom before a bit of it leaked out.

No one owes the public anything, until they're ready to announce it. Otherwise, the maker is just officially letting the competition know what's coming. Every maker has pre-production versions of something or another around; and many of them never see daylight.

There are some "semi-official" leaks such as what's been out on the new Nikon D5000, but no one has one:

http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/02/20/nikon-prepping-a-new-entry-level-dslr-the-d5000/

Gossip can be useful - one rumor on the Web gets everyone talking. Samsung, on the other hand, has kept this one pretty much to themselves - using the pre-show publicity 3/2 as a launch point. That makes it "fresh"; and they get good press coverage (133 stories on Google News right now). They need brand exposure in more expensive market segments, which Panasonic already has.

You can think whatever you like; but I doubt that you know a thing about what's going on there. The aforementioned Samsung sales figures from Britain, however, show that they're no flash in the pan.
 
ljmac said:
4/3rds will always allow considerably smaller lenses than APS-C -
it's simple common sense, just as a larger sensor will always allow
better noise/DR performance, all other things being equal. In this
market though, the former means a lot more than the latter.

Leica has had to go to heroic lengths to correct the edge issues with
their lenses on digital, and they aren't entirely effective either.
Click to expand...
Here's a shot from the Leica M8 review from this site. Both lenses are 50 f1.4 and I fail to see your "common sense" from the above statement. The leica is a 1.3x sensor vs a 1.6x for the Canon.



I think your plainly wrong here. Is there a reason why this 50 f1.4 shouldn't work on a 1.5x sensor of a Samsung without the mirror box? I doubt it.

I have no idea where they're at in development. I don't really care either. I just won't swallow your "common sense" as I think the compact M series lenses prove otherwise. Any reason an evil camera would need a larger lens than a rangefinder? I don't think so.

--
-
Greg

http://www.spanielsport.com/
 
Releasing a new SYSTEM STANDARD is an entirely different thing from releasing a new product. Smart people will demand to know the technical details of the new system, especially lens compatibility etc. And so they should, and Samsung (like everyone else) knows that. So why are they showing mock-ups but not releasing any technical info? Because they don't have any, as the mock-ups are nothing but FUD.

If Samsung wanted to be secretive, they wouldn't reveal anything; and if the system was anywhere as close to finished as they're trying to make out, they would reveal at least some technical details (as Oly and Panasonic did when they announced Micro 4/3rds).

Have you people got it yet?
 
how's that for a double standard.

Didn't Samsung say they fully intend to get into this market already? They did. What's so surprising about this. I mean, didn't Olympus show a mockup? Didn't Panasonic show a G1HD mockup?

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'
 
Thisjustin said:
Samsung is doing nothing wrong.
Click to expand...
Except blatantly spredaing FUD, which is exactly what I am accusing them of.
Thisjustin said:
You're just an obsessive trolling fan boy.
Click to expand...
Oh, and you - who doesn't use Olympus and has never posted here before this thread - aren't? Why the hell should you care so much if I'm accusing Samsung of spreading FUD, unless you've just come here to troll?
 
It's their OWN standard, not anyone elses.

Oh btw, you don't get u4/3rds technical details either, only Panasonic and Olympus share that. If you want in, you have to "demonstrate you are willing to make a substantial commitment to the u4/3rds standard" - words of Panasonic/Olympus. So far it's only them.

I hate to say this but all this stuff sounds just... between ridiculous and pathetic.

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'
 
This so-called "double-standard" has been addressed by myself and others many times over already. Suffice it to say, announcing a whole new SYSTEM with only mock-ups and NO technical details whatsoever as an obvious spoiler tactic against Micro 4/3rds is a whole different thing from showing a mock-up of a new MODEL so Oly can guage people's opinions about it. Who was Oly spreading FUD about? They didn't attack Panasonic's MFT models, like Samsung is deliberately doing with Micro 4/3rds.
 
With Micro 4/3rds, we know about lens compatibility. If Samsung had that information, they would surely share it - that's just the most obvious example of what I'm talking about. It is to their advantage to talk about such things, so if they had such info, they would share it. But they don't, because they haven't even worked out the details of the system yet.

And Oly/Panny have revealed quite a bit of technical info about MFT (mount size, back flange distance etc.), along with schematics explaining how it works. This is what companies do when they release a new standard - if they actually have one to release.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top