sandro

I tested this camera at photokina. The AF-c and tracking was very poor, much worse than on an average DSLR. The high Iso iq also seems terrible:

 

http://www.optyczne.pl/7466-news-Samsung_NX1_i_NX_50-150_mm_f_2.8_S_ED_OIS_-_pierwsze_zdj%C4%99cia.html

The pictures look AWFUL :( Worse than a digital compact camera with a smaller sensor. The hair is extremely muddy, even at ISO200! It may the lens but to me it looks like an internal processing thing.

Also at high ISO you start to see those weird halos seen in the video sample, either a weird sharpening or noise removal. Whatever it is I'm not liking it.

Something to keep in mind is the image produced by Samsung's note 3 4K phone, the image it produces is simply astonishing with its 1/3" sensor and tiny teeny lens, with astounding clarity, lack of aliasing, vivid colours and pretty damn good dynamic range! It looks better than many dedicated video cameras out there up to very high price points. If this Nx1 is coming from the same direction but with the benefits of a large sensor, it will produce some very, very high quality images.

 I do hope so!

He means hardware acceleration by the GPU or some help from the CPU (like Intel Quick Sync). Right now there's no GPU AKAIK that even simply decodes H265 in hardware so editing would be a pain. We're also dealing with 5x slower renderings.

My question is: what's the catch?!

There must be something here as it seems too good to be true. Does it like fall to pieces above ISO 800? Horrible aliasing and moire? Terribly overheats? Has a worse user enterface than Nikons? Picture profile locked on an over-sharpened / over contrasty setting? Worse rolling shutter than the A7s?

It seems like what I always wanted my GH4 to be; have a s35 sensor and better lowlight performance and an even more efficient codec.

Those are the most important and relevant questions but I doubt Samsung will ever answer those :D We need reviews from independent sources.

Can you change exposure while recording like aperture, iso etc..? Also the sample on YT looks extremely over-sharpened and video-ish. Do they apply some kind of sharpening that makes it look like a smartphone or was it done in post?

It's not only you, absolutely :) Let's just hope they put some horrible sharpening in post. 

Meh, it's so sad.

One thing worries me looking at the samples...it looks like video and it doesn't have the cinematic look. Am I right?

Also colors...mmm looks like shot on a smartphone.

If the 7D is not for video then what is/will be? They want me to pay for the Cinema EOS line to even get a decent 1080p in 2014? WiIl never happen, Canon is dead for video for average people. This release is the definitive proof because the next Rebel will just have the usual same sensor with swivel LCD but same crappy video. 

Time to move on for real now.

I can spot Canon's horrendous in-camera sharpening from miles away (in the picture profile) , and this one has it set to something like 4-5. It's some sort of unsharp mask that harsh-ens the edges, increases local contrast and produces halos for no apparent reason other than making your video look like it's been filmed with a phone. 

The Youtube compression makes it impossible to judge the detail of the image... I don't see aliasing and moire though, more like 5D3 not 70D, but again very hard to judge. It's probably the same 70D sensor with improved light-gathering ability therefore better in low-light by a stop or two, and pixel binning used instead of line skipping, like 5D3. Resolution/detail is the thing to look out for and is what will make me decide whether this is a good upgrade or not. I would be very disappointed if it's just better in low-light and has no aliasing without an improvement in resolution over the 550D and 5D mk III (which are similar in that regard!). Everybody else is doing both low-light performance, no aliasing and high detail (A6000/D5300/GH4/A7S/G6, well all) 

I don't wanna be that guy but since the 550D days even with YouTube compression the first samples always provided me the definite impression if something was a game changer or not and I was never wrong. Let me tell you that this camera from that video just sucks. I'm just talking about details. It still has that OLD and SURPASSED DSLR look.

Also for wide angle lenses lovers the Canon's 10mm-ish counterpart ($300) from Sony costs $800 and from Samsung $300. So another advantage! God this is basically the camera I've always wanted: not pricey, APC-S, mirrorless, great 1080p video (it should), great for stills (it should) and it even has 4K! Now it only has to really have no weird video issues nor awful low light quality (like high ISO digital noise and such). Even though I truly feel it will have some kind of stupid problem that would make it worthless (like aliasing or horrible low light quality). It's like too good to be true :(

I must say though that I'm a little biased towards the idea of buying Samsung lenses, how good can they be? I doubt Samsung has the knowledge on camera systems like Canon/Nikon... am I wrong?

Andrew, will you get a chance to review it?

This is just awful. I just watched the official video sample from Canon and it sucks, I see nothing new! Fine the 7D was not for video but it was used for that A LOT and now the new one doesn't even have the swivel LCD? It's like going back 5 years, nothing changed. Nothing.

Unless Canon has something else for Photokina they're officially dead to me.

Let's pretend the image will be pretty good, what about lenses? What can I use on this mount?

We'll know in less than one month what Canon wants to do. 

Unfortunately the image looks pretty soft with aliasing and moiré, at least compared to the A7S.

Would be interesting to see how it looks compared to latest Nikons and Canon 5d mk3.

Even if it has XAVS-C it doesn't mean it would have great quality. They could cripple the video details since they are experts at this :)

I wouldn't shoot anything above 1/50-1/60 so for me ND filter is a must.

It seems to be a common mistake to associate video card = video editing. That's (almost) completely wrong. GPU acceleration is used only by some editing software like Premiere Pro and only for some effects, actually from CS6 they added a lot of effects. Also keep in mind that GPU acceleration is used only for rendering effects not for decoding and encoding. 

So my advice is not to spend a fortune on video cards, just the best you can get that supports acceleration with your editing software and invest on CPU, RAM and dedicated HDD for videos. I'm not saying that GPU doesn't make a difference, I mean that high end GPUs can be an overkill.

If canon introduces the ultimate APS-C action camera (which it will), it would be a must for Nikon to also introduce a D300 successor for action/sports, otherwise will lose a very big market. 

Where video fits in all of this? as much as the companies want. Canon could completely ignore video on the 7D, line skip or something and keep the C100 as the upgrade path for video, or they could make the ultimate s35 Canon DSLR for video (which I expect, and hope).

I want a s35 Canon DSLR I can use all my Canon lenses on fully, with no aliasing/moire, Canon colours, and great low-light performance.

It looks like the 7D successor is going to be a significant product for Canon, and they waited 5 years for it so makes sense. Talk about "entirely new sensor technology" being introduced in the next 7D, and "next generation of Dual pixel AF", could that mean exceptional resolution? or dynamic range? or low-light performance? all of them? There's talk it's going to be a mini 1D style body with an integrated battery grip and 1D top plate, maybe 10 fps? I am waiting for the 7D successor in Photokina and quite optimistic about it.

Canon says those magic words for every upcoming announcement.  

The GX7 would be with or just above the GM1 (same image, more features).

 

The A6000 would probably be just below the D5300/D5200 (similar but inferior image quality) or perhaps equal (easier to use than the Nikons).

From what I've seen I'm not that sure that the A6000 in terms of details is worse than the D5300.

Resolution looks promising.

I completely agree with the video. Nikon is being really stupid. They have no video market to protect and they could destroy everyone.

I read that with the Nikon with "digital" lenses you can't change the aperture in live view and when recording. Is that true? That would be a real PITA for me.

I believe no manual controls for video right?