Samsung's mirrorless APS cheaper than micro 4/3rds cameras

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Jan 16, 2010.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    NX10. By quite a large margin. $699 with an 18-55mm kit lens.
     
    RichA, Jan 16, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    Save $3.99 Guest

    "RichA" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > NX10. By quite a large margin. $699 with an 18-55mm kit lens.


    Well it is a Samsung, not a Panasonic, Olympus or LeicaSonic
     
    Save $3.99, Jan 16, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. David J Taylor, Jan 16, 2010
    #3
  4. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On Jan 16, 4:28 am, "David J Taylor" <-
    this-bit.and-this-part.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
    > "RichA" <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:...
    >
    > > NX10.  By quite a large margin.  $699 with an 18-55mm kit lens.

    >
    > .. or you could get a "proper" camera for even less:
    >
    >  http://www.dpreview.com/news/0907/09073005nikond3000.asp
    >
    > David


    Click-whir "I must buy a traditional DSLR," click, whir....
     
    RichA, Jan 16, 2010
    #4
  5. "RichA" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Jan 16, 4:28 am, "David J Taylor" <-
    > this-bit.and-this-part.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
    >> "RichA" <> wrote in message
    >>
    >> news:...
    >>
    >> > NX10. By quite a large margin. $699 with an 18-55mm kit lens.

    >>
    >> .. or you could get a "proper" camera for even less:
    >>
    >> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0907/09073005nikond3000.asp
    >>
    >> David

    >
    > Click-whir "I must buy a traditional DSLR," click, whir....


    You really should get that oiled, Rich.

    You want wider than 18mm, longer than 200mm? You want fixed focal length
    lenses? You want image stabilisation? You want an optical finder? Then
    the NX10 is not for you today.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 16, 2010
    #5
  6. RichA

    Paul Furman Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:
    > RichA wrote
    >> David J Taylor wrote:
    >>> RichA wrote
    >>>
    >>> > NX10. By quite a large margin. $699 with an 18-55mm kit lens.
    >>>
    >>> .. or you could get a "proper" camera for even less:
    >>>
    >>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0907/09073005nikond3000.asp

    >>
    >> Click-whir "I must buy a traditional DSLR," click, whir....

    >
    > You really should get that oiled, Rich.
    >
    > You want wider than 18mm, longer than 200mm? You want fixed focal
    > length lenses? You want image stabilisation? You want an optical
    > finder? Then the NX10 is not for you today.


    I'm tempted by the Panasonic GF1 although it lacks a decent viewfinder
    and stabilization (except some lenses) just because it's small & seems
    easy to use with good AF & controls and that 20mm f/1.7 pancake lens.
    The price sucks though.

    BTW here's what a 45mm Ai-P pancake looks like with adapter on a GF1:
    http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v686/winginging/craigslist 2010/IMG_6053.jpg
    Kind of silly, but interesting how much difference in the mount. It
    could be handy with a longer lens kept in your pocket like a 75-150
    Series E would be darn near like a 300mm f/2.8, or a 105 macro lens,
    50mm fast prime, etc.

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Jan 16, 2010
    #6
  7. "Paul Furman" <> wrote in message
    news:hit232$5cp$-september.org...
    []
    > I'm tempted by the Panasonic GF1 although it lacks a decent viewfinder
    > and stabilization (except some lenses) just because it's small & seems
    > easy to use with good AF & controls and that 20mm f/1.7 pancake lens.
    > The price sucks though.


    I've wanted to look through that camera for some time - strange how all
    the times I've tried there has never been a battery in the demo camera! I
    do feel that stabilisation is a must, and the lack of it in the NX10 is a
    deal-breaker.

    > BTW here's what a 45mm Ai-P pancake looks like with adapter on a GF1:
    > http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v686/winginging/craigslist 2010/IMG_6053.jpg
    > Kind of silly, but interesting how much difference in the mount. It
    > could be handy with a longer lens kept in your pocket like a 75-150
    > Series E would be darn near like a 300mm f/2.8, or a 105 macro lens,
    > 50mm fast prime, etc.
    >
    > --
    > Paul Furman


    Yes, rather silly! If I want something compact, I take my Panasonic TZ3
    (and have to compromise on ISO).

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 16, 2010
    #7
  8. RichA

    Paul Furman Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:
    >
    > "Paul Furman" <> wrote in message
    > news:hit232$5cp$-september.org...
    > []
    >> I'm tempted by the Panasonic GF1 although it lacks a decent viewfinder
    >> and stabilization (except some lenses) just because it's small & seems
    >> easy to use with good AF & controls and that 20mm f/1.7 pancake lens.
    >> The price sucks though.

    >
    > I've wanted to look through that camera for some time - strange how all
    > the times I've tried there has never been a battery in the demo camera!


    The add-on EVF is supposed to be just sort of adequate and costs another
    $200, which is probably a deal breaker for me. You'd think they could
    make a simple optical range finder clip on for the 20mm lens.


    > I do feel that stabilisation is a must, and the lack of it in the NX10
    > is a deal-breaker.


    Not really a deal breaker for me.
    No stabilizer in the lenses either?
    I wouldn't even bother getting the stabilized kit lens for the GF1 and
    the un-stabilized 20/1.7 wouldn't really need it.

    The Oly m4/3 is supposed to not handle very well.

    The Samsung 30mm f/2 sounds reasonably useful.



    >> BTW here's what a 45mm Ai-P pancake looks like with adapter on a GF1:
    >> http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v686/winginging/craigslist 2010/IMG_6053.jpg
    >>
    >> Kind of silly, but interesting how much difference in the mount. It
    >> could be handy with a longer lens kept in your pocket like a 75-150
    >> Series E would be darn near like a 300mm f/2.8, or a 105 macro lens,
    >> 50mm fast prime, etc.

    >
    > Yes, rather silly! If I want something compact, I take my Panasonic TZ3
    > (and have to compromise on ISO).


    My only compact is a 10 year old Oly 3MP as big as these.

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Jan 16, 2010
    #8
  9. "Paul Furman" <> wrote in message
    news:hitbh9$4d3$-september.org...
    > David J Taylor wrote:

    []
    >> I do feel that stabilisation is a must, and the lack of it in the NX10
    >> is a deal-breaker.

    >
    > Not really a deal breaker for me.
    > No stabilizer in the lenses either?
    > I wouldn't even bother getting the stabilized kit lens for the GF1 and
    > the un-stabilized 20/1.7 wouldn't really need it.
    >
    > The Oly m4/3 is supposed to not handle very well.
    >
    > The Samsung 30mm f/2 sounds reasonably useful.


    I saw no mention of lens-based stabilisation, no.

    If you're into just wide-angle, image stabilisation is certainly less of
    an issue, but even so it can extend your taking speeds down to 1/8s or
    1/4s with wide-angle lenses, which can be useful for interiors without a
    tripod. Not so good if your subject is moving, of course, except for
    special effects.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 17, 2010
    #9
  10. "Rich" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    []
    > I don't pretend they should have the system range of Canon and Nikon
    > when
    > they JUST RELEASED THE FIRST CAMERA. Besides, Olympus and Panasonic
    > (4/3rds, micro 4/3rds) have 7-14mm (14-28mm equivalent on FF) lenses
    > that
    > are better than ANY Canon lens and most Nikon lenses. Give Samsung some
    > time, if they get it right, they could have a fuller system.


    I'm not sure they have a lot of time, to be honest.

    When I last looked, Olympus lenses were rather expensive, and yet lacked
    image stabilisation, even in the telephotos.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 17, 2010
    #10
  11. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 22:22:27 -0600, Rich <> wrote:

    >Besides, Olympus and Panasonic
    >(4/3rds, micro 4/3rds) have 7-14mm (14-28mm equivalent on FF) lenses that
    >are better than ANY Canon lens and most Nikon lenses.



