ntblowz

Mercer is from one man band with low to zero budget production and unlimited time so he have different requirement than most people who do video as full time job and have tight schedule
 
For our company c200 is more preferred since its mostly internal video or YouTube/Vimeo, but for me if I want to be projects to be shown on TV/Netflix EVA1 is more suited for me need. (After using c100 for those boring jobs for sooo long my mindset is set, Canon for boring corporate stuff while sony/pana for exciting projects lol)

Sorry to hurt your feelings.
The GH5 looks like homevideo unless you filter it a lot in production and post production.

If the EVA1 looks like the GH5 I will buy the C200 with it's unprocessed RAW codec, which won't look like video since it's unprocessed.
If the EVA1 looks like the Varicam LT/35/HS I will buy the EVA1, since the Varicam LT/35/HS look like organic film since their lack of internal processing like sharpening, NR and what so ever, and of course it's 10 bit internal codec which will make editing and storage easy. And I agree, if this is the case, no manufacturer, not even Blackmagic, can compete.
 
 
You can easily see the ugly processing the C300 MKII does in the ungraded footage.
The Varicam looks like organic film while the C300 MKII looks cheap and processed (the original C300 was way more filmic). The C200 will provide internal RAW, which hopefully will be unprocessed. I see no issue here honestly. And we still don't know how many parts of GH5 technology the EVA1 will be made of. I honestly hope, none.
After watching the full comparison I can say:
- Canon color science doesn't even come close
- DR on Varicam as well as highlight rolloff is amazing, shadows are way cleaner, the C300 MKII looks almost like the GH5 in highlights...
- Ghosting and electronic grain on the C300 MKII in dark and low contrast areas.
 

C200 only record 4:2:0 8bit in mp4 format which is a bummer, no flexible 4:2:2 10bit in reasonable space. 4K raw only can shot 15 minute with 128GB card

C200 only record 4:2:0 8bit in mp4 format which is a bummer, no flexible 4:2:2 10bit in reasonable space. 4K raw only can shot 15 minute with 128GB card

C200 only record 4:2:0 8bit in mp4 format which is a bummer, no flexible 4:2:2 10bit in reasonable space. 4K raw only can shot 15 minute with 128GB card

Actor turned director have insight of how actor's head are thinking than someone coming from director's background. I met some people like that and they sure do get some good performance from the actors on stage.

Saw this on fb, looks like Panasonic gonna roll out professional service like cps, definitely good for us using it professionally

I'm not in the industry, but I'd hazard a guess that if you're a TV station or an educational institution or any of many other types of organisation looking to buy 50 or 100 cams you'd always go Canon, Sony or Panasonic and avoid BMD like the plague (what? You buy 50 cams and have to send 25 back for replacement?). Likewise, if you're doing anything where serious money is involved at the kind of level at which this new camera is aimed you would (if you have any sense) go for the platform that offers robust, quality products for which replacements are available within 12 hours tops. BMD seem to make great cameras, with lovely imagery - but they're just nowhere near the QC and ubiquity of supply necessary when deadlines have to be met and crews standing around waiting for stuff can't be afforded.

I mostly use native lens as I hate the wobble when doing critical focus with adapted lens and adapter, plus AF is crap with adapted lens and drain more battery.. Hence I have dual native Sony E mount and MFT lens lol.
Though I mostly buy 2nd hand lens which MFT is pure bargain (up there with Canon), Sony one is still more expensive, i can get both 12-40 and 35-100 2.8 for the price of one used Sony 70-200mm F4 OSS and still lighter.
18-105 on FS5 and Sony 28-135mm on A7S is my fav lens, too bad Pana doesn't have equivalent PZ lens on their setup which is a bummer.
I used to have Leica F1.2 and Voigtlander 0.95 lens, but since I got Osmo X5 I just use small primes for gimbal stuff as I mostly use zooms nowadays for my shooting, and don't shoot night much at all.
 

Maybe its the "Americanah Concept Trailer" it matches with the Specs and the Badroom.
These infos are given from User cantsin
Look at this example - according to its maker, it has been shot with a GH4 using the internal codec, Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8, 20mm F1.7 & 42.5mm F1.7 lenses, Tiffen Black Satin filter, three cheap Yongnuo LED lights and a Nebula 4000 gimbal

That's excellent. 
In all honesty, I don't actually like social media. While it's very useful for positive outcomes, it's absolutely battered with non-stop bollocks which makes it very difficult to see the hidden gems of content. 
The video industry is changing massively, and this is because of smartphones and social media. (I'm sure you all know about the square format!)
Brands aren't spending as much on video (or are just plain alienated by it), and industries such as music give you laughable budgets - even big labels with big artists. 
So businesses are opting for regular video content but at a short form level, instead of spending a million billion $€£ on one 'hero' video. 
We're now seeing a massive amount of Uber style video providers - where you basically press a few buttons and you get a video for fuck all money. (YouTube Director, Animoto, Ripl etc). 
Many companies and agencies are setting up video in-house, and makingbit themselves. So there's quite an emphasis on videographers / filmmakers now being a consultant, as well as a creator. 
If you're just starting out or growing, you have to go all guns blazing to be seen. Also it helps if you have something unique to offer. Social media is growing so we have to take advantage of the right platforms for our audience. 
YouTube is a great platform however it's massively competitive. There's so many uploads it's difficult to get your stuff viewed when searched organically. 
Facebook is growing immensely with video, and is a serious consideration. 
Main thing is, keep creating awesome stuff and be happy with what you're doing.  

The only work I've gotten via social media is making DCPs for indie filmmakers. But that doesn't exactly pay the bills. That's more for what my dad used to call "walkin' around money." My bread and butter is cutting featurettes and other marketing content for the major studios. And those jobs come from real life relationships. That being said, I've somehow put together 15,000+ film-industry related followers across FB, twitter and IG. Not a ton, but it has raised my profile enough that when I bring a film to a distributor, they already know who I am. And I think that helps curtail any lowball offers or shady practices, i assume because they know I have an audience -- not that I would wield my social media presence as a weapon, but you know. To me, this question boils down to "do you want a fighting chance to have people to see your work?" and I do. An active social media presence is not the only a powerful component to achieve that.

It's annoy to switch from normal to slowmo because now you found you have to stay back since composition changed 

It's annoy to switch from normal to slowmo because now you found you have to stay back since composition changed 

Yeah that the thing, we are shooters with different purpose and mindset, I for one shoot for economical gain so having cost control/time management is important as well.  If I do stuff for hobby/interest where time is unlimited then shooting raw seems to be fine, but not if you have deadline due for the client which is a different story.

I have FS5 which said to be better performance than FS700 but lowlight still outgunned by much cheaper A6300, FS700 can only be worse, I guess their good low light performance is for year 2012 and not year 2017

Says Kodak or Nokia...
 
But not releasing new camera often means the camera doesn't depreciate fast, so good for us camera buyer in a way

FS5's weakness is sensor is old and codec not solid, I know cause I own one, I also have A7RII which I can get better colour from a7rii than fs5 anyday, a7rII colour just feel more solid, though non compares to C100MKII which with a few tweak will have good colour even if straight from camera footage looks crap.
 
I know many people waiting for AF100 successor, me included, price is still within reach so thats ok lol (gonna trade my FS5 for it), I got GX85 and loads of M43 lens, also got Sigma 1.8 zoom lens on EF mount (for FS5). So what if new camera doesn't use mft, I can use it on GH5/GX85, but I know my sigma 1.8 zoom will be on new Pana camera so that works ok fine. 
 
And I hate native Sony lens because their MF is really terrible, that why I use Canon mount lens on FS5 for solid MF support, still dont know what the big fuss about af, I know AF lens suck ball when you try to use MF, they are totally unusable! Vice versa for Canon lens too, only STM lens have really nice AF (but suck MF) on C100MKII, L lens is only ok but I wouldn't rate it stellar and they make noise, but MF is reliable.

I dont care about RAW, that why I never bothered getting the $500 upgrade for unlimited RAW on my FS5, it doesn't fit to my business and doesn't make economical sense as well, I rather spend on that 120fps unlimited upgrade which is more useful.

Brought the 10-bit file into FCPX and rendered to ProRes, then brought into PP CC and quickly graded with Lumetri. With a little post looks reasonably organic.

Codec on FS5 is weak, that is my biggest beef, and sensor is from fs700 so performance not as good compare to newer modern sensor on Sony mirrorless cameras, I feel I get more solid colour from A7RII than 10bit 4:2:2 limited 50mbps xavs-l codec, but super slow mo wise nothing beat it for the price range (except 2nd hand fs700)
at work we use couple c100mkii and occasional c300mkii.. real work horse camera without exciting spec, and since I use it almost everyday to me they are just tools, dont get the big deal people keep praising them almost like worshiping lol.  And I hardly use AF with those, manual is still the way to go, unless camera connected to my brain lol

Poke the bear to find out as much as you can about http://www.43rumors.com/panasonic-teases-the-launch-of-a-new-mft-compact-cinema-camera/ ?

Looks like Panasonic 14mm 2.5 and Panasonic 14-42mm PZ lens is the best fit for Moondog, 14mm 2.5 slight vignetting but usable, 14-42mm PZ usable from 18mm and up, unlike Panasonic 14-42 II which only 35mm and up is usable.  Another guy tested 20mm 1.7 but seems unusable, the 45mm 1.8 looks pretty bad at 1.8 aperture.. probably need to step down.
 
I am waiting for my one to arrive, which I will try on 12mm 2.0, 15mm 1.7, 25mm 1.7, 42.5 mm 1.7, Leica 45mm 2.8, Sigma 60mm 2.8 and Olympus 14-42EZ and see how they fair.

Looks like Panasonic 14mm 2.5 and Panasonic 14-42mm PZ lens is the best fit for Moondog, 14mm 2.5 slight vignetting but usable, 14-42mm PZ usable from 18mm and up, unlike Panasonic 14-42 II which only 35mm and up is usable.  Another guy tested 20mm 1.7 but seems unusable, the 45mm 1.8 looks pretty bad at 1.8 aperture.. probably need to step down.
 
I am waiting for my one to arrive, which I will try on 12mm 2.0, 15mm 1.7, 25mm 1.7, 42.5 mm 1.7, Leica 45mm 2.8, Sigma 60mm 2.8 and Olympus 14-42EZ and see how they fair.