trac63

Joined on Jan 17, 2013

Comments

Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

trac63: The big problem with Samsung's camera division was their pricing strategy. There was wide regional disparity in prices, and huge mark-ups on new models. The NX30 was priced well above the Nikon D5300, while the NX1 was double the street price of a Nikon D7100, and that was a huge problem. Almost all of their cameras were available at clearance price within a year of their introduction.

Thank you for your polite and informative replies arbux.

They are as useful as the photos I can see in your gallery.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 23:19 UTC
In reply to:

trac63: The big problem with Samsung's camera division was their pricing strategy. There was wide regional disparity in prices, and huge mark-ups on new models. The NX30 was priced well above the Nikon D5300, while the NX1 was double the street price of a Nikon D7100, and that was a huge problem. Almost all of their cameras were available at clearance price within a year of their introduction.

My NX500 has the same AF module as the NX1. The AF performance on the NX500 is very good for a mirrorless, but it's not close to what I get from my D7100, especially in low light. The RAW buffer on the D7100 is a non-issue, as most serious sports/action photographers shoot JPEG-only anyway. Even for sports/action, I will take the D7100 with its AF system and the lenses it mounts over the NX1 100% of the time.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 20:35 UTC
In reply to:

trac63: The big problem with Samsung's camera division was their pricing strategy. There was wide regional disparity in prices, and huge mark-ups on new models. The NX30 was priced well above the Nikon D5300, while the NX1 was double the street price of a Nikon D7100, and that was a huge problem. Almost all of their cameras were available at clearance price within a year of their introduction.

Here's the review:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/samsung-nx1

If you look at the bottom of the first page, the Samsung NX1 with the 16-50mm /f2.0-2.8 and battery grip was US $2,2799, not $1,699. That's about double what you would have paid for a Nikon D7100 with e.g. a Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 VR.

I say this because I own an NX210 and an NX500. They're great little cameras, but if I want to schlep around a 3-pound DSLR-style camera, my Nikon DSLRs do all the bread-and-butter still photography stuff a lot better: JPEG engine, AF system, metering, flash control. And they mount Nikon lenses, flashes and accessories. The only significant advantages that the NX1 had over the Nikon D7100 were live view and video.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 12:28 UTC

The big problem with Samsung's camera division was their pricing strategy. There was wide regional disparity in prices, and huge mark-ups on new models. The NX30 was priced well above the Nikon D5300, while the NX1 was double the street price of a Nikon D7100, and that was a huge problem. Almost all of their cameras were available at clearance price within a year of their introduction.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2017 at 17:05 UTC as 32nd comment | 16 replies
On article Confirmed: Bowens is going out of business (48 comments in total)

Well, I'm happy I got my pair of Gemini 1000s while Bowens were still in business.

Link | Posted on Jul 22, 2017 at 18:16 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Canon EOS M6 Review (395 comments in total)

Nice camera, but I still prefer my Samsung NX500.

:)

Link | Posted on May 16, 2017 at 23:37 UTC as 63rd comment
On article Action-packed: Sony a6500 review (1187 comments in total)

Nice camera but, it's more than triple the price I paid for my Samsung NX500. It does some things better but, man, that's an awful lot of money for a camera in this class.

Link | Posted on Dec 14, 2016 at 23:07 UTC as 120th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

trac63: Nice camera, but $1400 is literally four times what I paid for my Samsung NX500 earlier this year. And the Samsung came with a nice 16-50mm pancake zoom.

Thank you everyone for the sort of polite, informative replies I've grown accustomed to on this site. I have learned so much from this exchange. Special thanks to ttran88. Even though I had clearly posted twice that I knew that the Samsung system was dead, he read between the lines and deduced that I was secretly holding out hope, and he told me to accept the truth and get on with my life. I am eternally grateful.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2016 at 07:32 UTC
In reply to:

trac63: Nice camera, but $1400 is literally four times what I paid for my Samsung NX500 earlier this year. And the Samsung came with a nice 16-50mm pancake zoom.

No, it doesn't matter. It's just that some people were going on about Samsung NX being a dead system, when Sony's support for the a6xxx series has not been much better.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 07:05 UTC
In reply to:

trac63: Nice camera, but $1400 is literally four times what I paid for my Samsung NX500 earlier this year. And the Samsung came with a nice 16-50mm pancake zoom.

My point, since some people have obviously missed it, is that $1,400 body-only is a ton of money for a rangefinder-style APS-C mirrorless. Yeah, I know Samsung is out of the camera business, but what does Sony offer in the way of available lenses for their APS-C mirrorless system? When was the last time they introduced a new lens for it?