    Better, eh?

    On what basis are they "better"?
     
    Bruce, Jan 17, 2010
    #11
  12. In rec.photo.digital David J Taylor <-this-bit.and-this-part.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
    > "Rich" <> wrote in message
    > news:p...
    > []
    >> I don't pretend they should have the system range of Canon and Nikon
    >> when
    >> they JUST RELEASED THE FIRST CAMERA. Besides, Olympus and Panasonic
    >> (4/3rds, micro 4/3rds) have 7-14mm (14-28mm equivalent on FF) lenses
    >> that
    >> are better than ANY Canon lens and most Nikon lenses. Give Samsung some
    >> time, if they get it right, they could have a fuller system.


    > I'm not sure they have a lot of time, to be honest.


    > When I last looked, Olympus lenses were rather expensive, and yet lacked
    > image stabilisation, even in the telephotos.


    Olympus do the image stabilisation in the camera, not the lens.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
     
    Chris Malcolm, Jan 17, 2010
    #12
  13. In article <eVA4n.27388$>, david-
    -this-bit.and-this-part.co.uk.invalid says...
    >
    > When I last looked, Olympus lenses were rather expensive, and yet lacked
    > image stabilisation, even in the telephotos.
    >
    > David
    >


    I don't know a lot about different Oly dslr models, but the E-620 has
    sensor shift IS. I understand sensor-shift is not as effective as lens
    based, but on the other hand it makes for lighter lenses and allows you
    to achieve IS with adapter mounted lenses ... (point of special interest
    to me).

    -P.
     
    Peter Huebner, Jan 17, 2010
    #13
  14. "Chris Malcolm" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In rec.photo.digital David J Taylor
    > <-this-bit.and-this-part.co.uk.invalid>
    > wrote:
    >> "Rich" <> wrote in message
    >> news:p...
    >> []
    >>> I don't pretend they should have the system range of Canon and Nikon
    >>> when
    >>> they JUST RELEASED THE FIRST CAMERA. Besides, Olympus and Panasonic
    >>> (4/3rds, micro 4/3rds) have 7-14mm (14-28mm equivalent on FF) lenses
    >>> that
    >>> are better than ANY Canon lens and most Nikon lenses. Give Samsung
    >>> some
    >>> time, if they get it right, they could have a fuller system.

    >
    >> I'm not sure they have a lot of time, to be honest.

    >
    >> When I last looked, Olympus lenses were rather expensive, and yet
    >> lacked
    >> image stabilisation, even in the telephotos.

    >
    > Olympus do the image stabilisation in the camera, not the lens.
    >
    > --
    > Chris Malcolm


    Thanks, Chris. If the Olympus lenses don't even have IS, there's less
    excuse for them being so expensive. There is no IS in the Samsung NX10,
    either lens or camera. I think they will need that before being taken
    even half-seriously.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 17, 2010
    #14
  15. "Peter Huebner" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    []
    > I don't know a lot about different Oly dslr models, but the E-620 has
    > sensor shift IS. I understand sensor-shift is not as effective as lens
    > based, but on the other hand it makes for lighter lenses and allows you
    > to achieve IS with adapter mounted lenses ... (point of special interest
    > to me).
    >
    > -P.


    Thanks, Peter. If you have particular needs, that obviously influences
    what you buy.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 17, 2010
    #15
  16. "Gary Eickmeier" <> wrote in message
    news:4b533782$0$20414$...
    []
    > The Sony A550 has it all. It is a DSLR with fast focusing live view,
    > rotating LCD, sensor stabilization, HDR, and 14MP.
    >
    > Gary Eickmeier


    You haven't used a long telephoto lens hand-held with in-lens IS, have
    you?

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 17, 2010
    #16
  17. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 16:53:49 GMT, "David J Taylor"
    <-this-bit.and-this-part.co.uk.invalid>
    >
    >There is no IS in the Samsung NX10,
    >either lens or camera. I think they will need that before being taken
    >even half-seriously.



    I agree. It is a pity that Samsung had not extended its co-operation
    with Pentax beyond DSLRs to include the NX series. Samsung would
    then have had access to Pentax' in-body stabilisation technology for
    the NX10.

    Instead, the relationship was terminated altogether, leaving Pentax in
    a fairly desperate state. And Samsung without stabilisation.
     
    Bruce, Jan 17, 2010
    #17
  18. In rec.photo.digital Peter Huebner <> wrote:
    > In article <eVA4n.27388$>, david-
    > -this-bit.and-this-part.co.uk.invalid says...
    >>
    >> When I last looked, Olympus lenses were rather expensive, and yet lacked
    >> image stabilisation, even in the telephotos.
    >>
    >> David


    > I don't know a lot about different Oly dslr models, but the E-620 has
    > sensor shift IS. I understand sensor-shift is not as effective as lens
    > based, but on the other hand it makes for lighter lenses and allows you
    > to achieve IS with adapter mounted lenses ... (point of special interest
    > to me).


    Also IS isn't a fixed technology. It keeps improving. So if you want
    the extra stop or so of extra IS that's just been developed you either
    have to buy a new set of lenses, or just a new body, which you were
    probably going to buy anyway. If your lenses are full of
    electromechanical technology they're goiong to age a lot faster.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
     
    Chris Malcolm, Jan 17, 2010
    #18
  19. In rec.photo.digital Gary Eickmeier <> wrote:

    > "Peter Huebner" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> In article <eVA4n.27388$>, david-
    >> -this-bit.and-this-part.co.uk.invalid says...
    >>>
    >>> When I last looked, Olympus lenses were rather expensive, and yet lacked
    >>> image stabilisation, even in the telephotos.
    >>>
    >>> David
    >>>

    >>
    >> I don't know a lot about different Oly dslr models, but the E-620 has
    >> sensor shift IS. I understand sensor-shift is not as effective as lens
    >> based, but on the other hand it makes for lighter lenses and allows you
    >> to achieve IS with adapter mounted lenses ... (point of special interest
    >> to me).


    > The Sony A550 has it all. It is a DSLR with fast focusing live view,
    > rotating LCD, sensor stabilization, HDR, and 14MP.


    It doesn't have it all. It doesn't have MLU! :)

    But it does have two excellent new features you didn't mention. The
    first is a big bright LCD with adaptive brightness which can easily be
    seen in weak sunlight. (The strong sunlight test is still a few months
    away in these northern latitudes :)

    The second is that in addition to the secondary sensor live view which
    gives you fast AF with live view, you can also switch with one button
    press to image sensor live view with magnification up to pixel level
    all over the image. Makes critical manual focusing to the millimetre
    so easy it's a delight to use!

    --
    Chris Malcolm
     
    Chris Malcolm, Jan 17, 2010
    #19
  20. In rec.photo.digital David J Taylor <-this-bit.and-this-part.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
    > "Gary Eickmeier" <> wrote in message
    > news:4b533782$0$20414$...
    > []
    >> The Sony A550 has it all. It is a DSLR with fast focusing live view,
    >> rotating LCD, sensor stabilization, HDR, and 14MP.
    >>
    >> Gary Eickmeier


    > You haven't used a long telephoto lens hand-held with in-lens IS, have
    > you?


    I certainly haven't, but given all the rumours about how badly
    in-camera IS performs with long lenses I was pleasantly surprised to
    discover how well it worked with my 500mm.

    --
    Chris Malcolm
     
    Chris Malcolm, Jan 17, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. RichA

    Samsung's mirrorless APS "shot across the bow"

    RichA, Jan 4, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    649
    John Turco
    Jan 30, 2010
  2. RichA
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    284
    Ray Fischer
    Feb 15, 2010
  3. RichA
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    614
    John Turco
    Mar 29, 2010
  4. RichA
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    345
    Eric Miller
    Dec 27, 2010
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    438
    David Ruether
    Jan 15, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page