NX500 as the near perfect compact camera

We all know how good the NX500 is but I just wanted to add that in my opinion it was close to being perfect for me (but not quite).

For stills I have no complaints - there are a variety of excellent compact lenses available, from the 16-50mm pz, to any of the small primes and even the 12-24mm. The 10mm is also good and compact, although arguably niche.

Where the NX500 could be better is in terms of video. For me it's frustrating that there is a 4k crop. I thought that the NX1 and the NX500 had the same internals but that can't be the case. Equally there is no DIS on the NX500 and 120fps is limited to 720p, so clearly the hardware must be inferior, or somehow limited.

What's also a shame is that there isn't a truly great compact video lens. The pz is great for outdoors and good light but there isn't anything that good for low light. It's not really feasible to use the primes as they aren't stabilised. If Samsung had released a 20mm f2.0 with OIS and great, silent autofocus that would have been amazing.

I've recently acquired an RX100v and I'm wondering whether this is actually better indoors due to the f1.8 at the wide end, and oversampled 4k. I haven't done the calculations to compare f1.8 on a 1" sensor Vs f3.5 on an apsc sensor but I imagine its close. If you then shoot 4k on the nx500 any advantage that the rx100v would have would surely be more pronounced.

Anyhow, enough rambling, I just wish Samsung had remained in the market long enough to release a successor to the NX500 that addresses some of these issues (and perhaps added a mic jack). I would say the same about the NX1 but that camera in my view is not really lacking in any area.

I hear you Mark. The NX1 is much better suited for video.

That said, I think the HD video on the NX500 looks great and is good enough for most of my uses - especially if it's the only camera in my bag. If you install the hack you can go as far as 2K without crop (which I didn't do).

Shooting 4K with the 12-24 lens gives you a pretty good range but no stabilization. A little tripod will be needed... and this is always a great combo on a gimbal. For low light you'd need fast primes and a tripod.

Too bad about the missing audio input but synching in post is not a big deal anymore.

At some point I used to own a Sony RX 10 and the video looked pretty decent. But on the 1 inch sensor there was the magic missing that the NX cameras are able to produce...

I am with you, why the heck did Samsung get out of the game...???

Agree completely, in fact the 1080p of the nx500 can give the 4k of the Sony a run for its money. And it's true there is something missing from the Sony footage but it's hard to put your finger on exactly what.

A gimbal definitely helps but unfortunately the primes aren't spectacular in terms of autofocus in video mode, and somewhat noisy and move in and out a lot! If you are adept (not me) you can toggle the manual focus button on the touch screen whilst shooting video and this improves things greatly as long as the subject isn't moving around too much.

The NX1 is a fantastic camera for both stills and video. Paired with the 16-50s lens or 18-200mm it's unbeatable!

And I need to give that 2k mode a go when I feel brave enough 😄

OremLK wrote:

I feel like as smartphones get larger sensors and get better and better at video this is becoming less of an issue. Lot of smartphones out there with 1/1.7" sensors or similar now, and the stabilization has gotten nearly gimbal-like on some of the top options. I'm especially interested to see what Apple comes up with (even though I'm an Android user) for the iPhone 12, since it's rumored to have a 1/1.9" sensor, and they're already at or near the top of smartphone video with a comparatively tiny sensor in the 11.

Of course if you're doing professional work, depending on what exactly it is, a smartphone probably won't cut it. But if you're just trying to sub in for what the NX1 can accomplish, I'll bet you can get reasonably close. (Not in stills, just in video.)

You're right, smartphones are really closing the gap in particular with regards to stabilisation.

However, I've decided to get off the 'buying phones for the camera' bandwagon as it drains my finances greatly and never leaves me completely satisfied! There are always compromises to be made with phones and because they do everything, you have to prioritise which features you want. For me the camera is no longer at the top of the list like it used to be.

I'd rather use something compact like the rx100 as ultimately it produces much better results (so far). I've only ever bought used so I'm not too much out of pocket.

I liked my nx500s while i owned them. I did miss the DIS, but I mostly used them on a tripod as a B cam to my NX1. 2.5k mode worked well for me as well. I always thought if the 4k crop was a 'selectable' option, that would be amazing. I wish the NX1 had 4k crop as an option for when I need telephoto but don't have the lens for it. That being said, neither camera is perfect. The nx500 is great because of its flip screen. NX1 lacks that. NX500 lacks mic input, which ruins it in some ways. I also quite like using the gammaDR setting in the NX1, which the nx500 lacks. I dialed in the picture wizard profiles as best I could, but there is a curve in the gammadr profile that cannot be matched with the simple picturewizard settings.

All that said, NX500 is still a beast. If you don't need an external mic or super stable video, it is an amazing piece of tech. I was planning to use one for a car camera rig, but ended up going NX1 for better color profiles, battery life, endurance.

You got right, the difference between NX1 and NX500.
NX500 is less video prone, and not only the size but the price differ.

As an OIS video lens for NX system, ther is NX18-200mm zoom (known VIDEO ZOOM).
It is quick, I do not remember how noisy is since I did not used it in last 2 years (I have both S lenses and my hobby is the Photo, Video is just a collateral disturbance I rarely use).

Everyone likes to talk about how great a NX2 would have been but just take a second to think about a NX700 with all the features of the NX1 (no crop 4k, DIS, gamma DR) in that tiny body. Talk about a perfect compact travel camera setup for photo and video.

If only 

deemdee wrote:

Everyone likes to talk about how great a NX2 would have been but just take a second to think about a NX700 with all the features of the NX1 (no crop 4k, DIS, gamma DR) in that tiny body. Talk about a perfect compact travel camera setup for photo and video.

If only

Very true. But what happened to the NX600?

Kisaha wrote:

Until recently there wasn't any camera at this form factor without any kind of crop at 4K.

Even huge and expensive Canon cameras have crop, most M cameras crop and no dual pixel. D500, a6XXX have terrible 1080p and some form of crop anyway on different modes.

Fuji used to have terrible crop and file size limits.

NX500 is 5 years old, give it some credit. It was almost 800€ new..it was almost free for 2015..I gave as much for the extra version with 2 batteries and charger.

The problem is thermal. To make a pro video tool on a tiny m43 sensor, Panasonic made the GH5 a beast, both in size and weight. The GH5 is heavier and bigger than the NX1, mind you..

The 18-200 is a do it all lens. I take it on holidays if I do not want to carry much. I had it with me on a recent trip on an ancient city.

16-50 is fine for most things. Similar offerings from other brands, we are not missing much here. Only lenses we are missing a Pro S UWZ (like the 10-24mm Fuji) and long teles, everything else is covered.

I gave it a lot of credit and still do!

I just think about how good its successor may have been.

The NX500 was certainly impressive for its time, but recent Fuji cameras have better video capabilities and Canon was able to one-up Samsung in terms of APS-C pixel density with their EOS 90D and M6 Mark II. If Samsung had continued producing compact cameras, would they have fallen behind?

Since getting an A7RIII, I barely touch my NX500. I was never satisfied with the NX500's image quality at high ISO values, and the Sony has less noise and much higher resolution. Only downside is having to buy larger bags to carry my gear. If I wanted to shoot video, I'd get an X-T30, X-T3 or X-T4.

Kisaha wrote:

You are comparing a full frame camera that costed thousands of $€ to a tiny APS-C that was a lot less?! That is how good the NX500 from 2015 is..

I purchased my Sony in like-new condition for roughly twice the launch price of the NX500. Pricing doesn't seem so disparate that way.

Mind you that not everybody buys cameras every year. Imagine buying Canon/Sony/Fuji in 2015. You would have to buy 2-3 cameras from each brand those 5 years to finaly equal, or surpass the NX500.

The "investment" in lenses is not proportional either. Bigger - heavier - more expensive lenses.

Buying cameras yearly has little advantage - it typically takes multiple years for manufactures to make major improvements. Not only does the NX500 have light lenses, it also has a light body. I'm not sure if any current camera approaches its performance without being appreciably heavier.

Fuji has multiple problems with video (white balance issue, overheating, some time limitations, zoom shift exposure = that is a lenses issue, they weren't build with video on mind), battery issues on most, e.t.c) and most of their lenses are terrible for video. They will replace most of the old ones, and even the new 16-80mm everybody was expecting is just a mediocre lens for too much money. This is the review from my favourite lens reviewer:

https://www.lenstip.com/571.11-Lens_review-Fujifilm_Fujinon_XF_16-80_mm_f_4_R_OIS_WR_Summary.html

and watch this from a guy a very much respect. Korean, but perfect english subtitles

https://youtu.be/Vva3GV_XElQ

Undeniably X-T4 is a great tool but it is 2020. Imagine buying in 2014 a Fuji camera Vs the NX1 (because you can not compare the flagships with the tiny NX500). You needed exactly 3 Fuji flagships since 2014 to match the NX1, and still some of us prefer the NX1+S 16-50mm combo as our workhorse. Fuji still needs to polish things further (IBIS, the shifts, ergononics, lenses, e.t.c)

No camera has perfect white balance, fortunately Fuji has a log format for video which helps alleviate this concern. Most people aren't going to encounter overheating. For situations where heat is a concern, a Panasonic S1H or Sigma fp would be more appropriate. Indeed it seems somewhat counter-intuitive to use a general-purpose camera if high fidelity video is one's focus. The NX500 has time limitations for recording too, unless you modify it. Also, I'm not sure what battery issues you're referring to.
As for the video you linked, I strongly believe that demonstrates an issue which would be correctable in software; it should even be correctable in post if one takes their time to even the exposure of individual frames.
I wouldn't expect much from an APS-C lens with kit zoom range and an f4 aperture. Fuji have a wide range of lenses, weather resistance adds to cost. And Fringer has a fantastic adapter allowing many Canon EF-mount lenses to be used on Fuji cameras with reasonable AF performance. I don't have one of those, but I do own a non-flagship, pre-2014 Fuji camera that I find great for taking stills - the X-M1.

I'm certainly no Samsung hater and plan to soon make a thread I think frequenters of this forum may enjoy.

shutterbugnx wrote:

Kisaha wrote:

You are comparing a full frame camera that costed thousands of $€ to a tiny APS-C that was a lot less?! That is how good the NX500 from 2015 is..

I purchased my Sony in like-new condition for roughly twice the launch price of the NX500. Pricing doesn't seem so disparate that way.

Mind you that not everybody buys cameras every year. Imagine buying Canon/Sony/Fuji in 2015. You would have to buy 2-3 cameras from each brand those 5 years to finaly equal, or surpass the NX500.

The "investment" in lenses is not proportional either. Bigger - heavier - more expensive lenses.

Buying cameras yearly has little advantage - it typically takes multiple years for manufactures to make major improvements. Not only does the NX500 have light lenses, it also has a light body. I'm not sure if any current camera approaches its performance without being appreciably heavier.

Fuji has multiple problems with video (white balance issue, overheating, some time limitations, zoom shift exposure = that is a lenses issue, they weren't build with video on mind), battery issues on most, e.t.c) and most of their lenses are terrible for video. They will replace most of the old ones, and even the new 16-80mm everybody was expecting is just a mediocre lens for too much money. This is the review from my favourite lens reviewer:

https://www.lenstip.com/571.11-Lens_review-Fujifilm_Fujinon_XF_16-80_mm_f_4_R_OIS_WR_Summary.html

and watch this from a guy a very much respect. Korean, but perfect english subtitles

https://youtu.be/Vva3GV_XElQ

Undeniably X-T4 is a great tool but it is 2020. Imagine buying in 2014 a Fuji camera Vs the NX1 (because you can not compare the flagships with the tiny NX500). You needed exactly 3 Fuji flagships since 2014 to match the NX1, and still some of us prefer the NX1+S 16-50mm combo as our workhorse. Fuji still needs to polish things further (IBIS, the shifts, ergononics, lenses, e.t.c)

No camera has perfect white balance, fortunately Fuji has a log format for video which helps alleviate this concern. Most people aren't going to encounter overheating. For situations where heat is a concern, a Panasonic S1H or Sigma fp would be more appropriate. Indeed it seems somewhat counter-intuitive to use a general-purpose camera if high fidelity video is one's focus. The NX500 has time limitations for recording too, unless you modify it. Also, I'm not sure what battery issues you're referring to.
As for the video you linked, I strongly believe that demonstrates an issue which would be correctable in software; it should even be correctable in post if one takes their time to even the exposure of individual frames.
I wouldn't expect much from an APS-C lens with kit zoom range and an f4 aperture. Fuji have a wide range of lenses, weather resistance adds to cost. And Fringer has a fantastic adapter allowing many Canon EF-mount lenses to be used on Fuji cameras with reasonable AF performance. I don't have one of those, but I do own a non-flagship, pre-2014 Fuji camera that I find great for taking stills - the X-M1.

I'm certainly no Samsung hater and plan to soon make a thread I think frequenters of this forum may enjoy.

Looking forward to reading it!

Kisaha wrote:

Upon release the 7Riii was 3.499euros, and the NX500 799euros, if I remember right.

Seems about right.

For a "workhorse" 24-70, you have to pay 2.149euros in my country (upon release it was more than 500euros more expensive), and for the S 16-50S 2-2.8f lens was 1.199euros (it was much less a few months after release). Fuji 16-55mm is non stabilized 2.8f and is 1.199, right now. The S is the smaller and lighter and the only one stabilized. Start your set up from here.

https://www.sharkandpalm.com/camera-reviews/fuji-18-55mm-f28-4-the-best-fuji-video-lens
Fuji have a very nice lens for video which is available quite cheaply. As for Sony lenses, Sigma and Tamron both have cheaper alternatives than Sony's own lenses while still offering good performance. How much does cost really matter? If you're investing in lenses for video work, you should be able to break even without going the budget route.

The only issue you "had" was bigger bags...that is not a valid comparison at all, like comparing an everyday small, light and cheap car, with an expensive premium SUV.

The SUV is bigger, better, more, the small hatchback (maybe a Fiesta) usually drives well, economically, can turn, light and easy to steer, can park easily on a bigger city, but can take you on the high way too.

Some people own both types of car. If the larger model is no less comfortable, why not get it? I don't even use a strap with my A7RIII because it is so much more comfortable in my hand than my NX500.

Huge advantage, look how much the "premium" compacts from Fuji and Sony cost right now, and how much the NX500 with the 30mm pancake, or any other pancake.

NX500 was released 5 years ago. How much will Fuji's premium cameras from now cost in 5 years I wonder...

There are issues with F log, too... Fuji isn't prime time for video professionals, I said, they still need to polish things.

I think Fuji today is as capable as Samsung, if not more so. You mention video professionals, but Samsung is unlikely to ever be as revered as say the 5D Mark II, whereas Fuji is increasingly garnering recognition.

Samsung doesn't overheat, I assure you about that and regulars here have read tons of examples I have given them through the years. It is just unbelievable. Recording straight for 73minutes, it is not even a "hack" just an option inside the DEV menu of the camera. The hack is a different thing altogether, making NX cameras even better.

What you mean is Samsung doesn't have overheating protection. You can find people here who have had their cameras "mysteriously" stop working - I'm sure heat was implicated in some of those instances.

Fuji batteries are small, cameras drain too much power, it is even worst in the X-T4.

The NX500's battery isn't particularly impressive either. Besides, cameras can be powered externally.

You can't go and correct exposure shift on a days work, or your holidays if you are an amateur. In the first case you are just loosing valuable time and money, in the second, you just can't bother.

If you don't have time to edit your footage, perhaps a point-and-shoot camera would be more appropriate.

One of the issue is a LENS problem, the guy even does the same tests with his NX1 to prove how bad the Fuji issue is. These are all well documented facts.

It is a shortcoming of the lens which is not compensated for in software.

The 16-80 lens was supposed to be the go-to lens for video, it is expensive, it doesn't deliver.

It is clearly a stills-oriented lens.

If I want to use EF lenses, I buy Canon. and now that you mentioned it, the new Canon mirrorless, will probably be game changers for the whole industry, so why to buy a different Fuji until they fix their issues, and not a proper Canon or Nikon Z?

I primarily use EF lenses on my Sony and have no issue with AF performance for stills, and I hear Metabones has an adapter with decent video AF performance. I own an RP, which I no longer use. My Sony has better resolution and IBIS. Yes, Canon's next camera will match that, but it will likely include arbitrary limitations. It seems like you're simply being contrarian here and not speaking from experience. Canon and Nikon cameras have problems too. Panasonic's S1/S1H are cameras seriously oriented toward video.

We will see soon, I am waiting for this generation of Canon mirrorless and the second generation of Nikon Z, and probably I will decide between those two, and I am definitely keeping most of my NX, NX500 for sure, it is almost unbelievable small, light, nice looking, and capable at the same time!

I'm likely not keeping my NX500. Planning to switch to an NX2000 as I am not a fan of the heavy-handed always-on RAW noise reduction in Samsung's later models. Going to keep my NX Mini however, it's amazingly compact and the battery life is fantastic.

If I had bought any other brand in 2014, instead of NX, I would have changed multiple cameras and systems until now, I stayed NX, I am still using them professionaly (I have other equipement too), and I am waiting for the next mirrorless cameras to take me to 2025 and beyond.

Perhaps you would have gone through multiple systems, but the past is fixed.

I know people that changed NX at 2015/2016 and changed 2 or 3 different systems until now (m43/eos M then, Sony a and Fuji X later, some back to m43 because the GH5 was and is a real video tool), and they will change another one soon (most people will go Canon or Nikon, again).

There are also people who own multiple systems. M43 is limited in terms of video capabilities, this is particularly exemplified by the disparity between the GH5 and GH5S.

Kisaha wrote:

This lens is far inferior to the 16-50S. It is a shame for the brand that this truly is the best video lens they have.

It's half the weight of Samsung's lens, similar in terms of sharpness, and matches the fast aperture on the wide end. I think it's very impressive.

what that does even mean?! because you drive, you own a Porsche?! Because you do video you own an Alexa and using Cooke cine primes?!

Wouldn't using an Alexa with Cooke primes be more like driving a Bugatti? Such exotic brands offer reliable performance, but are not general-purpose tools.

The size and price ratio is completely a different league, it is a mistake to compare a small 799euros 2015 camera with a full frame 3499 beast of a later year. I am not sure why this is so hard for you to comprehend.

I neglected to draw any comparisons with my Nikon DSLR because I do not see it as being comparable. I do not see why you view comparing one compact mirrorless camera against another as being unfair. Realistically, both cameras are in a consumer-oriented price range.

There is a camera called NX1 that has the best ergonomis ever in the business. Hold one, and you will understand. On another forum we were recently discussing how incredible the menu system, ergonomics, buttons placement, buttons, touch screens, super AMOLED screens of the NX1 are. NX500 is miles ahead of the similar a6000 series Sony cameras. Samsung did the right thing pretty easily, After 5-6 models, Sony still do not get it. Get it?

Are you saying I should have bought an NX1? Physically, the ergonomics of the NX1 aren't much different from the A7RIII. Sony's menu system is complicated, but it has a lot more options than Samsung's. For looking at detail of stills, I much prefer Sony's LCD screen.

Why do not check what Fuji had on offering in 2014 and 2015 when NX1 and NX500 were out? How much they cost now? Noone even talks about them.

Early Fuji cameras had poor video quality. This changed with the X-Pro2 (released early 2016). Samsung cameras are cheaper because it's a dead system. Even so, a used X-T20 (2017!) would likely be similar in price to a used NX500.

Also, I was talking about the premium compacts. Are the Panasonic LX cameras any better than the NX500 with the 16-50PZ lens (the compact one)? I do not think so..

I don't have an LX, but I do have a TZ/ZS. I find the video quality reasonable for casual use.

The Fuji X100V just released, and it costs 1.569euros, is it really that better? Is it better at all?

Compared to the NX500, there are several ways in which it is better. For example, it has weather-sealing, a microphone port and hybrid viewfinder.

Obviously Samsung stopped, in 2-3 years NX1 will be completely "obsolete", but it is funny that it is not yet. I am talking about video professionals because there is a good bunch of us still rockin the NX1s.. I do not know anyone still using a 5DmkII...

This is the Samsung sub-forum. If you would like to meet people using Canon cameras, try "Canon EOS-1D / 5D / 6D Talk".

I am using the cameras since then, on the worst heating conditions, scorching Mediteranean heat, near the sea, or on the sea on boats, recording continously live performances and all my NX cameras still working flawlessly. NX1 (2 of them), NX500, NX3000. I have to clean the NX500's sensor at some point, but everything else is brilliant. You can't even imagine how many "dead pixels" or burned ones the aforementioned 5DmkII had just after a couple of years of use (and most of the first Canon cameras we were using for video back then 60D was dreadfull too)!

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4483724
Have you seen this thread? I noticed hot pixels in some of my stills too and there is no solution provided yet.

What cameras have "mysteriously stop working"? I do not remember much sensor damage either, if any at all.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4016548

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4031620

It is impressive, I can do a 90 - 110 minutes show with one battery and a bit, original ones since 2015. The amazing thing is that I can do same show with NX1 with just one battery, easily. Still rockin' original batteries, for almost 5 years now! I even have just 3 NX1 batteries for 2 cameras! Do not even change batteries, even on double camera photography jobs.

"one battery and a bit"? If you have to change out the battery once, how is Fuji any worse?

Haha! when you are a professional time is money, when you are an amateur do not own the equipment, or the knowledge to do most things. I am trying to minimize the post work, not increase it. That is a common workflow in pro world, if you can do it in production, you save time and money later on in post, except if you are directing the new Thor or X-Men movie..

For a simple post work/editing job, do you know how much it costs per hour?!

