my "way out"

mordor_74 wrote:

Time for some outing here!

Original plan was to stay on nx system until EOSM build a line of lenses and sensors reach top samsung performance. Part of this plan was get a 45mm or maybe a 60mm.

But in the last 12 month or more, price of lenses have only rised. The cheaper 45mm i've found around recently from a reliable source was not less than 230 euros. Guess i passed away my best chances a while ago!

So my brain started looking around and for some week i've considered a sony a3000 body plus its sigma 60mm. I could have both for near the price of the 45mm. But...

1) only lenses that attract me in the e-mount system are the 3 sigma primes
2) i really dont like the recent sony direction, i have no trust, just look at what they did with the minolta system. slt looks like a joke to me
3) flash system?

Meanwhile i was looking around and considering other options.

Then i've found a Canon 40mm at a very good price and i've pulled the trigged. Sold a minolta 50mm that was keeping dust and used the money for the 40mm.

Plan have changed.

I like my 30mm, the 16-50pz and the 20-50 and i'm pretty happy on how they combo with my nx1100. I will keep it for my compact system as long as they'll last.

I've already sold the 18-55 (at a price that made happy both me and the new owner, i could get more money but i like to think i am honest) and with some extra money i bought a canon 100d/sl1 body for my 40mm.

I've read a lot about this cam, it is just like a cheap hybrid between a mirrorless and a dslr. Just a bit over the size of my NX20 but with a better AF sysytem in live view.

I will give it a try and if it work i will sell the nx20, the 50-200 and the flash system (godox wireless catch my eye) and build a second system around the 100d.

But, as i state before, for all the situations where a compact fits (trips, family events, street) i will still use my nx meanwhile the Canon will handle the flash and tele situations.

I share this with you because i know that many here are pondering on post-NX days.

I heard that 700D is an even better camera for similar money, I do not follow cheap dSLR market though, so I do not know. If I was going for something cheap D3200 and something from the 5xxx Nikon series would be more appealing.

The 22mm pancake for the M system is something I look with interest, I will do it some day! Maybe a cheap M3 or something would be an interesting choice, and it could lead you to the M system slowly (as the M system just suppressed your cameras with the very expensive M5).

From the dpr review:

"The EF 40mm f/2.8 STM is a lens whose impressive image quality belies its low price and tiny size. For APS-C users it's a tiny, inexpensive companion to a kit zoom, and on full frame it offers a great option for general shooting. It's also nicely built, and on the whole the STM focusing works pretty well. Compact pancake primes have undergone something of a revival in recent years, with such gems as the Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH and Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake showing that small size doesn't necessarily have to mean compromised quality. It's taken a while for Canon to come to the party, but the 40mm takes its place alongside its peers as one of the best examples of its type."

Also struggles in AF, like all these lenses do, while the 45mm is ultra fast. 45mm is an excellent lens, 70mm in NX, while the Canon's crop factor is 1.6 instead of 1.5 of NX(approximately).

The 40 pancake is much closer to the 30mm NX pancake in style and use than the 45, I wouldn't compare them.

A classic 50mm Canon lens would be more comparable. The 40 is also 2.8f, while the 45 is 1.8f and the 30 is 2f (you are not gaining anything in ISO with the Canon).

What are the real benefits of the Canon though? It has less megapixels, and I would doubt any real world increase in performance in anyway (maybe a bit in AF in high ISO?).

How much you paid for the camera, and how much for the lens?

I am expecting your experience with this (almost) entry level dSLR (that sounds so 2012!).

mordor_74 wrote:

Hi Kisaha,

100D has a better liveview mode than 700D, the rest of the camera is similar other than the software on the 100D is better and the 700d has a "more dslr" handling.

45mm on nx is 67mm
40mm on canon is 64mm, not much difference.
the performance of the canon 40mm are ok from the widest aperture, like the nx 30 and 45. the 50mm from canon need to be stopped down to 2,8 to get the same sharpness and i'd like better the 40mm focal since i will be gatting also a 85mm in future.

My Nx are all 20mp so going down to 18mp makes no difference to me. Also iso performance are on par. The incamera NR from Canon is slight better but does not make difference to me since i use RAW.

The lens was 80€ and the body under 200€.

The advantages are lens availablity right now (and int he future i guess), a better flash system (a department where i'm focused on learning) and, as you say, better AF.

Always compare with i own, not with what was the best samsung offer.

I will let you know if i am happy or, else, if i will drop this path!

Of course, all systems are good, we all had a Canon dSLR or SLR at some point!

I mean, that the AF speed, the size, and the price of the 40mm is comparable with the 30mm.

The 45 is in another league, it is my favorite lens, and always on one of my cameras.

"Samsung have created a lens which delivers excellent sharpness from maximum aperture, very low levels of fringing, low falloff and distortion. It is as close to flawless as can be had, especially for the asking price of around £230. This lens should make a great addition to any existing Samsung NX kit, and the fast maximum aperture will be a bonus for shooting in low light, or for isolating your subject from the background."

The 40mm is a lot less sharp at 2.8f, than the 45mm at 1.8f (yes, at 1.8f), in my mind, that is a gain in ISO of a whole generation of Canon APS-C cameras.

"Canon's EF 50mm f/1.8 lens may be a suitable alternative for those on a budget, especially as it weights about the same. Even though it isn't as compact or as well built as the 40mm lens, it is considerably cheaper at around £90 and has a maximum aperture over a stop faster.

Also, for around the same price, the Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 Macro lens can be picked up. Although this lens is a little bulkier than this 40mm optic, it does allow close focusing and 1:2 magnification."

If you want to play with manual, there are a ton of 50-55-58 legacy lenses for around 20-50euros/$ that some of them have great character, and usually at 1.8f.

I will sell at least a Pentax 55mm/1.8f (I have 3 identical!) for less than that, and it is an amazing portrait lens (around 83mm in NX).

mordor_74 wrote:

You touched a weird key... 40mm AF speed. I've read everything and the opposite... Some say it is slow, some say it is on par with the 50mm and other says it is faster than the 50mm...

you will find out and tell us! Good photo taking.

Did you had the SEF42 by the way? Can you comment on that at all?

mordor_74 wrote:

Well, consider that my best experiences in term of flashes where a pro flash at the time of the asahi pentax film (and i was 6 to 15 year old, and the camera was older than me) and a short period with an SB600 with the D80. Other flash i owned where almost crap...

I am pretty pleased with the metering of the SEF42 with the NX20 (i dont use it with the nx1100 becase it feels unbalanced). The quality of the light is good and the power is enough to tilt the head at 45-90 degree and still get good result. In flash controls are at least decent and confortable.

What it missing more is orizontal head movement.

Do you think it can be sufficient for some semi-pro work, or is it missing anything important?

Does it worth 200-250euros from ebay?