Birk Kromann

Are these still for sale? 

I think people tend to forgot DR. We can discuss this forever, but resolution and but depth isn't everything. IMHO the most difficult thing to correct/change is DR ergo is should be the highest priority. To me that gives the nicest images and is why the A7s looks so much nicer.
And that's talking from a professional point of view.

Do you really want me to post links to all the interviews to convince you it's not just "anecdotal"?
Why would you need a trained crew for that? If you have a budget to hire a gaffer and sparks why wouldn't you have money to hire proper lighting - still not my point; A cinematographer working on a budget should be able to operate, light and act as a grip on a budget film and use (and know what) equipment fits the budget and purpose.

I respect your opinion that you don't see any reason for using the D800, all I'm saying is, that if DOPs use it, and use it instead of BMC, Canon and Panasonic, surely there must be a reason for it?

Another thing that I haven't mentioned is why DOPs use the D800. Have seen a few videos with the D800 and the D4 and the highlight rolloff is (what I would call) incredibly close to that of an Alexa. It's looks very realistic and it holds so much detail in the shadows, which is another reason why it's becoming wildly used in productions.

What do you suggest Chris?
 
If we skip the whole stills camera thing for video... what exactly do you suggest we do...
 
Blackmagic is not for everyone, and the cheapest interchangeable lens video camera with a cinematic image starts at around $6000. Big gap to $799. I believe I alluded to the stupidity of comments like this in the article, so ironic to see one here.

I completely agree. They could. They are too lazy and too comfortable, which was the main problem Canon had after launching the 5D (and probably still have)

Still doesn't change the fact that people should stop whining and make use of what they have and stop dreaming about what they don't.
Nikon and Canon doesn't make film cameras with such specs just because a few bloggers and people commenting think they should. These companies have a lot of money and uses a very big part of that money on R&D otherwise they simply wouldn't exist.
People fail to remember that they earn most of their money on photographers.
Why change something that works perfectly for what it's designed to?
It's the same as saying the Alexa is shit because it doesn't do 4K, 5K and 6K and can't take 36MP stills.

Why should Nikon change the best DSLR on the market because some video people says so? And why should (and why haven't) Arri changed or updated the Alexa? It's very simple - seen from their (business) point of view; there's simply no need.

I don't think you got my point? The point was not that people should use Alexas. My point was that people seem to say that the D800 is a bad camera even though it is the most celebrated DSLR by real cinematographers.
My whole point was that people should worry less about the camera, but more about the lighting (and camera for that matter) Ask any cinematographer and in sure they'll say, that light, movement and lenses are more important than the actual camera, hence why you could use a D800 and cut it seamlessly with an Alexa.

Am I wrong to assume that actual working cinematographers would have something to say here? Not saying that I'm one of these endangered species, but I'm specifically thinking of Bradford Lipson (Wilfred) and Jeff Jur (Dexter). Jeff Jur said in an interview, that most of the time the post production team had a hard time telling the difference between their A and B can and the Nikon D800, which is fair enough if it wasn't for the fact that the A camera was an Alexa.
Again, not claiming to be a cinematographer equally skilled to the above mentioned I think their on to something. Why else would two very successful cinematographers use them? If Blackmagic and GH2/GH3/GH4 are such amazing cameras why is that only amateurs and small businesses uses them and not big studios with budgets large enough to use whatever camera they like?

Nothing bad about mr. Reid, but I think people are focussing to much on what, in my opinion, are facts, numbers and presumptions.
Blackmagic might very well have packed 13 stops of dynamic range into their cameras but if that's what you're relaying on as a cinematographer, you're not really doing you're job. It does indeed challenges your knowledge of light and the way you (or rather the camera) sees it, but if you can't adjust to that you should probably find another line of work or admit that you don't have what it takes.

And yes, some people are probably going to argue that the GH2 was "voted" the winner of the Zacuto shoutout and that it was only because of the expensive light gear they had access to, but you'll be surprised how much you can achieve with work lights, fluorescent tubes, gels, baking paper, reflectors, foam core and flags (all of which are very cheap) At least that is my personal experience.

...and hey, then you don't have to worry about carrying tons of batteries and spend thousands on storage.

Coming from a photographic background that makes me think of the most famous (and annoying) quote amongst photographers: "the camera doesn't make the creative decisions" also sometimes heard as "the camera doesn't create the photographer"

I don't think this site is aimed too much at producers of content to big budget productions. Correct, you won't find GH2/GH3/Blackmagic, or D800 or Canon 5d mk3 there for that matter. (maybe any of these as funny experiments or very limited scenes where they don't want to risk more expensive equipment).
 
 
The nice thing about a camera like the Blackmagic, is that it affords filmmakers who can't afford a big crew of lighting people etc to still end up with good footage.
 
So:
 
Nikon 5300 - soccermoms
Blackmagic/GH2/GH3/GH3 - indie, smaller productions
Arri (mostly) - large budget digital