Editing can easily run into hundreds of dollars per hour.

This is true for ALL Fuji zoom lenses. and there was another problem on that video too.

Using my X-M1 with an XC 16-50mm F3.5-5.6, I do not see any exposure flicker while zooming during recording. The other issue is poor auto-exposure performance. Hopefully Fuji fixes this.

That was supposed to be the go-to lens for video. It did not deliver. It is expensive for what it is. Why change the 18-55 2.8-4f then? Because the 16mm at the wide end is remarkable useful when you do video, and that is why the 18 is not that good for video, because with the crop, is almost 29-30mm in full frame, that is not wide at all, while the 16mm APS-C sensors are almost 24-25mm, which is amazing for most things (wide shots, bigger groups, buildings, chuches, landscapes, weddings, performances, e.t.c) when you have a zoom (while the longer end, can do small groups, portraits, e.t.c That is why the 24-70 is a workhorse lens)

16 and 18mm on APS-C are not significantly different. Fuji claim 18mm is equivalent to 27mm in FF for their cameras (~1.52x crop factor). Even 35mm is considered wide on full-frame. Fuji have an 8-16mm, which is far wider than any of Samsung's offerings.

Yes, that was the selling point for Sony for a lot of years, since Canon was the sleeping rabbit in Aesop's tale, but now that the turtles went ahead at the race, the rabbit wake up with impressive releases all over (new 1D, R5 and R6, even new M cameras). Sony are terrible cameras for so many years, I honestly had to work with them for many jobs, and I was trying to avoid them. I have many posts on the issues. The latest ones are much better than the first ones, I must admit, but still there are so much behind, that 1 true good release from Canon will destroy them completely.

In terms of video capabilities, sure. Many photographers are still going to stay with Sony though.

Sony cameras is like software engineers are making the cameras, and not photo camera makers.

I don't like the look of Sony's JPEG images SOOC with default settings, but their raw files give me a lot of latitude.

The best cheap mirrorless right now is easily the Nikon Z5, with their first try they went ahead of Sony! That is why I am waiting for their second try.

The Z50? It seems about even with Sony's a6400.

Canons were terrible until now, and still are, because the new cameras are not out yet, and the first R cameras were a joke, that is why I am telling you that I saved money staying NX, and that is why we are still using NX.

"The first R cameras were a joke"? I think the EOS R is perfectly capable, but its pricing is not particularly competitive. You didn't save money by choosing NX, any camera system is an investment and perhaps a different system would have been more financially rewarding for you.

Panasonic are serious machines, I haven't worked with the new full frame ones. I believe they are too expensive, the lens collection doesn't make any sense for now, and most of us we are waiting for the new releases. We most have EF lenses anyway, so going native, is always a better strategy.

Sigma's MC-21 allows EF lenses to be utilized on Panasonic's full-frame bodies, though AF performance is limited.

I have the NX3000 and this camera has a very Canon-like soft video, that is why I gave my NX300 and bought a NX3000 for. Great little machines. I will probably give to my kids later on.

People praise NX500 for its sharpness, but you praise NX3000 for its softness? Why did you get one, and not a Canon?

Choices, choices...I did fine..

What do you mean disparity?

GH5 cameras are used here for broadcast TV, they are broadcast standard compatible. I have many episodes on the biggest networks here, shot on GH5 cameras. They are workhorse tools.

GH5S does not have IS, GH5 is heavier and has worse low light performance.

But still, NX1 crashes it for photography, and ISO capabilities on both cameras are sub par for todays standards, but NX is super clean when well lighted, which is not the case for the GH5. That is why there is the GH5S, with 3200 native, and the Pocket Cinema 4K with native 3200. Incredible video tools both. Best in class. Unlimited recording, raw capabilities (internal for the Pocket), native 3200 ISO, so no issue with low light, and do whatever with tons of m43 lenses, and use any kind of speedboosters and have different focal lengths with the same lens (2X when not speedboster, X0.64, X0.71 e.t.c Depending what you use. Viltrox and other brands offer good solutions for cheap).

Is the GH5S a better compact camera than Samsung's then?

3 issues there are really for NX1.

1) Not as good in high ISO as some of todays sensor (28megapixels was the maximum resolution for so long, and I believe they went for that, instead for low light photography, there is a stupid NR going on after 3200ISO, and 3200 is not dual ISO clean..)

2) not 10bit files

3) Samsung doesn't make cameras any more!

And hot pixels in stills...