SMGJohn

I only used a borrowed NX1 for a few weeks and that was a long time ago, so I can't recall a lot of real specific details about the colors.
My recommendation based on what you want:
Fujifilm X-S10 or used X-H1: all the great colors and profiles, internal Eterna and f-log (but 8-bit internally on both, 10-bit externally on the X-H1), and IBIS. The deeper grip of both is much more similar to the NX1 and the top panel display is on the X-H1. The X-S10 also has the flip out screen, which may be preferred by you, the X-H1 has the 3 way tilt like the X-T4.

X-S10 pros: newest sensor and autofocus, likely a little better IBIS, better battery life, PASM dial like NX1 which I prefer myself especially because you can do custom modes (C1, C2, C3) just like the NX1 has. I also think it's better if you do a lot of video work.

X-S10 cons: single UHS-I card slot, no vertical grip, no 400mbps output, maybe worse EVF but I don't remember.

X-H1 pros: cheaper (used, no longer available new), vertical grip compatibility, 10-bit out, top panel LCD.
  Nikon Z6/Z6II: (Z6II is worth the extra $500 if you buy new - better AF, dual slots, vertical grip)e

-- Pros: Higher dynamic range, better RAW colors, full frame, amazing lenses that are leagues above Fuji's, superior autofocus to Fuji (some people may argue about this but I returned my Fuji X-T4 after finding its AF (in both S-AF and Continuous) to be extremely underwhelming. Nikon is fast, quiet, and locks on accurately every time. C-AF is great too, even in video mode (better than Fuji, not as good as newest Sonys or Canons). Best ergonomics of any mirrorless cameras, except for maybe the Panasonic S1 which has a beefier grip and more external controls, but at the expense of significantly more bulk and weight. Also, ability to use Sony FE lenses with autofocus using the two adapters on the market. No other system can do this. 12-bit ProRes RAW and BRAW output.

-- Cons: more expensive, bigger and pricier lenses (price you pay for full-frame), no internal LOG profile but Andrew does sell his own faux-LOG profile for the Z6/Z7 here and it's quite good. 4K video is limited to 30fps vs. 60fps on Fuji. MUCH better IBIS. The best of any APS-C or FF mirrorless system along with Panasonic L and the much more expensive Canon RF cameras. Worse JPEG profiles compared to Fuji.

I tested the methods explained in this thread and I cannot find this supposed superiority, there is a severe penalty to the sharpness, you have a HUGE shift towards green even though I turned the green to 1.90
This is all with manual mode, no automatic garbage going on, all old fashioned adjustment, white balance equal for every image to show you the shift it goes from magenta to green its quite severe. 
There massive loss of sharpness with this method, the noise is far more prominent and here are examples that took me 5 minutes to do with manual focus, 1/30 shutter, 2.8 aperture and ISO of 1600.

Left is the standard profile. Middle one is adjusted ISO down to 800 with RGB boost. Right is the one with the 1.99 RGB levels and no adjustments, you gotta open these real up close and notice what happens, other than the RGB settings every other setting is completely identical. These are JPEG's by the way so video would look just as similar but worse noise obviously.
 

Again the Left is standard, middle is adjusted level and right is the boost one with no adjustments. 
Notice the sharpness loss in these, the camera was on a tripod with manual focus kept at same level in all 3 shots. 
The details are quite muddled suggesting your lossing something here, its almost like you are trying to extract details but not getting enough light, its exactly what this is. 
I read that some people suggested it gives you 1 - 2 stop extra range, but at a sunny day at 160 bitrate you can already pull a few stops out of the shadows anyway with a LOG like settings or not, this RGB boost seems to present no advantages in those shadow details at all in fact there seems to be a loss of details. 

I tested the methods explained in this thread and I cannot find this supposed superiority, there is a severe penalty to the sharpness, you have a HUGE shift towards green even though I turned the green to 1.90
This is all with manual mode, no automatic garbage going on, all old fashioned adjustment, white balance equal for every image to show you the shift it goes from magenta to green its quite severe. 
There massive loss of sharpness with this method, the noise is far more prominent and here are examples that took me 5 minutes to do with manual focus, 1/30 shutter, 2.8 aperture and ISO of 1600.

Left is the standard profile. Middle one is adjusted ISO down to 800 with RGB boost. Right is the one with the 1.99 RGB levels and no adjustments, you gotta open these real up close and notice what happens, other than the RGB settings every other setting is completely identical. These are JPEG's by the way so video would look just as similar but worse noise obviously.
 

Again the Left is standard, middle is adjusted level and right is the boost one with no adjustments. 
Notice the sharpness loss in these, the camera was on a tripod with manual focus kept at same level in all 3 shots. 
The details are quite muddled suggesting your lossing something here, its almost like you are trying to extract details but not getting enough light, its exactly what this is. 
I read that some people suggested it gives you 1 - 2 stop extra range, but at a sunny day at 160 bitrate you can already pull a few stops out of the shadows anyway with a LOG like settings or not, this RGB boost seems to present no advantages in those shadow details at all in fact there seems to be a loss of details. 

I've done some tests today. The camera was set to UHD, 25p, Gamma DR, -5 contrast, -7 sharpness, 16-235, sRGB. I compared different ISOs with and without RGB set to max (1.99). 
 
So what I found out:
All RGB channels at 1.99 increase exposure by 1 stop (or very, very close to it);
Therefore ISO 1600 with RGB at 1.99, is the same exposure as ISO 3200 with RGB at 1;
It positively affects the inbuilt noise reduction. Seems like the NR really is triggered by ISO value and not the actual sensor gain;
It doesn't have any visible gains in highlights.
 
Here's the test. The password is - rgb .
Here you can download the edited test file, if you would like to take a closer look - https://failiem.lv/u/xvgh44ks
 

I wish you did a test with Samsung NX1 using bitrate hack seeing how it does improve 120fps 1080p footage substantially. 

"Samsung has profitable growth, but it is currently collecting the fruits of work and technology developed in the past years."
These Samsung statements are also in line with the success of Samsung NX cameras that are still current despite their technology being stays at three years ago.
With the arrival of the new CEO, I hope that Samsung will reflect on the possibility of sharing with the production of NX cameras.
https://www.ndtv.com/business/samsung-electronics-ceo-kwon-oh-hyun-to-step-down-1762342

Aputure Dec Canon lens control is not autofocus but this is better of Metabones Speedbooster for who use the Samsung NX1 camera to shoot video.
 It's nice control the lens with grip, in wifi you can control the lens with camera on the drone or on the crane.
The price it's the same and if you want you can buy the Aputure Dec after new or used and assembly it yourself.
The system it's made for reassembly the Aputure Dec like original.
In this time it's a prototype but the work it's in the end road.
I can't make more. this is the max I can make for take to live this spectacular camera. 
Thank's.

Put together a little review of the DP3 Quattro.
Contains +20 samples.
 

After a full day with nothing but the DP3Q I must say, despite it being Sigma and a 75mm eq it was quite the street performer.
(Pun absolutely intended  )

I would disagree with you on the points that Samsung's own store did not sell them and the employees who worked there never heard of NX1.
I worked at Samsung's OWN store as a sales associate in London where we have seen the NX1 and got trained on it month before the release of this camera. I was the first person to sell the NX1 on the launch day.
I bought the NX1 (display unit) that was being used in the store as training purposes by us and to show customers after the store shut down on December 23rd.
I'm still using it and I bought another NX1 just few months ago to use it as backup or B-cam.
Used the NX1 last month on a wedding. The footage came out astonishing. I also had the Sony A7S II, but it was resting inside the bag most of the time. Prefer to shoot with the NX1 more.

I wish you did a test with Samsung NX1 using bitrate hack seeing how it does improve 120fps 1080p footage substantially. 

I jumped ship, sold my NX1 16-50S & 50-150S. I purchased the a7ii (returned it, I really like 4k recording and this didn't have it), a6500 (still have it, I love the eye AF but the camera is just too small for my hands) and tried the a7rii (returned it, picture quality was good but camera operation was too slow).  I am really thinking about purchasing the NX1 again as the only reason i sold it was because I was afraid that if I needed service, no one could repair it. I loved everything about the NX1 the operation, handling and the picture color/quality. The NX1 was easier to take photos with. Also, I can't afford Sony's 2.8 lenses.  So I'm also trying to decide to if I should buy the NX1 again.

So I took the camera out in the nature when there was a lot of light hitting the Foveon censor thinking that this behaves a lot like old CCD sensors, if you do not feed them enough light they start to suffer.
As someone suggested I took these at F5.6 to give them both fair chance. Both the Samsung NX1 and the Sigma SD Quattro are shot at ISO 100 and same lens range, same everything including standard picture profiles, nothing is touched on in Photoshop just cropped. turned off Sigma PhotoPro 6 noise reduction when exporting X3F RAW files to JPEG.
And as I suspected, the Foveon was not getting enough light, the Sigma F2.8 lens is definitely nowhere near the premium glass of Samsung F2-2.8 16-50mm S lens. 
The Sigma absolutely destroys the Samsung in resolution and I noticed how the Sigma seem to get more in focus than the Samsung does, straight out the bat the colour resolution seem to be superior on the Sigma but if you turn up colour vibrancy on Samsung raw files they start to match very closely, amazing technology for Samsung part but again CMOS weakness shows, green bias and lack of details in red colour spectrum.
 
LEFT Samsung NX1 - RIGHT Sigma SD Quattro

 
LEFT Samsung NX1 - RIGHT Sigma SD Quattro

 
LEFT Samsung NX1 - MIDDLE Sigma SD Quattr - RIGHT Samsung NX1 Photoshop Match

 
This is by no means scientific tests but they are field tests and I always believe that field tests show more in practicality than some lab room tests but the Sigma SD Quattro in the right hands and in the right conditions is a superior camera however its not versatile and the NX1 will destroy it in multi use from low light to harsher conditions and so on. 
Still, its a real fun camera to use, its like shooting film, you just have to breath in and have patience the AF system is pretty slow too and its pretty hard to pull focus on the awful sets of display units you have at your disposal. 
Someone mentioned the Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro, one of the last DSLR's with a CCD sensor, like Foveon these tend to provide a more organic image than CMOS.
I been looking to acquire one, they go for pretty good prices on eBay and in pristine condition from Japan. Just like Foveon though they have shit low light performance and are only good when there is lots of lights or at lower ISO's, the FinePix is suppose to deliver amazing colours however, of most CMOS sensors I think Samsung has the nicest colours however you still notice its CMOS because the way it handles greens and reds and how clinical it is at times. 

I disagree the Nikons seem to do better than the Samsung NX1, I am talking APS-C sensor cameras at the same time of release, the Sammy seem to loose a lot of dynamic range at higher ISO's, yes its got good ISO performance comparable to most cameras but the colour accuracy seem to suggest that dynamic range at higher ISO's had to be sacrificed, you have to consider that in order to capture more light you have to make it extract less information of course the NX1 has a BSI sensor on the top of that which suggests that without BSI it would suffer even greater, the Nikons at the time does not have BSI but they do have lower megapixel count, 24 compared to 28. 
Cramming lots of pixels on the sensor will also mean its less light sensitive as more pixels need more light hence why Sony A7s is only 12 megapixels, less pixels on a large sensor usually means brighter images. 
Not that I am complaining that much, but it reminds me a little of the CCD days, I just wish the dynamic range did not drop so rapidly when hitting 800 ISO.

I agree.  Everyone applauds Canon for their colors, but my NX1's colors look way more natural and pleasant than my Canon 80D's colors.

Samsung keeps hiring old Japanese engineers, designers and other talented people who are "honourably" fired from Japanese Corporations because the new generation must replace the old.
And this is the result, Samsung is destroying Japanese Corporations, Sony fired a lot of elderly extremely talented people and Korean Corporations fished them in. 
Having tried several cameras it seems that Samsung NX1 and NX500 trades high ISO performance for superior extremely high colour reproduction. 
So while having very bad ISO performance in general with huge drops when reaching 800 ISO and beyond, the colour reproduction at lower ISO is superior to most cameras I have tested so far, even the Sony big megapixel beasts cannot seem to keep up. The Sammy's do what other CMOS bayer sensors struggle with the most, capturing accurate autumn colours.
Even Sigma SD Quattro with Foveon censor seem to struggle very hard to keep up with Sammy censor.

Samsung keeps hiring old Japanese engineers, designers and other talented people who are "honourably" fired from Japanese Corporations because the new generation must replace the old.
And this is the result, Samsung is destroying Japanese Corporations, Sony fired a lot of elderly extremely talented people and Korean Corporations fished them in. 
Having tried several cameras it seems that Samsung NX1 and NX500 trades high ISO performance for superior extremely high colour reproduction. 
So while having very bad ISO performance in general with huge drops when reaching 800 ISO and beyond, the colour reproduction at lower ISO is superior to most cameras I have tested so far, even the Sony big megapixel beasts cannot seem to keep up. The Sammy's do what other CMOS bayer sensors struggle with the most, capturing accurate autumn colours.
Even Sigma SD Quattro with Foveon censor seem to struggle very hard to keep up with Sammy censor.

Samsung keeps hiring old Japanese engineers, designers and other talented people who are "honourably" fired from Japanese Corporations because the new generation must replace the old.
And this is the result, Samsung is destroying Japanese Corporations, Sony fired a lot of elderly extremely talented people and Korean Corporations fished them in. 
Having tried several cameras it seems that Samsung NX1 and NX500 trades high ISO performance for superior extremely high colour reproduction. 
So while having very bad ISO performance in general with huge drops when reaching 800 ISO and beyond, the colour reproduction at lower ISO is superior to most cameras I have tested so far, even the Sony big megapixel beasts cannot seem to keep up. The Sammy's do what other CMOS bayer sensors struggle with the most, capturing accurate autumn colours.
Even Sigma SD Quattro with Foveon censor seem to struggle very hard to keep up with Sammy censor.

I think you are right.  Just film is making me broke!
Shot this on Kodak Ultramax 400.
I don't know if the Nikon D80 is going to get there
 

Its the removal lens camera, SD Quattro is their latest high end camera, I heard a lot of praise for the image quality it makes, however I cannot seem to find it any better than the Samsung NX500 or NX1.
Saturation is already insane compared to what I usually use on my Sammy cameras. 
Maybe Samsung just have an exceptional high tech sensor with colour reproduction prioritisation in exchange for high ISO performance.
I will do some more tests, I prefer real world tests and its a good time to be testing these cameras as its closing in on autumn that means lots of nice colours that CMOS bayer seem to struggle heavily with.
If anyone got any good advice I be happy to listen to what I am doing wrong if I am doing wrong.

NX1's AF was the second best back then, not that further away from Canon's, and still I prefer it from Sony's for video (so in my opinion, it is still the second best!). Samsung was nothing to Canon back then, the smaller players were afraid the most (Olympus, Fuji, Panasonic mainly; Sony was worried, and Nikon would have been doomed). Olympus and Fuji haven't the resources to fight Samsung, Nikon can't compete in the new digital age, and even Panasonic is much smaller than Samsung.
Sony is powerful, but Samsung had some amazing R&D breakthroughs, and the capacity to manufacture EVERYTHING you need for a photo/video camera (CPUs, RAMs, lenses, Super AMOLED touch screens, everything). First 28mpxls BSI sensor (A7Rii was the second big sensored BSI actually) etc etc.
Samsung just decided that they didn't want to compete on a declining market, and pro video/photography was a long shot. NX1 was too late in the game.
It is just a pity that we didn't see a NX1mkII, they did the first version SOOOOO good, without any prior real practical experience. The NX team had some truly talented and passionate people (just check some of their older corporate videos), something that a huge capitalistic and autocratic mega-trust, couldn't allow to exist.

Hi Kino, In relation to this I think it changes little if the heir of Samsung is in prison.
The data is clear, Samsung's strategy to focus their employees on commercial products and smartphones has proved to be a great success.
http://www.bgr.in/news/samsung-records-85-percent-jump-in-profit-in-q2-2017/
I just hope that Samsung (also for a prestigious issue) continues to shoot professional cameras with NX2 release, also because Red has decided to enter smathphone market with Red Hydrogen damaging the Samsung Galaxy market , So I hope that Samsung to discourage Red (which has 100% sales of professional video cameras) is to produce professional cameras and camcorders, for professionals, invading Red's market.
These are just my considerations, but the only certainty I have is that if Samsung comes out of a new professional camera, whoever has a Samsung camera will definitely run to buy it.

I remember that someone posted a post here showing the effects high bitrate had on macro blocking, personally I never experienced macro blocking anymore with 140mbps bitrate as its the most stable one with autofocus and everything on, if you turn off autofocus and sound you can push it to stupid levels like 220mbps is the highest I ever got before it gets unstable.
It speaks for itself, you probably remember the macro blocking issue before Samsung increased the bitrate through firmware update, I still got old footage with horrendous macro blocking before the first firmware rolled out. 
I shot a lot of 140mbps bitrate video on Crete when I was there last year, did not notice any macroblocking that would cause issues for me and this is with in-camera picture profiles, the last one I pushed saturation to 10 just to see how much the codec could handle, seem to have handled the colours just fine, skin colour is a disaster though when you start experimenting with the picture profiles.

NX1 & NX500 Calm – Type 801 - R1.00 G0.95 B1.00 | 3 Sat | -10 Sharp | -1 Contr | -6 Hue | 16-255

NX1 & NX500 Standard – Type 006 - R1.00 G0.95 B1.00 | 3 Sat | -10 Sharp | -1 Contr | 6 Hue | 0-255

NX1 & NX500 Standard – Type 005 - R1.00 G0.95 B1.00 | 10 Sat | -10 Sharp | 8 Contr | -3 Hue | 0-255

Camera will only do reliably 140mbps with autofocus + audio + lens stabiliser.
So far I never seen anyone do a proper test with 140mbps vs 250mbps or 300mbps.
I was thinking about doing one but since you practically have to disable everything in order to shoot above 200mbps, it was never worth it for me.
I would suggest if you tried yourself, go find something with lots of contrasts, and then do 140mbps, 160mbps, 200mbps, 250mbps and 320mbps if you can get  it working that fast.
Then start pulling some shadow to and zoom in on the details, I got the Lexar Professional 2000x, if you cannot do this I might spare some time and try. 
 
If you plan on getting a faster SD card, look at this review, Lexar is still the King but Toshiba is catching up, SanDisk is awful reliability issues.
https://havecamerawilltravel.com/photographer/fastest-sd-cards/

Camera will only do reliably 140mbps with autofocus + audio + lens stabiliser.
So far I never seen anyone do a proper test with 140mbps vs 250mbps or 300mbps.
I was thinking about doing one but since you practically have to disable everything in order to shoot above 200mbps, it was never worth it for me.
I would suggest if you tried yourself, go find something with lots of contrasts, and then do 140mbps, 160mbps, 200mbps, 250mbps and 320mbps if you can get  it working that fast.
Then start pulling some shadow to and zoom in on the details, I got the Lexar Professional 2000x, if you cannot do this I might spare some time and try. 
 
If you plan on getting a faster SD card, look at this review, Lexar is still the King but Toshiba is catching up, SanDisk is awful reliability issues.
https://havecamerawilltravel.com/photographer/fastest-sd-cards/