Reading mode: Light Dark

Samsung NX lenses are weird .. (reviews coming)

Go to last post
KingDon said:
Ariston said:
from what it appears, SOny is great with sensor development, although we can't say the same thing with their lenses. it is something like Fuji, great sensor, no lenses.
Click to expand...
What great Fuji sensor? The sensor in X100 is Sony's 12 MP CMOS sensor. There are many great Sony lenses on A-mount, such as 85mm F1.4, 135mm F1.8, 70-300, 70-400, etc. Sony has a long history of building stabilized lenses for their pro-camcorders too.
Click to expand...
S3 and S5..great sensors...the new X10 seems to have a good sensor...and....:
http://photorumors.com/2011/11/18/be-afraid-be-very-afraid-of-fuji/

the rumored organic sensor is supposed to be great.....we have to wait and see...sony lenses for the alpha line are ok, not great...and thats not the point..this is the samsung froum and for now samsung is about mirrorless cameras and of course lens for these cameras..so comparison is only with the nex line (that suck@#$s...)
KingDon said:
The 16mm is a cheap kit ($150). It's the cheapest 24mm eqv lens ever made, I think. The Pentax eqv of that lens costs around $500. 18-55 and 18-200 are fine too for kit.
Click to expand...
is supposed to be chaep...its so bad it should not even be in the stores.....18-55 and 18-200mm are far from prosumers and pros dreams...and for the NEX7, i bet they wont perform wonders....

Samsung is yet to become good as sony in sensors, but please be honest...sony is far from above average regarding lenses in the NEX line...
 
http://bit.ly/tp0WBm
Ariston said:
absolute BS. there is no proof that would suggest that the X100 used Sony's sensor. all these are unfounded rumours. from the so-called D90 sensor to Sony. btw, haven't you heard of Fuji's Super CCD sensor? besides, why do you think that Sony is worried about Fuji's upcoming cameras if they are the one who is providing their sensor?

and with regards to the lenses you mentioned, are you referring to the Zeiss-designed lenses (which are not really Sony made by any way) ? you are eating too much Sony grass there fella.
Click to expand...
 
Jon Rty said:
Ariston said:
absolute BS. there is no proof that would suggest that the X100 used Sony's sensor. all these are unfounded rumours. from the so-called D90 sensor to Sony. btw, haven't you heard of Fuji's Super CCD sensor? besides, why do you think that Sony is worried about Fuji's upcoming cameras if they are the one who is providing their sensor?

and with regards to the lenses you mentioned, are you referring to the Zeiss-designed lenses (which are not really Sony made by any way) ? you are eating too much Sony grass there fella.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
and that exactly proves what? I heard of that reference before but does it equate to > > > http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fotoactualidad.com%2F2011%2F04%2Fsensor-de-la-finepix-x100-fabricado-por.html%3Futm_source%3Dfeedburner%26utm_medium%3Dfeed%26utm_campaign%3DFeed%253A%2BFotoActualidad%2B%28Foto%2BActualidad%29 ?
 
Ariston said:
and that exactly proves what? I heard of that reference before but does it equate to > > > http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fotoactualidad.com%2F2011%2F04%2Fsensor-de-la-finepix-x100-fabricado-por.html%3Futm_source%3Dfeedburner%26utm_medium%3Dfeed%26utm_campaign%3DFeed%253A%2BFotoActualidad%2B%28Foto%2BActualidad%29 ?
Click to expand...
Your link is hearsay. Someone is claiming that someone heard Mr. Yang (Fuji China -- Fuji is Japanese company) claim the sensor is made by Fuji. That's a pretty long winded second-hand and not credible source.

When Fuji is original designer of the sensor (such as super CCD ones), they advertise it heavily. Thousands of times. They sing about it. Dance around it. But is this the best you can come up to to claim it's a new sensor never seen sensor? Is that all?

Canon has never produced an APSC CMOS that matched this 12 MP Sony's CMOS sensor (for years, since 2008), especially DR at base ISO that is unique patented technology in Exmor sensor, but Fuji did that, but they forgot to tell anyone about it? The fact is that Fuji has no history of ever making APSC CMOS sensor. The sensor MP ( 12.3 MP) is exactly identical to Sony's sensor. The sensor performance is identical too.

There is absolutely no question that it is the tried and tested 12.3 MP CMOS sensor by Sony seen dozens of times.
 
Ariston said:
KingDon said:
I remember when x100 was launched, fuji were specifically asked if it is a Sony sensor. They did not deny it. They could have ended the rumor right there. Their answer, as far as I remember, was that it doesn't matter who built the sensor. The sensor is specially tweaked for x100. . The microlenses on the sensor are specially made to gather more light with the fixed lens.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Ariston said:
it's funny you forgot to remember the link. unless you can substantiate your claim, it is nothing more than just a mere rumor.
Click to expand...
http://www.quesabesde.com/noticias/fujifilm-finepix-x100-entrevista-hiroshi-kawahara,1_en_7074

Question: It has been said that the sensor used is similar to that seen in some Nikon SLR cameras, and therefore manufactured by Sony. Can this information be confirmed?

