It's not good news from me on the NX1...

ChuckTa · Dec 4, 2014

aftab said:
Your test was surprising and not surprising at the same time.

It wasn't surprising because we all know that DSLRs with their dedicated AF sensors and many years of fine tuning do a better job than mirrorless in AF tracking. And D750 has Nikon's best AF system.

It was surprising because it performed so poorly (especially given the hype of 200+ AF points). Even my FZ1000 has far better keeper rate than this. Experience in making cameras matters, I guess.

I looked the grass at large size (NX1), its is sharp just behind the hind leg of he dog. This confirms what the video review said about subject moving towards the camera: the first shot would be in focus, the subsequent shots more and more out of focus, the camera simply unable to keep up with speed of the subject.

If your keeper rate with D750 was more than 90% I would call it phenomenal. Most people will get 70 to 80% keepers with their best DSLRs. See video below starting from 5.30 minutes.

aftab · Dec 4, 2014

lol101 said:
lol101 said:

Your test was surprising and not surprising at the same time.

It wasn't surprising because we all know that DSLRs with their dedicated AF sensors and many years of fine tuning do a better job than mirrorless in AF tracking. And D750 has Nikon's best AF system.

It was surprising because it performed so poorly (especially given the hype of 200+ AF points). Even my FZ1000 has far better keeper rate than this. Experience in making cameras matters, I guess.

I looked the grass at large size (NX1), its is sharp just behind the hind leg of he dog. This confirms what the video review said about subject moving towards the camera: the first shot would be in focus, the subsequent shots more and more out of focus, the camera simply unable to keep up with speed of the subject.

If your keeper rate with D750 was more than 90% I would call it phenomenal. Most people will get 70 to 80% keepers with their best DSLRs. See video below starting from 5.30 minutes.

Click to expand...

aftab · Dec 4, 2014

ChuckTa said:
aftab said:

Your test was surprising and not surprising at the same time.

It wasn't surprising because we all know that DSLRs with their dedicated AF sensors and many years of fine tuning do a better job than mirrorless in AF tracking. And D750 has Nikon's best AF system.

It was surprising because it performed so poorly (especially given the hype of 200+ AF points). Even my FZ1000 has far better keeper rate than this. Experience in making cameras matters, I guess.

I looked the grass at large size (NX1), its is sharp just behind the hind leg of he dog. This confirms what the video review said about subject moving towards the camera: the first shot would be in focus, the subsequent shots more and more out of focus, the camera simply unable to keep up with speed of the subject.

If your keeper rate with D750 was more than 90% I would call it phenomenal. Most people will get 70 to 80% keepers with their best DSLRs. See video below starting from 5.30 minutes.

Click to expand...

Chris62 · Dec 4, 2014

Picture from NX1 was taken with ISO 400 - Nikon over 500 so it is brighter.

Why focal lenght is different? If yo do a comparison use the same parameters for all.

Even old NX10 is able to take a running dog. My Amstaff is very fast one.

NX10 ISO 1600/F6,3/~150 mm

ChuckTa · Dec 4, 2014

aftab said:
aftab said:

Experience in tracking fast moving or erratic subjects (which OP seems to have) and tweaking various AF settings surely helps. But something makes me think that these findings are valid as we haven't really seen a decent tracking sequence form NX1 yet (other than really slow moving subject) either from common users or from reviewers. Maybe it is too early, maybe we will see them.

Click to expand...

Actually, I saw a youtube video from this guy that show a series of photo on his computer screen with Lightroom on AF tracking of his kids running toward the camera, and almost all the shot were in focus except the last part when the kid is partly out of view. The kids are running fast too. But he screw up saying there is some problem in the image when actually it is due to DOF or motion blur (0.6s shot) and he pull off the video. Too bad, he could have just cut those out and leave the AF tracking part.

Anyways, below is he comments after a week or so of usage.

Usee · Dec 4, 2014

NeilJones said:
And my Nikon D750.

After 3 days of testing both cameras side by side, I've decided to keep the D750 and send the NX1 back.

Bottom line.

