Brian Luce

​I played around with that and it's extremely cool. I find it super hard though to actually implement such capabilities into my shooting style because I am so locked in to manual focus in video mode. I am essentially terrified of giving up any sovereignty to the software. That's how Skynet got started after all. 
 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9brRGknqFc

​That's thing though,  like a lot of people I used to think Moire was a purely electronic phenomena. But the naked eye CAN see some moire and it very much looks to be some video related artifact, but obviously it isn't otherwise why is the naked eye visualizing it? Once you realize that moire is part of real life, it makes it easier to accept something that shows up on your NLE the next day. I worry much less, generally, than most of you guys here about resolution and even DR, my biggest concern with a motion picture image is the presence of artifacts that look electronic and thus break the 4th wall. Moire perhaps shouldn't be the cringe inducing apparition that it's made out to be. 
so in other words, I'm suggesting a purely psychological remedy here. 

​Working out how to avoid it. How best?
​By doing the contrary first, by learning how to produce moire. A lot of factors contribute to that, but in the end it all boils down to the resolution of patterns. So the obvious answer is looking for patterns. The lens is capable (sharp enough) to depict smaller picture elements (google >circle of confusion) than the pixel grid on the sensor, never the other way around. This reduces the actual resolution drastically. If you additionally allow any in-camera sharpening, the aliasing stays the same, but the moire will pop out more (software solutions as shown above affect only this, they can only soften the existing aliasing, imo not worth the trouble/money). There are filters you can put in front of the sensor (> OLPF) that will tune the spatial frequency. They will eliminate moire. But they are expensive and they have to be made specifically for your camera.
However, during your deliberate chase of moire patterns you will notice that with one too sharp lens you will only be able to produce moire under certain conditions. 
1. The most important is the spatial frequency of the lens, which alters depending on the aperture you chose. For just about every lens there are test charts that show this correlation in a graph. As a rule of thumb: 

At open aperture, the lens usually performs 'worse'. You should learn to find the aperture range that allows moire with your combo!
NOTE: With some lenses, choosing an inappropriate aperture alone makes moire disappear (which is not what we intend),
2. The pattern needs a certain contrast. As we all know, contrast is highest on a sunny day at noon and lowest in a dimly lit cellar. So you need to avoid wide apertures in bright light. If you are after moire, stay away from ND filters!
By understanding those two conditions, you will capture 90% of all moire that's achievable.
The third condition is the relative size of the pattern itself. Whereas the first two factors are easy to manage, this one really restricts your options regarding framing, focal lengths or choice of motifs in the first place. A pain in the ass. But in reality, it's actually pretty easy to instantly recognize promising patterns. And then, all together now:
1. Turn up in-camera sharpening (this embosses otherwise barely noticeable moire and bakes it into the image, best advice!)
2. Find the aperture at which your lens performs best (also depends on focal length with zooms)
3. Change your position during shooting ever so slightly. Doesn't need much practice, you'll know intuitively pretty soon, it actually doesn't limit your choices.
4. Don't be afraid of moire-free images! Cameras with very high moire efficiency are around for almost one decade now. It's lunacy, but many filmmakers actually at some day lost their skills to capture moire. Cinema features have been released shot with those cameras, and nobody complained about missing rainbows. People got used to the clean images, so don't worry.

What? No RAW or 800 fps? Samsung sucks!

I'm interested in the techy aspects to an extent, it's part of the picture and is especially useful for those trying to decide which camera to buy. Talking about aesthetics and *art* is great too, but fundamentally more subjective. So, if we're going to talk techy, can't we be a little more scientific and apply some reasonable guidelines and methodologies? DR is a useful thing to talk about about, I use to shoot a lot of ocean sports, especially surfing, DR matters in those environments, but how about more emphasis and emulation on the approach of someone like Adam Wilt, where things are quantified in controlled environments. Saying "NX1 looks to have about 2 stops more than a RED1 according to my eyeballs"  isn't particularly helpful IMO. That'd be my criticism. 

​A7s need a recorder for 4k right? And HMDI interface? Man, if you're on the clock for money, never trust HDMI. It'll burn you down. 

I'm interested in the techy aspects to an extent, it's part of the picture and is especially useful for those trying to decide which camera to buy. Talking about aesthetics and *art* is great too, but fundamentally more subjective. So, if we're going to talk techy, can't we be a little more scientific and apply some reasonable guidelines and methodologies? DR is a useful thing to talk about about, I use to shoot a lot of ocean sports, especially surfing, DR matters in those environments, but how about more emphasis and emulation on the approach of someone like Adam Wilt, where things are quantified in controlled environments. Saying "NX1 looks to have about 2 stops more than a RED1 according to my eyeballs"  isn't particularly helpful IMO. That'd be my criticism. 

​Perhaps, but when it comes to cameras and many of the hobbyist/enthusiasts that use them, gear acquisition is always going to be more important than creating.  I don't think that sentiment is anything new; been around for more than a century.  
And those are the people most likely to fret about the latest and greatest and, in turn, help fulfill advertising.  And advertising is important on these sorts of websites.
After all, if you like really playing with tech stuff and you know you're not as good as other people making creative things (I'm figuratively looking in the mirror while typing this, btw) what else do you have to hang your hat on?  Ownership is then what tends to matter more. 
For what it's worth, I've also run into pros that dismiss more than capable cameras as "toys" simply because they're not in the upper tier of equipment.

I tried to load it to youtube but wouldn't work. The FB quality is terrible. But look at the airvents, you can see some aliasing/moire, but the poor encoding masks it. It's the baskbetball vid. Tried in different settings. GH2 didn't alias in comparable settings.
No one here needs to explain the hows and why of this informal test for my sake. I'm not interested in DPreview nerdsnark.  I'm just putting it out here to show that aliasing and moire are things to contend with on most cmos cams and the NX1 isn't an exception from my experience to this point. However it's not a deal breaker IMO, it's just something to keep an eye out for if it bothers you. Lots of ways to cope with aliasing.
I do some music videos occasionally, and those can tax a cmos sensor -- the guitar string, the extreme contrast on piano keys, so far the NX1 hasn't created an issue in those types of shooting situations. YMMV. 
https://www.facebook.com/pages/NX1-Rumors-and-Tips/306653216190462?ref=hl
 

Just remember, NX1 isn't perfect, you're gonna get your moire and jellovision. Not perfect. 

Dunno about photography, but precious few people can write a good script. Almost no one can write a great script. This will not change. Ever. 
 

The blackhat group, commonly known as "Magic Lantern" has been working with Samsung allegedly to create more functionality with the NX1

Also Ivar, before you return the NX1, you do realize the new firmware allows us to remap the REC button. That's huge. Maybe you should reconsider your decision.

Ivar, the workaround for the NX1 is never to pan and never to tilt. And you can't dolly either. Crane shots are out. Stedicam won't work either. But as creatives we shouldn't be limited by such things, if we can't tell our stories with fully locked down shots, then the problem is with us, not the NX1. 

​Amen. This is not acceptable performance. 

Do any of these fixes address to exposure drift issue we've been struggling with? Why isn't that front and center? 

​Okay, I'm not techy enough to do a proper DR test. However, I'll try and post my footage of the GH2/NX1 aliasing comparison. I used comparable settings and glass and clearly the NX1 produced slight aliasing on some air vents and hepa filters inside a gym and the GH2 didn't.  So in at least that real world environment, the GH2 got the edge in aliasing control, however I'm not concerned with NX1 aliasing issues, the problem is nominal IMO. 
Ivar, yes, I hate those P and S setting, the GH2 had even more. That's one of things I like about the nx1 is the simpler dial. 
 

​Those are my objections too. I am merely guestimating DR, but I've shot with a lot of cams, including GH2, and the NX1's DR doesn't seem good. Weird because NX1 still shots were tested at  14 stops and it's a big modern sensor. GH2 doesn't even have a good DR, and it seems equal to or better than NX1. I've noticed too the evf and oled don't match well and neither accurately reflects what you see once you computer plays off the card. 
I'm worried I'm outside of the return window, hope not, I can't wait and hope Samsung tries to address this. What a disappointed first firmware upgrade right? All these glaring issues and they just nibbled around the corners with the upgrade. 

new firmware is on my nx1 - was so simple to install.  It has enabled 6k IMAX recording and global shutter and 14 444 pro res files and slo mo up to 400,000 FPS and made the camera say "nice shot" everytime I get a good shot.  I highly recommend upgrading.