Got the NX1 in for review today. Ever since trying it at Photokina, I've been excited to get a chance to shoot with it. It's a big camera. I'm testing it with the 16-50 f/2-2.8, which is also a big lens, so the combo is no smaller than any DSLR with standard zoom. Notably larger than my X-T1 (though the lens looks to be similar in size to Fuji's new 16-55/2.8.) I haven't installed Firmware 1.2 yet, but will do that later tonight. The camera is responsive and the rear screen is gorgeous. The grip is also extremely comfortable to hold. Samsung made one change between the pre-production NX1 I saw at Photokina and the production model: They eliminated the fiddly dial lock for the left hand drive mode dial, which is a good thing.
Image quality at first blush is mostly stellar. The 16-50 is a very good lens, and stopped down, you're getting tremendous amounts of resolution out of the 28MP sensor, and the files are clean too, which is a really nice surprise. On the downside, dynamic range looks a bit more limited than the competition. Overall, my first impressions are really positive. I'm looking forward to the firmware update, as the one thing that does currently drive me nuts is that I HAVE to press the EC button to change EC. With 1.2, I understand I can (logically) assign EC to the rear dial.
Jman13 wrote:
On the downside, dynamic range looks a bit more limited than the competition.
I was curious what your first hand impression of the DR would be. Looking forward to the rest of the review.
Funny thing, for some reason, the very first thing that came to my mind when I saw the bodies side by side was...I wonder how long it will be until Fuji removes "Film" from their name.
Excellent option for the majority who prefer SLR/PASM type controls.
Top LCD, nice big grip, fast AF, top grade electronics... it seems to tick a lot of boxes.
If they catch up on the lens and accessories race while controlling their prices they might be the ones to eventually tip the scales towards mirrorless.
The NX1 is exciting, but what makes Samsung really exciting as a camera maker is that they're taking no prisoners with lenses; they're serious, and they appear willing to work toward delivering the 'whole package'.
Great samples! I played with an NX1 at CES and was very impressed. The NX1's dynamic range is actually very good - the only thing lacking is Samsung not doing impulse noise reduction and hot pixel suppression in the raws (impulse noise is the salt 'n pepper specs that doesn't show up in SNR graphs but has a negative perceptual effect on images).. Canikon started doing impulse noise reduction in raws starting around the D3s/5DM3/6D/1DX.
Here's a 5EV push of an NX1 raw I took from CES (full-sized):
Tariq Gibran wrote:
.I wonder how long it will be until Fuji removes "Film" from their name.
I was thinking the same today about "Milwaukee tools" which are long sold to a Chinese company and made in China
Maybe "Guangzhou tools" doesnt have such a nice ring to it...
Nice examples, looking forward to seeing more. I haven't made the jump to the NX1, but I have the 16-50 S lens for my NX30. It is the best zoom lens I have ever owned. Samsung surprisingly make some excellent glass, that includes many of the very small ones
snapsy wrote:
Great samples! I played with an NX1 at CES and was very impressed. The NX1's dynamic range is actually very good - the only thing lacking is Samsung not doing impulse noise reduction and hot pixel suppression in the raws (impulse noise is the salt 'n pepper specs that doesn't show up in SNR graphs but has a negative perceptual effect on images).. Canikon started doing impulse noise reduction in raws starting around the D3s/5DM3/6D/1DX.
Here's a 5EV push of an NX1 raw I took from CES (full-sized):
There's OK shadow recover capability (though as you note, it is very noisy...which does reduce DR...if there's no detail the DR is limited. The big thing is that there is almost NO highlight headroom in the RAW file. You clip the highlights, they are mostly gone. Maybe 1/3-1/2 stop at most. Meanwhile, my m4/3 cams and Fuji cams can easily recover one full stop in the highlights (and the Fujis several stops in the shadows....really good range there), and the Sony cameras can't recover as much in the shadows (but about the same as the NX1), but at least 1.5 stops in the highlights on something like the a6000 and probably 2+ on the A7 series.
