Olympus XZ-1 vs Samsung NX1
The Olympus XZ-1 and the Samsung NX1 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in January 2011 and September 2014. The XZ-1 is a fixed lens compact, while the NX1 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. The cameras are based on a 1/1.7-inch (XZ-1) and an APS-C (NX1) sensor. The Olympus has a resolution of 10.1 megapixels, whereas the Samsung provides 28 MP.
Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.
Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Olympus XZ-1 and the Samsung NX1? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.
Body comparison
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Olympus XZ-1 and the Samsung NX1 is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
The XZ-1 can be obtained in two different colors (black, white), while the NX1 is only available in black.
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Samsung NX1 is considerably larger (97 percent) than the Olympus XZ-1. It is noteworthy in this context that the NX1 is splash and dust-proof, while the XZ-1 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the XZ-1 has a lens built in, whereas the NX1 is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup.
The power pack in the NX1 can be charged via the USB port, which can be very convenient when travelling.
The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, you can use the CAM-parator app to select your camera combination among a large number of options.
Camera Model |
Camera Width |
Camera Height |
Camera Depth |
Camera Weight |
Battery Life |
Weather Sealing |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus XZ-1 | 111 mm | 65 mm | 42 mm | 275 g | 320 | n | Jan 2011 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
2. | Samsung NX1 | 139 mm | 102 mm | 66 mm | 550 g | 500 | Y | Sep 2014 | US$ 1 499 | ebay.com | |
3. | Fujifilm X-Pro2 | 141 mm | 83 mm | 46 mm | 495 g | 350 | Y | Jan 2016 | US$ 1 699 | ebay.com | |
4. | Fujifilm X-T2 | 133 mm | 92 mm | 49 mm | 507 g | 340 | Y | Jul 2016 | US$ 1 599 | ebay.com | |
5. | Nikon D5300 | 125 mm | 98 mm | 76 mm | 480 g | 600 | n | Oct 2013 | US$ 799 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-PL1 | 115 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 334 g | 290 | n | Feb 2010 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 37 mm | 313 g | 300 | n | Jun 2011 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-PM1 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 34 mm | 265 g | 330 | n | Jun 2011 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PM2 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 34 mm | 269 g | 360 | n | Sep 2012 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus TG-5 | 113 mm | 66 mm | 32 mm | 250 g | 340 | Y | May 2017 | US$ 449 | ebay.com | |
11. | Olympus XZ-2 | 113 mm | 65 mm | 48 mm | 346 g | 340 | n | Sep 2012 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
12. | Panasonic FZ150 | 124 mm | 82 mm | 92 mm | 528 g | 410 | n | Aug 2011 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
13. | Panasonic FZ200 | 125 mm | 87 mm | 110 mm | 588 g | 540 | n | Jul 2012 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic LX5 | 110 mm | 65 mm | 43 mm | 271 g | 400 | n | Jul 2010 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
15. | Panasonic LX7 | 111 mm | 68 mm | 46 mm | 298 g | 330 | n | Jul 2012 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
16. | Samsung NX500 | 120 mm | 64 mm | 43 mm | 287 g | 370 | n | Feb 2015 | US$ 799 | ebay.com | |
17. | Sony A7 | 127 mm | 94 mm | 48 mm | 474 g | 340 | Y | Oct 2013 | US$ 1 699 | ebay.com | |
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders. | |||||||||||
The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The retail prices at the time of the camera’s release place the model in the market relative to other models in the producer’s line-up and the competition. The XZ-1 was launched at a lower price than the NX1, despite having a lens built in. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down.
Sensor comparison
The size of the imaging sensor is a crucial determinant of image quality. All other things equal, a large sensor will have larger individual pixel-units that offer better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Olympus XZ-1 features a 1/1.7-inch sensor and the Samsung NX1 an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the NX1 is 702 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 4.4 and 1.5. The sensor in the XZ-1 has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the NX1 offers a 3:2 aspect.
With 28MP, the NX1 offers a higher resolution than the XZ-1 (10.1MP), but the NX1 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.63μm versus 2.13μm for the XZ-1) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the NX1 is a much more recent model (by 3 years and 8 months) than the XZ-1, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the NX1 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.
The resolution advantage of the Samsung NX1 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the NX1 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 32.4 x 21.6 inches or 82.3 x 54.9 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 25.9 x 17.3 inches or 65.8 x 43.9 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 21.6 x 14.4 inches or 54.9 x 36.6 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus XZ-1 are 18.3 x 13.8 inches or 46.5 x 35 cm for good quality, 14.7 x 11 inches or 37.2 x 28 cm for very good quality, and 12.2 x 9.2 inches or 31 x 23.3 cm for excellent quality prints.
The NX1 has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.
The Olympus XZ-1 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 6400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Samsung NX1 are ISO 100 to ISO 25600, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 100-51200.
In terms of underlying technology, the XZ-1 is build around a CCD sensor, while the NX1 uses a BSI-CMOS imager. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.
Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. This service determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). Of the two cameras under consideration, the NX1 offers substantially better image quality than the XZ-1 (overall score 49 points higher). The advantage is based on 5.4 bits higher color depth, 2.8 EV in additional dynamic range, and 3.5 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
Camera Model |
Sensor Class |
Resolution (MP) |
Horiz. Pixels |
Vert. Pixels |
Video Format |
DXO Portrait |
DXO Landscape |
DXO Sports |
DXO Overall |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus XZ-1 | 1/1.7 | 10.1 | 3664 | 2752 | 720/30p | 18.8 | 10.4 | 117 | 34 | |
2. | Samsung NX1 | APS-C | 28.0 | 6480 | 4320 | 4K/30p | 24.2 | 13.2 | 1363 | 83 | |
3. | Fujifilm X-Pro2 | APS-C | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/60p | 23.7 | 13.0 | 1608 | 80 | |
4. | Fujifilm X-T2 | APS-C | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 4K/30p | 23.8 | 13.1 | 1653 | 81 | |
5. | Nikon D5300 | APS-C | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/60p | 24.0 | 13.9 | 1338 | 83 | |
6. | Olympus E-PL1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.5 | 10.1 | 487 | 54 | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.9 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
8. | Olympus E-PM1 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 21.0 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
9. | Olympus E-PM2 | Four Thirds | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 22.7 | 12.2 | 932 | 72 | |
10. | Olympus TG-5 | 1/2.3 | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 4K/30p | 20.5 | 11.9 | 934 | 50 | |
11. | Olympus XZ-2 | 1/1.7 | 11.8 | 3968 | 2976 | 1080/30p | 20.4 | 11.3 | 216 | 49 | |
12. | Panasonic FZ150 | 1/2.3 | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 1080/60p | 19.4 | 10.9 | 132 | 40 | |
13. | Panasonic FZ200 | 1/2.3 | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 1080/60p | 19.1 | 10.8 | 114 | 37 | |
14. | Panasonic LX5 | 1/1.7 | 10.0 | 3648 | 2736 | 720/60p | 19.6 | 10.8 | 132 | 41 | |
15. | Panasonic LX7 | 1/1.7 | 10.0 | 3648 | 2736 | 1080/60p | 20.7 | 11.7 | 147 | 50 | |
16. | Samsung NX500 | APS-C | 28.0 | 6480 | 4320 | 4K/30p | 24.8 | 13.9 | 1379 | 87 | |
17. | Sony A7 | Full Frame | 24.0 | 6000 | 4000 | 1080/60p | 24.8 | 14.2 | 2248 | 90 | |
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age. |
Many modern cameras cannot only take still pictures, but also record videos. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the NX1 provides a better video resolution than the XZ-1. It can shoot movie footage at 4K/30p, while the Olympus is limited to 720/30p.
Feature comparison
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the NX1 has an electronic viewfinder (2360k dots), which can be very helpful when shooting in bright sunlight. In contrast, the XZ-1 relies on live view and the rear LCD for framing. That said, the XZ-1 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-2. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Olympus XZ-1 and Samsung NX1 in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras.
Camera Model |
Viewfinder (Type or 000 dots) |
Control Panel (yes/no) |
LCD Specifications (inch/000 dots) |
LCD Attach- ment |
Touch Screen (yes/no) |
Max Shutter Speed * |
Max Shutter Flaps * |
Built-in Flash (yes/no) |
Built-in Image Stab |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus XZ-1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 614 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 2.0/s | Y | Y | |
2. | Samsung NX1 | 2360 | Y | 3.0 / 1036 | tilting | Y | 1/8000s | 15.0/s | Y | n | |
3. | Fujifilm X-Pro2 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1620 | fixed | n | 1/8000s | 8.0/s | n | n | |
4. | Fujifilm X-T2 | 2360 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | full-flex | n | 1/8000s | 8.0/s | n | n | |
5. | Nikon D5300 | optical | n | 3.2 / 1037 | swivel | n | 1/4000s | 5.0/s | Y | n | |
6. | Olympus E-PL1 | optional | n | 2.7 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
8. | Olympus E-PM1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
9. | Olympus E-PM2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | Y | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | n | Y | |
10. | Olympus TG-5 | none | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 20.0/s | Y | Y | |
11. | Olympus XZ-2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 5.0/s | Y | Y | |
12. | Panasonic FZ150 | 202 | n | 3.0 / 460 | swivel | n | 1/2000s | 12.0/s | Y | Y | |
13. | Panasonic FZ200 | 1312 | n | 3.0 / 460 | swivel | n | 1/4000s | 12.0/s | Y | Y | |
14. | Panasonic LX5 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 2.5/s | Y | Y | |
15. | Panasonic LX7 | optional | n | 3.0 / 920 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 11.0/s | Y | Y | |
16. | Samsung NX500 | none | n | 3.0 / 1036 | tilting | Y | 1/6000s | 9.0/s | Y | n | |
17. | Sony A7 | 2400 | n | 3.0 / 1230 | tilting | n | 1/8000s | 5.0/s | n | n | |
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one. |
One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The NX1 has a touchscreen, while the XZ-1 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.
The reported shutter speed information refers to the use of the mechanical shutter. Yet, some cameras only have an electronic shutter, while others have an electronic shutter in addition to a mechanical one. In fact, the NX1 is one of those camera that have an additional electronic shutter, which makes completely silent shooting possible. However, this mode is less suitable for photographing moving objects (risk of rolling shutter) or shooting under artificial light sources (risk of flickering).
The Olympus XZ-1 and the Samsung NX1 both have an intervalometer built-in. This enables the photographer to capture time lapse sequences, such as flower blooming, a sunset or moon rise, without purchasing an external camera trigger and related software.
Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the XZ-1 and the NX1 write their files to SDXC cards. The NX1 supports UHS-II cards on its first slot and UHS-I on its second one, while the XZ-1 cannot take advantage of Ultra High Speed SD cards.
Connectivity comparison
For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Olympus XZ-1 and Samsung NX1 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
Camera Model |
Hotshoe Port |
Internal Mic / Speaker |
Microphone Port |
Headphone Port |
HDMI Port |
USB Port |
WiFi Support |
NFC Support |
Bluetooth Support |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus XZ-1 | Y | mono / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
2. | Samsung NX1 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 3.0 | Y | Y | Y | |
3. | Fujifilm X-Pro2 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
4. | Fujifilm X-T2 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 3.0 | Y | - | - | |
5. | Nikon D5300 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | mini | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
6. | Olympus E-PL1 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
8. | Olympus E-PM1 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
9. | Olympus E-PM2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
10. | Olympus TG-5 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
11. | Olympus XZ-2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
12. | Panasonic FZ150 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
13. | Panasonic FZ200 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
14. | Panasonic LX5 | Y | mono / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
15. | Panasonic LX7 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
16. | Samsung NX500 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | Y | |
17. | Sony A7 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | Y | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - |
It is notable that the NX1 offers wifi support, which can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location. In contrast, the XZ-1 does not provide wifi capability.
Both the XZ-1 and the NX1 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The XZ-1 was replaced by the Olympus XZ-2, while the NX1 does not have a direct successor. Further information on the features and operation of the XZ-1 and NX1 can be found, respectively, in the Olympus XZ-1 Manual (free pdf) or the online Samsung NX1 Manual.
Review summary
So how do things add up? Is there a clear favorite between the Olympus XZ-1 and the Samsung NX1? Which camera is better? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.
Reasons to prefer the Olympus XZ-1:
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- Ready to shoot: Has a lens built-in, whereas the NX1 requires a separate lens.
- More compact: Is smaller (111x65mm vs 139x102mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
- Less heavy: Is lighter even though it comes with a built-in lens (unlike the NX1).
- Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
- More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
- More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in January 2011).
Advantages of the Samsung NX1:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (28 vs 10.1MP), which boosts linear resolution by 70%.
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (49 points) in the DXO overall evaluation.
- Richer colors: Generates noticeably more natural colors (5.4 bits more color depth).
- More dynamic range: Captures a broader range of light and dark details (2.8 EV of extra DR).
- Better low-light sensitivity: Can shoot in dim conditions (3.5 stops ISO advantage).
- Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 720/30p).
- Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
- Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
- Better sound control: Has a headphone port that enables audio monitoring while recording.
- Easier framing: Has an electronic viewfinder for image composition and settings control.
- Easier setting verification: Features a control panel on top to check shooting parameters.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1036k vs 614k dots).
- More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
- Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
- Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (15 vs 2 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Less disturbing: Has an electronic shutter option for completely silent shooting.
- More flexible: Takes interchangeable lenses and can thus be used with specialty optics.
- Longer lasting: Gets more shots (500 versus 320) out of a single battery charge.
- Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
- Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
- Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
- Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
- Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
- Easier wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
- Faster buffer clearing: Supports Ultra High Speed (UHS-II and UHS-I) SDXC cards.
- More modern: Reflects 3 years and 8 months of technical progress since the XZ-1 launch.
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the NX1 is the clear winner of the contest (28 : 7 points). However, the relative importance of the various individual camera aspects will vary according to personal preferences and needs, so that you might like to apply corresponding weights to the particular features before making a decision on a new camera. A professional wedding photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a travel photog, and a person interested in cityscapes has distinct needs from a macro shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.
How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Olympus XZ-1 and the Samsung NX1 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Travel-Zoom Camera and Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.
In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the XZ-1 or the NX1. User reviews, such as those found at amazon, can sometimes inform about these issues, but such feedback is often incomplete, inconsistent, and biased.
Expert reviews
This is where reviews by experts come in. The following table reports the overall ratings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], digitalcameraworld [DCW], dpreview [DPR], ephotozine [EPZ], photographyblog [PB]). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.
Camera Model |
AP score |
CL score |
DCW score |
DPR score |
EPZ score |
PB score |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Olympus XZ-1 | 4/5 | .. | .. | 74/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2011 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
2. | Samsung NX1 | 5/5 | .. | .. | 87/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Sep 2014 | US$ 1 499 | ebay.com | |
3. | Fujifilm X-Pro2 | .. | + | .. | 83/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2016 | US$ 1 699 | ebay.com | |
4. | Fujifilm X-T2 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 86/100 | 4.5/5 | 5/5 | Jul 2016 | US$ 1 599 | ebay.com | |
5. | Nikon D5300 | 4/5 | + + | .. | 79/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Oct 2013 | US$ 799 | ebay.com | |
6. | Olympus E-PL1 | .. | 86/100 | .. | 69/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2010 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Jun 2011 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus E-PM1 | .. | 86/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jun 2011 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus E-PM2 | 3/5 | .. | .. | 77/100 | 5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus TG-5 | .. | + + | 4.5/5 | .. | 4/5 | 4/5 | May 2017 | US$ 449 | ebay.com | |
11. | Olympus XZ-2 | 4/5 | + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
12. | Panasonic FZ150 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 76/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Aug 2011 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
13. | Panasonic FZ200 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 80/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jul 2012 | US$ 599 | ebay.com | |
14. | Panasonic LX5 | 4/5 | + | .. | 73/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jul 2010 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
15. | Panasonic LX7 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 75/100 | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Jul 2012 | US$ 499 | ebay.com | |
16. | Samsung NX500 | 4.5/5 | .. | .. | 81/100 | 5/5 | 4.5/5 | Feb 2015 | US$ 799 | ebay.com | |
17. | Sony A7 | 5/5 | + + | .. | 80/100 | 5/5 | 5/5 | Oct 2013 | US$ 1 699 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just use the search menu below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.
- Canon 1100D vs Samsung NX1
- Fujifilm X-T100 vs Olympus XZ-1
- Nikon 1 J5 vs Olympus XZ-1
- Nikon B700 vs Olympus XZ-1
- Nikon D850 vs Olympus XZ-1
- Nikon P1000 vs Olympus XZ-1
- Olympus TG-6 vs Samsung NX1
- Olympus XZ-1 vs Panasonic G90
- Panasonic FZ200 vs Samsung NX1
- Panasonic ZS80 vs Samsung NX1
- Samsung NX1 vs Sony A58
- Samsung NX1 vs Sony A99 II
Specifications: Olympus XZ-1 vs Samsung NX1
Below is a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the two cameras to facilitate a quick review of their differences and common features.
Camera Model | Olympus XZ-1 | Samsung NX1 |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Fixed lens compact camera | Mirrorless system camera |
Camera Lens | 28-112mm f/1.8-2.5 | Samsung NX mount lenses |
Launch Date | January 2011 | September 2014 |
Launch Price | USD 499 | USD 1,499 |
Sensor Specs | Olympus XZ-1 | Samsung NX1 |
Sensor Technology | CCD | BSI-CMOS |
Sensor Format | 1/1.7" Sensor | APS-C Sensor |
Sensor Size | 7.85 x 5.89 mm | 23.5 x 15.7 mm |
Sensor Area | 46.2365 mm2 | 368.95 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 9.8 mm | 28.3 mm |
Crop Factor | 4.4x | 1.5x |
Sensor Resolution | 10.1 Megapixels | 28 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 3664 x 2752 pixels | 6480 x 4320 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 2.13 μm | 3.63 μm |
Pixel Density | 21.81 MP/cm2 | 7.59 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | no AA filter |
Movie Capability | 720/30p Video | 4K/30p Video |
ISO Setting | 100 - 6,400 ISO | 100 - 25,600 ISO |
ISO Boost | no Enhancement | 100 - 51,200 ISO |
Image Processor | TruePic V | DRIMe 5 |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | 34 | 83 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | 18.8 | 24.2 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | 10.4 | 13.2 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | 117 | 1363 |
Screen Specs | Olympus XZ-1 | Samsung NX1 |
Viewfinder Type | Viewfinder optional | Electronic viewfinder |
Viewfinder Field of View | 100% | |
Viewfinder Magnification | 0.69x | |
Viewfinder Resolution | 2360k dots | |
Top-Level Screen | no Top Display | Control Panel |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 614k dots | 1036k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Tilting screen |
Touch Input | no Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Olympus XZ-1 | Samsung NX1 |
Focus System | Contrast-detect AF | On-Sensor Phase-detect |
Manual Focusing Aid | no Peaking Feature | Focus Peaking |
Max Shutter Speed (mechanical) | 1/2000s | 1/8000s |
Continuous Shooting | 2 shutter flaps/s | 15 shutter flaps/s |
Electronic Shutter | no E-Shutter | YES |
Time-Lapse Photography | Intervalometer built-in | Intervalometer built-in |
Image Stabilization | In-body stabilization | Lens stabilization only |
Fill Flash | Built-in Flash | Built-in Flash |
Storage Medium | SDXC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Single card slot |
UHS card support | no | Single UHS-II |
Connectivity Specs | Olympus XZ-1 | Samsung NX1 |
External Flash | Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 3.0 |
HDMI Port | mini HDMI | micro HDMI |
Microphone Port | no MIC socket | External MIC port |
Headphone Socket | no Headphone port | Headphone port |
Wifi Support | no Wifi | Wifi built-in |
Near-Field Communication | no NFC | NFC built-in |
Bluetooth Support | no Bluetooth | Bluetooth built-in |
Body Specs | Olympus XZ-1 | Samsung NX1 |
Environmental Sealing | not weather sealed | Weathersealed body |
Battery Type | Olympus Li-50B | Samsung BP1900 |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 320 shots per charge | 500 shots per charge |
In-Camera Charging | no USB charging | USB charging |
Body Dimensions |
111 x 65 x 42 mm (4.4 x 2.6 x 1.7 in) |
139 x 102 x 66 mm (5.5 x 4.0 x 2.6 in) |
Camera Weight | 275 g (9.7 oz) | 550 g (19.4 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.