Does this bundle comes with the flash? It is unclear.

cajunqt wrote:Does this bundle comes with the flash? It is unclear.

Under the "features" tab it says this:
The bundled SEF-8A flash (GN8) mounts to the camera's hot shoe. Flipping it up turns it on; flipping it back down turns it off again

The plus point of the Samsung is the size of the sensor, and the available lenses. The APSC sensor means you'll have better ability to separate subject from background than with a smaller sensored camera like the Nikon J1/V1, or a M43 camera. Interchangeable lenses are nice if you:
a) Understand that you're not just buying a camera, you're buying into a SYSTEM. If you don't want to buy more lenses/accesories you're probably better off with a big sensor point and shoot.
b) want to carry the smallest package possible and are willing trade some zoom range for compactness
c) Or conversely, don't care about zoom, but want a lenses that is faster (can take a picture in lower light levels)
Or
D) Want to mount old SLR camera lenses you might have laying around.

That said, having considered Samsung's mirror less offerings myself before going with Fuji, the one huge knock against them for me is their sensors are not great at high ISO. If you do the comparison for other cameras in class on the NX210 (model above this one in Samsung's lineup, same sensor):

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/samsung-nx210/6

...it gets beaten like a drum above ISO 1600, even by the newer/smaller m43 sensors. That destroys a lot of the value proposition of a big sensor MILC over a P&S right there. Good image quality at base ISO, but pretty much any camera will do that. 'But more megapixels...' Unless you make poster size prints on a regular basis, or crop way too much, you can pretty much ignore the megapixel differences. The fact is, for not that much more money you can buy into a a better supported Sony NEX or Olympus system that outputs good quality images over a more flexible range of conditions.

west3man wrote:No one seems impressed with the internet capabilities of this bad boy. Maybe because there are more purists here than hobbyists (or whatever lower level I'm on).

But it'd be nice to exceed the image quality of the iPhone while retaining its ability to upload directly to various sites.

I was at a rally at the Capitol, recently, and wanted to have both, high quality images and quick FB uploads while onsite.

So, I had to quick switching from one device to the other.

Sucks mildly.

There are dozens of cameras on the market that will do exactly what you want and most are cheaper with a better zoom lens. Do not be led astray by the high MP especially if you're posting online.

It isn't a bad camera.

But it isn't a great deal either. This model was new last year and is being phased out for the next model hence the price drop. While Woot is posting a MSRP of nearly $700 the reality is you can get the same thing off Amazon for $330 and free shipping... so here you are saving a whopping $25... Not nearly the %57 saving Woot is trying to claim.

Not saying its a bad camera, just not a great deal.

they don't show one shot of the back of the camera... does it have a pimple?

kencan420 wrote:does anyone know how compatible this camera is with apple devices ?

You mean it doesn't come with a lightning port!!!!

gak0090 wrote:You mean it doesn't come with a lightning port!!!!

wut is a lightning port?

sincecc wrote:wut is a lightning port?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_(connector)

junyo wrote:
That said, having considered Samsung's mirror less offerings myself before going with Fuji, the one huge knock against them for me is their sensors are not great at high ISO. If you do the comparison for other cameras in class on the NX210 (model above this one in Samsung's lineup, same sensor):

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/samsung-nx210/6

...it gets beaten like a drum above ISO 1600, even by the newer/smaller m43 sensors. That destroys a lot of the value proposition of a big sensor MILC over a P&S right there. Good image quality at base ISO, but pretty much any camera will do that. 'But more megapixels...' Unless you make poster size prints on a regular basis, or crop way too much, you can pretty much ignore the megapixel differences. The fact is, for not that much more money you can buy into a a better supported Sony NEX or Olympus system that outputs good quality images over a more flexible range of conditions.

The high-ISO argument depends on the type of shooter that you are. If you shoot in clubs all the time, or indoors in dim rooms without flash, sure... it will be an issue. But most of the models that have good high-ISO will run you at least $200 more than this Samy.

I looked at NX, NEX, Olympus, and Panasonic when I moved from my Olympus E-series DSLR to a CSC.

The need to shoot at high ISO was a non-factor for me, so I wanted good output (more resolution) and good controls, compactness, and convenience, all at a reasonable price (I know, I was asking a lot). I also wanted good resolution first and foremost. I shoot primarily landscapes, wildlife, and outdoors, and indoors I use a flash (with a diffuser). I did not like the reviews of the first generation m43 sensor. It seems like that would be a lateral move from my old E-410. I did like the reviews and test output from the NX gen 1 sensor (same sensor in the Pentax K20D and K-7 DSLR). DxO gave it great marks too. Again, this is for resolution, not high-ISO performance.

