mercer

I recently heard about this waxy skin problem as well. I have the a5100, but am selling it, not for that reason though. I'm not sure if this solution will work, to reduce the heat, on such an extended record time, but lifting the LCD screen is an easy fix for regular record times.

I have a web series project I am working on and I was planning on getting the D5500 for a good 1080p. But with the price of the G7 being so good, I am not sure if that is the way to go. I am a fan of transcoding 4K down to 1080p, I feel it has a weight to the image. But, for my needs, will the 1080p from the D5500 be a better choice?

I wish I could "Like this" comment twice. Well said!!!

I don't know, I think the majority of this community likes the clean look you are referring to. If you like YOUR videos to look like The Martian, by all means go rent an Arri, and have at it. I, personally, like the look of vintage film and/or video with character, but I, unlike you, can respect people's individual tastes.

Neither do I, and I know even less of what I'm talking about. I bet you didn't tell her that. Yeah, the PZ lens looks nice. I don't have any of the native Samsung lenses but you guys seem to be getting some good results with them. That's what's really cool about these Samsungs... You can get a nice clean look out of the box, perfect for family events, or you can tweak the clinical image to get a filmic look, or even a crazy look. Although highly compressed, the codec can handle a lot.

Very clean, natural image. Good stuff.

Yeah, I think 0 contrast is the way to go. I have been using -4 saturation, with good results... As is, it looks fairly good out of camera, but I also have a little leeway to adjust. I have not messed with the hue or colors at all. I remember reading some comments on a post a few months ago where a guy was shooting calm and then bumping up his colors. I never tried it, but maybe. Btw, retro and landscape look interesting too, but without a doubt, vivid is best out of box profile. Good find!!!

-

Okay, here is a shot I took yesterday testing the -10 contrast with a custom profile. Otherwise, I had Saturation at -4 and Sharpness at -10. I just tweaked the curves and threw on an M31. Ok, and here is one I took today. This one is in vivid. The first shot is 0 contrast and the second is -10 contrast. I basically, adjusted the curves until I was able to get the waveforms to almost completely match, then I added an m31 LUT to them both. The one with -10 contrast has the LUT at 100%, the 0 contrast has the LUT at 50%. I think the 0 contrast looks better and requires less fussing. I think it also has a warmer feel to it, but I'm sure a better colorist could pull that out more. But it does seem like you gain a half stop with the -10 contrast.

Yeah, sorry I was actually referring to the test video... Should have written that before the b&w comment. Anyway, according to the description, he shot the NX1Test video with negative 10 contrast. I messed with it a little and found it a tad frail, but definitely grade able... Unsure if you really get anything more out of it though. But it does seem like the color is uniform. I'll post some before and after grabs later.

The consensus with the NX was that contrast was supposed to be at -5, so that's where I left it for months, but the colors were off, no matter what I did with saturation I couldn't get a uniform look. Either the blues or the reds were off. The yellows, and greens never looked right. Then I saw a video and the guy left the contrast at 0 and bingo, the colors looked great. The classic black and white is pretty nice too. Do you shoot any black and white, if so, do you get it in camera, or in post? But then again, Ed David was shooting with -10 contrast and he was getting some pretty good looks.

Thanks man, you weren't kidding about vivid. I had heard so much about underexposing on the Samsungs, but it wasn't until I started ettr that I started getting a better feel for it. Like you said, it's insane how much information is in the highlights and with just the slightest of tweaks you can pull it out. In fact, I think the zebra's are a hair too sensitive on the 500. I've been getting the best color, for my tastes, with contrast at default.

Are you saying no screen is better than the screen the pocket came with? Lol.

Here's a grab from a clip I shot earlier in Vivid. I think the adjusted settings are Saturation -4, Sharpness -10, and Contrast 0. I used a Minolta MD 50mm f2, wide open with an ND. I tweaked the curves a little, and then added Fuji rec709 LUT to it at about 50%. Here's another Vivid, but with this one I used the Minolta MD 28mm f/2 lens and the M31 LUT from Impulz at 100%

Yeah, as I said before, I have the NX500, so I lack the DR Gamma update the NX1 had, but I thought the same way as you about Vivid, but after seeing what Kidzrevil has done with it, I gave it a try... And it looks great.

I don't know, even with Vimeo compressing the file again, I think 1080p from 4K still looks better than both regular 1080p and straight 4K. But yes, the micro cinema camera looks great... Just wish it had an LCD.

Sounds awesome. Am interested in D5500, would love to see some footage from the D7200 though?

I messed around with vivid for a little bit today, nice profile. The colors looks great, weirdly less "vivid" than I thought. I remember an older post where you commented about treating the picture profiles as their own film stocks... I think you are definitely onto something there.

Good to know, I assume the 500 does it too. For some reason I thought you needed a native lens for that function. I imagine that would be great when you don't have an nd, but you still want to shoot wide open. Amongst other scenarios.

Yeah they are. So, you can do +/- exposure with manual lenses on the NX1?

The shot of the lifeguard stand looks like a vintage post card. Wicked. And the dirt looks great. The texture and details are great.

Looks great!!! The decomposing fish looks like the beginning to a revelations based horror film... With vibrant colors. The shot of the bobber next to the dead fish has an interesting juxtaposition. I really like that camera. What are they going for now? I feel like Canon was a little off with the pricing, but if any cheaper, it might take too much of a chunk of their higher end Rebel business away from them. Oh yeah, even with a small sensor, you've managed some nice depth of field.

It seems like Ed was using the NX1 before the FW updates and to my eye, that test, with those settings, look way better than anything I've seen with Gamma DR. Of course, Ed wants a more stylized image, and I appreciate that more than a cookie cutter, clean, event look. I don't have the NX1, but I do have the NX500. Although different cameras, I wonder if 500 behaves like the NX1 prior to the Gamma DR update. Again, different cameras, but one thing that took me a while to adjust to was the minor effect different lenses has with it. The in camera settings seems to affect the picture look more than the lens does. Coming from a Canon Rebel background, I was used to obtaining different "looks" just by using different lenses. I wonder, if with Ed's settings, the varying looks of different lenses returns while still having some leeway to grade. Anyway, interesting post and it's nice to see the Samsungs being discussed again. I guess with all the rumors of Samsung ending their camera line, the NX series has become that boring ex that has moved on, which magically makes her a lot more interesting.

Thanks for the link. The D7200 does seem like a nice upgrade to the D5500, but for the extra money, for my needs, the D5500 would probably do. How is the audio with the Nikons? I would love to be able to plug in a shotgun mic and get usable sound.

Yeah, the flat profile looks great. I used to shoot with a t2i and eos-m and I miss the ease of the post work, but their image just isn't good enough anymore. I have recently been messing around with ML Raw on my eos-m. With the 3x crop, I can use a set of vintage c-mounts I had bought when I thought I was going to get the BMPCC. So, that's been kinda fun, but too tedious for any real work. I'm interested in the Nikon for a web series I want to shoot next year and thought the quick turnaround would be a better fit than the 4K. Plus there is just something so filmic about that Nikon image. And, last but not least, I have a small set of Nikkor lenses that I'm excited to use natively. I only have vintage lenses, so it might be nice not to have to worry about adapters. Do you know the main video differences between the D7200 and D5500... To save me a tiring Google search...