Samsung image quality

If you've read my other posts, you'll know that I'm a very happy owner of not one, but two, Samsung EX1's. The EX1 has been my constant companion for over two years now. It's got a 24mm wide angle lens, the best articulating viewing screen, and good manual controls. It's small enough to go in a pocket, and it's built like a tank. The only real negative I can find with it is the image quality. But I accepted that from such a small sensor.

I eagerly awaited the arrival of the NX300, only to be disappointed that it didn't have an articulating screen. I hoped that the NX30 would be my ideal next camera but although it has an articulating screen, to be very honest, and after much research, the image quality doesn't make me want to spend probably 1,700+ pounds on one with a 16-50 lens to match the focal range that I have on the EX1.

I've been looking at the Canon G1 X. Although it has a slightly smaller sensor, the image quality (at least to my eyes) is way ahead of that of the NX30/300. It's more lifelike, less grungy with finer detail, and has more nuance. In other words, more like the picture quality that I got from my film cameras.

Am I the only one who thinks that Samsung image quality from all its cameras appears a little artificial, almost like it has had a mild artistic filter applied in Photoshop (more so when the shot is taken at lower light levels)? Is this down to their processing engine?

Of course the G1 X isn't perfect. It only goes as wide as 28mm, the autofocus is slow, and it doesn't focus closely. Who would have thought it so hard to find a compact camera with an articulating screen and very good picture quality? Or am I just too fussy?

Yes, you are.

Samsung image quality is superior to that of Canon. NX300 does have a tilting screen.

However, I think that Panasonic G5 or G6 is the camera for you.

I like the Samsung image quality, tones seem pretty natural by default instead of hyper-saturated, etc. You can adjust the JPEG settings to get different effects.

However, I shoot RAW so pretty much any camera is whatever colors/tones I want.

Bottom line is everything thinks has the best colors and has bad skin tones, etc. Go with what you like. Each camera is tweaked a little different. As I said, you can adjust the default from Samsung, it isn't like you are stuck with what their engineers pick.  Go read the Fuji or Olympus forums for a bit if you want to see users obsessed with JPEG colors

Eric

It's not colours or tones, so much as over all picture quality. I must have looked at most of the pictures on Flickr that were taken with an NX300 or NX30, but compared to those taken by something like like the G1 X, or say the Canon D600, they look inferior. I agree though, a lot is to do with personal taste.

I've played around a lot with RAW files from the EX1 although that may not be a fair comparison with what I may get from an NX30/300 with the larger sensor.  The 'signature' of the NX30/300 picture quality does seem very similar to that of the EX1 though. If only we could all play with these different cameras before actually buying one!

Good call on the Panasonic G5/G6 as that was another camera that I have looked at closely. My friend has a G3 though and I've never particularly liked it when actually handling it. If the GF1 etc had articulating screens instead of titling, that would probably be my next step. I simply don't understand why manufacturers go to the trouble to making a tilting screen when it would be no more difficult or expensive to make it articulating!

Fortunately, I am old enough not to feel that I've not got to rush and and buy something immediately, but that said,  the EX1 purchased in December 2011 was meant to be a temporary measure!

I have had a G1X since it came out and it`s been very useful for work for silent shooting, candids etc , have owned the EOS-M and have had Samsung NXs since the 200 .

Samsungs IMO are hamstrung by their mediocre at best JPG engines, they slam too much detail killing noise reduction on even at low ISOs and mess up high ISOs with streaking etc , so they need to be shot RAW to get anywhere near the best from them, the G1X benefits RAW too but it`s not as essential ..

shoot the G1X, EOS-M and my current NX, the NX20 + 20-50mm (not the dissapointing 18-55) In RAW and the NX pulls away by quite a margin with far better shadow recovery, finer per pixel sharpness and even highlight recovery is better . high ISOs are cleaner too . the EOS-M is noisier than the G1X for some reason, likely a lack of cooling due to the RX100 size of it .

don`t get me wrong, the G1X Mk1`s high quality 28-120 effective super-stabilized zoom has no match in mirrorless (range, size & IQ ratio) and from reports the new Mk2`s faster lens may not be as sharp either and the camera is so damn useful but an NX with a prime or the wide end of the 20-50 beats it easily in every respect Image wise in RAW .

I noticed a massive jump in detail with the EX1 too in RAW with Capture one when i had one 4 years ago ..

Peadingle wrote:

It's not colours or tones, so much as over all picture quality. I must have looked at most of the pictures on Flickr that were taken with an NX300 or NX30, but compared to those taken by something like like the G1 X, or say the Canon D600, they look inferior. I agree though, a lot is to do with personal taste.

All APS-C cameras perform fairly equivalently. In terms of RAW performance (specifically high ISO SNR), Canon is about the worst with Samsung in the middle with Sony at the top. All within about 1/2 to 1/3 stop between best and worst.  For dynamic range there is a huge improvement between Canon and the competition (competition is much better with around 1 stop better DR and color sensitivity at low ISO settings).