I wanted an optional EVF, which I don't use often, but I use whenever I go long and I like having the option available.

So, at the time of my search last year, I tried the Olympus E-PL1 and E-PL2 (ironically just about the same size as my E-410 body), the EVF-less NEX-3 and NEX-5 (NEX-7 was just too expensive, and still is IMO) and the glass for the NEX series is HUGE. I wanted compact. Panasonic GFs were all too expensive compared to their Oly counterparts, but seemed faster compared to the PENs.

Here's my breakdown of the CSCs. I actually like them all for different reasons (again, this is completely subjective... but might give a newbie some tips).

Samsung NX:
PROS: Controls: i-Fn is incredibly useful for example. Enough external controls to get shots fast. Output is bright right of the camera. Not a lot of PP needed (just point and shoot). Good small lens optics (the 3 pancakes are awesome). LENSES: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_NX-mount#NX_lenses
CONS: firmware update process is very old-school and manual; long-term support; resale value (as in, none). The lower end series NX#00 and NX#000 do not have build in flashes.

Sony NEX
PRO: Nicest dual-mode (still and video) of the small CSCs. If you shoot video the NEXs are pretty darn good and the optional mic attachment is nice to have as well (other CSC makers now have followed suit with the mic thing).
CONS: for me, the menu system was/is terrible, even with the firmware update. Not a shooter's camera at all, but if you are willing to dig in menus or just point and shoot then is an OK camera. Other than the not-well reviewed kit pancake, the other optics for the NEX are larger and heavier across the board. Also, no EVF option at the lower end. Awkward ergonomics. Left-tippy with a lens on.

Olympus E-PL1/2
PROS: during my testing, these were reliable with output. Good balance of sharpness. More natural looking on the colors then Sony and Samsung (IMO). Familiar menu coming from an full-size E-series. Built-in Flashes (not happy they got rid of it on the PL3). Good lens pipe-line with Oly, Pany, and now Sigma, and other 3rd makers on board.
CONS: Larger then expected (maybe because of the flash?). 12mp sensors (or gen 1 & 2) did not blow me away with resolution when I enlarged my test shots. Again, I shoot landscapes. I need and want the larger output. That said, if was to hand camera to another family member to shoot it the Oly would do quite nicely. Side-by-side price was $150 more than the Samy NX100 at time of purchase (for the E-PL1, the PL2 was $300 more).

Panasonic: really the same pros/cons as the Olys, but add $100 to the cost of bodies.

That's my take on these. I did not include Nikon's, Canon's, Fuji's or Pentax's offering in my analysis here... but here are my one word reviews:

Nikon 1: Fast
Canon EOS M: Slow
Fuji: Expansive
Pentax: Niche (Q or K-01)
Ricoh GXR: Modular

For a new buyer to CSC... if you just plan to Point and Shoot with the kit lens and never plan to expand, then just get the cheapest you can find. Just about everything I rambled through will take decent pictures.

Want lots of len options: m43 (Oly or Pany), Sony NEX

Want Canikon? Then buy Canikon.

Want speed? Nikon 1 series or Samsung NX300 (have to wait on see on this one). Soon others will follow with the Phase/Contrast hybrid focus.

Want good controls: I think Samsung's are good. The rest are pretty even... I did like the Canon during a recent handling (nice feel in the hand). And amazingly the Pentax Q's handling is quite nice too (especially considering it's size). The Nikons are all menu-based. No buttons. With Oly and Pany is depends on whether you are at the entry-level or high-end. High-end models have better controls, but cost more.

Want a built in Flash? Some of the Nikon 1's have them. The older E-PL1 and E-PL2 have one (as does the E-P3) A few of the GF3 and GF3 have them (but omit any accessory port).

Want smallest size? Pentax Q, E-PM Mini series. Pany GF3 and GF5 are pretty small and this NX1000 is pretty small too (smaller than my NX100 anyway).


So there's my non-scientific take on the current CSC's in the market place. Your needs/opinions may vary. Don't hate me for mine.

(As always) if you have a local store with these, go, put one in your hand, try before you buy. This is a great price for a CSC, but you need to see and try the menus for yourself. If you like it, come back to Woot and get the deal. Deals like these are the only time to get pick up cameras as they tend to be overpriced at retail and/or launch. Patience and smart shopping win the day.

Good luck making your decision buyers.

P.S. My 5-lens + EVF + GPS NX100 cost me under $800 for the entire setup. That was about $100 per lens and $300 for the body and accessories (EVF/GPS). These were all purchased from major retailers/dealers during sales and close-outs. That is why I went with Samsung: value at the time (right place/right time). If I could have gotten something for the same completeness and price point, I might have... but it's been a great camera so far. I suspect the NX1000 would be too.

(And excuse all the typos, I type faster then my spell check).

kencan420 wrote:does anyone know how compatible this camera is with apple devices ?

Hrel wrote:LoL.

What is so funny? They asked a simple question. I'm not a Mac person kencan420 or I would try to answer you.

MichXelle wrote:kencan420 wrote:does anyone know how compatible this camera is with apple devices ?

What is so funny? They asked a simple question. I'm not a Mac person kencan420 or I would try to answer you.

It's kind of an inside woot joke. you wouldn't understand. Well you probably would if I explained it.

FWIW, I pulled the trigger last year about this time on an NX200 with an 18-55mm kit lens for about $500. (The lens included with this deal has long been discontinued, but is still servicable.) I'm very happy with it except for two aspects: I picked up a 50-200mm zoom which is gosh-awful in terms of chromatic aberration (fuzzy edges). At the time, I chose the sam over sony because of the better availability and what I thought were better quality lenses. Samsung prime lenses probably still beat Sony's if they ever developed any, but stay away from the Samsung 50-200 zoom. (My kit lens is damn sweet.) The other downside is the lack of eye viewfinder which works better for me in bright light. Some DSLR fankids like to tease you have to hold the camera at arm's length, but if you have to do that, you need glasses real bad. I like not carrying a brick, myself. To each their own. For those who have to have a mirror, more mass, size and noise in their camera, Samsung makes them too, and they even use NX lenses: the NX20, for example.

The 20MP sensor rocks, btw.

Would have jumped if there was GPS.

Does anyone know how well this camera does in low-light or "artistic" settings without a flash? I work in theater and need to be able to document my work under stage lights, so using a flash isn't an option for me.

imscience wrote: I picked up a 50-200mm zoom which is gosh-awful in terms of chromatic aberration (fuzzy edges). At the time, I chose the sam over sony because of the better availability and what I thought were were better quality lenses. Samsung prime lenses probably still beat Sony's if they ever developed any, but stay away from the Samsung 50-200 zoom.

Which version of the 50-200mm do you have, version I (without the i-Function) or version II (with i-Function)? I've never noticed the fuzzy edges in my copy of 50-200mm, which is version II (with the useful i-Fn button). Your post made go back and check my bird photos from last year to look for fuzzy edges. Tack sharp across the frame... and that scares me even more. Does that mean QC issues with Samy lenses? Or maybe a firmware issue here? (my v2 is running the latest lens FW). Oh well, maybe I shouldn't worry since mine appears to be a good copy.

I love my 50-200mm... my only complaint is that Samsung doesn't have a 70-300mm or something similar for the NX. I've heard rumors for a while, but no long lens yet. The 200mm is a little short for birding... but mine's been a workhorse on my NX100. It's great "zoo lens" too.

Another thought... I've also heard complaints from some NX users that certain lenses work better on the old 14mp sensor of the gen1 NX-series versus the gen2 20mp bodies. In particular the manual focus 8mm fisheye and 14mm wide from Samyang vignette a bit wide open on the 20mp sensor (and the 16mm is a little prone too). Perhaps the 50-200mm has that issue on the 20mp sensor as well and the fuzzy edges are vignetting of sorts.

Just checked, mine is version 2, firmware version 1.10. Lens version 1 (non-iFn) has a current firmware of v1.20.

Samy really needs to allow FW updates on NX cameras and lens via IntelliStudio. It sure would make it easier to keep these things up to date (their point-and-shoots update via IntelliStudio, why not their "Pro" cameras too).

electricfire wrote:Does anyone know how well this camera does in low-light or "artistic" settings without a flash? I work in theater and need to be able to document my work under stage lights, so using a flash isn't an option for me.

I find no problem using ISO 400 or 800 and do so regularly. That said, you'd be best served with a faster lens like the f/2 30mm. At least one is available, unlike other brands.

badboyhao wrote:Would have jumped if there was GPS.

You can add one pretty easily:
http://www.samsung.com/us/photography/digital-cameras-accessories/ED-GPS10

These run well under retail if you're patient enough (got mine for under $50 on close-out, which made it an impulse buy at that price).

The mothership has them for around $100 shipped: http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-ED-GPS10-Camera-Accessory-NX/dp/B004BOG55U

cameronpurdy wrote:No, you won't. You'll have something that is twice as heavy, at least twice as bulky, has a tiny dark OVF tunnel to look through to compose pictures, and will gather dust sitting on a shelf at home.

If you're going to get a DSLR, do not waste your time on anything less than "full frame" with a bright ~100% OVF, e.g. Canon 5d iii or Nikon D600. Yes, it will be big and heavy, but at least there will be a reason for that ;-)

Full frame? Plebeian trash. You should at least be getting a Phase One.

Am I the only one that thinks that this is one butt ugly camera?

tomduff87 wrote:In the opinion of the people who know cameras, is this overkill, or "too much camera" for someone that has no idea what they're doing, but is unhappy with their $99 little detachable-lens-less point and shoot digital camera and wants to shoot better quality photos? It's just on the cusp of what I would consider paying for a camera, so I'm torn.

The Samsung has a "smart" auto mode which would allow you to use it just like a regular point-and-shoot camera. Because of the larger DSLR-sized sensor, it offers higher quality images too. Should you ever decide to take photography beyond snapshooting, this has the control for that as well.

Does anyone know if this has a limit on video recording time? I purchased the Kodak Z990 Max a while back and I absolutely love the camera; however, it only allows recording in 30-minute increments. I record psychotherapy sessions for supervision and need something that will record at least 50 minutes at a time. If this has that capability, I'm in and will sell the Z990 Max.

If this were the Canon SX50 HS one would be on the way to me already!

cameronpurdy wrote:No, you won't. You'll have something that is twice as heavy, at least twice as bulky, has a tiny dark OVF tunnel to look through to compose pictures, and will gather dust sitting on a shelf at home.

If you're going to get a DSLR, do not waste your time on anything less than "full frame" with a bright ~100% OVF, e.g. Canon 5d iii or Nikon D600. Yes, it will be big and heavy, but at least there will be a reason for that ;-)

I disagree. I'm very happy with my Canon 7D, which has an APS-C sensor. I don't find the viewfinder dark or tunnel-like at all.

Yes, it's a big, heavy camera. I see that as a feature, especially when I've got a bigger, heavier lens on it, since I can hold it steadier.

It's not a camera I would recommend as an alternative to this one (although the price is pretty darned great on it right now), but I don't think one needs to get a full-frame to make a DSLR worthwhile.

tomduff87 wrote:In the opinion of the people who know cameras, is this overkill, or "too much camera" for someone that has no idea what they're doing, but is unhappy with their $99 little detachable-lens-less point and shoot digital camera and wants to shoot better quality photos? It's just on the cusp of what I would consider paying for a camera, so I'm torn.

A better camera will allow you to take better pictures, but it won't automatically make your pictures better.

The best thing you can do to improve your pictures is learn more about photography. Most of the blah pictures I see on Facebook could be improved by better composition and paying attention to where the light is coming from.

Quiwi wrote:I am not a photographer but...

pandasetebamboo, I don't think the shutter speed is what you're interested in. 1/16000 vs 1/4000 represent the shortest time the front of the camera stays open, it's in seconds :-P (as in one four-thousandths of a second). It's usually used for freezing action (taking sports photos*) or maybe sunny day photos with a "wide-open" lens.

Somewhat more appropriately would be the burst frame rate. (60 frames per second (fps) vs 8fps) Usually burst fire on these cameras means you take a bunch of photos while you hold down the the shutter release button which is usually followed by a substantial amount of time when the camera is saving the pictures.

What you probably want is some shot-to-shot numbers. According to http://www.ephotozine.com/article/samsung-nx1000-csc-wireless-review-19726

Shutter Reponse <0.1
Wide - Focus / Shutter Response (20mm) 0.65
Full zoom - Focus / Shutter Response 0.6
Switch on Time to Taking a Photo 2.1
Shot to Shot (without flash) 1.8
Shot to Shot with Flash 1.8
Continuous Shooting (JPEG) 7fps (11 shots)
Continuous Shooting (with Flash) 2fps (11 shots)
Continuous Shooting (RAW) 6fps (8 shots)

It'll be just under 2 seconds between photos.

I'm sure someone can correct any fallacious statements I've made :-)

*edited to change shutter speed example from race cars. I like the blurry background panning shots. Also, a little bit of motion blur in sports photos can add a sense of action!

That's a lot of good information, but the conclusion is a bit off.

The time it takes to focus and shoot is 0.6-0.65 seconds, which is what I think he was asking.

If the photographer does like me and presses the button just enough to enable autofocus (I assume this camera will do that), then the delay when pressed all the way is 0.1 seconds, according to these numbers.

As a side note, I've shot roller derby with a shutter speed of 1/200, but only because the light was so low at the roller rink. There are many things I don't like about the pictures I ended up with, but motion blur wasn't one of them.

I gave up on trying to get accurate exposure and just set the shutter speed manually, opened the aperture all the way, and set the ISO for 6400. This gave me very short depth-of-field, which is the way I like to shoot, anyway, but the images were very dark. I adjusted them in Lightroom, but the results were pretty grainy (noisy).

This one was shot with a shutter speed of 1/160 and an aperture of f2.8 at 110mm. It's not a great picture, but the action was stopped well enough.

NOOOOOOO! Woot must put this deal up again. My impulse to woot didn't function last night when I first layed eyes on this beauty. T^T

I read somewhere about some study
(ya i know real specific!) and they took several different photos ranging in mega pixels and noone could really tell the difference except for one guy who was a photography professor. Guess what I'm trying to say is anything over 13 or 14 MP is overkill.

craigthom wrote:A better camera will allow you to take better pictures, but it won't automatically make your pictures better.

The best thing you can do to improve your pictures is learn more about photography. Most of the blah pictures I see on Facebook could be improved by better composition and paying attention to where the light is coming from.

+1 - in photography, someone with a great eye can make art from a cheap digital camera, while someone with no ability to "see" won't be able to take anything better than a snapshot with the best camera on the planet. It really is about the person BEHIND the lens.

jackietherussell wrote:+1 - in photography, someone with a great eye can make art from a cheap digital camera, while someone with no ability to "see" won't be able to take anything better than a snapshot with the best camera on the planet. It really is about the person BEHIND the lens.

A good bit of it is technique a person can learn, not something he or she is born with.

Kodak's wonderful How to Take Good Pictures is out of print. It's worth looking at, even though it has a lot of stuff about film in it.

They also have some great stuff on their Web site. A lot of it seems very simple and common sense once you read it, but that's the idea. I recommend going through this stuff before (or concurrent with) buying a new camera.

ndk0911 wrote:I read somewhere about some study
(ya i know real specific!) and they took several different photos ranging in mega pixels and noone could really tell the difference except for one guy who was a photography professor. Guess what I'm trying to say is anything over 13 or 14 MP is overkill.

It's pretty much like buying a family sedan that can go 140mph, instead of the one that can go 120mph simply because the number is higher. You probably wont ever drive it 120, yet you think its better to get one that can go 20mph faster.

ndk0911 wrote:I read somewhere about some study
(ya i know real specific!) and they took several different photos ranging in mega pixels and noone could really tell the difference except for one guy who was a photography professor. Guess what I'm trying to say is anything over 13 or 14 MP is overkill.

The quality of the sensor is much important than the number of megapixels. My backup Canon 20D 8 megapixel DSLR still creates amazing images. The main benefit of more resolution is the ability to crop the image without sacrificing quality.

I just received an e-mail that my camera shipped but the tracking number isn't loaded into USPS's system yet. Hopefully I will get it before our cruise, fingers crossed.

Tracking info is now working, but they don't appear to have actually physically shipped yet. Was hoping to get it by Sat, looks like that won't happen.

Received my camera today via USPS.

ThinkBortak wrote:Received my camera today via USPS.

Mine just arrived at the local PO, probably too late to get sorted into today's mail. Crud, gonna miss it by one day.

sleebusjones wrote:Mine just arrived at the local PO, probably too late to get sorted into today's mail. Crud, gonna miss it by one day.

Hopefully you get it tomorrow. I can't wait to try it out this weekend.

If you're looking for a larger lens, the 50-200mm lens dropped 10% in price today.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004W81AM8/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Also having issues with tracking. Website loads but nothing with info on location.
Where is it being shipped from?
Just trying to figure out if it will take a day or longer to ship to me.