The D750 produces better images in most situations. (Well, it is a full frame sensor)

...and you probably used the crippled Lightroom for developing the NX1 RAWs:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3755221

RAWTherapee is showing much better detail, even without CA correction (100% crop):

RAWTherapee 100% crop without CA correction

View: gallery page

Within the SRW Lightroom output, the wind turbines and the nearby road have CA

and it looks like crap somehow...(100% crop):

LR-100% crop - CA inventions (red CA on the left, blue CA on the right of the road and wind turbines)

View: original size

As long as you used Lightroom, you didn't compare the cameras, but what Lightroom allows you to see! ;-)

Member said:
The AF is better all round on the Nikon D750. (Especially in continuous shooting mode)

The Nikon sensor is just so hard to beat especially when you crank the ISO to higher levels. It really is!!

Have you checked both cameras in M-mode at the very same settings, whether they have the same sensitivity if set to the same ISO setting?

Member said:
I was so surprised today when I did the extreme dog running towards my camera test. I used 3 cameras in the same situation with same ( or very similar) settings.

The Nikon killed the NX1 getting 95% of the shots in focus. The Sony a6000 came in second place with the NX1 struggling in last place. This really surprised me! I tried the test several times with the Nikon killing it every time! Majorly!!

Due to the higher frame rate, the NX1 can deliver, even a 40% hit rate would be better, than a 95% hit rate of the D750... ;-)

Member said:
I completely fell in love with the Nikon D750 and will keep it as my main camera.

That is completely OK.

Member said:
No flaming here, just giving my thoughts after testing these cameras.

Well, the thread you opened (and was sadly removed - but for some reason), with the question:

"whether someone has compared the NX1 to his i-phone 6..."

...indicates something different... ;-)

Member said:
I'm sure the NX1 will do very well. Just not with me.

I agree with you on this one.

Member said:
I bid you farewell for now.

Mission completed - isn't it?

Member said:
Peace to all.

If you are really interested in peace,

why did you open a very provoking thread with the question "whether someone has compared his NX1 to the i-phone6" - (this thread was removed for some reason).

No problem, if people are not trying to bad-mouthing something, without reason,

or make wrong claims, like we have seen in some video reviews - it works without effort. ;-)

Member said:
Your friend,
Neil.

I'm not your foe anyway, but I like to see the truth.

Member said:
--
" All you need is love"

--
Envy is the highest form of recognition.
-
Stop to run, start to think.
-
Think twice - that doubles the fun!
-
Your world is as big, as Your mind.
-
Avoid to have only one point of view!
-
U see?

Raw Jaw · Dec 4, 2014

kcamacho11 said:
For everyone that has been posting in DPreview forums for a while, please take a look at NeilJones post history and note his crazy trends.

You will notice he:

1- Buys camera system after camera system

2- Praises the new camera he purchases

3- After a while, "finds something wrong" with it

4- Returns it and explains why it did not work out

The Samsung NX1 is now his latest masterpiece.

The guy has owned more cameras in recent time than anyone in this entire Samsung forum put together.

Let me tell you something my friend, you have ISSUES. And serious ones at that.

I have never encountered anyone like you in this forum, or in my life rather.....and it comes down to only TWO explanations:

Either you have LOADS of money and are filthy rich, but yet LOVE to take advantage of stores by returning their PERFECTLY good products......or you have a psychological problem which you might want to have checked out.

I think it's a combination of both.

I could care less what your excuse is, to be honest. I could care less about what photography experience you claim to have. The SAD thing is, that you are failing to acknowledge the ONE true key here and that is that what matters most is the person behind the camera, and not the camera itself. You seem to be bashing AMAZING cameras which are capable of unbelievable captures, as you search for the world's "perfect" camera. Guess what? That doesn't exist. Each camera has their pros and cons.

What you need to do, is find something else useful to do other than waste everyone's time here and apologize to every store you have returned the cameras to (which must be quite the list).

You are an embarrassment to this forum. I wouldn't be surprised if you are banned from purchasing from certain camera stores.

Add the fact that his original proclamation had no mention of the glass used and your statement seems very plausible.

Raw Jaw · Dec 4, 2014

Coldamus said:
ChuckTa said:

I have no doubt FF will have better quality than apsc, and that the AF might be better. But I am curious about your in focus % from the NX1 as what I have seem from other source says otherwise.

Are both test done at the same time? The D750 images looks brighter and too warm to look like anything from a cloudy day, while the NX1 looks like a pic from a cloudy day.

Click to expand...

