IronFilm

Fun story: one time, a friend of mine was taking a walk and came across a shoot for a Progressive commercial. They ushered him through so they could get back to work, but he managed to catch a glimpse of the DP's name from the slate.
It was Emmanuel Lubezki.
This was well after Children of Men and Tree of Life, too.
While I agree with your main point-- that feature films have to find unique aesthetic characteristics to distinguish them from lower-end productions-- I cannot abide the implication that accepting commercial work precludes someone from being a true artist. In my eyes, any true artist would do whatever work they had to if it meant taking another step toward realizing their next project. 

Wow, amazed this is a real thing.

Wow, amazed this is a real thing.

Wow, amazed this is a real thing.

You can detach the zoom and use it closer for interviews, connect a lav to it and put it in the pocket, connect a wireless lav and leave it on the camera, connect any number of wired mics to it, mount it on a boom, etc, etc.

Seriously? Do you think a crap job using high-end gear makes everything else less "special"?
Here's an amazing idea - it's not about the gear. The only way to make a WalMart spot "special" is with great concept, writing, talent, lighting, shooting and editing. 
Another shocking concept: A crap job shot on an Alexa 65 will still look like crap.
A stunning and radical suggestion: amazing and moving stories have been made with really low-end gear, few lights, and tiny crews.
A soul-shattering observation: very few people can discuss at length the cameras and lenses used for "Citizen Kane", "2001", and… well, you get the idea (sheesh, I hope anyway).
An intriguing question: Can you tell me, off the top of your head, the gear used by Wong Kar-wai to shoot "2046"? Does it even matter? (It's, umm, really damn gorgeous if you haven't seen it).
And finally, an earth-shaking idea: many "true high end jobs like features" are crap, even when shot with amazing gear.
I would sit down in a dark room and ponder those ideas and see if they make any sort of sense.

They won't. The camera comes packaged with the Prime 65 lenses as well as the Codex Vault 65 data management system. The day rate is somewhere near $10k per day. And beyond some extremely high-end commercials, I can't imagine anyone using this but Hollywood features in the nine-figure budget range. The post-production costs for 6K Arriraw are astronomical.
Some day, maybe fifteen years from now, I'm sure that these Alexa 65 bodies will wind up on the used market selling for a pittance, much like the Arri D21 and Sony F35 have. But by then, I'm sure we'll have 12K IMAX-sized sensors in our DSLRs. Maybe not Canon. They'll still be doing 8-bit HD.

Pretty sure you could make a purchase at a http://www.geekbuying.com/category/RC-Quadcopters-1569/DJI-c-1266-v-3289.html for example... I think the cheapest (yet decent and DJI-like) way to start out though might be by going over at HobbyKing and getting yourself a Quanum Nova (PRO) (Cheerson CX-20) found here: http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__2010__2009__Multi_Rotors_Drones_Parts-RTF_ARF_PNF.html . They have the Inspire 1 and Phantom 3's as well, btw. There's a huge resource over at http://www.rcgroups.com/multirotor-talk-659/ .
 

My Micro has arrived! Such a little beauty. My VS-2HD looks huge when mounted on the Micro 

Interesting. Most of the Kine owners I've spoken to are pretty happy with the support. Can you expand a little on your experience with them?

Domestic...? Yes, they have it: in China ;-) But they have some US connection as well.

From what I've read following it in the FB group for Kinefinity it sounds like their support is AMAZING!

Still not even had time to install the new firmware... and the little time I have for cameras outside of work is being stolen by the M8.
But here is some footage.
A quick edit of material gathered for a BTS to a friends photo exhibit. As some may know I shoot a lot of analog film, so when he needed a BTS for his Large Format project I was game.
He is doing two things, recreating old pictures of his home town. And also takes portraits in the same old stiff ways they did back in the 50s, but in todays environments. 
In this "draft version" I left in some shakes, zooms and sound for the sake of reviewing the LS300. The final version will be silent, probably B&W and much much longer.
(its going to loop on a monitor in the museum)

Its shot in HD 4:2:2 using only a Canon 35mm f2.0 IS lens. All closeups etc are done with the marvelous Prime Zoom.
It was a good test of something I already knew, the LS300 is a killer Run-n-Gun camera. There was no directing, blocking, or retakes. Everything outside was was done in an hour and I have loads of footage. 
Like I said, these are just some random shots from the material, I didn't spend more than 10 minutes on grading since its going to be B&W. 
I might do a short version of the final video and put it on Vimeo later on.
 

Not kool-aid, more like finely aged CCD wine.

Yeah, you can always start out little and go big later... maybe this is a good entry

Hey Guys. I've been building and flying drone for years now, long before it became mainstream. Here is what I would consider:
- Before buying a 4-5K inspire, get a a dirt cheap used Phantom 3 Standard (the cheap version) for $300-400 and play with it a lot. The control and handling are similar to the Inspire but this is the one you want to experiment and crash (because you will crash at the beginning). I would even start with a $35 Hubsan X4 to get familiar with the controls.
- There are a lot of brand but the ready to fly package are DJI, Yuneec and 3DR. unfortunately the inspire with X5 is the only one that can provide enough IQ for real pro work.
- Matrice 600 Vs Inspire X5R ? Beside the big size difference, the main aspect is redundancy. There is no room for failure on the Inspire. If one ESC/Motor/Prop/battery/flight controller IMU or compass fails, the whole drone is going down.
The new Matrice 600 offers in its Pro version a new A3 flight controller with 3 GPS antenna and 3 IMU in order to prevent failure (like in modern airliners, the 3 sensors check against each other and the computer eliminate the one unit that would give false reading)
The Matrice can also handle the loss of and ESC/Motor or prop and land safely, albeit with limited control. A quadcopter will spin an free fall in this case. There are solutions though with safety parachute and automatic deployment systems such as MARS and NorthUAV mayday board.
Last the Matrice 600 has a multi battery system that can handle the loss of power on one battery. This multi battery systems also offers the advantage of not having to carry large battery like other drone in this class. Large batteries are a problem because they are legally impossible to carry on board aircraft (check IATA policy).
- As for flying, all these machine offer dumb proof assisted flight mode (GPS, ATTI, Return to home). No need to be an helicopter pilot. Any kid can fly a drone these days. Just a matter of practice.
Feel free if you have other questions.
 
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100010518735843
https://vimeo.com/oliverkmia

Yes you should get a few dozens/hundreds of hours of practice with a DJI Phantom or similar before buying an Inspire 

How the heck did he have an AXE in the studio??? :-o

If you haven't already tried the technique in this link with your F35 footage Ed you really should give it a shot, along with the color chart method it gives the best neutral grade for the F35 of any method I have tried. The normal color chart method is good to but I have found it adds too much contrast to the highlights at least in my opinion. It is very easy the only real downside is since it is ACES most luts will not work correctly but Filmconvert seems to be fine.
http://www.filmscientist.com/blog/2015/01/29/film-scientist-aces-workflow-revisited/
In the project settings switch it from YRGB to Davinci Aces.
In the color manangement tab select either Rec709 or RGB for the ODT depending on what monitor you use.
On the footage in the media pool assign the lut from the link above.
If you want to use the color chart correction make sure the input gamma is linear, target gamma is linear and target colorspace is ACES and that is it. For the first time with any version of Slog I feel like I am getting a truely neutral starting point.

That is a good but fairly expensive package. If you have no experience flying a drone I strongly suggest you get a DJI Phantom 3 Standard or 4K to practice with. those are $500-$650. Don't practice from a dead start with the X5R.
My documentary team has an FAA licenced rotorcraft pilot to fly our fleet of three Phantom 3 Pros, although we may upgrade to the Inspire/X5R. It is not legally required but he's a helicopter pilot and has lots of drone experience. He is constantly reading, studying and practicing to optimize our chances when we get on site. He has a large tacklebox of repair parts and tools. Despite that experience, he has crashed several drones on various shooting sites. Most of those were not disastrous but several of them could have been. 

Try and check it out before you buy... it is a big, somewhat dangerous bit of kit. It's a bit like seeing a Red epic in pictures, then seeing and holding one in person.

This flagship DSLRs are mostly used by PJs and Jpeg is very important for these guys. Now look at Canon white balance in  DPR night mode. D5 nailed it, but Canon seems took Sony color, and made it worse than their own 1DX :-)

The DPreview tests back up everything Andrew has said here...  Journalism is all about presenting information in a concise package.  DPReview's article is plagued with positivity - if they're not positive they don't get advertising revenue or free cameras sent early.  Andrews article simply points out and opens conversation regarding the less positive facts that are almost avoided by dpreview to best play political ball - brushing under the carpet hastily the fact that the 1dxii doesn't improve upon - infact based on the tests can;t even compete technically against a 4year old predecessor.
 
I like the article because it's brought to light that from a stills point of view my investment in an A7Rii was a good one and from what I'm seeing here canon won't offer anything that will compete for at least a few years.  

Thank you.
Indeed we must be realistic.
DPReview always put an overtly positive 'spin' on things.
It's the job of an independent blogger to add balance to any given set of facts.
The facts:
- No low light improvement over the 2012 model
- Colour is more muted
- Less detail in JPEGs at high ISOs
- 4 years since the predecessor

Dynamic range still behind Sony and most Nikon sensors.
DPReview wrote this:
"Like the EOS 80D there's a big improvement in the camera's dynamic range. Canon's move to a design using on-chip analog-to-digital conversion allows less noise to be added before the signal is converted into digital values"
Which in my opinion is highly questionable.
The way DPR tested the dynamic range relies on the sensor being ISO invariant - i.e., maximum dynamic range at base ISO, exposure achieved by underexposing by as much as 5 stops to protect the shadows. This technique completely changes the distribution of your histogram and kills tonality / skintones / colour, all 3. If you wanna shoot like that be my guest but it's not a viable technique if you want to maximise image quality.
Canon didn't move to on-chip A/D conversion with the 1D X Mark II. The original 1D X has on chip A/D, so that's flat out wrong.
"Big improvement" to dynamic range. By any measure it's not "big".
So you can drink their cool aid and be happy, or you can be properly informed and less happy.
Your choice.
I know which option Jimmy would choose!

Of course it will. So does the 1Dx. The problem is not about being a bad camera, it's a about the micro leap in terms of improvements over the previous generation.
4 years for what ? A slightly bump in pixel, catching up in DR, same ISO, a few more FPS, better AF. It's not worth $6k for me.