Samsung NX Mini Mirrorless Digital Camera?

Hi Brad,
I'm not sure why, but I never take Samsung cameras seriously.
I mean, they look all too much made for tourists, too fragile, with limited lens capabilities and loaded with unneeded features.

In practice, I think their image quality isn't good. the user-experience is far from competitors. they feel cheap.
They also focus much more on amateurs instead of semi-professional photographers.

So, if I would be you, I'd take a look on:

Panasonic GM5 if you want interchangeable lenses
RX100III if you don't mind about the interchangeable lens
or Canon G7x if you are short in money and want 90% of sony rx100iii (BUT-no in charge future!)

Hope it helps somehow.

Moving away from P&S seems like a good idea: between phone cameras and mirrorless cameras, point and shoots make little sense these days. Yet, Samsung is not a brand that comes to mind first. Sony has best and largest sensors, Panasonic and Olympus m43 have best lens selection. If you are just venturing into more serious photography you will probably be shooting JPEGs initially. In this case Olympus E-PL series may be a good choice, for instance. Get a camera that's about a year from the release date (or one generation behind current), you'll pay 1/2 to 1/3 of the original MSRP. A $350 should get you a decent camera with a kit lens.

"RX100III if you don't mind about the interchangeable lens
or Canon G7x if you are short in money and want 90% of sony rx100iii (BUT-no in charge future!)"

One could argue that the RX100iii is 90% of the G7x, considering the G7x has the nicer lens.

Anyways, is the Samsung really that much lighter/compact than the Sony alpha offerings? 1" is pretty small for a camera like that.

What are your reasons for going to a mirrorless vs a high end P&S?

If it's to have a wider choice of lens/focal length options, then look at your lens options. I have an A6000 and think it's a very good camera for the money but I wish I had better options for fast f2.8 telephoto lenses for sports photography.

Many backpackers (if not most) just want a camera that has good image quality paired with a wide angle lens (24mm equivalent give or take a little.). If that's what you're looking for, I suspect the Samsung NX paired with their 9mm prime lens (which is 24 equivalent in 35mm/full frame format) will get it done but I think there are a couple better options for near the same price.

You may want to shoot manual settings from time to time and having the ability to adjust ISO, aperture, shutter speed at your fingertips vs having to dig into a menu is invaluable. The RX100 is very good in this regard.

The Richoh GR has an APSC sensor and is reported to be very good. I've never used one but i suspect its cult following is well deserved.

If lens options are important, micro four thirds cameras are well worth a look and you should be able to find a camera and lens pairing that'll get you started for what you're willing to pay for the Samsung. This will give you a larger sensor than what you are looking at and a wealth of lens options you can take with you if you upgrade your camera body later on.

I really love my Sony A6000, don't regret my purchase, but wish there were more and faster telephoto options that don't require an adapter. For anything under 75mm, there are some really nice options including some spendynZeiss glass.

Don't neglect the fuji line. An xe2 + 14mm prime is a godly and tiny landscape combo.

If weight AND cost are not a factor, then DSLR/interchangeable lens cameras are the way to go. There are many options but you can pay anything from $1000 and up for something that will work better than a P&S. IF you are looking at something <$1000, you are probably looking at a perfectly good camera with a crappy kit lens. Until you upgrade to a better (and heavier) lens you'll have a setup that is inferior (in terms of image quality) to, say, a 10 oz Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III or other good fixed-lens camera.

I don't know why this is the case, but ever since the Sony R1 camera (in 2005 I think), Sony (and now Panasonic and maybe others) have been sticking super good lenses on $800 to $1000 fixed-lens cameras where the lens is actually better than an interchangeable lens alone for $1200. Makes no sense that I can see but it's true. The really recent trend now is to put bigger sensors in relatively small cameras (not yet APS-C but 1" and 4/3; look in Wiki if you want to learn the cryptic sensor size terms). So the fixed lens cameras are really stepping up. One theory I've read is that the P&S market is dead/dying due to phone cameras. But that has opened up a new niche for cameras that are light/small but produce good image quality (though of course less versatile than DSLR).

The best place for camera reviews and detailed information is http://www.dpreview.com/. [Edit: Oops! I see you've already been there…]

Two I'd recommend (from reviews/specs alone, I haven't tried them) would be Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III (10 oz; ~$800) and the new Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 (13 oz; ~$900). The former has been out longer and you can find posts on it here. If you want to pay less than $500 but have something 90% as good, find a used Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 I or II.

On "getting away from P&S" photography, it isn't changing lenses that is going to help you so much. It's getting control of aperture/shutter/etc that will make a difference. For this, I'd recommend the Panasonic mentioned above. It has the brightest sensor/lens combo of anything under 1 lb, I think, meaning more depth control. But probably more important, it puts dedicated aperture and shutter speed controls on top of the camera where you will actually use them (and thus, learn to use them). It has some other control features that look really good, like easy aspect control. (In general, any feature that requires going into a menu won't get used and therefore might as well not exist.)

I'd guess that the Sony will give you better landscape images (due to more pixels), but Panasonic better "portrait" and creative style close images (due to brighter lens/sensor combo and better controls). Both are limited in zoom, but that's the price you pay for good image quality in a small package. There are many other factors and trade-offs to consider — no perfect solution exists.

One thing to consider is that you can rent these cameras (and many others) from http://www.lensrentals.com. (I'm considering that for JMT hike next summer so I won't have to buy anything or carry my current 60 oz rig.)

EDIT (after actually looking at camera suggested in thread title): Sensor size relative to small body size is good and is following current trend. We don't know anything about image quality so you should wait for DPReview info on that (I doubt it's as good as the Carl Zeiss or Leica lens you get with my two suggestions above). However, from what I can see in the picture of this camera, I'd say that you are definitely looking at a P&S shooting experience here. You simply won't use controls that aren't easily accessible on top. Carrying around 2 or 3 lenses won't help with that.

If you do go the interchangeable lens route, you should consider carefully the lens mount. There are excellent and cheaper 3rd-party lenses available for the long-established lens mounts: Canon, Nikon and Sony "A-mount" (inherited from Minolta). Sony created the newer "E mount" (for A6000, alpha7, etc) to facilitate smaller system without need to support old Minolta lenses. There is much less available for this new mount but I'd guess that Sony is serious about supporting it and that these will come over time. I'd worry that neither Samsung nor any one else will bother to develop very good lenses for the new Samsung mount, but I may be wrong…

The great thing about an interchangeable lens mount *that is well supported* is that you can rent a monster 600mm lens for something like $180 when you go on safari (rather than buying it for $thousands) and take pictures like this: https://500px.com/cwwhitfield.

"I don't know why this is the case, but ever since the Sony R1 camera (in 2005 I think), Sony (and now Panasonic and maybe others) have been sticking super good lenses on $800 to $1000 fixed-lens cameras where the lens is actually better than an interchangeable lens alone for $1200. Makes no sense that I can see but it's true."

Well, $1200 is probably enough money to get a m43 body and Panasonic 7-14mm lens ($900), which is (supposedly) a professional quality lens and wider than zooms on any P&S listed.

Another interesting option for interchangable lens cameras (as opposed to high end P&S) is to buy a body and a lens separately. For instance, you could get a new Panasonic 14mm pancake prime lens for ~$300 on Ebay and a m43 camera body (GX1, E-PL), which gives a very compact and light combination. Personally I find that outdoors I mostly use the widest end of any zoom anyway, so a prime lens makes sense.

Do you like to shoot moving water with long exposures? You will need ND filters. The P&S listed have some sort of of a filter, but it's only 3 stops, which may not be enough. I think for many outdoorsmen this is sort of a deal breaker. There's no better subject than moving water! :)

Another thing that's really relevant for me is that P&S zooms don't really like dust (sand). With an interchangeable lenses you could get a prime (non-zoom) lens and have no moving parts while hiking in desert environments, and have a zoom in lighter conditions. This sort of goes with the notion that there are (more expensive) m43 bodies that are weather proof.

