Samsung NX 20 mm f/2.8
11. Summary
- handy, physically light and solid casing at the same time,
- very good image quality in the frame centre,
- decent image quality on the edge of the frame (apart from the maximum aperture),
- negligible astigmatism,
- quite good performance against bright light,
- accurate and silent autofocus.
Cons:
- high distortion,
- significant coma,
- image quality at the maximum relative aperture, on the edge of the frame should have been better.
It would be difficult not to feel sympathy for this lens. It is a small, lightweight, handy instrument with an all-purpose focal length which provides the most important thing – a very good image quality in the frame centre. Of course it has some flaws because any ‘pancake’ device is doomed due to their small dimensions.
Please Support UsIf you enjoy our reviews and articles, and you want us to continue our work please, support our website by donating through PayPal. The funds are going to be used for paying our editorial team, renting servers, and equipping our testing studio; only that way we will be able to continue providing you interesting content for free. |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
If there is one feature you can carp about it’s the aperture. Producing the EF-M 2/22 model Canon proved that you can make a neat ‘pancake’ lens with a similar focal length but faster. Accordingly, if only the Samsung was a bit faster it would be difficult not to recommend it to all and sundry.
Now the matter of price. If I was to pay for this lens 1000 PLN or even the suggested 1199 PLN the situation wouldn’t be rosy. The Canon 2/22, being noticeably faster, is also cheaper, costing just 949 PLN. However, if you take into account the fact that we bought this one for less than 400 PLN outside the official distribution channels, it is really difficult to complain about anything. The question is how long that unofficial distribution will function and what the Samsung company says about it. We still don’t know whether the company taciturnly agrees to such a practice or is it an arbitrary act of their authorized service partners. I admit the situation is a bit ambiguous because it jeopardizes the business of normal shops, which have got Samsung lenses for ‘official’ prices and now they try to sell them with a price tag twice as high as that you can find on an auction site. If such a situation continues shops might stop ordering Samsung lenses and there will be no official distribution at all.
Our test answered one important question, though. The tested model seemed to be a flawless lens in every respect. It was able to produce very sharp images, without astigmatism, and I am sure it would be a joy to use. I don’t think that lenses offered on auction sites are somehow worse than those coming from legal distribution channels.
Sample shots