timepresent

Dave, You said in an earlier post the camera is "fine in low light" -- how would you compare it to current a7Sii? I looked at a7riii quickly and it seemed miles ahead of the gh5 with lowlight... I was considering to get the r3 to replace BOTH the a7sii and gh5 and add a gimbal camera with that wicked AF and add a stills camera Thanks!

seems kaby lake has some hardware acceleration for 10bit color and/or h265 would make the 2017 model much more future proof ...

Hey all, I need a MacBook Pro for Resolve work Has anyone seen real world difference between the 2016 and 2017 models 2017 with 4gb radeon 560 and Kaby Lake (running faster at same clock and I think longer without over throttling) + 512 drive VS 2016 with 4gb radeon 460 and Skylake + 1tb drive Same price now so I am wondering if its better to have the bigger SSD or the faster processed... (iMac won't cut it b/c I need the portability) (I need it now so I can't wait to see if there will be 32gb versions next year) Thanks!

Hey all Are there any proper lowlight reviews/tests yet? It seems like it might be good enough to replace a7sii for this capability (as long as you don’t need the extreme see in the dark capability)

Backup isn't the concern/question. I already do backup best practices. I want the RAID for speed but don't want to lose an arm and a leg (so RAID 0 is fine/preferred to keep cost and size down). I will use the 2TB Samsung pro SSD and another 1TB SSD for scratch / renders, so yes the RAID is for the project media files There's a cheaper old Thunderbolt G-tech RAID that can do 320 MB/s but I am wondering if there's a big performance increase for editing when moving to the newer / enterprise drives that do 440-480 MB/s? So was hoping to hear from anyone who uses these G-tech Thunderbolt 2 drives, or another similar 2 bay mechanical drive solution?

Hey all, What are you using for editing larger projects? I've been using a Samsung 2TB SSD pro for projects, but it is too small for a current project, for which I need at least 8TB. Has anyone used the G-technology thunderbolt2 raids? http://www.g-technology.com/products/g-raid-thunderbolt-2 https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1123837-REG/g_technology_0g04085_g_raid_thunderbolt_2_usb_3_0.html Says it will support compressed 4k at up to 480 MB/s which seems quite good for just a 2 drive solution. (most 4-bay options seem ) The portability is a huge plus for me as I have to move around a lot. There doesn't seem to be anything faster for the price. To get 8TB w/ SSDs w/ the better random I/Os is going to be triple the price and totally out of budget. But maybe I am missing something? No experience with RAID drives -- how much slow down will I see as the 8TB fills up? Better to go for 12 so there's headroom? Thanks!

Hi all... I will be in EU the next year and will pick up a couple cameras. Last time I was in EU for an extended period I ended up with a Panasonic camera that was within warranty and needed service, but I couldn't get it serviced in EU w/o voiding the warranty so I had to wait months until I was back in the US It's a bit of a tough call right now b/c you can extend Panasonic warranties to 3 years in the US and Sony cameras are much more expensive in EU, but it'd be nice to be able to get a camera with global warranty (minus the US) serviced in EU. I wonder if anyone can share their experience with Sony and Panasonic warranty claims/service in EU? Thanks!

Trying to pick a lens for the camera... what have others found to work best? (I have been looking at panasonic 14-140 3.5-5.6 and panasonic 35-100 2.8. I don't see a big difference in the quality of the footage. I like how versatile and compact the 14-140 is and the option of 2.8 on the 35-100.) Also -- wondering if there is any solution for panning jitters? Does the lens affect this? Thanks!

Hey All I've been waiting/searching for a year now for decent mass storage that is portable. I edit a lot on the go on a 15" Macbook Pro w/ dedicated graphics card, 16gb ram, 512 SSD -- one with thunderbolt 2 ports. I am using Premiere to edit footage from Sony a7Sii, Panasonic LX100, and Samsung NX1. What I've found to work the best is 1tb Samsung Pro SSDs in an Inateck USB 3 case. I tried the Samsung EVO but it was just a bit too slow. Other cases didn't work on the Samsung Pro. I am now hitting more than 1tb of video for some projects and working on 2-3 long term projects simultanously. Thunderbolt dock doesn't work well for travel and neither does shuffling around terabytes worth of data from slow to fast drives while working on multiple projects. Right now a 2tb Samsung Pro in the Inateck USB 3 enclosure seems like the only option... I was hoping to find a 2 drive thunderbolt 2 enclosure to get another 1tb ssd and put two 1tb Samsung Pros into a raid. If such a thing exists it should be faster and cheaper than buying a 2tb Samsung Pro (almost $900 for those!). Anyone have a solution?

What are folks using for Macbook Pro playback and light editing (e.g. 1/4 resolution in Premiere) when you can't carry around a raid array? (As in the field or while traveling) Has anyone tried the Samsung Portable SSD T1 1 TB External SSD? ($480) It is USB3, which is the downside, but still seems to achieve real world transfer of 400 MB/s+ which is on par or faster than many SSDs on thunderbolt (non-raided). Wondering how that will hold up with 4k Thanks!

As soon as one says $4k then it becomes $5k, etc.... so yes $3k is the budget, but pix-e5 recorder looks very cool and nice to know there is a smaller, cheaper option to grab 4k from the a7S for future possibilities. In the real world (and traveling) in my case I think an external recorder will trip me up, hold me back, and importantly change how people relate to the presence of the camera which is why a7S never seemed like the best choice for me. (Also... say you run out of SD cards, you can find them relatively easily -- probably around the corner if you are in a city -- but you run out of space on this pix-e5 and you might not as quickly find the SSD you need) So I think for me it comes down to what's going to complement the NX1 best or pick up where the NX1 lacks for under $1000 -- LX100, a6000, or D5300? I don't have a clear idea of how they compare in low light (I had seen the low light thread you mentioned though) D5300 seems best for low light but adds more weight -- the weight is why I passed it over initially LX100 is not as good in low light but still extends beyond NX1 capabilities a bit; lightest, smallest; has 4k a6000 seems to be the compromise camera -- second best in low light but not as bulky as D5300 I wonder then which would be easiest to match the footage to NX1? Thanks!

Thanks @Cinegain Things would indeed be easier if I did not find the 4k editing possibilities necessary (from previous use and for my style); I am willing to sacrifice other things. But I know 4k opens up all kinds of problems too; in the end I am not coming in with a lot of "proper" film making experience, so it could be self defeating whippersnapper logic : ) But further... in terms of NX1 + LX100 combo, wondering if the LX100 could pick up in the lowlight, I just found this comparison -- LX100 actually holds up more at 3200 (seems usable at 4k and in downscaled on screen to1080p seems completely usable) and even at 6400 in 1080p it looks okay in a real pinch. Much better than NX1 in both cases. It seems to do very well in low light, almost pleasingly so. So at f/1.7 and 3200 ISO and 4k it might be just the ticket for cheap, light, low key, low light shooting. LX100 really keeps up in good conditions and pulls ahead when the lights drop. If LX100 shot high res stills I would probably roll with only that as Liam suggested. LX100 does have fantastic picture quality to size/price ratio, certainly a better ratio there than the NX1. But still I think NX1 4k image in good and average conditions is great for the fine detail that is important for me; I also find that the NX1 is easier to handle and focus than the LX100. I couldn't find much comparing LX100 in low light to other cameras (except vs GH4 which it seems to best). a6000 seems good in low light but I can't find a comparison with LX100. How do you think the a6000 compares to LX100, @Cinegain? I don't necessarily want the weight of the 16-50 S on the NX1, but it does seem to be the best option for the main camera. I planned to only get/carry 1 lens (thus the zoom makes sense to me); so I really only need 1 good lens rather than flexibility. I think the quality difference I see in the image b/t NX1 and the GH4 with 12-35 Lumix lens is worth the extra weight of the NX1 combo -- trade offs. I haven't used a GH4 w/ speedbooster (only without), so I don't know if I'd feel differently about it vs NX1 in that situation. Those two combos used are about the same price. Speedbooster for GH4 is an extra $500. Even if that brought them closer together, I think shelling out an extra couple hundred for used LX100 as a second camera makes more sense. I don't know the Nikon cameras at all. NX1 vs D750 I see more detail in the NX1 in this test at 1080p, but it could be partially an optical effect of the higher contrast in the NX1 straight from camera. And I am sure some prefer the look of the Nikon to the NX1 regardless of detail differences. I guess if lowlight were the top priority I would still take used smaller a7S over Nikon D750 for same price. So NX1 + D3300 is an interesting thought. Two cameras this size or lots of lenses starts to seem a bit travel unfriendly to me, but perhaps possible if the Nikon had a lightweight, cheap prime (keeping body and lens around the LX100 $800 price point). And D5300 low light looks great so I assume D5500 would as well. I wonder how much better in low light would it be than the LX100? Maybe I was thinking backwards and LX100 for 4k + another larger body camera for lowlight and stills (like the D3300) is the better option where I could come in at under $2k and a little lighter. Good stuff

I have used the LX100 a bit, indeed the compactness is amazing and at one time I thought it might be all I needed and I could save a bundle. Tried it with a handle/bracket and a Zoom H1 on the top; not bad and super compact/light. One issue with it is that I it was difficult for me to manually focus on the fly with the focus ring being so close to the body, but maybe I never got used to it. I also need solid stills at a high resolution that can be printed fairly large, though. So hard to rely on LX100 alone. So could be LX100 and a7S is a good combo indeed. But indeed low light will be a rare occasion so I was looking more at the NX1 for its internal 4K recording (4K is important for me for this project and I prefer the image a bit to the a7S). So I am still leaning to NX1 for the main camera but looking for a second. Wish it could be the a7S but not possible in my budget. I'm more struggling + looking for help with the idea of the second camera. I was hoping there was something that could maintain in low light beyond ISO1600 where the NX1 falls off. I am not so familiar with the smaller body camera options. @Liam, when you say there are "pretty good low light performers for way less" than a7S, what are you thinking about in particular? I was wondering about NX1 vs <$1000 cameras at higher than ISO1600. I saw the EOSHD article on the a6000 and GX7 but it didn't sound like either of those would be better? Maybe the f/1.7 on LX100 is helpful, but overall I don't think the LX100 is? RX100? Others? If not -- then it seems NX1 + LX100 may be my best bet. Thanks!

I have to confess I don't remember what it feels is like to carry around a film SLR. I do wish the NX1 were as light on its feet (or in my bag…) as the a7S and that there seemed to be a lighter option for a good lens than the heavy Samsung 16-50 S lens. What I'm shooting: I am in an early phase of a project where I'll be starting by shooting archaeological sites, archaeology fieldwork, and laboratory work. So landscape is important, and details/close-ups are important -- and moving between scales is going to be important, for which 4k punch-in ability during editing is great. I have never used the a7S and I already miss having its low light capabilities. But in the situations mentioned above I'll mostly be in sunlight, outdoor daytime shade, or well lit rooms (lots of fluorescent lights actually -- have had issues with this before in cameras and so definitely need to make sure I don't get banding) For now I am basing the choice on what I know now which is that I do not foresee low light situations being common, so I have not made it the highest priority. If there was an extra $2.5k in my budget I'd just get NX1 and a7S and be done with it, but I have to choose one or the other as the primary camera. It is the detail the NX1 seems capable of pulling out in its 4k image in adequate light that attracted me; where some say it is "too sharp," that is what I found attractive -- at least for this project. This two year long project will eventually be part of a video-based installation shown in an art gallery/space. I actually normally shoot in 30p and my work mixes abstract video shot both in and out of a studio, documentary-like material, and sometimes animated 3d scans (these things are not usually in the same video, but in separate channels). I wanted to do something a bit different for this, but not sure yet what the precise aesthetic parameters are. I thought 30p might be too clinical for something already quite analytical; so I wanted something more cinematic for this project than what I normally produce. But looking a bit video-y might be appropriate. Thanks!

I like both of these ideas, thanks for your thoughts! Most of the time I will be shooting outside in good light or inside with adequate light to stay under 800 ISO maybe 85% of the time; that's why I thought about relying on the NX1's 4k image most of the time I was trying to cover myself a little bit for the times when the NX1 is the wrong camera -- knowing I would I'd still only make it to being maybe 95% covered I've never used it, but the a7S is definitely a camera of interest especially for the incredible low light, but I couldn't figure out how to make the a7S work for my needs and my budget. The editing possibilities in post afforded by 4k are actually really important for me, personally -- so I did not want to be limited to shooting in 1080p as the only option even if that is a bit higher quality image. The a7S especially would be a nice small package with that lens; but with a recorder attached I feel like that compact, light package and low profile is lost and $3k budget blown. FZ1000 I considered for the B cam, but didn't feel it could do the double duty of the LX100 by being 4k and compact (but probably not going to help with low light as much as I want) or the a6000 by being decent in low light -- from what I have read -- and compact. I have only used the LX100 and like it okay. I know it is not even in the same league as the a7S for low light, but I have been curious about the a6000 compares to LX100 and NX1 for lowlight.

I agree that the NX1 + 16-50 S lens seems quite heavy; 2.7 pounds is roughly the spec online. I am curious to see how the NX1 handles with a light, fast, compact, lens. Options will surely increase over time...

Hello, This is my first post in this recently discovered site + forum (both of which I've been really grateful for the past week -- thanks Andrew and everyone else!) I'm trying to put together the best all around, do (almost) anything, travel kit for around $3000 and under 5 lbs -- for a 3 month trip with a fair bit of moving around, mainly working on a project I am hoping to have: 4K (I plan to export 1080p videos, but the editing possibilities in post afforded by 4k are important for me) Solid stills Workable low-ish light performance (does not have to be at 4k or the absolute best low light performance) …desirable also would be something compact, esp. for down low shooting It seemed impossible in a single camera. So I thought, why not 2 cameras? …which -- since I am a one person crew -- also offers the possibility of having one camera on tripod and another as B cam My thought is… Camera 1: Samsung NX1 + Samsung 16-50 S lens (Around 2.7 pounds and $2100 buying both used) For: 4k video All around video quality (at or under 800 ISO) Solid stills Camera 2: LX100 (Around .87 pounds and $650-700 buying used) For: Lowish-light (at f1.7) 4K Compact/pocketable (for more run and gun/downlow shooting) OR alternative possible Camera 2: Sony Alpha a6000 + Sony 35mm f/1.8 OSS (or some other small, light, cheap prime -- I don't know what works well with this camera) (Around 1.1 pounds and $800 together, by buying body used) For: Low-ish light Compact/pocketable (for more run and gun/downlow shooting) I couldn't really find a comparison of low-light performance for LX100 vs a6000. Thoughts? Other (better) options? I like the compact, light-weight form and flexibility of the GH4 paired with 12-35 Lumix lens (that combo purchased used is about the same price as the NX1 combo purchased used and has similar focal length equiv on m43), but like many others, I much prefer the quality of the video produced by the NX1 over that of the GH4. The stills are significantly better on the NX1, so already the NX1 can do double duty, which is a huge bonus. (I don't love the NX1 rolling shutter but 1080p seems to help for action or walking shots. I don't love having to convert to Pro-res to edit, but once I do it is pays off since it is much smoother editing -- especially with any effects -- and faster exporting than H264.) I thought about going full frame for low light situations, less rolling shutter, and solid stills, but having worked some with 4k in post, 1080p seems severely limiting by comparison. I would still consider it, but I think it might bust the $3k budget and 5lb weight concerns.. And what to do if there's a couple hundo left over? Samsung 30mm f/2.0 NX Pancake(.18 pounds and $200) for those times when I want the NX1 image quality but not the weight of the lens? (Is there a better option?) Rode video mic? Thanks! Best wishes