Julian

Looks good. What apertures where you using? Does it perform well wide open at f/0.95?

So much awesome It was crowdfunded on Kickstarter ($630K). Shot on Sony FS700 and Canon 5D https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/kungfury/kung-fury/description Title track by David Hasselhof

Wouldn't surprise me to see a next generation GM camera with 4K, maybe next year? Panasonic goes all out with 4K: FZ1000, LX100, G7. They're not holding back.

Where's the frontpage article? Revolutionary camera imo, for the budget shooter. The GH2 of 2015

http://***URL not allowed***/canon-xc10-footage-first-impressions-and-review/ Conclusion: "All in all I would expect a market leader like Canon to deliver a more solid product especially when the price tag is so high for what it is. I can sum up that working with the XC10 was simply tiring for me. Too much menu fiddling and “worries” about staying in focus but hey, who said that the way to produce nice looking images should be easy…."

You can use EF lenses on the NX1 with an adapter, but you won't be able to change the aperture. There are no electronic adapters as far as I know and I haven't seen EF-NX adapters with built in aperture. It makes no sense to use a Canon 18-55 kit lens on the NX1 anyway. Just get Samsung's kit lens so you can use AF and OIS. If you like your Canon 18-55mm for video, the Samsung 18-55mm will be as good I think. There's also a small 16-50mm Pancake zoom. The Nikkor 35mm will be fine on the NX1, I guess it has an aperture ring since you use it on the 550D. Sadly there is no alternative for the 10-18mm in the same price bracket. There is a Samsung 12-24mm f/4-5.6 but it's twice the price.

You can update to the newest firmware (2.2) right away.

Personally I'd get a speedbooster and some fast primes. 50mm f/1.2 or 85mm f/1.4 + speed booster will give you crazy shallow DOF. The 42.5mm f/1.2 is a beautiful lens though and the OIS works very well. I used it for this video. Handheld, not wide open, shot at f/1.6 most of the time and not very close to the subjects, so the dof can still be a lot smaller than this.

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdigicame-info.com%2F2015%2F05%2Fg7-2.html&edit-text=&act=url

The G6 was €599. Bit harsh to call it crippled because it didn't have a headphone jack. At least it does have a microphone jack. It was a steal at the time. Awesome 1080p quality for the money. I hope they keep the introduction price the same, the G7 will be probably the first usable budget 4K camera. No extreme crop like the NX500 or silly 15 fps like the Nikon 1 J5. I'd expect UHD (no Cinema 4K), I hope it does 24/25/30 fps even if it's not PAL/NTSC switchable. Of course there are going to be differences with the GH4. If it's cheap like the G6 I wouldn't expect a headphone jack. I hope the G7 introduction also means the GH4 will get V-LOG soon... Panasonic needs to keep the GH4 tempting for people who only care about the 4K and might otherwise just go with the G7.

​True. But lens size will always be linked to body size. I also prefer full frame for photography. That doesn't make aps-c or m43 dead. Of course Sony 'admits' it, they have been focussing heavily on fullframe cameras. Sony is a good example of the lens size 'problem' though. Most of the FE lenses are huge. On the other hand, that is a design choice. Sony could make more small full frame lenses. The 28mm f/2 and 35mm f/2.8 are perfect examples and lenses I'd love to use if I had a A7. I don't like huge beasts like the 35mm f/1.4 or 70-200mm f/4 OSS. I wish Sony would make more f/2 - f/2.8 lenses. 20mm f/2.8, 24mm f/2.8, 35mm f/2 OSS, 50mm f/1.8 OSS (just a cheap one :)) would be nice. They could be small and not crazy expensive. One thing that does disappoint me is cost of lenses for smaller sensors and the inability of Olympus/Panasonic to make really FAST lenses. Take the new Olympus 7-14mm f/2.8 for example. It's compact, 534 grams, costs €1299. I'm sure the image quality will be great, but essentially it uses half the glass (and is half the weight) of a full frame equivalent like the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 (€1679), but it is not half the cost. Volume is probably a problem here and again - the quality of the M.Zuiko will be outstanding, but so is the Nikkor. I just wish M43 lenses were not only half the size and weight, but also half the cost. Or the same price with an aperture that makes the lens actually an equivalent. In theory a 7-14mm f/1.4 should be possible with the same size as a fullframe 14-28mm f/2.8. So far only Sigma has accomplished something close to this with the 18-35mm f/1.8. Lenses like that show the value of aps-c imo. Would be great if there were more like them.

​It will be 1000mm equivalent. The adapter does not change the cropfactor of the camera. It's hard to say if your Sigma (150-500? there is no 100-500) will work. Not all lenses work perfectly on such adapters. Even not all Canon lenses. I don't know if Kipon has a list of supported lenses, like Metabones does. I haven't seen it yet. The only way to know for sure is to try it out... or you could try asking Kipon support.

If you want really cheap and don't mind manual focus, I'd take the same route as dhessel. I don't agree with full frame lenses being (more) expensive. Personally I love full frame for photography because of the shallow dof with normal/wide lenses. A 35mm f/2 is pretty cheap. To get the same dof and field of view on aps-c you would need to buy an expensive 24mm f/1.4.

​What are the exact settings of each shot? Did you try to reproduce it?

​Thanks! The F35 certainly does look a lot better in the panning shots. The video doesn't give any details about the shutter speed though...

Did anyone ever do a test to compare motion cadence between different cameras? I don't really care for the mathematics, numbers and graphs either, but I can't really compare when just watching random clips of random cameras.

Yes, it is really 1.8 You can look at the measured T stops on DxO: http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Sigma/Sigma-18-35mm-F18-DC-HSM-A-Canon---Measurements When comparing it to your Leica, you don't have to 'guesstimate', you could test (and confirm the aperture) by shooting in manual mode. Shoot with both lenses wide open, with the Leica use 1/50s, ISO 800 for example, and set the Sigma to 1/50s ISO 400. Brightness should be almost equal with those settings.

To me it still works like a 'free social-media website for film lovers'. I do have a paid plus account though so I can upload higher quality. Not that I upload a lot, but I don't mind supporting the website in this way. I've never paid to watch anything on Vimeo and I don't feel like I'm being pushed to. Still plenty of good stuff available for free. It's still the decision of the content creator to ask money for it or not. I don't see a problem with that.

Why do you want to see the exposure values? If you are shooting manual, you will know what the values are since you've set them yourself. If you are shooting auto, seeing the values is not going to give you control over them in any way. Why would you shoot auto modes?

At least now Canon has a direct competitor to the Nikon D600

But downscaling 8K to 4K requires a lot more horsepower of course, since it is four times the data... Also it means you need a sensor that can do full pixel readout at very high speed. Here's a list of Sony sensors with some specs: http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/IS/sensor2/products/index.html You can see the IMX094 (36MP fullframe) for example, as used in the Nikon D800 / Sony A7R. Max Frame Rate @All pixels = 4,7 fps. Speeds are going up though. The current Sony 24MP asp-c sensor (IMX193) does 8.7 fps. There's a new one listed (IMX271) that is rated at 19 fps. Maybe this could be used for 4K with a small crop or little processing. Sadly the 12MP 35mm Sony sensor is not listed, would be interesting to know the max frame rate of that one.

Interesting. Weird video though, that iPhone 6 footage is bullshit. The question is if it will work (and bring benefits) for large sensors? Seems like they are working on small cellphone sensors - like most new technologies. A few years ago BSI technology was the next big promise. Since 2009 it has been implemented in consumer products. It does have advantages for (very) small sensors, not so much on bigger ones. The Samsung NX1 sensor is the only BSI aps-c cmos, good sensor, but not a clear advantage over non-BSI chips. Same goes for the 1-inch Sony 20 MP Exmor R sensor (BSI), it performs pretty much exactly the same as the previous 20MP Exmor (non-BSI). Maybe those quantum dots will scale better to bigger sensors, no idea, but expect development/production in small sensors only the coming years. The website also shows the focus: "QuantumFilm provides thinner phones" ( http://www.invisage.com/technology/ )

Which is a great achievement indeed. The NX1 is a bit bigger than a Sony A7 though and has a smaller sensor. Samsung has more room for heat disposal. My point still stands: high resolution is not an advantage for 4K, it's the opposite. Look at the video quality of the Canon 5DS / 5DS R...

It's the other way around. More pixels means 4K is less likely. Sony used 12MP in the A7S to make 4K with full sensor readout possible. 4K is only 8MP after all. Downscaling 36MP or more to 4K requires enormous power - which generates heat. Small cameras like the A7 series don't have space for the required heatsinks and fans.