SMGJohn

I agree with you John, I think it is better complete control of Canon lenses that partial control of all lenses, but I have to look ahead and work on a long-life project.
You have the website of this guy who built this conversion board? My project is different but it could be a useful see his work.

Is it impossible at this stage to make an electronic adapter? 
Techart Pro with electric connection to lens for stabiliser would be amazing, its no point if the electronic lens is not activated and it just adjusted it as if was a manual lens, there was a guy who managed to make the Samsung communicate with Canon lenses with a conversion board. 

I have reflected on the possibility of building a smart adapter,
But before working on this project I would like to ask you friends of the forum, which would you prefer:
1) Aputure Dec
2) Techart Pro
Aputure Dec has the advantage of remote manual control, no mechanism on the adapter, built-in battery, open the iris and the display showing the iris aperture values.
Disadvantages, it works only with Canon EF lenses.
Techart Pro has the extraordinary advantage of transforming all manual lenses with auto focus lenses, and since the thickness can mount almost all existing lenses.
Disadvantages, can not adjust the aperture of the iris of Canon EF lenses, no remote control.
This question is not an official communication to work on Autofocus system to Samsung, this depends on the time and money that I can spend, I just want to do a survey to see what you prefer.
I look forward to hearing your opinions.
- write 1) for Apture Dec; 
- write 2) for Techart Pro.
Thank you

Sorry for the delay, good to hear you have a solution, if you know anyone with a longer lens or a store that has one, maybe you could please test on a 600 or 800 lens.  Here are the images with the 1st version NX-L attached.  5707:Canon 400mm f/2.8 IS L version one,  5708:Sigma 150-600 Sport @150mm, 5709:Sigma 150-600 Sport @600mm, 5710:Tamron 75-300 Vi DC?...mumbo jumbo the latest one @75mm, 5712:Tamron 75-300@100mm, 5713:Tamron 75-300@135mm, 5714:Tamron 75-300@200mm, 5715:Tamron 75-300mm@300mm, 5716:Canon 400mm f/5.6 L.  
5722:Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art glassless adapter, 5723:Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art with NX-L  Focus is on front edge of the door, sharpness is retained quite well. Vignetting is much worse in the NX-L shot, but in this case it is in my opinion just from seeing more of the image circle here, though I should double check against a FF body just in case.  It's just vignette, not so much like the total corner blackout on the telephotos. 
Hmm, having trouble uploading my shot of the 400 f/5.6 on the 5DSR.  Maybe file/size limit per post, will retry in a separate post. 
 

https://www.produzionidalbasso.com/project/samsung-nx-camera-to-full-frame-with-nxl-adapter/
This one is the V2??

I'm having both.... keeping nx1, selling a7s... buying gh5.
Adios Sony..... will be happy to see you leave.
I love the nx1... will be great alongside the gh5

Can you mark the new release with a v2 at least? So I know I buy the latest version and not the old one.
Yes I too hope Samsung stops being fools and restart production of their new camera. 

I Spent many nights to create the NXL, I started with a vision and with the contribution of all those who have bought and tried I could improve it.
The boards of all were useful, I alone could not test it with all the lenses and detect the defects, a project carried out in crowdfunding is this.
To answer your question, I must tell you that in reality this would be the Mark XXX version, but I prefer to stick to the NXL version.
Currently, the construction costs are very high because it has made in Italy and in a limited number of pieces, so I can not reduce the price, but it remains a good investment given the rarity of the piece, maybe will be revaluated as anamorphic lenses.
 ALSO I AM SURE THAT SAMSUNG RESUME PRODUCTION OF CAMERAS JUST HAVE INTERNAL PROBLEMS SOLVED AND REORGANIZED THEIR COMPANY.

I had no Idea... here you go
https://www.ifixit.com/Device/Samsung_NX1
Now get to work making an active ef mount!      

You honestly might just get the KineMAX 6k for a similar price tag and enjoy 6k RAW video or 2k 200+fps 

One thing the Panasonics have going for them since the G7 is workable ISO up to 3200, and no I am not pulling this one out of my back. Have a look for yourself:
 

All NX1 + Helios 58 f2

It seems the camera industry is moving away from enthusiast photographers to professionals for full steam now, the reason why I think the NX series did so badly is because they were targeting regular people like smartphone users instead of the professionals. 
I come to a point in my life were having the latest and best is vanity, I had my Xperia Z for almost 4 years now and I see that I rarely use it for much else than what you would not be able to do in a low end device anyway, sure it may not have the fastest processor out there and not the greatest camera even for its own class back then, but it gets the job done.
The same goes for my camera, its materialistic obsessive to continue purchasing newer and newer products because you want the quality to be superior, its not true a good camera wont make you a good photographer, its the way you use that camera that makes you a good photographer, whether your work turns out good or not. 
I seen modern Chinese movies shot with 16mm Soviet cameras you can get off eBay for like 80 dollars and these movies have better cinematography than most Hollywood movies and they were a lot more enjoyable story wise too. 
GH5 looks like a good camera no doubt and price wise is very good as well 1999 dollars for such great features? Its a steal if you ask me. 
But I too used to be like "Quality matters" but I had time to use my NX1 now which in a few months now is almost 3 years old, think about that for a second, over 2 years old and still produces excellent images and video, the hack has also done a lot for us but it would been even better if they managed to make it spit out MJPEG's with little to no in-camera processing specially making it shoot 2160p60, but I wont complain they did an excellent job non the less. 
I for one wont be upgrading for a long while, this camera will stay with me for at least 6 years in total, and one day I will use it for a full feature film, I grew up with Soviet cinema and I know that masterpieces are not dependant on camera equipment but only the ingenuity if their production crews. 
This does not mean a shitty Nokia phone camera is the tool for the job, there is of course a limit and there always will be, for photography most pro photographers seem to say that around 4 to 6 megapixels is really the sweet spot for digital delivery but if you go print you must go higher, 1080p seems to be that sweet spot too, even though 35mm produces up to 6k digital prints if it is low clean ISO film, 1080p still looks great even on a big screen but for me 2k is minimum in a cinema, most cinema projectors are only 2k too. 
Its been a while since 4k has been out and overall the adoption of 4k screens is very slow still, 1080p came out for the first time in the late 80s, you can start to imagine now how long it will be before 4k is universal standard for everything. They did not even start to get serious about 1080p until 2006 when Blu Ray was being released despite there being a delivery format that supported HD delivery in the 90s like the D-VHS and MuseLD.
Another thing I noticed, majority of movies and TV-series are produced at low cost and quality is not generally very important, often they just rent big 4k cameras without giving much about its capabilities as long as it just shoots the resolution they are happy enough. 
Also most Hollywood films these days are shot behind green screens and more time is spent in the editing rooms than the scene. 
A good camera is not essential these days even in the industry as most movies uses low range colours and shadows and purposely crushed, video for TV are usually decapitated before being broadcasted in order to limit the bitrate they often kill colour depth and destroy dynamic range to fit it in the standard hence they end up looking very greyish. 

Not sure but a simple button push will let you use focus peaking anyway, Kinoseed one remembers your focus position after restart with wirefocus lenses if you set it in the options.
Kinoseed one is the slowest to load but its packed with features, the Vasile one is more video oriented and its as fast as a vanilla NX1/NX500 

Gh5, a7s2, i know that i m totaly crazy but...last week...i've buyed another nx1 body with...16-50 2-2.8...all of the other cameras have somenthing better than my sam...but..i really love the image that i can obtain with this "old" piece of electronic...

True I never liked the MFT sensor size, I always been APS-C guy, full frames were usually heavy and bulky until the Sony A7 series came out but those are plagued by horrible ergonomic designs and a menu that reminds me of early Windows 3.1 days. 
It seems to be most manufacturers keep compromising one things all the time, GH5 looks very nice in video department, but its probably going to get outdone in photography by even the NX500

Not sure but a simple button push will let you use focus peaking anyway, Kinoseed one remembers your focus position after restart with wirefocus lenses if you set it in the options.
Kinoseed one is the slowest to load but its packed with features, the Vasile one is more video oriented and its as fast as a vanilla NX1/NX500 

I might take another look at the gh5 in the summertime once it has been out in the wild for a while and recieved all the promised firmware updates and features fully added. I can't really see myself getting one new though, $2k plus a $650 speed booster (a must-have for m43 in my opinion) means it's not exactly a cheap option to move right over to.
My NX1 and NX500 continue to astound me, especially now that I have one of Luca's super awesome NX-L's to play with. IQ wise, for me, the files coming out of the Samsung's have more than enough dynamic range, detail, color, and yes even low-light ability (with a fast lens I just very rarely need anything higher than 1600). I had a wedding shoot earlier this week with awesome results and I'm shooting a short film tomorrow with them and am fully confident in their ability to capture great images.
I will certainly be very jealous of the 4k 60p, 10-bit color and super cool 6k 4:3 anamorphic mode that GH5 users are going to get to play with though.
 

