Samsung NX1 vs Fujifilm X-T2 vs Nikon D5500 vs Sony a5100 shootout

[Inazuma]

Ever since I gave up my Nikon D5200 a few years ago for the Panasonic GX7, I've been dearly missing one lens. The 17-50mm f2.8. I tried the 12-35mm f2.8 on the Panasonic but didn't like it. Then the Samsung NX1 came out along with the 16-50mm f2-2.8. At the time, it was way above my budget. So I've since considered other systems such as the Sony but for one reason or another, they didn't fit my needs. But now, over 2 years later, I've finally been able and willing to pick one up. Luckily as well, the camera body is entirely unused. The manufacturer sealing was still in place. 

One of the first things I do when I get a new camera is to compare it to my other camera(s) for things like colour, dynamic range and noise. I've made many such tests before but never usually post them. This time I've taken the time to do it properly and edit it together for all to see. 

First up is the X-T2 vs NX1 shootout. The main point of this was to see the differences in colour and tonality. See the video description for all the fine details on settings.

And next is this high iso comparison with two other cameras I currently have. Again, you can see the video description for all the setting details.

Some thoughts on the differences between the X-T2 and NX1:

• AF-C and focus pulling with AF works much better on the older NX1 than the X-T2; in video anyway. 
• The 16-50mm f2-2.8 is a ridiculously good lens, image wise. And the focus rings works just like a classic lens.
• The grip and button layout of the NX1 is far better. I've always felt the retro styling of Fujifilm were a detriment to their functionality.
• The downside to the NX1 is that it is far inferior to the XT2 in low light. The last shot in the shootout was shot at ISO 800 on the NX1 and 1600 on the XT2, yet the NX1 shows less detail and more muddiness due to the noise reduction. 
• Also the NX1 is far sharper in 4k and HD but has more aliasing and moiré in the latter.

 

Anyway, I'd really like to hear your thoughts on the difference between the images I'm yet undecided of which system to keep, even though the NX1 would finally fulfil my want.. or need of a 16-50mm f2.8. 

[Mattias Burling]

Nice tests and interesting results and conclusions.

"The grip and button layout of the NX1 is far better. I've always felt the retro styling of Fujifilm were a detriment to their functionality."
Depends imo. If you use it for stills, given that they are first and foremost still cameras, then the "retro" controls are far superior in speed and functionality.

[Arikhan]

@Inazuma

Thank you for your work! Respectable results for the older cameras, keeping good up with the new X-T2...

Quote

The downside to the NX1 is that it is far inferior to the XT2 in low light

I love this camera and shot about 25.000 photos with it...But low light and low contrast (tungsten) are simply a desaster - not in stills only...

[Kisaha]

Wow! had some great time in the wider Manchester area a decade and a half ago! studying in Midlands, partying in Machester (was doing videos for some teams up there, and otherwise!).

Watched in 1440p.

Seriously, I am impressed with the NX1 performance, I was expecting a much better image from X-T2. From the Sony's NX1 is in most modes miles ahead though.

In the high ISO test you did I was impressed of how good NX1 performed in 3200ISO (I am not using them) and it proves that with a limited ok lighting source the results are much better.

The one thing that I want to point out (and is a great advantage in my book) is how great the 16-50S lens is. Not something to underestimate, as a NX1+ S combo can achieve great things (do not forget that similar lenses are 2.8-4f or 4f, so a small handicap in ISO is excused for the greatest megapixel count in crop world).

Also NXs ISO metering is the most accurate with Sony second. Fuji's 6400ISO is consider to be close to 3750ISO +_ 100ISO, while NX is close to 5400(something like this, I do not have the time to double check it right now, the Fuji number is accurate though, just can't remember the NX exactly). I am not sure that means, just mentioning it!

[Inazuma]

@Mattias Burling Yeh things like that are purely personal preference really. One of the reasons I think the Fuji is functionally slower to use is because going from an auto mode to full manual requires changing dials in three different parts of the camera. And there are some other odd things, such as the focus mode dial being on the front of the camera.

@Kisaha Hah, interesting to hear about your past! Regarding the ISO test, you're right the NX1 doesnt look too bad there. But the difference is more obvious with the last shots in the XT2 vs NX1 vid.

How do you feel about the colours coming from the cameras?

[BTM_Pix]

4 hours ago, Inazuma said:

Some thoughts on the differences between the X-T2 and NX1:

• AF-C and focus pulling with AF works much better on the older NX1 than the X-T2; in video anyway. 
• The 16-50mm f2-2.8 is a ridiculously good lens, image wise. And the focus rings works just like a classic lens.
• The grip and button layout of the NX1 is far better. I've always felt the retro styling of Fujifilm were a detriment to their functionality.
• The downside to the NX1 is that it is far inferior to the XT2 in low light. The last shot in the shootout was shot at ISO 800 on the NX1 and 1600 on the XT2, yet the NX1 shows less detail and more muddiness due to the noise reduction. 
• Also the NX1 is far sharper in 4k and HD but has more aliasing and moiré in the latter.

 

Anyway, I'd really like to hear your thoughts on the difference between the images I'm yet undecided of which system to keep, even though the NX1 would finally fulfil my want.. or need of a 16-50mm f2.8. 

Nice test.

The NX1+16-50 combo battered the XT-2+18-55 for me.

I was watching it with trepidation as it was going along though thinking "I hope he didn't hang around Piccadilly Gardens to do the high ISO tests"

 

[jonpais]

I'm not seeing the Samsung battering the X-T2 at all. At 2:26 and a couple of other spots, the NX-1 outshines the X-T2 in detail and DR, but even though they were both shot simultaneously, the X-T2 appears to be out of focus for one thing. I don't own the 18-55, but it can't be that blurry, no way. I say this because although i don't own the 18-55, I do own at least a half dozen other Fuji lenses, and they are all tack sharp. I've also seen footage shot with the 18-55, and nothing I've seen looks that soft. 

Edit: I will say however, that if I could buy the Samsung and 16-50 in Vietnam today, I'd do so in a heartbeat. The footage of Nepal shared by another forum member the other day blew my mind.

19 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Nice test.

The NX1+16-50 combo battered the XT-2+18-55 for me.

I was watching it with trepidation as it was going along though thinking "I hope he didn't hang around Piccadilly Gardens to do the high ISO tests"

 

Maybe I'm mistaken, it's happened more than once! Is the DR of the NX1 really that much more than the X-T2? I won't be able to sleep tonite.

[BTM_Pix]

7 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I'm not seeing the Samsung battering the X-T2 at all. At 2:26 and a couple of other spots, the NX-1 outshines the X-T2 in detail and DR, but even though they were both shot simultaneously, the X-T2 appears to be out of focus for one thing. I don't own the 18-55, but it can't be that blurry, no way.

As a combo based on what was presented I thought the Samsung looked better but,yeah,there are are a lot of variables involved in the test that are influencing that 

[jonpais]

1 minute ago, BTM_Pix said:

As a combo based on what was presented I thought the Samsung looked better but,yeah,there are are a lot of variables involved in the test that are influencing that 

I guess the idea of selling off all my lenses and camera body is too dreadful to even accept that the NX1 might be that much better.

[BTM_Pix]

9 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I guess the idea of selling off all my lenses and camera body is too dreadful to even accept that the NX1 might be that much better.

The problem with the NX1 is that the people who have them know how good they are so the sort of dirt cheap second hand prices you'd expect of a dead system that wasn't able success either just haven't materialised.

Same with cameras like Sigma DP2m which when it ended up being sold off at £300 new then you'd expect to pick up second hand ones now for half that but the people who have them know what they've got and won't be getting rid of them! 

If NX1s were at the sort of level that I thought they would be under those circumstances (£400-500 ish) then I'd say chop in the XT2 for an X-T20 and a used NX1 and have the best of both worlds!

 

[Kisaha]

1 minute ago, jonpais said:

The X-T20 is really that good? 

The X-T20 is really that cheap (compared with the X-T2)! and has a touch screen as well..

It ain't true that aren't great NX bargains, they just becoming less and less.

End of 2015, when it was obvious that Samsung was abandoning the market, a lot of people sold their kits for dead cheap. In that period and early 2016 (until last summer more or less) most shops were getting rid of stock and you could find NX1 new for 650euros in Switzerland (I was considering fly there to pickup a couple of NX1s and S lenses!) and other crazy offers in Australia, Canada (I bought a 12-24mm, but with the shipping costs to Europe and all, it was more expensive that I hoped!), UK (John Lewis, or whatever its called, had until recently some boxes with the NX1+S lens kit, some lucky people got the deal of the century), Turkey (a lot of Turkish people became rich, buying locally and selling world wide, for some period the best lenses bargains on ebay were from Turkey) and Scandinavia.

After the releases of new cameras in 2016 (and just before the GH5 announcement), it was pretty obvious that NX system will be relevant for at least a few more years, as it was offering the biggest megapixel count in APS-C land (28MP), the only BSI crop sensor (the other one, but full frame is the A7Rii), futureproof H265 that just recently can be fully utilized (almost every hardware piece, from mobile phone SoC to PC components and software are H265 compatible), a very modern AF system on sensor (with some tricks also, detecting movement, baseball throw, photo finish trigger, jump activation), 15fps, excellent OLED screen and viewfinder, best in industry (back then) wireless/connectivity features, UI and touch screen implementation (Fuji and Sony still strangling in that matter), very good 120fps slow motion, plus all the other advantages (ergonomics, battery life, no overheating etc etc) and plus the great mod/hack scene that increased the already many feats and video capabilities.

With the NX500 (same sensor, crop in 4K though) and some other older NX I have, I have a complete kit for most uses (from family photos to paid jobs).

For me, the only disadvantages are

1) aggressive NR in high ISO settings (but with the 2-2.8f 16-50S I can be in the same lever as other similar systems have 2.8-4f or 4f lenses)

2) not able to zoom in to check focus while recording video (a cheap monitor can do the job, still I would prefer it in build).

I have no experience with the X-T2, NX1 simply totally annihilates older Fuji cameras, but I was expecting X-T2 to really crush NX1, that is not the case, and in most instances I prefer NX1 more than the Fuji, plus some other things that Samsung is better anyway.

[BTM_Pix]

11 minutes ago, jonpais said:

The X-T20 is really that good? 

It depends on what you're going to use it for. The X-T2 is better in terms of build quality and ergonomics (especially the joystick) but I've used them side by side for work and what ends up in the image file is identical.

I don't find the AF lacking and for what I'm using it for the AF does get exercised heavily.

The reduced FPS and buffer weren't a practical issue either to be honest.

As for video, well you lose the 1.17 crop in 4K so there is some potential artifacts involved but I'd need to do full A/B comparison but it's not jarring enough for me to draw attention to itself. 

And there's no FLOG but there's no additional £1000 to pay for an external recorder either. 

The compact size is a bonus for me but I will definitely look at getting the X-T10 side grip to make it a bit more ergonomic. 

In a straight choice then of course I'd have X-T2 but if it came to saving or raising funds for additional stuff then I wouldn't be fazed by having to 'make do' with the X-T20 

 

[mercer]

14 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

It depends on what you're going to use it for. The X-T2 is better in terms of build quality and ergonomics (especially the joystick) but I've used them side by side for work and what ends up in the image file is identical.

I don't find the AF lacking and for what I'm using it for the AF does get exercised heavily.

The reduced FPS and buffer weren't a practical issue either to be honest.

As for video, well you lose the 1.17 crop in 4K so there is some potential artifacts involved but I'd need to do full A/B comparison but it's not jarring enough for me to draw attention to itself. 

And there's no FLOG but there's no additional £1000 to pay for an external recorder either. 

The compact size is a bonus for me but I will definitely look at getting the X-T10 side grip to make it a bit more ergonomic. 

In a straight choice then of course I'd have X-T2 but if it came to saving or raising funds for additional stuff then I wouldn't be fazed by having to 'make do' with the X-T20 

 

How is the X-T20's 1080p? It seems to do native 24p, which I have found helps with motion cadence. Also is the 60p in 1080p any good? That Acros B&W is simply gorgeous and for the price, the X-T20 seems like a fun get up and go camera. Also, can you adjust highlight and shadow tone in movie mode with the X-T20?

[BTM_Pix]

 

I did some 1080p60 on Sunday with it at a game. I'll post a bit of it when I get back from this trip in a few days.

You can save 8 custom profiles which store your combination of film simulation,ISO,WB,NR,File type,Highlight,Shadow,Saturation and sharpening.

They are accessed off the Q button and then you scroll through them. Makes it really fast to go from stills profiles to video ones etc 

[jonpais]

27 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

 

I did some 1080p60 on Sunday with it at a game. I'll post a bit of it when I get back from this trip in a few days.

You can save 8 custom profiles which store your combination of film simulation,ISO,WB,NR,File type,Highlight,Shadow,Saturation and sharpening.

They are accessed off the Q button and them you scroll through them. Makes it really fast to go from stills profiles to video ones etc 

You can save custom video settings on the X-T2?

[BTM_Pix]

4 minutes ago, jonpais said:

You can save custom video settings on the X-T2?

Yes, same process.

I haven't got it in front of me but it saves some additional stuff too if I remember correctly. I think it might be the custom AF settings but don't quote me on that.

[jonpais]

3 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Yes, same process.

I haven't got it in front of me but it saves some additional stuff too if I remember correctly. I think it might be the custom AF settings but don't quote me on that.

I tried to find a way to save Custom settings in video when I first got the X-T2, but couldn't figure it out.

[BTM_Pix]

25 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I tried to find a way to save Custom settings in video when I first got the X-T2, but couldn't figure it out.

Sorry, my lack of clarity remembering there.

You do it whilst in stills mode and save them through the custom settings in the IQ menu. That item is not there in video mode so they must be setup in stills mode.

You can then select the profile using the Q button before you switch to video mode and it will use those settings.

You can then tweak the parameters of that profile while in video mode by pressing the Q button but if you want to change to a completely different profile then you have to quickly switch to stills mode and select it through the Q button before going back to video mode.

It's far less clunky than I've just described when you actually have the camera in your hand! 

The reality is that you'll probably have two profiles - a stills one with everything flat and the video one with ProNegStd -2/-2 etc although I have a few for different white balance and NR settings for night matches under floodlights 

 

[Inazuma]

The NX1 is sharper but that should be no surprise. It's a full readout of a 28mp sensor while the XT2 does a readout of a crop of a 24mp sensor. Yes the 18-55 is softer than the Samsung 16-55 but at the apertures I was filming at (mostly around f8) the lens resolutions should be quite similar. But even if they were a bit different, it shouldn't matter since the frame is still only 4k, which is a fair amount smaller than the 6k frame they're used for in stills.

This comparison was mainly to judge colours. I would not use this comparison to judge the difference in dynamic range as slight changes to settings can affect the perceived DR quite a bit. 

@Kisaha "1) aggressive NR in high ISO settings (but with the 2-2.8f 16-50S I can be in the same lever as other similar systems have 2.8-4f or 4f lenses)"

I thought this so I tested this out. That's what you see in the last shot of the comparison. The Samsung is at f2 ISO 800 while the XT2 is at f2.8 ISO 1600. As you can see, the XT2 still looks a lot better.

 

BTW does anyone here prefer the colours of the XT2? It seems like the NX1 is getting more love here!

[mercer]

Well, if you're using it to judge colors, then the XT-2 wins hand down. It also wins for character of image and a system you can grow.