sandro

how low do you think it can go?

How does Samsung 16-50 compare (f/2 apart) to other lenses on the same range made by Nikon Sigma etc? Is it really worth the money?

what deal?

funny how instead the 18-200 lens is the most expensive in EU.

source?

is someone using the 18-200 lens? is the focusing fast? It's from 2011... will it be on par with the nx1 monster?

is low light as good as a7s?

yup lowlith is its weokaness but it bet it could be improved if they didn't apply that heavy NR.

I well aware of that. I guess the price is so high because they have a monopoly for the NX system.

Yeah I own the 16-50... pretty sharp. Thing is the job I have right now requires a single lens from 16/18 to at least 130mm and the 18-200 is the only option Samsung offers to use autofocus (and fast) which I absolutely need. I also read the optics is pretty bad. Also I notice there's no cheap third party lenses flashes to use on the NX1 (another must for this job). Doesn't look like the NX system is ideal for photography.

Is it worth the money? The tamron 18-200 made for canon and nikon is a lot cheaper.

50mm is too long...I guess 18-200 is my only bet for using the nx1 for pics. I find it weird to invest so much money on this lens on a basically dead system.

Hello, I'm working for the winter on the ski slopes and I'm stuck using my old 550D with Canon EF lenses provided by employer. Being a video guy I have a set of manual lenses for my NX1. Since I'm only shooting pictures I need an all around lens for this purpose and I want to use the potential of the NX1 for pictures as well! Do you know if there's an adapter to use AF with third party lenses? I see that nobody makes lenses for NX1 and the only one made by Samsung is the 18-200mm.

Looks like the Helios lenses.

I want a 50% refund from Samsung. At this point they should lower the 16-50 S lens price as well.

I actually thought it just tells player how it should be display. Good to know it actually changes the way it records, so you basically loose information when you set 16-235?

I think it's a just a flag on the file, it doesn't change the way it records.

Can you do the opposite? Record in 16-235 and bring back 0-255?

Yeah I believe that's the reason.

I can also suggest to avoid shooting in 120p at high ISO. At 1600 details will be lost big time, I believe due to the bitrate too low for this framerate (?).

I don't have a CPU that powerful but I was able to get smooth playback of 4K HEVC 80Mbit files at 30p using latest MPC-HC x64 + LAV filter x64. I'm using a i5-3570k at 4Ghz.

I wanna see the footage as well...what kind of help do you need?

Imagine if they could hack the camera and achieve a more "raw" video quality. We could get a similar quality at 6400 like you did instead of that 1600 usable limit.

I got the adapter but I'm waiting for a friend to give me her vintage lenses

I tried to look up for pictures of the Nikon mount and I couldn't find the lever on the mount