Quirky

Well, you reasoning makes sense and sounds solid. So the answer would be nope, not really. Other than the theoretical chance of using a different (faster, wider) lens in an interchangeable lens body. But for the needs you described, a camera like Sony RX10 or the Panasonic FZ1000 would be just fine. With all the essential extras like a proper tripod, monodod, lavalier mic, lights, reflectors and so on. The rest is a matter of taste. Although personally I wouldn't be too sure about 4K being an absolute must, even within the next 5 years, for the kind of usage you described. Horses for courses, you see. Plain old HD will work well for a good few years ahead, too. Also remember that 4K, and even just DaVinci Resolve 11, require a mighty mojo box to handle the footage. But other than that, your proposal does indeed make sense, IMO.

Well, with the tragic Nokia video blooper still clear in everyone's mind, one would think they did actually use the camera they claim they did. Even though I agree that I wouldn't be surprised if the production team used whatever cameras they had on the set, and not just the subject matter. I agree that knowing the metadata would be interesting but then again, the footage was quite obviously directed and shot by a team and a DP who know their stuff. Any Samsung boffin with the NX1 or any other camera in his hand wouldn't have accomplished the same. Good looking footage takes more than just a fancy camera. These marketing demos are always larger than life, so to speak. But the fact remains that along with the GH4, the NX1 is still the most cost-effective way to get started with (HDSLR-style) 4K. Whatever Canikon is up to, as suggested by the rumours, is likely to cost much more, as does the A7s.

You know, I'd probably say bollocks. I haven't been working in Photokina, but I have been working on other similar venues. Standing on the carpet wearing a shirt and a lanyard with a logo and talking to people. Things are hardly ever black and white. I have no obligation to defend Canon or their reps on a fair but, keep in mind that we only know about one side of the story, or barely even that. Some perspective would always be good to have. Also keep in mind that the people there are hired to concentrate on talking about the products the company currently have on display, not on the stuff they currently don't have. If you stick to a personal agenda and press them mostly about what they don't have is likely to result to frustration at some point. They won't have an answer for you. They may even not know the answer. If you choose not to bark at the wrong tree doesn't make you a "yes man." That is something different. For the most part the people on the floor aren't those who have the decision making power to begin with. So let's give the reps on the floor a break, shall we. We all have bad days at times, and apparently that one rep had his at that time. Disclaimer: I have no affiliation whatsoever to Canon or their local dealers. I don't even shoot with Canon gear. Canon didn't actually start any filmmaking revolution. Filmmakers like Vincent Laforet, Gale Tattersall and a few others did, when they discovered that a new feature added in the 5D (and D90) for something more simple could be used for something cool, too. Canon didn't have them or enthusiasts/indie filmmakers in mind when they added that feature. The "revolution" that followed was just a lucky accident from them. A one that they haven't utilised, apart from the pricey C line aimed at professionals. Had they really been responsible for a pre-planned "revolution," their mainstream products would not be what they have been so far, ever since the 5D2. The only reason we're now starting to hear rumours about new stuff is because of outside pressure and latest sales figures. In other words, it's not weird, more like business as usual for them. The real revolutions are likely to come from other players, the hungry underdogs, and at this point the lazy market leaders are likely to react rather than lead the way, as we've seen. BTW, the title of this topic mentions Nikon D810, so why is all the talk here about Canon? Just like in any Sony or other brand topic the talk is mostly about Nikon. Now that's genuinely weird and ironic, isn't it. ;)

Well, one thought that came to my mind was about this: Maybe it's just me, but I would never edit on the MacHD. I'd let FCPX make the default folder(s) it wants to do in the main HD of the Mac, but never use them for anything. I tell FCPX to make a new Projects and Events folders on a separate, relatively big and relatively fast external hard drive, and then import (copy) the sources and edit from there. I always keep the original source materials elsewhere on yet another hard drive, or import them into the work Projects folder directly from the SD(D) drives. When I'm done editing and finish the project, I consolidate the library and then get rid of the unnecessary files to save space. There are also some FCPX library managers available. I've got a free/cheapo app called Final Cut Library Manager. It might be handy at some point. I've never bothered with Time Machine when it comes to the render files and finished projects. It feels like an unnecessary step, as FCPX is making copies of your imported files anyway, if you let it do so, and when the render files are missing, FCPX will make new ones on the fly. So far I've done my backups manually onto a separate backup disk. Just my general thoughts. Effective or not, that's how things are in the Quirky HQ at the moment. I might come up with a new workflow later next year, if I manage to gobble up enough dough to upgrade my editing hardware.

So, if this is a video site, why do you keep bringing up these Canikon dSLR topics yourself, then? I'm amazed you haven't noticed how profoundly that defies logic. ;)

Yes, we are the noble Knights on a guest for the Holy Grail. Along with our noble king Andrew, anointed by the Lady of the Lake, we try to find a trail pass those woeful French who taunt us relentlessly, and throw cows and manure upon us from the mirrored bowels of their Canikon catapults. But Thou shalt not give up, noble Knight, not even before the 4K layer of shrubbery! Carry on! :P

No offense intended, Ebrahim, but... duh.

I'm not saying the three fellows are wrong, quite the contrary, but I don't think that 4K is just a ploy to sell TV's, either. I'm not about to get polarised about the 4K issue. In fact I'm trying to do the opposite, and steer away from the (inevitable) polarised debate. I just thought that bringing in Canikon as an argument to support the ploy to sell more 4K TV's theory was a bit pointless, because Canikon are not relevant in the mainstream/prosumer (limited budget) video market in the first place. They are making dSLR's. But as pointed out above, several other pro-oriented companies, even Canon with their cine line, are offering 4K/UHD, too, regardless of their involvement in the TV business. I believe the industry is moving towards 4K, eventually, whether we really need it or not. It's not just about selling more TV's, it's about selling all sorts of new stuff. It's normal product differentiation to boost sales in general, and to keep the momentum going. Like so often in the business of selling stuff, product differentiation often comes down to new buzzwords. 4K is the hot new buzzword. A part of the process may be just natural progress, too, and that's why some of the smaller, non-mainstream higher end manufacturers are jumping onboard. Even though their core business is not depending on the sales of big TV's or even smartphones. For the time being I'm quite content with high-quality 1080p, too, but I am also somewhat 4K-curious. One possible benefit of 4K is the option for better quality 1080p/2K, be it just a happy accident or a deliberate result. But I believe I will jump into UHD/4K, eventually. Thanks to all the current hype, it may be our only option, sooner or later.

Yes, you're right, but I think this works as a classic example of the power of brand recognition. People are projecting their personal wishes, even their personal pride, onto these big brands. The fact that Nikon do dSLR's rather than video cameras doesn't (seem to) matter. Also the hardcore Nikon fanbois are known to be even more ferocious than their Canon cousins. On the other hand, in defence of the complainers here, Nikon have used pro level video as a selling point with these cameras. I haven't seen any ads for the D750, but apparently Nikon have touted the D800/810 as a pro video camera in their own marketing copy. So I wouldn't go as far as calling it ridiculous. Pointless, perhaps, but not entirely ridiculous.

Do AJA, Blackmagic and Kinefinity make TV's? Nope.

@Andrew So, did you get to do a proper interview with the Samsung people? Did they promise to send you a demo unit, hopefully equipped with the final firmware? A new blog post coming soon? Got to admit this new release has made me slightly Samsung-curious, if not quite a fan yet. It would be nice to have a third real contender into the bipolar battle between Sony and Panasonic. That would make the mainstream/prosumer market a bit more colourful. Hopefully the new NX1 will be more than just a nice try, and hopefully they'll keep the right kind of momentum up with their next models.

You're welcome, but that wasn't really intended to be a lesson, just my 2c on the subject. ;) What to recommend to someone else, I'd rather not do that, because our personal preferences and needs are so different. I often try to get away from that question by saying something like "your money, your decision." To be able to give you any usable suggestions I/we should know more about your personal preferences, and what you wish to accomplish with the camera. Just like a proper salesman in a camera store would start by asking you plenty of questions first. Nevertheless, here are some thoughts, so anyone else reading this please skip the rest of this post. :) Being a photographer, too, a fancy MILC with an EVF built in would be an obvious choice for me. Single purpose cameras are fine, too, but I don't prefer typical ENG/camcorder style cameras or rigs. The ergonomics often don't quite work for me. Besides that, it's up to the specs and ergonomics of the camera. It has to feel 'right' in my hand. I don't own GH4 or A7s, (yet, anyway), but I believe either of those would be a nice choice. But when comparing those two pricey primadonnas to something like the $600 a6000, we're comparing apples to oranges, aren't we. Maybe our budget won't stretch all the way to the A7s right now. If we look into the $600 or thereabouts price range, suppose the a6000 is not such a bad choice, provided that you're okay with the one hotshoe mic that works with the camera, or recording primary audio with an external recorder. And that the camera itself feels 'right' in your own hand. I've played with one a bit, and I got some mixed feelings about it. I decided that it's not quite my cup of tea, but not because of the footage it delivers. It's not bad, suppose I could live with one, but it didn't feel just 'right.' Then, if we go up in the price range, there's the BMPCC, for example, but it's a bit quirky, and needs plenty of additional gear, not just lenses. They all cost money. You'll easily end up with a system costing nearly $1,500, with just one lens. But the footage is nice enough, although it's not a lazy shooter's tool. There's also the aforementioned RX10 and its Panasonic rival, the RZ1000 around $1k, but those come with a fixed lens. Which is also a good way to start, or to use as a secondary camera, because you can then concentrate on other essential gear, like a good tripod, lights and so on. The RX10 would also benefit from an external recorder, within certain limits, as described above. Which is another extra cost, of course. Some people are quite happy shooting with 'older' models like Panasonic GH3 and G6, and neither of those look to be too shabby for video, in their current sub-$1k price range. Personally I didn't quite like some of the knobs and bits in the GH3, but that's just me. Probably just a matter of getting used to. the GH3 doesn't have focus peaking and the 'zebras' are a bit different, but you can get along fine without those, or you can get an external monitor or recorder which come with peaking, zebras and stuff. But the bottom line is, it's a matter of taste, and it all boils down to your wants and needs, so... -_- If you fancy the a6000 and it feels right in your hand, just go for it. It's not too bad. To get something significantly better, you'd have to spend clearly more money. If you don't know what you want, just wait for a while. Maybe even few months, if you can. No doubt there will be another batch of cool new cameras coming within the next few months. From the usual suspects. ;)

In München steth ein Hochbräuhaus, eins, zwei, zuffa! Da läuft so manches Fäßchen aus, eins, zwei zuffa! usw... Prost! Hint hint, nudge nudge, eh, eh, say no more, say no more! :P Other than that, I've only seen the 65mm film projected on a large screen, and that is indeed a thing of beauty. Likely to 'spoil' the viewer for any 'ordinary' footage. I'd love to see this 65mm digital footage displayed on a huge plasma or whatever screen, too.

I've not shot with the A7s yet, but I have seen the same kind of effect before in some of my shots, in similar (night scene lit by bright street lights) conditions, with another camera. Without going into an A7s-spesific over-analysing mode, I tend to agree with richg101 and andy lee. To me that looks like a simple case of blue fringing around overexposed (clipping) street lights in an otherwise dark night scene shot with a non-native lens. It happens. I believe the easiest way to fix that would indeed be to not shoot such a high-contrast scene so hot. Especially with a non-native lens on such a sensitive camera. Using a native Sony F or FE lens would probably minimise the lens-related colour aberrations in camera, but the clipping highlights in a high contrast scene, especially in a mixed artificial light scene, are begging for coloured fringes, not just with a Sony A7s.

The ProRes codec of your external recorder has little to do with the a6000 internal video performance. Ever heard of the notion of garbage in, garbage out? ProRes codec alone cannot do magic to the signal that comes out of the HDMI port. It simply records it with a higher bitrate into an edit-friendly format, onto a recording device fast and spacious enough. The end result depends on what the incoming signal to be recorded is like. Simply increasing the maximum rpm a car engine can reach won't make the overall driving performance much better, if the rest of the car remain the same. Not an ideal analogy, I know, but hopefully you'll get the picture. For ideal performance, you'll need to have more than just a higher bitrate codec. On the other hand, in theory, if the a6000 had internal ProRes built in, that would have made bigger headlines, at least in this video enthusiast circle. Had Sony done that, they would probably done more than just that, for the aforementioned reason. I haven't tried an external recorder with an a6000, but I have done so with an RX10. The signal out of the HDMI port of the RX10 may be different from that of the a6000, but the principle is the same. The difference an external recorder will give you is subtle, but there is a difference. Whether that's worth the investment in the case of the a6000, that's another story. Suppose it depends. Anyway, the basic AVCHD footage out of the RX10 looks fairly decent as is, especially when the scene is reasonably static. But when you add camera movement, things tend to get a bit muddy. Record the same scene onto a Ninja 2, for example, and the motion mud mostly disappears, and therefore the overall footage looks slightly better. The other benefit of the externally recorded ProRes footage is that it's likely to have more latency for editing/grading. The lower bitrate H264 AVCHD footage is likely to fall apart sooner than the ProRes footage, and the codec is designed for delivery and playback, rather than editing. Recording externally won't change the original 8-bit 422 or 420 signal into anything more than it already is, though. FWIW, I for one would not use that video review as a guide to set anything in the camera. I'd recommend ignoring the settings suggested and doing your own experiments, starting from the default settings of that camera, and tweaking it as little as possible at first. Chances are that either the 'normal' (or whatever it's called) profile is designed to give decent out of the camera look, as cameras like these are aimed for the so called average user who don't do colour grading. The other profiles and sliders are there mostly to tweak the end result to the user's liking. They're not intended to deliver a "log" or something fancy for a seasoned colour grader to start working with. If they were, the cameras wouldn't come with just the basic H264 or AVCHD delivery format to begin with. So don't expect miracles when you start 'grading' the internal footage of the camera. You might even end up with something worse than the default footage, like the clip with the standing girl holding a pint of beer and a phone in that video, for example. When you record onto a Ninja 2 or Star, you may have a bit more to work with before things start looking terrible but again, don't expect miracles from a $600 consumer camera.

Well, if you're not allergic to manual focus lenses, there's always the Samyang 35 mm F/1.4 AS UMC, and there's also a VDSLR version of the same lens. As for the adapter, I don't think that's feasible. or at least I've never seen one. Canon FD is doable, so are Pentax K, Minolta MD, Minolta/Sony A, Leica R, M42, Nikon F, Olympus OM and Contax/Yashica, but I wouldn't count on Canon EF.

Are you still hovering around in the same hall? Have you done the interview already? If you haven't, and can can have a longer interview, it would be interesting to know a bit more about the new sensor, for example. So it's backside illuminated and has no low pass filter whatsoever (right?), but how about the rest of the sensor stack? How thick is the glass + IR filter in the front of the sensor? Since the flange distance is longer than, say, the Leica M mount, do they use any micro lenses in the front of the sensor? (a bit nerdy line of questions, I know, but it's relevant and interesting in the sense of adapting SLR lenses to the body, and just to satisfy our curiosity) They also claim it can read the whole 7K sensor without pixel binning or line skipping up to 30fps, so is there any heat-related restrictions to the length of a recording? It would also be quite interesting to know about how the camera delivers 1080p 25/30fps, and even though they won't comment about it, it would be interesting to know how does it look like, in terms of moire and aliasing. Can you convert the 4K footage into 1080p @10-bit 422, á la GH4? I'm sure you'll come up with plenty of other interesting tidbits to ask, as we're all sort of positively surprised by this new kid in the block.

Yes, please. Take the OT nerdy-nam-nam to some place else. Depends on the adapter and the lenses. If the adapter has a ring and a mechanism to move the aperture mechanically and the aperture in the lens can be moved mechanically, like in all the classic Nikkor lenses (Nikon F), then yes. The Samyang won't be a problem, but the Sigma might. I believe it's an electronic only G lens, with no mechanical coupling to the aperture blades. Which means it'll work with full aperture only. Then again, if you're really into going for the NX sytem, I believe you'd have no problem whatsoever to sell the Sigma and then buy a Samsung or Samyang equivalent, or something similar. Trading just one lens should not be a major hurdle in swapping camera systems, whereas a dozen might be.

Quite a few people will, actually. There will be plenty of dSLR luddites, Canon fanbois and newcomers who only recognise Canon, and possibly Nikon. All those will be mostly photographers. A handful of video enthusiasts might buy one, too, despite the awkward video shooting ergonomics and other shortcomings. Never underestimate the power of brand recognition, lemming effect and peer pressure. They'll have no trouble selling those. They can simply wait for the herd to come asking for them. Disclaimer for the Canonites; I'm not dissing you or the camera, so leave the pitchforks alone. I'm simply saying that it'll sell just fine, for an APS-C dSLR, even though it's no my cup of tea, or that of many video oriented people in this forum.

Yeap, just like the new iPhone. Which is apparently exactly what the hipsters and smartphone nerds want. A huge pocket gadget that won't fit in the pocket. But the iPhone 6 has one big advantage, it's not running Android. The CM1 is quite an interesting launch from Panasonic, nevertheless. I hope they will soon make it available continent-wide.

I just noticed this spec sheet circulating the interwebs, and according to that list, the NX1 seems to be the fist model from Samsung that doesn't do the "Noodleman," and does seem to offer 25p and 50p for the PAL regions, but apparently in basic HD mode only. I wonder why they didn't do things properly this time, all the way through the resolution scale. Doing it like this is both corn fusing and frustrating. Hm, better to wait for a while, until the camera will get some mileage out in the wild, in the hands of some experts. http://samsungimagingblog.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/nx1_table1_blog.jpg?w=526&h=1024

What exactly are you not agreeing? Not criticising, just curious. Just think of the most popular car on the planet these days. No doubt it's some Toyonissan Whateverolla, dominating the sales statistics for the past few decades, but surely it's not the technically most innovative, highest quality, etc. car on the planet. Or try explaining how Windows could dominate the mainstream market in the 90's and early 2000's. Surely you cannot possibly claim that MS Windows was and is the best computing platform ever in every possible way, and that's why it dominated the mainstream market. At least if you've ever seen any other platform. And so on, and on and on. Product X is tecnically better than product C/N, no argument there, but it simply doesn't matter. The masses keep on buying the "market leader," anyway.

I understand the frustration, but that's how things have been for a century or so, and it certainly not limited to the camera industry. Good quality and technical prowess don't matter. They always lose to marketing and logistic might.

Do they? If that's true, that would be reasonably nice for a generic Canikon dSLR. The spec sheet provided (so far) gave me the impression that 7D Mark 2 = 7D Mark 1 + 70D. Compared to that, the 5D3 specs would be an improvement, wouldn't it.

So what's the problem? The obvious and the most logical solution in your case would be to put your Canon gear on eBay and use them to fund the purchase of some more useful gear. Thank goodness we do have plenty of alternatives and more than one brand to choose from. When your blog has existed and grown in popularity for a number of years, it's obvious that the audience will change and start attracting more 'mainstream' audience, too. I don't think that belittling your new audience is going to 'fix' that, though. No offence intended, but in this particular case, the only 'problem' here seems to be your obsessive devotion to still hold Canon (Canikon) on a holy pedestal, for some strange reason. A pedestal they no longer deserve, if they ever did in the first place. Times change, and a big bunch of your (new and clueless) audience have no problem in adapting other brand gear that (better) fits their needs. Gear that in the right hands is capable of delivering good results, without killing the wallet. Maybe I'm indeed totally clueless, too, but to me this looks like much ado about nothing. From an outside point of view you're throwing tantrums towards your favourite brand that doesn't give you the toys you want, instead of being happy with those who at least try. That doesn't seem too productive, does it. You might as well join the fun on the new bright side and change the name of the blog from EOSHD to something closer to today's reality. Nothing here is eternal.