It seems the camera industry is moving away from enthusiast photographers to professionals for full steam now, the reason why I think the NX series did so badly is because they were targeting regular people like smartphone users instead of the professionals. 
I come to a point in my life were having the latest and best is vanity, I had my Xperia Z for almost 4 years now and I see that I rarely use it for much else than what you would not be able to do in a low end device anyway, sure it may not have the fastest processor out there and not the greatest camera even for its own class back then, but it gets the job done.
The same goes for my camera, its materialistic obsessive to continue purchasing newer and newer products because you want the quality to be superior, its not true a good camera wont make you a good photographer, its the way you use that camera that makes you a good photographer, whether your work turns out good or not. 
I seen modern Chinese movies shot with 16mm Soviet cameras you can get off eBay for like 80 dollars and these movies have better cinematography than most Hollywood movies and they were a lot more enjoyable story wise too. 
GH5 looks like a good camera no doubt and price wise is very good as well 1999 dollars for such great features? Its a steal if you ask me. 
But I too used to be like "Quality matters" but I had time to use my NX1 now which in a few months now is almost 3 years old, think about that for a second, over 2 years old and still produces excellent images and video, the hack has also done a lot for us but it would been even better if they managed to make it spit out MJPEG's with little to no in-camera processing specially making it shoot 2160p60, but I wont complain they did an excellent job non the less. 
I for one wont be upgrading for a long while, this camera will stay with me for at least 6 years in total, and one day I will use it for a full feature film, I grew up with Soviet cinema and I know that masterpieces are not dependant on camera equipment but only the ingenuity if their production crews. 
This does not mean a shitty Nokia phone camera is the tool for the job, there is of course a limit and there always will be, for photography most pro photographers seem to say that around 4 to 6 megapixels is really the sweet spot for digital delivery but if you go print you must go higher, 1080p seems to be that sweet spot too, even though 35mm produces up to 6k digital prints if it is low clean ISO film, 1080p still looks great even on a big screen but for me 2k is minimum in a cinema, most cinema projectors are only 2k too. 
Its been a while since 4k has been out and overall the adoption of 4k screens is very slow still, 1080p came out for the first time in the late 80s, you can start to imagine now how long it will be before 4k is universal standard for everything. They did not even start to get serious about 1080p until 2006 when Blu Ray was being released despite there being a delivery format that supported HD delivery in the 90s like the D-VHS and MuseLD.
Another thing I noticed, majority of movies and TV-series are produced at low cost and quality is not generally very important, often they just rent big 4k cameras without giving much about its capabilities as long as it just shoots the resolution they are happy enough. 
Also most Hollywood films these days are shot behind green screens and more time is spent in the editing rooms than the scene. 
A good camera is not essential these days even in the industry as most movies uses low range colours and shadows and purposely crushed, video for TV are usually decapitated before being broadcasted in order to limit the bitrate they often kill colour depth and destroy dynamic range to fit it in the standard hence they end up looking very greyish. 

It seems the camera industry is moving away from enthusiast photographers to professionals for full steam now, the reason why I think the NX series did so badly is because they were targeting regular people like smartphone users instead of the professionals. 
I come to a point in my life were having the latest and best is vanity, I had my Xperia Z for almost 4 years now and I see that I rarely use it for much else than what you would not be able to do in a low end device anyway, sure it may not have the fastest processor out there and not the greatest camera even for its own class back then, but it gets the job done.
The same goes for my camera, its materialistic obsessive to continue purchasing newer and newer products because you want the quality to be superior, its not true a good camera wont make you a good photographer, its the way you use that camera that makes you a good photographer, whether your work turns out good or not. 
I seen modern Chinese movies shot with 16mm Soviet cameras you can get off eBay for like 80 dollars and these movies have better cinematography than most Hollywood movies and they were a lot more enjoyable story wise too. 
GH5 looks like a good camera no doubt and price wise is very good as well 1999 dollars for such great features? Its a steal if you ask me. 
But I too used to be like "Quality matters" but I had time to use my NX1 now which in a few months now is almost 3 years old, think about that for a second, over 2 years old and still produces excellent images and video, the hack has also done a lot for us but it would been even better if they managed to make it spit out MJPEG's with little to no in-camera processing specially making it shoot 2160p60, but I wont complain they did an excellent job non the less. 
I for one wont be upgrading for a long while, this camera will stay with me for at least 6 years in total, and one day I will use it for a full feature film, I grew up with Soviet cinema and I know that masterpieces are not dependant on camera equipment but only the ingenuity if their production crews. 
This does not mean a shitty Nokia phone camera is the tool for the job, there is of course a limit and there always will be, for photography most pro photographers seem to say that around 4 to 6 megapixels is really the sweet spot for digital delivery but if you go print you must go higher, 1080p seems to be that sweet spot too, even though 35mm produces up to 6k digital prints if it is low clean ISO film, 1080p still looks great even on a big screen but for me 2k is minimum in a cinema, most cinema projectors are only 2k too. 
Its been a while since 4k has been out and overall the adoption of 4k screens is very slow still, 1080p came out for the first time in the late 80s, you can start to imagine now how long it will be before 4k is universal standard for everything. They did not even start to get serious about 1080p until 2006 when Blu Ray was being released despite there being a delivery format that supported HD delivery in the 90s like the D-VHS and MuseLD.
Another thing I noticed, majority of movies and TV-series are produced at low cost and quality is not generally very important, often they just rent big 4k cameras without giving much about its capabilities as long as it just shoots the resolution they are happy enough. 
Also most Hollywood films these days are shot behind green screens and more time is spent in the editing rooms than the scene. 
A good camera is not essential these days even in the industry as most movies uses low range colours and shadows and purposely crushed, video for TV are usually decapitated before being broadcasted in order to limit the bitrate they often kill colour depth and destroy dynamic range to fit it in the standard hence they end up looking very greyish. 

