Arikhan

OK. I own and use the NX1 and the A6500 too and shoot high end architecture / real estate / property and interiors too. I've had these issues too (with both cameras) but now got rid of them. I will write down my detailed experience and some solutions later this day, as now I'll get out for some sports.

You say, you shot at F11. Which lens did you use?

Ah, OK... The "little shakes" you mention are a kind of micro-jitter...There are some ways to get rid of this. As you know, the NX1 can produce razor sharp footage in 4K. BUT...sometimes you can get some micro-jitter when moving and panning.... What you can do to avoid: don't pan fast when shooting 4K - try to pan smooth put a piece of mouse pad (cut one in the shape you want) between gimbal plate and camera, this will be a SUBSTANTIAL improvement. A piece of 1-2mm thick mouse pad is a cheap and ideal buffer to improve vertical shake when you shoot 25p, try to stay low with shutter - at about 1/40 or (depending on what you shoot) even lower put a ND filter on your lens - I use the Tiffen and the Breakthrough VND... use internal (software based) stabilization. Yeah, I know it crops, it's not great, but it still helps with micro jitter I shoot like this with the manual unstabilized Samyang 12mm f2.0 and have no problems...Consider that this combination is one of the sharpest combinations you can get on the market, when shooting wide angle at f5.6 or even f8.0...Gimbal is Moza Air... Of course the 16-50 kit lens and the 16-50 S are stabilized and a better solution to get more stabilized footage, but both of them are far away from the wide angle, general optical quality and color reproduction of the 12mm Samyang, when stopped down to f5.6....With this lens you will get unmatched resolution and detail at a very wide angle - edge to edge spectacular resolution, even during camera/shooter movement... Have fun!

There is NO ADAPTER supporting stabilization of a third party (non Samsung) lens when mounted on a Samsung camera. To get stabilization, you have to use a native lens. The Samsung 16-50mm f/2.0-2.8 OIS is threfore a phantastic lens, the Samsung 50-150mm f2.8 s ED OIS is great too. For wide shots it's the Samsung 16-50mm f/2.0-2.8 OIS you need, if you need a stabiized lens. When using a gimbal - as you say in your post - and need a wide lens, simply use the Samyang/(Rokinon/Walimex 12mm 2.0 manual lens without stabilization - it works great with a well calibrated gimbal, after some practice when walking and holding or operating the gimbal. Have fun!

@Matthew Hartman Wow, this sounds really simple. Now all you have to do is to find a hacker on the deep web with knowledge in Tizen and Digital Image Gathering and Processing - as it should be questionnable if all functionality and processing software within the NX1 is done in Tizen. Send him a NX1 (better wiould be 2) and some lenses he can use and (a substancial sum of) money...then wait. Don't bother if this would end up like waiting for a more peaceful world... PS: No offense, I own, use and love the NX1 - but it is a dead horse...

Very true this...Todays "perfection" is NOT perfect imagery and cinematographic perfection - it's just action / emotion / information / entertainment, etc. Nowadays cinema screen is the smartphone or tablet...And NOONE (OK...not true, I mean 99,9 percent of young audience) cares about "color science" and 300% punch ins... Do I personally like this? For sure not...But we can't refuse to face reality...

@Andrew Reid I don't do any lens correction to videos...But there are colleagues arguing to see some issues (in video) when comparing to the much more expensive comparable Zeiss lenses. When considering IQ, AF capabilities AND pricing, some Sigma Art primes are really hard to beat when used with Sony mirrorless cameras.

When looking at the results you can get with them and depending on your needs (resolution, color rendition, considering CA and other aberrations, etc.) for sure. At least for photography...When talking film, there are people who don't want this level of high resolution and detail offered by Art lenses... Another problem with Sigma lenses is their use with DSLRs: When trying to use Sigmas with eg Nikon, you have sometimes to try more copys to get them work with your camera - because of AF inconsistencies, even after calibrating lenses with USB tuning and internal AF fine justage within your camera. But - as said - this is only a problem for some DSLR cameras. Please consider, the Sigmas are not perfect - some of them need serious correction in camera and post. No problem when talking RAW photography, but sometimes a bummer when talking film. Zeiss is mostly better, but there is another price point to consider too.

@Andrew Reid Sigma Germany is about 1 hour far away from my house and it offers the possibility to test there every Sigma lens you want. I tested the 35mm 1.4 and the 85mm 1.4 (Canon version) with MC-11 on the A7R iii and the A6500. Both lenses work superbly on both Sony cameras for video - AF is quite smooth. Eye AF (photography) works very nice too (with both cameras). In my eyes, both lenses are more responsive with the A7R iii than with the A6500.... The weight and form factor of the lenses (especially the 85mm 1.4) is not ideal, because - compared to the 2 Sony cameras - the lenses are HUGE...Without vertical grip not ideal to hold in your hands for a longer time when packed on mirroless Sony E-Mount... But imagery is really exceptional...For my personal taste, the 35mm 1.4 offers a little bit of "neutral" colors, not so much microcontrast (for photography)...But that's splitting hairs in this league...

Oh, I see...Discrediting people, only because you don't agree with them? Mattias, it's NOT you who define the term "sexism"...I simply communicated my and my moms non-mainstream opinion. BTW: @Andrew Reid knows about my real identity, so no worries.... In one of your posts you say, you were teaching marketing...that's probably your problem in this case: you simply refuse to understand, that journalism is NOT the right place for emotional investment and activism. Journalism should be impartial (marketing and PR guys don't like this, as they want to manipulate) - a journalist can not be an activist, as - by doing this - he would give up his objectivity and credibility. This "article" we talk about should have been called "column" or "opinion"... @Andrew Reid OMG...I bought things from you and by my mail adress with which I registered here, you should know my website and real identity. But it seems, your culty credo doesn't allow any objectivity. No problem.

Hehe...And your claim sounds as you were caught in the scandalization trap of frustrated editors who always offer solutions for problems people don't have. (BTW: Next week I'll get 17 years old...so no old man out here...) My mom works for more than 20 years in the health industry. My grandma - till retired - worked as physician in Bavaria. Every 2-3 years armchair editors wrote about "discrimination" and "sexism" against women in the health indistry. The truth? There was none...Brainwashing at its best... I understand, that it might be some sexism in our society. BUT it is not a general / major problem without artificially constructed scandalization. "No scandal? Let's create one..." My mom took a look at this thread...She was laughing. Her claim (she could confirm this by sending you a mail from her official real name mail account): "I didn't meet sexism. Neither in the health industry, nor in photography...That might be some singular cases in Central Europe, but I didn't EVER have any problem with sexism. I have more problems with exagerations and hallucinating media editors." EDIT: She will create an own account @EOSHD in some days to officially express her opinion (mainly photography and filming)...

@maxotics This. Militant German feminists would virtually "kill" a Jason Lanier or M. Ortiz just because of their shootings...They would cry "Sexism! Sexism! - You subjects are treated like objects!". Even as female photographer you could get on the screen of militant feminists calling you a "sexist"...

"Easy"? Hmm...with a older domain and a HUGE domain & link popularity it's easy - as in Googles eyes you are an authority. And DPReview is an legit authority with an organic backlink structure - nothing desperados can get or buy in siome months without getting banned. But getting there is not as simple as claimed in forums. It takes years - or the risk to get banned... Still disagree with your second point. Embedding your video, DPReview gets views(clicks/visitors without having to create the content, yes...But you (the creator and owner of the content) get visibility...It's a win-win for both... Don't care too much about Google: In the "pre-Google" era there were billionaires too...Just try to take a look at the "old-fashioned" business principles...Connections, real life, networking, talking to people instead kidding SEs and discussing in internet only...It could pay out...

I agree with this aspect. Though, there is another important point, I can NOT agree with you: People putting their work / videos / photos on social media platforms, do it to get it spread - more awareness, more visibility, networking, building an audition, etc. And this is - without doubt - what an DPReview article mentionning & embedding your video does for you: It helps your content to get a very good awareness and many, many views, you wouldn't have gotten without having beeing mentionned on a major imaging website. So what? Reducing awareness on Google SEO aspects only, is a liitle bit odd nowadays. Should we rely on Google SEO mainly? Never ever...The coming algorithm change could kill your business / search engine visibility... If you don't want your visual content to be shared on other platforms, just don't post it on YT / Instagram / Facebook, etc. Just post or stream it on / from your own website or server and pay extra for adds and public visibility and awareness (or just do excessive SEO for your website - waiting for next Google algo change to get "killed").

Nope...My mom claimed months ago, beeing tired to carry around "dinosaurus bricks" - aka CanoNikon cameras and lenses...Further saying "I will NOT hire some Sherpas to carry around my gear..." Now months after using the A6500 and trying out the A9 for a week she says: "Shooting with minuscule and unbalanced (with big super tele primes) plastic crap is not funny..." She gets more and more a Nikon fan... BTW: She wants to buy a D5. The Nikon rep came to our house to give us a test device and was very nice & polite. No sexism...When it comes to money, there is no sexism. When it comes to money, even Nikon machos transform to bootlickers...Manufacturers lick everyone's boots for money....

This. I'll buy it (Beachtek new), as I need a compact, portable preamp. Tomorrow I will visit the audio guys and take a closer look (and get a little bit of audio education) at the DR-70D vs Zoom F4 for my humble RECORDER needs. As said, if first class / highest level audio needed, it would be better to hire an experienced audio pro...When coming from a photographic background, most people neglect their own audio education and quality awareness - exactly what I did. Time for me to improve audio knowledge and quality....

Thanks @Don Kotlos...I've already considered the Beachtek (as "preamp only" solution), it's already on my list:

@kidzrevil Great video...You really have a specific, unique own style of shooting and grading. Just some questions: A. It seems, the shots were mostly handheld? If so, you have quite steady hands... B. You still own the A7S, or have you sold it? C. Do / did you generally like the A7S (IQ, ergonomics, handling, general feeling, etc.)? (I've read in your video posting, you didn't like the in-camera sharpening...)

Sorry....I meant the Zoom F4 and not the H4...Absolutely your recommendation. For DSLR "handheld shots" (only minimal rigging with cage + mic) I use the NX1, the Nikon D500, in 2-4 weeks probably the D850, sometimes the Pana FZ1000.... When using dedicated camcorders like the Pana HC-X1 for "quick shots", I don't need a recorder, as the camera does very good (for my needs) audio internally. Testing was done with the FZ1000: A. Recording with Sennheiser MKE 400 and B. MKE 400 + Beachtek + FZ1000. BIG differences, even for an audio wise uneducated newbie like me. PLEASE CONSIDER: The DR-70D / Zoom F4 are too big for use them on a quick (handheld) shot, only as preamp...That's why I'd like to buy some kind of a "mini preamp" (NO need to record for this device, only preamp needed) - quick handheld shots... No, simply a small (2 guys working full time there) audio studio, doing sound recording for film / documentary and sometimes for music production...A journalist colleague recommended them to me...They don't want to sell me anything and they know my requirements, even accepting the fact, I don't need any higher end gear... They were very nice and helpful and explained me quite a lot...

@IronFilm Please consider, English in not my first language, so there are times I can not exactly explain my needs (lack of proper terminology, etc.)...Yesterday I just visited a German audio recording studio, asking for advice. As the guys hadn't too much time yesterday, I resolved only one of my two problems: The need for an external preamp to bypass DSLRs internal preamp. First problem: Which preamp to buy and use? So the guys do advisory for more Run & Gun type shooters and they recommended me, to buy and use the Beachtek DXA-MICRO PRO Audio Adapter. They say, it's best bang for the buck, when recording audio in the camera. And that's what I need it for: a small, portable device (usable for mobile shooting / one man band scenario), helping to improve my sound quality. I had one DSLR with me, and they demonstrated immediately a BIG difference (using external Beachtek preamp vs. using camera preamp) in sound quality. For a newbie like me, it was quite impressive...Though they said, it might exist some cameras, where the difference might be not be such obvious.... Second problem: Which recorder? So now I will write down my use cases and requirements and will get in the next days the occasion to walk in their studio and hear and discuss the buy of an recorder. As you've recommended, I suggested the choice between DR-70D and Zoom H4...The guys are quite experienced and helpful, so I hope to get a clear view on a comparative view of facts...

Just quoting one of the numerous IMAX Hollywood blockbuster filmmakers in internet forums: "Pros use manual focus only. AF is only for pussies [...]"

@Lars Steenhoff Nice video, thanks for sharing. Remember the hateful title of the thread? "...d850 nothing to see here - move along ...". It seems, the GH5 and the a7r ii have to "move along" in some case... No offense for Pana and Sony fanboys and pathetic mirrorles advocates, just a suffisant remark... Disclaimer: I use Nikon gear, but emotional investment in a brand is absolutely counterproductive.

@Damphousse, @IronFilm, @BTM_Pix, @Kisaha Thank you guys for your contributions and advice! I will now decide between the DR-70D and the Zoom F4 - after comparing the specs to my modest needs, I will have to put my hands on the two devices and proof finally which one of them meets my use case expectations (weight, attachment capabilities, handling, ergonomics, menus, etc.). That's why I like this forum: A bunch of passioned people sharing their experience and knowledge, so audio newbies like me can get helpful advice.

C'mon @BTM_Pix, overheating is a feature...An important innovation, helping shooters to plan their takes carefully. It simply doesn't make sense nowadays to shoot Godfather IV in a single, continuous take. Overheating warnings are nothing but artistic reminders...

Interesting: Sony just announced the new RX10 IV bridge camera (fixed lens F2.4-4.0), capable to shoot high bursts - 24fps per second with a buffer of 249 images, even in RAW. That means 10 seconds of RAW video. Great!