Samsung NX1 First Impressions Review

Thanks for the link! (Sadly, these claims aren't always true; there are "14-bit RAW" cameras out there that use only 1792 values out of the 16,384 possibilities in a 14-bit range.)

The NX1 raws I have look good to me, below ISO 6400--and then even better at say ISO 400. Used the fast 16-50mm $1300 "kit" zoom.

Samsung is kind of infamous for big raw files, something like 50MB per file for the NX1.

I do not make any assertions, I pass information from reviews and user experiences. New NX lenses do not work on older Samsung bodies, because Samsung adopted the same policy as they have for mobile phones for their cameras.
This type of ripping off customers is something new in camera industry. Once customer is locked in she must still buy new gear to be able to use her equipment meaningfully.
It's been reported that 16-50 pz lens does not work on NX100.

I looked and NX100 started selling 2010/9, the latest firware is 2012/12 now is 2015/2

Do you really want me to say obvious facts about Samsung?

Samsung produces gadgets, consumables, approx 18 months, throw it to trash. buy new. Gigantic customer ripping off. Does anyone in camera business base their business on this? No because Samsung adopted mobile phone philosphy for their cameras.

You can read about issue with lens and camera in Samsung forum here. If it works then ok, go there, help and also post image take with nx100 and 16-50 lens with exif data. If it works then cool. I take my information from available sources. Unfortunatelly I cannot believe you, because you have not been able to provide any image or reference to what you are saying and you actively reject to do so.

I've been waiting years for Nikon firmware updates, never had a life changing update. Samsung has given me 2 FW updates in 2 months. I don't expect a FW update every month for a year, just useful updates till the products gets fully mature and has no flaws.
Nikonhacker core developers have done much more for Nikon users with a tiny donation-based budget.
GOODBYE NIKON!

I'm also not upset. At all.

I do not have information from myself, but from reputable reviews and users here on dpreview which tell reality.
Samsung NX1 has sensor with DR lower than micro 4/3, is overpriced, lens is soft, Samsung algorithms naive. You can find all reviews, measurements, user experiences and Sample images with Google. If you claim otherwise send at least links where Samsung lens is compared with Nikon.
I tell that Samsung lenses are beer bottles againts Nikkor.

Ok, but where are these samples? I want to see. If they prove to be better than Nikon then ok. Send link or something.

Trk,

I don't share raws, for reasons I've explained. It's mostly about unwitting models, but also I'm not going to share my method of getting samples.

Trk:

No, my information isn't worthless. And I very much base my claims on very real things, but I'll not share, there's a difference there.

I suggest you learn it.

Reviews can be somewhat helpful.

But remember I've shot with this NX1 and a lot of very good lenses.

You keep skipping this, and it does you no credit: Those would also be Oly, Fuji, and Sigma "fantasies." All make optically better lenses than Canikon.

See Randy V above.

Trk: where did you read about dr being lower than 4/3? My nx300 is same or better than any m4/3 already dr wise...so let me doubt about that. I'd like to see the source of those.

Nx300 dynamic range is at least one stop worse than micro 4/3, see dxomark
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Olympus-OM-D-E-M1-versus-Samsung-NX-300___909_851#tabs-2

Trk:

DXO sensor scores are next to useless, not just for Samsung sensors either.

It's well established that DXO relies heavily on theoretical light sources, not entirely, but a good bit.

DXO doesn't account for lenses, and better lenses help with colour and noise control.

You're going to have to link raws from the NX300 and Oly EM1 to demonstrate this claim.

It's not entirely impossible, but not because of the sensor. The NX300 does NOT have a good kitzoom, and the EM1 may have been using a much better Olympus lens. Or DXO's theoretical light sources could be providing bad "data" and therefore inaccurate conclusions.

Trk:

Absolutely not. I claimed the best Samsung lenses, of which there aren't many, are better than the best Canikon lenses. I also pointed out that good Leica and Zeiss lenses are optically better than the best Canikon lenses. Olympus, Fuji and Sigma's best lenses are also better.

I said not a peep about DXO lens testing. You've added something there.

You have have grossly misrepresented my point to suit your ends. There's another word for that behavior.

You remain wrong about both Samsung sensors and Samsung lenses. (Also I've not commented on BSI for the APSC sensor.)

Of course there are not great Samsung lenses--the 50-200mm zoom springs to mind.

So next time read my point. And don't so obviously make things up.

You can disagree, but I've used the lenses and cameras I comment about.

When done well, the best Samsung lenses are the optical equals of very good, not the best, Leica and Zeiss lenses. Can't say that about Canon and Nikon lenses.

"You missed all the other lens manufacturers also shipping optically better lenses than Nikon."

The 300 F4 PF is pretty good, 20 f1.8 is pretty good and so is 85 f1.8 . Come on now , nikon is very good. There's no "best", but it's among the best.

Lassoni:

Nikon makes optically good lenses, but they're not optically extraordinary.

I haven't used the 20mm f/1.8, so perhaps something changed. Nor have I used the 300mm f/4.8.

The Nikon 24--70mm f/2.8 constant shows some promise, even the cheap 50 f/1.8 with the Df is showing promise. Nikon is waking up to how to engineer optically better lenses.

But I have yet to see a good Nikon that can compete with a half decent Zeiss for optical quality. But the best Samsung NXs can. (And then Olympus, Fuji and Sigma, doing their best, also surpass Nikon, and Canon.)

From images and reviews I have seen Samsung lens 16-50 is soft. It looks also soft from dpreview comparision tool. You have also admitted that other Samsung lens are soft. Can you please provide list of sharp and quality Samsung lenses with reviews and sample images that prove this? I asked you many times whether you can provide anything - but you cannot provide any links, any sample images, nothing that would demostrate Samsung lenses are good.
I read reputable reviews and photograper claimed that Samsung lens 16-50 is soft.
You see pro photographers shoot with Samsung? Hardly. Samsung manufactures gadgets, not serious stuff with serious service.

Trk:

Actually no, I've not admitted that other Samsung lenses are soft, you're seeing, yet again, something I've not posted.

I can't dispute images from the fast 16-50 you've seen, but my examples are very sharp--with wonderful colour.

You seem fixated on lens sharpness; there are other more important factors.

The 85mm f/1.4 is both very sharp and has very good colour, there are reviews out on the interwebs. This lens is in the territory of Leica and Zeiss.

The 45mm f/1.8 is both sharp and has good colour.

The 30mm f/2.0 has very good colour, but isn't as sharp.

The 60mm f/2.4 is very sharp, but doesn't have great colour.

Pro photographers shoot with systems with decades of history. (Not news.) Not a lot of pro photographers use Sony or Pentax either.

Simply saying that Samsung, the ship builder, aerospace and nuclear power company, makes gadgets is more than ignorant. Oh then there's one third of the world market for flat screens. And Samsung makes smartphone CPUs.

You wrote that "The NX300 does NOT have a good kitzoom", so what this means? That is is sharp?
We are talking here about camera business and for it Samsung creates gadgets, I am not talking about other their businesses.

Photographers do not shoot with Samsung because they would bankrupt otherwise.

Trk,

It means that the 18-55mm isn't a great kit zoom, that's all.

"Photogaphers do not...". You are not to say who and who isn't a photographer buddy.

And you remain wrong about the 16-50PZ lens, it's perfectly useable on the NX100, I checked with my NX100 body.

Trk:

My NX100 body has the latest (last) firmware.

Nowhere have I defended customer support from Samsung USA. Don't imply that I have.

This camera was supported for more than 18 months, that's far longer than most Sonys, and many other serious camera manufacturers.

You may write or say what you will (as long as the moderator doesn't take it down) but I suggest that if you insist on making things up you may get called out for that behavior.

And when you repeatedly put terms into my points that simply are not in the original you can expect to be taken to task.

Ok, can you post somewhere image take with your NX100 and that lens with EXIF to be able to verify your claims? And did you help guys on Samsung forum here? If it works then cool.

For support take a look at e.g. 5dmark II, released 2008, last firmware 2012. You should think about what you write here.

I am not violating forum rules and you opinion in this matter is irrelevant.

HowaboutRAW, I will teach you about product support. Take a look at e.g. Canon page http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/professional/standard_display/customer_satisfaction_pro_philosophy

on the other hand Samsung doctrine is only release product and go to the next model - malicious doctrine adopted from mobile phones.
I will be surely glad if Samsung improves their support and praise it if they will be good. But currently there is no support, there is no email or phone contact in my country available.

Trk:

I didn't make specific claims about every Canon 5D model. There you go again putting terms into my statements to make your point seem valid.

The fact remains that the 2-1/2 years of firmware support for the NX100 is longer than many, not all, cameras get supported. Picking one of the most famous DSLRs ever shipped and comparing its firmware support to one of the not so known mirrorless bodies is preposterous.

I don't share raws. Perhaps if a tiny jpeg preserves the lens+body data I might consider sharing. But it's not as if I need to prove anything to you, I'm very solid in my conclusion that you were wrong.

I have no idea what the guys on the Samsung forums are doing incorrectly. But I can't undo body firmware updates and see where, or if, that lens stops working with my NX100. Can't revert firmware to an earlier state--not like System Restore on a Windows computer or Time Machine on a Mac.

And I never accused you of violating terms of use--there you go yet again.

Trk:

That's a Canon link. That's Canon support, on which I've not commented.

Again, I made no comment on Samsung's customer service in the USA. You're getting kind of insulting with continually adding claims in my positions that I did NOT include.

I commented on firmware releases, not whether Samsung returns emails. There's a huge difference. Learn it, today.

The more you post on this subject the weaker and weaker your case becomes.

HowaboutRAW, you wrote that "if insist on making things up you may get called out for that behavior", this is personal attack from you that is prohibited in forum rules - because I am not making things up, there are people with problem and it is real. You can help them and support your claim with raw images, if no your credibility is zero. After issue is solved I will gladly confirm that there is no issue with it.
You claim that Samsung service 2-1/2 is longer than many, not all, cameras get supported, but I am saying that it is insufficient in contrast with other manufacturers where support is e.g. 4 years and 5D II was example of that.
(I want emphasize what Samsung support doctrine is, they do not even have support email or phone contact in my country [they have only presales "support" contact] and that relying on Samsung might be very dangerous for business)

Trk,

Yes, it's well documented that you make additions to my points, that you then disagree with, pretending that you've disagreed with something I've posted.

This is making things up.

This is easily checked fact. That you did it is your problem, don't try to make it mine.

Again you're citing the firmware support for one of the most famous DSLRs ever made, why?

Does Canon still update the firmware for the EOS-M v1?

I checked: The EOS M firmware was updated for 12 months, from release in mid 2012 to mid 2013.

Does this mean I should never consider a Canon camera?

JackM:

To a degree absolutely, but shooting in say really dark interiors is helped a great deal with a good EVF in the place of even a very good OVF on an SLR.

I totally agree with you Perl. But it seems that many ppl are happy with this form factor, yet want a mirrorless camera instead of a dslr. This beats me, but it's evident by reading messages on various boards.

@HowaboutRAW - Not true about all FF shutters, the 5d3 in silent mode is barely audible, FPS slows down, but its very quiet compared to the clack of most mirrorless shutters.

I agree with your other points though. The A7s could be a little larger to make accessing controls easier, same with the E-M5. Too many buttons on a small body.

But DSLRs are neither bulky nor heavy.

chrisfromalaska:

Right, I should have added a qualifier about silent shooting mode, but then the definition of "top DSLR" is a question.

I guess I didn't know about the silent mode on the 5DIII, but did know about the Df's, D610's, and D750's. (But I don't consider those top Nikon DSLRs.)

However it just occurs to me that I missed the D810, and that is a "top" Nikon full framed DSLR, and it has some variety of quiet mode.

The point remains that mirrorless, not so much Sony, is often much quieter than mirrored.

Though things like the Pentax K3 (APSC), Nikon D5300 (APSC), and Canon 6D (FF) are real quiet.

Paul B:

1DX, S2, D4s.

Even the 5DIII.

@T3
If we talk about the current NX1 and not the promised coming mirrorless nirava - in what meaningful way would a NX1 be better than a Canon 7DII for the kind of shooting the 7DII is designed for? The EVF can't keep the live view, the on-chip AF is by all accounts not as good. It is handicapped by the technology. 15 fps vs 10 OK - but 10 is plenty and true live view is more important.

PerL:

I'd thought of the Canon 7DII as answer to the challenge, but it's a good bit thicker--bigger.

The Pentax K3 is closer and has a fast frame rate.

The thing is even the best Canon and Pentax lenses can't really compete for optical quality with the best Samsungs. Yes, I'm serious, and this fast zoom on the Samsung is one of the best lenses from Samsung.

P:

Right the Canon definitely has more lenses to go with it than the other two.

And I like all 3.

