Logical Exercise: Sell NX, buy Fuji/Sony?

Owning both the Samsung NX1 and the Fuji X-T2 & X-T1, I can honestly say Samsung is still a better platform, especially for the money. Used prices:

Samsung NX1 - $850
Samsung 16-50S - $635
Samsung 45mm 1.8 - $200
Samsung 85mm 1.4 - $500

Total: $2,185

Fuji X-T2 - $1000
Fuji 16-55 - $850
Fuji 56mm 1.2 - $750
Fuji 35mm 2.0 - $225

Total: $2,825

Samsung is a far better video camera, and probably 95% as good of a stills camera. The glass in these respective setups are a win for the Samsung as well. The 85mm 1.4 is a slow AF, but so is the 56mm 1.2 (both are amazing optically). The 45mm 1.8 is comparable to the 35mm 2.0, and the 16-50S is better than the 16-55mm by a decent clip.

There's more options in great glass with the Fuji, but a lot of the focal ranges are covered by Samsung at a lower price. The Fuji outclasses Samsung on the wider end of the lens spectrum for sure.

M43ForMe wrote:

Owning both the Samsung NX1 and the Fuji X-T2 & X-T1, I can honestly say Samsung is still a better platform, especially for the money. Used prices:

Samsung NX1 - $850
Samsung 16-50S - $635
Samsung 45mm 1.8 - $200
Samsung 85mm 1.4 - $500

Total: $2,185

Fuji X-T2 - $1000
Fuji 16-55 - $850
Fuji 56mm 1.2 - $750
Fuji 35mm 2.0 - $225

Total: $2,825

Samsung is a far better video camera, and probably 95% as good of a stills camera. The glass in these respective setups are a win for the Samsung as well. The 85mm 1.4 is a slow AF, but so is the 56mm 1.2 (both are amazing optically). The 45mm 1.8 is comparable to the 35mm 2.0, and the 16-50S is better than the 16-55mm by a decent clip.

There's more options in great glass with the Fuji, but a lot of the focal ranges are covered by Samsung at a lower price. The Fuji outclasses Samsung on the wider end of the lens spectrum for sure.

These are my findings as well, but I know just 2 people using Fuji (professionaly though, so their critic is important to me).

Also, I bought most NX new, and if I change system I will buy most of its parts new (if not all), but it was very good that you mentioned used prices that I wasn't aware of.

Canon M with a pro body and a couple of pro M lenses could be a good canditate to replace NX in a couple of years, and there is the X-T3 coming this autumn. It has to be significant.

Thank you.

Very nice and realistic listing of facts. Plus: It seems you use your gear on a daily basis and are happy with the "old" NX1. You seem tu use what you like and what works for you. Pure realism. Have to say, that you are not alone with this attitude - many photographers and videographers out there using a reliable gear for years. Some of them just having fun with it, other guys even making a living out of their visual work.

On the other side, people buying nearly every piece of gear announced and selling their "old" (max. 1 year old) gear to buy and "test" the new one. Nothing wrong with this attitude, a growing economy just needs consumerism. Do these guys make better photos or films? Absolutely not. But they help technology manufacturers and gear sellers to pay salaries and bills and drive beautiful cars.

Theo12 wrote:

Very nice and realistic listing of facts. Plus: It seems you use your gear on a daily basis and are happy with the "old" NX1. You seem tu use what you like and what works for you. Pure realism. Have to say, that you are not alone with this attitude - many photographers and videographers out there using a reliable gear for years. Some of them just having fun with it, other guys even making a living out of their visual work.

On the other side, people buying nearly every piece of gear announced and selling their "old" (max. 1 year old) gear to buy and "test" the new one. Nothing wrong with this attitude, a growing economy just needs consumerism. Do these guys make better photos or films? Absolutely not. But they help technology manufacturers and gear sellers to pay salaries and bills and drive beautiful cars.

I am full in on consumerism! To list all my equipment (lights, sound, legacy lenses, editing suites, etc) would take me days!

I just detest the clickbait "X brand, killer", "the camera that rules them all" e.t.c titles. Most tools/products have their time and place, and between logical limits, modern cameras offer excellent quality and value.

My opinion is that NX system will be relevant for at least a couple of years more, and if anyone needs raw video or more than 28megapixels photos then definitely needs a different tool; also, renting now and then, it may be a more logical, cheaper and less stressful choice.

Personally, I am investing more in accessories and things that can raise my production values lately, rather than cameras and lenses, most (if not all) are seriously good enough for most jobs/circumstances.

In most jobs/hobbies, people do not change their tools/equipmemt every year. That is not only financially deranged, but counter productive also.

Everything else is about choices and artistic decisions. Some people want medium format only, others are perfectly fine with 20mgpxls m43 and their small zooms. There is no bad or good equipment, just choices.

Lanfeust59 wrote:

Hello,

Wait to see what Fuji is coming out. The xt2 dates from 2016. After that, it is sure that the nx team will always have the best value for money ...

