deezid

Guys, thanks so much for all the input. Here's my summary of what look like the best settings (based on input here/elsewhere and my little experiments):
Sharpness: -10, I think everyone agrees with -10, default is too sharp. Gamma: DR. Definitely wider than Normal, probably best till we get a log option. Contrast: -5. Many like it. Had lowest banding (vs. 0 and -10) in my test scene. Highs can look weird in some scenes though. Smart Range+: Off. I have no idea what this does. Per the Samsung manual, it "corrects for the loss of bright detail." Master Black Level: 0. Many recommend +10, but in my testing it's just lifting the levels, so useful only when not planning on post work. Luminance Level: 0-255. Some like 16-235, but that too squishes the waveform - would help when using directly out of the camera however. Please let me know if I'm factually off base on any of these here.

Where did you see talk of everything at 0 in the thread? Unfortunately I can't open the attachment links, they seem to be only for subscribed users. When I set sharpness to 0, I saw artifacts at the edges when blown up, -10 looked more natural/organic. You're not seeing any issues? Other than that and contrast at -5, I've found the same as you did.

​Yes, DR is independent of sharpness, so you'll need to set sharpness separately. If you zoom in, you will see artifacts at the edges if you shoot at sharpness 0, and that goes away at -10 (it did in my tests anyway). You can always sharpen in post if you wish, but with the 4K image out of NX1, I don't see any need unless you crop.
Also, AFAIK sharpening in camera increases its information content, which stresses the encoder because there's more info (spurious, but still more) to encode within the same bandwidth. So, low sharpness will help improve final IQ that way as well.

@Jordan Drake
Skintones are actually manageable using cinelike D. But have been working on my workflow quite some time...
This is an example just using my LUT (Before, below after LOG LUT and further grading)
Notice the green hue on her skin (especially the last picture). It's completely gone after grading. 
I really would love to see a test between my workflow and V-LOG.

Here's the link:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?336957-dLOG-(a-vLOG-replacement-somehow)
 
@Andrew Reid
Congrats to your forum software! Love it.

@Jordan Drake
Skintones are actually manageable using cinelike D. But have been working on my workflow quite some time...
This is an example just using my LUT (Before, below after LOG LUT and further grading)
Notice the green hue on her skin (especially the last picture). It's completely gone after grading. 
I really would love to see a test between my workflow and V-LOG.

Here's the link:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?336957-dLOG-(a-vLOG-replacement-somehow)
 
@Andrew Reid
Congrats to your forum software! Love it.

@Jordan Drake
Skintones are actually manageable using cinelike D. But have been working on my workflow quite some time...
This is an example just using my LUT (Before, below after LOG LUT and further grading)
Notice the green hue on her skin (especially the last picture). It's completely gone after grading. 
I really would love to see a test between my workflow and V-LOG.

Here's the link:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?336957-dLOG-(a-vLOG-replacement-somehow)
 
@Andrew Reid
Congrats to your forum software! Love it.

​I've noticed a huge improvement in skin tones with V-Log L, I've been bitching about Cine-D 'wax face' for some time. I've only shot preliminary tests with 10 bit, but it does look to make a difference in skies. I'll test it more thoroughly this week.

​Yes to both.

So true.
Cinelike D is a mess. Orange/Magenta color cast with ugly compressed skintones which make people look like zombies... :(
 
Would like to see something like Slog2 or BMCC Log on this otherwise nice camera. ;)

I hope this is true. Cine D is terrible for colours.