Sony A7RII 4k versus NX1 4K

[richg101]

Your 24-70 lens WILL NOT match the resolving capabilities of the samsung lens.  It just won't.  The 24-70 will have been designed with an approximate 30lp/mm onto a full frame sensor.

 

full frame capability of the lens 30linesx2pairs x 36mm(sensor width) = 2160pixels (wide) optical resolution onto full frame

apsc capability of the lens 30x2pairs x 24mm = 1440pixels (wide) = not even full hd resolution

Add to this that the lens is marketed as a digital and film lens meaning it's not optimised for either, its a middle ground.  It was also developed before 35mm sensors were any greater than 4mpx.  It's old technology.  Red strip or not, it aint a stellar lens by modern standards

The samsung will likely have been designed to 60lp/mm meaning for the same image area 60x2 x 24mm = 2880pixels wide.  immediately the lens is delivering 2x the optical resolution onto the same image width, and 4x the optical resolution onto the total area - That's a big difference.  The samsung will have been developed to cater to the 28mpx sensor of the nx1 - some of the most tightly packed pixels on any sensor yet.  It'll also have been designed specifically to be APO corrected for the thickness of the sensor cover glass.  

 

I'm not saying the A7R2 matches the overall res of the nx1 - it's clear the nx1 is doing great things.  but when attempting such a test you should always use the same lens, or at the very least, if one camera is being used with a lens optimised for it, both lenses should are optimised for each camera.

 

I'm pretty certain that if you;d used the 55mm/1.8 on the a7r2 the results would be closer.  

  

 

 

[jagnje]

Comparisons with the Sony?

 

no, the nx1...1080p and 4k comparison. But it might become a bit irrelevant now, since samsung seems to be officialy killing the camera bussines. Price drops to come maybe?

[Geoff CB]

no, the nx1...1080p and 4k comparison. But it might become a bit irrelevant now, since samsung seems to be officialy killing the camera bussines. Price drops to come maybe?

Wow am I sick of hearing this, until Samsung announces this it is just a unfounded rumor. Samsung is one of the biggest tech giants in the world which supposedly had great sales with the NX1. Why would they close up shop?

[The Chris]

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.

[Triumph61]

Your 24-70 lens WILL NOT match the resolving capabilities of the samsung lens.  It just won't.  The 24-70 will have been designed with an approximate 30lp/mm onto a full frame sensor.

 

I'm pretty certain that if you;d used the 55mm/1.8 on the a7r2 the results would be closer.  

  

OK richg101   Sorry but I disagree and so does the real life output.  I have taken two shots attached here at 100% crops.  They were taken on the Samsung at 24mm and the Canon on the A7RII in APSC mode at 24mm.    Both shot in RAW and imported into Lightroom with sharpening turned completely off on both.  Exported both to 4K resolution to be fair as the Samsung is slightly higher res and to emulate what happens when each frame of Video is created.  Then I have cropped in at 100% on where I focused and here are the results.  The Samsung benefits very slightly from a higher starting res at this pixel level magnification of very fine detail, but the difference is very small, hardly any difference and CERTAINLY not what is show when the same test was run as Video output rather than Raw stills.  So the Variable here is ............Video output versus Still capture and I am sorry but by far the largest loss of res is NOT the lens but it is lost in the conversion in camera to Video.  By the way, hardly fair to have a 16-50 F2 zoom compared with a 55mm 1.8 prime?  But as you can see here that would not be the difference in a shoot out with these two camera's when Video is chosen.  :-)  Sony is the first image and Samsung the second image.  Happy to post edge resolution but its still shows the same result.  To be honest I probably could have shot the Samsung in Video and taken a similar grab for a similar effect, the Samsung seems to be able to create 25 frames at it actual still resolution in a fairly lossless way when resolution is considered. Still grabs from Samsung footage look like still shot images.  Not so for the Sony.

[Triumph61]

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.

Hi Chris, I disagree re FF comparison, it does serve a purpose, many here may want to see what the real difference is,   It's one thing to read that it's not as good and a bit "soft" in FF but for some, this will be a better illustration.  Two of my images were S35 so I showed both FF and S35 and i did qualify that one of my main attractions was FF video and stills.   The other things like back focus button and adapted lenses are fair enough, but to me, seem far more relevant for a still shooter than video.  I have found adapted lenses on the Sony to be fairly flaky with Metabones 4 and latest firmware. It's great you can do it, but far from a great experience.  If I had seen a comparison like this before I bought, considering that FF was one of my criteria, I may have purchased differently.   TOOOO many talking heads on so called "reviews " online without real life data, to show what a bit softer actually means. IMHO  Personally I was a bit shocked when i started looking at the 4K output from the A7RII, but I have gone from 5DMKIII magic lantern raw to NX1 and now Sony A7RII and the output from the Sony surprised me after the other two especially with regards the discarded detail as shown in the images at the start of my post. People have said they have shot footage on the Sony in FF and S35 and edited it with no real discernible difference in the final cut between them, I think my images show that is far from correct.  FF is mush not just a "bit softer"   I will do some more tests and maybe I can live with it, but so far I am unconvinced.  If ONLY Sony hadn't left Phase detect AF from the A7SII, it could have been my potential Still/Video shooter  :-(

[richg101]

OK richg101   Sorry but I disagree and so does the real life output.  I have taken two shots attached here at 100% crops.  They were taken on the Samsung at 24mm and the Canon on the A7RII in APSC mode at 24mm.    Both shot in RAW and imported into Lightroom with sharpening turned completely off on both.  Exported both to 4K resolution to be fair as the Samsung is slightly higher res and to emulate what happens when each frame of Video is created.  Then I have cropped in at 100% on where I focused and here are the results.  The Samsung benefits very slightly from a higher starting res at this pixel level magnification of very fine detail, but the difference is very small, hardly any difference and CERTAINLY not what is show when the same test was run as Video output rather than Raw stills.  So the Variable here is ............Video output versus Still capture and I am sorry but by far the largest loss of res is NOT the lens but it is lost in the conversion in camera to Video.  By the way, hardly fair to have a 16-50 F2 zoom compared with a 55mm 1.8 prime?  But as you can see here that would not be the difference in a shoot out with these two camera's when Video is chosen.  :-)  Sony is the first image and Samsung the second image.  Happy to post edge resolution but its still shows the same result.  To be honest I probably could have shot the Samsung in Video and taken a similar grab for a similar effect, the Samsung seems to be able to create 25 frames at it actual still resolution in a fairly lossless way when resolution is considered. Still grabs from Samsung footage look like still shot images.  Not so for the Sony.

even the thumbnails here show a drastic difference in resolution.  the top image is smeared (take the sell by date numbering as a reference.  blow those two images up 2x and the difference is even more obvious.

 

 

[Triumph61]

 

even the thumbnails here show a drastic difference in resolution.  the top image is smeared (take the sell by date numbering as a reference.  blow those two images up 2x and the difference is even more obvious.

 

 

Sorry  disagree and certainly not what is being seen in the  Video files as a  Huge difference.   There is a difference, but drastic?  More res based than lens based I can read the same writing in each raw file.  Drawing a long bow I think, I'll give you this  10% lens and 90% internal camera processing.  If I had more time I could do the same test and flick them to video output to show you the lens is the insignificant factor here.  

[The Chris]

Hi Chris, I disagree re FF comparison, it does serve a purpose, many here may want to see what the real difference is,   It's one thing to read that it's not as good and a bit "soft" in FF but for some, this will be a better illustration.  Two of my images were S35 so I showed both FF and S35 and i did qualify that one of my main attractions was FF video and stills.   The other things like back focus button and adapted lenses are fair enough, but to me, seem far more relevant for a still shooter than video.  I have found adapted lenses on the Sony to be fairly flaky with Metabones 4 and latest firmware. It's great you can do it, but far from a great experience.  If I had seen a comparison like this before I bought, considering that FF was one of my criteria, I may have purchased differently.   TOOOO many talking heads on so called "reviews " online without real life data, to show what a bit softer actually means. IMHO  Personally I was a bit shocked when i started looking at the 4K output from the A7RII, but I have gone from 5DMKIII magic lantern raw to NX1 and now Sony A7RII and the output from the Sony surprised me after the other two especially with regards the discarded detail as shown in the images at the start of my post. People have said they have shot footage on the Sony in FF and S35 and edited it with no real discernible difference in the final cut between them, I think my images show that is far from correct.  FF is mush not just a "bit softer"   I will do some more tests and maybe I can live with it, but so far I am unconvinced.  If ONLY Sony hadn't left Phase detect AF from the A7SII, it could have been my potential Still/Video shooter  :-(

Depends on the situation, in some cases there's very little difference between FF and crop  

the Canon zooms are pretty close to native lenses on the A7rII with the Metabones 4, not dodgy at all  

Use what makes you happy. For me there's plenty of resolution with s35 mode and the better DR/less noise is more significant than a little more detail - especially when most viewers don't have 4k panels.

cheers

[j.f.r.]

What do you consider poor ISO performance? I can shoot up to ISO 2500 just fine on the NX1, which is plenty for me.  I consider a sensor with 2000+ ISO native sensitivity a niche thing.  Who wants to shoot in daylight at ISO 3200, or even 1600 for that matter.  That's craziness.  Sure, you can shoot in pitch black... but, that's not a normal thing for me.  Normal conditions, 4K on the NX1 > Sony A7R II and Sony A7S II (from what I can tell so far).  

Call it sharpness or detail, I call it resolution.  And it is your friend.  You can always artificially down-resolve an image, but you can never add true resolution like you get with the NX1. 

Post your 2000+ iso footage......

 

Also I work with professional cameras, NX1 is has nothing similar to RED, SONY, ARRI, PHANTOM, etc.

 

You perceive "digital sharpness" and mistake it for resolution/dynamic range. Personally the NX1 imo has a horrible image and I haven't seen even one good narrative done on the camera. I would rather shoot on a 5D before I pick up and use an NX1.

[Liam]

Post your 2000+ iso footage......

 

Also I work with professional cameras, NX1 is has nothing similar to RED, SONY, ARRI, PHANTOM, etc.

 

You perceive "digital sharpness" and mistake it for resolution/dynamic range. Personally the NX1 imo has a horrible image and I haven't seen even one good narrative done on the camera. I would rather shoot on a 5D before I pick up and use an NX1.

"sony" isn't a professional camera either. colors seem deeper in the nx1 than an A7s (or easier to get to look that way) and great skins. and I'll usually prefer crushed blacks in a final grade and don't need.. all the highlight detail anyway. plus the rolloff is really great too. the 5D is great, but not an example of a resolution/dynamic range king

[vaga]

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

That is true: I haven't either

[neosushi]

That is true: I haven't either

Not many owners out there compare to Sony's cameras. Also I think that directors amateurs or pros looking to film more fiction will be probably more interested in DR than sharpness.

[ricardo_sousa11]

 

 

The NX1 video frames do look a lot like still photographs, heres a few shots I took from 4k video - http://imgur.com/a/CCBXl - it is so outstanding how sharp the image is (please note this image has grading, still WIP, but its not raw image).

What I've realised too is, the camera handles bokeh differently between 4k video and 1080p video (or even photography), making it look like FF almost when in 4k.

You can make the footage look as filmic or digital as you want.

**The reason why theres very few actual good footage of the NX1 is due to the marketing structure. Many people bought it and use the kit lens and are amazed at the "out of focus background", this is a pro-sumer camera, that was  marketed as a "bigger" higher end point n' shoot, besides its a very very new camera and system, very ew people actually risk going for it, considering lens selection and completely new system. Let me share with you a few great examples of how amazing this camera is :

 

 

 

[The Chris]

What do you consider poor ISO performance? I can shoot up to ISO 2500 just fine on the NX1, which is plenty for me.  I consider a sensor with 2000+ ISO native sensitivity a niche thing.  Who wants to shoot in daylight at ISO 3200, or even 1600 for that matter.  That's craziness.  Sure, you can shoot in pitch black... but, that's not a normal thing for me.  Normal conditions, 4K on the NX1 > Sony A7R II and Sony A7S II (from what I can tell so far).  

Call it sharpness or detail, I call it resolution.  And it is your friend.  You can always artificially down-resolve an image, but you can never add true resolution like you get with the NX1. 

You can't add DR to the NX1 either, so its a tradeoff depending on your preferences. The NX1's extra sharpness wouldn't improve on this piece one bit. https://vimeo.com/142734311

Pretty tough to shoot anything indoors without going above 1600 unless you're bringing lots of lights. I shoot events and go to 6400 regularly, even with F/1.4 lenses. Less noise and more DR make a bigger difference because the NX1 gets pretty messy above 1600, and 6400 is absolute mush, all the detail is lost in the noise. At least that was my experience.

"normal conditions" aren't the same for everyone.

YMMV

[Marco Tecno]

Imo nx1 could be much improved via a fw update implementing higher bitrates and better encoding algorithm. If I shoot a still at iso 6400 using raw, then apply slight nr and enhance sharpness a little bit in lightroom, then resize it to 8mp (4k like) I get a much, much better image compared to a frame grab from 4k video at iso 6400.

[deezid]

Why are people always confusing resolution with sharpening artifacts (which NX1 does plenty even with sharpness down at -10)?

I think if Samsung add a LOG mode with post processing completely turned OFF, the NX1 will actually rock!
Nowadays better go with GH4 (v-log -5/-5, external 10 bit), a7SII (PP9, Slog3 Sgamut 3.cine), a7RII (SLOG2, Cine Matrix) , BMCC, BM Pocket, Canon XC10 (C-LOG), RX10 II or RX100 IV (SLOG2, Cine Matrix) etc... for a filmic, non artifally sharpened output!

[Marco Tecno]

+1 for a real log profile for nx1! I don't know why samsung does not implemented it from the beginning. Nx1 is a camera with such strong video specs!

[j.f.r.]

"sony" isn't a professional camera either.

 

Many films shot on "Sony" cameras, we all know this. I stated a "brand" not a specific model....

[Triumph61]

 

Yes the NX1 still over sharpens but it also does capture more detail as per the image below.

Has anyone got a A7SII, and can relay how well it focuses without Phase Detect AF?   I assume it crap with adapted lenses and OK with native?