iamoui

Women are different.  I have three girls.  The middle is close to a "rocket scientist" and recently said, "if Apple doesn't get its shit together I'm moving to PC".  She also dropped her state-of-the-art smartphone and instead of replacing it with the next model bought a model 2 revs back because she said the new phones weren't worth the money.   Like it or not, many men do buy cameras as statements of their power, or whatever you call it.  It makes them feel good.  Makes me feel good.  Just like many women feel good with the right shoes or handbag.  This is what I see; I don't understand all the fuss.
What shouldn't be confused is that women understand what's important about the tech just as much as men.  The only difference is they don't make a fetish of insignificant technical differences.  So @Arikhan 's Mom is moving towards Nikon because (I assume) she focuses on the one thing she wants--stills image quality.  She doesn't care about video, doesn't care about skin-tone "color science".  She just wants the best dynamic range camera she can get that won't die by a single raindrop (like the Sonys).  The ONLY people who knock Nikons are the ones that 1) don't have those priorities and 2) haven't used a Nikon camera.  
Nikon probably also considers this--men talk cameras.  They write blogs.  Show me one big camera GEAR blog-site run by a woman.  Again, it's not that a woman may not be as good as a man to represent Nikon, it's just that they won't talk up the cameras the same way.  So Arikhan's mom tries Sony because of her son (I assume again) but she knows her own mind.  
At the end of the day, I'd wager there are more successful photographers that are women, or just as much as men.  Who Nikon wants to push their gear has nothing to do with that.  In short, women don't push cameras but they do recognize when the camera gives them what they want.  Nikon should include women.  Not because they deserve a spot, but because I ACTUALLY want their take because I do feel they're often more practical.  When my daughter gives her verdict on some piece of tech I don't second-guess it for a nano-second.   Same thing for movies btw.  My youngest has an uncanny ability to predict whether I will like a movie or not just by lookng at the advertisement.  

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....

Jesus Christ please don't turn this into an identity politics forum. That cancer has destroyed enough platforms already.

The guy joins the forum, looking for pointers to clips that in the forums' users' opinions are cinematic-looking and he gets greeted like that by one of the moderators. Wow - I bet he'll be recommending EOSHD to his pals as a real friendly and helpful place.

Any phone can shoot amazing stuff if you light it properly (get exposure to base ISO). DXO is a poor benchmark. Study studio scene comparisons and come to you own conclusions. Ed, you are killing me.

Looking forward to watching hipsters jumping off cliffs into azure seas with their $1000 iPhones on selfie sticks, later telling the insurance company that renowned DoP @Ed_David 'said it was a GoPro killer'.

A smartphone cannot "kill" an action camera. Totally different tools. I dear you to use is with a clip-on fisheye and strap it on any helmet. /thread

It was incredibly eloquent existential trolling, a great performance, and it gave everyone watching on E! News a reason to consider suicide  

Yes.

Perfect isn't an option all the time... Nature doesn't always give you perfect lighting.
If a controlled interior scene is lit for the narrower dynamic range of a Rec.709 8bit image you can get it looking good, as the guys with the GH2 showed in the famous Zacuto shootout that had Francis Ford Coppola fooled.
If you try to pack too much dynamic range into the frame then colour is going to suffer with 8bit.
That is why the 1D C has good colour but not 14 stops DR
And it is why 14 stops DR in S-LOG doesn't have good colour
And it is also why Canon LOG on the 1D C never quite regains the punch of the standard picture profiles if you want to keep your extra highlights and shadows intact.
It is all the fault of 8bit.
I foresee BIG gains for Sony colour if they do the entire imaging pipeline 14bit -> 10bit on a future A7S3, along with the improvements to the colour science evident from the A9's JPEGs.
Isn't that what I am saying?
Well there's lossless compression which means you don't lose any visual information, the structure of the file changes, but the end result is the same.
Compression can be lossy... meaning you throw stuff away in the image.
LOG is lossy in 8bit, you are throwing away fine gradation and colour information to make room for more dynamic range.
Honestly it's easy to see
When you tweak the shadows and highlights in 10bit RAW on the 5D Mark III it maintains the natural, realistic still-life look of the shot, smooth roll off between two subtle tones in the shadows like a dusk sky and the street... whereas in 8bit on a lossy camera it turns to Digital Sick™
 

The year when the X-T20 already had a flash and tilt screen. The year of Choice
It has a focus ring. It also has constant aperture... if you are willing to pay for it. This is a cheap kit zoom. What constant aperture kitzooms are we comparing to?
Its a smaller and mid range option to the X-Pro2.
Im thinking in the same direction. I would use it as my small backup until the X80 or GRiii finally sees the light of day.

The other XE's were noted for their pop up bounce flash. This one has ommited the flash altogether. And no tilt screen. What year is this?
I strongly disagree about the 18-55 being cinematic. It's one of the most boring lenses i've ever used. And the lack of good focus ring and constant aperture makes it a poor choice for video. 
This camera seems to be aimed at photography purists, so good for them. 

Just when my wallet thought it was in for a nice long rest.

16-50 f2-2.8 definitely. When I first using nx1, I expect the fast auto focus tracking in video is working with any samsung lens. but not the case. most lens is not really useful at all for tracking in video. only some new lens works. the 16-50 f2-2.8 is among the best one. Very similar performance to the sony a6300/6500 system. add OIS, 120p full hd. This lens is a perfect mate to nx1.

The 16-50S is one of the main reasons staying with the mount. I can't think of any better overall lens for an APS-C sensor. Image Stabilization, good focus dampening (or whatever it's called), fast AF (fastest on the system at least), 2f for its wider focal lengths (almost prime territory really), dust/splash proof, good build quality, iFN function (I just put the ISO there) and relatively light (for such a lens) that goes from 24-75mm. Those few extra mm in the wide end is a huge thing for me. If you only have to own one NX lens, let be it.
I have a moderate collection of legacy lenses but I have replaced most with NX lenses.

Hey Nikkor, it's a suspense thriller about a man who comes home after spending some time in a mental hospital. The familiar people and places begin to dislodge hauntingly, faint memories of his dead girlfriend but the visions seem real and vengeful. 
It's kind of a mixture between a classic English ghost story and Japanese horror. 

Yes, going to be good for warp stabiliser. With Dual IS, 5 axis IBIS and Warp, maybe we won't need that £1000 tripod Flowtech 75 after all

Here are a few more screengrabs from my film. The first one is with the Canon 24-70mm f/4...
 

And the second is with the Canon 35mm f/2...
 

Haha, in the first one, the actor looks like he is shaking his head that I am posting these grabs... lol.

Here they are in alphabetical order  4K(+) Bolded. I also Added a few from C5D numbers, and cleaned up the list.
RX100 V 250 fps ---- 3.8 ms  1DC S35HD --------- 18ms 1DC 4K ------------- 25ms 1DX II 1080p 24 --- 11.1 ms  1DX II 1080p 60&120- 6.7 ms  1DX II 4k 24&60 --- 14.7 ms  5D MKII ----------- 25 ms 5D2 --------------- 25.9 ms  5D3 --------------- 20.5 ms (18ms C5D) 5Dsr -------------- 27.7 ms  7D ---------------- 21 ms a6000 1080p24&30--- 12.2 ms  a6300 1080p24 ----- 15.2 ms  a6300 4K 24fps ---- 39.0 ms  a7r II 1080p FF---- 10.8 ms  a7r II 1080p S35--- 10.5 ms  a7R II 4K FF ------ 19.9 ms  a7R II 4K S35 ----- 33.3 ms  a7s APS-C 1080p --- 19.5 ms a7s FF 1080p ------ 30.5 ms  (29ms C5D) a7s II FF 1080p --- 30.3 ms  a7s II FF 4K ------ 30.4 ms  a99 II 1080p ------- 8.7 ms  a99 II 4k --------- 23.4 ms  AF100 ------------- 14.85 ms Alexa 2K ------------ 6ms Amira S35 2K ------- 2ms BM 4.6K ----------- 15.2 ms (official) my measurement was 16.3 ms  BM 4.6K (2K crop)--- 6.3 ms (official) BM 4.6K (4K crop)-- 12.6 ms (official) BM MicroStudio 4K--- 9.9 ms (official) BMC --------------- 23.6 ms (official) my measurement was 25.0 ms  BMMCC ------------- 13.3 ms (official) my measurement was 13.4 ms  BMPCC ------------- 17.7 ms (official) my measurement was 17.8 ms  C300 -------------- 16 ms C300 II 4K --------- 6ms D5200 ------------- 22.4 ms  D750 -------------- 14.5 ms  D90 --------------- 33 ms F65 --------------- 14 ms Film --------------- 5 ms? FS100 ------------- 15 ms FS7 4K ----------- 15 ms (here) (14ms C5D) G7 1080p ---------- 16.9 ms  G7 4k ------------- 28.1 ms GH1 --------------- 25 ms GH3 --------------- 15.5 ms  GH4 1080p --------- 13.7 ms  GH4 4K/UHD -------- 22.0 ms (official) my measurement was 22.5 ms (C5D: 14ms) GH5 --------------- 15.0 ms (official, preproduction) GX85 1080p -------- 15.4 ms  GX85 4k ----------- 28.9 ms  NEX-5N ------------ 29.4 ms  NX1 1080p ---------- 7.9 ms  NX1 4K ------------ 30.9 ms  NX1 UHD ----------- 32.6 ms NX500 2.5k --------- 8.6 ms  Red One MX -------- 16.6 ms RX10 -------------- 14.8 ms  RX100 IV 1080p ---- 16.9 ms  (without stabilization it's slightly faster: 16.1) RX100 IV 4K ------- 36.6 ms  (without stabilization it's slightly faster: 35.7) RX100 V 1080p ----- 13.9 ms(first 2 with stabilization, last 2 without) RX100 V 4k -------- 17.5 ms  (first 3 with stabilization, last 3 without) Scarlet ----------- 14 ms XT2 1080p --------- 16.9 ms  XT2 4k ------------ 30.7 ms 

Tokina Angenieux 28-70mm with 5D3 ML Raw...
 
 

Only three legs??? Pass.

NX1's AF was the second best back then, not that further away from Canon's, and still I prefer it from Sony's for video (so in my opinion, it is still the second best!). Samsung was nothing to Canon back then, the smaller players were afraid the most (Olympus, Fuji, Panasonic mainly; Sony was worried, and Nikon would have been doomed). Olympus and Fuji haven't the resources to fight Samsung, Nikon can't compete in the new digital age, and even Panasonic is much smaller than Samsung.
Sony is powerful, but Samsung had some amazing R&D breakthroughs, and the capacity to manufacture EVERYTHING you need for a photo/video camera (CPUs, RAMs, lenses, Super AMOLED touch screens, everything). First 28mpxls BSI sensor (A7Rii was the second big sensored BSI actually) etc etc.
Samsung just decided that they didn't want to compete on a declining market, and pro video/photography was a long shot. NX1 was too late in the game.
It is just a pity that we didn't see a NX1mkII, they did the first version SOOOOO good, without any prior real practical experience. The NX team had some truly talented and passionate people (just check some of their older corporate videos), something that a huge capitalistic and autocratic mega-trust, couldn't allow to exist.

Thanks!
Yes the NX1 is a great tool( only miss 50p in UHD)
DR is not bad at all..
.

We have definitely had a few on here.
There have been three or four 'users' who popped up and offered some seemingly helpful yet clearly cribbed from a script information midway through a thread. They had been triggered by a camera model or term by the looks of it.
So, for example, someone might say
"Has anyone used the AF-C mode on a Fuji X-T2?"
and there would be a reply along the lines of
"In continuous-servo AF (AF-C), the camera continues to adjust focus to compensate for changes in the distance to the subject while the shutter-release button is pressed halfway. This makes it a good choice for subjects that are in motion." 
And there would usually be a link for 'further reading' about it. So the replies looked contextually correct but the information in them was always set out in this definition style. A few of them looked like they were triggered by a term from a user guide and then the section of the user guide was posted.
One interesting thing is that we seem to have not been invaded by the 'love and spirit guide guru' offerings that we used to get a lot of and I actually think they were triggered by the amount of discussion of the Black Magic cameras as the spambot often referenced black magic banishment in its offerings. Its definitely indicative of the decline in the discussion of the BM cameras for me.
Ironically, @jonpais I wonder if what you listed in the pinned thread regarding guidelines for posting on Al Jazeera might make this issue more prevalent over there as having a defined set of rules would make these bots more easily shaped to fit in with what a 'real' poster looks like? 
With regard to anonymity, it probably can make people more suspicious if you post under a pseudonym and without a real profile picture so I should probably remedy that myself and change my own profile name and picture to actually be me.
Best Regards
Mr. Pixtech 8500
 

That's too bad... for them. Seriously. I've found, through experience, that clients that lowball like that are also the biggest headaches. They likely would have piled on extra requests, wanted infinite revisions to your edits, etc. that would use up more of your time. If they can't come up with 650 for three days of work, they aren't valuing their own business very highly. I have no doubt they will find someone cheaper, but the end product will look exactly like what they paid for it.

In other words, don't feel bad and DON'T feel like you should ask for less for you talents!