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 06:39 UTC

Nice camera, but $1400 is literally four times what I paid for my Samsung NX500 earlier this year. And the Samsung came with a nice 16-50mm pancake zoom.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2016 at 00:21 UTC as 92nd comment | 19 replies
On article Nikon 1 V3 stock shortage prompts official apology (285 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: Let's see if I understand this....

Nikon "apologizes" for not making the V3 fast enough to meet demand... and this took all of three weeks. But it took Nikon two full years to apologize for dust and oil on the D600 sensor, after denying the problem existed, claiming the camera was "within spec" and blaming their customers for having unreasonable expectations from a $2,000 camera.

Remind me again. Did Olympus ever apologize for Shutter Shock, or offer their customers a full refund?

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2014 at 14:00 UTC
On article Samsung NX30 real-world samples gallery (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

naththo: JPEG processing looks average joe, bit too much sharpening and not enough coloiurs in some of outdoor bright sunny day eg grass supposed to be greener than that. Skin tones are pretty good I must say. The noise reduction is somewhat too aggressive to me like the shopping mall you took pic with rather high iso, I see very soft to it. Focus accuracy from what I noticed is not that perfect. I guess review will tell why.

That's entirely subjective.

I actually like the Samsung JPEG engine. Colours are very subdued, the sharpening and contrast are somewhat restrained compared to most of the other manufacturers.

Link | Posted on Mar 24, 2014 at 12:58 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: I don't think Nikon gets it.

Small MILC cameras exist because they are tiny, and perfect for street shooters and travelers. They are great for a large pocket or purse and are perfect for social events, or any time you want to travel light or be discreet.

They work best with fast primes and pancake zoom lenses.

Birders and wildlife photographers don't need tiny cameras. They need image quality and reach. Do you really need a tiny camera if you are already hauling an eight pound tripod around with you?

So... along comes Nikon with a camera twice as big and twice as expensive as a Panasonic GM1. And it has a sensor half as large. But they saved you a whopping 1 gram of weight by using a memory card designed for a cell phone!

Exactly what is the point?

Nikon has created yet another overpriced MILC camera that will sit on the shelves and end up being sold at clearance prices six months from now. And this will validate their decision to keep making DSLRs for another 50 years.

The "point" of this camera is the AF performance and operating speed, where it should have a huge advantage over any other mirrorless.

If you want a compact high-performance camera for sports, action and wildlife this is it.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2014 at 14:20 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4: a quick summary (471 comments in total)

Nice camera.

Panasonic has apparently found their niche with still/video hybrid cameras.

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2014 at 14:41 UTC as 74th comment

Nikon can't have it both ways.

A big selling point with their camera bodies is the wide array of available 3rd party lenses and flashes, and yet Nikon continues to break the interface for 3rd party manufacturers.

Link | Posted on Nov 19, 2013 at 14:17 UTC as 35th comment
On article Buyers' Guide: Best DSLRs and ILCs for under $1000 (91 comments in total)

I guess some of the prices will vary widely depending on where you are.

I just got a new Nikon D7100 body for $999, and you can get a D7000 body for $799 here in Canada.

Meanwhile, the price of the Lumix GX1 hasn't fallen through the floor here like it has in other places. It's still around $399 for the body only.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2013 at 17:49 UTC as 20th comment | 1 reply

That is a very attractive price.

I thought it was going to be in the $1,200 to $1,500 range.

Link | Posted on Jun 14, 2013 at 13:26 UTC as 75th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

Ybor: Canon has won this battle for several models now. Both would seem to have a very specific audience now as larger sized sensor cameras can be purchased for the same, or less than either. For example, NX210 is priced at $439 or less with 18-55 sharp lens (even if slower than G15's). No contest.

Having said that, I would buy either at $299.

You can get a Nikon 1 J1 with a pancake zoom for the same money, and it's about the same size and weight as the G15 or the Coolpix P7700.

I agree that a lot of the mirrorless cameras are ridiculously overpriced, but there's also a lot of them that sell for much less than $1,000 and are a huge upgrade over a high-end point & shoot.

Link | Posted on May 29, 2013 at 14:27 UTC
In reply to:

Ybor: Canon has won this battle for several models now. Both would seem to have a very specific audience now as larger sized sensor cameras can be purchased for the same, or less than either. For example, NX210 is priced at $439 or less with 18-55 sharp lens (even if slower than G15's). No contest.

Having said that, I would buy either at $299.

That's just it. Neither of these cameras represents a whole lot of value when you can get a pretty good mirrorless for a little bit more money.

Link | Posted on May 29, 2013 at 13:43 UTC
Total: 26, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »