Samsung NX10

[Depth]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1001/10010402samsungnx.asp

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/samsungnx10/

Samsung has announced the NX10, the first of its NX series of mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras. The NX10 wraps a 14.6 megapixel APS-C-sized CMOS sensor up in a comparatively compact, DSLR-style body including an eye-level VGA resolution electronic viewfinder. It also features a 3.0" OLED screen, promising lower power consumption, a wider range of viewing angles and better contrast than LCD technology. It can also shoot 720p HD video with H.264 compression. The company has also launched an 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens, a 55-200mm telezoom and a 30mm F2 pancake lens for the camera, which uses a completely new lens mount. We've had a pre-production camera for a little while, so have produced a full preview (with sample images to follow later today) to give you an idea of what to expect from the little Korean camera.

[funks]

Another EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lens) camera, hopefully - this will force Panasonic to to drop the price on the GF1. Nevertheless, that APS-C sensor is quite a bit bigger the u4/3. Only problem that I see is that Samsung is the only that's going to be using this mount, I wonder if Pentax will rebadge and release lenses for it.

Samsung has the shelf space, maybe we'll start seeing this enroach in low end DSLR (XS), High End P&S (G11) market, forcing Canon and Nikon's hand to release a competitor.

[roger767]

wow great camera even the size is smaller than the panasonic GH1 but the sensor is bigger, nice! Only downside is the spectrum of lenses. As long as samsung really supports this format with a wide array of lenses this it could be a hit.

[woos]

The image quality doesn't look any better than the G11. lol

[pharp]

For everyday travel or outdoor/nature work I'd much rather have a compact but solidly built [magnesium frame, some weather sealing] XS sized SLR [maybe even a little thinner with smaller handgrip like a G series] and some high quality [build and optics] primes that are portable [you know the kind - with real focusing rings that don't pop off]. The 35mm f/1.4 is supposedly very good, but is just too big, too expensive and most of us [I'm guessing] would be happy with a comparable quality f/2 @ half the size/price as a carry about lens. I don't think its a coincidence that people refer to their L zooms as the "brick" or such. I'm guessing there might even still be a market for MF [w/focus confirmation] lenses [Zeiss seems to be doing well with their new lenses - and they're not inexpensive!]. I'd be curious how many people use older MF Leitz, Zeiss, Contax, Nikon, etc on their Canons (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=644277). It appears there is a thriving market in adapters for such. Of course high quality primes aren't as profitable as the rumored 10-600 f/1L IS zoom. :) While I'm dreaming - how about supplying it with a decent focusing screen. Finally, how about a nice compact macro twin flash? Even though you can - does anyone really use an MR-14 or MT-24 on a G series camera? I would even happily put up with an external battery pack for a smaller shoe mounted flash controller. In many ways I think Pentax has it about right and I'm sure Canon could do it if inclined. I'm betting it would sell - I'd buy one!

I can't be alone in the wilderness.

[KenjiS]

Another EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangeable Lens) camera, hopefully - this will force Panasonic to to drop the price on the GF1. Nevertheless, that APS-C sensor is quite a bit bigger the u4/3. Only problem that I see is that Samsung is the only that's going to be using this mount, I wonder if Pentax will rebadge and release lenses for it.

Samsung has the shelf space, maybe we'll start seeing this enroach in low end DSLR (XS), High End P&S (G11) market, forcing Canon and Nikon's hand to release a competitor.

I'm curious about converting lenses, if this camera can deliver good quality, i can see people snapping it up to put say..old Canon FD-mount glass on it..which is possible with the flange distance of 25.2mm...

For manual focusing and such, those EVFs actually offer a couple advantages, such as zooming in close for precise focus...

[woos]

[quote=KenjiS;9321793]I'm curious about converting lenses, if this camera can deliver good quality, i can see people snapping it up to put say..old Canon FD-mount glass on it..which is possible with the flange distance of 25.2mm...quote]

Have you looked at the IQ samples lol. The iso 1600 looks as bad, or worse, than the G11. I don't think Canon has anything to worry about lol.

[Depth]

Have you looked at the IQ samples lol. The iso 1600 looks as bad, or worse, than the G11. I don't think Canon has anything to worry about lol.
Not every person needs to use the higher ISO's.

Anyways, I agree with Kenji. People are already converting lenses on the current Micro Four Thirds cameras, so I can see the same happening with this. Less of a crop too.

[pharp]

EVFs might be OK, haven't tried one, but why have two LCDs? A small one @ eye level and a larger rear mounted one. Why not design a body that isn't your standard SLR shape so that you could use the 3" LCD at eye level? I'm not sure exactly what that would look like, but if we're going in a new direction why not really go!! Maybe something boxy like http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Pentax-Digital-645-Prototype-A-First-Look-.htm (scaled down of course) and instead of the small viewfinder and large LCD have a single large viewfinder ala shortened, foldable or collapsable hoodman type loupe for viewing the big LCD. Something like http://www.cinema5d.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/5d-0501as1-300x300.jpg - just chop off the small viewfinder/pentaprism - could be useable. I would think the sports/wildlife photographers would love having a huge viewfinder that is visible in sunlight especially if they could ramp up the LCD refresh rate. I should think that a smart industrial designer who is actually a photographer could come up with something. The EVF has to add quite a bit to cost, power consumption, real estate - lose it.

I can't think of any lens that I'd care to use [except maybe some leica M] that there isn't already a good adapter for on the EF mount. It has to be really special lens to put up with stop down metering, no EXIF data, etc. so not being able to use FD mount lenses isn't a problem. I just don't see alot of people getting one of these cameras just to use old FD lenses - why bother? I've heard the µ4/3 is popular with folks wanting to use Leica M lenses - what can we take from that? There is a market for compact SLR like cameras that can mount compact high quality MF primes. Uuummm. Canon could make some if they wanted in EF mount. Compact cameras with large bulky zooms are a non starter for me. The Samsung's larger sensor [compared to the µ4/3] should make it possible to make some more sensible UWA lenses, 2x vs 1.6x really hurts with the wide angle lenses. I'd be afraid to use the panasonic 7-14 in most cases with that bulbous front end.

[KenjiS]

[quote=KenjiS;9321793]I'm curious about converting lenses, if this camera can deliver good quality, i can see people snapping it up to put say..old Canon FD-mount glass on it..which is possible with the flange distance of 25.2mm...quote]

Have you looked at the IQ samples lol. The iso 1600 looks as bad, or worse, than the G11. I don't think Canon has anything to worry about lol.

Ok i didnt until now...their noise reduction really sucks to put it bluntly...and things dont looks too great to me [sharpness-wise at least]

and trust me, Canon doesnt really have much to worry about, I personally wouldnt buy it because its Samsung, and I do not like Samsung very much [Their customer service makes Sony look good for instance]

[KenjiS]

I can't think of any lens that I'd care to use [except maybe some leica M] that there isn't already a good adapter for on the EF mount. It has to be really special lens to put up with stop down metering, no EXIF data, etc. so not being able to use FD mount lenses isn't a problem. I just don't see alot of people getting one of these cameras just to use old FD lenses - why bother? I've heard the µ4/3 is popular with folks wanting to use Leica M lenses - what can we take from that? There is a market for compact SLR like cameras that can mount compact high quality MF primes. Uuummm. Canon could make some if they wanted in EF mount. .

For me its the fact the old FD primes are -very- cheap...things like 500 f/4.5s and that which are very long lenses are substantially cheaper in FD mount than they are for native EOS mount..

I guess i can achieve the same thing with old Nikon primes of course on my 7D...Which are bloody fantastic [and I see the old manual focus 400 f/2.8s well below $1500 sometimes]

[pharp]

Sure, some Canon FD lenses are cheap, but certainly not better or cheaper than lenses for which adapters are readily available; Nikon, Contax, Olympus OM, Pentax (M42), etc. - very nice lenses in these mounts can be had at reasonable prices.
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/manual_focus_EOS.html
Stop down metering with a 500mm lens would be a real pain, unless you shot wide open - a used Canon or Sigma would work better I'd think. My guess is the Samsung won't be cheap and the adapters won't likely be either and having a small body isn't an advantage with a big lens. Bottom line, spending several hundred dollars so you can use older, cheap lenses is false economy - I'll bet you'd be happier if you used that money to buy better glass! I'd rather have one great lens than two mediocre ones.

[gkarris]

Here's more detailed info:

http://k-rumors.com/samsung-nx10-specs/

Looks like you can adapt old lenses to it - which would be its saving grace.

Assume companies will make more adapters for it than Samsung's K and M mount ones.

[pharp]

I suspect Canon could do as well or better with a couple of small lenses [µEF] and an adapter [retains functionality] to accept regular EF/EFs lenses [similar to the 4/3 & µ4/3]. They'd have a huge base right out of the gate.

[tkbslc]

I honestly will be looking into one as my "walkaround" kit. I love just taking my Sigma 30mm and my XS, but even that kit is about 5 inches thick. The NX10 with the 30mm pancake is 2.3" thick. That's almost into G11 territory. Or another way of looking at is, the NX10+30mm is the same size and weight as my 1000D with just the body cap on. And I still get a viewfinder and APS-C size sensor unlike the m4/3 kits.

I am still waiting for some uncooked RAW samples, though. Those dpreview and other web samples look heavily processed.

[woos]

This is true (on the waiting to see some uncooked RAW samples). However as it is I don't see any reason why someone would buy this over the Pen.

The EP-1/2 have in body IS that works great. From the looks of the IQ I've seen so far the Pen has better IQ. The EP-1/2 work great with adapted lenses. My friend here at work uses an EP-1. He uses some rangefinder glass on it. He has a Voigtlander (I probably spelled that wrong) 15mm and a 90mm...or something like that. Both are extremely sharp. And a Leica Tri-Elmar (the first one, the one with the more useful focal range) which works *REALLY* well on the EP-1. They all get IS which is pretty godly. If you want to adapt manual lenses why wouldn't you get the body that has IS?

[tkbslc]

Good points. I am still not going to buy anything for a few more months to see where it all pans out. If there truly is no benefit to the larger sensor in this case, then yeah, why carry around the larger body - even if it is only slightly larger. I do like the idea of a semi-real viewfinder though.

I did hear preliminary price tags of $600 for the NX10 + 30mm f2, so if that is the case, there is a huge price advantage to the Samsung.

[Rio Sundoro]

Other than Canon & Nikon, who presumably adopted lens based IS due to legacy technology, so we basically have 4 companies now using lens IS (Panasonic & Samsung). I wonder why both Panasonic and Samsung, both with very limited range of lenses, opted for lens IS, rather than sensor based system.

[KenjiS]

Other than Canon & Nikon, who presumably adopted lens based IS due to legacy technology, so we basically have 4 companies now using lens IS (Panasonic & Samsung). I wonder why both Panasonic and Samsung, both with very limited range of lenses, opted for lens IS, rather than sensor based system.

Because lens-based IS is superior to in-body IS in most cases

The IS system in the lens and the CPU that controls it can be optimized for the best effect, also they can place the lens elements that do it in the best place for optimum performance

Similar to why Canon went with in-lens Autofocus...

[Rio Sundoro]

Similar to why Canon went with in-lens Autofocus...

Ah, this one is interesting. What is this actually? Is it only applied on the P&S?

[KenjiS]

Ah, this one is interesting. What is this actually? Is it only applied on the P&S?

?????

Canon has lens-driven AF, meaning each lens contains a focus motor and CPU specifically optimized to that particular lens...the body only has sensors that feed the lens the distance information and to focus closer or farther...everything else is in the lens

At first this was called very costly because theoretically it makes lenses more expensive compared to Nikon/Minolta's approach of putting the focus drive motor in the body, and linking it with a driveshaft, but Canon quickly proved its superiority with the AFD and USM lenses which focused a LOT quicker than anything Nikon or Minolta had...as well as more accurately...

Thats why Canon took the Pro market so fast and Nikon has played catchup since the 80s...Nikon didnt have an AF telephoto beyond 300 until 1993/1994 iirc...And the AF-I lenses werent that great focus-speed wise from what i understand... so it wasnt until later that Nikon finally gave their users the AF-S lenses that they had something roughly equivalent to Canon's USM...

Minolta's AF speed was supposedly better in their bigger lenses, they even had a driveshaft-driven 600mm f/4 [Something Nikon could never get to work] and one Minolta user said the 300mm f/2.8 HS focuses nearly as fast as a USM lens because of how its geared [But it makes a hell of a racket]

But still..Nikon and now Sony [who inherited Minolta's system] are going to in-lens focus motors for a variety of reasons...Proving Canon was right in the first place basically ;)

[Rio Sundoro]

yes, that AF motor, sorry, i thought you meant some other things like AF sensor, etc. My mistake..

[nads]

EVFs might be OK, haven't tried one, but why have two LCDs? A small one @ eye level and a larger rear mounted one. Why not design a body that isn't your standard SLR shape so that you could use the 3" LCD at eye level? I'm not sure exactly what that would look like, but if we're going in a new direction why not really go!!

One advantage of the small viewfinder is that holding a camera with 2 hands and bracing against your face is significantly more steady than holding out in front of your face with two hands.

[pharp]

Agreed, but what I was suggesting is having a hood type eyepiece that allows putting the camera to your face to view the 3" LCD. If your going to use an EVF, the bigger the better?

[Depth]

Agreed, but what I was suggesting is having a hood type eyepiece that allows putting the camera to your face to view the 3" LCD. If your going to use an EVF, the bigger the better?

http://www.hoodmanusa.com/prodinfo.asp?number=H-LCKIT

[goby]

I'm disappointed that they didn't work with Pentax more closely to allow some kind of AF-retaining adapter for PK-AF lenses. Samsung could've been the first company to do this and drastically raised their market interest.

[tkbslc]

I'm disappointed that they didn't work with Pentax more closely to allow some kind of AF-retaining adapter for PK-AF lenses. Samsung could've been the first company to do this and drastically raised their market interest.

I don't know. Why would you buy this camera if you have AF PK lenses. Why not just grab a Kx or K2000? They do have an adapter for non-AF PK lenses, though.

[KenjiS]

I'm disappointed that they didn't work with Pentax more closely to allow some kind of AF-retaining adapter for PK-AF lenses. Samsung could've been the first company to do this and drastically raised their market interest.

I know precisely why, Because Pentax K-AF lenses EXCEPT the new SDM ones would not work at all with such an adapter and retain AF

They're screwdrive, meaning this Samsung camera would have needed to incorporate a driveshaft and a motor into itself, which would have added bulk and added to the size (I doubt you could fit one into the adapter) and cost of the body...

An SDM one is likely possible, but since most of the SDM equipped lenses are fairly big bulky affairs Samsung probubly figured the market is VERY small to bolt them onto their compact bodies

[goby]

They're screwdrive, meaning this Samsung camera would have needed to incorporate a driveshaft and a motor into itself, which would have added bulk and added to the size (I doubt you could fit one into the adapter) and cost of the body...


That's the exact point I'm making. Don't get stuck in the mind of current technology, I'm talking about a new advance in technology. You certainly could fit one into the adapter itself. This all could've been possible if they worked more closely, but they failed.

[Er1kksen]

The Samsung-Pentax relationship has soured and gone downhill significantly; I wouldn't expect to see any close collaboration between Pentax and Samsung on the NX system. The reason they made a little deal out of the K-mount adapter is because all the previous "samsung" DSLR lenses (rebadged Pentax, generally) are K-mount.

RAW image quality should be pretty decent. I don't plan to buy one, however.