Updated (April 2012): Compare the Samsung NX1000 vs Samsung NX210

Samsung NX1000 vs Samsung NX210

Winner
Samsung NX1000

100

Samsung NX210

96

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Samsung NX1000

High resolution screen
Screen resolution
921k dots
Almost no delay when powering up
Startup delay
1700 ms startup delay
High true resolution
True resolution
20 MP
24p movies
Supports 24p
For that film look
 

Reasons to buy the Samsung NX210

Screen type
OLED Screen
Bright and vivid
External mic jack
External mic jack
Record higher quality audio with a microphone
True resolution
High true resolution
20 MP
Supports 24p
24p movies
For that film look

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Samsung NX1000.

competitors

Samsung NX1000 Competitors

Samsung NX500

Samsung NX500

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$1,646 body only

$2,052 with 16-50mm lens

Shutter lag Much less shutter lag
Screen type Has an OLED screen
Lowest price More expensive
Samsung NX1100

Samsung NX1100

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$418 with 20-50mm lens

Weight Lighter
Thickness Slightly thicker
Samsung NX3000

Samsung NX3000

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$500 with 20-50mm lens

Shutter lag Much less shutter lag
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Startup delay Much more startup delay

Samsung NX210 Competitors

Sony Alpha A5100

Sony Alpha A5100

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$448 body only

$509 - $548 with 16-50mm lens

Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
Screen type Doesn't have an OLED screen
Samsung NX2000

Samsung NX2000

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

Screen size Much larger screen
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Screen type Doesn't have an OLED screen
Olympus Stylus SP-100

Olympus Stylus SP-100

Super zoom

$419

Image stabilization Image stabilization
High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Screen type Doesn't have an OLED screen

discussion

Samsung NX1000
NX1000
Samsung

Report a correction
Samsung NX210
NX210
Samsung

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments