NX500 still worth it in 2020?

Hi guys,

I have the opportunity to buy a used NX500 with the 16-50mm PZ for a fairly decent price locally ($350). Should I seize the opportunity or go for a mirrorless camera system that is is currently supported by its manufacturers (ie sony or fuji)?

Just to give a little bit of context, I am looking for high resolution and decent imaging quality (a step up from my 16MP m4/3) for stills. I do not care about video. All that I have read is that the 28MP BSI sensor in the NX500 is still competitive for today's APS-C standards.

Additionally, I have the opportunity to add the 12-24mm for $120, the 20-50mm for $40 and the 85mm f/1.4 for $450. My perception is that for less than $1k I can have a pretty decent kit with quality glass that could serve all my photography needs while delivering the IQ I need for low ISO wall sized prints.

Is it a fair assumption that if I go the Sony or Fuji route, I would spend considerably more money to get similar quality in both sensor and glass?

What do you guys think? I would love to hear the perspective from experienced users on the NX system.

Thanks in advance!

Personally, I'd not want a stills camera without an eye-level finder ... I'm not interested in video either.

The market for NX gear is likely to diminish further over the next five years, making any expenditure now more prone to be written down than similarly aged and specified second-hand equipment from other manufacturers. Battery availability may also be a consideration. Are they still being manufactured?

Just my thoughts as a confirmed DSLR user (my NX system is definitely a "second string" arrangement, bought very cheaply)

Good luck

krloz wrote:

I have the opportunity to buy a used NX500 with the 16-50mm PZ for a fairly decent price locally ($350). Should I seize the opportunity or go for a mirrorless camera system that is is currently supported by its manufacturers (ie sony or fuji)?

I think you should also consider Nikon's 24MP DX DSLRs. You should be able to find them used around that price. Then you would have the option of upgrading to a mirrorless Nikon later on and using the FTZ adapter for F mount lenses.

kypfer wrote:

Personally, I'd not want a stills camera without an eye-level finder ... I'm not interested in video either.

The market for NX gear is likely to diminish further over the next five years, making any expenditure now more prone to be written down than similarly aged and specified second-hand equipment from other manufacturers. Battery availability may also be a consideration. Are they still being manufactured?

Just my thoughts as a confirmed DSLR user (my NX system is definitely a "second string" arrangement, bought very cheaply)

Good luck

Thanks! As this camera will be used mainly for landscape photography on a tripod, so an eye-level finder will not be missed the majority of the time.

I am facing this camera as working tool mainly. So by the time it becomes truly obsolete or even out of order without repair, I hope the camera would have paid itself several times over. So, I am not too concern with resale value.

My main doubt though is: IQ wise can it hold its own with newer APS-C offerings from Sony and Fuji?

shutterbugnx wrote:

krloz wrote:

I have the opportunity to buy a used NX500 with the 16-50mm PZ for a fairly decent price locally ($350). Should I seize the opportunity or go for a mirrorless camera system that is is currently supported by its manufacturers (ie sony or fuji)?

I think you should also consider Nikon's 24MP DX DSLRs. You should be able to find them used around that price. Then you would have the option of upgrading to a mirrorless Nikon later on and using the FTZ adapter for F mount lenses.

Unfortunately in my country Nikons and Canons are very sought after, and therefore, their prices are way above market prices in the US (mainly given the 100% import tariff for electronic goods). I guess the NX500 is cheap for our local standard because the demand is very low for a discontinued system here.

My main goal was to purchase a D750 + a 24-120mm F/4, but its price here for a used one (with over 100k shutter count) is $1500+. I would need to add a wide zoom as well, so this kit would cost well over $2000 here.

krloz wrote:

My main doubt though is: IQ wise can it hold its own with newer APS-C offerings from Sony and Fuji?

As long as you avoid high ISOs, pretty much. You don't get an option for silent shutter if that's important, but there is EFCS and silent shutter can be achieved with a software modification.

Unfortunately in my country Nikons and Canons are very sought after, and therefore, their prices are way above market prices in the US (mainly given the 100% import tariff for electronic goods). I guess the NX500 is cheap for our local standard because the demand is very low for a discontinued system here.

Very enlightening.

shutterbugnx wrote:

krloz wrote:

My main doubt though is: IQ wise can it hold its own with newer APS-C offerings from Sony and Fuji?

As long as you avoid high ISOs, pretty much. You don't get an option for silent shutter if that's important, but there is EFCS and silent shutter can be achieved with a software modification.

Unfortunately in my country Nikons and Canons are very sought after, and therefore, their prices are way above market prices in the US (mainly given the 100% import tariff for electronic goods). I guess the NX500 is cheap for our local standard because the demand is very low for a discontinued system here.

Very enlightening.

Thanks for your input! What is EFCS Is this accessible via some hack? Are there any other hacking available that could enhance the camera further?

krloz wrote:

Thanks for your input! What is EFCS Is this accessible via some hack? Are there any other hacking available that could enhance the camera further?

Electronic Front-Curtain Shutter. It's called "E-Shutter" in the camera's menu. The NX500 user manual says "We recommend that you use the electronic shutter to minimize camera shake when using a telephoto lens or taking a close-up photo". I generally leave it on, as it is quieter than the default.

If you would like to read about further enhancements for this camera, go here .

This is a difficult decision. For the price it is hard to find a camera close to it. $350 is a reasonable price for one in good condition. These are hard to find cameras. This is a 5 year old camera and the used prices are not dropping. There are still lots of lenses out there for sale, although the wide angle 10mm and 85 mm are very hard to find. So it is a gamble... but it, use it until it dies, or spend more on a different system. Good luck.

What type of photography will you be doing? If it's landscape the 12-24mm is a great option and at that price the lens is a bargain!

The NX500 delivers excellent image quality and some of the lenses are great. I would skip the 20-50mm if you're already getting the pz though.

I can't really comment on comparisons with other aps-c options as the NX line of cameras is the only one I've used. However I do know that even 5 years on the system is still competitive. It is however a bit of a risk in terms of probably not having a warranty, however I think the NX500 has been proven to be quite a robust and reliable camera, compared to the NX1 (which admittedly only has minor issues).

krloz wrote:

Hi guys,

I have the opportunity to buy a used NX500 with the 16-50mm PZ for a fairly decent price locally ($350). Should I seize the opportunity or go for a mirrorless camera system that is is currently supported by its manufacturers (ie sony or fuji)?

Depends. If the lenses available are enough and you intend to use it for say 5 years then you have little to lose. I use mine for street and it compares well with my Sony RX1R and Fuji XF10.

Just to give a little bit of context, I am looking for high resolution and decent imaging quality (a step up from my 16MP m4/3) for stills. I do not care about video. All that I have read is that the 28MP BSI sensor in the NX500 is still competitive for today's APS-C standards.

Additionally, I have the opportunity to add the 12-24mm for $120, the 20-50mm for $40 and the 85mm f/1.4 for $450. My perception is that for less than $1k I can have a pretty decent kit with quality glass that could serve all my photography needs while delivering the IQ I need for low ISO wall sized prints.

The 12-24mm zoom gives excellent image quality though the build is poor.

Is it a fair assumption that if I go the Sony or Fuji route, I would spend considerably more money to get similar quality in both sensor and glass?

For sure.

What do you guys think? I would love to hear the perspective from experienced users on the NX system.

I also still have NX1, NX mini and EX2F..

norman shearer wrote:

krloz wrote:

Hi guys,

I have the opportunity to buy a used NX500 with the 16-50mm PZ for a fairly decent price locally ($350). Should I seize the opportunity or go for a mirrorless camera system that is is currently supported by its manufacturers (ie sony or fuji)?

Depends. If the lenses available are enough and you intend to use it for say 5 years then you have little to lose. I use mine for street and it compares well with my Sony RX1R and Fuji XF10.

Just to give a little bit of context, I am looking for high resolution and decent imaging quality (a step up from my 16MP m4/3) for stills. I do not care about video. All that I have read is that the 28MP BSI sensor in the NX500 is still competitive for today's APS-C standards.

Additionally, I have the opportunity to add the 12-24mm for $120, the 20-50mm for $40 and the 85mm f/1.4 for $450. My perception is that for less than $1k I can have a pretty decent kit with quality glass that could serve all my photography needs while delivering the IQ I need for low ISO wall sized prints.

The 12-24mm zoom gives excellent image quality though the build is poor.

Is it a fair assumption that if I go the Sony or Fuji route, I would spend considerably more money to get similar quality in both sensor and glass?

For sure.

What do you guys think? I would love to hear the perspective from experienced users on the NX system.

I also still have NX1, NX mini and EX2F..

I think there are different versions of the 12-24mm. I believe that they modified the design and strengthened the mount. My version seems solid, touch wood.

However I guess it can be hit and miss to know why version you would get.

doceyes wrote:

This is a difficult decision. For the price it is hard to find a camera close to it. $350 is a reasonable price for one in good condition. These are hard to find cameras. This is a 5 year old camera and the used prices are not dropping. There are still lots of lenses out there for sale, although the wide angle 10mm and 85 mm are very hard to find. So it is a gamble... but it, use it until it dies, or spend more on a different system. Good luck.

I am sitll using my Leica M8 release in 2006 with great joy and surprisingly good image quality even for today standards at low ISO. Usually I use my cameras until they stop working or do not meet my needs any longer. I have only felt the urge the have more than 16MP (from my OMD EM5) recently given some demand of large prints from customers. So I believe the NX500 would be a great companion for ate least few more years. My primary choice was getting a NX1 but I have not come by one in the local used market for the past 6 months...

I dont see cameras (specially digital ones) as an asset, so I do expect to make money by selling gear later on. I do hope, however, to get my investment paid back quickly through selling my pictures.

markyboy81 wrote:

What type of photography will you be doing? If it's landscape the 12-24mm is a great option and at that price the lens is a bargain!

The NX500 delivers excellent image quality and some of the lenses are great. I would skip the 20-50mm if you're already getting the pz though.

I can't really comment on comparisons with other aps-c options as the NX line of cameras is the only one I've used. However I do know that even 5 years on the system is still competitive. It is however a bit of a risk in terms of probably not having a warranty, however I think the NX500 has been proven to be quite a robust and reliable camera, compared to the NX1 (which admittedly only has minor issues).

Thanks! I will be using the camera mainly for low ISO landscape so yes, the 12-24mm is high on my list! From everything I read, de 16-50mm PZ is and outstanding lens in terms of resolution, which is quite unusual for a kit lens.

I was also offered the 60mm macro for $200, and 50-200mm f4-5.6 for another $200. All this 4 lenses might be the ultimate kit covering from ultra wide to tele, including macro and portraiture. The offering of the somewhat expensive 85mm ($500) lens became less compeling now that I believe I could use the 60mm (with OIS!) for portraiture as well.

norman shearer wrote:

krloz wrote:

Hi guys,

I have the opportunity to buy a used NX500 with the 16-50mm PZ for a fairly decent price locally ($350). Should I seize the opportunity or go for a mirrorless camera system that is is currently supported by its manufacturers (ie sony or fuji)?

Depends. If the lenses available are enough and you intend to use it for say 5 years then you have little to lose. I use mine for street and it compares well with my Sony RX1R and Fuji XF10.

I belive it is more than enough. I am planning on getting (in addition to the 16-50mm PZ) the 12-24mm for landscape, the 60mm macro and perhaps the 50-200mm for travel.

Just to give a little bit of context, I am looking for high resolution and decent imaging quality (a step up from my 16MP m4/3) for stills. I do not care about video. All that I have read is that the 28MP BSI sensor in the NX500 is still competitive for today's APS-C standards.

Additionally, I have the opportunity to add the 12-24mm for $120, the 20-50mm for $40 and the 85mm f/1.4 for $450. My perception is that for less than $1k I can have a pretty decent kit with quality glass that could serve all my photography needs while delivering the IQ I need for low ISO wall sized prints.

The 12-24mm zoom gives excellent image quality though the build is poor.

So I have read. I am very excited about this lens. In fact, having it together with the 28MP in the NX500 I believe it could enhance dramatically the IQ of my prints on the cheap

Is it a fair assumption that if I go the Sony or Fuji route, I would spend considerably more money to get similar quality in both sensor and glass?

For sure.

That is what I thought. I am not willing to part with a lot of money on gear currently. I set a budget for around $1000 for high quality kit for my printing needs and apparently the NX500 plus lenses are the best alternative.

What do you guys think? I would love to hear the perspective from experienced users on the NX system.

I also still have NX1, NX mini and EX2F..

That EX2F has been on my list back in the day, but could never find one at a good price

markyboy81 wrote:

norman shearer wrote:

krloz wrote:

Hi guys,

I have the opportunity to buy a used NX500 with the 16-50mm PZ for a fairly decent price locally ($350). Should I seize the opportunity or go for a mirrorless camera system that is is currently supported by its manufacturers (ie sony or fuji)?

Depends. If the lenses available are enough and you intend to use it for say 5 years then you have little to lose. I use mine for street and it compares well with my Sony RX1R and Fuji XF10.

Just to give a little bit of context, I am looking for high resolution and decent imaging quality (a step up from my 16MP m4/3) for stills. I do not care about video. All that I have read is that the 28MP BSI sensor in the NX500 is still competitive for today's APS-C standards.

Additionally, I have the opportunity to add the 12-24mm for $120, the 20-50mm for $40 and the 85mm f/1.4 for $450. My perception is that for less than $1k I can have a pretty decent kit with quality glass that could serve all my photography needs while delivering the IQ I need for low ISO wall sized prints.

The 12-24mm zoom gives excellent image quality though the build is poor.

Is it a fair assumption that if I go the Sony or Fuji route, I would spend considerably more money to get similar quality in both sensor and glass?

For sure.

What do you guys think? I would love to hear the perspective from experienced users on the NX system.

I also still have NX1, NX mini and EX2F..

I think there are different versions of the 12-24mm. I believe that they modified the design and strengthened the mount. My version seems solid, touch wood.

However I guess it can be hit and miss to know why version you would get.

I did not know about that. Do you know how one can  tell them apart?

krloz wrote:

markyboy81 wrote:

norman shearer wrote:

krloz wrote:

Hi guys,

I have the opportunity to buy a used NX500 with the 16-50mm PZ for a fairly decent price locally ($350). Should I seize the opportunity or go for a mirrorless camera system that is is currently supported by its manufacturers (ie sony or fuji)?

Depends. If the lenses available are enough and you intend to use it for say 5 years then you have little to lose. I use mine for street and it compares well with my Sony RX1R and Fuji XF10.

Just to give a little bit of context, I am looking for high resolution and decent imaging quality (a step up from my 16MP m4/3) for stills. I do not care about video. All that I have read is that the 28MP BSI sensor in the NX500 is still competitive for today's APS-C standards.

Additionally, I have the opportunity to add the 12-24mm for $120, the 20-50mm for $40 and the 85mm f/1.4 for $450. My perception is that for less than $1k I can have a pretty decent kit with quality glass that could serve all my photography needs while delivering the IQ I need for low ISO wall sized prints.

The 12-24mm zoom gives excellent image quality though the build is poor.

Is it a fair assumption that if I go the Sony or Fuji route, I would spend considerably more money to get similar quality in both sensor and glass?

For sure.

What do you guys think? I would love to hear the perspective from experienced users on the NX system.

I also still have NX1, NX mini and EX2F..

I think there are different versions of the 12-24mm. I believe that they modified the design and strengthened the mount. My version seems solid, touch wood.

However I guess it can be hit and miss to know why version you would get.

I did not know about that. Do you know how one can tell them apart?

I could be wrong but I believe the earlier versions may have had a plastic mount, the later versions a metal mount.

krloz wrote:

markyboy81 wrote:

What type of photography will you be doing? If it's landscape the 12-24mm is a great option and at that price the lens is a bargain!

The NX500 delivers excellent image quality and some of the lenses are great. I would skip the 20-50mm if you're already getting the pz though.

I can't really comment on comparisons with other aps-c options as the NX line of cameras is the only one I've used. However I do know that even 5 years on the system is still competitive. It is however a bit of a risk in terms of probably not having a warranty, however I think the NX500 has been proven to be quite a robust and reliable camera, compared to the NX1 (which admittedly only has minor issues).

Thanks! I will be using the camera mainly for low ISO landscape so yes, the 12-24mm is high on my list! From everything I read, de 16-50mm PZ is and outstanding lens in terms of resolution, which is quite unusual for a kit lens.

I was also offered the 60mm macro for $200, and 50-200mm f4-5.6 for another $200. All this 4 lenses might be the ultimate kit covering from ultra wide to tele, including macro and portraiture. The offering of the somewhat expensive 85mm ($500) lens became less compeling now that I believe I could use the 60mm (with OIS!) for portraiture as well.

I have the 60mm and the 85mm. The 60mm is great for portraiture and has OIS which is handy, especially for video.

The 85mm is a lovely lens though and that f1.4 aperture gives them great out of focus backgrounds. But it is expensive and I don't seem to get that much use out of mine.

markyboy81 wrote:

The 85mm is a lovely lens though and that f1.4 aperture gives them great out of focus backgrounds. But it is expensive and I don't seem to get that much use out of mine.

I don't use mine enough. I took it out the other day for candids of my wife with the NX1 and I was again amazed at the image quality. Yes, it can be expensive, it's big-especially on the NX500-, and can be slow to focus but the images it produces are amazing.

wpstl wrote:

markyboy81 wrote:

The 85mm is a lovely lens though and that f1.4 aperture gives them great out of focus backgrounds. But it is expensive and I don't seem to get that much use out of mine.

I don't use mine enough. I took it out the other day for candids of my wife with the NX1 and I was again amazed at the image quality. Yes, it can be expensive, it's big-especially on the NX500-, and can be slow to focus but the images it produces are amazing.

Agree on all those points. I've contemplated selling mine before but when I shoot with it and see the results all thoughts of selling it disappear!