Shield3

Using C100 is what turned me on to ignoring sheets of numbers and start looking at real-world performance. It's wonderfully robust for such compressed footage.
Stick a Ninja 2 on it with DNxHD 220x or similar and the footage is amazing, again, the pipeline has something good going on.

The codec on the 5d3 isn't what killed it.  It's the shit pipeline Canon put in between the 14 bit data coming off the sensor and before the data is written to the card.  The codec itself is fine; it's doing a fine job lightly compressing the crappy "baked in" data its getting.  Case in point, the 1dc in 1080p24 mode didn't look any better, and neither does the 1dx II (and they are using MJPEG).  Whatever Canon does to that image (going from 14 bit raw to the 8 bit output) is what kills the image.  Codec is the least of your problems - the c100 original had a puny 24 Megabit AVCHD file and walked all over the 3 aforementioned cameras in 1080p24.  The lowly XC-10's 1080p24 does as well; same codec I believe in 1080p mode (ALL-I or IPB). 
Moral = line skipping / binning is not your friend.

The codec on the 5d3 isn't what killed it.  It's the shit pipeline Canon put in between the 14 bit data coming off the sensor and before the data is written to the card.  The codec itself is fine; it's doing a fine job lightly compressing the crappy "baked in" data its getting.  Case in point, the 1dc in 1080p24 mode didn't look any better, and neither does the 1dx II (and they are using MJPEG).  Whatever Canon does to that image (going from 14 bit raw to the 8 bit output) is what kills the image.  Codec is the least of your problems - the c100 original had a puny 24 Megabit AVCHD file and walked all over the 3 aforementioned cameras in 1080p24.  The lowly XC-10's 1080p24 does as well; same codec I believe in 1080p mode (ALL-I or IPB). 
Moral = line skipping / binning is not your friend.

Nothing wrong with shooting an Alexa, but I do think that anyone in film production that truly believes technical superiority offers the best path to creative achievements has some goofy priorities.  I get why aspiring filmmaker folks want to do their best technically, but to prioritize it above the artistic craft is nuts.  It's there to support the thing you're trying to accomplish, not the thing itself.  There's no real way forward in being a filmmaker with that attitude.

Yeah, with an Alexa. 

I guess I am not explaining myself clear enough. By using auto ISO and exposure compensation in this manner, with manual lenses, you can basically turn the camera's meter into a zebra-like exposure tool that will blink until you set either your aperture or ND filter to the proper setting based on your chosen +/- exposure stop.

I had no intentions of getting another one - long story short one was offered to me with 4 batteries, a 18-135 STM, the box and all accessories for $1950 cash.  All legit with receipts.  I couldn't jump on it fast enough - it was the Mark II and the seller was a professional photog - just needed rid of it.  I have felt somewhat guilty, but he told me he priced it half off just to move it.  Twice in my camera buying career I've gotten very, very lucky - last year was a XC-10 with 2 256 GB CFast cards for $1200.  Otherwise, I normally take a bloodbath / beating buying and selling gear.

Overall I've been very happy with mine in the field -haven't seen any serious ghosting with higher iso's. I've found it to be very easy to use with nice IQ, and quite refreshing compared to a hybrid mirrorless where video is secondary to stills. 

Its amazing how the XC10 went from crap-what was Canon thinking, to the XC10 is amazing-how did the internets get this camera so wrong, back to the XC10 is crap-I won't ever believe what the internets tell me ever again.  
In reality, it has very nice IQ in good light, and better than expected IQ in low light given the sensor size and slow lens.  IMO it makes up for any low light deficiencies with the form factor, c-log, lens range and great image stabilisation.
If you use it for what is it intended and play to its strengths, its a nice compliment to a C100.  Its not an A7S but then its probably not really fair to compare a 12 megapixel full frame sensor to a 12 megapixel 1 inch sensor for pure IQ in low light.  In good light, I think it holds it own and is very very easy to match to other C cameras.

I think the A7s7 is really gonna be the sweet spot

I heard that Trump will be setting up his own camera plant in Detroit, the rumours are that the first camera to be released is to directly rival the GH5 and will have these features:
4k, just the best 4K...you'll going to love it. Honestly, the best 4K. Camera body in any colour as long as its red,white or blue. Colour balance is locked to 2700k for uniform orange skin tones. Buttons made for extra small hands. Weather resistant, including urine. Overheating notification in 4K mode is displayed as "Hoax invented by china". Camera strap has red dye to be deposited onto neck of user. firmware accessible via secure server, directed via Russia. No word yet on pricing yet, but rumour has it Mexico will pay for them.

Is there a chance president Trump could only allow to enter the country cameras with internal 10-bit 422 codec?

This is a complete no-brainer.
The 1D C is the one to go for if you want the best 4K.
The sensor crop of the 5D Mark IV and poor low light performance kill it. The only reason to even consider it is Dual pixel AF.
The 1D C is also a MUCH better stills camera, with a pro body - which means build quality is in a different league altogether.

I thought both shot in C-log looked very similar after grading and the 1dc downscaled.  I think the c100 has more detail than the 1dc even in 4k though; they are different animals.  They both have that MOJO for sure though.

Such as 79,400 views for that camera test. Northrup and Dugdale have millions of views by making camera tests entertaining. Whether you agree with them or not, they are creating content that many people enjoy watching. My 'best' camera test only got 26K views- no story and pretty boring (this kindof had a story, though not much really going on (11.5K views)). How about yours?

Documentaries tell a story too: all good content tells some kind of story. Test videos or 'art videos' have a very limited audience to the general public. To be honest, calling something 'art' when it's a random jumble of incoherent shots is a cop out. True art tells a story and evokes emotion in a way that words alone cannot. Telling a good story isn't easy, that's why most content leaves us unfulfilled. My first short (which I co-wrote) wasn't very good, as the story was weak. All great filmmakers say the same thing: keep making movies, the first ones won't be very good and don't give up. You'll get better by making more. If one doesn't continue to make more, and learn from each until they are good, then they are stuck where they quit. If one is making a filmed work and not thinking about story, they are missing out on the most important element. Just a little bit of story makes the work much better (even wedding videos, a soccer game, etc.). Save the Cat explains 'the physics of storytelling' and it's right on: http://www.amazon.com/Save-Last-Book-Screenwriting-Youll/dp/1932907009 . If you add story to your next test video / review, it will be much better / easier to watch. Sure it's more work and planning, but well worth the effort. Which reminds me, I need to re-read Save the Cat
Her story resonates with me- she was a teacher and also worked some kind of corporate job ('interior office'). After she had her daughter and having learned the basics of pottery she decided to take a risk and start her own business doing what she loved. And she succeeded, which is very rare, starting a business from nothing with no experience and becoming successful on the first go (profitable) . In the end it's more work than a corporate office job, but since she loves what she's doing it's not really work. Doing what you love and getting paid for it, isn't that what everyone wants? That's an inspiring story.
Our current project involves interviews which on their own can be boring unless watched by a very small relevant market. So we're adding fun cutaways / animations / graphics to make it more entertaining for a wider audience. What's boring to you may be very interesting to someone else (for example anyone interested in starting their own business, entrepreneurs etc., may find the pottery piece interesting as it involves doing what one loves, art, creativity, recycling, and making enough money to not have to work a corporate job). The pottery piece also shows the 1DX II works well as a doc / short / advertorial camera.
Sure, the 1DX II highlights blow out earlier than we'd like (I'll compare to the C300 II's Canon Log 2 at some point (much better than CLog, though requires 10 or more bits)). However I doubt a single non-camera-person consumer would ever notice blown highlights when the subject is properly exposed (they've seen blown highlights for years). IIRC, shooting with highlights at 80 IRE on the WFM (sunlight on a white fence, subject in shadow) with the C300 II resulted in blown highlights which I couldn't fully recover in post with PP CC. My background is image/graphics software and tech (not a camera operator), and intuitively 80 IRE should have been recoverable (where 100 IRE is 'max voltage'/signal value). Guess I'm missing something or there's an issue with PP CC. The point is even the mighty C300 II with Canon Log 2 will clip highlights if care is not taken (need to shoot tests to understand highlight clipping behavior).
The 1DX II's strengths are very good color reproduction, including pleasing skin tones, very good (but not perfect by a long shot) PDAF, very nice 4K (and 4K 60p), decent audio preamps, and native Canon lens support without adapters. It's so nice to get footage straight from camera that needs little or no tweaking- that's why we skipped the FS7, FS5, etc. We're voting with our dollars: we're not spending any more money on cameras with poor color science (regardless of bells and whistles).

He used the camera to shoot a mini-doc, he told a story; I think he did a pretty good job. Then he discussed how it performed doing the job. A flip out screen would be nice, sounded more like a wish list item (something like a SmallHD 502 effectively solves the need). I stopped using 1080 on the 1DX II as the quality is so much better in 4K (and scaled to 1080p for 1080p projects). The tradeoff is less recording time and storage costs (though minimal as hard drives are so cheap). I haven't even tried 1080p 120 (60 slowed to 24 (2.5x) is good enough. Still have the FS700 for up to 240, but we just haven't needed it (probably sell it soon). The A7S II does decent 1080p 120. The 1DX II's 1080p 120 might be OK for a face close up (similar to 5D3 H.264 resolution, but with aliasing). 
What is the value of a forum post? Does it contribute knowledge to the community, does it help people, does it solve a problem? Were you ironically joking with the ego comment? Pure technical tests are helpful, as you like to do to and adding a storytelling component where the camera is used in production is even more valuable. 

Oh the crazy Japanese. Oh wait, Apple does it too. Oh wait, so does any consumer electronics company. It's called economics in the 21st century, with mass production, globalization, etc. 
Ah, the days when you had two sets of clothes, one pair of shoes, and it cost you 6 months salary to buy that "television?"
You're demanding a perfect camera so you won't have to buy another camera again for the rest of your life. If you want that bargain, then you'd have to make it profitable enough for that company. Buy that Alexa.
No? Then you have to deal with compromises and shop at h&m like the rest of the masses and follow the seasonal trends.
Look, even apple is struggling because the 5s is good enough for too many people. Ironically, their phones became too good, satisfying consumers as well as pushing their competitors. So Apple now has pressure because consumers are spending less money than expected. That's the power you as a consumer wield.
These are consumer electronics companies, and you are the consumer market. There's really only one way to clearly communicate to the company. Buy or don't buy. 
That's why blackmagic is a welcome addition. Competition lowers prices and drives innovation. 
There will never be that "perfect" camera if you have the purchasing power of a consumer. Technological advances and expectations will always keep you wanting.
 

EV is like 0.5 of a stop better at ISO 100, that's negligible. It trumps D5500 in everything else and that's what you pay for. The best balanced body on the market so you don't have to take 5 different cameras fromy sony and nikon as you've just realized yourself ;). Sensors are similar nowadays from entry level to pro level in FF category. File size might be a problem but that's easy to overcome by buying more cards ;). 
btw. nice photos

Hi 
Have both cameras. The sharpness is more or less equal, maybe an edge in S35 mode on A7R2. Obviously both cameras have their strength and weaknesses.
I run some test : Resolution : 
 
For me the colours are nice on the 1dx2 : handheld with the 70-200 lense. 
 

This is helpful; I'll try this; I agree something is going on with the midtones when I shoot with the contrast all the way down.  Thanks!

Canon makes (and I own and use ALL the time) a 24-105 STM F/3.5 - F/5.6.  It's cheap (you can find them around $350) is light, dead silent AF, and works beautifully with the 1dx II.
As a testament to how good this lens is - in Ohio today it warmed up to around 60 degrees - my daughter just learned to ride a bicycle on her own without training wheels.  I grabbed the 1dxII and this lens and shot it in 4k and it turned out wonderfully - just stopped down to F/5.6 and was able to zoom in/out without issues (IE no aperture flicker).
HIGHLY recommend the STM 24-105.  Did I mention it is a EF lens?  IE made for full frame?    A hidden gem...

4k, 8k, bah.  I was watching a Blu-ray rip of the 1983 Scarface tonight allowing my UHD to upscale the *gasp* 720p footage and thought it looked AMAZING for 33 years ago.  I guess content is always king of course. 

4k, 8k, bah.  I was watching a Blu-ray rip of the 1983 Scarface tonight allowing my UHD to upscale the *gasp* 720p footage and thought it looked AMAZING for 33 years ago.  I guess content is always king of course. 

4k, 8k, bah.  I was watching a Blu-ray rip of the 1983 Scarface tonight allowing my UHD to upscale the *gasp* 720p footage and thought it looked AMAZING for 33 years ago.  I guess content is always king of course.