Jman13 wrote:
There's OK shadow recover capability (though as you note, it is very noisy...which does reduce DR...if there's no detail the DR is limited. The big thing is that there is almost NO highlight headroom in the RAW file. You clip the highlights, they are mostly gone. Maybe 1/3-1/2 stop at most. Meanwhile, my m4/3 cams and Fuji cams can easily recover one full stop in the highlights (and the Fujis several stops in the shadows....really good range there), and the Sony cameras can't recover as much in the shadows (but about the same as the NX1), but at least 1.5 stops in the highlights on something like the a6000 and probably 2+ on the A7 series. ...Show more →
So I'm not crazy after all in my impression of the lower DR from the raws which I previously posted about (someone suggested it was not really lower DR but a poor tone curve implementation by Samsung). If it is/ was a tone curve issue, underexposure to protect those highlights and then recovery of the shadows in post would show this...but you seem to be confirming there is not the room in the shadows to do so - at least to the degree possible with other APS and even m43 options. So, with regard to DR, your impression thus far is that it shoots like a smaller sensor camera than m43?
I will definitely deal with the RAWs in Capture One 8.1 as well. It's really hard to say 100% with such limited shooting so far...I think with the shadow detail, it's about on par with something like the GX7 in the DR department (less highlight recovery, better shadow recovery), which isn't bad at all, but it's not top of game. Still better than Canon FF sensors. It is, however, cleaner than m4/3 (and I'd say it's cleaner at the pixel level than my a6000 as well)...plus tons of detail. I'll of course be evaluating this further over the coming week.
Jman13 wrote:
There's OK shadow recover capability (though as you note, it is very noisy...which does reduce DR...if there's no detail the DR is limited. The big thing is that there is almost NO highlight headroom in the RAW file. You clip the highlights, they are mostly gone. Maybe 1/3-1/2 stop at most. Meanwhile, my m4/3 cams and Fuji cams can easily recover one full stop in the highlights (and the Fujis several stops in the shadows....really good range there), and the Sony cameras can't recover as much in the shadows (but about the same as the NX1), but at least 1.5 stops in the highlights on something like the a6000 and probably 2+ on the A7 series. ...Show more →
The NX1's shadow noise looks very low and that is the noise that would factor into DR. Noise above the shadows would relate instead to general SNR. Highlight recovery is a function of metering rather than being a property of DR of the sensor but naturally total DR would be the sum of shadow recovery and highlight clipping/saturation.
The shadow noise gets pretty bad if you push it hard. I'm aware the total DR is the sum of the highlights and shadows. What I'm seeing so far puts it slightly behind the DR I'm seeing with my Fuji cameras and the a6000. It's not a huge gap, but it's there. The other imaging characteristics make it not that big a deal, to be honest. It also has nice bracketing. Some shots from this morning. The last one is a 4 shot HDR (+2, 0, -2, -4).
Jman13 wrote:
The shadow noise gets pretty bad if you push it hard. I'm aware the total DR is the sum of the highlights and shadows. What I'm seeing so far puts it slightly behind the DR I'm seeing with my Fuji cameras and the a6000.
It would be awesome if you could include a DR comparison for your review. I don't have a direct comparison handy but here's an A6000 push of 5EV and 7EV (here and here [black-level corrected]).
I will certainly delve deeper...what I'm seeing now is my first impressions. In any case, let's not dwell too deeply on that for now. Installed v1.2 firmware and the extra customization takes it from a camera with good controls to a camera with excellent controls. Samsung has done a very nice job here. So far, I really like it.
Here's one more. I will say one thing that is very positive about the RAW files: while noise is induced when making contrast changes and such, and the first few files I pushed last night didn't look so good, the shot below had a LOT of local contrast and manipulation of tones, and while there's a bit of noise introduced, it's remarkably clean given the punishment I put it through. My Fuji files withstand punishment like that pretty well, but probably not quite as good as this, and part of it is the higher resolution. The file holds up notably better than Sony RAW files. Really quite impressed.
I have to say, overall, I'm really impressed with the sensor. It's really clean at base ISO, there's tremendous detail, and at high ISO it's still pretty darn clean, especially considering the pixel density. Even pixel for pixel, it's as good as any APS-C sensor out there, and perhaps even a bit better...AND it's a denser sensor with higher resolution. Overall, this is one heck of a camera. One more:
Excellent, been looking forward to your review for this camera. I've been really tempted to give this camera a try but holding off for more reviews and some rumor/announcement for a longer zoom lens than 200 mm.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Funny thing, for some reason, the very first thing that came to my mind when I saw the bodies side by side was...I wonder how long it will be until Fuji removes "Film" from their name.
Until this whole retro wave they're riding falls out of favor, at least.
