<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: UPDATED -&gt; First Samsung NX-10 versus Panasonic GF1 noise comparison!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://k-rumors.com/first-samsung-nx-10-versus-panasonic-gf1-noise-comparison/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://k-rumors.com/first-samsung-nx-10-versus-panasonic-gf1-noise-comparison/</link>
	<description>Pentax and Samsung K-mount rumors</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2011 03:39:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric</title>
		<link>http://k-rumors.com/first-samsung-nx-10-versus-panasonic-gf1-noise-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-699</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2010 17:23:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://k-rumors.com/first-samsung-nx-10-versus-panasonic-gf1-noise-comparison/#comment-699</guid>
		<description>GF1 definitely has more dynamic range,  The NX looks flat, lifeless and smeared with Noise reduction at higher ISOs   =(.

Thanks for posting the links though!   The NX has to adjust the JPEG engine, most likely. If it&#039;s using an APSC sensor, it should perform better than that, at least in RAW...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>GF1 definitely has more dynamic range,  The NX looks flat, lifeless and smeared with Noise reduction at higher ISOs   =(.</p>
<p>Thanks for posting the links though!   The NX has to adjust the JPEG engine, most likely. If it&#8217;s using an APSC sensor, it should perform better than that, at least in RAW&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: admin</title>
		<link>http://k-rumors.com/first-samsung-nx-10-versus-panasonic-gf1-noise-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-698</link>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:30:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://k-rumors.com/first-samsung-nx-10-versus-panasonic-gf1-noise-comparison/#comment-698</guid>
		<description>Thanks Ihkim!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Ihkim!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ihkim</title>
		<link>http://k-rumors.com/first-samsung-nx-10-versus-panasonic-gf1-noise-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-697</link>
		<dc:creator>ihkim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2010 15:25:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://k-rumors.com/first-samsung-nx-10-versus-panasonic-gf1-noise-comparison/#comment-697</guid>
		<description>The original poster updated his comparison by using 30mm instead of 18-55 zoom. Please update image links.
Thank you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The original poster updated his comparison by using 30mm instead of 18-55 zoom. Please update image links.<br />
Thank you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ihkim</title>
		<link>http://k-rumors.com/first-samsung-nx-10-versus-panasonic-gf1-noise-comparison/comment-page-1/#comment-696</link>
		<dc:creator>ihkim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Jan 2010 02:21:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://k-rumors.com/first-samsung-nx-10-versus-panasonic-gf1-noise-comparison/#comment-696</guid>
		<description>The image has the comparison up to ISO800 only. You missed another image for ISO3200.

NX-10 firmware is still in beta status.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The image has the comparison up to ISO800 only. You missed another image for ISO3200.</p>
<p>NX-10 firmware is still in beta status.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

