jasonmillard81

For docs and promos I'd suggest C100ii. It is the perfect camera in that price bracket. I think you'd get a more cinematic/rich image from the URSA but you'll also deal with bigger files.

Seriously, if you want a camera just for low light alongside the NX1, get at D750.

@jasonmillard81 I don't have any demo for this. That said, there are many many samples for high low-light capabilities of the D750, A7R II, 5Dm2...These 3 cameras (OK + Canon 1DXm2 + Nikon D3S + D4, etc.). Furthermore the fantastic focusing skills of the D750 in very low light are proven in real world conditions by many photographers. Even the A7R II is in low-light focusing questionable...So this is not only all about IQ but focusing capabilities too...And herein I don't have ANY proof for the Fuji.
Furthermore, don't forget TCO. As said, the X-T2 is all in all not very affordable for me...

Have you seen this?
 
I cannot get over how great the quality is...i'm literally stunned.
 

@jasonmillard81 Yes, I've seen it.
But I must act from a realistic and practical point of view. As said, buying in the Fuji ecosystem means investing in a for me new ecosystem (lenses, filter, etc., etc.) and that's expensive. As I am not a pro making money with photography and filming, I have to administrate my tight budget. And the Nikon ecosystem is - for my use - much more cheaper than the Fuji. Point 1.
Point 2: The X-t2 is till now NOT known as low-light monster. So the stunning video IQ of this camera under ideal lightning conditions is useless for my purposes...There are so many cameras with stunning IQ, but only a handful competing in extreme low light and afordability concerning total cost of ownership. I work hard for photography and filming during holidays (earning money), but that said, please consider that I can not buy cameras + needed equipment pros can buy. So I have to be very realistic when buying equipment.
I am more than happy with the NX1 (stills AND video), it's a fantastic and robust hybrid camera. The IQ is in my eyes mindblowing, AF and usability too. But it rapidly falls apart in low light conditions. I get in some conditions unusable STILLS with ISO 6.400. Very decent light, low contrast, tungsten and yellow-brownish light are not the strongest points of the NX1. In such conditions the Samsung is as bad as my old 7D, despite 50mm 1.8 lens...The NX1 looses almost any detail, contrast and IQ. There are the limits of this device....
So I have to compensate this point with another camera competing in these poor light conditions.

Wow, I knew it's good, but now I see test results that prove that the Fujifilm X-T2 is even better than I thought. It was the first time for me, that I pre-ordered something, but I spent my money well.

Fuji colors are just legendary. The XT-1 is the first stills camera I've owned where I don't do any editing on them. I just use the Provia color profile. The XT-2 is very tempting with video now.
 

Yes just $599 more than the A6300 for a camera with better ergonomics, better EVF, weather sealing, better colour science, better styling, better menus and seemingly no major overheating issues with the vertical grip.

Just pulled the trigger!  Nervous/excited to see how I like the c100 II.  I ordered it with the 24-105 f4, I already have a Tamron 17-50 2.8 and figured these two lenses were a good start.  I can then decide if I need to sell the zooms for a faster zoom or just add 2-3 primes (24, 50, 85)
 
Are there any videos, blogs, articles I should read to get a head start on how to use this new weapon!?

Not really, but a studio set-up is way different than what you'd use for actual filmmaking. You'd use specialized studio/broadcast equipment.


So, something like this (and that's just one in a multicam studio set-up):

For over the shoulder work and on-location type shots some broadcast ready type of camcorder. ENG.

A little more in this direction:

 
Guess they use a lot of Sony. Other than that. Google is your friend. It's the easiest to find out about movies and series, though:
https://shotonwhat.com/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5778848/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec (e.g. with very limited information)

Thanks for your input Geoff. Very good points. 
I honestly am the guy to buy the camera without renting it first but I do realize that it's not the smartest thing to do. So I think for the first time I will rent first and buy later. 
I actually have used the ursa mini 4K before and was not happy with the image or DR, but I hear the 4.6k is way better so I'll probably rent that too. 
The amount of the features the fs5 has is what draws me but the image of the 4.6k is what draws me. So I feel so torn right now but that's why I'll rent first. So borrowlens.com here I come! Lol
i will probably be doing a video on my tests of both cameras and make a video on why I chose which camera.
I'll post the video for the 2 people interested  in my dilemma on this thread LOL. 

With the C100ii you will keep 98% of your clients happy, and with the XC15 the rest of them, and it seems like a very good 2 way system too. You got 2 cameras for less money than the rest of your options.

It just went down a few thousands during the summer! Even if it goes down, it will be more than twice the price for a long long time..
I honestly would prefer a C100markIII instead, with similar to the XC15 files, but a C100 nevertheless. C300 is a different animal than the 100 and you would need an upgrade to everything you own (tripods, monopods, sliders etc) to tame it sufficiently. We have one in the production company I work; most of the times I go with the C100ii.
You always have to consider the fact that the camera that you use now, is better than the one you haven't, or can't get!
 

65k is NOTHING on a 1d series body.  Plenty of people knock Canon for being lackluster in the spec department; they're like the Toyota of the camera world.  Rock solid and proven reliable.  The 1dx/1dxII/1dc/1div etc are cameras that could be taken into the jungle, desert, war zone, etc.  Heavy and solid as a tank.  I had a 1dIV with 225k clicks and the shots looked like a brand new one.  Anything can fail though, but in the last 7 years of shooting Canon I have only had 1 SD slot failure in a 5d3 that Canon had back to me fixed for free in about 10 days.
My Sony a7r went in the shop twice and took a month each time to get back to me.  It and many other Sony bodies had overheating, compatibility issues with AF adapters (even Metabones) in which the camera would shut off.  Obviously you're not asking about Sony a7x series cameras, but my point is there's a world of difference between 65k on a 1d series and a non-pro body.
Basically it comes down to this:
You can pick up a used 1dx II for about 5-5.3k and it will give you a ton of stuff over the 1dc.  PDAF with face tracking is really the shit, and the 4k60 is so good that I find myself doing frame grabs and shooting 4k60 all the time.  Yes the codec is a pain in the ass, but it's 8 bit 4:2:2 and looks fantastic.
I personally would rather have a C100 Mark II over the 1dc for video - the 1080p60 and all the other features far outweigh the 4k24/25 (there is no 30/60 4k on the 1dc).  In fairness there is no 4k on the c100 either, but it is a 4k sensor downscaled in camera to amazing 1080p.  It's a workhorse and a delight to use.
My advice?  If you have shot with a full frame Canon with a grip you'll pretty much know what to expect with the 1dc.  Go rent a c100 Mark II and you will flat out love using it.  I tend to shoot Cinema/C-log and expose about 1 stop to the right; it grades lovely and easily in post.  The built in microphone is amazing too.  i set the button on the right handle to toggle AF on and off, and the "nipple" you can quickly adjust shutter, ISO, F/Stop, WB without even moving your eye from the EVF.
Lastly, the c100 IMO when exposed correctly (and shot in C-log) looks 99% as good as the 5d3 raw with about 10,000 times the reliability as assistance factor.  With the heavier compressed codec you do have to pay attention to exposure though, so there is less leeway for error.
I shoot my son's travel baseball games.  I'll set the c100 up in the outfield with a long lens on a tripod and just let it record (no 30 minute time limit either) - I can record for like 3-4 hours with a 128GB SD card and the larger battery.  Then I can shoot stills and get 1080p120 shots with the 1dx II and the footage matches up nicely.  Canon colors are great.
Either way you can't go wrong.  All of these will provide stunning results.  Absolute image quality goes to the C-Log 4k 1dc if you have a planned shot and time to set everything up.  Going to shoot an event or need to quickly work?  C100 and it's not even close.
 

It would kill the 80D and GH4 for stills. 
Check that, murder the 80D and GH4 for stills.
Scratch that, kidnap and torture, preform experiments and then make a 4K snuff film of the murder which it sends to the 80D and GH4s families.

Honestly, I think the 1DC would be the A cam to a C-100 B-Cam... But YMMV based upon how important DPAF is to your video work. They both have C-Log, so in that respect, they would work great together. As far as stills, I'm just starting to shoot them, but I believe other than the lack of DPAF, the 1DC would be a great stills cam.

The scamster never replied.  I gave up.  
 
Question though, second hand used c100 II can be had in the 2000s....is it worth waiting around for one to be sold in NY or is it worth getting brand new?  I do not know much about the pros/cons.  Any insight?

Price, 5-Axis IS, and broadcast quality 4K codec. If none of those matter to you, then probably not. The C100ii has interchangeable lens options, DPAF, S35mm sensor, better audio interface, more built in ND support... I'm sure there's more, but that's all I got as I don't have a C100ii. 

Too shady. I gave up...$900 is about what I'd get for my GH4 that I'd like to sell.

Or just go with a couple friends.

That certainly sounds too good to be true... Tell him you'll meet him at his local police station's parking lot.

A C100 mk2 for US$1.5K?!? Damn that is a deal. 

If you use a speedbooster then you'll lose all benefits in picking Canon for their AF.

I purchased a GH4 a few years back under the guidance and direction of some helpful members here.  I have like the camera in many aspects and learned that I am probably more implicitly biased to video and photo look of FF cameras.  I am a complete amateur/hobbyist but appreciate the technical side of the artwork and the discussions that go on here.
 
I am going to sell my GH4 soon and want to replace it.  
 
What I do:
1. Personal photography/video for myself/family/friends
2. Mini video documentaries for my history and special education students where I may interview people etc.
What I liked about  the GH4:
*Superior sharpness/clarity compared to my 5d MK iii I sold to purchase the GH4
What I dislike about the GH4:
*#1 is definitely ISO performance, I understand that I can purchase neat video or get LED lights but again this is not my profession although I'd like the ability to deliver as high quality content I can doing this by myself
*I miss the FF look and bokeh
Options:
A7R II (seems to be a better camera than a7S II for 50/50 video and stills) - I like the MP count since I'd like to print and frame photos but dislike Sony colors with a passion
5D MK IV - I think the video is fairly comparable to the 1DX II but not as clear/sharp as I'd like even at 4K
C100 MK II + 5D MK II (use ML raw at times for video) - I think I like this combo the best since it would provide great video/audio on the c100 II and good photos with the 5d
I really love Canon colors and have yet to see too many images that do a good enough job.  I like that the C100 II has built in ND filters and I can mount my Rode NTG 2 on it for good audio.  I wish there was a hybrid DSLR that could be both photo/video but it seems like I am leaning toward separate tools for separate functions.
 
I love the video look on this Netflix documentary:  
I believe this was mostly shot on a Canon C300 Mark II
Questions:
Which of the above choices do you think would fit my needs the best? Are there any other options/combos that may be better suited and I should look into?

It's a business, they all do this... Apple, Ford... everyone. Bodies are not investments in hardware, they are investments in your talent. If you want a healthy return on that investment you need to produce paying work.