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-A6000-versus-Samsung-NX-30-versus-Canon-EOS-70D___942_931_895

My guess is the difference you are seeing are differences in photographer skill or some other factor.

I've played around a lot with RAW files from the EX1 although that may not be a fair comparison with what I may get from an NX30/300 with the larger sensor. The 'signature' of the NX30/300 picture quality does seem very similar to that of the EX1 though. If only we could all play with these different cameras before actually buying one!

go to Best Buy if you have one locally, they have NX cameras now days in their large Samsung floor space area.

Eric

viking79 wrote:

go to Best Buy if you have one locally, they have NX cameras now days in their large Samsung floor space area.

Eric

Thanks but I'm a bit out of the way as regards camera stores.

Oh, and I do agree about the skills of the photographer playing a part too!

AdamT wrote:

I have had a G1X since it came out and it`s been very useful for work for silent shooting, candids etc , have owned the EOS-M and have had Samsung NXs since the 200 .

Samsungs IMO are hamstrung by their mediocre at best JPG engines, they slam too much detail killing noise reduction on even at low ISOs and mess up high ISOs with streaking etc , so they need to be shot RAW to get anywhere near the best from them, the G1X benefits RAW too but it`s not as essential ..

shoot the G1X, EOS-M and my current NX, the NX20 + 20-50mm (not the dissapointing 18-55) In RAW and the NX pulls away by quite a margin with far better shadow recovery, finer per pixel sharpness and even highlight recovery is better . high ISOs are cleaner too . the EOS-M is noisier than the G1X for some reason, likely a lack of cooling due to the RX100 size of it .

don`t get me wrong, the G1X Mk1`s high quality 28-120 effective super-stabilized zoom has no match in mirrorless (range, size & IQ ratio) and from reports the new Mk2`s faster lens may not be as sharp either and the camera is so damn useful but an NX with a prime or the wide end of the 20-50 beats it easily in every respect Image wise in RAW .

I noticed a massive jump in detail with the EX1 too in RAW with Capture one when i had one 4 years ago ..

Thanks Adam, that's extremely useful!

This thread reads like something posted by T*world when he was around.

The choice of camera used is entirely down to the OP. Nothing is stopping you using whatever camera you like as photography is a subjective imaging thing. An exact physical science it isn't, although the pixel pushers at ISO 200,000 on the Nikon forum would have it that way. I don't think Avon & Somerset Police have yet established a camp on Exmoor for 'camera re-education' sponsored by the Canikon Consortium, so go with whatever makes you happy.

The whole premise is something similar to what I saw in photo show in Dublin last week where a woman teacher was buying her first 'serious' camera to photograph a school outing. She started off sensibly enough looking for an easy compact. Then the sales manager earned his money and she bought a very good Canon DSLR and 2 lenses. It took both credit cards of her and partner to pay for it. The clincher was the sales guy telling her that this was a professional grade Canon 'used by Pro's, you know' and will get you far better pictures than a little compact..'

Half the above is in the mind: It's a Canon / Nikon / Leica so it MUST produce better pictures than a Samsung / Fuji etc?

Truest words you will read. People seem to believe if it doesn't have a mirror box it doesn't take proper photographs , this attitude drives me nuts.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/simon-nx/
Trying to capture the images i see around me.

Jaberwok wrote:

This thread reads like something posted by T*world when he was around.

I'm sure if you look at my other posts on the forum, or my Flickr photostream, you will be reassured that I am an enthusiastic Samsung camera owner/user, and no troll.

The choice of camera used is entirely down to the OP.

Thank you but I was aware of that.

Nothing is stopping you using whatever camera you like as photography is a subjective imaging thing. An exact physical science it isn't, although the pixel pushers at ISO 200,000 on the Nikon forum would have it that way.

I agree, it is quite a subjective topic, hence i was asking for people's opinions.

I don't think Avon & Somerset Police have yet established a camp on Exmoor for 'camera re-education' sponsored by the Canikon Consortium, so go with whatever makes you happy.

As an ex -professional purchasing officer, I can again reassure you that I will make my own decision on which camera I buy.

The whole premise is something similar to what I saw in photo show in Dublin last week where a woman teacher was buying her first 'serious' camera to photograph a school outing. She started off sensibly enough looking for an easy compact. Then the sales manager earned his money and she bought a very good Canon DSLR and 2 lenses. It took both credit cards of her and partner to pay for it. The clincher was the sales guy telling her that this was a professional grade Canon 'used by Pro's, you know' and will get you far better pictures than a little compact..'

Half the above is in the mind: It's a Canon / Nikon / Leica so it MUST produce better pictures than a Samsung / Fuji etc?

I think that you are right as regards the majority of camera buyers, or indeed those buying any sort of technology. I buy what I like, and finances, or rather lack of them, tends to keep me away from the temptation of a big brand name.

I have an EX2F and the image quality (for the sensor size) is great. And my photos are lined up with those from larger sensor cameras like the Sony NEX 5R, Panasonic GH2, Pentax K10D etc that I owned before the EX2F. (Bought the EX2F because it is so compact and does everything well.)

See below, shot with it in the last few weeks: