Samsung NX is not competing with NEX, look at their pricing

Started May 18, 2012 | Discussions thread
Jon Allison Regular Member • Posts: 317
Re: Samsung NX is not competing with NEX, look at their pricing

viking79 wrote:

Jefftan wrote:

NEX F3 is only $600 so even the cheapest one (without image stabilization kit lens) is $100 more. They are using a sensor that is proven to be worse in high ISO (3200) compare with NEX, no auto HDR and most likely worse video quality than try to sell it at a higher price.

The NEX F3 has no mode dial. Usability is seriously hampered by this.

The Sony 16 MP is not much better at 3200 if shot in RAW. The NX 20 MP sensor is very capable.

The NX has WiFi (the F3 does not).

Auto HDR mode is a gimick You do better to shoot in RAW my personal opinion and expose for the highlights and boost the shadows. The NX has real bracketing, +/- 3 EV so you can shoot your own HDR and do a better job at it. The Sony is only +/- 0.7

I would probably be willing to pay the $100 more.


I understand your point, but I think that the target audience wouldn't really do much RAW processing, or be too worried about the interface. They probably wouldn't buy any more lenses.

-- hide signature --

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: (bi-weekly)
Flickr Photostream: (updated daily)

-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow