Nx 50-150 2.8

Discussion in 'Samsung NX Forum' started by Brian style, Jan 4, 2015.

  1. Brian style

    Brian style SC Regular

    127
    Jan 3, 2014
    Does anyone on here actually have the 50-150S?

    I was initially very interested in this lens but lately I have really been thinking: The 16-50S is already a pretty hefty lens, no doubt making it a 2.0 on the wide end contributed to that. Samsung made sure to differentiate themselves by doing so, but as a mirrorless system I've been really wondering about the weight and size of these lenses.
    A 16-50S that was a constant 2.5 would still stand out as the second fastest zoom for APSC (Sigma is 1.8 but only 18-35 and not IS) in the world while managing to be lighter and smaller than the current 2-2.8 S zoom. I have the 16-50S and to be honest, I'd rather have less weight and mass than f2 on the wide end. Not to mention, a constant f-stop zoom makes things easier...and consistent, especially for manual shooting!

    So after so much researching the 50-150S, which is apparently optically brilliant, I started wondering if a 50-135 f2.8 would not only be sufficient but also lighter, smaller, and less expensive. At 2.02 lbs the 50-150S is heavier than a Canon 70-200f4 IS (what could be considered the FF equivalent DOF and and FOV wise) although still substantially lighter than the 70-200 f2.8 IS. 135mm on a crop sensor is still good reach but being lighter and shorter would be welcome.
     
  2. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin SC Hall of Famer

    Dec 24, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    Nic
  3. JKLso

    JKLso SC Regular

    45
    Nov 24, 2014
    near Kelso WA USA
    jim
    It's not something I will get for my NX300 with its thin body and grip. If I do buy into Samsung more fully it's pretty high on my list, though I hope it will come down in price by then; I cannot upgrade for several months at least, so I believe I have a decent chance there :)
     
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2015
  4. Brian style

    Brian style SC Regular

    127
    Jan 3, 2014
    The Fuji I knew was heavier and longer I believe, which doesn't bode well for Fuji users who don't have the bigger grip an NX1 offers. Hand held doesn't look like a good time.
    The Sigma got blasted because of the massive size and weight, not offering as much benefit as promised for APSC users.

    The only real complaint I'm seeing for the Samsung is the size and weight so it had me wondering if others would rather have a little shorter focal length for a savings in size&weight.
     
  5. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin SC Hall of Famer

    Dec 24, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    Nic
    One advantage I did find in shooting with a camera system that had two different sensor formats was that sometimes the focal length range of the lenses designed for a 36x24 sensor could work in favour of an APS-C sensor. Probably the best example is the 70-200mm zoom lenses. I find 200mm to be a bit too short as a telephoto, but 200mm on a Canon APS-C body became 320mm equivalent. This made the EF 70-200mm f4L IS USM a nice, reasonably fast telephoto lens option that wasn't too heavy at 760g.

    A constant f4 lens that maxes out at about 200mm would be my preferred telephoto option for the NX system.
     
  6. tomO2013

    tomO2013 SC Rookie

    14
    Oct 19, 2014
    Just my 0.02...
    I don't care too much if there are a few grams of weight difference in it between one manufacturers telephoto lens over another... in this case the Sammy vs the Fuji. Once the size/weight difference falls within my subjective range of what is acceptable with respects to optical quality, features like focus limiters and build/weather sealing then I'm happy.

    On the telephoto zoom end, both Sony and Samsung are the only mirror-less manufacturers today that can provide me with a telephoto lens with all of these features!

     
  7. JKLso

    JKLso SC Regular

    45
    Nov 24, 2014
    near Kelso WA USA
    jim
    The top feature of the 50-150S is the customized focus limiter. Imagine never focusing on the fence in front of home plate again, or a distant wall behind the play! That alone is worth a few ## and $$..
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. tomO2013

    tomO2013 SC Rookie

    14
    Oct 19, 2014
    Agreed with the other posters. I don't understand this obsession with size and weight when comparing Fuji and Samsung's offerings. In the grand scheme of things the differences are not that significant. And certainly if size is the be all, end all, just use a camera phone!!!
    For me, I'm happy if one lens can give me a look and functionality that the other cannot and if I find one lens to be subjectively superior to another, therefore justifying the additional size weight.
    Personally I find the Fuji 40-150 and Olympus 40-150 severely lacking for not including a focus limiter. For my uses that makes the Samsung 50-150S and Sony 70-200FE the only games in town. Both are excellent. Ultimately it would come down to which rendering that i preferred most. Ironically the two manufacturers with a background in electronics are giving mirrorless photographers photographic features that they are asking for. It still baffles me that Fuji, Olympus and Panasonic do not provide focus limiters. Unless they plan to provide electronic limiters, but there has been no sign of that...
     
  9. Brian style

    Brian style SC Regular

    127
    Jan 3, 2014
    It's not an obsession, it is a relevant question considering the main reason most people gravitate towards mirrorless is to loose the size and weight compared to DSLRs, and it is the main thing mirrorless makers use as a selling point. Although the NX1 has the relative size of a DSLR, it is still substantially lighter. You're giving up a better all around focus system and 3rd party support in lenses/flashes, and battery life in a DSLR in exchange for a smaller/lighter package, otherwise what's the point? If the lenses are bigger and heavier than the equivalent DSLR lenses the advantage is lessened or removed. A 70d certainly focuses better all around than the NX1 and the size difference isn't substantial (weight is the biggest difference).

    So the big trump card for mirrorless is the size/weight advantage and my question was about that. If you're making lenses that leave you with a package that is just as big and nearly as heavy as a DSLR, where is the one major advantage constantly trumpeted by mirrorless? The 16-50S is great optically but when I put it on my NX1 the overall package is just as large and heavy as a crop DSLR with a 17-50ish equivalent. If a 16-50 f2.5 was smaller and lighter it would still be faster than a 2.8 zoom while allowing the overall package to be lighter and smaller: win win.
     
  10. tomO2013

    tomO2013 SC Rookie

    14
    Oct 19, 2014
    I'm not saying it's not a relevant question, but I subjectively feel that it has become the rallying cry that all mirrorless lenses MUST be small and high optical quality. Two very differing characteristics for optical design. I love that with mirrorless systems e.g an EM1 or A7ii I can have a small system (leica sized even) for street, but that that same system can be built out with bigger, larger lenses and battery grip for a mini d4 or 1dx experience when that is needed too. As in, you can build out the system up to be big if you need it but also have the option of keeping it small. The NX1 still gives you that capability.

    I don't agree with your comment better all round focus system etc... backfocusing is still a major issue for most if not all DSLR ecosystems - why they provide manual overrides on most pro gear, and even still this sometimes isn't enough. My 5d mark iii was taken in by Canon repair and acknowledged to have a back focusing issue. They gave me another one. It still back focussed but wasn't as bad. Mirrorless has gotten rid of such backfocus issues. The camera either misses focus or gets focus in the majority of cases. I would take a NX1, A7s/ii, EM1, XT1 any day of the week of S-AF dependent assignments just to not have to worry about back-focussing and to have the confidence of focus peaking and manual EVF overrides that modern mirrorless provides.

    In terms of lens focus speed 'better all round focus system' is entirely dependant on situation and lens. It's not a one size fits all. For example my 5d mark iii was not the fastest focussing single autofocus with the 85 1.2 or 35L. My EM1 is faster if not the fastest Single AF I've ever experienced including 1dX and D4. My A7ii is faster than my 5d mark iii in S-AF depending on lens.
    Where DSLR has had an advantage is on continuous AF. That gap has been largely closed in the last year. A6000, even the A77ii and A7ii (on the Sony side) introduced their 'lock on expandable flexible spot' which in the majority of cases gives results not far off or as good as a good DSLR for continuous tracking. I've seen some stunning results with the NX1 in continuous tracking and the latest Olympus firmware 3 update has really brought huge improvements to the EM1 sports shooting capability. Continuous AF + tracking is an area that all mirrorless manufacturers are making huge strides on. If they are not 100% as good as a top end DSLR today, they are not very far off at all now.

    Regarding 3rd party support. There is no doubt that you give up some 3rd party support going mirrorless (particularly with the Samsung system). On the flip side, the lenses that are available from Samsung are so good and so affordable that I don't believe that it is too much of a concern once a lens is available in the focal length that you want to use. Samsung have the majority of popular 35, 50 and 85 focal lengths covered in some way, shape or form. Majority are sharp and very high optical quality for their price. Sure, there are gaps in the focal length range that need to be padded out relative to whats available from Canon, Nikon, Sony/Minolta etc...
    I do take your point on TTL flash support. Again here though I don't think that it is as big a deal as often times most people do not rely on TTL and there are a wealth of 3rd party manual flash options that can be leveraged by most mirrorless systems.

    Another reason to go modern mirrorless ecosystem is that you are buying into an eco system where the lens and camera itself has been built and optimized around a digital ecosystem. Many DSLR's (EF, F mounts, A mounts etc..) have their heritage back in film and carry the baggage of needing to maintain backwards compatability. For the same size and weight, a mirrorless lens can offer many functional and technical benefits (such as software based optical corrections baked into the lens firmware (mu43, Fuji X, Sony E/FE).
    For me size was never the deciding reason to jump from my 5d to Fuji XE1 or EM1. It was the quality of the lenses that were available in the focal lengths that I used and good first party video support in an era where many people are asking for photo's and videos of their weddings.
    The EVF has been the biggest jump in photographic technology in years. I still shoot with a Hasselblad 501 and 503CM film cameras, and I just prefer the EVF for what it gives me - the capacity to visualize exactly what the sensor will capture and focus on composition. This has been the biggest advantage of going mirror-less.

    Again my comment is really a subjective opinion on mirrorless. Everybody has their own interpretation. But for me again, size weight is not the overriding reason to go mirrorless. There are lots of other really good reasons.

    BTW I think a better comparison for size/weight between the NX1 and a Canon equivalent would be the 1DX and still here, in many ways the NX1 leaves it in the dust.
     
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2015