Anybody compared an NX1 w/ 18-200 to XC10, RX10, FZ1000?

[Shaun Walker]

Wondering if, for a travel/casual/run/n/gun camera, the compacts would be better in any way other than size -- the NX 18-200mm is pretty soft, but maybe it's good enough for 4K and the NX1 low light is probably better??

[Andrew Reid]

I prefer the NX1 with the 16-50mm F2-2.8

Not tried the 18-200 but these zooms for APS-C are usually pretty soft

4K needs a good lens.

The XC10 would be better in low light, it can do pretty respectable 6400 whereas the NX1 is very noisy indeed at that level

RX10 II 4K is pretty soft, I don't rate it. RX10 III much better

FZ1000 is a very decent bargain super zoom, this is cheapest way to get a 24-400mm.

28-200mm is the 18-200 on NX1

[kidzrevil]

Funny, I haven't ran into the RX10 II 4K softness issue you mentioned. You think your copies lens just may be messed up ? Could be worth looking into it. How is the stabilization on the 16-50 ? @Andrew Reid

@Shaun Walker it may be worth looking into the xc10 or the rx10 ii to travel with. I have the RX10 ii and its pretty good

[ReinisK]

I have shot only with nx1 and the 18-200, which I have. I bought it based on some review, which said, that for video it's good enough, only for pictures the resolution is kind of low. For a year or so I had an 18-200 Canon on my 550d, that lens was very nice (at least I thought so back then), so I though I'd give this a try, too. Well, I'm disappointed with it (bought it used though, but in "excellent condition"). The sharpness is maybe just enough for full hd, for 4k it's lacking I think.

Stabilizer is no good @200mm. Don't know why, but at 200mm it stabilizes the big movements, but there always remains a very small, very unpleasant shake/jitter. Up to 150mm it seems good though. It also turns off IS when it thinks I'm using a tripod, but it's actually a monopod I'm using, where I really WANT the IS, but it just stops until a very big shake happens. Tried the IS calibration in the dev settings but it didn't do anything. Can someone who owns the lens comment on these issues? Maybe I just have a bad lens?

Apart from the sharpness and IS, there is another thing - the look that the lens creates. I really don't find it nice. Maybe it's the combination of quite an ugly bokeh, small aperture and lack of sharpness. Can't explain more, but it sux compared to my Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC. Also comparing to the videos I shot with the Canon 18-200 and 550d, this look just seems worse.

Maybe the unsharp Canon video was hiding the flaws of that 18-200 lens, whereas NX1's super-high resolution exaggerates them...

[tugela]

I would guess that you don't see the flaws on the Canon due to the poor resolution on that camera. The 550D is essentially 720p resolution, and soft even at that. It would be hard to compare the relative lens performance unless you mounted them both of the NX1. I have shot some stuff with my Canon zooms using the NX1, but not having an electronic lens is a problem. It is also hard to get critical focus with the Canon since the throw distance is so small. Fine adjustment of manual focus is an order of magnitude easier with a native NX lens.

[kidzrevil]

@tugela have you tried the 16-50s ? Really curious about that lens