It seems the camera industry is moving away from enthusiast photographers to professionals for full steam now, the reason why I think the NX series did so badly is because they were targeting regular people like smartphone users instead of the professionals. 
I come to a point in my life were having the latest and best is vanity, I had my Xperia Z for almost 4 years now and I see that I rarely use it for much else than what you would not be able to do in a low end device anyway, sure it may not have the fastest processor out there and not the greatest camera even for its own class back then, but it gets the job done.
The same goes for my camera, its materialistic obsessive to continue purchasing newer and newer products because you want the quality to be superior, its not true a good camera wont make you a good photographer, its the way you use that camera that makes you a good photographer, whether your work turns out good or not. 
I seen modern Chinese movies shot with 16mm Soviet cameras you can get off eBay for like 80 dollars and these movies have better cinematography than most Hollywood movies and they were a lot more enjoyable story wise too. 
GH5 looks like a good camera no doubt and price wise is very good as well 1999 dollars for such great features? Its a steal if you ask me. 
But I too used to be like "Quality matters" but I had time to use my NX1 now which in a few months now is almost 3 years old, think about that for a second, over 2 years old and still produces excellent images and video, the hack has also done a lot for us but it would been even better if they managed to make it spit out MJPEG's with little to no in-camera processing specially making it shoot 2160p60, but I wont complain they did an excellent job non the less. 
I for one wont be upgrading for a long while, this camera will stay with me for at least 6 years in total, and one day I will use it for a full feature film, I grew up with Soviet cinema and I know that masterpieces are not dependant on camera equipment but only the ingenuity if their production crews. 
This does not mean a shitty Nokia phone camera is the tool for the job, there is of course a limit and there always will be, for photography most pro photographers seem to say that around 4 to 6 megapixels is really the sweet spot for digital delivery but if you go print you must go higher, 1080p seems to be that sweet spot too, even though 35mm produces up to 6k digital prints if it is low clean ISO film, 1080p still looks great even on a big screen but for me 2k is minimum in a cinema, most cinema projectors are only 2k too. 
Its been a while since 4k has been out and overall the adoption of 4k screens is very slow still, 1080p came out for the first time in the late 80s, you can start to imagine now how long it will be before 4k is universal standard for everything. They did not even start to get serious about 1080p until 2006 when Blu Ray was being released despite there being a delivery format that supported HD delivery in the 90s like the D-VHS and MuseLD.
Another thing I noticed, majority of movies and TV-series are produced at low cost and quality is not generally very important, often they just rent big 4k cameras without giving much about its capabilities as long as it just shoots the resolution they are happy enough. 
Also most Hollywood films these days are shot behind green screens and more time is spent in the editing rooms than the scene. 
A good camera is not essential these days even in the industry as most movies uses low range colours and shadows and purposely crushed, video for TV are usually decapitated before being broadcasted in order to limit the bitrate they often kill colour depth and destroy dynamic range to fit it in the standard hence they end up looking very greyish. 

https://github.com/ottokiksmaler/nx500_nx1_modding/tree/master/nx-on-wake
https://github.com/ottokiksmaler/nx500_nx1_modding/tree/master/video-bitrate-mods/nx-patch
https://www.facebook.com/NXKS2/

I agree, RAW is not the easy road... if you enjoy color grading it has some nice benefits though. I enjoy the luxury of slow turn-around on most of my projects, so it's workable.
Putting the absurd consumption of hard-drive space aside, if you take the RAW straight into DaVinci Resolve it plays smooth and works well. Once inside the editor, I can't tell the difference between RAW and a MP4 as far as playback is concerned... and my computer isn't that fast. I'm running the old 8-core amd and a somewhat modern radeon graphics card.
Camera gear aside... framing your shots and lighting are certainly the most important for good looking shots. Also, audio is more than half the battle. I worry more about audio quality than anything else.
---
On a separate note, after tinkering and testing, my NX1 seems to record stably at the 190 bit rate. Again, that's on manual with vintage M42 lenses, so no auto-focus/image stabilization, etc.
---
Lastly, I'm working on the next Carry Trainer episode now. The NX1 footage with my Super Takumar 24mm F/3.5 lens looks impressive right out of camera so far. I'll have more on that soon...

This month has been terrible for shipments. I had some parts still in customs for almost a month, only yesterday they passed through customs!
Pictures by @carlic