A couple points. The 7DII is a great camera, but does cost more than the NX1. For sports and action it has many, many more AF lenses available too. Of course with mirrorless you can adapt far more manual focus lenses.
There also is no denying the NX1 has a better sensor, higher resolution and significantly better video.
Cherry picking one type of photography and claiming that makes the 7DII better for everyone is very disingenuous.

Randy,

I think the high ISOs can be pushed a bit more with the Canon 7DII.

But correct it's what you want to do, and what lenses you already own.

@Randy
I picked the Canon 7D II because the NX1 seems to be an attempt to challenge DSLRs on their home turf - action shooting, but technology isn't really there yet. The sensor hasn't anything to do with mirrorless or not. Yes, video is probably much more convenient with a mirrorless, but I excluded that in my opening comment.

You must understand that largest number of people who buy DSLRs are not sports professionals. Instead they are soccer moms and amateurs. For most of them the NX1 is a better option because it costs less and is a better "all around" camera than the 7DII. As I said, more resolution for cropping, better video, faster performance and so on. It is a bit smaller too, but still has a nice grip and controls.
Pros are going to buy Canon and very well should. Moms and dads and the common buyer I think are better served by the less expensive but better "all around" NX1.

Papi61:

Have you tried working with the H265 codec? Even just 1080/30p?

Even basic playback is still hard.

And the files still need conversion to MP4 or ProRes. For 30 minutes of recorded video this conversion is NOT a 30 minute long process.

And I like the NX1 and think it shows real promise for video--but it's a pain to shoot with and that will be the case for at least 2 years.

Nah, there are already video editors that work with H265. Plugins for Premiere are also available. I reckon that by the end of this year pretty much every piece of video editing software will have its built-in H265 plugin.

Papi61:

Name an editor?

Nope, there aint a plugin for Adobe Premiere that edits H265.

There's a convoluted method of using a Premiere plugin to convert H265 to ProRes. And then ProRes files can be edited. That's very different.

Then simply editing 4K is still a significant challenge for anything but a Xeon workstation.

So 2 years. And 4K will still be a challenge even then.

"Name an editor?"

Power Director 13

"Nope, there aint a plugin for Adobe Premiere that edits H265."

Cinemartin

The HEVC H.265 codec is pretty awesome. Super small file sizes whilst retaining excellent video quality. I have no doubt it will soon become a standard.

Intel released released hardware-level support for h.265.

Papi61:

Not Cinemartin, you should read that more carefully. That's a converter plugin--also costs 100 pounds.

32 of 64GB of RAM is a bit more than a basic computer and will be for years to come, so there you've made my point.

A Wikipedia search of X99 mobo turns up zero; this is a problem, is that some video card? Or AMD processor? [Figured out it means mother board. I think the point about Xeon processors is you can get many more cores working on the problem than with an i7 CPU.]

Powerlink (really CyberLink) seems questionable, but could of course be worth a try.

You've described an $8000 machine. This price will go down.

nerd2:

And Windows 10 plays H265 natively in WinMediaPlayer.

Papi61:

So I emailed Cyberlink a question, the email was acknowledge with an auto response. But nearly 48 hours later still no answer.

Not good.

No, it's not an $8,000 machine. X99 mobos take any modern GPU. One 980 will be more than enough to handle 4K editing, especially if your editor supports CUDA acceleration.

The CPU's for the X99 are 5820k, 5930k and 5960x.

A top-notch X99 mobo can be had for about $450

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=1105924&Q=&is=REG&A=details

But, of course, you can go down considerably, especially if you don't need a lot of ports.

Example here:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130796&nm_mc=KNC-GoogleAdwords-PC&cm_mmc=KNC-GoogleAdwords-PC-_-pla-_-Intel+Motherboards-_-N82E16813130796&gclid=CjwKEAiAjNemBRCgp_vymcvVym0SJACRp_UZkrWi3ry0Vwy7MwGNicK6-OvepXK4JsYXI61VICvCvhoCVhzw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds

The 5820k is $389, the 5930k $550, the 5960x about $1k. 32gb of DDR4 RAM = $450. So, you can see that it's not really $8,000 we're talking about. Unless, of course, you buy something ready-made from a major brand like HP or Dell (but it's still not $8,000.)

Papi61:

Perhaps you could build it yourself for less than $8000, but just for warranty reasons some people will avoid that route.

Speaking from experience, an i7 quadcore CPU with a discrete Cuda Nvidia GPU has a hard time editing 4K video, 30p either h264 or ProRes that started out as h265.

I think the point about Xeon processors and whatever special system boards are required is that one can have many more than 4 cores working on the processing.

These are Haswell-E CPU's, not just run-of-the-mill Haswells.

The 5930k has 6 cores.
The 5960x has 8 cores.
5930k and 5960x come with an impressive 40 PCIe 3.0 fast lanes.

The 980 has no problems whatsoever handling 4K (actually even on more than one screen.) Not all the nVidias are the same. Incidentally, if you think you need more GPU power, you can always add a second 980 in SLI and make your combined GPU twice as fast.

Most Xeons are slower than these CPU's, especially if you overclock them, something you can't do with a Xeon.

When you buy quality parts from newegg, they always come with pretty good warranties. If you are still doubtful, you could have your machine assembled by MicroCenter or a ton of other similar businesses that offer up to 3 years of warranty for no additional fee. Usually you don't pay more than $200 above the sum of the parts.

This page will give you a good idea of the components I'm talking about:

http://www.learningdslrvideo.com/daves-beast-computer-build/

BTW, the cost of this particular 5960X build is $3,500. Add the drives and you're at about $5,000, just like I said.

Of course if you use a 5820k instead of the 5960x, less ram and less drives, you can probably make it with $3,500 including drives.

Pap:

Okay, I didn't realize Haswells come with more than 4 cores.

Right, there are specialized system builders, but it's best if they are local--and you have a relationship with them.

My point remains that most people, probably me included, would purchase a workstation, with a good warranty, more than a single Xeon CPU, and local service, rather than having a machine built or building it themselves. And that would raise the cost to say $8000--$10000.

Nothing wrong with your approach if you feel comfortable doing it.

Generally, people would pick system stability over other factors. Losing video files that you've spent 8 hours rendering is to be avoided at all costs. Rendering video or animation is very different than other processes that use fast CPUs+GPUs+RAM but don't build huge files.

FZ1000 is that good huh?

I see, thx for taking time to reply.

What about the blackout issue in burst shooting? Did you try reporting it back to samsung and see if it can be fixed/tuned via fw?

@Trk
You are asking about manufacturers adjusting their firmware just to get better testing results on the test scene? Doesn't make sense that any of them would do that just to get better results from the DPR test scene. If firmware comes out for fixing things or improving things it is for general use of customers not tuned to the DPR test scene.

Yes, but Samsung might tweak their firmware to provide better results for dpreview tests, e.g. it looks like they applied more noise reduction and image is not so sharp. Samsung and other manufacturers in computer industry do these things often - adjusting their software to win benchmarks with loss of quality somewhere else.

Head scratching Trk post.
He says Samsung purposely makes their images blurry so they will look better on the DPR studio scene.
For serious people, compare the D3200. It uses a bad lens too and suffers similarly.
EDIT: I saw in your history how you honestly believe the 6D is 4 stops better than the Panasonic GX7.
I see a pattern.

My 16-50s is perfect, even quite good in the corners...

But my 60mm is better. Razor sharp. Sharpest lens I have.

A quick test showed our copy of the 16-50 to be sharper edge-to-edge than two copies of the 60 macro, hence why the scene was shot with the 16-50.

I see, strange, but of course you can have bad copies. What about the 45/1.8?

looks like a Foveon-CFA hybrid. top layer green pixel photodiode and bottom layer filter array of blue and red. by making bottom layer a Bayer filter array gives some sort of enough light to penetrate sensor. tricky part if top layer for light to pass thru. making use of organic photodiode for illumination does appear to help light penetration and increase sensitivity. would like to see actual implementation of this concept.

Compared to the established DSLRs, M43 and Fuji, yes. Compared to other mounts like Sony E or FE, Samsung is better with the 85mm F/1.4, the stabilized 60mm macro, the F/2 pancake, etc. I really am not interested in F/2.8 standard primes.
Samsung does have a long way to go. I would like to see a 300mm zoom.

Thanks Randy! The .jpg in dark light is horrifying from the NX1, but the RAW looks sloppier but less color-noisy (apologies, I'm still green at this identifying noise types thing) than the a6000.

I wonder how much disadvantage the Samsung has dealing with that standard zoom compared to the Zeiss, but I don't think the ugly .jpg is much due to the lens.

Hmm, I really should see if I can get a hands-on myself. I use a V2 sometimes and I don't seem to run into that particular problem.

It will be enough if people wants to shot high quality 4K video (just look at the price of Sony FS7 or Canon 1DC), or those who want a 3x zoom that starts at f2, or need 15fps, or 28mp or ...

And EM1. XT1, A7, GH4 looks like P&S... They look more like DSLR. Think SnakePlissken statement is true. People who have the money but don't know much about digital camera would go for the default brand which is Canon and Nikon.

Definitely true. A lot of friends who are not camera geeks, but want a "good" camera went for canikons. Most of them went for rebels or d3200/5200. Few for 6d and 600d. But no one of them would spend more than 500€ on a camera different than canikon.

First, looking at actual use of brands may give little information about where the market is heading. DSLR is a rather mature technology, and lots of users are happy using 2-6 year old gear. CaNikon+Pentax definitely did something right, the question is, what is right now? When those casual CaNikon DSLR shooters find it is time to upgrade... I guess a lot of them will go mirrorless.

tecnoworld, not so fast.

With digital cameras, there is an exposure phase and there is a read-out phase.

The DSLR's OVF becomes available as soon as exposure is finished (and mirror has moved back). The read-out phase happens asynchronously.

The mirrorless EVF (ditto LCD) has to do black out and wait for both exposure and read-out phases to finish before it can become active again. EVF uses the sensor and for as long as it is busy with something else, there is no display possible.

As read-out speed improves, it would be less of an issue. But just not yet.

I'm not sure about that. Samsung claimed 240fps from the sensors. Even if there is the exposure time involved, 15 is a lot less than 240...I still think that it's theorethically feasible. Perhaps not so easily, but I'd like at least to read a statement from samsung about this. That's why I asked if dpr asked them about this.

I understand. I'm curious about what it'd show in the vf if no stills were displayed.

Mirrorless blackout is not at all related to sensor. Most cameras are reading from sensors at 120hz or even 240hz for contrast-based focusing already. It's just processing lag, which can be solved by adding more (parallel) pipelines.

Flagship DSLRs 35~40ms VF blackout, and EVF blackout can be less than 8ms (120hz readout case)

Nerd, that's why I stated than nx1 could do it with its processing power. It has a 4 cores arm cpu, plus a dedicated gpu.

I agree aboit the lack of support for older cameras. Nx300 had a lot of small issues that could be improved via fw, but they never did. Of course new fw has been out, but bringing very few improvements with them, after the first few months.

But perhaps this is changing with nx1, giving the different target?

Fujifilm are providing the right way to earn business as a "start up"- lets face it Fujifilm were nothing until they started creating the X series camera lineup- with constant road maps, fw updates, strengthening the lens lineup- and improving bodies, this is how you do it. ;)

And even so, Fujifilm still have a long way to go to gain real marketshare. Even though they are making mistakes, they seem to learn from them and quickly change/address them. Now they need to get the service aspect cleaned up... serious shooters need serious service.

My first SLR was a Fuji in 1967. I've been buying, among other brands, Fuji film since that time. My first digital camera was a Fuji in 2000. Now, all of a sudden, they're a start-up?

It's stacked sensor, the same as FOVEON!

And there is already a working prototype. Panasonic and Fuji delayed theirs due to design issues that need to be worked out.

@nerd2, now they have joined ranks of other camera/sensor manufacturers - Canon, Sony and Panasonic (TowerJazz) - who have patented similar things over the last 5+ years. And yet no camera with such sensor has materialized. I wouldn't expect much. The new tech would arrive first on the small sensor devices anyway.

Panasonic and Fuji said they failed due to energy drain issues and over heating. Samsung uses copper instead of aluminum to help with that. Samsung also has a working prototype, but did not say what size it was (smartphone, ILC).
Those very same companies have worked on larger BSI sensors like APS and 4/3rds, but nothing materialized as of yet.
Samsung has the tech and the infrastructure to be first.

According to data from paper it's 1/3 to 1/4" so cellphone sized. Also "just" 1,6x photons captured, not twice as much as in ideal conditions. More important is full green channel and twice as much R and B sensels so more accurate representation of reality.

just because you have a habit of liking your own comments, doesn't mean I do what you do.

its good to know others get (and like) what I say on DPR.

I haven't liked my comments.
only those who dislike me will ally with your chain-yanking (your groupies are no different from you in this regard)

btw: your Pentax K-5IIs dSLR has only Autogain (rudimentary) LV ... unless DPR lists differently (but, they don't make LV distinctions in their comparison database) ... so, you may not know LV differences anyway.