Kisaha wrote:
shutterbugnx wrote:
Kisaha wrote:
This lens is far inferior to the 16-50S. It is a shame for the brand that this truly is the best video lens they have.
It's half the weight of Samsung's lens, similar in terms of sharpness, and matches the fast aperture on the wide end. I think it's very impressive.
What?! so Fuji "mistakenly" have a more expensive 16-55mm?! You are changing history here..
The 18-55 is less sharp, is not as wide, is slower in every focal length.
what that does even mean?! because you drive, you own a Porsche?! Because you do video you own an Alexa and using Cooke cine primes?!
Wouldn't using an Alexa with Cooke primes be more like driving a Bugatti? Such exotic brands offer reliable performance, but are not general-purpose tools.
Exactly. So what was your point?
The size and price ratio is completely a different league, it is a mistake to compare a small 799euros 2015 camera with a full frame 3499 beast of a later year. I am not sure why this is so hard for you to comprehend.
I neglected to draw any comparisons with my Nikon DSLR because I do not see it as being comparable. I do not see why you view comparing one compact mirrorless camera against another as being unfair. Realistically, both cameras are in a consumer-oriented price range.
The one is a flagship full frame camera that was 3499euros, and one of the most expenive mirrorles of the end of 2017, and the other a entry to mid level APS-C release of 2015, for 799euros.
The only common thing is that they are cameras.
4Xthe price of anything.
B suv 20.000euros X 4 = 80.000 you buy most SUVs possible at whatever category.
TV of 800euros X 4 = 3200euros TV
CPU of 300 euros X 4 = 1200euros CPU, can you see the trend here?
There is a camera called NX1 that has the best ergonomis ever in the business. Hold one, and you will understand. On another forum we were recently discussing how incredible the menu system, ergonomics, buttons placement, buttons, touch screens, super AMOLED screens of the NX1 are. NX500 is miles ahead of the similar a6000 series Sony cameras. Samsung did the right thing pretty easily, After 5-6 models, Sony still do not get it. Get it?
Are you saying I should have bought an NX1? Physically, the ergonomics of the NX1 aren't much different from the A7RIII. Sony's menu system is complicated, but it has a lot more options than Samsung's. For looking at detail of stills, I much prefer Sony's LCD screen.
No, but the NX1 is a more appropriate comparison in ergonomics. I should, I did, thank you very much.
No comparison in ergonomics, menu system and the such, of course the A7Riii is 3 years younger, the Sony full frame flagship e.t.c e.tc
Why do not check what Fuji had on offering in 2014 and 2015 when NX1 and NX500 were out? How much they cost now? Noone even talks about them.
Early Fuji cameras had poor video quality. This changed with the X-Pro2 (released early 2016). Samsung cameras are cheaper because it's a dead system. Even so, a used X-T20 (2017!) would likely be similar in price to a used NX500.
Exactly. I couldn't buy a Fuji camera at 2014-2015-2016, until X-T3 to be honest NX were a lot better cameras. Samsung cameras have kept their prices very well all these years, of course they will loose more value now, that we have so many new releases, but almost all the 2014-2015 cameras are "obsolete" now.
Also, I was talking about the premium compacts. Are the Panasonic LX cameras any better than the NX500 with the 16-50PZ lens (the compact one)? I do not think so..
I don't have an LX, but I do have a TZ/ZS. I find the video quality reasonable for casual use.
Yes, everything is reasonable, and everything is similar. My point was very specific.
The Fuji X100V just released, and it costs 1.569euros, is it really that better? Is it better at all?
Compared to the NX500, there are several ways in which it is better. For example, it has weather-sealing, a microphone port and hybrid viewfinder.
Yep, but today is 2020, and the cost is 2 and a half times more, and in video and photo quality cameras are very close. NX500 for us, older owners, have paid its price over and over again.
Obviously Samsung stopped, in 2-3 years NX1 will be completely "obsolete", but it is funny that it is not yet. I am talking about video professionals because there is a good bunch of us still rockin the NX1s.. I do not know anyone still using a 5DmkII...
This is the Samsung sub-forum. If you would like to meet people using Canon cameras, try "Canon EOS-1D / 5D / 6D Talk".
I know very much what sub forum I am in, have you checked my posts here? how many are yours? a dozen?
I am using the cameras since then, on the worst heating conditions, scorching Mediteranean heat, near the sea, or on the sea on boats, recording continously live performances and all my NX cameras still working flawlessly. NX1 (2 of them), NX500, NX3000. I have to clean the NX500's sensor at some point, but everything else is brilliant. You can't even imagine how many "dead pixels" or burned ones the aforementioned 5DmkII had just after a couple of years of use (and most of the first Canon cameras we were using for video back then 60D was dreadfull too)!
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4483724
Have you seen this thread? I noticed hot pixels in some of my stills too and there is no solution provided yet.
yep, it is pretty normal after so many years, Fortunatelly I do not have the same issues, and that is one example among so many owners around here and other forums I am, and in real life NX users I know.
What cameras have "mysteriously stop working"? I do not remember much sensor damage either, if any at all.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4016548
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4031620
2 NX300 cameras?! The NX300 was released in January 2013! This is the best you can do?
The 5DmkII and 60D that I have perfect knowledge of, were almost unusable after a few of years of video use. It was much better if you were a photographer ofcourse.
All the cameras can have issues. There were some serious ones in all cameras from time to time. I remember a serious one from Olympus, some recent Nikon dSLRs, Fuji changed country of manufacturing and many X-T3 were sent back.
It is impressive, I can do a 90 - 110 minutes show with one
battery and a bit, original ones since 2015. The amazing thing is that I can do same show with NX1 with just one battery, easily. Still rockin' original batteries, for almost 5 years now! I even have just 3 NX1 batteries for 2 cameras! Do not even change batteries, even on double camera photography jobs.
"one battery and a bit"? If you have to change out the battery once, how is Fuji any worse?
Because in NX1 I do not even change one.
I am wondering, have you done any pro work with Fuji and Sony? If you happily take 35 pictures of a meadow, there aren't many things that can go wrong, but when you shoot a 800 people wedding, on a private island, you want reliability. I have to shoot Sony from time to time, and I used to carry plenty of batteries.
The situation is a lot better with the newer releases though, I admit that, A7iii was a huge release for Sony, much better grip too, for the right price. Still the owner of the camera couldn't show me where some settings were on the menu system when I asked him, and he shoots Sony since A7s.
Haha! when you are a professional time is money, when you are an amateur do not own the equipment, or the knowledge to do most things. I am trying to minimize the post work, not increase it. That is a common workflow in pro world, if you can do it in production, you save time and money later on in post, except if you are directing the new Thor or X-Men movie..
For a simple post work/editing job, do you know how much it costs per hour?!
Editing can easily run into hundreds of dollars per hour.
Exactly, so you get my point, if you can save some post work, you do it on the production day. Prices are fixed any way on such jobs, so more post work is ones personal loss of money and life (time).
This is true for ALL Fuji zoom lenses. and there was another problem on that video too.
Using my X-M1 with an XC 16-50mm F3.5-5.6, I do not see any exposure flicker while zooming during recording. The other issue is poor auto-exposure performance. Hopefully Fuji fixes this.
This issue is well documented. If you care about Fuji video making, there are dedicated threads on more specialized forums, this is just a casual forum.
That was supposed to be the go-to lens for video. It did not deliver. It is expensive for what it is. Why change the 18-55 2.8-4f then? Because the 16mm at the wide end is remarkable useful when you do video, and that is why the 18 is not that good for video, because with the crop, is almost 29-30mm in full frame, that is not wide at all, while the 16mm APS-C sensors are almost 24-25mm, which is amazing for most things (wide shots, bigger groups, buildings, chuches, landscapes, weddings, performances, e.t.c) when you have a zoom (while the longer end, can do small groups, portraits, e.t.c That is why the 24-70 is a workhorse lens)
16 and 18mm on APS-C are not significantly different. Fuji claim 18mm is equivalent to 27mm in FF for their cameras (~1.52x crop factor). Even 35mm is considered wide on full-frame. Fuji have an 8-16mm, which is far wider than any of Samsung's offerings.
So, the so called "work horse" lenses, which are the 24-70mm, and that any brand has, and is used by professionals, amateurs and hobbyists for so many years is a mistake? You know better, right?!
I already explained why the "compromise" of 24-70mm is the most convinient one.
https://www.digicamdb.com/specs/fujifilm_x-t4/ all the crop factors I checked for Fuji is 1.53
1.53 X 18 = 27,54mm
1.53 X 16 = 24,48mm
anyone that has used a interchangeable camera for more than 5 times, know what a huge difference is. mm on the wide end, cost a lot of money to buy.
90 to 93mm in the tele end is literally nothing at all. Doesn't really cost anything, doesn't really changes much, but 3+millimeters at the wide end, can make you or brake you.
No,one is using a 8-16mm lens as a workhorse lens. You throw things around, some will stick, right?
I have said here, multiple times, maybe more than 50 times, and I said it recently too, that the one lens I am missing from the NX line up is an Ultra Wide Zoom lens of S quality. This isn't the 8-16mm that takes mediocre reviews and no one really cares about, is the 10-24mm 4f, which is a lens, that attracted me to the Fuji system for a couple of years, but the lack of other important lenses for me (such as the NX fisheye) and the domination of the 16-50S lens vs anything from Fuji, combined with various issues in video workflow, kept me here.
The 12-24mm NX is a wonderful lens for most uses though. It is a bit slow in 3.5-5.6f, but I use it as a landscape lens, so a bigger apperture isn't really a problem, my issue is that I can't use it with manual focus for video, because of the cheap construction, but it can be used nicely on a tripod as a B, C, or even D camera (I shoot multiple setups depending the situation).
Yes, that was the selling point for Sony for a lot of years, since Canon was the sleeping rabbit in Aesop's tale, but now that the turtles went ahead at the race, the rabbit wake up with impressive releases all over (new 1D, R5 and R6, even new M cameras). Sony are terrible cameras for so many years, I honestly had to work with them for many jobs, and I was trying to avoid them. I have many posts on the issues. The latest ones are much better than the first ones, I must admit, but still there are so much behind, that 1 true good release from Canon will destroy them completely.
In terms of video capabilities, sure. Many photographers are still going to stay with Sony though.
Definitely, freedom of choice is amazing! Sony started selling bodies to use with EF lenses, but now many lens makers make native Sony lenses, so they changed the momentum. But Sony lenses are very expensive for what they are (check their architecture and design, there are some flaws there, and some articles about it).
My favorite is easily the 12-24 4f, it is somehow specialized, but I really enjoyed using it Vs some other options on other brands. Like the 10-24mm for Fuji is a selling point for me, this is a selling point for going Sony.
Sony cameras is like software engineers are making the cameras, and not photo camera makers.
I don't like the look of Sony's JPEG images SOOC with default settings, but their raw files give me a lot of latitude.
The best cheap mirrorless right now is easily the Nikon Z5, with their first try they went ahead of Sony! That is why I am waiting for their second try.
The Z50? It seems about even with Sony's a6400.
Sorry, I meant Z6, which is an A7iii, but better. Z50 is a whole universe ahead of any a6xxx camera in ergonomics and other photography related things. a6xxx cameras are just a spec sheet. Can't really waste any energy for the a6xxx. Can't believe they haven't change that terrible design yet.
Canons were terrible until now, and still are, because the new cameras are not out yet, and the first R cameras were a joke, that is why I am telling you that I saved money staying NX, and that is why we are still using NX.
"The first R cameras were a joke"? I think the EOS R is perfectly capable, but its pricing is not particularly competitive. You didn't save money by choosing NX, any camera system is an investment and perhaps a different system would have been more financially rewarding for you.
Any other system from 2015 I would have changed multiple cameras, on different brands, and multiple lenses. I do not know how that would be financial wise. It took the market so much time to go forward..
It is not competitive and have myriads of shortcoming, especially video related. Everyone bought one recently, or last year, will loose most of its value when the new R cameras are released - which is really soon.
Panasonic are serious machines, I haven't worked with the new full frame ones. I believe they are too expensive, the lens collection doesn't make any sense for now, and most of us we are waiting for the new releases. We most have EF lenses anyway, so going native, is always a better strategy.
Sigma's MC-21 allows EF lenses to be utilized on Panasonic's full-frame bodies, though AF performance is limited.
I haven't used any of those. I am sure they are remarkable machines. Panasonic delivers real tools, not spec sheets like most Sony cameras (most, not all, do not be offended).
I have the NX3000 and this camera has a very Canon-like soft video, that is why I gave my NX300 and bought a NX3000 for. Great little machines. I will probably give to my kids later on.
People praise NX500 for its sharpness, but you praise NX3000 for its softness? Why did you get one, and not a Canon?
Because I can use it as a crash cam, with my fish eye or other lenses for specialized jobs and specific "missions". Plus, I can use it as my everyday camera with a small pancake.
Sharpness in video is not always the best thing. It is a bit complicated, depending the job and the client.
Choices, choices...I did fine..
What do you mean disparity?
GH5 cameras are used here for broadcast TV, they are broadcast standard compatible. I have many episodes on the biggest networks here, shot on GH5 cameras. They are workhorse tools.
GH5S does not have IS, GH5 is heavier and has worse low light performance.
Ok, I get it, yep. We will see what the next GH6 will bring to the table. There are not great cameras for photos. The A7Riii is like 3 universies ahead/away. That is the greatness of NX, after so many years still beats some of the newer ones, and has respectful performance against the best ones.
But still, NX1 crashes it for photography, and ISO capabilities on both cameras are sub par for todays standards, but NX is super clean when well lighted, which is not the case for the GH5. That is why there is the GH5S, with 3200 native, and the Pocket Cinema 4K with native 3200. Incredible video tools both. Best in class. Unlimited recording, raw capabilities (internal for the Pocket), native 3200 ISO, so no issue with low light, and do whatever with tons of m43 lenses, and use any kind of speedboosters and have different focal lengths with the same lens (2X when not speedboster, X0.64, X0.71 e.t.c Depending what you use. Viltrox and other brands offer good solutions for cheap).
Is the GH5S a better compact camera than Samsung's then?
Is a better low light camera for video. In anything else NX1 is better. GH5 offers broadcast standard files, so it is a staple on lower budget productions, reality TV, when a smaller camera doesn't attract attention, e.t.c
Nx1 doesn't offer broadcast quality files, no 8bit video camera does. It is a matter of standards. I do not own a GH5, but I have worked unlimited times with one. Still doesn't even come close to the NX1 ergonomics, is a lot heavier (with a lot smaller sensor), and some minor issues. Is a video workhorse though. Can record continously very nice and thick video files. I wouldn't buy it as a perfect hybrid (photography is sub par, and dSLR heavy is a minus), but it is a video tool that does respectable pictures (GH5S is very low in resolution to consider it a professional photo camera).
3 issues there are really for NX1.
1) Not as good in high ISO as some of todays sensor (28megapixels was the maximum resolution for so long, and I believe they went for that, instead for low light photography, there is a stupid NR going on after 3200ISO, and 3200 is not dual ISO clean..)
2) not 10bit files
3) Samsung doesn't make cameras any more!
And hot pixels in stills...
Not me, not yet!
Kisaha, what do you mean when you say you can't use the 12-24mm in manual mode for video? And that lens starts at f4 doesn't it?
