Pavel Mašek

MB (megabytes) and not same as Mb (megabits = usual unit for bitrate). 170MB/s (megabytes per second) are 1360Mb/s (megabits per second)... so it is completely different level of bitrate.
Vasile hack provides +100Mb/s ( I do not want to brake his request about "not mention" bitrate :-)) so it is higher than default bitrate but still much lower than 170 MBps/1360 Mbps.

Hey guys, discovered that the OIS calibration is safe to perform in the DEV menu. Hit it accidentally when I was exploring the menus. Takes about 30 seconds to calibrate then will say "DONE!" on the screen, you have to hit left on the wheel to exit the calibration.  Worked for my 16-50, did it twice and performing great. Panning performance when using it has improved slightly. So if you ever have OIS issues with the 16-50s it might be able to sort it out!

seems like that com.samsung.di-camera-app is something like the complete gui of the camera. at least it contains all icons and images.
so i'm currently taking a really close look at it as well 
too bad it's a compiled binary... 

Your calculation is correct, but this my mastake makes it even more exceptional the processing power of the samsung nx1.
My experiment done with Samsung nx1 + Sd card GOBE 64GB 95MB / S read.
Test 1, 15fps- raw28 + jpeg super fine (40MB for both), buffer full, and camera stop after 131 files (600MB/s continuos shooting for almost nine seconds).
Test 2, 15fps, super fine Jpeg, 6480x4320, 143Mb / S, never full buffer, camera continuos shooting without stopping.
Test 3, 15fps, super fine Jpeg, 4682x2592, 62MB / S, 16: 9 aspect ratio, camera never full buffer, continuous shooting without stopping.
This test is proof that the system software and hardware of the camera are capable of internally recording unbelevable 143MB/s (with possible peaks of 600MB/s) and can shoot 30fps at 4682x2592 jpeg format super fine (124MB/s) without any problems!!

I paid almost 100€ for it, 6 months ago. So indeed that's a steal. You'll notice a great increase in responsiveness.

Thanks mate, I was looking for UHD-II but this deal is just a steal imao.

I have just ordered this 2000x Lexar card (64GB) - I hope  there will be some benefit over Extereme PRO 95MB/s ( maybe in even higher bitrates thanks to Vasile's hack). BTW I think quite good deal for EU based users

As already said, with the lexar 2000x (fastest UHS-II card on the market now) the camera can continue at 15fps in super fine jpg when the buffer is full.
To do the trick one should enable silent e-shutter on NX1 (otherwise...bye bye shutter) and increase the fps at least to 24fps.
 
 
review of Lexar:
http://www.cameramemoryspeed.com/reviews/sd-cards/lexar-professional-2000x-uhs-ii-32gb-sdhc-memory-card/

The differences between UHS-2 and UHS-1 are vast. In looking into what card slot the nx1 contained there was quite a lot of info on how they run. The UHS-2 has 8 or so extra pads to do the data rate it is designed for. There could be numerous reasons for the failure. But the max datarate of UHS-1 is 104MB/s So UHS-2 is a must for any of the firmware mods I am going after. More testing is needed though for sure. See how close we can get to the max of UHS-2 write.

I have found a massive issue regarding record limit on the HEVC, it appears to be more the fault of HEVC screwing around with us rather than the camera or file structure issues.
I tested the MJPEG codec this time around with a 64GB card and the camera plugged into the wall with no battery power to do a record session. Lets just say, just not did it pass the 75 - 78 minute limit the HEVC exhibits.
It clocked around ~620 minutes before running out of space on the 64GB card and froze, I am pretty sure it would last even longer if I had used the 128GB one.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Now again this is a low bitrate, low resolution video mode that works the sensor less, so I did the test again but this time with 480p HEVC at 25fps, and once more it crashes at 75 - 78 minute mark, its hard to tell the exact mark because its random most of the time. 
I tried both HQ and Normal bitrate but it still crashes above 75~min. files for HQ are no more than over 2GB and the Normal one is half that. Its strange and mystifies me, which concludes that it could be a codec limitation, if the MJPEG can do it, why can the HEVC not do it? Sounds really strange, I am testing the 720p mode as we speak, if it wields the same results I wont bother posting about it, someone else tested 1080p mode which seemed to suffer from the same issues. MJPEG is the only one that not just broke the 78 minute mark but it completely blew me away how long it recorded, it was still going until next morning until it ran out of space and froze the camera.
I will also do a third record session with the MJPEG with the 128GB card to see how long he can sustain record time, I am going to assume its going to be over 1200 minutes which will be quite long time indeed. I decided to share this details simply because it struck me as weird, why would the MJPEG reach 58GB while the same resolution HEVC did not even reach 3GB before stopping, its just puzzling.

Chant said he might look into increasing resolution and maybe bitrate for the MJPEG, honestly I think the focus should be more on the MJPEG rather than the HEVC which is just painful to work with already and any higher bitrate will make it even more painful to work with than it already is, so instead of having a thorn in our bums, MJPEG would be the better pick here for easy editing.

As promised, here are some Before-After + settings on how this was graded :






Settings :
Saturation : 53
Fade : 30,6
Sharpen: 11,1
Lut - Sunderland (DeLuts) @ 57,4 Intensity

Contrast/exposure are done individually, also forgot to turn off grain for some of the before shots, sorry ! Hope you guys like it =) 

When Im off work Ill post up what Ive been doing and the things that have happened with the route Im doing. I suggest that otto k and vasile when he is back start a new thread containing the work they have done, as they are pertaining to different things and their updates come more quickly than mine! I will also post up the info in a github of the progress but I think it would help the organize the information better

I see the NX1 and NX500 have an MJPEG codec, but it's only used for the 640x480 recording mode.
But the codec is there, right? Maybe we could persuade it to record at a higher resolution and bitrate in 4:2:2 like the Canon 1D C. (Ok, wild leap there, but any improvement would be an interesting discovery).
Also the silent shutter, in this mode it does raw from a rolling shutter scan of the sensor, just like a video mode... the raw data must be lurking in the buffer somewhere whilst it runs in video mode... now what we need is a genius to dive in a grab it

Things are moving fast guys.
I've created a sub-forum for any subjects which might require a separate thread.
Regarding compression on uploads or attachments, let me know if this is a problem and I will look into it.
http://www.eoshd.com/comments/forum/25-samsung-nx1-hack/

Interesting tool in firmware (at least on NX500): https://github.com/ottokiksmaler/nx500_nx1_modding/blob/master/Prefman_tool.md

Exactly. 10bit would be an incredible achievement for nx1, but I doubt it will be easily implementable. The bitrate hack is already a big potential improvement.

Just wait at least until 6th April :-) But I think the improvement will be significant. I just made few 120fps shots yesterday - those with shallow depth of field are very nice without any macroblocking... but others are where is everything is in focus are quite awful (especially in shadows). 80mbits are clearly not enough and it is most visible in 120 fps mode. 

Just wait at least until 6th April :-) But I think the improvement will be significant. I just made few 120fps shots yesterday - those with shallow depth of field are very nice without any macroblocking... but others are where is everything is in focus are quite awful (especially in shadows). 80mbits are clearly not enough and it is most visible in 120 fps mode. 

Just wait at least until 6th April :-) But I think the improvement will be significant. I just made few 120fps shots yesterday - those with shallow depth of field are very nice without any macroblocking... but others are where is everything is in focus are quite awful (especially in shadows). 80mbits are clearly not enough and it is most visible in 120 fps mode. 

This was something that I noticed with Vasile's aquarium too. It is normal for bitrates to be somewhat variable, especially with the amount of color and light changing (i.e. less detail, less light, requires less data). But, assuming VLC's "Statistics" panel is accurate, this seems to be inverted with Vasile's clip; when the clip is completely black is when the bitrate is the highest. I have found frames (at around 21 seconds) that are less than 1/4 of the bitrate during the completely black seconds at the beginning. What is going on here?
EDIT: I just checked a clip (DC24P [Cinema 4K] Movie Quality 'Pro') that I shot on NX500 to see if there was variation in bitrate throughout the shot. The shot lasts 8m09s. The subject is moving water at sunset... a huge amount of variation in color and light. The data rate is locked at 71826kb/s (this is for my shot, not Vasile's!). After looking at this shot I looked through a few more and they also have this exact same bitrate.

I am not expert in codec science and I do not believe that HEVC is so efficient - I saw quite heavy macroblocking on my NX1( I believe that h264 would look better in similar situations with similiar bitrate). 
But I cannot agree that HEVC does not preserve fine details - I could saw every single needle on the tree but then there was heavy macroblocking on the sky - 80Mbit simply could not handle it all. But I am convinced that higher bitrate will solve it. Moreover - it seems that it also brings higher dynamic range. You saw video from hacked NX1 - do you think that H264 would hold so much information in shadows?
I would wait on proper test and comparison of hacked NX1... 3 weeks at least :-(

The second image is incredible.
P.s. now think about what could be recovered if the bits were 10 instead of 8, with that high bit rate!

Hope these images sit within reason... May need to convert the H265 4k to something like a CineForm / ProRes / DNxHR 2K. These codecs might actually edit / process quicker than H265 and/or H264; particularly ProRes.
The grade is a single node:
Shadows at 50. (Kinda pushing it far... But, not too much to create halos.) Highlights down to -25. Midtone Detail is set to 40. (Kind of far here, too.) Saturation at 70. (Need the extra with raised shadows IMO) I threw in a simple curves adjustment, particularly aimed at the midtones. 1. Data Levels.

2. DaVinci Grade.

3. Video Levels.

Even before this hack, the shadows could be brought up quite a bit. Even in higher contrast situations than this. When you set the PP levels to 16-235 it actually shows, that the contrast here it no so harsh.
What I'm really interested in is testing these new things against the old things in the same conditions.