I know just 2 professionals using Fuji (and as a back up or secondary system to their Nikon dSLRs) and they will skip the X-H1 waiting for the X-T3. They believe it will be a significant release, and it will come before Christmas 2018.

Whatever it is, a) it won't be cheap b) still have to see what it will brings. Definitely the camera maker to watch, especially for APS-C users, like me. But as I said earlier, Canon has already figure out the touch screen interface, the menu system, pretty good ergonomics and color science (they are Canon, after all!) and admittedly the best AF system in business, right now.

When they will deliver a "serious" or pro camera body, and a couple of good/pro lenses, and they already having the advantage to adapt every EF/EF-S lens, almost natively, then I can predict a shift in sales towards Canon. They already were outselling everyone else in mirrorless in Asia/Japan!

I don't think any of the seriousness from Canon will come in the M series. I think they'll save that for their answer to the A7III with whatever pro level mirrorless they release.

The problem for them is that they can't price it at $3000 like you know they want to. Nobody is going to pay Canon prices in this new Sony world.

M43ForMe wrote:

I don't think any of the seriousness from Canon will come in the M series. I think they'll save that for their answer to the A7III with whatever pro level mirrorless they release.

The problem for them is that they can't price it at $3000 like you know they want to. Nobody is going to pay Canon prices in this new Sony world.

This is a comment I did on a different forum about the new Nikon, when I make the argument that Nikon is maybe too late in the game. Of course you are taking it out of context, as you do not follow the rest, but it has some points about this new Sony world, as you say.

"Sigma/Tamron/Samyang already offer AF lenses and they will produce more zooms this year. Sony E lenses are extremely expensive, and not any better than Canonikon ones, but now that other makers make cheap E lenses, the system is becoming more attractive. Even Fuji make pro video E lenses these days.

That huge Canonikon base, maybe won't buy another camera, ever. I know plenty of people buying a dSLR back in the golden age, using it a couple of times, and then put them in the closet for ever. Especially now that phones are good enough for them, and admittedly easier to carry and shoot, they are not going back to any dSLR or mirrorless.

It is pretty obvious that mirrorless is the future (and past and present for me, as I am using mirrorless for half a decade now), I do not see what benefit dSLRs will have in a couple of years from now. Migration to Sony will slow down, for sure, but it is already an industry standard, in many cases, there are just too many A7 cameras around, a lot of people have idolized the A7s series, the A7r series has an incredible megapixel count, and the A7 series is amazing for an entry level FULL FRAME mirrorless camera. Also, a6xxx cameras are the top sellers in every online shop for a few years now, and most of the young people starting in "business", are Sony users, and know only Sony as a "serious" camera manufacturer, so the trend is the opposite for them. A6000 has sold amazingly well in amateurs.

I am just saying that it is more complicated than "huge Canon/Nikon user base", that was the case a few years ago, but just recently that has changed, and I seriously doubt Nikon will make a camera like the A7iii (spec wise) and that will cost less than 3333euros (and Sony is 2300euros here). We will see of course, but Sony IS a player, plus has access to a huge R&D department that makes also game consoles, mobile phones, most of the sensors in the market, so can get components easier than Nikon, cheaper, and have more info beforehand. Not that we have seen those in their cameras (touch screen implementation is a joke, their screens are mediocre - at least, overheating was a major issue for years, QC is questionable, Nikon/Fuji are getting better results from the same sensors, e.t.c), but still they have some advantages.

As of the Nikon full frame mirrorless system,

I believe Nikon will have an active adapter offered for cheap/free. Continuity is a huge thing for them, more than anyone else, and they will deliver. I am 97% certain of this. They have produced a few patents the last couple of years of interesting stuff, and definitely they need a different, more modern mount, but with backwards compatibility. They will find a great solution I believe, and maybe that is the reason of the late arrival of that camera, but as I said earlier, maybe that will be later that it should!

Also, they can go all in in video mode, they are a bit behind everyone right now (except Olympus, and Pentax, are we still consider Pentax a player?!), but they have no cine camera line to protect, and already they have delivered excellent image quality in some models. An amazing Nikon mirrorless with one of the best SOC video, will worth the, around, 3.000euros that Nikon will ask for their full frame mirrorless. Fuji asks 2300euros for a machine that most people will consider vastly inferior to a great Nikon full frame mirrorless. If the video is so so, then Sony will be a better option for true hybrid shooters in full frame, and the rest will happily stay with m43/Fuji, or move to newer, greater, EOS M cameras.

Video is the battle field right now, every one is talking about AF and Video performance as top selling points. Maybe 10bit will be a mandatory spec in a couple of years, the photo quality is quite good already, but video can be improved a lot."

The point you make about Nikon not having a cine line to protect is well taken. I've never understood why they couldn't get live view AF working properly. Could you imagine if the D500 or the D850 that shoot a really nice 4k image had good autofocus?

They wouldn't need to scramble to do something in mirrorless, they'd already have legitimate competitors to Sony.