Sony A7RII 4k versus NX1 4K

[tugela]

Weird, I had the opposite reaction when I saw the NX1 4K framegrabs compared to the A7R2.. the NX1 looked softer and more compressed to me (especially around the grey-on-grey "DPREVIEW" text).  I downloaded the full-size JPG's DPReview provided and did some A/B.. what am I missing here?  Left is A7R2 Super35, right is NX1.. I see more softness and a lot more compression artifacts on the NX1.  These are saved at JPG quality 10 in photoshop and hosted on my own site to avoid re-compression by the forum software BTW.

Here are the playing cards in the upper right.. 

That is because the NX1 image IS more compressed, lol. The jpeg for the NX1 is 2.2MB, while the jpeg for the a7RII is 4.2MB.

For a proper comparison you would also need to use the same lens, and it isn't clear if that was done or not.

And, as always, particularly with a flat image, there is always the question about whether or not both cameras were focused properly at the time. The comparison is more valid in the a7RII when looking at the two modes, since presumably all the physical aspects of the camera were kept the same when shooting those.

[Pavel Mašek]

Well, it depends on which part you look at. See images below.

Also remember that the lenses are not same (I hink that 16-50 on NX1 is not so sharp and detailed especially in the cornes), NX1 received lot of updates since March and maybe screenshot was grab from transcoded video...

 

[The Chris]

And, as always, particularly with a flat image, there is always the question about whether or not both cameras were focused properly at the time. 

Because its so difficult with the camera on a tripod to to magnify the image and turn the shitty focus by wire, which you claim is better, to get a sharp image. SMH...

[tellure]

Here's the 100% crop comparison of that head portion of the image Pavel posted above (A7R2 S35 on the left, NX1 on the right).  It's definitely not as big a difference as the playing cards above, but I'd say the A7R2 in S35 looks sharper and more detailed.. e.g. the hairs on the top of his head and the detail in the eyes.  Of course the number scale on top is quite different.

Definitely agree that lens plays a huge role.. in their NX1 review DPReview says they used the 16-50 OIS since it provided the best quality:

"We found that within the lens range that keeps us at the proper shooting distance, the Samsung 16-50 OIS provides the best overall performance (corner to corner). That's high praise for a zoom lens, but most systems' primes offer better performance. Hence, our comparison as it is is not the final word in sharpness for NX1 files - it's entirely plausible that a better lens for the NX system will be available in the future."

I could certainly understand some people wanting to see test results with the exact same lens via an adapter.  Personally this test is still pretty valid for me since I like using the best native lenses on the system so I can get the full range of image stabilization and autofocus capabilities.

[Pavel Mašek]

Strange - same image and I think exactly the opposite. But never mind... they look similar.

BTW one "non-scientific" comparsion https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FB2t05JQmLY

[Liam]

I haven't seen even one good narrative done on the camera.

if you were actually still looking to be convinced... true that not many pros shoot with it though, and in my search for footage there's a lot of heavily LUTted and improperly exposed footage with jello, but these are probably my favorites so far from the camera and hard to argue that they aren't fantastic. 

https://vimeo.com/brainstem/review/136679800/daa914d0aa

 

[blafarm]

I'm referring to the % zoom ratios you get in Photoshop or Premiere.  When I look at a 4k framegrab in Photoshop full-screen on my 1900x1200 monitor, Photoshop shows the zoom ratio at 50%.

My bad.  Sorry I misunderstood.

[Triumph61]

This is from dpreview:

I hope you can see the differences between resolution/sharpening and why your test was more about the lens than the camera. 

Sorry Don  I disagree with this test.  But it's DPreview so it must be correct eh ;-)   Did I read somewhere that they couldn't use their normal adapted test lens on the NX1 so they used a zoom to compare?  I have noticed on many DPreview tests, errors? or lens alignment issues?? in their comparisons.  One camera area sharp, comparing as unsharp on another camera, then the opposite in another area of the image.  All good though the Samsung has it's strengths and so does the Sony.     The Sony is perfectly fine in isolation, the NX1 is just a super sharp high resolving 4K camera and to own  both and compare can be a challenge toward what you want out of your camera.   I chose the Sony in the end. FF and still images where my deciding factors. 

[The Chris]

 I chose the Sony in the end. FF and still images where my deciding factors. 

Interesting, from your earlier comments it appeared you favored the NX1.

[Triumph61]

Interesting, from your earlier comments it appeared you favored the NX1.

In many ways I did.    had to choose one system and eventually the Sony won out,  with still shooting a factor in my choice.

[kidzrevil]

The nx1 bit rate hack has officially thrown the macroblocking argument out of the window. People are reaching up to 200mbps with no compression artifacts @Don Kotlos

[Shield3]

On 10/22/2015 at 5:44 PM, The Chris said:

The A7rII is softer in FF vs S35, that's well known. If you're comparing them, using FF serves no purpose other than to make the A7rII look worse than it really is. I only use it when I don't need the extra detail like interviews. While S35 may not be as sharp as the NX1, it definitely has more DR, the highlights are far less brittle and the A7rII is cleaner at 3200 and above. This goes for stills as well. I sold my NX1 almost immediately after the A7rII was released, so any improvements since then are excluded from my opinions. The NX1 had a few quirks that drove me nuts, mainly the complete lack of back button AF - since I remove focus from the shutter button on every other camera I've owned, and Samsung only has a few lenses that are MF friendly. The EVF is far better on the A7rII as well.

After seeing the performance of the A7rII with adapted lenses I decided my NX1 was on borrowed time. No electronic adapters and no speedboosters means there's a lot of great glass that's tough to adapt on the NX1. The fact that its been a year since Samsung introduced its last NX lens makes me feel it was a good decision to move to Sony.

There's plenty of detail in A7rII S35 4k for me, it really pops on my 4k panel after sharpening and bumping contrast a bit.

I completely agree Chris.  Also the a7r2 in FF is much better @ 24p vs 30p; the other day I did some tests and it's almost a different animal when you use 30p (to the worse).  Also I never shoot above ISO 1600 in FF mode as it does get bad pretty quickly, but I find it has more than plenty of detail when downscaled to 1080p from UHD 24p.  The fact that the s35 mode is brilliant is just a bonus.

+1 to the lack of back button focus on the NX1.  I see your lack of BB focus and raise you the most annoying thing ever -the fact that on the NX1 once you hit record one cannot toggle between EVF and rear LCD.  That drove me MAD on long takes.

I really liked the NX-1, and had that tech been allowed to mature I'm sure a NX-2 would have been even more amazing.  At the end of the day I didn't want to invest in Samsung glass, I owned the 30 F/2 and 16-50 S lens.  However  there was no way to have a smart adapter for Canon long lenses (no AF).  Meaning no AF for my Sigma 150-600 C or Canon 300 2.8 for sports shooting.   I still love my A7r2 for everything except sports shooting; that's when I pick up the 1dx.

[kidzrevil]

Why is everyone screaming that they didnt want to use samsung glass like the nx1's mount isn't adaptable ? That isn't much of a valid reason to berate the camera when you can mount lenses from canon all the way to m42 mount. @Shield3

[Shield3]

3 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

Why is everyone screaming that they didnt want to use samsung glass like the nx1's mount isn't adaptable ? That isn't much of a valid reason to berate the camera when you can mount lenses from canon all the way to m42 mount. @Shield3

If you advertise a camera as being "28 MP with 15 FPS" and then there is no 300/400/500/600/100-400 etc glass to back it up, that's why.  From my research there was a slow 70-300? lens being the longest.  One would think 15FPS would be ideal for sports and tracking moving subjects right?  Go shoot your kids' soccer/baseball games in manual focus only without EXIF and these dumb adapters (which I did try out) and tell me how well that works for you.  The 70-200 Sammy seemed nice, but that's just not enough reach. 

[kidzrevil]

Unfortunately I do not have any children to shoot however I have a background in shooting fast moving objects such as incoming aircraft during military operations and the occasional live performance. Never once lost sleep over not having autofocus. Not denying the importance of it for SOME people but it's certainly not a deal breaker nor does it rule a camera out for professional work. Pro's have been shooting manual before AF was even a thing. 

Different strokes for different folks but not all of us rely on AF or some of the other tech like stabilization. Some of us are pretty old school and it works. Cheers. @Shield3

[Shield3]

On 5/12/2016 at 1:02 PM, kidzrevil said:

Unfortunately I do not have any children to shoot however I have a background in shooting fast moving objects such as incoming aircraft during military operations and the occasional live performance. Never once lost sleep over not having autofocus. Not denying the importance of it for SOME people but it's certainly not a deal breaker nor does it rule a camera out for professional work. Pro's have been shooting manual before AF was even a thing. 

Different strokes for different folks but not all of us rely on AF or some of the other tech like stabilization. Some of us are pretty old school and it works. Cheers. @Shield3

Well incoming aircraft should be pretty predictable and easy with manual focus, no?  Had a smart adapter been introduced so I could have used my Canon whites I may have stuck around longer.  Also for video you never addressed how annoying it is once you start rolling to be unable to toggle between EVF and LCD.  I could not reconcile with that, period.  Look, the NX1 is a hell of a camera; it's just more of a jack of all trades master of none.  Certainly not what anyone will ever see on the sidelines of any professional sports and for good reason.

[kidzrevil]

@Shield3 I guess we may never see pro's shoot with the nx1 but I dont care its just a tool. Just didn't agree with you that AF was that important...especially in video