kidzrevil

What is the camera that these are going to be used on? Also how large aperture do you want? 
If you only care about MF then Zeiss milvus (21,35,50,85) will best fit your criteria. These will also keep their value and probably you won't have to buy these focal lengths again..
Otherwise Sigma ART can give you very very good quality, bright & AF (but no 85mm yet). If your mount is Sony FE , then the new sigma adapter can give very nice AF. 

This was mine dilemma as well, but I ended up with GH4, because I really needed a better camera performance for a project than my t3i's. We'll see what the GH5 can do, but to be honest, the GH4 performance is solid, the 100/200mbit codec is great, the 4K's nice, anamorphic shooting is now a thing, the battery last long enough and there is no overheating. Yep, there are downsides as well, but you'll always have to sacrifice some specs. So far, so good, I'm hyped for the GH5, but I'm really fine with the GH4's performance.

Just purchased the Pro version of Resolve from a fellow board member. Haven't heard how it handles the NX1 files, we'll see if it works better with 0-255.

Better color tonalities & less banding are expected theoretically with more bits as mentioned earlier in this thread. Your tests confirm that. The differences are subtle but still there. 
Some of Sony's gammas are also not correctly recognized in Premiere and it is indeed annoying. Even more annoying is that I don't know who to blame for this. 

I'll never understand if it's better 0-255 or 16-235. In the profile that Andrew made for nx1, 16-235 needs to be used.

No idea but I doubt it w/o replacing the codec. Chant might eventually be able to do something about it but don't hold your breath. At the moment I see a slight chance to get:
more resolutions (i.e. 2.5K on NX1) the high rate 2.5K on NX500 (subject to dangerous manipulations on burner cam) maybe higher res and rate MJPEG out of NX1 (although TBH I do not think it would reach the quality of 150-160 Mbps hevc) with a lot of luck disable or reduce video NR (I might take a look at this at some point in the future but this will definitely involve weeks of work so not too keen to start). Basically Chant is looking into adding true new stuff.
I have been looking more on the side of tweaking what's already in there - easier than Chant's ambitions but I already picked the low and medium hanging fruits.

Yes, we know both capture the same info (nothing gets dropped at the top or bottom), the difference is in how they get ENCODED. I.e., which part (lows, mids, highs) gets preference in terms of space on the 8 bits. See comments on the page for the difference and effect on banding.
Here's my summary and recommendation:
0-255. Works for most situations, especially recommended when mids are more important than lows and highs. Uses the entire 8 bit range, so it's the best you're going to get for mids and overall image. Not good if you aren't planning post work. 16-235. Necessary when delivering out of the camera without post work. Also good on high contrast scenes where you want to preserve details in lows and highs at the cost of mids. 16-255. Good when you have critical info in the lows and can't lift the overall exposure because it will blow the highs.

otto is working on a gui for the scripts he, vasile and hirsti produced. This is not very far from a magic lantern sw.
 
as to the nr, there is the option to enable or disable it, but I never understood if it affect also video or only jpg stills. It should be investigated and seen if it stores the variable of 'nr on' somewhere, like it happens for bitrate.

I agree that a very big thing for nx would be turning off the terrible nr. And when I say 'off' I mean really off, completely. Both in jpg pics and - much more important - video.

I am for MJPEG but imo, the noise reduction in video mode is far more important now as its completely cancerous. Its impossible to film above 800ISO in 1080p without having a video footage that looks like its from 1997.
2160p can do about 1600ISO before it looks awful, the NR seem to cause serious issues in destroying details in dark areas too. Which means you cannot underexpose at all before ending up with ruined images with lost details and the camera overexposes quite easily and balancing this literally requires a degree in science...

I can confirm after so many shoots and so many tests that Sony white balance on the A7 series DOES NOT WORK PROPERLY. How it gets into the working cameras is beyond me. I think this is the main reason why A7 colour science seems a bit like puke. 
FS7 and F55, much better. These cameras skin tone seem more bronzed, muted, not plastic at all. They still need much more work than other brands to get right. 
I'll probably always keep an A7S whatever version though as its a superb tool to have in the bag, always. Sometimes the "crappy" colour is ideal. Battery life is shocking though. They need to sort this. 

well I couldn't let this go, so I did so of my own tests.  a 4k video with 120mbs bit rate is recompressed to 22mbs.This is by using the download button in vimeo, A 1440p with 120 is compressed to 12mbs.
Pathetic.I want to know what happens to my uploaded videos on their end. Exactly how it is compressed.
Results using vimeo's own recommendations gave even lower bitrates.
I also investigated what the default AUTO quality(you can no longed decide a default quality) always gave me a 720p version. WTF. I have a powerhouse computer and out of this world connection speeds. What do you need to get high auto quality?
And I'm a vimeo pro for god's sake. I pay them.
If there's something I'm not getting please enlighten. I'm ready to drop vimeo but I've spent a lot of time setting all my portfolios up. It's a major deal to move stuff to youtube.
 
 
 

Sony pumps out new cameras every month now.

You know what I think makes a really good Formula 1 or MotoGP driver? That he's as good in the field as he is with his team of engineers. He not only needs to know his personal limits, he needs to know where his machine shines and where there's room for improvement to squeeze out that little bit of extra oompf.
Albert Fast is one of these folks that knows the limitations of his gear and knows what to do in post processing to make it go that much further. I feel like that's the real struggle. It's like flying a plane, everyone can make a decent take-off, just throttle up and yank the yoke... pulling off a smooth landing is a 2nd. You've got to have a feeling and understanding for it. It's about putting the puzzle pieces together, you've got to have that oversight. I'm still trying to get to that place with getting my looks down, figuring out the whole deal with all these different LUTs, techniques and methods especially, since I've been shying away from them except for getting quick impressions how different looks would suit certain footage and then just tinkering away from scratch, which tends to get a little time consuming, but I also don't want to throw in a LUT and look like a Instagram hipster. Tough to find that balance, I salute those who have a natural feel for it!
One of my fav looking vids to come across over the last year, must have been this one by Ed on the F35, to me that's just gorgeous synergy of men and tools.
 

You can get great results with any camera - then it's a matter of tastes, budget and workflow. For a lot of users coming from the "GH" world, the NX1 feels like a great alternative - but we're all entitled to have different tastes  

My guess is that's a compression artifact. Yeah, a bit-rate increase "should" help with that.
I think you hit it right on the head Casey.

I still see some macroblocking in shadows in 120fps but I think it renders details better. Buf for now I will stick to 60 fps when using hack.
I think best benefit is in prevention of macroblocking - image is stable and I think also gradient is better. But I did not make any comparsion.
Below is screenshot from graded (and one ungraded) 160Mbits, 4k30fps, Standard, 0-255 videoclip
 
 

You know what Samsung should have done. Used the m4/3 mount.
Its free to use. It covers the sensor. Many MFT lenses cover the whole sensor, some would be good for crop mode. Their own lenses would have been very popular among GH4/e-m5/etc users. More people would have taken the plunge or bought the nx500 as backup.

13 hours ago, christrad said:
Sorry but apparently you didn't write the Vimeo comments of the owner who said how much he love his NX1 and is not in anyway disapointed by it but just "felt like it was time to try something new".
 
Actually, that was my input there and his reply, respectively:
"how have you found the difference with your new G7 toy?"
Albert Fast 4 months ago:
"G7 is lighter and smaller but lacks 100-120 fps slow motion and headphone jack. Different color science but comparable low light performance. Both great cameras!"
 
In a personal note, in a way or another, I share the same perspective of him and many others (no matter the camp you play), to usually be open and straightforward : ) No football cheerleaders contest over here. By the way, it is an European who's writing it :-)

Just have to say after shooting in both UHD and DCI 4K... I really think DCI really shines. I have't measured the differences, and I'm only using the eye test, but I will now shoot exclusively in DCI over UHD. Gamma DR, DCI 4K and the 16-50mm S lens is a dream. Loving this camera, and can't wait to see what some of your custom settings look like. I will have to experiment some more after I finish up my latest project. You guys are awesome!

the nx1 will be a solid camera forever. especially if you adapt manual glass, if this is totally dead in 10 years, it'll still be awesome and likely an incredible bargain. I'm sure new cameras will be fine too though, I just can't see the image ever sucking in comparison. we already have raw 6k, and the nx1 looks great. Didn't digital bolex start their company saying they're only doing the one camera? they've updated firmware, but you'll never need to "upgrade", obviously, what's more to want? - maybe I'm mistaken about that though... not a ridiculous concept. your camera being discontinued now is better than upgrading every time sony tells you to

If you need great colors I would rather go for the NX1... (you also get great AF at the same time if you use NX S lenses)

Some things related to hacking and video modes. Based on examining /sys/devices/platform/drime5-pmu.1/ during operation. This is a power management unit (it shuts down blocks that are not currently used - a very definite source for what's being used when):
During MJPEG block called mp is used (also in video preview)
During HEVC block called hevc is used, but mp as well (also in video preview)
Block called srp is used only during SAS mode, not during video
Block called pp is always used and I have a hunch (just a hunch) that noise removal is included in it (same name in various places during any image processing, memory allocatin, etc, even just for displaying)
This strongly suggests that both hevc and jpeg are done in dedicated hardware, not something that can be easily changed (but migh accept various parameters, etc).

NX1 has way better colors straight out of camera. Panasonic users can't even imagine.

Panasonic g7 with speed booster metabones Xl , superb camera and you can get the colours right all in camera it is a very powerful camera with its internal colour processing , you can get away with not grading , I have four of these camera they are that good