neosushi

while raw video could even be possible for the mighty hw of the nx1, I have much lower requests that could be implemented in...less than a day, in the firmware. Perhaps they are simply too busy to read the mails of suggestion we sent.

Correct:)
Edit: Did a test with the DIS feature: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZvaamTS1kk&feature=youtu.be

There should be a camera with Samsung's processor know-how, Sony's sensor know-how and Olympus' IBIS know-how

I think it looks very similar to a7s but better for stills because of extra size of photo sensor I think - but i messed with it so quickly
I still think to wait for a7s II if you can
samsung nx1 is great - it surprises me more every day- i mostly just use it as a scouting camera.  the a7r ii and a7s has more dynamic range but there is a punch in resolution to the image of nx1 - but i still like the color better out of the a7s and a7r ii
i look forward to the next round of the samsung camera

Maybe bringing down the sharpening (in camera) could help also to reduce this aliasing. 

Hobbyists benefit from accurate and pleasing skin tone color by not having to deal with LUTs, which are very specialized and only work as intended with a known input color space and proper levels.
For professional paid work, we don't want to waste time color correcting inaccurate+unpleasing colors from the camera. Time is money. Also very important is showing clients straight-from-camera footage. For pleasing skintones, Sony looks comparatively terrible compared to Canon, Nikon, BM, even Panasonic. It's really puzzling since the F35 and F65 look so amazing (but not the F55, F5, FS7, FS700, A7 series and so on). In controlled situations, the F55 (even FS7) can look very close to the Alexa using LUTs, however in practice folks still choose Alexa over F55 etc. if they have a choice.
At the high end the ARRI cameras (Alexa, Amira) have class-leading accurate and pleasing skintones, so hiring a colorist isn't needed. For episodic TV, fast high quality production is very important. For film production, colorists are hired to help set the mood and tell the story, not so much to fix broken color from market trailing color science cameras (which won't be used very often except perhaps as crash cams or other limited-use specialized applications).
Since Sony works closely with Nikon, why not license Nikon's color science for these cameras? Perhaps that's a question for Nikon ;). Color science is the most valuable element of a digital camera.
 

Am I the only one to find the greyish color skin to be kind of weird ??

Not very realistic to expect a major firmware update every month.
At least they are solving some bugs quickly.

Sensors do have a colour signature actually, it's not all just down to interpretation of the bayer data in software. The hardware makes a difference. CCD sensors vs CMOS for instance...
The quality of micro lens, signal to noise ratio and the analogue to digital conversion onboard the sensor all impact colour.

GH4 4K files dont have that big a bandwith compared to prores for example - that would put more stress on the hard drives.

However since they are encoded in H264, they require a lot of cpu power.

​The reason they do this is because there is a market for them to offer this cheaper options, thus it is in their interest to serve them too which expands their customer base and increases their company's revenue. Which enables them to do even more in the future. 
However... the cost to physically redesign the hardware and offer different actual hardware configurations is waaaay too costly for a small niche item. While doing it in software is relatively cheap, just go to flick off a setting here and there. 

I can't imagine getting really pristine sound from any DSLR - so-so circuitry designed to be tiny, not awesome.
It's not about camera gain settings or XLR adapters. Don't choose a camera based on its audio capabilities, choose it as a camera. A Tascam DR-60 is 10x the utility and quality, and comes with PluralEyes, so your synch issues are history. 2 tracks with phantom power (and a -6DB backup track of each for safety) and 2 more line ins, headphone out with a level KNOB and line out - with a knob as well. A really, really unobtrusive limiter and a low cut. Can't beat it for $200. And that's just the entry level, but you get XLR combo's, good meters, a wealth of features.
I shoot plenty of corporate stuff all by myself. It really doesn't take me any remarkable amount of time to plug my mics into a recorder vs. a camera. When I'm doing interview stuff or planned-out stuff with DSLR or BMC style cameras, I run a line out from the Tascam to the camera for cleaner synch. But PluralEyes synchs with the in-camera mic just fine. You can mount a recorder on your rails or stick it where it's convenient.
If the gig is just a crazy run & gun deal, I use a "video" camera with ND, zoom, a real viewfinder with peaking, XLRs, etc. I've watched the DSLR guys miss 20% of their shots at those deals.
Plugging mics into an NX1 (or a 5D or a Nikon or a BMC)... just don't do it. If you can afford a YHAGI you can afford a great recorder and do it right. $199 gets you out of the crap preamps realm, and if you have more budget you can get more. And the YHAGI is pretty overpriced unless you need the SDI. Dual system sound just does not add complexity to worry about. YMMV and my .02 of course...

Or just light your scene

​They appear to be using FFMPEG elements for file reading (LGPL libraries vs. FFMPEG itself) and appear to be using AVFoundation (etc.) which is native OSX if using Apple's ProRes for final output. At which point AVFoundation supports H.265 decoding (does it already?), FFMPEG (and libraries) wouldn't be needed at all to transcode H.265 into ProRes. AVFoundation is super easy to code for (especially compared to DirectShow on Windows). If AVFoundation already supports H.265, a custom tool for H.265 to ProRes would be fairly quick & easy to create (a few hours of coding- GUI, etc. would take more time). MainConcept also has decent tools/libraries (possibly much faster than the free/GPL/LGPL stuff), though the licensing cost would up product cost.

Thanks Andrew !
Any chance you can compare it against iffmpeg (with last update) ??

Thanks again  

Just a precision: in Europe all cameras have a limit of 30min :/ 
And I went through hardware issues with both my gh3 and gh4, but not with my NX1 yet - I think it's a matter of luck also, and early adopter being treated as "beta testers"... (for both companies)
- Also to be fair, the customer support in Paris is very good concerning panasonic's camera. Haven't tested the samsung service yet. Also my NX1 fell on the concrete when I was shooting in a rainy day in NY and nothing happened to it. It continued filming in the snow, in the rain, in the sun. I can speak highly of the NX1 reliability.  - Don't wanna sound like a NX1 fanboy, I still can't sell my GH4  - I'm really attached to how small and easy to use it is.

Just a precision: in Europe all cameras have a limit of 30min :/ 
And I went through hardware issues with both my gh3 and gh4, but not with my NX1 yet - I think it's a matter of luck also, and early adopter being treated as "beta testers"... (for both companies)
- Also to be fair, the customer support in Paris is very good concerning panasonic's camera. Haven't tested the samsung service yet. Also my NX1 fell on the concrete when I was shooting in a rainy day in NY and nothing happened to it. It continued filming in the snow, in the rain, in the sun. I can speak highly of the NX1 reliability.  - Don't wanna sound like a NX1 fanboy, I still can't sell my GH4  - I'm really attached to how small and easy to use it is.

Well for instance the lens option is not really a "con". Because since you have a super 35mm you have better wide angle options. And because Samsung pro lenses are really fantastic. 
Since I have both of them I would tell you that I think the main difference - the one that makes you pick one camera rather than the other - is the "look". And personally the image I get from the NX1 I find it to be so much better than the GH4.

Also the battery runs forever, the videos are highly compressed (H265 takes little space on your hard drive) etc.

And yes H265, you have to transcode for now (but iffmpeg or rocky mountain converter are fast and very easy to use).
For me right now the debate is more about macroblocking and banding (NX1) vs noise (GH4). But considering that, I still always pick up my NX1 rather than my GH4. 

GH4 fan here btw.

Rent both of them for 2 days. Since it'll be a decent sized purchase it might be worth it.

Found this post on BMCuser and wanted to bring it here. Hopefully BM will introduce this sensor tech into new cameras down the road the specs look incredible. 
THIS WAS ORIGINALLY POSTED BY JOSHUA CADMIUM ON BMCUSER.COM
"Fairchild Imaging, the maker of the sensors in both the Pocket and Cinema Camera, just announced a new sensor on the front page of their website, the LTN4625A. Preliminary data was found here:http://www.atdelectronique.com/our-offer/bae-systems. 

It looks like it will have the same dynamic range of the Pocket (14.5 stops), but it does so using a smaller pixel size of 5.5um (the Pocket and Cinema have a 6.5um pixel diagonal.)

This is huge. The CMOSIS CMV12000 sensor in the Production and Ursa cameras also have a pixel size of 5.5um, but can only do about 9.9 stops. This Fairchild sensor would be sucking up over 4.5 times the amount of light. 

The Fairchild sensor is also bigger, and arguably much more usable resolution-wise than the CMOSIS. The Fairchild maxes out at 4608 x 2592, which is a 16x9 ratio. The CMV12000 maxes out at 4096 x 3072, a 4x3 ratio (although only 4000 x 2160 is currently being used in the Production and URSA in raw).

The new Fairchild sensor would be a true Super 35mm size, with a 29.08mm diagonal at its maximum resolution.

The Fairchild is also speedier. The CMV12000 can only do a maximum of 90fps with full image quality (URSA currently tops out at 80fps.) The Fairchild is listed at 240fps.

I have no idea when Blackmagic will implement this and in what final form it would take, but I would wager a guess that it is only a matter of time. This is a very attractive video sensor, and something I've definitely been waiting for from the company."

It's just upscaled. 
I did some tests a while back that showed that youtubes compression is so bad that hd upscaled and 4k looks pretty much the same.
But when upscaled youtube enables three times the bitrate and when viewed in 1080p the resolution is back to normal but you still gained the higher bitrate. 
Same with good HD from the bmpc and 4k downscaled, on youtube it looks the same.

​But that's the thing: the dji is crazy heavy   Espescially compared to the Movi (although in terms of price range they aren't in the same category). 

I'll be following MOZA/Gudsen work on a lighter gimbal.
I think (like a lot of person actually) that today the gimbals are really split - or should be - between two categories: the one you'll use for you DSLR (which now are super light: NX1, GH4, A7S), and the other ones you'll use for REDs, FS7, Alexa, etc. - which require a much higher carrying capacity.

Personally a gimbal that can handle a 2kg camera+lens combo is more than fine for my dslr (NX1/GH4). That should really cover 90% of the amateur/semi pro/dslr needs. And for that I will want the gimbal to be super light and under 1500$ - otherwise I might also be looking into a nebula 4000 and such. 

However for a heavier camera (RED, etc.) the MOZA isn't compatible. So I think its a shame because then I would have to rent a MOVI. But still have bought a 2K gimbal... 

And it's also a shame because with all its features (wireless HDMI), and wireless remote for an assistant camera, the Moza has a great potential. But it is either too heavy for DSLR work, or not able to carry heavier cameras for professional work. That being said I really think it's great to see a new competitor with really nice and new features - that is why I will definitely follow gudsen/moza products - but for now will also be looking at defy and such.

​It's great work ! Especially considering the price / size of the gimbal. But I still have the feeling that it lacks the natural motion of more expensive gimbals... But maybe I am being too critical I don't know... I can feel the person walking, whereas with a DJI / Movi, I feel like the camera is magically "sliding"/flying...

​But that's the thing: the dji is crazy heavy   Espescially compared to the Movi (although in terms of price range they aren't in the same category). 

I'll be following MOZA/Gudsen work on a lighter gimbal.
I think (like a lot of person actually) that today the gimbals are really split - or should be - between two categories: the one you'll use for you DSLR (which now are super light: NX1, GH4, A7S), and the other ones you'll use for REDs, FS7, Alexa, etc. - which require a much higher carrying capacity.

Personally a gimbal that can handle a 2kg camera+lens combo is more than fine for my dslr (NX1/GH4). That should really cover 90% of the amateur/semi pro/dslr needs. And for that I will want the gimbal to be super light and under 1500$ - otherwise I might also be looking into a nebula 4000 and such. 

However for a heavier camera (RED, etc.) the MOZA isn't compatible. So I think its a shame because then I would have to rent a MOVI. But still have bought a 2K gimbal... 

And it's also a shame because with all its features (wireless HDMI), and wireless remote for an assistant camera, the Moza has a great potential. But it is either too heavy for DSLR work, or not able to carry heavier cameras for professional work. That being said I really think it's great to see a new competitor with really nice and new features - that is why I will definitely follow gudsen/moza products - but for now will also be looking at defy and such.