Sekhar

A video we just completed with NX1/NX500 for a label this week
 https://vimeo.com/brainstem/review/136679800/daa914d0aa

lol first thing i did
 

I love the Blackmagic image as well and the URSA Mini 4.6K looks extremely good so far.
I can't get my head around why they keep announcing stuff at NAB instead of closer to when they are actually read to ship.
Somebody move NAB closer to the Blackmagic release dates because visa versa is clearly never going to happen!!
Video Assist is just a cheap monitor... good one at that... but why does it take them until October to get them out of the door? Summer is peak shooting time!!
Yep the price is good however Blackmagic seem to have more firmly defined their market as professional.
With the initial cameras they had more of a cross over appeal and Blackmagic seemed to encourage it and get them into consumer high street photography stores as well. Can't see that happening with the URSAs.

I've owned a total of 8 BM cameras. Zero issues. No hiccups. Worked every time. 
And not only have they worked like advertised, they have been improved via Firmware. And I dont mean bug fixes, I mean real useful features added.
So if I wanted or needed an Ursa Mini I would have no problems pre-ordering. Also Im having a realy tough time not jumping on the brand new URSA 4k in an unbroken box that goes for $3200 on a classified here

The sad part is nobody seems to be truly objective anymore, you can spin things any way you want. Canon (especially the hallowed, beyond-any-reproach-of-any-kind 1Dc) can have any number of flaws, but you can always take refuge with two words: "color science" (whatever that is). And be sure to ignore what you can do in post, it don't matter. Kind of like the $8K Leica M Monochrom buyer ignoring all objective comparisons and calling it worth the price because it's just "magical" (whatever that is).
And it's not just with cameras. Last night we had a Republican debates with 10 candidates, want to know who the winner was? Any of them, depends on who you ask. Heck, we don't know anything for sure anymore, from if there is a multiverse to if OJ was guilty to if a7RII or NX1 can render color as well as 1Dc. Reminds me of what Jack Nicholsen tells Diane Keaton in Something's Gotta Give: "I've never lied to you. I've always told you some version of the truth."

The sad part is nobody seems to be truly objective anymore, you can spin things any way you want. Canon (especially the hallowed, beyond-any-reproach-of-any-kind 1Dc) can have any number of flaws, but you can always take refuge with two words: "color science" (whatever that is). And be sure to ignore what you can do in post, it don't matter. Kind of like the $8K Leica M Monochrom buyer ignoring all objective comparisons and calling it worth the price because it's just "magical" (whatever that is).
And it's not just with cameras. Last night we had a Republican debates with 10 candidates, want to know who the winner was? Any of them, depends on who you ask. Heck, we don't know anything for sure anymore, from if there is a multiverse to if OJ was guilty to if a7RII or NX1 can render color as well as 1Dc. Reminds me of what Jack Nicholsen tells Diane Keaton in Something's Gotta Give: "I've never lied to you. I've always told you some version of the truth."

The sad part is nobody seems to be truly objective anymore, you can spin things any way you want. Canon (especially the hallowed, beyond-any-reproach-of-any-kind 1Dc) can have any number of flaws, but you can always take refuge with two words: "color science" (whatever that is). And be sure to ignore what you can do in post, it don't matter. Kind of like the $8K Leica M Monochrom buyer ignoring all objective comparisons and calling it worth the price because it's just "magical" (whatever that is).
And it's not just with cameras. Last night we had a Republican debates with 10 candidates, want to know who the winner was? Any of them, depends on who you ask. Heck, we don't know anything for sure anymore, from if there is a multiverse to if OJ was guilty to if a7RII or NX1 can render color as well as 1Dc. Reminds me of what Jack Nicholsen tells Diane Keaton in Something's Gotta Give: "I've never lied to you. I've always told you some version of the truth."

I always enjoy a review with a sense of humour. 
You do have to respect Canon for actually making products that always work. That's why they are slow. They are not a joke like some people make out. (although it is a joke you don't get basic video features like peaking on a 1DC. That's just a very silly joke indeed!)

Fair enough, I thought you were looking for feedback on how the Match Color worked. Once you're done with all your tests, please do post your findings/conclusions on the pros/cons of different settings.

It looks good overall, but I still see issues with color (they don't look natural) and contrast (not much shadow detail).

Clearly, the guy had real low shutter angle, see the passing car at 0:12, there hardly any blur. These days, I'm regularly shooting at high shutter speeds with my NX1 myself and not bothering to stick to the hallowed 180 degrees. Two reasons:
You can get some amazing 8MP still frame grabs. I went to Costa Rica recently and some of most exciting stills of wild life I got were frames from video because you have so many to choose from with just the right timing and framing. I don't like using ND filters anymore. I have a pretty good variable ND filter (Tiffen 77mm), but it reduces the quality (especially adding flare) and is not the most convenient to use. Putting it on/off was not really an option in the Costa Rica rain forests (BTW, both my NX1 and 16-50 S lens took the rain well). Given the low angle footage, I'm experimenting with getting the blur. So far, I've found the pixel motion blur in AE to be quite good (you need to bump up the frame count though), but it is dog slow, so you'll need to add that to your workflow time. The ReelSmart motion blur is really fast (especially when using graphics card), but has artifacts (at least in my testing). If anyone else has suggestions, please share. 

Looks like any other "freemium" model to me that's meant to upsell/crosssell. There are tons of examples all over, most obviously in the free or super-cheap "educational" and the "personal" versions when it comes to creative tools. This model would especially work for tools like this as they take time to learn/perfect, which builds an automatic lock-in and loyalty. E.g., up and coming filmmakers (of which there are a ton) will try it, hopefully like it, preach/sell it (free word of mouth and social marketing), switch to the $$$ paid version themselves when they turn pro, buy/promote related products like the BMC cameras, etc.

I use 0-255 and MBL 0 (defaults) with DR gamma, sharpness -10 (lowest), and contrast -5 (anything lower or higher can cause artifacts). Keeping at 0-255 and MBL 0 makes sure you use the entire range of the (tiny) 8 bit range. As I see, the only reason to use 16-235 is when you plan to hand off the footage directly without post processing. Check out my thread NX1 Dynamic Range Settings that has more on this.

Clearly, the guy had real low shutter angle, see the passing car at 0:12, there hardly any blur. These days, I'm regularly shooting at high shutter speeds with my NX1 myself and not bothering to stick to the hallowed 180 degrees. Two reasons:
You can get some amazing 8MP still frame grabs. I went to Costa Rica recently and some of most exciting stills of wild life I got were frames from video because you have so many to choose from with just the right timing and framing. I don't like using ND filters anymore. I have a pretty good variable ND filter (Tiffen 77mm), but it reduces the quality (especially adding flare) and is not the most convenient to use. Putting it on/off was not really an option in the Costa Rica rain forests (BTW, both my NX1 and 16-50 S lens took the rain well). Given the low angle footage, I'm experimenting with getting the blur. So far, I've found the pixel motion blur in AE to be quite good (you need to bump up the frame count though), but it is dog slow, so you'll need to add that to your workflow time. The ReelSmart motion blur is really fast (especially when using graphics card), but has artifacts (at least in my testing). If anyone else has suggestions, please share. 

The first part (normally exposed, till 1:50 or so) looks great, I liked it the best. Natural looking, with nice detail. Seemed a tad contrasty though, for example at 1:00.

Ok, I was able to do a few more tests today. I used the Standard Profile and dialed Sharpness, Saturation and Contrast to -5. I also dialed down Hue to -15.
I used the Canon FD 28mm f/2 lens and a Canon 35-70mm f/4 zoom.
I converted two versions... One downscaled to 1080p and one 4K version. I tried over and under exposing some shots but haven't graded anything... This is all straight from the camera  
 
Here is the 1080p conversion.
I am waiting for the 4K version to upload, I will post that when it does  
 

I convert to ProRes 422, I think it's enough. And yes, you have access to the whole frame, which is why you can cut with 100% and 50% to simulate two cameras; keyframe the zoom to effect slow zoom; keyframe lateral/vertical moves to fake slider and jib shots; etc. For the fashion show video I posted, I only had the 16-50 zoom, and even at 50 I just about managed to cover the stage; but with this crop technique for example I was able to go real tight, and the models (all amateur event attendees and their kids) were very happy. Going to ultra zoom is the main reason I got the NX500.

Whoa, why the hostility? This is a friendly community where we share ideas to improve each other's work, we aren't competing. If you have input that helps the rest of us, you're welcome to share.
Having said that, you're mistaken in many ways. First, mercer here also got the NX500, and we're comparing notes on the effect of sharpness/contrast settings at default and at -10/-5, you likely didn't know that. Next, my goal is to cross cut NX500 and NX1 footage, and I'm checking to see if setting sharpness/contrast the same would help on that. And you can always get it sharper either in camera or outside (see below for a sharpened version of the same video), the point is to evaluate NX500's capability as a teleconverter, this is not a production video. Finally, it's great that you are happy with your video, but none of your shots go as tight as I went, which is the point of this thread. If you do have anything that goes as close, please post so we can compare apples to apples.
 

My money was on Lumix/Panasonic to bring 10bit recording to the GH5... but it seems the DVX200 is only 8 bit, will they better their new prosumer model? Canon/Nikon seem unlikely to be first to push new tech and Sony seem to be staying put with 8 bit. Feels like the dream of 10bit in a DSLR/Hybrid is still a long way off.
10bit seems to be the last big sticking point. We are seeing 4K, we are seeing log, we are seeing incredible ISO... Yet 10 bit is probably as important a feature as any.

Basicially to get similar output you would need a a7rii with an odyssey 7q+ and would end up costing same as ursa mini.
 
Also in 6 months the a7s ii will come out.
So before you buy. Have patience. Wait for reviews.
Dont blow all your money on the new toy.
Issues of skew and jello. Look harder at images
 
Rent and compare cameras.
 
3 grand plus is a lot of money.

No, this time I had the sharpness at -10 and contrast at -5 like on my NX1. I'll use those for everything going forward, I still need to check how the NX500 video compares to NX1's with those settings, I want to be able to crosscut.

You know NX500 as a great little video camera that shares many of NX1's awesome qualities. What may not be obvious is that it can work as a great teleconverter. Using its APS-C sensor and 4K crop and placing its 4K footage onto a 1080p timeline, you can turn a 200 mm zoom into a 1,000+ mm ultra zoom (200 x 1.54 x 1.58 x 2.13 = 1,037 mm). I got an NX500 yesterday and thought I'd post some footage of birds on our street that I shot today with my Canon 70-200 L lens. Try it out if you have the NX500.

You know NX500 as a great little video camera that shares many of NX1's awesome qualities. What may not be obvious is that it can work as a great teleconverter. Using its APS-C sensor and 4K crop and placing its 4K footage onto a 1080p timeline, you can turn a 200 mm zoom into a 1,000+ mm ultra zoom (200 x 1.54 x 1.58 x 2.13 = 1,037 mm). I got an NX500 yesterday and thought I'd post some footage of birds on our street that I shot today with my Canon 70-200 L lens. Try it out if you have the NX500.

You know NX500 as a great little video camera that shares many of NX1's awesome qualities. What may not be obvious is that it can work as a great teleconverter. Using its APS-C sensor and 4K crop and placing its 4K footage onto a 1080p timeline, you can turn a 200 mm zoom into a 1,000+ mm ultra zoom (200 x 1.54 x 1.58 x 2.13 = 1,037 mm). I got an NX500 yesterday and thought I'd post some footage of birds on our street that I shot today with my Canon 70-200 L lens. Try it out if you have the NX500.

You know NX500 as a great little video camera that shares many of NX1's awesome qualities. What may not be obvious is that it can work as a great teleconverter. Using its APS-C sensor and 4K crop and placing its 4K footage onto a 1080p timeline, you can turn a 200 mm zoom into a 1,000+ mm ultra zoom (200 x 1.54 x 1.58 x 2.13 = 1,037 mm). I got an NX500 yesterday and thought I'd post some footage of birds on our street that I shot today with my Canon 70-200 L lens. Try it out if you have the NX500.