Parker

I'll give you my take:

The NX1 is very useable at 1600, in my opinion, that's really the highest I ever have to go with fast glass and a speedbooster. I'll use 3200 in a pinch, but that's honestly more light than I need 95% of the time. There is no gamma DR on the NX500. Most of us NX junkies here on the forum have stopped using Gamma DR anyway, and run with a tweaked standard profile, but the NX500 also lacks a master black level control, so it is quite difficult to get a flat image to match the  NX1. 

Quirks that drive me crazy: You can't adjust the focus punch-in; it's always right to the middle of the image, which is really annoying. Can't do it while recording either. Also, the EVF can't be toggled during recording, you either choose to use it or you don't, the only mirrorless cam I have played with that does this. No mic input on the NX500 also. 

Preamps on the NX1 are great, head and shoulders better than Canon. Autofocus seems about the same between the two cams. It's no dual-pixel, but very reliable during talking heads, interviews, that kind of thing, and I use it on a gimbal without a problem. I actually like the EVF much better on the NX1 than the Sony cameras, and the screen is way, way better as well. Sony screens and EVFs seem very mushy and soft to me, and peaking is basically useless. The NX1 is far superior in that regard. I've never used a Fuji camera, so I can't comment there. 

As Mountneer said above, the hack doesn't change rolling shutter at all. My favorite features are the bitrate hack of course, and allowing silent shutter on the NX500, which makes it rule as small, portable timelapse camera. The ergonomics of both cameras, but especially the NX1, are just fantastic. Clear, easy to use menu system, comfortable in the hand-- I just can't give them up. I've been playing around with a GH5 at work quite a bit lately, and it's a cool camera, but... I still like my NX1 more! Good luck!

The really flat gamma settings can be harder to bring back contrast and beautiful color in post and don't really seem to increase dynamic range much over the tweaked standard profiles anyway, I don't know, most of us are probably using the above poster Ricardo's settings, because he clearly knows how to make that camera sing! 

I'd be very careful with DIS. The edges warp super easy and can ruin the footage. The only time I really use it is occasionally combined with the IS of the 16-50 S lens for some discreet handheld work, like if I'm filming in a store, somewhere without a permit, etc. Using it like that, it's rock-steady, just don't try panning like crazy with it, running around, etc. 

The really flat gamma settings can be harder to bring back contrast and beautiful color in post and don't really seem to increase dynamic range much over the tweaked standard profiles anyway, I don't know, most of us are probably using the above poster Ricardo's settings, because he clearly knows how to make that camera sing! 

I'd be very careful with DIS. The edges warp super easy and can ruin the footage. The only time I really use it is occasionally combined with the IS of the 16-50 S lens for some discreet handheld work, like if I'm filming in a store, somewhere without a permit, etc. Using it like that, it's rock-steady, just don't try panning like crazy with it, running around, etc. 

I'll give you my take:

The NX1 is very useable at 1600, in my opinion, that's really the highest I ever have to go with fast glass and a speedbooster. I'll use 3200 in a pinch, but that's honestly more light than I need 95% of the time. There is no gamma DR on the NX500. Most of us NX junkies here on the forum have stopped using Gamma DR anyway, and run with a tweaked standard profile, but the NX500 also lacks a master black level control, so it is quite difficult to get a flat image to match the  NX1. 

Quirks that drive me crazy: You can't adjust the focus punch-in; it's always right to the middle of the image, which is really annoying. Can't do it while recording either. Also, the EVF can't be toggled during recording, you either choose to use it or you don't, the only mirrorless cam I have played with that does this. No mic input on the NX500 also. 

Preamps on the NX1 are great, head and shoulders better than Canon. Autofocus seems about the same between the two cams. It's no dual-pixel, but very reliable during talking heads, interviews, that kind of thing, and I use it on a gimbal without a problem. I actually like the EVF much better on the NX1 than the Sony cameras, and the screen is way, way better as well. Sony screens and EVFs seem very mushy and soft to me, and peaking is basically useless. The NX1 is far superior in that regard. I've never used a Fuji camera, so I can't comment there. 

As Mountneer said above, the hack doesn't change rolling shutter at all. My favorite features are the bitrate hack of course, and allowing silent shutter on the NX500, which makes it rule as small, portable timelapse camera. The ergonomics of both cameras, but especially the NX1, are just fantastic. Clear, easy to use menu system, comfortable in the hand-- I just can't give them up. I've been playing around with a GH5 at work quite a bit lately, and it's a cool camera, but... I still like my NX1 more! Good luck!

Found another video this one is NX1 vs GH5 straight up... I believe hes a Korean brother... Figured I would post here rather than make a new thread...
It seems the NX-1 is way sharper (can be good or bad depending) and the 10bit color on GH5 does look a little "Thicker" but I could easily get them to match in resolve... 
also I dont think he has NX-1 is in standard color profile if you dont want to correct much it looks great.. 
Guess im not the only one going down with the Samsung ship!  Trapped in a velvet coffin!  
That is all..

This guy is doing a series comparing NX1, 5D4, GH5
only two so far he says more are coming 
slow mo+ rolling shutter= 
Auto focus+lowlight
 

No hate against Apple here, but I just don't see the point for myself. For others, yeah, it's a nice minimalistic hip approach to hardware/software and people from all walks of life would instantly be able to use one, because it's so intuitive. Creative people have more capacity for their art, because they've kept things simple and well integrated. If you don't do much more than reading e-mails, browsing the web and use Final Cut Pro, then, what else do you even need? The integration of devices within the eco system is pretty awesome.
But... I've been messing around with computers since forever. We had computers with screens that weren't black 'n white, they were black and green. They'd take these huge ass flopping around floppy disks that made crazy sounds when reading/writing. Our operating was just DOS you know. Windows 3.11 was breathtaking and I've seen everything from Windows 95 through Windows 10 Pro. Every now and then someone ditched a computer and I took the best parts out of 'em and put 'em together in one system. I'd gotten used to stuff needing a bit of knowledge and experience. But... you'd end up with something where you'd exactly know what's what. Same with Android smartphones and tablets, although that turned more to the software side of things (but also I have no problem changing a little circuit board with a messed-up microUSB-port that's not willing to charge the battery anymore, or switching out a cracked display), I used to run roots, recoveries, ports, decompile shit, flash it. Though, in all honesty, I'm glad we're now seeing OTA just about everywhere, because I just can't be arsed anymore. On the hardware side, you can get anything from dualSIM to expandable storage and IR blasters on 'em though.
Windows 10, it actually works really well for me and it gives me the freedom to indeed have options... on the hardware part: what kind of display do you want? Glossy? Matte? Touchscreen? FHD? QHD? What's the design supposed to look like? Do you want an optical drive? What connectivity do you prefer? And what is all of that allowed to cost? You get a sick Intel i7 core processor and Nvidia graphics card in systems that are super fair about the price. Then the options regarding software... I indeed get to run my more exotic programs... play games (though, I used to be able to find more time to actually play some, don't get to do much gaming these days) and just the whole freedom of how you want to use your computer and what the interface is like as well. Same with Android though, that might be too much choice for people, they don't like to occupy themselves with that kind of nonsense as their time is better spent. For people with a Windows background, there's nothing to get used to, they're fine with it and as one of those folks... I really don't want things pre-chewed and spoonfed to me. I like the messing about, options and control and wouldn't really have it any other way.
Then there's just the whole elitist/status that goes with Apple. I'm a practical kinda guy and I value value. So it just has to work and work well (for me). But a lot with Apple is spend solely on the name alone. You won't see me sitting in a Starbucks with a Macbook in front of me on the table. It's like a lifestyle accessory. Like a fancy watch (although, I kinda like watches, though I don't really see the practical value of a really really expensive one), or for girls: a Gucci hand bag or whatevz. So, I'll admit 'you know what, that looks quite nice', but I really am not getting urge to get one. But you know. It's cool that we're all different. Would be a boring place if we all had the same taste and opinion. Like, Apple people probably like the Bugatti Chiron... I'd rather get something more fun and less yacht like, like I don't know, a Koenigsegg Regera or something. Or that NIO (NextEV) EP9, now that's something else!
Anyways. Mac VS PC... you just do you. Just for the Mac users, I do hope that they'll get more PC-like freedom, power and value. Everything else... whatever works, works!

Those are some loud words. I generally find MacOS and many of its structural implementations retarded and counterintuitive. Especially when it comes to system configuration and file management (which are some of the primary OS functions) -- I find Windows so much more streamlined, efficient and nuanced. And coming from Amiga before this, I hated Microsoft and Windows and wanted to like Apple/Mac (mid-nineties, around System 7/Windows 95 time). Both were lousy at the time but I found Windows to be more flexible and everything changed with the release of XP, from then on I have never had a reason to look back.
The whole stability thing is a myth -- in the older times, both systems were crashing like crazy (and MacOS even didn't have task manager long since Windows already had it), and nowadays, from Windows 7 on, it's been perfectly stable. My uptime is weeks at a time and the only thing that ever crashes is Firefox when they're on a lousy build. While I have no reason to not believe people when they say they have had more problems with PC and coming to Mac has been liberating, there is no such thing in my experience. Neither I have had virus for at least a decade -- and I don't even have an antivirus program installed other than the built in Windows Defender. So I tend to think it's those users who are the problem rather than the perceived OS inferiority.
Of course, I am saying all this from a perspective of Windows user (although I am still forced to use MacOS now and then for work -- and asked to troubleshoot theirs by friends haha) and I respect everyone's choice of whatever works best for them. But the high-horse attitude of people like Wolf33d can really trip me off
BTW, writing this on a 2012 Sony Vaio machine which has seen upgrade (not a clean install) from Windows 7 to Windows 8 to Windows 8.1 to Windows 10 with no stability issues whatsoever and all drivers and software functioning perfectly.
I'd love to have a productivity battle including different tasks between myself and an expert MacOS user -- confident I'd win cause the Mac users only think it's so efficient and effective cause they don't know any better..

I've mentioned this before in other similar threads, but a few years back I did pretty exhaustive vari-ND research and eventually settled on the SLR Magic one others have mentioned. It's fantastic. No discernible cast of any kind, no X-patterns, no vignetting on wide angles, hard stops on either end so it doesn't just keep spinning all the way around, it's really just about perfect. The other one I had been looking at at the time was a genustech, but we have one at work now and it's kind of a pain to use and I like the SLR Magic much better (I have the original version, before they added the additional twisting polarizer thing on the front). But I just combined it with Xume magnetic filter holders so I can stick it on any lens I own in half a second, works fantastically. 

I've mentioned this before in other similar threads, but a few years back I did pretty exhaustive vari-ND research and eventually settled on the SLR Magic one others have mentioned. It's fantastic. No discernible cast of any kind, no X-patterns, no vignetting on wide angles, hard stops on either end so it doesn't just keep spinning all the way around, it's really just about perfect. The other one I had been looking at at the time was a genustech, but we have one at work now and it's kind of a pain to use and I like the SLR Magic much better (I have the original version, before they added the additional twisting polarizer thing on the front). But I just combined it with Xume magnetic filter holders so I can stick it on any lens I own in half a second, works fantastically. 

I wouldn't worry Juxx, looks like Luca is still busily at work, thank goodness.

I wouldn't worry Juxx, looks like Luca is still busily at work, thank goodness.

I wouldn't worry Juxx, looks like Luca is still busily at work, thank goodness.

They DO make weapons!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_SGR-A1
..and other stuff that kill people, for ever, they kill them forever. No replies, no up votes or down votes, just dead.

Until Edward Bernays effectively created 'Public Relations' based on concepts from his uncle, Sigmund Freud, marketing was based on people's actual needs. Bernays changed everything and marketing evolved into emotion and fantasy-illusion based and thus the world has been changed. Now marketing is based on emotion and desire, and not actual need for daily living or survival.
The Universe Loves Drama, so combined with the emotional-fantasy-based social reality we now live in, explains the current behavior of social interaction, especially in social media. It's enough of a challenge for logical thinkers to effectively communicate with emotional thinkers (and neither side being able to communicate with the other). It becomes a deeper communication challenge with the added fantasy layer, which affects everyone at some level (including me: for example I too used to believe in the 'Full Frame' look until I studied the math and performed my own tests). What we really 'know' changes with time and it's important to remember that.
Another interesting social element is that most of the people discussing cameras, and all gear for that matter, spend far less time creating with the tools than focusing on the tools themselves. The tools become a form of entertainment in and of themselves: playing with them, doing 'tests', debating online, discussing deficiencies in the current model(s) and yearning for the new model(s), buying and selling, etc. And for perhaps the vast majority, not actually creating any content other than writing, discussing, and debating the tools in social media. This is not a judgement, rather an observation of another form of creating and fellowship of like-minded enthusiasts: people who focus on the tools themselves for entertainment vs. using the tools to create content, for entertainment or for a living. Every now and then someone will post, "get out and shoot people!", but that's not why most of the people are on these forums.
The GH5 of course is a major improvement and is an excellent content-creation tool. Is it a baby ARRI? Who knows, let's see some side-by-side tests as were done with Canon 5D3 RAW, which with 14-bit Canon color is indeed like a baby Alexa as shown by various tests done over the years.

The perfect camera for jail-ees?
Read the full blog post

Just gonna leave this here, I saw this video earlier today and it seems relevant: 

http://www.diyphotography.net/make-ultra-lightweight-giant-scrims-diffusion-gels/ 

Rokinon 12mm f/2 in NX mount, it's the lens I have on my NX500 90% of the time. 

Samsung NX1 + Biotar 58mm F.2

 
Samsung NX1 + Biotar 58mm F.2 + NXL

 
Samsung NX1 + Biotar 58mm F.2 + NXL + Anamorphot 1.33

 

If anything, I'd expect some Super! Exciting! New! 1-inch sensor! mirrorless cam announcements from Nikon that nobody wants and nobody will buy. Then again, Nikon has revealed time and time again that they only really care about what Canon is doing, so maybe they go all out and try to rival the marvelous *cough* EOS M, since Canon is doing so well with those, right? I'm afraid they're not going to make it, which, sadly, will let Canon become even more dinosaur with their pricing and innovation without a direct DSLR competitor on the market.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see an awesome video-centric mirrorless Nikon just like the rest of you would, but I just don't think the video enthousiast market is big enough for these companies to bother with--or turn much of a profit on. We would all buy it, yes, but us camera/video/hybrid/mirrorless nerds are definitely not the most common demographic. Look at Canon, who happily ignores our pleas and survives and thrives with the intro-DSLR market, soccer moms and high school kids who go into Sam's Club or Best Buy and want to buy a "real camera". Most of the time the 18-55mm kit lens is the only one they ever use, and eventually it collects dust. Canon doesn't care, because that's their bread and butter! If Nikon is really planning to axe their lower-end camera lines, I just don't see that being a good move business-wise. Sure, there is higher mark-up and higher return on prosumer bodies, but also way less sales. Too little, too late, I'm afraid. 

If anything, I'd expect some Super! Exciting! New! 1-inch sensor! mirrorless cam announcements from Nikon that nobody wants and nobody will buy. Then again, Nikon has revealed time and time again that they only really care about what Canon is doing, so maybe they go all out and try to rival the marvelous *cough* EOS M, since Canon is doing so well with those, right? I'm afraid they're not going to make it, which, sadly, will let Canon become even more dinosaur with their pricing and innovation without a direct DSLR competitor on the market.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see an awesome video-centric mirrorless Nikon just like the rest of you would, but I just don't think the video enthousiast market is big enough for these companies to bother with--or turn much of a profit on. We would all buy it, yes, but us camera/video/hybrid/mirrorless nerds are definitely not the most common demographic. Look at Canon, who happily ignores our pleas and survives and thrives with the intro-DSLR market, soccer moms and high school kids who go into Sam's Club or Best Buy and want to buy a "real camera". Most of the time the 18-55mm kit lens is the only one they ever use, and eventually it collects dust. Canon doesn't care, because that's their bread and butter! If Nikon is really planning to axe their lower-end camera lines, I just don't see that being a good move business-wise. Sure, there is higher mark-up and higher return on prosumer bodies, but also way less sales. Too little, too late, I'm afraid. 

The Oscars are rubbish. These days, anyway.

I believe filmmaking is the most powerful art-form. It has the power to influence hearts and minds, and allow people to feel things - truly feel things.

I really believe filmmakng can make the world a better place by means of subjective immersion, empathetic response, and telling the story of the human-condition.

Hence, I think success is if your film allows viewers to feel raw emotion via empathy (even with the most questionable of characters), and allow viewers to learn/experience something new from their subjective interpretation of your film.

I say this in regards to narrative fiction filmmaking.
With documentary filmmaking, I have the same beliefs, but the responsibility of remaining objective on the filmmakers behalf is very important.

With documentaries, I believe filmmakers have an obligation to remain objective - to strictly document - like a James Nachtwey photo - for the sake of the truth. However, even then, no matter how objective a documentary maker remains, the viewer will ultimately determine their own truth by means of their own subjective interpretation/research - well, I hope they do, anyway.
 

Exactly what I want to do with the pistol grip! I want to bring the old super 8 flame back!

You should be aware that this is a religious discussion.  Comparisons, and discussions about comparisons, should be avoided and only discussed in private!

Canon EF mount for smart adapter.