UPDATED with two more image -> First Samsung NX-10 versus Panasonic GF1 noise comparison!
We found the first image comparison between the Samsung NX-10 and Panasonic GF1!
—
UPDATE: New image comparison is available. This time in english and the NX-10 uses the 30mm pancake lens and Pansonic the and the GF1 the 20mm lens: From 100 to 800 Iso comparison and the 1600 to 3200 Iso comparison
—
Conclusion?
At High-Iso the Samsung NX images do look cleaner as the GF1 images. The GF1 has more detail.
source: http://blog.paran.com/payton/35887908
Share
Recent comments
Comment from Erik from Sweden: The NX10 got 2/3 EV more exposure, accor...
Comment from Will: Neldor, the "color noise" in the photo o...
Comment from Neldor: NX-10 had awful colour noise in dark are...- Comment from Will: The example is useless. They should have...
Carl
3 years ago |I don’t think I’d make the same conclusion. I see it as much more noise reduction being used in the NX photo. Also supposedly the GF1 doesn’t have a great JPG engine so a comparison done in RAW would be in order.
Andy Elliott
3 years ago |The ISO image of the Samsung may look cleaner, but all of the Samsung images look soft and lacking in contrast. My vote is for the GF1
Duarte Bruno
3 years ago |I second the previous posts. I’d take the GF1 pictures anytime. Yet, we might be comparing a mature product to a pre-production model…
gl
3 years ago |NX 10 have a D90 sensor (no?) and it seems a lot under the quality of the D90. But the size of NX10 is nice i hope that with a smaller sensor the GH2 will be even smaller and GF2 and Ep-3 even even smaller
ihkim
3 years ago |The image has the comparison up to ISO800 only. You missed another image for ISO3200.
NX-10 firmware is still in beta status.
ihkim
3 years ago |Keep in mind that It is a comparison between NX-10 Standard Zoom lens and Panasonic Prime lens.
Both noise reduction options are off, but contrast option could be different.
marcram
3 years ago |Should the higher noise in the m43 format be surprising? What is the difference in pixel density? As stated, the contrast looks much better with the m43.
AltraOttica » Blog Archive » Goodmorning 08.01.10
3 years ago |[...] macchina. Uno sconosciuto utente coreano ha effettuato una breve prova mettendo a confronto la NX-10 con la Panasonic GF-1, utilizzando le varie sensibilità ISO fino al valore massimo di 3200. La NX-10, forte del più [...]
Bilgy_no1
3 years ago |@ ihkim
Is it? The photo at the start shows both cameras with their pancake primes.
As to the results, the GF1 shows far more details in the statue. As to the test, it’s just the first one to appear and it’s not from a reputable source like DPR. The samples I’ve seen so far did not impress me really.
It seems Samsung are trying to bash m4/3. The ‘comparison’ on the NX10 website is just ridiculous; it’s obviously fake. Seems like a court case waiting to happen…
ihkim
3 years ago |@Bilgy_no1
He updated the test again.
First picture is with 30mm pancake. But the actual comparison was done with 18-55 zoom lens. That’s why you noticed the detail gap.
Today, he updated the comparison with 30mm again instead of 18-55.
Please visit his post and take a look.
Rumonger
3 years ago |I do not understand the rationale of the tester for keeping the shutter speed constant and picking up f8 for the Samsung and f10 for the Panasonic. What is the need to keep shutter speed constant?
At that sensor pixel density, f10 is very close to if not already on the diffraction limits for the Panasonic. Also the sweet spot for the lens is definitely far below the f10 and probably the same can be said for Samsung at f8.
I think the test should be redone, with both shooting at f5.6 to f6.3. Definitely no more than f8.
Eric
3 years ago |At this point noise tests and comparisons are becoming pretty much meaningless. I guess it’s nice to know which is the best, but for over a year now every single large sensor camera to come out has had at least usable ISO1600. It’s at the point now where it’s best just to buy into the system that best suits your style/objectives; the image quality is going to be good enough no matter what logo is on the camera.
Will
3 years ago |The example is useless. They should have taken photos of something OTHER THAN a smooth statue, since the smooth statue makes it difficult to determine what is the smoothness of the plaster, and what is the smoothness of the camera processing. A photo of something universally recognizable, like denim, would have been better,
Neldor
3 years ago |NX-10 had awful colour noise in dark areas – much worse then 4/3 system:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/samsungnx10_preview2/nx10-iso-1600-sam_3941_rb.jpg
http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/samsungnx10_preview2/nx10-iso-1600-sam_5255.jpg
Will
3 years ago |Neldor, the “color noise” in the photo of the toys on the carpet is dubious — it may be that the bright plastic toys were reflecting colored light onto the carpet. Notice how there is no color noise in the black on the back of the toy car, only some yellow-orange noise in the shadow area underneath the bright yellow-orange handle (which may have been casting a bit of yellow-orange complexion onto the carpet).
The color noise on the piano is more likely to be color noise, although it is really curious how it is only in the lower right corner.
Erik from Sweden
3 years ago |The NX10 got 2/3 EV more exposure, according to the tester, so the test is not valid