Sony NEX C3 vs Samsung NX100

Winner
Sony NEX C3

70

Samsung NX100

45

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Sony NEX C3

Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
In-camera HDR
HDR
Combines multiple exposures
In-camera panoramas
Panorama
Stitches together multiple photos into a panorama
 

Reasons to buy the Samsung NX100

Startup delay
Almost no delay when powering up
1100 ms startup delay
Screen type
OLED Screen
Bright and vivid
Movie continuous focus
Movie continuous focus
Makes it easy to get in-focus movies

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Samsung NX100.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Sony NEX C3.

competitors

Sony NEX C3 Competitors

Sony NEX F3

Sony NEX F3

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$559 with 18-55mm lens

Supports 24p Supports 24p
Shutter lag Significantly less shutter lag
Image stabilization No image stabilization
Sony Alpha NEX-3N

Sony Alpha NEX-3N

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$355 body only

Supports 24p Supports 24p
Shutter lag Significantly less shutter lag
Image stabilization No image stabilization
Sony NEX-5N

Sony NEX 5N

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$887 with 16-50mm lens

Supports 24p Supports 24p
Shutter lag Much less shutter lag
Image stabilization No image stabilization

Samsung NX100 Competitors

Samsung NX1000

Samsung NX1000

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$305 with 20-50mm lens

Dynamic range More dynamic range
Panorama Can create panoramas in-camera
Screen type Doesn't have an OLED screen
Samsung NX300

Samsung NX300

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$540 with 18-55mm lens

Screen size Much larger screen
Dynamic range More dynamic range
Startup delay Slightly more startup delay
Samsung NX2000

Samsung NX2000

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$430 with 20-50mm lens

Screen size Much larger screen
Dynamic range More dynamic range
Screen type Doesn't have an OLED screen

discussion

Sony NEX C3
NEX C3
Sony

Report a correction
Samsung NX100
NX100
Samsung

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments