Samsung NX1 vs Sony A7Rii

[DBounce]

It should come as no surprise to many here that I have been spending some time filming and taking stills with Samsung's mighty NX1 camera. What some may not realize is that I have also been getting to know Sony's own heavy weight contender... the A7Rii. In this writing are some of my thoughts and conclusions.

Pros - Samsung NX1:

1. Excellent 16-50mm S-lens (Clean optics, pretty fast... Great performance for the buck).
2. Feels good in the hand.
3. Excellent user interface (Easy to use).
4. Better than expected low-light (Good up to 6400 iso).
5. Future proof H.265 codec means it is compatible with cheaper/slower SD cards.
6. Good auto-focus.
7. Cinema 4k (Very cool).
8. Great OLED display.
9. Good battery life.

Cons - Samsung NX1:

1. Limited lens selection.
2. When recording video you cannot switch back and forth from EVF to rear display panel. 
3. Unnatural motion cadence when panning or recording a moving subject (deal breaker).
4. Limited dynamic range (troublesome).
5. External flash requires purchase of second expensive flash unit for off camera use.
6. Internal flash creates shadow when used with kit 16-50mm S-lens.
7. Stock battery grip does not fit correctly (QC fail).

Pros -  Sony A7Rii

1. Feels like the real deal, solid, well made... Quality (Confidence inspiring).
2. Amazing auto-focus (In a different league).
3. 42MP stills (Wow, just wow!!!).
4. Accessories (Flashes galore, wireless sound with connection though smart hot shoe, grips etc...).
5. Amazing lenses (Zeiss Distagon 35mm with selectable de-clicked aperture... must be seen to believe, Batis 85mm etc... ).
6. Adaptable (Canon lenses focus faster than on native canon bodies).
7. Large EVF (really large).
8. Video motion cadence is good.
9. Pleasing colors (Thank you Sony... at last).
10. Good battery life (With the new firmware I shot all day on a single battery, mix of video and stills).
11. Excellent low-light performance - full frame clean to 12800 and APS-C clean till 25,600 ISO (more than enough, unless you are doing surveillance).

Cons - Sony A7Rii

1. Expensive (Body alone is $3200 US)
2. Native lenses are expensive and mostly slow.
3. Rear LCD display should be better at this price point.
4. Non-intuitive user interface (Doesn't Sony make smartphone also?).
5. Battery grip use requires removing the in body battery.
6. Large file sizes means it takes a long time to write to even the fastest SD cards.

Let me first add that both are great cameras. And truly fantastic results can be accomplished with either. But that said, there really can only be one winner here. And after shooting with both cameras, I can declare with great confidence that if stills are entered into the equations... at all, you can just start saving your pennies now. The A7Rii is an amazing stills camera. The auto-focus is mythical. The burst speed is truly something to marvel at. The A7Rii is without a doubt among the best full frame stills camera currently available. 
As to video, after extensive testing I am forced to realign my previous thoughts regarding the NX1. While it is an excellent camera, it is simply out classed by Sony's offering. Overall image quality is superior on the A7Rii. Colors seem more true to life without the need for tweaking. The video motion cadence seems more natural. Dynamic range is much better also, with far better black levels. Auto-focus in video mode is very good on the A7Rii. 

I need to make a disclosure here, I am not unbiased in this review. I REALLY wanted the Samsung NX1 to blow away the Sony A7Rii. If it had, it would have saved me many thousands of dollars. But in the end, the results where undeniable. The A7Rii is the better camera. If you are on the fence and wondering if it is worth three times the money... Wonder no more. Safe in the knowledge that the new firmware has resolved the worrisome overheat problems that plagued this camera, the only sensible choice is the A7Rii. While the A7Sii does offer 1080p 120fps capture, the A7Rii's ability to deliver super high res stills  combined with the flexibility of filming in both full frame and APS-C video modes make it the clear winner for anyone outside of a private eye on a stakeout.

Verdict: I find for the Sony A7Rii.

 

[gsenroc]

Thanks for the comparison, nice to see more feedback from people who have both cameras.

They've just blown my mind when I tried each of them, but you get what you pay for. It's just a pity that the NX1 seems to go out of sight in the market. 

I'm actually planning to buy an external monitor for my NX1. I feel very uncomfortable when I use EVF/OVF when wearing glasses, it just pushes my glasses to my face and that causes something like distortion in everything because my glasses is not in the right place anymore, and I can't see the full EVF, the edge is always vignetting.

