MattH

4k60p means less rolling shutter as it can only have 16.6ms to scan worst case.
Hopefully the yello era is over.

Finally the pics.
http://photorumors.com/2016/09/15/pictures-of-panasonic-lx15-camera-leaked/

The wording of that suggests that the LX10 doesn't have those features. Maybe its just bad wording.  It would be strange if thats true as LX are generally meant to be higher end enthusiast compacts aren't they?

There's no chance that the GH5 promos will look like upscaled 720p.

Obviously you meant to quote 'maybe'.  Perhaps you didn't read my post before that when I admitted that sharpness and dynamic range were often messed up in promos.
I don't know what case you are resting.
What we are talking about here is the perceptive (aka actual) resolution.  You said that the GH4 promo looked like upscaled 720p.  Thats subjective, but everyone here can make their own opinion on that.  I would say that in terms of detail, the GH4, whether in the promo video or in general at least gives very detailed full hd when downscaled from 4k. The promo gave an accurate representation of the detail the camera delivers.  I would say that the canon promo video here in terms of detail gives not much more than 720p resolution. I see no reason to doubt that it too is giving an accurate representation of the detail the camera delivers
Expecting the output from the camera to magically increase in detail between now and release is in my opinion delusional.
All canon 1080p stills cams so far have not nearly aproached proper full HD detail, and there is no real reason to expect a change to that with this camera.
This video just seals the final side of the coffin with a row of 20 nail guns.

There's no chance that the GH5 promos will look like upscaled 720p.

Lackluster HD when viewed on a HD monitor. In 2016.  Come on man. They've got dual pixel going for it, but for me its so close yet so far.

They do - but there are still plenty of theatres (actual theatres, not cinemas) showing a healthy profit. Some art forms, once invented, do such a good job of capturing the human imagination that they will likely last forever.

So you end up with 720 or 1080 per point of view. Doesn't sound like you really shifted away, more like you are tired of looking at 640 and less.
Btw isn't this thread about what codec best to use to archive stuff.

1/50th will give you a smoother look.  People tend to blurt out the 180 degree shutter rule, but that rule was invented for use when the playback speed was always between 24 and 30 fps.  Really it should be called the 1/48th to 1/60th rule.   If you shoot 1/50th at 50p you are still going to get the same amount of motion blur per frame as you do shooting 1/50th at 25p just with more frames.  I have to say I haven't done a lot of research on this myself, but basically any 50 or 60p video I see I HATE it because of its staccato look.  Which seems counter productive because you would think it would be smoother.  Perhaps it is just the look of high frame rate, but I suspect it is strongly related to the fast shutter speeds people are using when they follow a silly catch phrase 'rule' like lemmings.  I would do a few tests.  Shoot the same scene, maybe a person walking or a car going past, using both 1/50th ant 1/100th and see which one looks smoothest.

1/50th will give you a smoother look.  People tend to blurt out the 180 degree shutter rule, but that rule was invented for use when the playback speed was always between 24 and 30 fps.  Really it should be called the 1/48th to 1/60th rule.   If you shoot 1/50th at 50p you are still going to get the same amount of motion blur per frame as you do shooting 1/50th at 25p just with more frames.  I have to say I haven't done a lot of research on this myself, but basically any 50 or 60p video I see I HATE it because of its staccato look.  Which seems counter productive because you would think it would be smoother.  Perhaps it is just the look of high frame rate, but I suspect it is strongly related to the fast shutter speeds people are using when they follow a silly catch phrase 'rule' like lemmings.  I would do a few tests.  Shoot the same scene, maybe a person walking or a car going past, using both 1/50th ant 1/100th and see which one looks smoothest.

Amount of rolling shutter, quality of interframe compression (or lack of ideally).  They effect the perception of motion in video.

It's a well known artifact with sony cameras.  Referred to mostly as 'highlight aliasing'.  Google 'highlight aliasing' and you will find many hits.  It is a lot more egregious in HD than it is in 4k but its clearly still there. Aparently It was even apparent on the f5 and f55 but was addressed and removed on those cameras.  On other cameras like the fs700 it wasn't addressed.  However, people observed with the fs700 that it could be bypassed with Raw recording.  Go and look at videos shot with sony cameras. Now that you have seen it you will notice it everywhere!  Even in cases were you can't see it obviously it still alters the overal look of the image as a whole, making it seem over sharp and less organic.  Its a big contributor to sonys reputation as giving a video look.    The good news for you is that it is smaller in 4k and in most cases people wont notice it.

It's a well known artifact with sony cameras.  Referred to mostly as 'highlight aliasing'.  Google 'highlight aliasing' and you will find many hits.  It is a lot more egregious in HD than it is in 4k but its clearly still there. Aparently It was even apparent on the f5 and f55 but was addressed and removed on those cameras.  On other cameras like the fs700 it wasn't addressed.  However, people observed with the fs700 that it could be bypassed with Raw recording.  Go and look at videos shot with sony cameras. Now that you have seen it you will notice it everywhere!  Even in cases were you can't see it obviously it still alters the overal look of the image as a whole, making it seem over sharp and less organic.  Its a big contributor to sonys reputation as giving a video look.    The good news for you is that it is smaller in 4k and in most cases people wont notice it.

Dont expect free speech from Dpreview. I was temporarily banned from posting in the forum. No reasoning given. Presumably because I posted a comment that insulted the week mind of one of the mods.

Dont expect free speech from Dpreview. I was temporarily banned from posting in the forum. No reasoning given. Presumably because I posted a comment that insulted the week mind of one of the mods.

