Jump to content

Big news - Samsung NX1 with 4K, 24p and **H.265 HVEC codec**


Andrew Reid

Recommended Posts

  • Administrators
Samsung NX1

The full press release is below, supplied by B&H Photo / Video. To pre-order the NX1 ($1499) click here

This is a bombshell announcement, a massive upset and a huge surprise to me that it has a 4K H.265 codec. With this model, Samsung have taken a step change in technological development to the market, adding the first ever High Efficiency Video Codec (HVEC H.265) along with 4K 24p and Ultra HD at 30p. The codec is a successor to H.264 and is capable of providing ProRes quality at 1% of the file size.

The camera also features a large Super 35mm 28MP sensor. The camera will be at Photokina in Cologne and I will bring EOSHD readers an exclusive hands-on from Tuesday onwards.

Read the full article here
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

HDMI is 4:2:2 8-bit.   ISO performance is unlikely to outperform the best 24MP sensors, so I expect usable 6400 images with 12800 as an emergency option.    If the AF is like the NX30 it will be p

It would be fine for me too, but I wonder how well the existing NX lenses perform on this body. We'll have to wait and see, as we don't have too many options here.

Any info on how the sensor reads out?  How about stabilization?

 

Looks like an interesting camera, but having 2 systems already  (E Mount & MFT) unlikely that I will be making a switch to Samsung anytime soon.

 

It will be interesting to see how the quality is on H265, but it may be degraded by the type of sensor readout.

 

P.S. Any release schedule for the A7s shooters guide.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've to say, I'm quite impressed by the specs, maybe Samsung's delivery is finally catching up with their bold claims. I didn't like the display side of the shoulder's design, it's falling and it doesn't seem to follow the curves. But I did like the overall curves of the camera, they work much better than Sony's attempt with their A-mount cameras.

 

The HEVC (H.265) codec is an EFF huge step, but codec is far from being everything, previous generations ILC all had AVCHD and nonetheless, there were also quite differences in implementantion. So HOW you encode, the pipeline used for that, how much quality you are able to extract from all those 28MP, full readout sensor, rolling shutter, etc. These things are really the key.

 

The codec only says that it allows you to get a great quality with a small file if you do it properly. Giving that Samsung doesn't have to hold back since they don't have a video/cinema line up to worry, this can be very interesting. But if the 8-bit HDMI output is any indication, Samsung should still be some steps behind Panasonic, but as hope, I hope for the best, the more competition, the best.

 

Everybody got surprised when Sony first managed to use their BSI tech in a 1" sensor, but Samsung is using their ISOCELL tech in this APS-C sensor. There was said at the time that there are not that many benefits of a BSI tech for bigger sensors, but I'm not sure how much of tha was simply an excuse or maybe the cost was not worth or something, anyway, that was about Sony's tech. Samsung ISOCELL is also BSI but the tech is different from Sony's, so it will be interesting to see if the max of 51200 ISO is just for show or for real.

 

I also liked the 15fps but what about AF performance? On paper it looks great, 205 of PDAF and 209 CDAF, but on paper, so many do, I'll wait for the tests. Most people don't know but Samsung does have a better sorted lens line up than Sony's E-mount, so they can explore the hole left by Sony in that segment. As I've said before, it's a little too late for me to go Samsung now, but I'm excited that they are finally fulfilling those empty bold claims of the past, I'm looking forward to see how they catch up from here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HDMI is 4:2:2 8-bit.

 

ISO performance is unlikely to outperform the best 24MP sensors, so I expect usable 6400 images with 12800 as an emergency option. 

 

If the AF is like the NX30 it will be plenty competent. Not sure how it will do in video, or whether it will have the Olympus E-M1's issue.

 

I'm having a good laugh at the control layout though - it reminds me of both Canon and Nikon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

HEVC is great, but Samsung will likely support only 4:2:0 8-bit.

 

That's not necessary bad, the GH4 does 4K in 4:2:0 8-bit as well. If Samsung is smart enough, they will make R&D and find a way to deliver better qaulity via firmware, they are already behind, they don't have the luxury to wait the next gen to do it right. For such forgotten mount, it's basically do or die, plus, they don't have a video/cinema line up to pretect, they better go all-in.

 

Panasonic's attitude seems to be the best right now, they have been pretty aggressive, delivering great products with some aggresive pricing (FZ1000 and soon, the LX100). That because Panasonic could worry about the FZ1000's 4K hurting some other camera or their own's sales and that's even more true for the LX100, but no, they are going for the throat with these, if Samsung doens't top or equal Panasonic's posture, there is not that much space on the market for half-assed when you are coming from behind*.

 

*LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites

ISO performance is unlikely to outperform the best 24MP sensors, so I expect usable 6400 images with 12800 as an emergency option. 

 

If the AF is like the NX30 it will be plenty competent. Not sure how it will do in video, or whether it will have the Olympus E-M1's issue.

 

I'm having a good laugh at the control layout though - it reminds me of both Canon and Nikon.

 

Why? I don't know the ISOCELL's tech - which is supposedly an evolution of the usual BSI - but BSI can give 25~40% boost in ISO performance over one without. There is quite a difference between the RX100 and RX100II/III. This should be plenty to think that it may not happen but I wouldn't say unlikely to outperform 24MP sensors.

 

I think it's more concerning how is the MF for video than the AF for video, I would worry more about AF for stills and in darker situations. For instance, from the ones I had and tested, Sony's fly-by-wire MF is simply horrible.

 

And in the end Samsung is really a copycat! LOL. Not necessarily a bad thing, but I'm just saying that they do make similar stuff to others manufacturers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BSI helps the most with small pixel pitches, so I'm not expecting a miracle. 25-40% is not even a stop, so that's rather marginal to me.

 

MF is definitely going to be by wire, so...

 

One slight downside is that the NX mount flange distance is the longest of all mirrorless systems, so adapting M mount lenses is tricky. However since most use DSLR lenses it should not be an issue for many. Is there a Speedbooster for the NX mount?

Link to post
Share on other sites

BSI helps the most with small pixel pitches, so I'm not expecting a miracle. 25-40% is not even a stop, so that's rather marginal to me.

 

MF is definitely going to be by wire, so...

 

One slight downside is that the NX mount flange distance is the longest of all mirrorless systems, so adapting M mount lenses is tricky. However since most use DSLR lenses it should not be an issue for many. Is there a Speedbooster for the NX mount?

 

Fly-by-wire can work ok if done properly, we'll see what side Samsung's MF is, actually, anyone that tested NX lenses can talk about it, but I have no idea about it.

 

I didn't think that the improvement from the RX100 to the RX100II was so marginal and I wouldn't say that 40% improvement in sensitivity is marginal as well, In that sense the difference between 24MP and 28MP is much more marginal. Actually, if you apply just the percentages here, the 28MP has slightly smaller pixels but if it has more sensitivity, it can, in theory, outperform a 24MP sensor. But anyway, those numbers are from Sony's BSI, not ISOCELL, in theory, there is an even greater improvement there, so again, it will all depend on how much of the things on paper translate into reality but it's not unlikely at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BSI helps the most with small pixel pitches, so I'm not expecting a miracle. 25-40% is not even a stop, so that's rather marginal to me.

 

MF is definitely going to be by wire, so...

 

One slight downside is that the NX mount flange distance is the longest of all mirrorless systems, so adapting M mount lenses is tricky. However since most use DSLR lenses it should not be an issue for many. Is there a Speedbooster for the NX mount?

 

This is from the Metabones FAQ:

"Will Samsung NX cameras be supported?

No. Unfortunately, it is not possible to fit the optics inside the Samsung NX mount owing to flange distance and physical interference issues."

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

. Most people don't know but Samsung does have a better sorted lens line up than Sony's E-mount, so they can explore the hole left by Sony in that segment.

 

 

The specs for the camera really look very nice.

 

Don't know how you get this bit though.

 

I thought there was ten Samsung lenses available for NX cameras.   How many third party?

 

E mount has 20 Sony or Sony-Zeiss with a couple more over the next few days I think plus a lot more third party (again more coming soon).      On top of that with an adapter you can use all the A mount lenses "natively" plus Canon and even Contax G with AF adapters for full functionality (AF and IS where applicable).

 

If you mean in terms of full frame E mount, then if you don't count the A mount lenses (though I would) there would probably be a few more available for the E mount still plus you can always use APSC mode or digital zoom to avoid vignetting with ANY E mount lens.

 

FE lenses are in their infancy but so is Samsung and both could do with a few more if you want native mount AF.

 

If the new Samsung is better than Sony equivalent level cameras it will not really be because of lens availability.

 

 

Edit.     I was out of date with the Samsung lens list it is a fair bit more than I thought but still less than E mount.

 

There are a few different ones available to NX that are not available to E mount but in most (if not all) of those cases the lenses are available in A mount.     Sony seems to consider the LA-EA# adapters and A mount as part of the E mount system. (rightly or wrongly).

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I didn't think that the improvement from the RX100 to the RX100II was so marginal and I wouldn't say that 40% improvement in sensitivity is marginal as well, In that sense the difference between 24MP and 28MP is much more marginal. Actually, if you apply just the percentages here, the 28MP has slightly smaller pixels but if it has more sensitivity, it can, in theory, outperform a 24MP sensor. But anyway, those numbers are from Sony's BSI, not ISOCELL, in theory, there is an even greater improvement there, so again, it will all depend on how much of the things on paper translate into reality but it's not unlikely at all.

If it's not even a stop it's not a clear enough distinction. Also the smaller pixels on the Samsung sensor are still much bigger than the ones in the Sony's 1" sensor.

 

 

Don't know how you get this bit though.

 

I thought there was ten Samsung lenses available for NX cameras.   How many third party?

 

E mount has 20 Sony or Sony-Zeiss with a couple more over the next few days I think plus a lot more third party (again more coming soon).      On top of that with an adapter you can use all the A mount lenses "natively" plus Canon and even Contax G with AF adapters for full functionality (AF and IS where applicable).

 

If you mean in terms of full frame E mount, then if you don't count the A mount lenses (though I would) there would probably be a few more available for the E mount still plus you can always use APSC mode or digital zoom to avoid vignetting with ANY E mount lens.

 

FE lenses are in their infancy but so is Samsung and both could do with a few more if you want native mount AF.

 

If the new Samsung is better than Sony equivalent level cameras it will not really be because of lens availability.

 

 

Edit.     I was out of date with the Samsung lens list it is a fair bit more than I thought but still less than E mount.

 

There are a few different ones available to NX that are not available to E mount but in most (if not all) of those cases the lenses are available in A mount.     Sony seems to consider the LA-EA# adapters and A mount as part of the E mount system. (rightly or wrongly).

Samsung's lenses are generally good, the E-mount lenses, on the other hand, are not so great. Save for a few lenses (the Zeiss 24/1.8) they usually suffer from poor corners. Maybe they might not matter so much for video, but they're not so nice for use in stills.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Samsung line is pretty good. They have a 16-50mm f2-2.6, priced about the same as Panasonic's 12-35. And a 45mm f1.8 priced about the same as the 25mm f1.4. Although to be fair both of these mft lenses are quite expensive anyway compared to their canon counterparts. Why don't these systems lower the prices to get more market share??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting!

 

But in the real world, how do our computers manage the H.265 files? Doesn't it cost much more processing power to edit native h.265 clips? Because if it does, there wouldn't be any real advantage to recording at h.265 in the first place, right?

 

But nonetheless I praise Samsung for pushing it further!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...