M Carter

Did an interview today, basic settings most people discuss here. Nikkor 28-70 2.8 at 70-ish/2.8 (room was too tight for my fave people lens, the 85 1.8 - or to get much separation from the BG). Haven't started an edit yet, but amped the DR flatness back up in Photoshop here. Very nice camera to use for these sorts of gigs, and though i recorded audio with an external, the line-out fed into the Samsung sounds fine, so no synching needed. I do think an attenuating cable will be in my bag next, the Samsung's pre's are pretty hot.
I really like Nikkors and such on this sensor - from wide open to F4/5.6 or so, they really sand off the hard edges nicely. Waiting for my FL adapter - I have some 1960's Canon glass to test… I may get a full set together if I like 'em. 
I do miss that Nikon sensor sort of "coolness" to the shadows… may play with that in post. Really had a lovely 3D-ish look sometimes.

Maybe I'm unique, but my must-haves were pretty simple for an affordable DSLR. I would have spent up to $2-$3k for:
APS-C/Super 35 sensor; At least 2k, pref. 4k (reframing for low-budget, 1 camera shoots and being able to pull great keys are huge for me); Ability to take a wide range of glass; Image with decent enough DR to be able to "light for the sensor" - I don't need 14 stops, I can light for 10. Audio meters, manual audio control, some sort of usable 1080 slowmo. I really wanted to love something from Black Magic, but those sensors meant Speedbooster, and the 2k cinema camera meant speedbooster and SDI monitoring. I really need at least 60p@ 1080, too. And freaking interchangeable batteries that last 45 minutes or so.
The NX1 really hit the sweet spots for me, and then some. I don't take a loupe to shoots anymore for chrissakes. Technically, the image is superior to the Nikons I've been shooting for client work. Aesthetically - my D7100 is still "prettier" in some ways, and it's got nothing on BMC at their best.
OK, find some tech guy to contact Samsung, license their tech, and create a reasonably priced cinema camera for pro, semi pro, corporate and enthusiast market. Give it Prores 422 to the card or an SSD, boost the DR and gives us some output options for raw or bit depth. 
There is a market - assuming it's Nikon or Canon's market is the big mistake forum posters here and otherwise make.
I live in Dallas, which has a lot of well-employed people. Not just the rich, but those with expendable income.
I'm really used to seeing the soccer-mom, the hipster dude, the dorky dad, the "I'm a big fan of live music" 20-something, all rocking nice cameras at shows or outdoor events. Look close and they have the mid-level zooms (not the 2.8 stuff but not the kit - fairly chunky F4 stuff in the $800 range). And the strap.
For this market, the strap is of vital importance and equal to the physical size of the lens. It absolutely must say Nikon or Canon. I don't recall ever seeing a Sony or Panny strap on those shoulders.
Can't tell you how many times I've chatted with such a camera owner - "Oh, I have that body" and you find they're shooting it 100% program/auto. They're getting the exact shots they'd get with a little mirrorless rig. But man, they look so legit!
This, and semi-pros concerned with lens ecosystem is likely what did Samsung in. I've yet to take a single still with the NX1, but on my third paying gig with it. I'm a drop in the bucket market-wise though.

Maybe I'm unique, but my must-haves were pretty simple for an affordable DSLR. I would have spent up to $2-$3k for:
APS-C/Super 35 sensor; At least 2k, pref. 4k (reframing for low-budget, 1 camera shoots and being able to pull great keys are huge for me); Ability to take a wide range of glass; Image with decent enough DR to be able to "light for the sensor" - I don't need 14 stops, I can light for 10. Audio meters, manual audio control, some sort of usable 1080 slowmo. I really wanted to love something from Black Magic, but those sensors meant Speedbooster, and the 2k cinema camera meant speedbooster and SDI monitoring. I really need at least 60p@ 1080, too. And freaking interchangeable batteries that last 45 minutes or so.
The NX1 really hit the sweet spots for me, and then some. I don't take a loupe to shoots anymore for chrissakes. Technically, the image is superior to the Nikons I've been shooting for client work. Aesthetically - my D7100 is still "prettier" in some ways, and it's got nothing on BMC at their best.
OK, find some tech guy to contact Samsung, license their tech, and create a reasonably priced cinema camera for pro, semi pro, corporate and enthusiast market. Give it Prores 422 to the card or an SSD, boost the DR and gives us some output options for raw or bit depth. 
There is a market - assuming it's Nikon or Canon's market is the big mistake forum posters here and otherwise make.
I live in Dallas, which has a lot of well-employed people. Not just the rich, but those with expendable income.
I'm really used to seeing the soccer-mom, the hipster dude, the dorky dad, the "I'm a big fan of live music" 20-something, all rocking nice cameras at shows or outdoor events. Look close and they have the mid-level zooms (not the 2.8 stuff but not the kit - fairly chunky F4 stuff in the $800 range). And the strap.
For this market, the strap is of vital importance and equal to the physical size of the lens. It absolutely must say Nikon or Canon. I don't recall ever seeing a Sony or Panny strap on those shoulders.
Can't tell you how many times I've chatted with such a camera owner - "Oh, I have that body" and you find they're shooting it 100% program/auto. They're getting the exact shots they'd get with a little mirrorless rig. But man, they look so legit!
This, and semi-pros concerned with lens ecosystem is likely what did Samsung in. I've yet to take a single still with the NX1, but on my third paying gig with it. I'm a drop in the bucket market-wise though.

Or they believe (or their research tells them) that DSLR-for-video is simply too small a market to invest much in. Since the D90 started all this (which seems to have been a case of an engineer saying, "hey, I think we can get the live-view feed to the card"), posters on every video-centric forum decry the stupidity of the two big DSLR makers. But maybe the truth is that investing in R&D and manufacturing that adds more features gives profitability too big a hit. Nikon, for one, must know by now the big-demand features we want. (And keep in mind some of the most-desired Canon features come from Magic Lantern, an open-source third party - not from Canon) (As far as I know, haven't owned a Canon since the D7000 came out).

I have to assume that Samsung's failure (if that's indeed what's going on) has just reinforced that idea. Any Nikon engineer pleading to add video features has just been told "look what happened to Samsung". I assume there's a lot of product dev folks in Asia heaving a big sigh of relief about playing catch-up with Samsung.
I'd love for someone at CES to see if they could get a clarification from Samsung though. An NX2 could be a lovely thing.

It's not perfect, but in motion on my 22" editing bay HDTV (UHD transcoded to 1080 prores) the compression really looks very good - I really don't "see" it if the shot is compelling - and the noise pretty much disappears. And this at 1800+ iso's.
Not an Alexa killer by any means, but for a $1000-ish DSLR body, it kills anything I've used to date in that range. (OK, this week NX1 prices in the US shot back up to release-date levels, oddly enough). I do a lot of small-biz/startup work that I'd turn down if I had rental expenses, and I've generally owned APS-C Nikons or Canons for those gigs. I find it to be a ridiculous leap in quality for that market, and I'm in the midst of a no-lights corporate gig where I expected to be waiting hours for neat video renders. Footage is, in a word, "damn pretty", and I consider DSLRs my "pretty" cameras vs. my do-it-all, small-chip broadcast cameras that I use for corporate events, etc.
Certainly you can get way better high-ISO performance when you get past $2k, but for real-world business clients that usually want 720 web delivery and a 1080 file for the trade show screen or the 60" meeting room TV? It's a fantastic little tool, and if you can properly light a shot, it's pretty killer. Very surprised it's actually useable at high ISO's is my overall point.

I've been shooting as high as iso 2200 and getting very clean footage. If I shot the same scenes at 1600-1800, it might look pretty sad. But opening the shadows with a higher ISO? I've found it shockingly clean. (and I own a shit-ton of lights, but I've had some no-lights-allowed commercial gigs and the NX1 has been the bomb. Had my Nikon body and a panasonic AC-160 "video" camera, never even considered breaking them out). 

Kevin's in the house!!!
That little 16-50 is a wicked lens on the NX1. Not for everything, but for the $$, very handy. I can see a lot of scenarios where a tiny AF wide will be great. 
Got my firmware updated, and yes, I'll do some testing with DIS, hopefully another handy tool.

Hey, even if people think you're a messed-up idiot, at your funeral they'll be toasting your memory in tears. (And I bought an NX1, and yeah, it's a bad little mofo of a camera).
 

Just a note on the max ISO listings - with the latest firmware, I shot a no-lights-allowed project with the NX1, and much of it was shot from 1600-2200 iso. I'm just not seeing any noise to speak of - the footage is amazingly clean. I blasted the ISO until I was just under highlights blowing at f3.5, F4 or 2.8 with some lenses. It's freaking clean as hell.
I assumed I'd be running it all through NeatVideo, but no need. Really kind of shocked.

Just a note on the max ISO listings - with the latest firmware, I shot a no-lights-allowed project with the NX1, and much of it was shot from 1600-2200 iso. I'm just not seeing any noise to speak of - the footage is amazingly clean. I blasted the ISO until I was just under highlights blowing at f3.5, F4 or 2.8 with some lenses. It's freaking clean as hell.
I assumed I'd be running it all through NeatVideo, but no need. Really kind of shocked.

Just a note on the max ISO listings - with the latest firmware, I shot a no-lights-allowed project with the NX1, and much of it was shot from 1600-2200 iso. I'm just not seeing any noise to speak of - the footage is amazingly clean. I blasted the ISO until I was just under highlights blowing at f3.5, F4 or 2.8 with some lenses. It's freaking clean as hell.
I assumed I'd be running it all through NeatVideo, but no need. Really kind of shocked.

I didn't record my settings at the shoot, but playing with the camera yesterday - this is ISO 2000. I see a tiny bit of noise in the shadows near the ear, but very fine. For web delivery I wouldn't mess with it at all - if the project were going to be projected large? Maybe. But in years of Nikon and Canon shooting, this looks to me like ISO 400-800 noise. 

I didn't record my settings at the shoot, but playing with the camera yesterday - this is ISO 2000. I see a tiny bit of noise in the shadows near the ear, but very fine. For web delivery I wouldn't mess with it at all - if the project were going to be projected large? Maybe. But in years of Nikon and Canon shooting, this looks to me like ISO 400-800 noise. 

A user-menu folder/section like Nikon has, where you can copy most-used menu items from any menu section.
WHITE BALANCE CONTROLS IN VIDEO PREVIEW!!!
SLOW MO EFFECTS AVAILABLE IN 24P!!!! (Yeah, I can just shoot 60 or 120p, but I like that the camera conforms the clips. Wish it did it at 24p too).
More customization choices for the buttons than just the ones Samsung thinks make sense;
Option to have the shutter release be the video trigger; Or at least option to make both the wifi and trigger buttons be the video button at the same time.
Wired remote able to set focus point, zoom native lenses, and stop/start video (may already exist but I don't have the wired remote yet) (I use my crane a lot and have yet to take even one still with this thing).
Other than those, my primary ones would be anything that ups image quality.
I'd like to see every DSLR maker that has decent video add a DV pin hole to the body, so anti-spin QR plates could be developed. The hole could also be for the battery grip alignment pin.
Really love this camera and tech, but I fear wish lists are a moot point now...
 
 

(Do let me know if I'm posting too much NX stuff… but for those on the fence…)
Did a real-world shoot and a tough one - school for severely - and I mean severely - cognitively disabled kids. No lights, rooms were not very bright, mix of flos and skylights. So, nightmare. (I'll be doing interviews with the directors and parent testimonials that will be properly lit down the line). Shot with these lenses:
Old Nikkor 80-200 2.8 AF push-pull, wide open - bought it used maybe 18 years ago, pre-D version and mojo for days;
More modern Nikkor 28-70 2.8 (aperture ring lens), wide open;
The little 16-50 Samsung kit zoom - wanted to try this for handheld stuff and mimic a steadicam using the AF and OIS.
Other than the day being sort of emotionally devastating (can't recall how may times a kid would absently take my hand if was standing still - sweet, beautiful kids who are mostly non-verbal) I was really psyched - I've never shot sony DSLR, only Canon and Nikon, but this thing is by far the best DSLR I've used. Never stuck a loupe or monitor on it, and only used the EVF outside -  the OLED with peaking gave me great focus, even at 200 2.8 (I wore a pair of reading glasses when shooting). I was constantly hitting custom WB and looking for something white - very mixed lighting and it really came through, with the usual light casts to highlights that are the norm in those situations - yellow/pinks that clean up easily in post. Shot from 800 iso to 2200, mostly from 1200-2000, all day. I can't tell the shots apart today. Was not thinking of this as a low-light (or mid-light) beast, but I'll be damned - it is crazy clean up to 2200 at least ( I didn't have murky, black shadows to deal with, lighting was dim but even).
Images below - 
200mm 2.8 - really pretty character, yet sharp as hell where needed - just a touch of color correction in Photoshop;
70mm 2.8 - 100% detail crop, ungraded or sharpened;
The kit lens, wide open - cleaned the highs a bit in PS.

A note about that kit zoom - I really dug it for wide & stabilized stuff… wide open. We shot out in a playground and I didn't know we'd be outdoors, so shot at F16-F22. It is a weird-ass lens stopped down like that. The sharpness is simply bizarre (and I had sharpness dialed all the way down). It's a lovely piece of glass wide, the OIS isn't earth-shaking (or earth UN-shaking) but will give warp stabilizer a head start), but the AF is freakishly, crazy useful for that sort of shooting. I see these going for as low as $140. If you don't have the big S zoom (hell, even if you do) it's a useful lens. I need to research the wide 2.8 pancake primes for these sort of shots now.
Very impressed with the camera so far. Battery life was reasonable, and I was 2nd-nature, not really thinking about anything but the image, on my first gig. Damn it Samsung, don't give up on the NX!!!

(Do let me know if I'm posting too much NX stuff… but for those on the fence…)
Did a real-world shoot and a tough one - school for severely - and I mean severely - cognitively disabled kids. No lights, rooms were not very bright, mix of flos and skylights. So, nightmare. (I'll be doing interviews with the directors and parent testimonials that will be properly lit down the line). Shot with these lenses:
Old Nikkor 80-200 2.8 AF push-pull, wide open - bought it used maybe 18 years ago, pre-D version and mojo for days;
More modern Nikkor 28-70 2.8 (aperture ring lens), wide open;
The little 16-50 Samsung kit zoom - wanted to try this for handheld stuff and mimic a steadicam using the AF and OIS.
Other than the day being sort of emotionally devastating (can't recall how may times a kid would absently take my hand if was standing still - sweet, beautiful kids who are mostly non-verbal) I was really psyched - I've never shot sony DSLR, only Canon and Nikon, but this thing is by far the best DSLR I've used. Never stuck a loupe or monitor on it, and only used the EVF outside -  the OLED with peaking gave me great focus, even at 200 2.8 (I wore a pair of reading glasses when shooting). I was constantly hitting custom WB and looking for something white - very mixed lighting and it really came through, with the usual light casts to highlights that are the norm in those situations - yellow/pinks that clean up easily in post. Shot from 800 iso to 2200, mostly from 1200-2000, all day. I can't tell the shots apart today. Was not thinking of this as a low-light (or mid-light) beast, but I'll be damned - it is crazy clean up to 2200 at least ( I didn't have murky, black shadows to deal with, lighting was dim but even).
Images below - 
200mm 2.8 - really pretty character, yet sharp as hell where needed - just a touch of color correction in Photoshop;
70mm 2.8 - 100% detail crop, ungraded or sharpened;
The kit lens, wide open - cleaned the highs a bit in PS.

A note about that kit zoom - I really dug it for wide & stabilized stuff… wide open. We shot out in a playground and I didn't know we'd be outdoors, so shot at F16-F22. It is a weird-ass lens stopped down like that. The sharpness is simply bizarre (and I had sharpness dialed all the way down). It's a lovely piece of glass wide, the OIS isn't earth-shaking (or earth UN-shaking) but will give warp stabilizer a head start), but the AF is freakishly, crazy useful for that sort of shooting. I see these going for as low as $140. If you don't have the big S zoom (hell, even if you do) it's a useful lens. I need to research the wide 2.8 pancake primes for these sort of shots now.
Very impressed with the camera so far. Battery life was reasonable, and I was 2nd-nature, not really thinking about anything but the image, on my first gig. Damn it Samsung, don't give up on the NX!!!

(Do let me know if I'm posting too much NX stuff… but for those on the fence…)
Did a real-world shoot and a tough one - school for severely - and I mean severely - cognitively disabled kids. No lights, rooms were not very bright, mix of flos and skylights. So, nightmare. (I'll be doing interviews with the directors and parent testimonials that will be properly lit down the line). Shot with these lenses:
Old Nikkor 80-200 2.8 AF push-pull, wide open - bought it used maybe 18 years ago, pre-D version and mojo for days;
More modern Nikkor 28-70 2.8 (aperture ring lens), wide open;
The little 16-50 Samsung kit zoom - wanted to try this for handheld stuff and mimic a steadicam using the AF and OIS.
Other than the day being sort of emotionally devastating (can't recall how may times a kid would absently take my hand if was standing still - sweet, beautiful kids who are mostly non-verbal) I was really psyched - I've never shot sony DSLR, only Canon and Nikon, but this thing is by far the best DSLR I've used. Never stuck a loupe or monitor on it, and only used the EVF outside -  the OLED with peaking gave me great focus, even at 200 2.8 (I wore a pair of reading glasses when shooting). I was constantly hitting custom WB and looking for something white - very mixed lighting and it really came through, with the usual light casts to highlights that are the norm in those situations - yellow/pinks that clean up easily in post. Shot from 800 iso to 2200, mostly from 1200-2000, all day. I can't tell the shots apart today. Was not thinking of this as a low-light (or mid-light) beast, but I'll be damned - it is crazy clean up to 2200 at least ( I didn't have murky, black shadows to deal with, lighting was dim but even).
Images below - 
200mm 2.8 - really pretty character, yet sharp as hell where needed - just a touch of color correction in Photoshop;
70mm 2.8 - 100% detail crop, ungraded or sharpened;
The kit lens, wide open - cleaned the highs a bit in PS.

A note about that kit zoom - I really dug it for wide & stabilized stuff… wide open. We shot out in a playground and I didn't know we'd be outdoors, so shot at F16-F22. It is a weird-ass lens stopped down like that. The sharpness is simply bizarre (and I had sharpness dialed all the way down). It's a lovely piece of glass wide, the OIS isn't earth-shaking (or earth UN-shaking) but will give warp stabilizer a head start), but the AF is freakishly, crazy useful for that sort of shooting. I see these going for as low as $140. If you don't have the big S zoom (hell, even if you do) it's a useful lens. I need to research the wide 2.8 pancake primes for these sort of shots now.
Very impressed with the camera so far. Battery life was reasonable, and I was 2nd-nature, not really thinking about anything but the image, on my first gig. Damn it Samsung, don't give up on the NX!!!

(Do let me know if I'm posting too much NX stuff… but for those on the fence…)
Did a real-world shoot and a tough one - school for severely - and I mean severely - cognitively disabled kids. No lights, rooms were not very bright, mix of flos and skylights. So, nightmare. (I'll be doing interviews with the directors and parent testimonials that will be properly lit down the line). Shot with these lenses:
Old Nikkor 80-200 2.8 AF push-pull, wide open - bought it used maybe 18 years ago, pre-D version and mojo for days;
More modern Nikkor 28-70 2.8 (aperture ring lens), wide open;
The little 16-50 Samsung kit zoom - wanted to try this for handheld stuff and mimic a steadicam using the AF and OIS.
Other than the day being sort of emotionally devastating (can't recall how may times a kid would absently take my hand if was standing still - sweet, beautiful kids who are mostly non-verbal) I was really psyched - I've never shot sony DSLR, only Canon and Nikon, but this thing is by far the best DSLR I've used. Never stuck a loupe or monitor on it, and only used the EVF outside -  the OLED with peaking gave me great focus, even at 200 2.8 (I wore a pair of reading glasses when shooting). I was constantly hitting custom WB and looking for something white - very mixed lighting and it really came through, with the usual light casts to highlights that are the norm in those situations - yellow/pinks that clean up easily in post. Shot from 800 iso to 2200, mostly from 1200-2000, all day. I can't tell the shots apart today. Was not thinking of this as a low-light (or mid-light) beast, but I'll be damned - it is crazy clean up to 2200 at least ( I didn't have murky, black shadows to deal with, lighting was dim but even).
Images below - 
200mm 2.8 - really pretty character, yet sharp as hell where needed - just a touch of color correction in Photoshop;
70mm 2.8 - 100% detail crop, ungraded or sharpened;
The kit lens, wide open - cleaned the highs a bit in PS.

A note about that kit zoom - I really dug it for wide & stabilized stuff… wide open. We shot out in a playground and I didn't know we'd be outdoors, so shot at F16-F22. It is a weird-ass lens stopped down like that. The sharpness is simply bizarre (and I had sharpness dialed all the way down). It's a lovely piece of glass wide, the OIS isn't earth-shaking (or earth UN-shaking) but will give warp stabilizer a head start), but the AF is freakishly, crazy useful for that sort of shooting. I see these going for as low as $140. If you don't have the big S zoom (hell, even if you do) it's a useful lens. I need to research the wide 2.8 pancake primes for these sort of shots now.
Very impressed with the camera so far. Battery life was reasonable, and I was 2nd-nature, not really thinking about anything but the image, on my first gig. Damn it Samsung, don't give up on the NX!!!

(Do let me know if I'm posting too much NX stuff… but for those on the fence…)
Did a real-world shoot and a tough one - school for severely - and I mean severely - cognitively disabled kids. No lights, rooms were not very bright, mix of flos and skylights. So, nightmare. (I'll be doing interviews with the directors and parent testimonials that will be properly lit down the line). Shot with these lenses:
Old Nikkor 80-200 2.8 AF push-pull, wide open - bought it used maybe 18 years ago, pre-D version and mojo for days;
More modern Nikkor 28-70 2.8 (aperture ring lens), wide open;
The little 16-50 Samsung kit zoom - wanted to try this for handheld stuff and mimic a steadicam using the AF and OIS.
Other than the day being sort of emotionally devastating (can't recall how may times a kid would absently take my hand if was standing still - sweet, beautiful kids who are mostly non-verbal) I was really psyched - I've never shot sony DSLR, only Canon and Nikon, but this thing is by far the best DSLR I've used. Never stuck a loupe or monitor on it, and only used the EVF outside -  the OLED with peaking gave me great focus, even at 200 2.8 (I wore a pair of reading glasses when shooting). I was constantly hitting custom WB and looking for something white - very mixed lighting and it really came through, with the usual light casts to highlights that are the norm in those situations - yellow/pinks that clean up easily in post. Shot from 800 iso to 2200, mostly from 1200-2000, all day. I can't tell the shots apart today. Was not thinking of this as a low-light (or mid-light) beast, but I'll be damned - it is crazy clean up to 2200 at least ( I didn't have murky, black shadows to deal with, lighting was dim but even).
Images below - 
200mm 2.8 - really pretty character, yet sharp as hell where needed - just a touch of color correction in Photoshop;
70mm 2.8 - 100% detail crop, ungraded or sharpened;
The kit lens, wide open - cleaned the highs a bit in PS.

A note about that kit zoom - I really dug it for wide & stabilized stuff… wide open. We shot out in a playground and I didn't know we'd be outdoors, so shot at F16-F22. It is a weird-ass lens stopped down like that. The sharpness is simply bizarre (and I had sharpness dialed all the way down). It's a lovely piece of glass wide, the OIS isn't earth-shaking (or earth UN-shaking) but will give warp stabilizer a head start), but the AF is freakishly, crazy useful for that sort of shooting. I see these going for as low as $140. If you don't have the big S zoom (hell, even if you do) it's a useful lens. I need to research the wide 2.8 pancake primes for these sort of shots now.
Very impressed with the camera so far. Battery life was reasonable, and I was 2nd-nature, not really thinking about anything but the image, on my first gig. Damn it Samsung, don't give up on the NX!!!

I got my son on of those "fancier" tripods from Amazon when he started UT film school. Then I got one for myself after playing with it. 75mm bowl, decent head. I use it when I have to manage multi camera shoots, or for making oddball rigs, and I often stick the head at the end of my crane. Really phenomenal for the $$.  They start at $99.
http://www.amazon.com/Fancierstudio-Professional-Heavy-Camcorder-Tripod/dp/B013HBO39C/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1450288375&sr=8-2&keywords=fancier+video+tripod

I got my son on of those "fancier" tripods from Amazon when he started UT film school. Then I got one for myself after playing with it. 75mm bowl, decent head. I use it when I have to manage multi camera shoots, or for making oddball rigs, and I often stick the head at the end of my crane. Really phenomenal for the $$.  They start at $99.
http://www.amazon.com/Fancierstudio-Professional-Heavy-Camcorder-Tripod/dp/B013HBO39C/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1450288375&sr=8-2&keywords=fancier+video+tripod

I got my son on of those "fancier" tripods from Amazon when he started UT film school. Then I got one for myself after playing with it. 75mm bowl, decent head. I use it when I have to manage multi camera shoots, or for making oddball rigs, and I often stick the head at the end of my crane. Really phenomenal for the $$.  They start at $99.
http://www.amazon.com/Fancierstudio-Professional-Heavy-Camcorder-Tripod/dp/B013HBO39C/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1450288375&sr=8-2&keywords=fancier+video+tripod

Well, the NX1 can dress up well for a night on the town, can't it? Big old 28-70 2.8 Nikkor, lovely glass.
 

Well, the NX1 can dress up well for a night on the town, can't it? Big old 28-70 2.8 Nikkor, lovely glass.
 

I'll let you know across the net couple weeks. Always loved Nikon's color, since the D7000. But my 7100 sensor gets noisier every shoot - ugly horizontal crap.
That's more like it: