DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

Started Sep 1, 2015 | Discussions
Matt Everglade Regular Member • Posts: 200
The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm
1

As introduced by ChimPanzer, here I'd like you to guess which Samsung lens belongs to which image.

I shot a "wall" with several meters distance.

16mm, F4 (F4.5 for the 12-24mm) and F11, ISO100 on a tripod with 2 sec self-release. WB corrected in Lightroom to be equal on all photos. Actually those images were shot on two different days due to (non-)availability of the lenses.

Center - Open the file at original size for 1:1 view.

Midframe - Open the file at original size for 1:1 view.

Corner - Open the file at original size for 1:1 view.

It is your turn to guess which Samsung lenses I used - left to right.

I will tell you how many answers you got right.

Cheers,
Matt

-- hide signature --

Visit my blog about photography and Samsung NX:
http://www.matteverglade.com

 Matt Everglade's gear list:Matt Everglade's gear list
Samsung NX1000 Samsung NX30 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 50-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +7 more
ChuckTa Senior Member • Posts: 1,492
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

Just a wild guess, and the different lighting made it more difficult.

Left to right

1. 12-24

2. 16-50 S

3. 16-50 pz (this one I am more sure due to edge softness)

4. 16 f2.4

 ChuckTa's gear list:ChuckTa's gear list
Sony a7 Samsung NX500 Fujifilm X-T20 Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9 Panasonic Lumix DC-GF10 (GF90) +8 more
ChimPanzer Regular Member • Posts: 307
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

Hi Matt,

Thanks for testing! I can see quite some diffraction at F11 on the pictures that impacts most of the pictures, except for Lens 3. I did not expect it to happen so notably on most of the lenses. So it is quite useful to remember to avoid F11 and higher stops.

Here are my guesses:

Lens1 16mm

Lens2 16-50mm PZ

Lens3 S 16-50 2.0-2.8

Lens4 12-24mm

ChimPANZER

zipcode Regular Member • Posts: 312
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

1. 16-50 S

2. 12-24

3. 16-50 pz

4. 16 f2.4

OP Matt Everglade Regular Member • Posts: 200
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

Must have been too easy, directly a 4 out of 4, congratulations.

-- hide signature --

Visit my blog about photography and Samsung NX:
http://www.matteverglade.com

 Matt Everglade's gear list:Matt Everglade's gear list
Samsung NX1000 Samsung NX30 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 50-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +7 more
OP Matt Everglade Regular Member • Posts: 200
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

I am sorry, none is correct. Try again!

-- hide signature --

Visit my blog about photography and Samsung NX:
http://www.matteverglade.com

 Matt Everglade's gear list:Matt Everglade's gear list
Samsung NX1000 Samsung NX30 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 50-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +7 more
OP Matt Everglade Regular Member • Posts: 200
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

Well done, 2 out of 4 are correct.

-- hide signature --

Visit my blog about photography and Samsung NX:
http://www.matteverglade.com

 Matt Everglade's gear list:Matt Everglade's gear list
Samsung NX1000 Samsung NX30 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 50-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +7 more
ChuckTa Senior Member • Posts: 1,492
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

Matt Everglade wrote:

Must have been too easy, directly a 4 out of 4, congratulations.

OMG, remind me to buy the lottery tomorrow  

It wasn't easy, luck was required. But my 12-24 tends to give darker images, that's the first. And I got 3 for the softer corner of PZ kit at f4.5. Guess the other two. But assume S lens sharper than 16mm pancake.

 ChuckTa's gear list:ChuckTa's gear list
Sony a7 Samsung NX500 Fujifilm X-T20 Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9 Panasonic Lumix DC-GF10 (GF90) +8 more
ChimPanzer Regular Member • Posts: 307
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

It is good that the S lens was among. However I a bit disappointed at is quality, especially the corner performance with lots of croma and fuzziness.

The 16mm seems a better lens than I expected. Was a useful test. Thanks Matt!

ChimPANZER

zipcode Regular Member • Posts: 312
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

Yes, the 12-24 seems to be a really good lens. I thought the chroma aberration could not have been from the S lens.

Jefftan Veteran Member • Posts: 3,501
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

I am sorry why is there 8 frame for 4 lens

if it the same lens from up to down?

ChuckTa Senior Member • Posts: 1,492
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

Jefftan wrote:

I am sorry why is there 8 frame for 4 lens

if it the same lens from up to down?

Top is F4, bottom at F11.

 ChuckTa's gear list:ChuckTa's gear list
Sony a7 Samsung NX500 Fujifilm X-T20 Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9 Panasonic Lumix DC-GF10 (GF90) +8 more
Jefftan Veteran Member • Posts: 3,501
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

surprising is how good the 16-50 pz is compare to 16-50 S

a little more sharpening of the 16-50 pz and they would look very similar.  A great advantage of Samsung camera and also Panasonic camera (12-32mm) is the good kit lens. Fuji camera also provide good kit lens but is large and not small collapse type

Not everyone would want the extra cost and bulk of extra good lens.  Smart people would not buy Sony just for their junk kit lens

mordor_74 Contributing Member • Posts: 622
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

So the choice for the landscapelovers is between 12-24 and 16? Lucky ones, they are pretty affordable!

 mordor_74's gear list:mordor_74's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX5 Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Samsung NX1100 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II VC LD Aspherical (IF) +7 more
ChimPanzer Regular Member • Posts: 307
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

A full frame 12 is much wider than an 12 at APS-C. So landsape tends to be shot with FF in most of the cases.

mordor_74 Contributing Member • Posts: 622
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm
1

I see your point but i dont think that everybody is willing to spent 1300€ (the cheapest FF body if i am correct: D610) for a body. Also consider that many people are starting do wide landscape "the other way" = stiching more pictures and i must say with good result andfar beyond the capacity of a 12mm + FF.

 mordor_74's gear list:mordor_74's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX5 Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Samsung NX1100 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II VC LD Aspherical (IF) +7 more
OP Matt Everglade Regular Member • Posts: 200
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

THe 12-24mm is a wonderful lens for landscape. I seldom needed a wider angle of view. I think no other system has a better wide-angle option in this price range.

-- hide signature --

Visit my blog about photography and Samsung NX:
http://www.matteverglade.com

 Matt Everglade's gear list:Matt Everglade's gear list
Samsung NX1000 Samsung NX30 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 50-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +7 more
ChimPanzer Regular Member • Posts: 307
Re: The Samsung BIG lens TEST - performance at 16mm

Ok, the 12-24 prices are currently down as any other Samsung lens prices as well. It seems many retailers clear their stocks due to Samsung withdrawing from several markets.

NX1 is appr 1600 EUR + 350 EUR for the 12-24, + you may bet 50-250 for 200 EUR

So you end up spending 2200 EUR roughly for the gear and then you have the broadest coverage fom wide angle to tele.

This you need to compare to a Full frame price with a lens that covers 18-300 to get the same .

The important difference comes when someone wants to go even wider. On FF you can, on APS-C not really.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads