Arikhan

@lucabutera As this adapter is NOT a mass product, it's completely clear, that it will be much more expensive than (feature wise) comparable mass products. Personally I still believe, 650 EURO should be the maximum of pricing, beyond that it will be quite hard to get it sold - even for NX enthusiasts. But this is only a personal point of view and feeling. You should consider, that this talk is only theory till this moment, because the price also depends on: how fast and accurate does AF work in stills with your adapter (comparable with Samsung native lenses) how fast and accurate does AF work in video with your adapter (comparable with Samsung native lenses) A good level of comparison is - in my eyes - the Metabones EF to E-Mount adapter (Metabones) or the MC-11, that works really well in Video-AF with Sigma lenses. You should also consider, the Samsung 16-50mm f2-2.8 OIS (can be bought at about 1.000 Euros these days) and the Samsung 50-150mm f2.8 ED OIS (can be bought at about 1.300 EURO these days) are very good video lenses with fast and accurate AF and OIS and cover the demands of almost all NX owners, who need AF. Most serious / ambitionned / enthusiastic NX filmers own the Samsung 16-50mm f2-2.8 OIS, so an adapter costing over 650,- Euro will probably be too overpriced for a majority of NX-users, so most of them will prefer to manually focus with an affordable EF to NX adapter....Always consider, the NX1 / NX500 are "dead cams" at the moment, so most possible customers will balance reasons to buy or not to buy such an expensive adapter for the dead NX system... I know, this is the crucial dilemma of every possible manunfacturer of such an adapter: Will they get enough customers to buy such a device in regard to the fact, that this adapter will probably never be a mass product for price X? As I told you, I will buy the adapter even for 600 EURO, probably also for about 650 Euro. If I would pay more than that, depends on the points I mentionned above...(AF speed and accuracy compared to another camera/adapter systems like Sony EF to E Metabones Mark IV adapter...)...probably not. 650 Euro would be a production price (R&D, testing, buying and assembling parts) hard to achieve from a manufacturer's POV, but it's a bunch of money for every potential customer - considering that Samsung retired from digital camera business... Another fact to be considered is, the GH5 is released - a modern device with a bunch of lens options and manufacturer support for the next years. So...I believe (my personal believe) many former NX users will probably sell their gear and move to Panasonic or wait for an A7R III / A9 / A7S III...Technology moves on and there is a "point of no return" for almost every NX enthusiast...Just my 2 cents... For sure, there will still be many NX enthusiasts out there, but the question (from YOUR POV) is: How many, and how much money will they spend on such an adapter?

@Eric Calabros Probably you are right. BUT manufacturers currently know, that a substantial marketing budget (spreading lies with the help of "enthusiasts" and not very well paid henchmen) is much more important than a serious customer support budget. Electronics / imaging are for many people a disposable. Buggy? Broken? Just buy another one or wait for a slightly improved model...Selling cameras and gear generates profit, serious customer support only costs money...

@lucabutera Thank you for answering! Unfortunately I can only help by 1. Buying the adapter when completed and 2. After buying, doing some tests with many "rare" EF lenses when used with the NX1. It's a crazy world...Innovative, enthusiastic and technically talented people like you outrange world wide acting global companies...Creative spirit, innovation and enthusiasm wishing the floor with the "fat cats" of the digital imaging industry...You made my day... ;-)

@lucabutera Personally I would pay 550 EURO for an Canon-EF to NX adapter with fully working IS and AF. If you complete this project, I will buy this kind of adapter immediately - for 550 EURO +/-. I still have some questions: Is it for sure, that you will begin to work on such an adapter in next time? How long do you think, the completion of this project could take? Do you plan an updatable adapter (eg per USB) for eventual firmware updates / adding features/ bug resolving? Thank you for answering! For myself I think that is a quite small market, so the prices for such an adapter can not compete with "mass markets", like some of the Metabones adapters - because Lucabuetra will (probably) never sell thousands of such devices And still, NX users should try to support active and intelligent small manufacturers putting a lot of effort in a successful work, giving filmers by far more options to work with the NX system. Up to 600 EURO, I don't think this is overpriced.

@jonpais The video is about JPEG...But I simply don't understand the eternal discussions on this topic (JPEG). When working with RAW, you can give your shots every appearance and color nuance you want, completely independent of the cam you shoot with. You just have to initially spend about an hour of work (one time) to set the (skin color) profiles you want. After that you can attach to every image any color appearance you want. If one is convinced, Canon had the "best skin tones" ever (me and many other people are not), you could put the precomposed Canon profile on every RAW image shot with a XYZ camera and get the exact Canon profile and overall match...By ONE klick... So what? Apart of this, the X-T2 has (in my eyes) very good skin tones. Sure, they are not everybody's taste, but the color science of the X-T2 makes this camera outstanding from other manufacturers. In my eyes, a unique selling point for "special color fans"...

@Dean and @Kisaha A week ago I shot a small fashion show (filming) of a fashion store with a friend of mine. I used my NX1, he shot with his X-T2 from different angles. It was his paid job, so I was lucky to gather some more experience into shooting show events like this. After shooting, I was very pleased, when seeing the X-T2 footage (colors, texture, outlines, etc.). But the NX1 is a complete different horse...and ironically, my friend's client was much more pleased by the NX1...In his eyes, the X-T2 footage was too "subjective", too warm. He liked the much detailed images and "neutral" color science (I shot with DR, Andrew Reid settings) of the NX1 more than the footage of the X-T2. He told us, the footage of the NX1 "matches much more the current requirements of the fashion industry than the X-T2". OK, it's only one opinion of one client, but you can see, the NX1 has still many fans on client's and enthusiasts side. For video - because of the very good 1080p and 120fps, addtionally to the outstanding detailed footage in 4K - I wouldn't sell it at the moment. For stills, it's very good (in good light) in IQ, but the images are too sterile in my eyes - same "sterile sharpness" as in video, but much more worse, when speaking of stills. It produces tack sharp images with great Canon EF lenses, with by far better photographical (from technical POV) IQ than the 5D m3. BUT...there is no feeling, no "special emotion" in these stills, they are like "sterile robotics photography". It's quite hard to explain and it's a personal point of view... Yes, you could tweak some profiles and add some texture and some kind of flair in post, but other manufacturers offer this much better. Curiously, I like the NX1 look in video (and many other people and friends of mine do it too), but not that much in stills...Just my two cents... BTW: When taking a quick look to the stills and videos out of the X-T2, I was very pleased. It has a completely different flair than other cameras on the market and it is (speaking of a short shooting experience) a great camera to shoot video and stills. Easy and very intuitive to use, with a very good AF in video - better than the NX1, but the X-T2 is the newer camera...

@jonpais A bunch of fanboys and zero-content-gearheads (99 percent of them NEVER hold the GH5 in their hands) defend some "short reviews" of a preproduction camera and dreaming about Hollywood productions...;-) Keep on your solid and pleasant real work Jonpais and never care about self proclaimed experts and lunatics, who already buy LUTs for a camera they never filmed with!

@BasiliskFilm Exactly...There is a nearly unlimited variety of EF lenses (with Metabones IV), Sigma-EF lenses (MC-11 adapter) supporting perfectly AF on Sony devices for stills. For video AF, adapted Canon and Sigma EF lenses work with the A6500 quite well (not all of them, some not working at all)....When wishing the most reliable AF, Sony native lenses are the way to go... People often say, high quality native Sony lenses are expensive...Hehe...Just try to compare the new Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR ED III - it's about 2.800 EUR - with the corresponding Sony lens, the SONY SEL-70200GM (also OSS) - it's the same as Nikon, about 2.800 EUR...

@Marco Tecno This week I have much work for school, but I hope to get the time next week to show you what I mean...I will post the experimental RAW (DarkTable) images here. BTW: DPReview is not right. By far...The NX1 breaks down in ***decent light*** and low contrast situations: 45mm F1.8 - 1/200 shutter - ISO 3200 --> not only ugly noise, but completely crushed colours (blue eyes getting brown-grey)...It's not only bad, it's a massacre.... As said, I will post the images including settings and describing the shooting scenarios... Yes, d'accord...but NOT in really low light and low contrast situations...The theoretical ISO excellence DPReview claims is useless...Because DPReview tested in good/normal lighting conditions...In ***real*** low light + contrast conditions, the camera IQ breaks down when high ISO needed... High ISO testing in good lighting is like testing an umbrella in sunshine and claiming "it's phantastic for rain"... ;-)

@ricardo_sousa11 It's just a great camera for stills and video...I own and use it too...This little and cheap camera is something very special - with many strengths BUT many flaws too (lack of DR, very bad in low contrast + low light)... Some weeks ago, I did a very interesting experiment: I shot some stills with the on camera flash and exagerated experimentally by "plusing" the internal flash till total over exposure...The image I got was totally white (because over exposed)...BUT I could recover the (RAW) image nearly completely in post. Trying to do same thing by underexposing, resulted in a miserable (ruined) image: The shadows couldn't be recovered in post... Shooting ETTR in highly contrasty situations with the NX1 is quite impossible, because the incapability of recovering shadows without noise (colour noise too) and artifacts... Shooting with the NX1 requires a clear view and planning, if you don't want to run in the "lack of DR tap" (highlight clipping, ruined shadows and blacks, etc.)... Many limitations, but much magic too.... ;-)

@jonpais High contrasts (highlights <--> shadows/blacks) are poison for this camera - because it simply can't handle them...The NX1 has a poor DR, one of the first shooters mentionning this fact was Noam Kroll, who compared it with the GH4 (it was worse than the GH4 in DR). From a pixel peaper POV: The NX1 is simply not a camera for highly contrasty situation, because it fails. The video I mentionned above doesn't contain "critical scenarios" for the NX1...And I believe, it's very important for a shooter to recognize "the most appropriate shooting scenarios" for a certain camera...The NX1 is not "an universal talent" - too sad... About one year ago, I visited a professional photographer who shot 4K product videos with the NX1 in his studio. He had a very good and experienced lighting conception and his clients paid quite much money for perfectly and tack sharp product videography. At that time, I didn't understand why....Because he created the best possible lighting situation for the NX1 and so this device could demonstrate excellence in IQ (perfect and balanced lighting doesn't require as much DR)...It was all about lighting and experimenting with a camera strengths and weeknesses. @ricardo_sousa11 Your "The Blossom of us" is a very nice piece of work. Very artistic and a nearly perfect match to camera's characteristics. Congratulations! Though, you can see the scene, when you shot against the sun, the NX1 failed completely (lack of DR). You gilded this critical situation somehow because of your experience with the camera, in composing and artistic skills... ;-)

@iamoui In my eyes, "Baltimore" is some footage highlighting the strengths of the NX1. The NX1 simply delivers one of the best 120fps 1080p quality (apart of much more expensive pro cameras) available on the market. I personally love the amount of detail and (sometimes) the unbelievable "clinical sharpness" of this camera... BUT it's not very easy to get to a cinematic look (texture, the right amount of grain and smoothness, "flair", etc.) into the footage. I've seen some specialists yet, who were very capable in NX1 "cinematic postproduction", but 95% of the as cinematic declared NX1 footage is simply failed wannabe - when talking about "filmic look"...I'm still putting a bunch of time in getting to the right workflow and balanced colour science and texture in post...Just hoping to get there someday... ;-)

@DaveAltizer Thank you for this interesting comparizon! I still have one question: What about the native 1080p (FullHD, not downscaled from 4K) of the 1 DC? Is the 1080p footage more detailed / sharp / crisp (not as soft and mushy) than the native 1080p of other Canon DSLRs (eg 5d m4, 1 DX m2, 80D, etc.)?

@jonpais It's not the name of the brand, it's what the shooter needs and requires. When shooting last weekend, I did a bet with one very well known German horse sports photographer: We will give my 10 years old sister a 5d m4 and a a6500 in her hands with a tiny 50mm 1.8. She will shoot "on location portrait" with both cameras and then compare the shots. Period of vocational adjustment and "getting familiar" with usage (AF mode preset on both devices of course): 5 minutes per camera... I bet some money on the fact, that - because of eye AF in the a6500 - she will deliver by far more well focused portrait shots with the Sony than with the much more expensive Canon. It's all about simplicity and effectivity...I am curious about that.... Canon is still a great brand manufacturing rugged and reliable devices. But ultraconservative and still living in 2009 (when speaking about DSLR filming, DR in stills, etc.) and trying to fool buyers with own standard declarations (= marketing bla bla). Nothing wrong about that...Perhaps some day they will wake up, similarly the old fashioned guys who shoot 1970's style, refusing to adapt to current market requirements....And complaining about the fact, that their work gets everyday cheaper and cheaper...

@kidzrevil Ah, OK...thank you for clarification. This behaviour should be a shame at ISO 500. And yes, excepting the 1DX m2 and the CX00 series, Sony handles low light and high ISO much more better than Canon. Canon is (excepting the 1DX m2 and the CX00 series) nowadays something for guys who refuse to adapt and to break out of their comfort zone. They sell more of "warmish looking and pleasing" image illusions - something like an "illusion factory" - than serious DSLR devices corresponding modern requirements in matter of flexibility, DR, technical precision and accuracy.

@andrgl Sure...Some of it, at least...Shot last weekend with the 5dm3 and the stellar 300mm F2.8 at the WorldCup Grand Prix in LElPZlG (Germany) - only altered ownership and serial number in EXIF because of privacy... And now one with the phantastic 17-40mm F4 USM lens...That's me in a composition (shooting against light and exposing ETTR) visualizing the flaws of the 5D mX: ZERO dynamic range (compared with Nikon / Sony sensors), no shadows can be recovered in post, because dark tones getting noisy as hell, etc....OK, when carrying reflectors and wireless HSS + strobes with you, it should work...But at this time our Sherpas were on vacation... ;-) Shooting more than 1.000.000 stills and more than 800 hours of film, I could say to have some experience...Even considering that I still go to school and do digital imaging as "professional hobby"....So, it's not necessary to enlighten me about Canon DSLRs advantages and flaws... @andrgl & @hmcindie If you would have seriously shooted video with the D750 (1.700 Euro) and the D8xx (about 2.500 Euro), you would have to admit, that even these two DSLRs offer by far more 1080p quality than any much more expensive Canon DSLR...So, no reason to advocate Canons mushy 720p packed in 1080p marketing bla bla... ;-) BTW: Put the 300mm 2.8 or the 400mm 2.8 with a cheap 20 Euro adapter on the 1.300 Euro NX1, shoot (stills & 1080p video) and compare with the 5d m3 (up to 300 ISO)...You will be shocked, how the NX1 (APS-C) blows the 5d m3 away...A cheap APS-C camera blowing a expensive FF flagship away...In stills and 1080p video (again: in stills up to 300 ISO)... @kidzrevil Well said, and so true...It's all about content and an impeccable IQ, corresponding to todays "industrial" standards...When doing serious work, it's about delivering best possible quality...For your clients, for your targeted audience and/or for your own eyes. Though, you should consider, that the XC10 is a 1" device. Pushing too far (means also in low light and high ISO) is not the strength of a 1" sensor.... @jonpais My mom bought now the A6500, we got a very convenient and cheap deal from a guy selling it with receipt and German warranty, just 4 weeks after buying it. He had huge hands and the camera was not a good device for this guy...But a good deal for us...First I will take it to a buddy of mine (electronics and hardware programming freak) to make some changes - making the cam to not overheat at all...After that, I will begin shooting with it and sending the footage to a professional colorist, who promised me to help in fundamental Sony colour grading/correction (mainly skin tones, greens and sky gradations to avoid banding and other artifacts with a 4:2:0 8bit footage). After that, I can discuss on this topic...

@jonpais I don't exactly know what you are talking about...Never shot Powershot, only xyzD or xyD / xD / 1DS x / 1DX...Never had a "blue look" effect (excepting photographer's failure with WB and in this cases it was WYSIWIG) in the cameras I shot with. In my eyes, the screen colours (LCD) are a personal matter, the operator gets used to. There are people prefering Nikon and other prefering Canon colour rendition when playing back their pictures on camera's LCD. After some times, the operator gets used to his camera and knows (in 98% of cases) exactly how the stills look - when talking about colours. When talking about sharpness and OF, revision on LCD becomes much more important because of catching up details/mistakes of the respective shot. It's interesting you talk about this. During last months, I am using more and more big control monitors for beauty shots (video and stills) - not for mobile shooting...HDMI...Just dreaming about wireless HDMI control, but with latency in mind, the fast and reliable solutions are still quite expensive though...And you need to hire some Sherpas to carry you gear...

@hmcindie Of course, I know it...That's my criticism: Manufacturers fooling us by NOT offering "real" 1080p in their devices. No real good 1080p in the 1.000 Euro A6300 and no real 1080p in the 4.000 Euro 5D m4. THIS is truly a shocker and demonstrates how fast the manufacturers got us consumers brain washed, accepting their costly and endless brazeness... That's not a claim but a known fact. Here you go - please set your comparison for each camera on 1080p (DPReview - Video image comparison tool). Just compare the FZ1000 with the oberpriced 5D m4. Apart of that, I am just working on a AF test (FZ1000 vs XYZ) and there you can watch the IQ of a 700 Euro 1080p. Of course, but not at 4.000 Euro. At a maximum of 2.700 Euro (new). Please, you don't have to tell me about Canon. I (my family) own them all, except 80D, 5Dm4 and 1DX m2 and probably one of the vastest Canon lens collection in Germany. But Canon is gone here, it became inexistent in our house (I'm still shooting 5dm3, cause I don't own the Nikon tele lenses I need yet). Not because it's bad, because it's not innovative, ultraconservative (hearing only on lazy journalists and photographers who don't want or need shooting RAW or refusing to modernize/reinvent their work) and meanwhile vastly overpriced. It's the world of 2009 - it was not a bad world, not at all. But it's gone. Canon is nothing but nostalgy. I love Canon, but not so much to buy any DSLR at the moment...I know, they are still very successful, but no more with my money. You can pay them even 10.000 for the mushy 1080p 720p out of the 5D m4, it's your money... ;-)

@andrgl Did you ever shoot 1080p with the 5d m4 (4.000 Euro camera) and the 1DX m2 (6.000 Euro camera) ? I did it for testing...You know what? The 1080p footage is much more worse than the IQ of my FZ1000 (700 Euro). Don't try to declare the 720p out of the Canons as "gourmet food". It's simply trivial fast foot compared with IQ of competition. Nothing to do with "production for theatre or IMAX". Please read my posting. There is no lunch for free, surely...But I am not willing to pay manufacturers marketing morons with their phantasy driven by steroids. There are the engineers, developers and workers work which should be paid...And don't forget: Consumers first! - and not manufacturers profit first...You should care much more about your wallet than about manufacturers profit and adopting marketing claims... Please consider, that Canon is (probably) not paying you for the 720p advocacy...

@andrgl No? You don't get the marketing lies? Canon's marketing statements, calling the 720p soft footage out of their most DSLRs "top notch Full HD"? They just simply take (potential) buyers for fool, their 1080p beeing far away from nowadays standards and existing technology. 1DXII is by far overpriced for filming (no peaking, no C-Log,l tons of hard disks needed to archive footage...). And for stills, same level as D4S years ago with much worse DR. So, simply vastly overpriced... The C100 m2 is at the end of the day perhaps the most realistic (not vastly overpriced) Canon offer for high quality 1080p in the S35 area....Worse buying in mint condition at about 2.800-3.000 Euro...The difference to the current price at 4.000 is for paying marketing lies as this blatant one.... ;-) Guys, top notch 1080p is not a "special feature" nowadays...It should be a minimum for a serious imaging company, just delivering good up to date devices and not trying to fool buyers and customers....

@jonpais When shooting video: AF-S is useless for moving subjects. If you are an one man band, you need AF-C for unpredictably moving subjects. Without a reliable AF, minimum 75 percent of your shots (subjects moving substantially forth and back, from left to right, etc.) will be pure garbage. For capturing a non recuring moment, you need a maximum of reliable AF-C. And Pana delivers that only partially - thousands of miles away from Canons DPAF or some current Sony models. Their engineers as surely not worse than Sony or Canon, but they just don't want to integrate a reliable AF in consumer cameras, as they do in their camcorders. They should be honest and communicate this fact: "Reliable AF features are only availbale for our camcorder product line." But they don't do it...When crying this out, sales would drop for their Lumix line , so they mostly relativise flaws and cons and prefer to remain vague... As the GH5 was announced and NOT ONE of the "first movers" said something about AF quality, I knew it. It remains the same wobbling DFD + contrast AF-C as known...Please don't misunderstand me: In some cases, it's usable, but in many situations not reliable at all...If the AF was near Canon or Sony, they would have scremed it out loud...Manufacturers and their paid and unpaid henchmen always talk about "outstanding features" - only buyers talk about flaws, after buying the in many cases overpriced gear...

Hi guys, I am brand agnostic. I read starkinsider.com for a while now and I like their content oriented and unblased style and their work. After 10 years of shooting Canon, Clinton Stark was about switching from Canon to Sony (for filming). Now he went on travel to Europe and tested the Sony A6500 vs Canon 80D. Here are some of his thoughts: getting in overheating issues with the a6500 jello "terrible ergonomics" - as he says This topic isn't new at all but more relevant than ever. Canon is kidding his filming DSLR customers by offering overpriced 720p "soft" footage and poor DR (stills) - corresponding technical requirements from 2009 - and Sony delivers wihin its "non professional" cameras spectacular specs, in fact beeing "baking & cooking solutions" and never carrying about balanced, just working products, without elementary technical limitations (overheating). And Panasonic kidding us about AF - AF working great in a DVX200, hc-x1 - ag-UX - and unreliable AF-features in their new consumer cameras. Unlike Canon (DPAF) and Sony (A6000, A6300, A6500, FS5, etc.) they just don't want to offer consumers reliable AF... We all (consumers/buyers) are guilty because - beeing brain washed by fanboyism and specs enthusiasm - we lost our criticism. We pay them (pretty all manufacturers) by far too much for their toys...Costiveness and public (harsh) criticism are arguments making manufacturers to move - it simply diminuate their profits but spare our wallets...

@Yuan My mom is not a pro working intensively x hours a day with the camera (when rented for a short time)...She will need about 4 weeks to get familiar with every new camera and to get to her personal conclusions regarding the Sony ecosystem.

@Flynn We own only 3 Nikon lenses at the moment (35, 50, 85mm F1.8) and dozens of Canon lenses. My favorite lenses at the moment are two Canon glasses: Canon EF 200mm F2.0 L + the 300mm F2.8 delivering great IQ with the NX1...I'm testing at the moment slow motion (100fps / 1080p) and 4K with the NX1 and the tele lenses...Phantastic IQ but not a realistic scenario to shoot with in real world situations - it's just "image porn" for my own eyes but ZERO content... In about five weeks I will visit a friend and we will make a "detail / sharpness shootout" with the two Canon tele lenses and my NX1 vs. his RED. I am very curious to see differences on his expensive HR display...I know, the RED will wipe the floor with the NX1 (not only in DR), but I'd like to see the differences in detail / sharpness (and colour science OOC) on a 4K timeline... To be honest, I generally prefer the Nikon lenses on the NX1 (just at the moment testing with the Canon teles)...In my eyes, they deliver a more "organic" image than the Canons - probably a matter of personal taste. The Nikon and the Canon lenses my family own blow ALL native Samsung lenses out of the water. I am far away from pixel peeping, cropping images 300% or putting my nose 5cm close to my display and screaming, but there are visible differences...Compared with most Canon and Nikon primes, the Samsung lenses are by far inferiour... For using our Canon and Nikon glasses on the A6300, my mother has to buy an EF to E-Mount adapter (Mark IV) first. And I should get familiar with shooting with this camera before talking about lens preferences or commenting on a6300 IQ... ;-)

@Flynn 28mm F2 would be her preference, but - as known - there is no stabilisation for spontaneous hand-held shots. So she should buy the stabilized 35mm 1.8. She already took a look at the 18-105mm F4 OSS and it seems to be a good lens, but as the thread is named, "one woman, one lens" and not "one woman + dozens of lenses". As my father and me already collect Canonikon lenses, we need an "purist" in our family... ;-)