Leaderboard

Wasn't that 20fps? Nikon are turning back the clock! Soon they will be giving us silent movies!!

It's resolution may not be on par with the GH4, but the image seems much nicer. But the the $6500 doesn't really seem like a bargain as much as it just seems like closer to a sensible price.

It's still a $6500 camera with an EVF from the devil's arse

Canon C300 EF now $6499 at B&H Canon C100 (Mark I) now $2999Many people aren’t ready for 4K yet. These people just got the bargain of the century with a massive Canon price reduction on the old Canon C300. Read the full article

All cameras at 25p and E-M1 can suck my balls!!

Even Charlie Chaplin's early worked managed 16fps

If being used on a weekly basis (commercially) for the year it's still viable as a commercial shooting solution then the price is worthwhile - particularly if you need to notch your profits down to stay below a tax bracket. As a consumer purchase (ie, used for what the majority of us will do), the price is still madness when compared to consumer cameras like the a7s and gh4 - both of which surpass the needs of non commercial shooters.

Just made me laugh, the way you made it sound like Andrew had championed some little indiegogo camera or something. That guy "Brother"'s videos convinced me... Until then I had not seen anything really nice out of the camera, including Samsung's big budget productions, so I really was not having a dig.. Just found it funny.

But you can use loads of cool and cheap vintage glass that's not s16. And s16 wouldn't cover the large APS-C sensor anyway.

The CX00 line has the best image rendering available short of the Alexa (worse highlight rendering than the Dragon, but much better noise pattern and low light and color) and this is a STEAL. But the C300 Mark II has some features that are really disruptive (and oddly forward-thinking) so investing now might not be the best choice, especially among the IQ-centric audience that populates enthusiast sites. Canon (and Arri) are after the "pro" market. Which is all about "good enough" out of the box, because when you're "pro" you get paid and so hiring a crew and post team costs money. The focus isn't image quality. A low bitrate is desirable, as is an image that doesn't need (or have) much flexibility for grading... It's decent 1080p that has small file sizes in an easy-to-ingest format that attract the pros. Not because they're better or more talented (clearly they aren't judging by the quality of reality tv) but because they care about money first and a camera with small file sizes, amazing ergonomics, and a great image out of the box gets you the most for you money. For enthusiasts who enjoy grading and 4k and want the best IQ (if you like raw, don't get Canon–I can't stand raw because it wastes my time, so I love Canon)... go with something that's more techie and more fun. For wedding videographers and professional shooters on the low end, get what your clients prefer (Canon or Alexa more toward the high end). That said, I like to judge images based on images and not specs. Canon's 1080p is sharper than anyone else's (not sharper than others' 4k, though, but 99% of the world is delivering to 1080p) and their colors are better than anyone other than maybe Arri. Sony's images have been garbage until SLOG 3 started to fix saturation clamping and color matrices but it's still nowhere near Canon level. Dragon Color is quite good, however, on the Red side. But the saturation clamping, skin tones, etc from Canon... brilliant. WideDR is a fantastic color space and Canon Log is sort of functional for what it is. The C300 isn't an enthusiast product, it's for pros (who care about money they can make back over image quality and about ergonomics; this is why the 1DX is 18MP to the enthusiast's 5DSR's 50+ MP but the 1DX has killer AF and durability) and so it is hard to recommend Canon to most people on this forum. Especially when the C300 Mark II outclasses the Alexa. But it won't come cheap.

This ​A completely custom GUI to run the camera- with complete control over everything: not running any of Canon's firmware would be possible. Instead of hacking on top of existing firmware/OS, now it's possible to completely take over: potentially higher performance, new functions/features. Loading codecs- not likely however if there's any way to access the custom hardware to perform debayering at a higher quality, then sending to the custom hardware for H.264 encoding at a higher bitrate, it could be possible to have RAW-like resolution with H.264. If possible to access the debayer hardware as well as individual elements of H.264 hardware, such as the DCT, it could be possible to create something compatible with ProRes (not likely the ARM processor can do everything by itself).

​I am not fine - I am out of my mind looney. I want firmware updates every day, damn it. Come on samsung, come on please. You know what else isn't logical- life. It's completely irrational and illogical. Just like my other favorite thing - love. I cannot say unsilly things to people - I am sorry Spock, I am. Next time I will try harder with my forum reply.

​Exactly. It has click-bait written all over it The biggest mistake for me was the ISO 800 vs ISO 12,800 sample images. The images are identical, with the ISO 12,800 having its brightness level upped a little. He could have at least waited for the rowers to change position/exit frame before taking the supposed ISO 12,800 image.. Ah well. Back to waiting on that GH4 firmware update...

Andrew, my favourite part of this article was the part about the GH4 at the end...

The C100 is a very good deal. Maybe some here haven't used a camera with simple luxuries like built in NDs and XLRs, but it is so liberating. I'd not be buying any $6500 camera so close to NAB though.

I've used both a c100 and an nx1. I'll just say that to me personally the dynamic rand is definitely close! I honestly didn't see that much of a difference at all in Dr on the nx1. I'll also add that the nx1 is a great camera that'd I'd personally choose to shoot on over a c100 or c300 at this point.

To be fair (and you're probably well aware of this), dynamic range tests are in a lot of ways subjective. It depends on how many stops is considered usable to that particular tester (noise levels, exposure clarity, etc). Add to that, people conduct the test in different ways (using different charts, profiles, differences in transcoder, firmware version and knowledge like you said), and it becomes even more confusing. I personally don't own the NX1, so I can't give you a definitive answer, but from all of the footage I've seen, it feels like the NX1 stops a little sooner in the highlights compared to other cameras, but that the highlight roll off is a fair bit more attractive. It seems like the NX1 benefits from underexposing a little bit instead of the other way around (though again, I may totally be wrong about that). According to Andrew's findings against the C300, "If the C300 can do 12 stops the NX1 can do 11.5." Cinema 5d pegs it much more harshly at 10.1 stops. To my unscientific eye though, I've seen footage that squeezed a lot of detail from contrasty situations in a great way, and some that fail dramatically. It really depends on the context and how much you really need for that shot imo.

I bought it 2 months ago, new, for 1.225€ shipped, so that's about the present price, but now it doesn't sound that great deal it did 2 months ago. I think samsung is terrible in this, and if nx1 goes lower than this it will destroy the credibility of a 'prosumer' product.

I did order a D750 should be here tomorrow. This will update my two older D700 cameras and replace the Samsung NX1 for any photo shooting as the NX1 kinda sucks for photography in any low light at all my older 6 year old D700 takes better photos at any iso then the NX1. The NX1 photo quality is more like my even older Nikon D40 6MP camera. Will do some NX1 D750 HD video tests and want to see how the D750 video compares the NX1 4k all mixed together to see if the 750 can be used as a B camera and the main camera for low light video shooting. As for the Nikon 24-120 F4 lens the one i have is very sharp i got it when the lens just come out one of the very first batch maybe that is why. I also had the 24-70 2.8 and my 24-120 is every bit as sharp so i sold the 24-70 and the 24-120 f4 almost never is off one of my D700 cams. It also takes very sharp video with my NX1.

Are you fine?? Where am I upset? I simply stated that it's about 1 month that nx1 does not get updated. In the meanwhile, a lower model came with some better specs. This, imo, is not logical and not customer oriented. If for you is different, then express yourself w/o saying silly things to others.