Leaderboard

It would kill the 80D and GH4 for stills. Check that, murder the 80D and GH4 for stills. Scratch that, kidnap and torture, preform experiments and then make a 4K snuff film of the murder which it sends to the 80D and GH4s families.

A couple of stills from my Disneyland trip (don't ask!) that I've graded in FilmConvert with the new profiles. 5207 Vis3, 60% film colour, 65% Super 16 grain. Tweaks to curve and saturation. Edit: shot in Canon log at ISO 500 (apart from the last one, which I think was at 2000. I'm really loving the image I get this camera - it may not be for everybody, but it matches my sensibilities. Knowing it is capable of producing exactly what I want and that it's so easy to use makes me want to shoot a lot more, which is - obviously - the best way to get better at anything!

My friends, I’m thinking on launching in the forum a new topic entitled “Where is Andrew Reid?”.. I’m a bit joking but I’m getting worried he doesn’t write anything.. I hope he is fully involved with some filmmaking project..

Second attempt...which is which?

Thank you for the explanation, however, I do not think it applies here. There is no indication for difference in performance. NX1 and NX500 can handle up to the same amount of increased bitrate for the encoder. When I said same PPUs/OPUs etc (some of which handle image-resizing) - I am under the impression those are programmable hardware units. In particular resizing/re-sampling is set by a few registers which set the parameters for (I think it was PPU1 that handled resizing?), and the only block that is preventing NX500 of having non-crop 4K is control of those registers (which was not successful for now), but we can dump them quite easily. So... if there were disabled processing cores, we would have noticed right away

Did your c100 arrive yet... How do you like it?

Well i think we would need to "profile" each lens using a measuring tape and perhaps a telnet script that moves to the first focus position takes a photos moves to the the next position takes another photo then so on then pull all those photos into the computer and zoom and see the exact focus distance at each position then use that to build a look up table.

Honestly, I think the 1DC would be the A cam to a C-100 B-Cam... But YMMV based upon how important DPAF is to your video work. They both have C-Log, so in that respect, they would work great together. As far as stills, I'm just starting to shoot them, but I believe other than the lack of DPAF, the 1DC would be a great stills cam.

In the end the operator and colorist will make this, or any, footage look good or not. I have seen great c100 footage and horrible c100 footage. I have recorded good XC10 footage and horrible XC10 footage. For the price, the XC10 is a great camera, and if you really look there is great XC10 footage floating around... A lot of which is in the XC10 threads on this site.

Yeah, this is a cool test. I don't have any exact numbers, but I know a lot of TV shows use the C300, and I'm sure a few features as well... So the fact that an indie filmmaker could pick up an XC10/15 for around 2 grand and shoot at C300 level is astonishing and one of the reasons I bought the XC10.

Yeah the Color Match feature isn't perfect, but I still like it as a starting point. I have attached a screenshot of a mask applied to one strip of colors in the chart. I usually then apply a slight Hue vs Hue, and Hue vs Saturation curve then move on to grading. The chart in this specific shot was shot under an overcast day, so green and yellow were pretty vivid in person. I plan on doing a comparison between RAW NX1 images with an Xrite dng profile applied verse videos with resolve's color match. Partially for better accuracy and also so that I might be able to imitate how I tweak (and presets) images in Lightroom (depending on how much I can push the files). I am currently not using the bitrate hack, but I would imagine it would help with the video's flexibility to grade further.

Film Convert have just released their profiles for the XC10, I really want to get my hands on this camera. An XC15 combined with mt a7s would make a killer combo for my needs.

Where did You get that from? From MediaInfo on NX1 clip: 3840x2160 HEVC (Main @ Level 5.1)!

I had terrible results with then FS5---after shooting Sony for 10 years, the image and color of the FS5 finally convinced me I should move to Canon. IMO you would be VERY unhappy with the FS5. If you do corporate videos if I were you with your $$$ I buy 1 XC15 and 1 XC10, use the XC15 as an A cam with the XLRs, and use the XC10 as a B cam and buy a fig rig. That would be an awesome combination creating a LOT of variety of image and perspective. None of the cameras you mentioned have 4k and beauty and color of image that the XC10/XC15 have. If you'll look at Reid's review of the XC10 comments you'll find an image matching of the XC15 and C300 M2 I just did, shooting both in C-log. There you can see just how good the XC15/XC10 is in color. Plus, the C100 Mk2 doesn't have anything close to the robustness of the image quality of the XC10. If you get the C100 Mk Ii you MUST get an Atmos Ninja Star to be able to record a robust image that you can grade without falling apart. the XC15 is so superior, and the XLR attachment audio quality is excellent. By the way, I've owned everyone of these cams and shot a lot. For doing what you're doing I'd definitely take the XC15/10. Just light the interviews well and you're good to go and the image quality is lovely! FS5---Sony colors are awful! AWFUL! Canon is frustrating in many ways, but they are vastly superior to Sony in their color science, especially for skin tone. And I'm not alone in this opinion.

I guess the top one is the xc15 due to the compressed background. Looks like they match up perfectly!

Not really. Unlike a physical shutter movement that takes places for stills, during video there is no real shutter movement and the camera captures images by sending power to the sensor for shorter bits. That is the reason for the motion artefacts of rolling shutter in (cmos) sensors that are unable to read the sensor details fast enough due to slowet sensors.

Agreed, The last shot of the converse is amazing.

Which parts are disabled? They both have same PPUs, OPUs, etc. NX1 has more memory, better WiFi, etc, but the processors are the same. better yet - consider the max possible bitrate for both cameras - both top at the same bitrates, which should give you clear indication that the computational power is identical. of course they will have to say it's slower processor, to have better product separation considering the price difference, but even Samsung management would not have put more money for redesign to create a slower processor, at the same production price.

Cool pans. The color looks great. Love the final Chuck Taylor shot. Btw, it does really look filmic.

Camera does not know actual distance, I've wanted to calibrate my lenses (it's straight forward procedure to record reported focus values at exact distances from the sensor at, let's say, 5 points and interpolate the others as it's not linear) but never had the time. We would also need to find a faster way to get focus distance value as the current method takes ~0.3s which is too slow.

you mean give you the depth of field? - it should be possible good idea - when I get some spare time, I'll look into it NX1 and NX500 encoders are identical. what gets fed into the encoders is slightly different (in layman's terms - nx500's encoder gets a crop of 4k, nx1 gets to downsize the frame before feeding if for the encoder as input) We are way pass the bitrate "profile" which Samsung has licensed, so you may be onto something there If you use modded versions allowing higher bitrates, you may be using it without a proper license keep in mind with the mods, you can do 400mbps 4K HEVC if you timelapse

I watched until the blackmagic part and then stopped out of fear of getting brain cancer. "Hey let's compare 12-bit 1080p to 8-bit 4K, they look the same, therefore 8bit and raw are the same. Don't mind the resolution. Resolve has similar knobs for both, they're the same! Let's shoot this test with optimal light so as not to strain any of the codecs, yay!"

Hahahaha I love the smell of trolls in the morning! @Kinoseed, I have a suggestion for a script/hack. Would it be possible to calculate in camera the near and far focal distance and then display those two numbers at the bottom of the screen? These numbers would then automatically update as you change focus or aperture. This would be good for landscape work as well as using the camera on a gimbal. This feature would obviously be toggled off and on in the menu. Side note, thanks for your continued effort into making these cameras even more incredible.

Everything must be balanced. For example, people are crazy with slow motion. Put this effect everywhere. It is the same crap.

I have both cameras, I think the NX1 is definitely better though. If I understand it correctly, the NX1 is downscaling a 6.5k full-sensor readout into hyper-detailed 4k, whereas the NX500 is a straight 4k crop of the sensor, hence the huge crop and (I presume) less detail. The NX1 image definitely seems superior, especially when I compare them head to head when using them on the same shoot. With gamma DR, the master black level, and other settings available only on the NX1, you're able to fine tune the image much better, and in my experience with the hack, the NX1 is also able to record with a higher bit rate than the nx500, I get more 'recording stopped' errors with it than with the NX1. That being said, I've been shooting a whole bunch with the NX500 lately on my new Zhiyun crane gimbal and, coupled with the roki 12mm, the results have been stellar.

Depends where you live, you'll need to look up your local situation.

@sanveer you know you'll do it. The idea is growing inside you! @Chris Oh thanks, a little fix until the arrival! And looking good!