Why is the nx20 so expensive?

Im thinkiking of upgrading my nx100,and very tempted by the nx 20 but it's so much more expensive than the nx 210. From what I've read the two cameras have the same sensor,same features, same processing internals. But the nx 20 has a built in viewfinder and flash, and an articulating screen. Am I missing something?

The reason I want the nx20 is for the EVf,which I have on my nx100 but isn't available for nx210. Does the nx 20 have anymore fearure that I've overlooked?

I also think the nx20 is too much expensive for what it offers. Besides, I really hate that form factor that makes it looking like an inexpensive bridge camera or mini DSLR.

For these reasons I was very disappointed at launch, and I still am, considering that no new bodies have been presented since then.

For now, the nx200 or nx1000, or even the good old nx100 (which I own) are the best products for their price/performance ratio in the nx line.

My intention is to wait for some new body to be released, hoping that it will have an even better sensor than NX20 DR and ISO wise.

rudeboymcc wrote:

Im thinkiking of upgrading my nx100,and very tempted by the nx 20 but it's so much more expensive than the nx 210. From what I've read the two cameras have the same sensor,same features, same processing internals. But the nx 20 has a built in viewfinder and flash, and an articulating screen. Am I missing something?

The reason I want the nx20 is for the EVf,which I have on my nx100 but isn't available for nx210. Does the nx 20 have anymore fearure that I've overlooked?

The NX20 is a great deal in the US.  It comes with a free 50-200mm lens and is about $1000 US.  I thought the launch price of $1100 US with 18-55mm kit lens was also fair given the features (maybe a tad on the high side, but fairly competitive for what it is), but now it is $100 less with the extra lens.  Some markets might have it more overpriced than others though.

I like the EVF on the Samsung NX20.  It works very well with eyeglasses as it has no activation issues like the NEX 7 EVF in bright light, where many users with eyeglasses complain it is almost unusable.  The NX20 also has an adjustable diopter unlike my Fuji XPro1.  The only issue is if you shoot at waste level with the articulated screen the eye sensor can get triggered by your body and turn the articulated screen off.

So given my NX200 and NX20, image quality is identical between the two in RAW mode, JPEG might be a bit different, but I don't shoot JPEG.  With the new firmware updates both perform about the same.  The main quirk is that some functions are locked out when the camera is writing to disk so it can be annoying sometimes if you are trying to change the focus point or something after you take a shot.  Have to wait for the camera to finish processing.  Aperture and shutter speed are still adjustable though.

One thing with the NX20 viewfinder is it has very little lag, even in low light.  My Fuji XP1 lags very badly in low light and makes it difficult to use the EVF, especially once the shutter is half pressed the video feed to the EVF gets a bit jerky.  The OVF on the Fuji is too dark to use in very low light. That being said, the optics for the EVF in the fuji are much better, it is sharper with less distortion.

So overall, of my mirrorless cameras I have in order of preference, the XP1 and NX20 come in close. (Yes, I have too many, good deals on a few of these).

NX20: Best to use, easy controls, don't accidentally bump controls, good focus performance, compared to the Fuji good overall performance (fuji doesn't lock out AF point selection while writing files, hint-hint to Samsung).

Fuji XP1: Best "cool" factor.  Weird watercolor patterns from XTrans sensor in fine detail, better in JPEG as Adobe Camera RAW isn't the best RAW converter for this, but I still notice the problem in the JPEG.  This sensor is good for low light, but even then some noise reduction on the NX20 and they are pretty close, the Fuji is cleaner out of camera but the NX20 cleans up with noise reduction a bit more.  I would still say the Fuji is a bit better, but not as much better as I thought it would be. Terrible video, several controls get bumped accidentally.

NX200: Function of the NX20, well 210 would be, but a bit too small for me and lacks articulated screen.

NEX 3: Terrible controls, best processor performance.  Good overall, but good native lenses are expensive.  Best video.

Eric

I don't consider the NX20 over-priced, at least not here in the Australian market.  The best deal going right now  is AUD$737 for NX20 with 18-55 kit-zoom.  At that price I'd say it's fairly competitive.

Eric....How would you compare the NX20 to the Olympus OM-D?

viking79 wrote:

rudeboymcc wrote:

Im thinkiking of upgrading my nx100,and very tempted by the nx 20 but it's so much more expensive than the nx 210. From what I've read the two cameras have the same sensor,same features, same processing internals. But the nx 20 has a built in viewfinder and flash, and an articulating screen. Am I missing something?

The reason I want the nx20 is for the EVf,which I have on my nx100 but isn't available for nx210. Does the nx 20 have anymore fearure that I've overlooked?

The NX20 is a great deal in the US. It comes with a free 50-200mm lens and is about $1000 US. I thought the launch price of $1100 US with 18-55mm kit lens was also fair given the features (maybe a tad on the high side, but fairly competitive for what it is), but now it is $100 less with the extra lens. Some markets might have it more overpriced than others though.

I like the EVF on the Samsung NX20. It works very well with eyeglasses as it has no activation issues like the NEX 7 EVF in bright light, where many users with eyeglasses complain it is almost unusable. The NX20 also has an adjustable diopter unlike my Fuji XPro1. The only issue is if you shoot at waste level with the articulated screen the eye sensor can get triggered by your body and turn the articulated screen off.

So given my NX200 and NX20, image quality is identical between the two in RAW mode, JPEG might be a bit different, but I don't shoot JPEG. With the new firmware updates both perform about the same. The main quirk is that some functions are locked out when the camera is writing to disk so it can be annoying sometimes if you are trying to change the focus point or something after you take a shot. Have to wait for the camera to finish processing. Aperture and shutter speed are still adjustable though.

One thing with the NX20 viewfinder is it has very little lag, even in low light. My Fuji XP1 lags very badly in low light and makes it difficult to use the EVF, especially once the shutter is half pressed the video feed to the EVF gets a bit jerky. The OVF on the Fuji is too dark to use in very low light. That being said, the optics for the EVF in the fuji are much better, it is sharper with less distortion.

So overall, of my mirrorless cameras I have in order of preference, the XP1 and NX20 come in close. (Yes, I have too many, good deals on a few of these).

NX20: Best to use, easy controls, don't accidentally bump controls, good focus performance, compared to the Fuji good overall performance (fuji doesn't lock out AF point selection while writing files, hint-hint to Samsung).

Fuji XP1: Best "cool" factor. Weird watercolor patterns from XTrans sensor in fine detail, better in JPEG as Adobe Camera RAW isn't the best RAW converter for this, but I still notice the problem in the JPEG. This sensor is good for low light, but even then some noise reduction on the NX20 and they are pretty close, the Fuji is cleaner out of camera but the NX20 cleans up with noise reduction a bit more. I would still say the Fuji is a bit better, but not as much better as I thought it would be. Terrible video, several controls get bumped accidentally.

NX200: Function of the NX20, well 210 would be, but a bit too small for me and lacks articulated screen.

NEX 3: Terrible controls, best processor performance. Good overall, but good native lenses are expensive. Best video.

Eric

How about the Olympus OM-D EM-5 ?  It seems to be about equal in price and size, but the features and IQ appear to be much better than the NX20?

Am I wrong, or, overlooking something?

Robert N wrote:

How about the Olympus OM-D EM-5 ? It seems to be about equal in price and size, but the features and IQ appear to be much better than the NX20?

Am I wrong, or, overlooking something?

It's of course a matter of taste, but I don't like those retro cameras. The design and handling is often terrible and I am not willing to pay a premium for the retro look. The NX system is much cheaper where I live.

OMD + kit lens: € 1250,- + 12mm (650,-) + 25mm (500,-) + 45mm Macro (700,-) = 3100,-

NX20 and equivalent (FOV, DOF) lenses:

NX20 + kit lens: € 800,- + 16mm (250,-) + 30mm (200,-) + 60mm Macro (400,-) = 1650,-

About IQ: The NX20/210/1000 have excellent image quality. If you want something substantially better, you have to go full frame. Everything else is pretty much the same or worse.

yes, that glass, plus the camera and kit, puts you right up there with full frame costs.....

shuutrr wrote:

Eric....How would you compare the NX20 to the Olympus OM-D?

Ah, the other camera I haven't tried yet, but I am afraid any more cameras and I might run into troubles at home

I was really split between the NX20, OM-D, and XP1.  I had a NEX 7 on preorder, but issues getting that delivered from flooding in Thailand and also the lack of a good lens roadmap from Sony and the pricing on their 24 mm f/1.8 (more than an X100 that serves the same purpose) and it led me looking elsewhere.

I ended up with Samsung only because I found some good deals on their cameras but also liked their lenses.  Then the OM-D and XP1 were announced, pre-ordered both of them, but cancelled them because the NX20 and already had some lenses for it.

The only thing holding me off from OM-D is small sensor size, but the sensor performs well for its size, same quality as say best current APS-C sensors but about 2/3 stop worse due to size.  They have good lenses available.  For it I would buy 12/2, 25/1.4, and 45/1.8 to start just because I like those focal lengths.

So bottom line is, I think all are good, it comes down to what you are looking for in the camera. I think NX20 with 30mm is a nice value compared to Fuji XP1 with 35 mm f/1.4 or OM-D with Leica 25 mm f/1.4.

Eric

shuutrr wrote:

Robert N wrote:

How about the Olympus OM-D EM-5 ? It seems to be about equal in price and size, but the features and IQ appear to be much better than the NX20?

Am I wrong, or, overlooking something?

It's of course a matter of taste, but I don't like those retro cameras. The design and handling is often terrible and I am not willing to pay a premium for the retro look. The NX system is much cheaper where I live.

OMD + kit lens: € 1250,- + 12mm (650,-) + 25mm (500,-) + 45mm Macro (700,-) = 3100,-

NX20 and equivalent (FOV, DOF) lenses:

NX20 + kit lens: € 800,- + 16mm (250,-) + 30mm (200,-) + 60mm Macro (400,-) = 1650,-

About IQ: The NX20/210/1000 have excellent image quality. If you want something substantially better, you have to go full frame. Everything else is pretty much the same or worse.

yes, that glass, plus the camera and kit, puts you right up there with full frame costs.....

Yeah, IQ of the OMD looks good, but when I looked at high ISO samples they looked like they had a lot of noise reduction applied.  You are losing area to the APS-C sensors.  You have to enlarge the image more to get to the same print size or screen size.  So even though it tests well at DXO Mark, it still isn't better than APS-C.  However, I think it is good enough where people won't complain about the quality as much any more.  When I had my EP1 I always thought the images were too noisy, even at base ISO.

Eric

viking79 wrote:

shuutrr wrote:

Robert N wrote:

How about the Olympus OM-D EM-5 ? It seems to be about equal in price and size, but the features and IQ appear to be much better than the NX20?

Am I wrong, or, overlooking something?

It's of course a matter of taste, but I don't like those retro cameras. The design and handling is often terrible and I am not willing to pay a premium for the retro look. The NX system is much cheaper where I live.

OMD + kit lens: € 1250,- + 12mm (650,-) + 25mm (500,-) + 45mm Macro (700,-) = 3100,-

NX20 and equivalent (FOV, DOF) lenses:

NX20 + kit lens: € 800,- + 16mm (250,-) + 30mm (200,-) + 60mm Macro (400,-) = 1650,-

About IQ: The NX20/210/1000 have excellent image quality. If you want something substantially better, you have to go full frame. Everything else is pretty much the same or worse.

yes, that glass, plus the camera and kit, puts you right up there with full frame costs.....

Yeah, IQ of the OMD looks good, but when I looked at high ISO samples they looked like they had a lot of noise reduction applied. You are losing area to the APS-C sensors. You have to enlarge the image more to get to the same print size or screen size. So even though it tests well at DXO Mark, it still isn't better than APS-C. However, I think it is good enough where people won't complain about the quality as much any more. When I had my EP1 I always thought the images were too noisy, even at base ISO.

Eric

DPReview gave the OMD quite a favorable review.  I am not fond of the retro look either, but I liked the mag body, the weather proofing, and, the controls appear friendly.  I haven't actually seen one in the flesh yet.   I compared noise with the active charts provided by DPR and IMO outperformed comparably priced Nikon's, Cannon's, and, the NX10, as I increased the ISO.  Unfortunately there is no DPReview for the NX20, not sure what that's about.  Anyway, the OMD seemed like a very good performer and is, of course, most importantly, "interchangeable" and "pocket-able".

It is a shame DP hasn't given the NX20 a proper review.