Sony NEX 5N vs Samsung NX5

Sony NEX-5N
Samsung NX5

Reasons to buy the Sony NEX 5N

Touch screen
Touch screen
Fewer buttons
In-camera HDR
HDR
Combines multiple exposures
In-camera panoramas
Panorama
Stitches together multiple photos into a panorama
Takes 3D photos
3D
View photos in 3D on 3D televisions
 

Reasons to buy the Samsung NX5

Viewfinder
Great viewfinder
Digital
Built-in flash
Built-in flash
External flash not needed
External flash
External flash
Better lighting

galleries

Explore our gallery of 23 sample photos taken by the Samsung NX5.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Sony NEX-5N.

competitors

Sony NEX-5N Competitors

Sony Alpha A5000

Sony Alpha A5000

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$299 body only

$448 with 16-50mm lens

Overall image quality Slightly better image quality
True resolution Higher true resolution
Screen resolution Significantly lower resolution screen
Sony Alpha A6000

Sony Alpha A6000

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$548 body only

$698 with 16-50mm lens

Image stabilization Image stabilization
Viewfinder Has a viewfinder
Touch screen No touch screen
Sony NEX 5R

Sony NEX 5R

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$400 body only

Focus points More focus points
Dynamic range More dynamic range
Low light performance More noise at high ISO

Samsung NX5 Competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 (Lumix DMC-GX80 / Lumix DMC-GX7 Mark II)

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 (Lumix DMC-GX80 / Lumix DMC-GX7 Mark II)

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

Movie format Higher resolution movies
Live view Has live view
Thickness Slightly thicker
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000

Pro digicam

$598 - $798

Movie format Higher resolution movies
High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Interchangeable lenses Built-in lens only
Samsung NX1

Samsung NX1

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$1,660 with 16-50mm lens

Movie format Higher resolution movies
Live view Has live view
Size Larger

discussion

Sony NEX-5N
NEX 5N
Sony

Report a correction
Samsung NX5
NX5
Samsung

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments