Kisaha wrote:
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.
Fuji's 16-55mm is weather-resistant and offers a constant f2.8 aperture. Fuji's 18-55mm has more corner sharpness than Samsung's 16-50mm S when used wide-open. At it's widest, the 18-55mm is only 1 stop slower than Samsung's lens, at 24mm it is only 2/3 stop slower, the same holds at 35mm. I don't see that as being a significant difference.
https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/fujinon/xf-18-55mm-f2.8-4-r-lm-ois/review/ | https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/samsung/16-50mm-f2-2.8-s-ed-ois-nx/review/
Exactly. So what was your point?
That an A7RIII is a reasonable alternative to the NX500.
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?
The A7RIV is Sony's current flagship. The NX500 largely shares its specifications with Samsung's flagship camera, the NX1. The A7RIII has similar specifications to the A7RII, which I also own and obtained used for under 700 euros. The A7RII has a lesser battery and is not as comfortable to me. Perhaps you would have been less perturbed if I had decided to contrast it with the NX500.
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
The Sony is a full-frame camera that just happens to use the same mount as a series of APS-C cameras. You have already written them off however.
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.
Older cameras may be "obsolete" in terms of video prowess, but are still fine for stills.
Yes, everything is reasonable, and everything is similar. My point was very specific.
"Better" is essentially subjective. I don't own an LX, so I can't draw a direct comparison. It has an EVF and stabilization, whereas the NX500 does not and it has high-bitrate video without having to resort to unsupported modifications. I'm not going to purchase one to see how it fairs in practice.
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.
And someone who purchases an X100V today could make their money back in the following years.
I know very much what sub forum I am in, have you checked my posts here? how many are yours? a dozen?
Apologies. I'm working on improving my post count. I have a software background and I would like to further the modifications available for Samsung cameras. I would also like to share some photos.
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.
The person I purchased my NX500 from (online) was not aware that it had hot pixels. I've seen photographers who use Pentax, haven't encountered a Samsung user so far.
2 NX300 cameras?! The NX300 was released in January 2013! This is the best you can do?
Most owners of NX cameras do not frequent these forums, most people who have their camera fail are not going to join these forums to post about it. Watch eBay if you want to see Samsung cameras with sensor issues.
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.
Sensor damage in video use is generally due to exposure to dangerous lighting, lasers for example.
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.
If an NX camera develops issues today, one has rather limited recourse.
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.
I enjoy taking hundreds of photos of nature. If you are shooting every member of an 800 person wedding, you're going to need multiple 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.
I add the settings I use to the custom menu of my Sony.
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).
Does this forum offer monetary rewards for posting?
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.
People don't seem to mind that the MKX lenses don't go below 18mm. I hear they're otherwise good for video making.
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.
I exclusively use prime lenses with my A7RIII. No troubles so far.
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.
Careful with those calculations. Compare the sensor diagonal of the A7III (no R) to that of the X-T4, and you get a crop factor of ~1.5179.
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.
I'm not aware of anyone being hurt by having a few more millimetres than 16.
No,one is using a 8-16mm lens as a workhorse lens. You throw things around, some will stick, right?
If it's not intended as a workhorse lens, I don't see why Fuji bothered with the F2.8 aperture and weather resistance. Would you like my Nikon DX AF-P 10-20mm? It's not as serious.
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).
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.
I'd rather see Samsung's S 300mm lens.
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.
Z6, more prone to aliasing, worse battery life, and Nikon's weird NR for stills... no thanks. Camera companies can't appease everyone.
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.
Those are very speculative statements.
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 hope Panasonic considers introducing some lighter full-frame offerings.
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.
An NX3000 with Samsung's fisheye would be nice.
Sharpness in video is not always the best thing. It is a bit complicated, depending the job and the client.
That's fair.
Happiness is priceless.
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.
Maybe Panasonic will add high resolution stills mode to more of their cameras.
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).
Do you ever use Nikon DSLRs? How do they compare?
Not me, not yet!
Maybe. Unless you regularly pixel-peep images taken in dim lighting, you might never know.
