Samsung NX10

[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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by KenjiS

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]

Originally Posted by Rio Sundoro

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]

Originally Posted by 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!!

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]

Originally Posted by 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?

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by KenjiS

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.