IronFilm

I've used both a c100 and an nx1. I'll just say that to me personally the dynamic rand is definitely close! I honestly didn't see that much of a difference at all in Dr on the nx1. I'll also add that the nx1 is a great camera that'd I'd personally choose to shoot on over a c100 or c300 at this point.

To be fair (and you're probably well aware of this), dynamic range tests are in a lot of ways subjective. It depends on how many stops is considered usable to that particular tester (noise levels, exposure clarity, etc). Add to that, people conduct the test in different ways (using different charts, profiles, differences in transcoder, firmware version and knowledge like you said), and it becomes even more confusing.
I personally don't own the NX1, so I can't give you a definitive answer, but from all of the footage I've seen, it feels like the NX1 stops a little sooner in the highlights compared to other cameras, but that the highlight roll off is a fair bit more attractive. It seems like the NX1 benefits from underexposing a little bit instead of the other way around (though again, I may totally be wrong about that). According to Andrew's findings against the C300, "If the C300 can do 12 stops the NX1 can do 11.5." Cinema 5d pegs it much more harshly at 10.1 stops.
To my unscientific eye though, I've seen footage that squeezed a lot of detail from contrasty situations in a great way, and some that fail dramatically. It really depends on the context and how much you really need for that shot imo.

I never saw the nx1 on ebay at 1200$...

I would keep it. But not the guy who's car broke down or that just have to have that new shiny thing released at NAB

Not sure GoPro can be considered niche anymore?
I was on vacation this week in Iceland, we went to a place called the blue lagoon.. A big tourist attraction, and I would say 1 in 4 of the younger tourists had a GoPro to take video/photos of them in the pool. I was shocked.

I really hope in this GH4 update: I'd love to have cropmarks for safe area (2.35:1 etc...), RAW and ProRes 422 (HQ) files direct to SD cards in BPCC style...
And, since I never liked the GoPro "look", it would be great if Canon could offer an alternative!
 

i can see some people running to sell out their cameras befor they lose more value!  what would be the c100 used price now?
disturbing!

The real innovation might already be in place... Letting developers access their SDK

​Don't get me wrong but you are free to "see" what you like, but you should accept that the truth might be far off.  
I don't own any Samsung products and I don't want to start a brand war, but just because Samsung is not followed by a cult does not mean it is not innovating.
It is not by chance that Samsung is the leader manufacturer of phones, tables, TVs, SSDs ...  And these are end products. Samsung is second to Intel on semiconductor sales. 
As far as cameras, look what they have achieved with the NX1. That is the first iteration of these series and yet it surpasses many... 
The real bottleneck of digital cameras and where innovation is needed, is where Samsung shines: electronic circuits. 

.....and Samsung are one of the largest designers and manufacturers of semiconductors in the world (2nd behind Intel) - you are seeing the effect of that in the image sensor and image processing performance of the NX1.
In the 35 years I've worked as an electronics engineer, I've seen Samsung grow from nowhere to being within reach of overtaking Intel in terms of semiconductor sales, so I've no doubt they could cause serious problems for Canon and Nikon (at the very least). And in case you think that is unlikely, once upon a time Canon and Nikon were the 'new kids on the block' with a better product and hungry for market share....

I think Samsung realized that the "low end" video market is quite big, so two models like A-style makes sense. I just hope for an improvement on the rolling shutter. 

​Um I think the 11mm from the Tokina 11-20 is plenty wide for every application imaginable.

From what I see, the Kinemini has a 1.7 crop factor, meaning that 11mm=19mm. That should be wide enough for me

Agree with Andrew. I have had no problems with skin tones on the A7s. In fact, I'm finding the footage incredibly beautiful and easy to work with.  WAY better than my T3i was
I think people just don't understand how to grade. Here is a hint: in FCPX there is a line in the vectorscope - this is your skin tone line. If you crop the image so only a piece of skin is showing, and move the highlight/midtone puck until the vectorscope is right on the line, then remove the crop and you've got a good starting point for your grade.
Proper white balance, proper exposure help too.

As the house is probably burning at night, AND the a7s cost more, I'd of course grab the Sony!

What's drawn you to either of these to get you to this final decision? Sorry, i mean i assume you've done your homework and know you want one of these two, just asking. Is it the 4k? I could see why someone would decide that's necessary at this point, but if not, there are other really good options in and below that price range for low light, sensor size, colors, lens options etc. Though these are obviously great cameras for the money for more than just the 4k, and I'd think native h.265 editing and v-log are on their way to make both options better. Having less color grading experience and not needing auto focus (or OIS really), I'd go for the nx1 between these two and adapt manual nikon lenses

Funny I ditched A7/5D2 for NX1/GH4 for wedding.. and don't miss the FF look, or "worse" low light performance, slowmo and aerial is the buzz lol.
For most client they don't really care about the stuff at we care. they just want good edited video with the right mood/atmosphere that show off their day.
 
For commercials they are much more picky, you can rent EPIC/FS7/C300 on the corner.

​For me, I have no interest in buying a lens that is the full frame equivalent of f7.6 to f15.2 in terms of depth of field. Having said that, I'm sure people will be able to produce beautiful footage with it. But I'm not gonna limit myself with a lens like that.

At best, this might be a somewhat decent competitor vs FZ100 and RX10. But I'll be skeptical if they manage it, hope they do! Would be nice to see more competition in that market. 

However, this certainly is no way at all the "GH4 competitor/killer" which was rumoured to come from Canon.

Just wanted to say stab, that the video you posted was gorgeous! I could never be brave enough to do any wedding video and on the basis of what you just showed, if I were in the Netherlands when I got married, you would be top of my list!

There actually is a very nice wide, bright and native solution coming up: the Voigtlaender 10.5mm f/0.95. Won't be cheap though. Probably well over €1000
http://voigtlaender.com/10,5-mm-f-0,95-nokton.html
Or the Kowa 8.5mm f/2.8, same price range...
http://www.kowa-prominar.com/special/wide_lens/index.htm
Expensive, but good: http://whimsical.nu/2014/12/01/a-kowa-prominar-8-5mm-f2-8-micro-four-thirds-lens-review/
 
 

​
Thanks JFR. First, would you mind editing your post and deleting the link that I've posted and you quoted? I just wanted to show it to you, not have it here online forever. Thank you very much. If people are interested in my work, they could visit my website http://www.cinematicwedding.nl .
The video you posted is indeed 'the next level'. Great looking footage, editing, grading, etc. But that is nowhere near 'run & gun' like we wedding filmers do. These shots are prepared and prepared well. They used lights, production design, etc. I'm sure most shots are done in multiple takes. This is more like a short film. Although I get your point, this isn't really a fair comparison.
When I bought my GH3 2 years ago, there wasn't an alternative that could shoot 1080p at 50 or 60 fps. There is now. Of course I will be upgrading along the way, but the camera is not my limiting factor at the moment. Neither in my creativity, nor in what my clients think of my films. Quite the opposite, they are often amazed by the 'clear image' and slowmo. Unfortunately, my business is not high enough ranked in Google yet to make enough money to constantly upgrade all my gear. As you understand, the camera is only one of the tools one needs to buy to make good films. 

And as much as I agree there are better camera's out there in terms of DR, colors and low light, the GH3 and GH4 are more than great alternatives. You are right that ISO 1600 is the maximum ISO one can use. We never go over it. But with a Speed Boosted f1.8 lens I've only once encountered a venue where it was slightly too dark and that was in the film that I posted here.
Anyway, will check out more work of Delivery Men. Cheers.

​This particular video has nothing to do with weddings, it's a preplanned production set, everything you see in that film is staged, you can make any camera look good in such a situation. Don't know if you ever have shot a wedding, their is no-one that says "action!" , there are no second takes and if you have to shoot from inside a venue directly into the sunlight during a ceremony that's just bad luck.

I have shot 6400 iso on the gh4 in 4k and it looks fine when downscaled into a 1080p project, that's why low light is not a issue for those camera's, ofcourse a c100 or a7s will shoot cleaner and can go higher in iso but why would you, if I can show a candlelit venue the way I can see it with my eyes when using a gh4 I don't need a a7s to turn night into day, I just need to show it like it was and then 3200 iso and a f2.0 lens are already sufficient.
Also remember, we are not talking high end commercial productions here for corporations, these weddingsfilms are for regular people that can't tell the difference between a image from a sony a6000 and a canon 1dc, as long as you manage to get the content right and have sufficient skill and talent to use your camera's at their best and edit it into a compelling piece then the gear doesn't matter. Almost all current camera offerings below 1500 dollar are suitable camera's to cover weddings, even high end, with.

Are you serious? A GH3 + Speedbooster + Sigma 18-35 f1.8 (f1.2 with SB) is not bad in low light at all. Sure, there might be better low light camera's, but this isn't bad at all. Also, I need the 50p 1080p for slow mo and I simply like the current look I'm getting. At the time I invested in these camera's, C100's couldn't even do 50p/60p at 1080...
Many people don't take these Panasonic 'toys' seriously but I guess that's actually a good thing. 
By the way I forgot to mention that I need this wide angle mainly for the 2nd camera, in this case the G6, to record a wide view of the ceremony.
​