IronFilm

There's only so much one can be critical of Canon, really. It's like screaming at a wall. Also, back in the nebulous days of DSLR filmmaking, it was exciting to see higher video quality from small packages like GH2 and later Magic Lantern Canon. I guess we sort of have gotten used to it. Nowadays, even if Canon doesn't deliver, Panasonic, Sony, Blackmagic, and even Samsung have already jumped in to fill that void. It's come far from the GH2 days.

I only hope the Samsung hack receives similar coverage from bloggers. It could be a big push to have that sort of coverage and enthusiasm that EOSHD did for the early HDSLR cameras.

I'm amazed that not one response here has included the word "impedance". Generally, (in the realm of microphones) XLR gear is expecting a low impedance signal; and mini-plug gear is expecting a high impedance signal. I'd at least get a barrel-style XLR to 1/4 transformer adapter, and then add a 1/4 to 1/8 (though these days someone may make an XLR to 1/8?). The other issue is that those three pins each do something. Most camera-in jacks are TR (tip ring) for a mono input, or TRS (tip ring sleeve, three conducters) for a stereo input. I believe most DSLRs have a stereo mic input, but could be mistaken? So you have the potential for grounding problems as well.
The design of the XLR connector is "purely for the stability of the connection" - it's pretty robust - but most XLR mics - and any you'd really want to use on-set - will be XLRs that are using the three pins to carry the standard low impedance signal. You can do low impedance with any three-conducter setup (1/4 TRS is popular) but mics for on-set audio (ecluding lavs) will use the full-sized XLR, will require phantom power, and will be low-z.
Speaking of phantom power - some mics have an internal battery, but if not, you're limited to using dynamic mics which generally aren't used for film sound for a host of reasons.
There's another current thread here dealing with this exact subject. Unless this is just a hobby for the OP, I'd say at the very least get a decent preamp that converts the XLR input to a preamped 1/8 output. And for probably the same money, you could get, say, a Tascam DR60D ($169 if you shop around, and showing up used all over), which has phantom power, mic power, meters, headphone and camera out level controls, minus 6DB safety tracks, low cut, a limiter, slate tone, etc. Far as I know it's about the best budget solution to beginner's audio needs, and the adjustable camera out allows you to stage your gain and at least try to get a clean and strong signal to the camera if you don't want to synch in post (and still have a nice clean recorder track if the camera audio isn't optimal). I imagine it would really up the quality of something like a blade as well.
I know some of the monitor/recorders have audio ins and meters, but you're missing a lot of really necessary features - features that can really save your butt - and you're not talking investing thousand of bucks to get those features. If you're planning to charge money, I'd really recommend a pro solution, even something entry level like the DR - it will outlive your next ten cameras.

How close can you get the Zoom with a capsule stuck on it to the actor's voice? I'm not super-familiar with that setup, but I'm thinking it's for ambient sound or recording concerts and such. If you're doing narrative work or interviews, you need a decent mic as close as possible to the subject. And optimally it's a mic that captures as little extraneous sound as possible. A Sure 57 2 feet from the talent is going to trump a zillion-dollar hyper across the room - much less a Rode videomic on the hot shoe. Think about getting a hyper on a stand, or a quality lav on the chest, while you're trying to shoot with a lens long enough for the look you want - usually 5 or 6 feet away for starters. Work backwards from there - what's it take to get up-close audio, with as little ambient sound as possible, into your edit? Not necessarily into your camera, but on your timeline?
There's no super-secret formula you'll find that beats a hyper mic just out of the frame. Plug that mic into a proper recording chain (balanced low impedance cables, decent preamp, decent recording medium). Stage yout gain so you get the max signal to noise with no distortion. Find a way to synch it to the camera (even FCPX has auto-synching built-in, or synch by ear). And it will synch to the built-in mic on about any DSLR - your synch track doesn't need to be amazing. Get a clapboard if you're worried.
That's it. A $1500 Schoeps mic is just icing on the cake. The basics are the basics and they work.

But Red Weapon users are very few in number and the market for medium format is very large in comparison (much larger than leica R). The prices will go up when there is the 5D equivalent of medium format (When the D3 came out, many lenses sky rocket, the 28 1.4 for example, because nikon had a poor new fullframe lens lineup).

Leica R - f2 or faster..  native e-,ount and m4/3 lenses will depreciate in value since they'll always be less adaptable than slr lenses.  personally I feel if a lens requires electronic contacts to allow it to be used, it's almost certainly gonna devalue rather than increase.

likely, a completely new form of art will emerge for the technology. Something that combines the gaming and film narrative experience. Imagine Myst/Riven as a VR experience...

I've done an hour on Vive without any nausea or discomfort.... the latency and comfort is great ... though Gear, and especially cardboard, are uncomfortable after a while.
The tech, latency and headset comfort will get better and better though... 

Try it... then you'll understand this is far, far different to 3D films 

poster took down the video and reposted for some reason. here's the new upload:

Also, this is from kinemini 4k, looks nice:
 

I'm very happy with my set up but if a person was starting out from scratch with semi pro / serious indie amateur aspirations on a tight budget then I'd also suggest keeping an eye out for these products:
 
Tascam DR70D  (only US$200 on sale I've seen it for!! :-o I've used it myself as the soundie on an indie feature film)
Aputure D3 (announced at this year's NAB, meant to be as good as a Sennheiser MKH-416, but heaps cheaper).
Saramonic UwMic10  (looks like the Sony! Has 2x TX to 1x RX feature).

Years and years ago started out with a Zoom H1. Then got a Tascam DR60D. Have a Rode VideoMic Pro.
 
Now use a Sound Devices 552 with a Petrol mixing bag I found cheap.
Will get a Tascam DR680 soon to pair with it (but want an F8!! But they're too pricey).
Have a Rode NTG2 and have a Sennheiser ME66/K6 on its way.
Have a RodeLink and 3x Samson Wireless kits.
Have a 3m carbon fibre boom pole.
Rode Blimp v2.
Various XLR cables and other accessories. Plus a bunch of less important mics.

Either an Audio-Technica AT4053b or an Audix SCX-1 HC or an Oktava MK012 (with some very heavy caveats... ! ) are basically the "standard" when it comes to indoor dialogue for low budget indies. 

But even those can not be low budget enough.....  Samson C02 seems like a viable alternative in that case. I've got one ordered which should arrive soon, which I plan to use myself. But for bigger paid jobs I'll be renting something better for sure! And hopefully in the near ish future I'll be able to afford buying an Audio-Technica AT4053b for myself. 

Also keep an eye out for the Aputure D3 which will ship soon, it is meant to be as good as a Sennheiser MKH-416, but at a heaps cheaper price than any of the others mics mentioned here so far (except the Samson of course). 
A RODE Blimp is basically essential for outdoors if you're going to have adverse conditions, ignore those who say it is no good, the v2 from RODE is greatly improved (I have it myself).

Really interesting camera, I found an unboxing on youtube already, here's the link:
 

There is no reason to think now that there is a new "Gear for Sale" subforum will start moving people away from the general discussion.
EOSHD runs I feel more like reddit - one super active forum - and not like DVXUser - which makes it more interesting.
Also the mods, thank you guys, are more lenient when things get heated here.  I don't think EOSHD is going to go anywhere.  There's always a new Canon camera to make fun of.

The reason is that dvxuser has to many subforums. Ive seen it again and again. To many subforums kills forums. 
Most people, me included, only visit one section of a forum. I'm one of the biggest Blackmagic nerds online and have visited the Blackmagic section of Eoshd less than 10 times. On bmcuser 90% only checks into the general discussion. 
Have as many sub forums as you like, doesn't matter to me. But I suggest checking with experts first. I know I wouldn't bluntly create sections on a clients forum without analyzing if there are numbers to support it. 
Its not a decision to be made based on 10 regulars thinking its a great idea. Ask the hundreds of visitors that lurk, they are equally important.

i'm not an expert, here's the suggested minimums. http://documents.blackmagicdesign.com/DaVinciResolve/DaVinci_Resolve_12_Beta_Configuration_Guide.pdf
I have a GTX 980 ti 6GB and get realtime playback of HD RAW files until I get upwards of 5 or 6 nodes. that includes NR.

the ratio of lens to camera here is amazing.

Agreed. I feel subforums can be beneficial and useful, when used right. 
But you need to strike a balance between too many and too few. Plus this balance is not static! It shifts and changes. A forum with a hundred users about stamp collection needs a different number of subforums to a forum with 100,000 users about marriage. Roughly speaking, the younger/smaller a forum is, the less subforums it should have. However as it grows, then it is ok to also grow the number of subforums, but at a slower rate than the growth of users! (don't want to have a relative oversupply of subforums to users.

Also, other features can work in place of subforums, such as tags/categories. For instance Reduser has a subforum for 3rd Party Gear Sales, but within it has various tags for items such as [LIGHTING] (I really really wish there was a tag for [AUDIO] as well!).

+1 on for sale sub forum.
on other topics it can indeed fracture the community, but for gear sale a single post per sale item makes sense. 
Works well over at reduser
lenses has an argument for it too, as it's just such a big topic.

Instead of just a thread, how about a subforum?

I'm very happy with my set up but if a person was starting out from scratch with semi pro / serious indie amateur aspirations on a tight budget then I'd also suggest keeping an eye out for these products:
 
Tascam DR70D  (only US$200 on sale I've seen it for!! :-o I've used it myself as the soundie on an indie feature film)
Aputure D3 (announced at this year's NAB, meant to be as good as a Sennheiser MKH-416, but heaps cheaper).
Saramonic UwMic10  (looks like the Sony! Has 2x TX to 1x RX feature).

Hell Yeah wait for the Kinefinity Terra 5K!

I don't know... The 60p alone is worth the upgrade, if you ask me. I'd rather it have a built in screen, but a cheap 3.5 in EVF will do the trick and still keep the real estate small. 
Also, you must have good eyes because I don't notice any of those things.
And it's kinda not cool to nitpick the images Zak graciously shared.
He said they are a couple grabs from a paid gig he is doing. Doubtful his client will see your comment, but still...

Lens setup was my Sigma 18-35mm, Metabones BMPCC/EF Speed Booster, Hoya IR Cut, Hoya ProND 200.

Well, considering an Arri from 10 years ago would be a D20 - there would actually be a lot of benefits to using the GH4, depending on what you're shooting. The D20 has a nice sensor and can give you a nice image, sure - but the mucking around to get that into some sort of workable format and workable image is ridiculous. The camera has been discontinued, and even its successor has been discontinued. How easy will it be to find parts if something goes wrong? 
It's actually more like saying 'I'm not going to spend money on a 10 year old camera that's been long discontinued, when I can spend the same or less on a camera that will give me an image that's nearly as good, and be 10x easier to work with, and is newer, so is likely to stay relevant for a bit longer.'
You should only ever consider buying a camera if you can be confident you'll be able to make a return on it within 18 months. The technology moves so quickly these days that a 7 year old camera becomes irrelevant very quickly.
Not to mention, the RED One is already 8 years old. To expect it to continue to hold up in another 7 years is naivety. Would you call the Sony F900 still relevant?
Unless you've just got money to blow (in which case just buy something, why are you asking), you should be pretty certain you can pay it off within 18 months. If you need a camera that's going to attempt to stay relevant for the next 7 years, you're going to need to buy a relatively new, relatively expensive camera now, and even then you'll likely be disappointed if you really can only pay the camera off over 7 years.
--
On the question of RED One vs RED Scaret - the Scarlet is by far a better camera. But the ROne kit is pick up and shoot, whereas the Scarlet one you're going to need all sorts of other things.
If I were you, I might think about something like an FS5 - gives you pretty good quality, soon to give you raw, can have a PL mount put on it, is 4k, pretty new, etc etc. Plus you can put cheap lenses and expensive lenses on it.. I think overall you'd probably be happier. The FS700 has been able to stay somewhat relevant thanks to its raw recording (though it is still only four years old). Otherwise, maybe a second hand F5. You'll probably only get the body, but that's essentially what you're getting with the Scarlet anyway.
It doesn't necessarily have the name recognition of RED, but realistically you're not going to book jobs based on the fact that you own an 8 year old camera. Maybe if you can find the money to upgrade the Scarlet to a Dragon sensor..

Hell Yeah wait for the Kinefinity Terra 5K!