The difference in brightness, contrast and colour balance was also the first thing I noticed. However it is mostly due to the images having an embedded colour profile of "ProPhoto RGB" which probably suits the OP's equipment better than yours or mine. If you load the images in Gimp, for instance, it asks whether to convert to sRGB. Doing so makes quite a large difference. A further improvement can be made with a slight curves adjustment.

Note also that the Nikon images have been cropped or resized from the original 6016 x 4016 pixels to 5000 x 3338 pixels. The NX1 pic. has been cropped or resized from 6480 x 4320 pixels to 3000 x 2000 pixels. So, in effect we're comparing 83% of the D750's resolution against 46% of the NX1's resolution.

The exif shows that matrix metering was used for both cameras. For this type of subject, I would have used centre-weighted or even spot metering in an attempt to get better exposure of the dog's face.

Coldamus said:

Did you use the NX1 AF tracking? It should show a square covering the dog on the LCD. I have seems example of 3 seconds 45 shots of a moving car with a tele lens with almost no mis-focus, but that is on a sunny day. So I am guess for fast moving object toward the shooter, a tele might do a better job than a standard 50mm range. Also the NX1 has a must deeper DOF than the D750, this might put the NX1 at a disadvantage as well as I believe a narrower DOF object is easier to track. Just my guess, if you would do the test in the exact same condition, the difference might not be as large.

Click to expand...

In the Nikon shots, the portion of the dog from front paws to just behind the eyes is sharp. That is more or less what you would want, of course. The grass is in focus only for a short distance starting from just in front of the front paws.

In the NX1 shot, the hind leg (only one is visible) seems to be sharp but nothing else. Strangely, the grass seems to be in focus in the NX1 shot all the way from in front of the dog to behind it. The grass is actually sharper than in the Nikon shots. The shorter focal length of the 16-50 lens together with the APS-C crop factor explain the greater depth of field. However, given that the depth of field covers more than the whole dog, why is the whole dog not sharp?

I was hoping the exif would indicate which AF tracking and AF area modes were in effect but if that data exists, the old version of PhotoME that I have doesn't show it. Given the results, I expect the NX was probably using the default Multi AF without restriction of the AF area. Perhaps the OP could clarify.

I think we need to see more examples with known parameters before conclusions can be drawn. For that purpose, OOC jpegs would be better as some processing has been done on these shots.

Precisely!

DGriff0400 · Dec 4, 2014

sorry but this seems like an odd test lol, he set the focus to manual but were talking about autofocus...couldnt he just have botched the focus?

NeilJones · Dec 4, 2014

Same test with just the NX1

just because I'm nice like that

thanks

Greynerd · Dec 4, 2014

An similarly underexposed shot at 40mm from the Nikon might be more convincing. Your 120mm shots with their shallow DOF do not give the Nikon any confusion on what you want to focus on. Your example shots do do say as far as I can see how you were metering or focusing and the black featureless dog is going to be difficult for a camera using CDAF which cannot help the PDAF here.

These are not exactly controlled comparisons especially using Auto ISO. Why not use the same focal length and same ISO and give full disclosure of all the camera settings?

NeilJones said:
Raw Jaw said:

Bill Hollinger said:

Thanks Neil. I kind of figured this was the case as time passed and there was no word from you. Another poster said the same thing about the Nikon750 vs the NX1. I suppose the 16-50 f2.8 would not be the normal choice for this task, but it is their new S lens and is supposed to focus quickly.

Were any of the NX1 images in focus? If so, do you have any idea what percentage? Or was it a total washout. Two of you reporting the same thing with the same cameras and lenses (and those are not Nikon's speedy focusing lenses) makes me wonder if the absense of the 50-150 here has anything to do with the results you see?

Thanks very much for taking the time and going to the trouble

Click to expand...

What trouble? His words are no more than the video from the Camera store.

I had to remind him to identify the glass used.

No. I take his report with a grain of salt until he posts some results of his test, which includes a zoom vs. A prime.

More details to substantiate your findings are needed.

NeilJones said:

of doing all this testing. I do hope your canine buddy enjoyed himself!

Bill

Click to expand...

Edit, just saw the dog pics, he is a real beauty!

Still does not mean anything without settings detailed.

Click to expand...

I'm certainly am not here to make war. Enough of that in our crazy world. Just sharing my real life experience with a couple of different camera's.