Then there's the issue of electronic viewfinder, once you try it, you will not want to go back to using LCD display.

Another useful option for interchangables is to rent lenses before buying them. For instance, I normally do not photograph wild life, I don't need a long zoom. Yet, I want to go to Yellowstone and see wolves this winter. Lensrentals.com has a choice of:

http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/micro-four-thirds/lenses/telephoto

lenses, some of which are very high quality and light and compact (I was looking at 70-200 equivalent).

***

The bottom line is that I would not recommend a fixed lens camera at this point. You are invariably going to run into a limitation that you'd want to overcome and then would have to replace the whole system.

Charlie, did you get all of those animal photos out on the Pacific Crest Trail?

–B.G.–

The Samsug can be had for under $400… all the recommendations on this thread are well over that. And most are heavier. And most are bigger.

P&S cameras tend to get dust on the sensor and are about impossible to clean oneself. They have to be sent in for cleaning and that costs a fair bit. I'm sick of throwing away mid-range P&S's because the cleaning costs nearly what the outdated camera costs.

Mirrorless cameras are the simplest to clean (ie, you can do it yourself). Easier than a DSLR.

YES… I've looked at the Sony RX's. A friend has one. Great photos, but at over twice the cost of the Samsung? And it's a P&S. Think dust!

I wonder if anyone bothered to read the reviews on the Samsung… it's a pretty darn good camera for the money with exceptional battery life. It's tiny. It's light. It has a 1" sensor.

Another:

http://www.thephoblographer.com/2014/06/09/review-samsung-nx-mini/#.VKQSmXvjXIV

And a good video review:

I'm not saying this in a negative way but it's a nice camera for casual photographers who want to share the occasional picture of their grandkids and post selfies on Facebook in situations where they won't be forced to work with poor lighting in less than ideal circumstances. There's a huge market for it.

When it comes to photography, it really comes down to your style and needs. I'm an enthusiast, at best, but the lack of easily accessible manual controls and the inability to pair a larger sensor with faster glass so I can shoot fast action in low light is a non starter for me.

Your situation is likely different from mine and this camera may be everything you need. You asked for our thoughts and opinions. If you want it, buy it.

I've lost too many good picture oppotunities to having the wrong gear. I once just looked for the smallest/lightest option. I now look for the smallest/lightest option that delivers the goods. For me, that's an A6000 and wide angle prime lens. For Jennifer, it's a Rx100iii. For Bob, it's a D7100 and glass so fast that you can see into the future with it. For others, it's an iPhone.

Only you know the answer of what's right for you.

I think this camera looks like a great option if you value low-cost, if the pancake wide lens is found to be adequately sharp, and if you are satisfied using only the (compact) wide lens. The reason I have the RX, and the reason I would want any 1" sensor camera, is to have the smallest take-anywhere camera with the best lens; simple, small, compact, sharp. Lens interchangeability is not why I would use a 1". The pancake wide angle on this camera is f 3.5 compared to the Sony f 1.8, which is a very important difference if like me you do street photography, for capturing action, dark scenes, and depth-of-field play (bokeh). The zoom lens is also slow. If all you want is a smaller camera for landscapes while trekking, this one might work fine for you.

I agree with Ian.

I read through the dpreview piece and it does look like a nice piece depending on your photography goals.

But I think the problem comes with where this camera fits in the photography world – dpreview calls it a "luxury P&S" and I can see that. Those who would understand and care about higher-end interchangeable lenses won't like the camera because of its controls (or lack thereof…) and image quality, but those for whom those things are just fine probably won't be able to appreciate the interchangeable lenses. Does that make sense?

I like the fact that it's so small and yes, half the price of the rx100iii (my new baby…). But not sure where else this goes that, say, the Canon S120 can't…..

Anyway – that's my itsy bitsy contribution.

And Ian, I still plan on getting the A6000 one day……..I think it'd be a great piece for taking pics of my niece!

NM