[Hene1]

If A7r II has "good battery life", then NX1's battery life should be "mindblowing battery life from different galaxy". It's just joke that you gave them both "good battery life" when A7r II is so much worse.

Cinema4K with NX1 is softer than UHD, so that shouldn't be plus, and 4K with A7r II is cropped which should be huge minus.

A7r II also requires good color grading to get useful results, while NX1 looks awesome straight out of box.

Screenshot from NX1 video (4K@1080p):

[Towd]

First time poster.

In regards to the Samsung NX1, I'm considering a purchase, but I'm a bit curious about your comment regarding "3. Unnatural motion cadence when panning or recording a moving subject (deal breaker)."   Is this in reference to some form of extreme rolling shutter when recording UHD or 4k?  

I've seen that the 4k rolling shutter is pretty bad on the Samsung but its also not great on the Sony A7 series.  However, the Samsung 1080p rolling shutter is one of the best among CMOS sensors.  My thought is that during scenes with extreme action or during lots of hand held shooting, I could drop to 1080p to compensate.

Or does motion cadence refer to something else?  To my mind, something shot at 24 fps at 1/50th shutter speed should be pretty much the same across cameras unless rolling shutter plays a major role in what is perceived by the viewer.

I'm very curious in regards to what people are referring to when they reference motion cadence.  Seems a very nebulous trait of a camera and I'm very interested in what makes good cadence vs bad cadence that would constitute a deal-breaker for a certain camera.

[Hene1]

In regards to the Samsung NX1, I'm considering a purchase, but I'm a bit curious about your comment regarding "3. Unnatural motion cadence when panning or recording a moving subject (deal breaker)."   Is this in reference to some form of extreme rolling shutter when recording UHD or 4k? 

I also wondered what this might mean. I haven't noticed anything strange with my NX1. I like to always keep shutter speed 1/50 (or 1/125 when shooting 100 fps slowmotion) and use ND filter. In my eye the motion seems very natural.

[Cinegain]

Yeah, 'motion cadence' is something as non-quantifiable and vague as an image that 'pops'.

But it kinda has to do with the organic flow of frames following up eachother. Even though the framerate and shutterspeed are set the same, there might be a different feel to the motion with different cameras. Something you can't quite put your finger on, but kinda know its there. Not science, but magic.

[Don Kotlos]

DBounce I am happy that you gave A7rii a try and it was to your liking.  

I'm very curious in regards to what people are referring to when they reference motion cadence

There is no definition for motion cadence that everybody adheres to. Most just use this expression for a subjective quality of motion. 

There are several things that affect it. 

1. Actual shutter angle. In my experience 24fps and 1/50 does not always give the same result in different cameras. There must be something else that is done in the background and we are not aware for some of them (E-M5ii was an example). 

2. Codec. Usually interframe  low bitrate codecs produce macro coding blocks instead of motion blur. 

3. Rolling shutter. While 180 degrees with 24p many times can produce pleasing blur, adding jello effect can become sickening really fast. 

A7r II also requires good color grading to get useful results, while NX1 looks awesome straight out of box.

This is one of the most misconceived things about A7rii/A7sii. If you use slog/sgammut of course grading will be needed, as post processing is the whole point shooting in that mode. If minor/no prost processing is needed, Cine4/Cine2 with Pro/Cinema gammut can produce awesome colors straight out of the box. 

[The Chris]

If A7r II has "good battery life", then NX1's battery life should be "mindblowing battery life from different galaxy". It's just joke that you gave them both "good battery life" when A7r II is so much worse.

Cinema4K with NX1 is softer than UHD, so that shouldn't be plus, and 4K with A7r II is cropped which should be huge minus.

A7r II also requires good color grading to get useful results, while NX1 looks awesome straight out of box.

Not true at all. A7rII shoots FF 4k, in addition to s35 with less noise at high ISO's compared to the NX1. Plus you can use a speedster with the A7rII if you want the cleaner s35 files, with a FF look. There are many profiles that give great colors SOOC on the A7rII, just don't use Sgamut with SLOG2, this is well known. Battery life is better with the NX1, but generics are $10 on the Sony, I have about a dozen. DR on the A7rII is much, much better, about 2 stops better according to DXO. DR in stills is significantly better as well, so is the AF in stills or video. I've owned both, the A7rII is a better video camera, IMO.

[Towd]

1. Actual shutter angle. In my experience 24fps and 1/50 does not always give the same result in different cameras. There must be something else that is done in the background and we are not aware for some of them (E-M5ii was an example). 

2. Codec. Usually interframe  low bitrate codecs produce macro coding blocks instead of motion blur. 

3. Rolling shutter. While 180 degrees with 24p many times can produce pleasing blur, adding jello effect can become sickening really fast. 

I can see the third one affecting the cadence of an image and a jello'd frame is pretty easy to spot in fast motion.  And its something that camera's like the Digital Bolex love to point out as a selling point for global shutters. 

Is #2 really a huge issue?  I guess overly compressed footage would be softer and affect cadence to an extent, but that just seems like soft footage.

I could see #1 being an issue if a camera recorded in 30 fps and then dropped frames to get to 24 fps.  Or do some cameras possibly record at 48fps interlaced and then reconstruct frames?  Seems weird and I'd be interested in seeing some real examples.

I'm not calling BS because I believe its a real phenomenon to some extent with various cameras.  I just wonder how visually perceptible it really is and to the extent it affects the NX1 if at all.

Personally, the only cadence issue I've encountered is when uploading 24fps footage to Youtube and watching in dismay as it plays back at 30fps through frame doubling.  Same for TV with some weird interlacing or frame doubling applied.  

Thinking along those lines, I'd imagine that the monitor the footage was viewed on would affect cadence as well.  At 72hz you'd get 3 refresh cycles per frame where a 60hz monitor would give you alternating 2 and 3 refresh cycles per frame.   I wonder if that would not be biasing an opinion.

[Dean]

And after shooting with both cameras, I can declare with great confidence that if stills are entered into the equations... at all, you can just start saving your pennies now. ... everyone knows it would have better IQ ... it's FF with a state of the art 42MP sensor. I like taking stills as well and thought that the A7Rii would be the perfect hybrid cam but it's not at all IMO. I just hated using it mainly from an ergonomic perspective. Not fun at all. NX1 is a pleasure to use. I'd rather have an NX1 & a D750 than just an A7Rii. 

The auto-focus is mythical. -- Try using a D750 ... to me the AF on that cam is amazing ... in any light.

The burst speed is truly something to marvel at - better than the 15fps on the NX1? At least on the NX1 you don't have to walk around the block to wait for the cam to finish processing those shots.

The A7Rii is without a doubt among the best full frame stills camera currently available -- utter nonsense. Many would argue a D4, D750, D810, 5DMkiii, 5Ds are better cameras. Just depends what you are using it for.

Overall image quality is superior on the A7Rii. Colors seem more true to life without the need for tweaking. -- did you get the cameras mixed up in testing? LOL

9. Pleasing colors (Thank you Sony... at last). ... really??? The NX1 seems to have much nicer colours. 

I've had both cameras as well. A7Rii is better for stills for sure (the end result that is .. not necessarily taking the actual shot), but everything else I'd rather use the NX1. Ergonomically I find the A7Rii terrible in comparison to the NX1. The NX1 seems to have everything in just the right place and feels great to use.

The A7Rii also feels drastically underpowered as far as the processor goes and really clunky to use ... like you are waiting all the time for things to happen. It's like they put a V8 in a mini.

I don't get why everyone says the AF is that great on the A7Rii either ... it's good for mirrorless but all mirrorless seem to suck really badly when they light goes down a little ... including the Sony's. The NX1 is worse than the Sony for sure but I don't find the Sony in any way near a D750 or the like. The AF is good for a mirrorless cam ... still no where near a DSLR IMO.

I also hate the fact that it is near impossible to film outside in 4k on the A7Rii as the LCD & EVF dim so much as soon as you press record. Makes it impossible to see what your actually filming. Only Sony's seem to to do this ... RX100iv does it as well. Doesn't happen in 1080p  so probably done to prevent overheating ... perhaps they can hire some soon to be out of work Samsung engineers soon to fix this up  

Also, at the end of the day, no matter how small they make the FF mirrorless cams, there's no way around the fact the any decent fast & bright (2.8) AF zoom is going to be a monster and totally unbalanced ... bigger cams seem much better suited to shooting these types of lenses.

That being said, I don't mind Sony and I'm happy they keep pushing the envelope and things like the 42MP sensor and inbuilt IBIS are awesome. I like the little prime lenses as well. I really wish they bring out a slightly bigger version of the A7 series with better ergonomics, much faster processor and no heating issues. This would be a nice camera.

 

 

[DBounce]

If A7r II has "good battery life", then NX1's battery life should be "mindblowing battery life from different galaxy". It's just joke that you gave them both "good battery life" when A7r II is so much worse.

Cinema4K with NX1 is softer than UHD, so that shouldn't be plus, and 4K with A7r II is cropped which should be huge minus.

A7r II also requires good color grading to get useful results, while NX1 looks awesome straight out of box.

Screenshot from NX1 video (4K@1080p):

In regards to battery life I shot pretty much all day (4k video also) and still had battery life left. It's much better than I had expected given all the talk of how bad it was. Granted, I am running the newest firmware, so it may be better than before. Color is subjective, but I feel the Sony looked good out of the box. BTW, 4k with the A7Rii is not cropped unless you choose to select APS-C mode. Can you select full frame mode on the NX1 or is it always cropped? Is it a "huge" minus?

From what I can tell, softness is not a real issue on either camera. Both are great overall. But for many reasons, the Sony is worth the premium. If you haven't shot with it, you need to take one for a spin. The rest will be history.

[Don Kotlos]

 

I'm not calling BS because I believe its a real phenomenon to some extent with various cameras.  I just wonder how visually perceptible it really is and to the extent it affects the NX1 if at all.

Towd, I was not talking about the NX1 specifically. I haven't paid that much attention to NX1 motion cadence but if anything then rolling shutter might affect it. 

 

[kidzrevil]

Glad to hear you like the a7rii. I've been debating getting a sony a7sii because some of my lenses look better on the full frame mount (canon fd). With that being said I would disagree with some of your statements (not trying to be argumentative). Although i havent shot with the a7rii I've only shot with the a7s I can say I never experienced the issues you have with motion cadence. I would go as far as to say it has the best cadence to my eye when compared to the gh4 & a7s I owned. I don't think any motion shot in 24 fps would look "natural" on any camera when some people eyes cant destinguish anything over 60 frames per second. Some people can distinguish frames beyond 60 and thats scientific fact. Point being I think the motion of any of these cameras are unnoticable to the user and will not make or break your aesthetic and this is coming from a guy who doesnt mind going up to 1/4000  second shutter at 24fps. The nx1 doesnt have the jittery effect however the fine detail can be a bit too much and adds to the "electronic" feel that may be a turn off for some. I tried shooting with diffusion filters with no luck cuz the camera  just cuts right through it, has got to be how it downsamples from the 6.5k sensor. Anyway back to motion it compresses motion blur very well...the xavc codec from sony is notorious for generating macro blocking because it cant handle that motion for some reason clueless as to why. 

As far as nx1 dynamic range is concerned it has plenty...especially for the fact the codec is 8bit. Shooting log with an 8bit codec is nonsense to me. Not enough bits to spare....not enough color data to spread around like that. With LOG the camera dedicates less and less data with each stop it renders...food for thought. This is why you see all the artifacting and banding on people insisting on shooting LOG. Over exposing slog footage two stops to avoid the noise it gives you kinda defeats the purpose but whatever. The NX1 has alot of detail hidden in shadows and to get maximum dr underexpose. That simple. Damn thing is almost noiseless 1600 and under. Besides in general when it comes to DR if you are not shooting on actual film your gonna have to prioritize your highlights or shadows. 

NX1 color straight out of the box is mind blowing. Skin tones are very close to accurate. Sony shifts their yellows towards green. This wreaks havoc on skin tones especially caucasian skin. And last but not least the infamous sony blue channel clipping makes it just about unusual in city scenariou with neon lights and events such as concerts.

full frame is overrated. APS-C is closer to motion picture full frame is 35mm photo equivalent. Full frame doesn't add mysterious magic to an image and with certain lenses crop will cut out the problematic areas of the imaging circle.

overall they are both great cameras. I prefer the nx1 over the a7 series

[DBounce]

Glad to hear you like the a7rii. I've been debating getting a sony a7sii because some of my lenses look better on the full frame mount (canon fd). With that being said I would disagree with some of your statements (not trying to be argumentative). Although i haven't shot with the a7rii...

And this is the part where everything else you say is based upon ZERO experience with the camera. Don't go by specs. Get your hands on one and put in some time shooting.

[kidzrevil]

And this is the part where everything else you say is based upon ZERO experience with the camera. Don't go by specs. Get your hands on one and put in some time shooting.

I HAVE the NX1 so im not sure how that part of my statement is invalid and SLOG 2 is the same across the board with all their a7 line. But whatever dude you obviously didn't read what I wrote, happy hunting.