NX1100 in the Peak District

The quality of these images is horrid, and I find that disturbing because I just ordered this camera.  Even though they are taken at fairly low ISOs, they all have that watercolor look.  I've seen much better pictures come from this camera.  What are you doing to cause this?

northlondon43 wrote:

CMurdock wrote:

The quality of these images is horrid, and I find that disturbing because I just ordered this camera. Even though they are taken at fairly low ISOs, they all have that watercolor look. I've seen much better pictures come from this camera. What are you doing to cause this?

Hey I can understand if you don't like certain photos if a) they're not your thing subject wise b) there's a very obvious 'technical' flaw (though that's ok if intentional) c) overly pp (again fine if intended) but 'horrid'? Come on what's up with you?

I was referring to the image quality, not the composition. I'm more than a little disturbed to see such technically poor pictures come out of the NX1100 given that I just spent $300 to buy one. The JPGs will probably be good enough to photograph the products that I sell; but for pleasure photography, I'll have to shoot RAW.

I have seen other sample images from this camera that were vastly better, and I don't understand why the image quality of these pictures is so poor.

Auster Pilot wrote:

CMurdock wrote:

northlondon43 wrote:

CMurdock wrote:

The quality of these images is horrid, and I find that disturbing because I just ordered this camera. Even though they are taken at fairly low ISOs, they all have that watercolor look. I've seen much better pictures come from this camera. What are you doing to cause this?

Hey I can understand if you don't like certain photos if a) they're not your thing subject wise b) there's a very obvious 'technical' flaw (though that's ok if intentional) c) overly pp (again fine if intended) but 'horrid'? Come on what's up with you?

I was referring to the image quality, not the composition. I'm more than a little disturbed to see such technically poor pictures come out of the NX1100 given that I just spent $300 to buy one. The JPGs will probably be good enough to photograph the products that I sell; but for pleasure photography, I'll have to shoot RAW.

I have seen other sample images from this camera that were vastly better, and I don't understand why the image quality of these pictures is so poor.

I hadn't ignored your response to my original posting - I just hadn't had enough time to investigate your concerns.

I can see the effect you may have issues with. I've seen it in other photos from Samsung NX cameras, but also from Canon DSLRs and others.

I think it is a result from a specific set of circumstances. In particular I have seen the watercolour effect when:

The image contains very small pattern objects (such as grass blades or tree leaves) where there is insufficient dimension to record the item in detail in the image.

There is either some movement of the items in the pattern (such as blades of grass or leaves moving in the wind) or the patterned items are not optimally focussed,

I think in the images I took with my NX1100 all of these aspects may have contributed to the effect.

So I agree the effect is there (and is so in the RAW images from which they were processed). I think it may be emphasized in certain lighting conditions.

Where we differ considerably is that compared to some other cameras where I have seen something similar, I actually like the "watercolour" outcome from the NX1100. Other cameras just smudge the result in a more unpleasant way.

It's probably the first time I have noticed this with my NX1100, but on review with my RAW processor, I can see it in other similar landscape images I have taken with the NX1100. I've also conducted a search in Flickr for other landscape images taken with the NX1000/NX1100 and can see the effect in some of them. But when looking at other landscape images taken with other (DSLR) cameras I have seen it there as well. I think you should assume that in similar circumstances you will achieve a similar effect.

And you really can only see this when pixel-peeping on a computer monitor. I have viewed these same images on a 42" HD screen and they look fine. The effect also largely disappears if viewing the image from 50% size or less on a PC monitor. But as I said, I don't find the effect unpleasant and there I suspect we will disagree.

First of all, Neil, my reaction was/is a visceral one which has nothing to do with the composition of your pictures, which I think is fine.  I just find it hard to understand what I'm seeing, as I have seen other landscape pictures from the NX1100 that were much better, and because I just (yesterday) purchased the camera, which hasn't even arrived yet.  I hate to think that I've made a mistake.  I purchased it from a seller which charges a restocking fee, so I can't return it without losing money.

The watercolor effect is unacceptable in any camera, in my opinion, and certainly in a camera with an APS-C sensor.  It's a clear indication of ... well, I was going to say poor JPG processing, but you say that the effect is in the RAW files too.  One thing I've learned is that some camera manufacturers tinker with the RAW output as well as the JPG output, and maybe that's what Samsung has done.

I wonder if what I'm seeing is camera shake.  Or perhaps the lens is sub-par.

Anyway, if you want to see superb image quality, check out the pictures from the Sigma cameras with Foveon sensors.  They are the cleanest images I've ever seen.  I would have bought one but I don't have $800 to $1200 to spend.

