noone

The Metabones IV has a larger inner hole and matt coating. Glad I got it over the III because my favourite lens is a Canon 24 tilt shift lens. http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB-EF-E-BM4 I had my first experience of it stopping work last night, just took the battery out for a second and it was fine.

​That would be nice though both of those lenses are not sealed! I do love the 135 L (on an A7/A7s).

Maybe not 2015 but I want to get a music video on RAGE (long running Australian national ABC TV iconic over night weekend music show). It is just a pipe dream but that is what I am aiming at. Will just be a band playing live. They do have an "indie of the week" that bands can submit original stuff up to three months old. In any event I will get lots of practice shooting covers that nobody will see first.

Apart from realising I would like to try and shoot video of live bands in addition to stills A) getting a Canon 24 3.5 TS-E lens and using it on an A7 and B ) an hour ago when my A7s turned up!

24, 50 and 85 for me but the A7 cameras can also use crop mode for more choices. I really would want two 24mm lenses a faster one and a tilt shift. Funnily enough I might keep some of the same focal lengths with M4/3 (so different angle of view) and maybe just add a fourth lens. The Gx7 also has a built in lossless teleconverter for video that works well with longer lenses for a bit more reach.

Strictly from an amateur long time stills photographer dabbling in video, I would have liked to vote for both 24mm AND 85 mm FF. I like to shoot live bands but by just letting the camera run with all the band in shot if possible and in focus to record a song.. I have found my dream lens for the A7 in the Canon EF 24mm 3.5 L mk II TS-E lens. If you have access to the lens on a Metabones smart adapter on an A7 ( normal A7, A7s or A7R particularly the A7s for video), by all means try it. A little shift can make it look a bit different too as well as being an exceptional almost distortion free 24mm lens though at a price. Stabilized on an A7 II should also be a bonus. I also like the angle of view and shallow depth of field with an 85mm lens FF for an individual though I voted for 24mm as it will be used more often and the TS-E is such an exceptional lens (I previously used my FD L 24 1.4 and while I still like the lens don't think it will get much use anymore).

Thanks, That's great! I am not disappointed at all. A7s is a video camera that can shoot nice stills, unlike the A7s, this is a nice stills camera that can shoot video to a nice amateur level with many of the tools to make it more usable. I have been happy with the existing A7 but this just improves things. IBIS for stills at least is something I love. Better 50/60p is a bonus.

I am actually fairly happy with the current A7 video. Sure there are better cameras but mostly it is ok (at least for my rank amateur uses) and easy with almost all the right things (zebras, focus peaking, decent audio and with mic and headphones ETC). Adding XAVC for better 50/60p and IBIS (great if just for stills better if it is both) just makes me want this even with the current A7. I love Pentax IBIS for stills and this should only be better. I got the Sony 50 1.8 OSS to play with on the A7 for the stabilization, now I can't wait for a stabilized Zeiss 55 1.8, my FD L 85 1.2 stabilized, my 300 2.8 Tamron adaptall stabilized FF my....... Means A mount lenses will be more desirable with an LA-EA4 too. The choice is get this or wait a couple more months for the higher spec A9 also rumoured (assuming both rumours are true).

Thanks, I was already 90% sold, you have just made it a certainty for me. One thing, just below the butterfly wing photo you have written GX7, did you mean G7X there (regards 20mp camera)??

I would look at the A6000, the A5100 (if you don't need a EVF) the LX100 and some of the M4/3 cameras. While I like the GX7 and it has lots of features (though some are half done to me), I don't like the grip and no mic input and maximum ISO is 3200 for video. If you can live with its limitations the video is quite nice. I prefer my A7 for video over my GX7 just because of all the video features and less restrictions and the a6000 seems to be slightly better video than the A7 (normal) with only a few more restrictions. The A6000 does not have a normal mic input either but can at least take one via a hotshoe adapter and can go higher than ISO 3200 if needed.

Can I have an LX100 with a 24mp A7s sensor and touch screen and mic and headphones jacks and 5 axis IBIS? No? Wonder how long until such a thing exists?

Actually you can get great colours out of the A7s (and other A7 series cameras as well as A6000 and more) even without any grading skills. The Live View grading App lets you use literally millions of combinations. The trouble would be finding something you like as there are just so many. The App is more for other A7 and A6000 ETC I would think than the A7s (for cameras that people would be more likely to use without grading).

The extra warranty makes it tempting. The other thing is that in a years time when we have moved on to the next big thing, the Leica version will have a higher residual value. Pay more now. get more selling. I want a high end 35mm fast FF lens for fitting a 5 piece band in shot from a reasonable distance. I have been considering the Leica 1.4 and f2 lenses that are very expensive. It seems I will have a bit more choice soon so I might not have to pay full Leica prices for something around as good. Still as expensive as Leica is, most of the stuff is quality and holds value. As for this camera, I am tempted but will still probably get the Panasonic version.

The 18-200 3.5-5.6 Samsung weighs 549 g and is 72x105.5, the Sony APSC18-250 3.5-5.6 weighs 440 g and is 75x86. It is lighter, smaller and yet goes 50mm longer for the same aperture! That says it all to me about this. I will agree to disagree that the Samsung line is more sorted.

The 28-70 FE is a nice lens. One of the better kit lenses I think. Stabilized, ok optically, fast AF (at least on the A7 in reasonable light). I use it for stills though with a A7. For video I have used FD lenses so far. It would be ok for family type video I think but it is a variable kit zoom after all..

Lets look at the "bulk" of the A mount lenses. I have already shown the cameras WITH adapter are smaller and lighter. Lets look at those bulky lenses. I only looked at two. The quoted 16-50 2-2.8 VS the Sony A mount 16-50 2.8. Yes, it is slower at the short end but that means extra bulk and the Samsung lens is bigger and heavier (622 g for the Samsung and 577 g for the Sony). Not like for like? Ok how about the 85 1.4? Sony A mount ZA is 640 g and 81x75, Samsung is 696 g and 92.2x79. There is NO extra bulk using A mount lenses on an LA-EA# adapter and E mount camera. I would not be surprised if I look at all the A mount and all the Samsung NX lenses if some where more bulky and some where not for each. There are not that many directly comparable lenses for Samsung though (not even a 50mm prime amongst them while there are several for E mount either alone or with LA-EA#). Lets leave it there shall we.

He discounted the A mount lenses (which are more extensive and much greater choice) because the LA-EA# adapters are "bulky" It seems they are not. Again, the Samsung may well be brilliant and the best yet. For those who use it Is it may well be but not because of the lenses if it is. I think Samsung lenses ARE very nice and not well understood. I also think the same applies to Sony (both also seem to have had one or two dogs of a lens that people judged all the lenses on).. Give yourself an uppercut!

You got me interested with this. I just did a check and it turns out the FF Sony A7 and La-ea4 is still smaller and lighter than the APSC NX1.and the Sony A6000 APSC is smaller and lighter again. The A7 and A6000 would only be larger in terms of depth and only by about 26mm for the A7 and 23mm for the A6000. . For height, width and weight the NX1 is larger and heavier than either E mount camera with LA-EA4. If you only want to use A mount lenses with motor in lens, the LA-EA3 is even smaller and lighter still and would only be about 7mm/9mm thicker on the A6000 and A7 than the NX1.

The E mount already can take more lenses with full or nearly full functionality than any other system. Full frame lenses might be a bit small a range for some people but there are enough for most with more all the time. I am waiting for the 35 1.4 in March (unless I get a Leica 35 before hand). Here is the Samsung lens list. Not including third party but there are not many of them (third party). http://www.samsung.com/za/nx/lenses/ Here is Sony's (again not counting third party but there are lots of them with more coming too). A mount lenses are on the same page and for me the A mount lenses are effectively native (not that I need or use them). http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-us/products/lenses/lineup/ Sony has a 90mm 2.8 by March (I think it is) and a fast prime in a year or so and some very nice lenses on the roadmap. Samsung also has some nice lenses and some nice ones on the roadmap. Again, I think that it is not going to be lenses that are the issue for E mount if the Samsung camera is better. Those specs are REALLY good. I wont get the Samsung as I already have Sony, M4/3, K mount and Nikon cameras (and Q mount though dead) but starting from scratch for a stills and video camera, I would give the NX a serious look as I would a A6000.

Andy, you really need to get a hold of an A7 series camera. I think you would love them. The LX100 is going to replace my GX7 I think and be a nice second camera to my ordinary A7.

The specs for the camera really look very nice. Don't know how you get this bit though. I thought there was ten Samsung lenses available for NX cameras. How many third party? E mount has 20 Sony or Sony-Zeiss with a couple more over the next few days I think plus a lot more third party (again more coming soon). On top of that with an adapter you can use all the A mount lenses "natively" plus Canon and even Contax G with AF adapters for full functionality (AF and IS where applicable). If you mean in terms of full frame E mount, then if you don't count the A mount lenses (though I would) there would probably be a few more available for the E mount still plus you can always use APSC mode or digital zoom to avoid vignetting with ANY E mount lens. FE lenses are in their infancy but so is Samsung and both could do with a few more if you want native mount AF. If the new Samsung is better than Sony equivalent level cameras it will not really be because of lens availability. Edit. I was out of date with the Samsung lens list it is a fair bit more than I thought but still less than E mount. There are a few different ones available to NX that are not available to E mount but in most (if not all) of those cases the lenses are available in A mount. Sony seems to consider the LA-EA# adapters and A mount as part of the E mount system. (rightly or wrongly).

25000 ISO for video? The GH4 only gets to 6400 and the GX7 3200.

Seems to me like it is aimed at a notch just below the average user of this site. A good stills FF camera with (likely) competent video for mainstream users. I think it is meant to soothe some of those waiting (and waiting and waiting) for a D400 for stills. Some odd things about it though, 1/4000 and 1/200 flash sync for a start. Up against the normal A7 it is 1.5 fps faster for stills with better AF tracking of a DSLR but while behind in some areas of useability. I would think video might be similar to that from the A7, maybe a touch better (maybe not) but with a bit less video features and ease of use. There seems to be a lot of Nikon users who are underwhelmed too though but I would think if they called it a D620 it would be looked on a lot more favourably- at least as a stills camera that shoots excellent video for (the level below the EOSHD market).

While it might not be ALL there is I think it is a big part of it. To me, (though I don't think I can shoot "cinematic" yet to save my life), it means ADEQUATE depth of field for the situation and ADEQUATE lighting and dynamic range. As for colour grading, well that can be done in camera in many instances so not such an issue for a "cinematic" look.