Answer: The sensor of the FinePixX100 is customized to match its lens. We should point out that the most important thing is not who produces the technology but the technology in itself, and in this sense Fujifilm optimizes its technologies depending on the photographic result being pursued at any given time.
 
It proves that the sensor performance of the X100 is very similar to the sensor performance of the D90. Meaning that it's highly unlikely that Fuji would've suffered the immense expenses of developing and fabbing a sensor of their own which is only used in a low-volume enthusiast camera, seeing as they didn't gain any competitive advantage from it.
Ariston said:
and that exactly proves what? I heard of that reference before but does it equate to > > > http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fotoactualidad.com%2F2011%2F04%2Fsensor-de-la-finepix-x100-fabricado-por.html%3Futm_source%3Dfeedburner%26utm_medium%3Dfeed%26utm_campaign%3DFeed%253A%2BFotoActualidad%2B%28Foto%2BActualidad%29 ?
Click to expand...
 
KingDon said:
Ariston said:
KingDon said:
Of course it is.
Click to expand...
just to be honest with you and hate to say this with frankness, IT'S NOT !
Click to expand...
Funny earlier in this thread viking79 who tested the lens says it is, but you who don't own it, claim it is not.

Have a look at this thread

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1042&thread=39669102&page=1

Looks like people who own this $150 are doing fine with it.
Click to expand...
doing fine is different from that of a lens being great. does that mean the kitlenses are great because people are doing fine with it?
 
ET2 said:
Ariston said:
KingDon said:
I remember when x100 was launched, fuji were specifically asked if it is a Sony sensor. They did not deny it. They could have ended the rumor right there. Their answer, as far as I remember, was that it doesn't matter who built the sensor. The sensor is specially tweaked for x100. . The microlenses on the sensor are specially made to gather more light with the fixed lens.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
ET2 said:
it's funny you forgot to remember the link. unless you can substantiate your claim, it is nothing more than just a mere rumor.
Click to expand...
http://www.quesabesde.com/noticias/fujifilm-finepix-x100-entrevista-hiroshi-kawahara,1_en_7074

Question: It has been said that the sensor used is similar to that seen in some Nikon SLR cameras, and therefore manufactured by Sony. Can this information be confirmed?

Answer: The sensor of the FinePixX100 is customized to match its lens. We should point out that the most important thing is not who produces the technology but the technology in itself, and in this sense Fujifilm optimizes its technologies depending on the photographic result being pursued at any given time.
Click to expand...
the statement does not confirm anything.
 
KingDon said:
Ariston said:
and that exactly proves what? I heard of that reference before but does it equate to > > > http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fotoactualidad.com%2F2011%2F04%2Fsensor-de-la-finepix-x100-fabricado-por.html%3Futm_source%3Dfeedburner%26utm_medium%3Dfeed%26utm_campaign%3DFeed%253A%2BFotoActualidad%2B%28Foto%2BActualidad%29 ?
Click to expand...
Your link is hearsay. Someone is claiming that someone heard Mr. Yang (Fuji China -- Fuji is Japanese company) claim the sensor is made by Fuji. That's a pretty long winded second-hand and not credible source.

When Fuji is original designer of the sensor (such as super CCD ones), they advertise it heavily. Thousands of times. They sing about it. Dance around it. But is this the best you can come up to to claim it's a new sensor never seen sensor? Is that all?

Canon has never produced an APSC CMOS that matched this 12 MP Sony's CMOS sensor (for years, since 2008), especially DR at base ISO that is unique patented technology in Exmor sensor, but Fuji did that, but they forgot to tell anyone about it? The fact is that Fuji has no history of ever making APSC CMOS sensor. The sensor MP ( 12.3 MP) is exactly identical to Sony's sensor. The sensor performance is identical too.

There is absolutely no question that it is the tried and tested 12.3 MP CMOS sensor by Sony seen dozens of times.
Click to expand...
you talk of hearsay while you can't even provide your own basis. we can go around in circles all day long and we can't agree on this matter due to lack of any credible source or confirmation that what you say holds true. if you can provide me with a sensible and reliable proof as you claim, maybe we can discuss this better rather than you talking about the same thing over and over which doesn't change anything. til you can provide something that FUJI itself claimed specifically mentioned what sensor it is, then go back with me and talk about it. otherwise, all that you have said and done will be dismissed as pure speculation. so with your utmost expertise of the matter, you shouldn't be having trouble acquiring and providing real data. I'll wait for it til you have really something substantial.
 
Ariston said:
KingDon said:
Ariston said:
Ariston said:
Of course it is.
Click to expand...
just to be honest with you and hate to say this with frankness, IT'S NOT !
Click to expand...
Funny earlier in this thread viking79 who tested the lens says it is, but you who don't own it, claim it is not.

Have a look at this thread

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1042&thread=39669102&page=1

Looks like people who own this $150 are doing fine with it.
Click to expand...
doing fine is different from that of a lens being great. does that mean the kitlenses are great because people are doing fine with it?
Click to expand...
Honestly, most kit lenses are nearly as good as pro grade lenses at or above f/5.6. Sometimes they lack the feel of the better lenses in terms of colors, etc, but that can often be corrected in post.

The real advantage to a lens like a 30mm f/2 vs an 18-55mm is the extra 2 f/stops. You aren't going to see much difference at f/4 or f/5.6 and up.

Honestly, the 16mm f/2.8 for Sony is a good lens given the price, but as you say, it could be a better lens with a higher price. I wish Sony offered both.

Eric
--
I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)

See my Blog at: http://www.erphotoreview.com/ (bi-weekly)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)
 
viking79 said:
The real advantage to a lens like a 30mm f/2 vs an 18-55mm is the extra 2 f/stops. You aren't going to see much difference at f/4 or f/5.6 and up.
Click to expand...
I wish this was true but it's not. have both lenses and tried both. the thing is, aside from the 2 stop advantage is, despite shooting both lenses at similar apertures, I could still tell the difference which one is shot with which lens even without looking at the exif. the kitlens however is close at f8 but still noticeable in some ways. the only way that I can't tell them apart from each other is after I carefully post-process the image. I use the 30mm not just because of it's pancake size, but what image I could get from it.
 
Ariston said:
viking79 said:
The real advantage to a lens like a 30mm f/2 vs an 18-55mm is the extra 2 f/stops. You aren't going to see much difference at f/4 or f/5.6 and up.
Click to expand...
I wish this was true but it's not. have both lenses and tried both. the thing is, aside from the 2 stop advantage is, despite shooting both lenses at similar apertures, I could still tell the difference which one is shot with which lens even without looking at the exif.
Click to expand...
Sure, maybe if you know the characteristics of each lens, but would you be able to in a blind study? Both lenses have similar resolution at f/4 and up, the only real difference is the 30/2 has slightly higher center resolution, but they are really quite similar.

The 30 still has the advantage, but the difference at f/4 and up is much less than the ability to shoot with great image quality from f/2 to f/4. I.e. if I was shooting at f/5.6 all the time, I might consider the kit zoom instead as it has the flexibility of added range.

My personal plan is to shoot with the 16, 30, and 55 when it comes out.
Ariston said:
the kitlens however is close at f8 but still noticeable in some ways. the only way that I can't tell them apart from each other is after I carefully post-process the image. I use the 30mm not just because of it's pancake size, but what image I could get from it.
Click to expand...
I agree the 30 has great image quality, but the advantage remains at larger apertures and for its smaller size, at the expense of zoom range (every lens has trade offs).

Eric

--
I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)

See my Blog at: http://www.erphotoreview.com/ (bi-weekly)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)
 
viking79 said:
Sure, maybe if you know the characteristics of each lens, but would you be able to in a blind study? Both lenses have similar resolution at f/4 and up, the only real difference is the 30/2 has slightly higher center resolution, but they are really quite similar.
Click to expand...
what do you mean by blind study? you mean not being aware of both lenses? if that is the case, then I still do notice such difference. to be honest, the 30mm has a really great resolving power and detail and I noticed this on several occasions, from simple close-ups, standard full body portraits and doing cityscapes. it's not just because it has an amazing center resolution but how it is performing across the image. that is why I can't really on the kit to do these sorts of things unless it's for an emergency. but the kit is good otherwise, not just getting what I look for in the images.
viking79 said:
The 30 still has the advantage, but the difference at f/4 and up is much less than the ability to shoot with great image quality from f/2 to f/4. I.e. if I was shooting at f/5.6 all the time, I might consider the kit zoom instead as it has the flexibility of added range.
Click to expand...
the use that I could find for both kits 20-50 and 18-55 is in the wide range. the 20-50 performs slightly better. although such use of these two may be in jeopardy once I get a copy of the 16mm. although I would still have to evaluate that lens personally as well.
viking79 said:
My personal plan is to shoot with the 16, 30, and 55 when it comes out.
Click to expand...
although the 16mm does look to be an excellent performer basing from what is going around here, I would have my reservations on how it would appeal me personally.
viking79 said:
I agree the 30 has great image quality, but the advantage remains at larger apertures and for its smaller size, at the expense of zoom range (every lens has trade offs).
Click to expand...
the trade off for me is in the wide range. once I get the 16mm, the kitlenses would probably become reserves.

btw, I didn't get the 20mm because it doesn't look as great as the 30mm and the 20-50 seems close to it's performance at the apertures that you mentioned. I'm just giving you my personal assessment regarding the 20mm. of course, others may find my observation different from theirs.
 
Ariston said:
ET2 said:
Ariston said:
KingDon said:
I remember when x100 was launched, fuji were specifically asked if it is a Sony sensor. They did not deny it. They could have ended the rumor right there. Their answer, as far as I remember, was that it doesn't matter who built the sensor. The sensor is specially tweaked for x100. . The microlenses on the sensor are specially made to gather more light with the fixed lens.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Ariston said:
it's funny you forgot to remember the link. unless you can substantiate your claim, it is nothing more than just a mere rumor.
Click to expand...
http://www.quesabesde.com/noticias/fujifilm-finepix-x100-entrevista-hiroshi-kawahara,1_en_7074

Question: It has been said that the sensor used is similar to that seen in some Nikon SLR cameras, and therefore manufactured by Sony. Can this information be confirmed?

Answer: The sensor of the FinePixX100 is customized to match its lens. We should point out that the most important thing is not who produces the technology but the technology in itself, and in this sense Fujifilm optimizes its technologies depending on the photographic result being pursued at any given time.
Click to expand...
the statement does not confirm anything.
Click to expand...
It does for me. The question was very straightforward and clear. If Fuji made the sensor, they would have taken the credit for it. At least not wiggle like that in answering a simple question.

The sensor is not Fuji made.
 
KingDon said:
Ariston said:
KingDon said:
Of course it is.
Click to expand...
just to be honest with you and hate to say this with frankness, IT'S NOT !
Click to expand...
Funny earlier in this thread viking79 who tested the lens says it is, but you who don't own it, claim it is not.

Have a look at this thread

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1042&thread=39669102&page=1

Looks like people who own this $150 are doing fine with it.
Click to expand...
'Doing fine with' a discounted piece of glass doesn't mean it's a sharp or even decent lens, nor comparable to the NX or m43 equivalents. One can do 'fine' with a pinhole camera, depending on what one is doing.

That thread is a 'prime' (sorry) example of how people, when limited to one lens that is lacking, tend to make the best of it. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of its capabilities.
 
KingDon said:
Ariston said:
I haven't been blow off by Sony lenses that aren't collaborated or atleast helped by Zeiss to develop.
Click to expand...
Can you name all A-mount lenses not designed by Zeiss that are bad? How about 85mm 2.8, 35mm F1.8. 50mm F1.8, 70-300mm G, 70-400mm G?
Click to expand...
'Bad' glass is a relative term, especially when talking to Sony fans.
KingDon said:
KingDon said:
that is the truth. and anyone who believes that Sony itself makes great lenses is delusional.
Click to expand...
Sony has been making camcorders for 20 years, and these camcorders have stabilized lenses. Who built them?
Click to expand...
Faroudja (which is to their credit, because that's excellent gear), at least through the 90's and into the 2000's. I can't vouch for the crap that came later.
 
Look at some of the 12 MP cameras

4000 x 3000 (S100)
4032 x 3024 (EPL1)
4288 x 2848 (X100)
4,288 x 2,848 (D90)
4256 x 2832 (D700)

Notice something weird? It's not just 12 MP, but the pixels on X100 and D90 are identical to 1000 of decimal point. So here we have two independently developed sensors with exactly the same number of pixels in both horizontal and vertical direction. What is probability of that?
Why not something like 4276 x 2856 on X100?
 
worldcup1982 said:
worldcup1982 said:
The 16mm is a cheap kit ($150). It's the cheapest 24mm eqv lens ever made
Click to expand...
is supposed to be chaep...its so bad it should not even be in the stores.....18-55 and 18-200mm are far from prosumers and pros dreams...and for the NEX7, i bet they wont perform wonders....
Click to expand...
Agreed. The E 16mm tests worse than any other equivalent lens on the market, for any mount. How Sony fans can spin that into something good is a constant source of wonderment.

NEX-7 has no glass save the one Zeiss $1K beast that matches the sensor (unless the sensor is only a half stop better than the A77, in which case it's anyone's guess).
worldcup1982 said:
Samsung is yet to become good as sony in sensors, but please be honest...sony is far from above average regarding lenses in the NEX line...
Click to expand...
I'd put the 20MP against the 16MP (corrected) and certainly the 24MP. I think it's right in there in terms of performance. Corrected it's within 1/2 stop of the 16MP and from what I've seen, tops the 24MP at ISO 1600 and 3200. Above that it's kind of a mess for either one and the 16MP pulls ahead.

Either way, Samsung has come a long way from the 14MP in the first NX models.
 
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