I've just been looking at other photos from NX cameras.  Some look good, but most have that watercolor effect, even at ISO 100.

Well, it looks like I bought the wrong camera.  I bought it because the Imaging Resource tests indicated that it had excellent color accuracy.  I guess I'll just use it for product shots, and I'll get something else for pleasure photography.  How disappointing to have wasted my money.

Auster Pilot wrote:

Just been doing some further research on what was known about this and the watercolour effect is mentioned elsewhere in this forum and on other reviews of the NX1000 (which is almost identical to the NX1100 except for the software that was supplied with the camera).

In this review of the camera:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/samsung-nx1000/samsung-nx1000A5.HTM

The reviewer mentions about the watercolour effect....

"Detail. The crop above right shows relatively minor noise suppression in the darkest areas of the model's hair, as most individual strands of hair are well defined except in very low contrast areas. Overall, detail is very good for an APS-C sensor at base ISO, especially one with 20 megapixels of resolution. Excellent results here. Noise-suppression systems in digital cameras tend to flatten-out detail in areas of subtle contrast. The effects can often be seen in shots of human hair, where the individual strands are lost and an almost "watercolor" look appears."

And in reference to a photo of human hair....

"Subtle detail: Hair

Noise suppression tends to blur detail in areas of subtle contrast but the NX1000 does better than most here"

I would tend to agree with all these statements in that, while the effect is there, it is better than many other cameras.

I too am not prepared to pay lots for a camera, and despite the watercolour effect I find the output as good if not better than my Pentax K-30 and K-01 cameras.

I wish you well in finding the perfect camera at a very low price!

-- hide signature --

Neil....
The Sky is a Beautiful Place

Well, my camera came, and so far so good.  I got it mainly for taking product photographs (because Imaging Resource says the color accuracy is good).  I usually photograph my products in natural daylight in front of the window.  I haven't had a chance to do that, but I did take some photos under lamp light, and I must say that I'm very impressed.  The photos are crisp and clear.  I've also noticed that I can turn the exposure compensation all the way up without increasing the ISO.  Since the water-color effect is the least at ISO 100, that means that I can avoid it in all my product shots.  However, I'm not seeing any water-color effect at all.

When I begin to take the camera out for pleasure photography, I'll investigate the water-color thing.  Maybe you are doing something that causes it.  Is the image quality in your camera set to super-fine?

Even if I'm not happy with my landscape shots, I am going to keep this camera for product shots.  It's a relief to know that I don't have to return it.

It turns out I was wrong.  The camera automatically adjusted the ISO up to 400, but the pictures still look fine.

Well, I just took my first outdoor shots with this camera.  I just walked out in front of the house and shot in all directions.  And what I saw surprised me:  very good pictures without any hint of the water-color effect.  However, one photo was over-exposed (a photo of a bush against a white fence, probably because of center-weighted metering).  Also, the green building across the street looks slightly aqua.  All the pictures have too-aggressive sharpening, in my view, but I may be able to tone that down.

Regarding your shots, which look blurry to me, I've begun to realize that the "original size" is probably not the original size at all, and that what I might be looking at is an enlargement of a reduced size.  That would explain it.  Otherwise, at a shutter speed of 1/100 (talking now about the photo with just the terrain and a rock in it), your hand would have had to be shaking severely or a hurricane would have to be blowing through for you to get such blur.

Yes, I think that's the explanation.  You didn't actually post your original size photos -- or for some reason (perhaps memory issues) my browser is showing me a reduced size.  So I hereby withdraw my original criticisms.

I have the NX1000 and use it mainly for landscape and have also noticed the water colour effect, however only ever on JPEGs and when processing the Raw file of the same photo I have never seen it.

marks123 wrote:

I have the NX1000 and use it mainly for landscape and have also noticed the water colour effect, however only ever on JPEGs and when processing the Raw file of the same photo I have never seen it.

I've now taken about 170 photos (JPG's only) and I haven't seen one photo that has the water-color effect.  However, the optics aren't particularly good (meaning that even sharp areas of the image are somewhat soft).  One of the first things I did when I got the camera was I set the JPG quality to super-fine.

What I am finding that disturbs me is that both metering and color balance are somewhat unreliable.  Metering seems to be better in Program mode than Smart mode.  As for color balance, even when I specify what it should be (meaning that I don't let the camera select it), some pictures will come out warmer than others.  It's quite annoying.

My problem is:  Do I accept the flaws of the camera because I paid a low price for it, or do I return it?  I can't decide.