People have different needs. I realized mine today. That's all. Again, i'm sure the NX1 will do great for a lot of people. Just I decided going with a full frame Nikon.

Here's another heavily cropped shot from the D750 from today. Tough to argue when this dog was running straight at me!

--
" All you need is love"

kcamacho11 · Dec 4, 2014

Raw Jaw said:
Raw Jaw said:

Add the fact that his original proclamation had no mention of the glass used and your statement seems very plausible.

Click to expand...

Believe me, it is more than plausible. Just go ask around the Sony, M43 and Fuji forums...I am sure they will know exactly what type of character NeilJones is.

Do you see the dog running photos he posted, claiming he is not happy with the results??

He literally did the EXACT same thing when the a6000 was released. He was not happy with it, and some of the photos he posted were TACK sharp using the Zeiss 55 F1.8 lens.

The dude has issues, and it is kinda sad, really.

kcamacho11 · Dec 4, 2014

NeilJones said:
Same test with just the NX1

just because ~~I'm nic~~e I have serious issues like that

thanks

--
" All you need is love"

Just go return the NX1 already like you said you would. You cannot avoid the inevitable.

Cannot wait to read your in-depth input on the Sony A7 Mark II (which we all know you will buy)....then a few days later, start a thread in the Sony forum of what you found wrong with the camera....which results in you stating it is going back to the store and that you are sticking with the (name camera) better.

Usee · Dec 4, 2014

kcamacho11 said:
Raw Jaw said:

kcamacho11 said:

Add the fact that his original proclamation had no mention of the glass used and your statement seems very plausible.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Believe me, it is more than plausible. Just go ask around the Sony, M43 and Fuji forums...I am sure they will know exactly what type of character NeilJones is.

Do you see the dog running photos he posted, claiming he is not happy with the results??

He literally did the EXACT same thing when the a6000 was released. He was not happy with it, and some of the photos he posted were TACK sharp using the Zeiss 55 F1.8 lens.

The dude has issues, and it is kinda sad, really.

I think the biggest problem is, that he uses Lightroom...

...and not a more advanced RAW software, like RAWTherapee, or DxO...

...even the Zeiss Otus can't show its strength, if the RAW files are processed, within Lightroom, which dictates, what you are allowed to see, and smudges fine details, without the possibility, to extract them, out of the RAW. ;-)

Usee · Dec 4, 2014

NeilJones said:
Same test with just the NX1

just because I'm nice like that

thanks

kcamacho11 · Dec 4, 2014

Usee said:
I think the biggest problem is, that he uses Lightroom...

...and not a more advanced RAW software, like RAWTherapee, or DxO...

...even the Zeiss Otus can't show its strength, if the RAW files are processed, within Lightroom, which dictates, what you are allowed to see, and smudges fine details, without the possibility, to extract them, out of the RAW. ;-)

Usee · Dec 4, 2014

kcamacho11 said:
Usee said:

I think the biggest problem is, that he uses Lightroom...

...and not a more advanced RAW software, like RAWTherapee, or DxO...

...even the Zeiss Otus can't show its strength, if the RAW files are processed, within Lightroom, which dictates, what you are allowed to see, and smudges fine details, without the possibility, to extract them, out of the RAW. ;-)

--
Envy is the highest form of recognition.
-
Stop to run, start to think.
-
Think twice - that doubles the fun!
-
Your world is as big, as Your mind.
-
Avoid to have only one point of view!
-
U see?

Click to expand...

Good guess, but the biggest problem is that he just has issues.

You wouldn't believe, how many people I know, which have the one, or the other issues... ;-)

kcamacho11 said:
What he does is not normal.

Well, sometimes seemingly "normal" people are really crazy and sometimes even dangerous.

kcamacho11 said:
I am talking about a long list of cameras which he has purchased in the past 1-2 years or so, uses them for a while, finds something wrong and returns them.

This may be the case, it is just his hobby, I have no problems with that, but I have "problems" if someone is judging something on a wrong base and / or making wrong claim.

kcamacho11 said:
I am baffled that he hasn't returned the D750 yet, but I think it is only a matter of time.

Well, some people change their partner daily and think, that there is nothing wrong with it...

...some even lie daily and forget about the (common) reality - and the (provable) truth...

...and think, that everything is OK with them...

...that is much more frightening, than what he does - actually. ;-)

-

Let's wait and see, whether he tries, what I suggested.

If this is the case, I'm happy that he was open minded enough to do so,

if not, then he is just the usual - I want it all, no matter if it makes sense or not - guy.

--
Envy is the highest form of recognition.
-
Stop to run, start to think.
-
Think twice - that doubles the fun!
-
Your world is as big, as Your mind.
-
Avoid to have only one point of view!
-
U see?

Greynerd · Dec 4, 2014

No other parameters either. On a back lit scene of woods with sky, which has stopped the camera down, with a dog in the scene compared with a tightly framed high contrast image of a dog and little else. He only needs to take the NX1 at multiple focal points and exposure and the Nikon ones at spot focus and metering to get the same effect. The camera type really has little to do with it.

A definite lack of scientific rigour in the examples.

Raw Jaw said:
kcamacho11 said:

For everyone that has been posting in DPreview forums for a while, please take a look at NeilJones post history and note his crazy trends.

You will notice he:

1- Buys camera system after camera system

2- Praises the new camera he purchases

3- After a while, "finds something wrong" with it

4- Returns it and explains why it did not work out

The Samsung NX1 is now his latest masterpiece.

The guy has owned more cameras in recent time than anyone in this entire Samsung forum put together.

Let me tell you something my friend, you have ISSUES. And serious ones at that.

I have never encountered anyone like you in this forum, or in my life rather.....and it comes down to only TWO explanations:

Either you have LOADS of money and are filthy rich, but yet LOVE to take advantage of stores by returning their PERFECTLY good products......or you have a psychological problem which you might want to have checked out.

I think it's a combination of both.

I could care less what your excuse is, to be honest. I could care less about what photography experience you claim to have. The SAD thing is, that you are failing to acknowledge the ONE true key here and that is that what matters most is the person behind the camera, and not the camera itself. You seem to be bashing AMAZING cameras which are capable of unbelievable captures, as you search for the world's "perfect" camera. Guess what? That doesn't exist. Each camera has their pros and cons.

What you need to do, is find something else useful to do other than waste everyone's time here and apologize to every store you have returned the cameras to (which must be quite the list).

You are an embarrassment to this forum. I wouldn't be surprised if you are banned from purchasing from certain camera stores.

Click to expand...

Add the fact that his original proclamation had no mention of the glass used and your statement seems very plausible.

kcamacho11 · Dec 4, 2014

Usee said:
Usee said:

This may be the case, it is just his hobby, I have no problems with that, but I have "problems" if someone is judging something on a wrong base and / or making wrong claim.

Click to expand...

Hobby? I am sorry but that is not a hobby, and furthermore it is nor fair to the camera stores.

Every time a new camera and exciting camera is released, he goes and buys it, uses it and then faults it. He simply cannot stick with one of the great and relatively new cameras that he has. He does not enjoy using and learning one great camera. Instead, he is always concerned and intrigued with what is coming out in the next month. That is not a hobby when it comes to photography, not even close.

If my favorite hobby was using Computers, you would not catch me (or anyone that is sane, for that matter).....purchasing computer after computer, and slowly returning one by one because there was "something I did not like about them", while others who have the same computer are perfectly capable of using it properly.

kcamacho11 · Dec 4, 2014

Greynerd said:
No other parameters either. On a back lit scene of woods with sky, which has stopped the camera down, with a dog in the scene compared with a tightly framed high contrast image of a dog and little else. He only needs to take the NX1 at multiple focal points and exposure and the Nikon ones at spot focus and metering to get the same effect. The camera type really has little to do with it.

A definite lack of scientific rigour in the examples.

Member said:

Add the fact that his original proclamation had no mention of the glass used and your statement seems very plausible.

Click to expand...

When the a6000 was released, he posted on the Sony forum that he was not that impressed with it's continuous AF system.

He started a thread the same way as this one, and posted ONE photo of his dog jumping in the air using the Zeiss 55mm F1.8 lens. The photo was absolutely TACK sharp. Everyone in the thread did not understand his concern, as the photo was excellent.

It's not good news from me on the NX1...

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Attachments

Senior Member

Senior Member

Active member

Veteran Member

Greynerd

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Greynerd

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts