MattH

I would really like to know how this works...
If I understood correctly this is what happens:
I have footage from the GH4, filmed with the specific settings (EOSHD Cinema Profile) that you researched and find best fitting for the LOG profile, which is applied much like a LUT is, which manipulates color so that it more closely resmbles a LOG profile, so you can then put a "real" LUT over it, which works better now, than before where you just had the standard footage out of the GH4. Right? (sorry for the long and confusing sentence)

I'm not sure why people are getting so defensive about what is a pretty apparent weakness with long exposures on the A7R II. It's to be expected with tons of pixels and poor heat dissipation. Does it render the camera unusable or condemn it to the junk bin? No. But it should be acknowledged and explored. Even if it turns out to be bad processing or poor exposure, we'll at least learn how and why the A7R II files fall apart. 

I would love to see someone fall on their face on this thing. Or rather, I would love to see them topple over with their expensive camera, smashing the camera into the floor and smashing their face into the camera, which is what will happen. How can you possibly concentrate on operating the camrea. The example has terrible framing and non existent focusing, It's like trying to stand on top of a ball. A really stupid idea. But dont let me stop you doing it, just make sure you have somebody else to film it at the same time. I could do with a laugh.

Price is one thing.  But I think some people are attracted to the idea of not being chained by the corporate monopolies of Apple or Microsoft.  The idea of never ending rent for  adobe products grinds with me as well.  But as you say, It seems as if we don't have all the same options available with linux, which is why most of us stick with Windows or Os X.  Though I am very interested to hear about any potential alternatives.

​Yeah mac has cheap and powerful hardware and free software doesn't it.

Full frame noise performance sucks balls, Crop rolling shutter performance sucks balls.
Peoples grades of 8 bit slog2 will suck balls as the Cinema 5d video above proves.
Please don't sell your cameras, this camera will be old hat in less than a month.

Full frame noise performance sucks balls, Crop rolling shutter performance sucks balls.
Peoples grades of 8 bit slog2 will suck balls as the Cinema 5d video above proves.
Please don't sell your cameras, this camera will be old hat in less than a month.

Trying out the 100/120 fps in real life, shots I'm interested in. Trying to find weakness in the image like aliasing etc.
Very impressed so far:

What? They all specify specifically "not 23.976" without you prompting it?  Or are they just saying they want "24p" or "perfect 24p".  This is an important distinction given that most people don't know the difference.  They may just mean 24p rather than 25p.
But if it really matters to you, then it obviously isn't the camera for you.

SLR Magic Rangefinder video stills from movie upcoming at the end of the day

If you have access to an RX100 iv please could you confirm what the maximum record times are for 50/60p and 100/120p?  (Or at least confirm if they go over 5 minutes).
If they are doing a full pixel readout I would expect the limit to be 5 minutes like the 4k due to heat.
No-one has yet discovered this information.

Price is one thing.  But I think some people are attracted to the idea of not being chained by the corporate monopolies of Apple or Microsoft.  The idea of never ending rent for  adobe products grinds with me as well.  But as you say, It seems as if we don't have all the same options available with linux, which is why most of us stick with Windows or Os X.  Though I am very interested to hear about any potential alternatives.

​Yeah mac has cheap and powerful hardware and free software doesn't it.

​Its 24-200 full frame equivalent.   Whenever they say 35mm they mean "full frame". What they should be saying is "135 format equivalent feild of view".  People usually say "super 35mm" if they are refering to the cinema standard. Although that could be anything from crop factor of 1.4 to 1.7 depending on how loose you are with the definition. So it wouldn't have much meaning or make much sense to gives equivalents in super 35 for a stills camera.  And I have never seen such an equivalent given.
DPReview gives the "Macro focus range" as 3cm.  I asume this is the minimum focus range from the front of the lens as opposed to the sensor.  And I would guess that would be at the widest angle.
The 135 format maximum depth of feild equivalent is about f7.5.  The APS-C maximum depth of field equivalent is f5.   Don't worry.  200mm f8 on 135 and 135mm f5 on apsc and 73.3 on " "one inch" type" will give you a blurred background.
 

I actually very rarely click on subforums.  Really I should.  But putting your review in a sub forum maybe a sure fire way for it not to get seen.

Whoa! that is one hell of a post.  Basically, you have intellectualised the thought process of a rational intelligent person in this field.  The problem is that not all people are sufficiently intelligent and also sufficiently rational.  This is why spec lists work as advertising. This is what has driven the megapixel war and now the 4k push.  What use is 4k if its got aliasing, macroblocking, focus pulsating and rolling shutter skew to the eyeballs?  Try pointing that out to someone who has already decided to buy the camera because its spec sheet says its 4k and has this and that, and they will say "Dude! this file is COMPRESSED! You need to see the original."  Yeah, because no video on youtube has ever looked good, right?  It's very hard if not impossible to get through to these people.  But be thankful that you are able to evaluate things rationally.

FAKE!

FAKE!

I would not go with the NX1 because it's too early to tell how committed Samsung is to cameras and as Oliver says, the public isn't clamoring for 4K.  Face it, if a client wants 4K they probably won't hired a "man and his dog" production company.  My wife gets mad at me when I order the HD version of movies on Amazon demand for $1 extra.  She says she can't tell the difference. Further, RAW based 1080 cameras like the BMPCC crush all 4K 8-bit cameras in color nuance and dynamic range.  Here's a video (I took quick and dirty) with some mixed cameras and you can see what the difference is.  I overexposed the a7 footage a bit, which means I'm stuck with it.  The BMPCC not only has better colors against the a7 (even if perfectly exposed) but it has, to me, a film look.  
 
I would not get the 5D3 because, as hell of a camera it is, and it is, it is built as a through-the-lens camera which makes video more cumbersome than the A7, where you have an EVF and can see zebras, focus peaking, etc.  Indeed, if you're going to shoot with the glass you have I believe an EVF camera is a must.
A bad thing for me, good thing for you, is that Sony's model updates and driving the prices down on their earlier cameras.  You should consider an a7 too because you may get one for a song.  However, the large pixel count of the a7 means it is susceptible to moire so you want to accept that trade-off.  If you like a really crisp image, then the panasonic m43rds, like FuzzyNormal says, deliver the goods.  For me, the a7 is the perfect utility camera, great stills and video, takes any lens.
Also, I can't keep someone focused on a full-frame at wide apertures.  For video, I agree with Fuzzy that you're going to end up shooting not lower than 5.8 anyway.  The sony autofocus on the A6000, does work reasonably well at 1.8 (effective 2.8 say) however.
Again, as Oliver implied, business isn't about getting the camera/equipment you want, it's about getting the camera the client wants (indirectly).  As for an investment for 3 years... I live one shot at a time
Photos of event https://www.flickr.com/photos/maxotics/sets/72157654514582616  I used an A7 with 55/1.8, a6000 with 10-18, Canon 50D with Nikon 50mm

​Its an instagram pseudo film grade with milk blacks, but apart from that the image looks ok.  Just a few nondescript test shots edited to an indi soundtrack.
This cameras main problem is the lack of lens options.  No wide aperture options, no wide angle option, no telephoto option.  But for the people for whom the money is nothing, it will be a convenient tool.
If this came with a selection of stabilised lenses designed for the format it would be fantastic.
 

Well if you need telephoto then the LX100 can be eliminated.
If you don't need telephoto and you are looking for a cheap all in one solution the LX100 looks hard to beat.  Isn't it about half the price as the RX10 ii?
Maybe wait a while untill more RX10 info and samples come out.

​No. Less megapixels.  A multi aspect sensor like the gh2 with DCI 4k native at the widest setting.   Global shutter, better dynamic range. 10 bit internal.  There's pleanty of room for improvement.

​You aren't listening. The press release implies that is the case, but does not confirm it. That is the point I'm making.  It only says the full frame mode uses the entire width of the sensor. It doesn't say what it does or doesn't do beyond that.
If I say "there are 2 cars on the race track, the BMW uses its 4 wheels to grip to the road as it speeds round the corner, the Mercedes uses it's V8 engine to deliver explosive power".  That doesn't mean that the Mercedes doesn't have 4 wheels does it? Although it does imply it.  As it happens I do think you're right. Its just a point of logical exactitude that I'm making.

​
 
​So they are listening.  This is what I put forward (among others probably).  A half way house between bad detail and bad rolling shutter: acceptable both.  Obviously its imposible to eliminate aliasing with line skipping but perhaps it isn't as bad as before?  It will be very interesting to see tests of this.
The sound with 120fps is also realy cool.

​So how is this avoided then besides not shooting on grass?  Is every other camera automatically compensating for the green?