Sekhar

Absolutely, because higher res automatically means low bit rate, low DR, bad RS stuff shot with a consumer stills camera (and by an amateur, I presume). The sad part is I don't think you realize how patronizing your put-downs sound. Hard to have a polite and intelligent exchange here.

Not always. I recently shot a stage event where we had dancers moving wildly left to right on stage, making it it next to impossible to cover them with pans alone. I was able to provide wide shots and then close in to follow a dancer as she moved, resulting in some great video. Makes the viewer believe the camera knew exactly how the dancer was going to move, but it didn't! I wish I could show that to you because it explains my point beautifully, but unfortunately we're selling that as Blu-Ray, so I can't post. However, another example is in this video that has wide shots interspersed with tight ones, including fake pans (e.g., at 2:25). I don't see how you can do this with just shooting in HD unless you use multiple cameras.

Guys, if you use SpeedGrade for grading, DO NOT upgrade to 2015.3! They've removed DirectLink so you can't interact with SpeedGrade. What's worse, they haven't updated SpeedGrade, so there's no way to grade 2015.3 sequences without rendering out for SpeedGrade (like very old times). Looks like I will need to go back to the old version. If you care about this, please ask Adobe to put those back.

Yes, and upscaling has improved a lot now as well. I have a Sony 70" XBR 4K TV and a Marantz receiver, both of which upscale to 4K really well. Broadcast HD (including the 720p ones) looks great, as do even some of the DVDs (remember those, with 480p?) with the scaling. I understand people are also increasingly using 4K TVs as monitors (I don't, yet).

Discussions like this really frustrate me because they're academic and digress into specs and possibilities. Every time there's a tech advance, the first reaction of many is to say they aren't impressed, as if that puts them on a higher pedestal than the mortals who are easily pleased. 4K? It's really about DR. High DR? It's about color. Great color? For pros, it's ergonomics. Everything? Camera doesn't matter. Full equipment? It's not about gear. Etc. Heck, I've seen people ridiculing the excitement over the first Internet browser Netscape (remember that?). Going back to the OP, if you read my first response, I mentioned Cronenweth on the video talking about the advantages of 4K that I mentioned. I didn't make that up: it's from the same video. It may not fit the narrative on this forum, but it was actually said. 4K is NOT about higher res folks, even when you deliver in HD. It's about giving you choices in post WRT stabilization, framing, camera moves, etc. I just put a video on another thread that has video from NX500 (a very low end 4K camera) cropped to be HD. NO extra res there, just HD, but you see a tight crop and framing that would have been impossible using a HD camera without additional lenses. And I was specifically comparing it (and NX1) with an actual HD camera BMMCC, not engaging in an academic discussion. My point is that today you can buy a 4K at comparable prices and get the advantages I mentioned, which directly addresses the OP. May be BMMCC's claimed 13 stops DR and RAW do shine, but I don't see evidence of that (not that it doesn't exist). Specs matter squat if the result is garbage.

Agreed, but I just don't see evidence of that, which is why I asked for specific examples comparing the two (either directly or indirectly). The videos I saw on YouTube show neither a better DR (in fact some videos are just awful) nor better colors (it's not easy to judge that however given all the grading that happens in post). NX1 actually produces some great colors as well, it's not just about resolution. Bottom line, specs are one thing and results are something else altogether, so it's not enough to just say BMMCC has great colors and DR and end the discussion.

Show me how HD produced with BMMCC is better than HD from 4K shot by NX1 (which I presume is what you're implying here), and I'll agree. I've seen some real crappy video from BMMCC that looks like mush compared to video from NX1, but may be I just saw the wrong video. There is a technical case to be made for shooting in RAW that will save you in post for some extreme exposures, but again this seems more like an academic issue than something that you have use for regularly in real life. Certainly not with controlled lighting. Again, please show specific and real life examples of how BMMCC is better than NX1, and I'll change my opinion. I mean this sincerely, not being sarcastic.

I guess it depends on the price range you had in mind, but the reason we're even discussing 4K vs HD is precisely because we get such high quality 4K for so little these days. I shoot regularly with NX1 and NX500; both produce fantastic 4K and neither cost me a pretty penny. I actually bought the NX500 for some $350 for crying out loud.

I like 4K over HD for the reasons Cronenweth mentioned: it gives you a lot of choices in post in terms of stabilizing, reframing, and even fake camera moves in a pinch (like pan and pedestal moves). Obviously there will always be other factors that might be more important than resolution, but with everything else equal 4K will typically make more sense than HD given the high quality of 4K these days.

We were on our way to Grand Canyon North Rim recently when we spotted a herd of bisons. Lying among them was a lamb that I initially thought was sick or dying...turns out it wasn't. As we planned to hike I had my tiny Sirui 025X carbon tripod, and I was able to capture the lamb on my NX500 and Canon 70-200 f4/L. Turned out the zoom and NX500 crop factor were too much for the tripod in the heavy wind, soI had to stabilize in After Effects, but the end result was reasonably steady. Thought I'd post the clip to show that we CAN get steady footage even with small tripods like this with big zooms while traveling. Thoughts welcome.

You can record the video/audio on your video camera and the audio separately on another device and sync the two pretty easily in Premiere Pro. E.g., I've recently covered a stage event where I recorded the video in my NX1/NX500 and got the audio through the XLR feed, and it was straightforward to put the two together. Premiere Pro will analyze the audio in the video and automatically sync it with the audio. Other editors might do the same, but I know Premiere Pro does it easily.

B&H has way better browse/search to research for the gear we folks buy; Amazon is terrible. For me (in CA) there's also no tax with B&H. OTOH, Amazon is incredible in fulfillment (often next day with my Prime membership) and good pricing. I don't like the frequent B&H breaks too, must be a union thing.

Good looking shots overall. I agree with all the comments, especially the one on cutting it a lot by removing redundant/weaker shots. Also, while you were able to convey that you're versatile (science fiction, drama, whatever), the assembly was also a bit random and meandering...organizing the shots (by genres, type of shots, etc.) depending on what you believe are your strengths (and want to be hired for) would help, IMO.

Canon was talking way back of using the 1Dc 4K video for event (like wedding) stills, but I haven't seen much talk of photogs regularly using 4K video for photos. I had a chance to cover an AbilityFirst fundraiser walk today and for the first time covered the entire event with just video using NX1. I believe this kind of video-for-stills approach really opens up the possibility to capture moments with more life, making it ideal for events/photojournalism photography. Anyway, check out my photos if you're interested at AbilityFirst Walk. All the video was with the 16-50 S, DR gamma (-10 sharpness), and 1/125 or 1/250 shutter speed. Would love to hear about your experiences/thoughts on using video for stills with 4K.

You said it took a minute to do the reset, so it seemed like you tried something else. Anyway, I'd try installing an older firmware version and see. If that works, you could update back to the latest version. I've never tried to go back though, so I'm not sure if the camera will allow that. But given what all you tried, it would be good to eliminate the firmware as the problem.