Andrew Reid

Just tried DVDFab. 50Mbit/s limit though? The resulting H.264 files at highest quality are smaller than the H.265 files so you must be losing something.   The blacks are somewhat crushed on default settings compared to what Wondershare does on -20 contrast or the Samsung app's flatter output.   This seems to produce less banding in the sky though compared to either of the other two apps in particular Wondershare.

  Don't convert to H.264 in Wondershare, use ProRes LT. Will try DVDfab, interesting to have another option.

Yes it does look like a marketing person got given the job of colourist on it and they could have used a few cinematographers on it, looks like it was done using crude stabilisation and self-shot, though I guess that was the idea.

ISO works for me too during movie recording, I have ISO assigned to the large rear scroll wheel for quick adjustments. The exposure changes smoothly. I don't tend to change ISO during a shot, only before, but make no mistake, the NX1 has full manual control of everything in movie mode.

An EOSHD reader, obviously ;)

Perhaps experiment with filters over the lens and see if one of them reduces the problem. It only seems to occur with very bright blue specular highlights. Try different white balances also. It's worth experimenting by trial and error on this one...   Sony cameras have had this issue for a long time. Very weird.

  Of course you see it. Would you buy a 2MP stills camera?

  Keep dreaming!

What matters is the sensor readout for us... 4K is all the image data. 1080p is traditionally a line-skipped mess or pixel binned atrocity, exception being the A7S.   Go back to 2009, compare 1080p on the 5D Mark II to a JPEG from the 5D Mark II, now do the same with the NX1 video at 4K and a 28MP JPEG off the same camera and tell me 4K doesn't matter :)   We've come a long way, and all in a single year.

If you don't need 4K, get the A7S. You can always add it later with Shogun. Though form factor isn't ideal.   If you need clean ISO 3200 and above, A7S.   If you need full frame look to lenses, A7S. It's more important for wide angle stuff than it is for mid-range, close-up or telephoto shooting.   If you prefer to have the resolution of 4K and the absolute best internal recording quality in good light, with the best colour - NX1. It is truly lovely.   If you want the extra features of the GH4 and you have the lenses to match, then still consider it but on balance I now prefer the NX1.   If you need a Super 35mm sensor to match your lenses, (PL for instance) NX1 will give you that and 4K internal whereas A7S won't.

  It doesn't do slow-mo, but yeah go ahead and put it in a high speed camera! Great logic that!

  So the Sony F55 then.

Recently I backed the fps1000 high speed camera on Kickstarter, choosing the £1000 Platinum version with 1" sensor. Its UK-based creator Graham Rowan says the camera will get a 4K Super 35mm sensor option in 2015. The existing camera has also been improved considerably since the initial plans, with numerous stretch goals being applied. Read the full article here

Turns out Adobe Camera Raw does have a setting for the NX1 + Samsung 30mm F2.0, I just have to turn it on to remove the fringing wide open. Quite a nice lens for 250 euros if you need the AF and small size. It weighs practically zero.

  A sense of pride in your existence :)

I talked to London Camera Exchange in Manchester and they said a lot of Sony bodies were selling now. Used to be mostly Canon and Nikon. Times are a changin. Don't say I didn't warn them...

  Allow me to fill you in on that second one at C5D. It's a seriously biased piece of writing and testing. Johnnie and Seb at that site fell out with me a year ago after they made a deal at NAB with a Berlin cine shop to do an exclusive review of the KineRaw Mini, practically whipping the camera from under me in my own back yard, doing deals behind my back with my own contacts and friends. Regardless when the camera landed in Berlin the shop offered the demo unit to me first anyway and I emailed Johnnie to ask if it was ok to put my results out there. He said yes ok, as long as no video. I forgot about the video and as part of the page of images put a very short clip out there showing some bubbles in slow mo and he lost his rag saying I couldn't be trusted. That was over a year and a half ago.   Now we come to the present and the NX1 is a target because I have been advocating it as a decent camera. So the C5D test is basically there to discredit me. And this tweet just before it came out, is another passive aggressive swipe at EOSHD -    It's full of flaws anyway. They criticise the EVF at the same time as giving the 7D Mark II top marks for handling... well that doesn't even have one! The EVF on the NX1 is great anyway! They complain about usability when all their complaints are solved merely by setting up the camera properly.   Put stills to 16:9 so it matches video framing, use peaking and magnified focus assist, hit record. Not hard is it? The 7D mark II doesn't even have peaking and neither can magnify focus whilst recording yet the NX1 gets a kick in the knees for it and the 7D doesn't. They barely mentioned it.   Most critically the workflow they used was totally the wrong one. They had SmartRange turned on and Contrast -10. Double trouble. They say 18 hours to transcode 1 hour of footage, but that simply isn't the case. They didn't use Wondershare to transcode to ProRes and only used the supplied Samsung software to transcode to H.264.   On top of this their rolling shutter test has been flawed previously, rating the GH4 in 4K better than the 5D Mark III in 1080p and the A7S in APS-C crop mode. That's not borne out in reality. Likewise their dynamic range test has brought up weird results. They rated the A7S at 14 stops, same as an Arri Amira and the 5D Mark III with CineStyle ahead of the 1D C with Canon LOG!! I'm curious how they get 11.8 stops out of the 5D Mark III's stock video mode when the sensor is only rated for 11.5 stops in raw!!   It all just seemed overly critical, more critical than their other reviews for distinctly less impressive cameras. What a shame some personal bias has affected their impartiality as reporters. I hope nobody cancelled their NX1 order as a result.

  Here's a 1:1 crop, as you can see the Samsung 30mm F2.0 has some chromatic aberration wide open in the raw (bottom image) but the video processor completely gets rid of it, which sharpens up the black text nicely. Best video processor ever in a stills camera.

  That rolling shutter on the NX1 is similar to the 1D C is actually quite a strong point.   One costs $1599, the other $12,000.   One is doing a 28MP readout in those 33ms, the other just a 8MP readout (and with a crop of the sensor).   One is doing that on a smaller battery. The other is a clunky beast all round.   One is labeled Samsung, one is labeled Canon.   One is raved about and hyped to an alarming degree. Guess which.

I think it's hard to give a one answer suits all for this.   Devil is in the detail. If you're focused on infinity with a wide angle lens and there's nothing in the foreground within 5 meters, then A7S is clearly going to be better in low light even though the 'deep depth of field' is a little less deep on the A7S shot, that shot will look the same as the GH4 because nothing will be out of focus.   APS-C crop mode on the A7S still benefits from the massive 9 micron pixels so we should compare that 1.5x crop to GH4's 2.3 crop in the DOF calculations, not full frame. There A7S will be cleaner on all shots, just not by as much.   The GH4 gets a bad rap in low light, it's not so bad actually. The reference point should be Super 35m film which gets noisy at 800 ASA and $25,000 cinema cameras which get noisy at ISO 3200. By those standards the GH4 is perfectly fine. The A7S is an alien from another planet, an exception.

Sorry yes A is video, B is raw.

A is video.   Some people got it perfectly. A bit more compression in the blacks on A and a bit more sharpening in-camera. The raw file had more C/A because Adobe Camera Raw didn't remove it by default and sharpness was left on default as well which is why it looked a little softer.   But the very fact that they look so similar to the general 'audience' with almost a 50-50 split between you on this forum over which was which, shows how good the video is on this camera.

Drum roll...  

  That was rather impressive actually. It won't be that reliable all the time though :)    He used the Samsung 16-50mm F2.0-2.8. Good lens.

  The 7D had a huge video following, actually. Canon say it is wildlife / sports stills camera because that's an even bigger market. Money talks. It will be their downfall in the end though, because the camera market is about more than just figures and numbers.