Dont expect free speech from Dpreview. I was temporarily banned from posting in the forum. No reasoning given. Presumably because I posted a comment that insulted the week mind of one of the mods.

The XC10 can use Canon's wide angle lens (WD-H58W wide converter lens) mounted on the XC10 lens.It's not all that heavy, easy to use, and you're only going to put it on for wide angle, so lugging it around on the camera won't wear you out. 
I use it when I want wide angle shots and it works very well. The downside is the H58W doesn't have threads for a Variable ND. Still, with just the XC10s internal ND you can get the vast number of your wide angle shots without clipping highlights--especially if you shoot in Log. 
I actually took an 80mm variable ND which, as chance would have it fit snuggly over the H58W with only a bit of tape inside of the rim of the Vari ND. Using it on the end of the H58W it works great in the harshest sun the light is easily controlled and you never clip.
Once I'm done with my wide angle shots I simply take the lens off and shoot the rest. 
 

Good question.  I think it is a relevant question because it is a real choice you have. You only have one lot of $3000 so cant get both and you don't have a camera so you have to get something and you are free to get anything.

I cant really say much extra about the NX1.  The fact that you are considering it shows that you don't care that Samsung is pulling out of the camera business.  That is something that may bother some, including myself, but it depends on how you look at it.

I suppose you would have to think of it as getting a fixed lens camera as you know you wont be able to use native lenses on anything else in the future.  You cant with fixed lens cameras either but people buy them.

The bmmcc part of the question is really a subject in itself.

A few things I can think of that may be of note.

You say the 24mm 2.8 is the widest lens with IS.  Its the widest prime with is, and its actually the joint widest EF lens with IS.  Its not, however the widest ef-s lens with IS
You've got the 18-55,18-135, 15-85 and the widest the 10-18.
And that appears to be one big advantage with the Aperture DEC LensRegain over the metabones XL, that it seems to have enough room for the protruding rear element protector of EF-S lenses. (Although I haven’t been able to find confirmation of this yet)

If this is the case then the 10-18 f4.5-5.6 would become a stabilized 7.5 - 13.5mm f3.2-f4
Giving 21.6 - 38.9 equiv on the bmmcc. And 15-27mm equiv on a full mft sensor.
That's one big advantage over the bmpcc specific metabones as well, you can use it for still photography and any other mfr camera in the future.

Its true that having the bm view assist would be overkill in the sense that the bmmcc already has a recorder, but the good thing about it is that it would enable you to easily switch to the micro studio camera if you needed resolution/even lower rs over dynamic range in any shots.  And of course, any other camera with 4k output.

Back to the overall question.  I think you have to remember that the bmmcc gives 10bit all - i frame prores with true HD resolution.  If it weren’t for 4k being all the rage right now we could appreciate how amazing that is.

All in all the NX1 would give you a self contained system which doesn’t require many extra purchases but cant be upgraded in the future. And The bmmcc route would give you a modular system with a lot of choices, flexibility and future possibilities beyond the bmmcc.
 

Wow... two thousand grand is... TWO MILLION BUCKS!!! That is a lot of scratch for a camera and grip - I'd at least want a lens, and 5 Ferraris...

If the refresh rate for the viewfinder is 100 fps, that to me suggests that the readout speed is 10ms. My reasoning for this is that presumably the refresh rate is maintained in video recording and I cant think of any simple way that two readouts could occur at the same time, beyond interlaced (comb filtering? I dont think so). Much simpler to increase the readout speed.   So I think rolling shutter will be fairly reasonable for 4k.
I too have seen a video which was an interview with a fuji employee that said that F-Log would only be via HDMI out .  Hopefully this was a confusion, as this would be disapointing for me.
Unless its 10 bit out then it would seem like a massive ball ache to rig up an external recoder just for a flat picture style.  Though I can sort of understand why they might to this. So non video pro's will never be able to complain about the "dull colour" for example.   If this is the case then I would be more interested in what the inbuilt picture styles can do.  Maybe they can be tweaked a little to get more highlight latitude.

Hello,
I`m new to this forum, but a long term reader, because it is the best forum for information about NX1 (which I own).
The Fuji got my interest for its pleasing colours.
I downloaded two original files from http://www.dkamera.de/news/preview-beispielaufnahmen-der-fujifilm-x-t2/
and discovered, that the codec implemantation may not be very good.
It uses a "High L5.1" variation of mp4 at 102 Mbps with no CABAC and no B-frames unlike for example Sony RX100IV etc.
One I-frame followed by 30 P-frames according to mediainfo and avidemux.
Just like smartphones, but at a higher bitrate.

Damn. Well perhaps if Fuji receive feedback that this will cost them a lot of sales they may make a change to the firmware.  They need to understand that the cost of a 4k recorder is no small addition. And its not like we are getting 10 bit with it either.  It gets to the point that people may as well buy a dedicated pro video camera.  For such a small change in firmware they could bring a lot of new people to the system.

Damn. Well perhaps if Fuji receive feedback that this will cost them a lot of sales they may make a change to the firmware.  They need to understand that the cost of a 4k recorder is no small addition. And its not like we are getting 10 bit with it either.  It gets to the point that people may as well buy a dedicated pro video camera.  For such a small change in firmware they could bring a lot of new people to the system.

Damn. Well perhaps if Fuji receive feedback that this will cost them a lot of sales they may make a change to the firmware.  They need to understand that the cost of a 4k recorder is no small addition. And its not like we are getting 10 bit with it either.  It gets to the point that people may as well buy a dedicated pro video camera.  For such a small change in firmware they could bring a lot of new people to the system.