Sony Alpha A5000 vs Samsung NX11

Winner
Sony Alpha A5000

96

Samsung NX11

73

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Sony Alpha A5000

24p movies
Supports 24p
For that film look
Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
Movie continuous focus
Movie continuous focus
Makes it easy to get in-focus movies
Light-weight
Weight
210 g
 

Reasons to buy the Samsung NX11

Viewfinder
Great viewfinder
Digital
Screen type
OLED Screen
Bright and vivid
External flash
External flash
Better lighting
Built-in flash
Built-in flash
External flash not needed

galleries

Explore our gallery of 15 sample photos taken by the Samsung NX11.

competitors

Sony Alpha A5000 Competitors

Sony Alpha A6000

Sony Alpha A6000

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$400 - $448 body only

$518 - $548 with 16-50mm lens

Image stabilization Image stabilization
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Size Larger
Sony Alpha A5100

Sony Alpha A5100

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$348 body only

$400 - $448 with 16-50mm lens

Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Touch screen Has a touch screen
Battery life Slightly shorter battery life
Nikon D3400

Nikon D3400

Entry-level DSLR

$326 body only

$409 - $447 with 18-55mm lens

Battery life Much longer battery life
Lens availability Much more lenses available
Screen flips out Screen does not flip out

Samsung NX11 Competitors

Samsung NX300

Samsung NX300

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$730 with 20-50mm lens

Screen size Much larger screen
Movie format Higher resolution movies
Viewfinder No viewfinder
Pentax K-r

Pentax K-r

Entry-level DSLR

$1,195 with 18-55mm lens

Image stabilization Image stabilization
Built-in focus motor Has a built-in focus motor
Screen type Doesn't have an OLED screen
Samsung NX1000

Samsung NX1000

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$342 with 20-50mm lens

Movie format Higher resolution movies
Supports 24p Supports 24p
Screen type Doesn't have an OLED screen

discussion

Sony Alpha A5000
Alpha A5000
Sony

Report a correction
Samsung NX11
NX11
Samsung

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments