IronFilm

"Virtual Reality" is a very new term and can be a very broad term. So some people could arguably classify 360 degree video content under "VR", but other people who are VR snobs wouldn't regard it as "proper VR".
For "proper VR" they'll say you need to not just have 360 degree vision around yourself, but also have complete freedom to move through the space you're in as you wish (just like you can do in real life). 

So how can you create that freedom of movement?  Well you'll need to create all the items in that space (& the space itself) painstakingly from scratch, just like they do with video games. This can be very difficult and expensive (this is why video games can cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make, just like big blockbuster movies do).

And the downside is it still won't truly look life like!! Instead it will look like you're in a video game. 
360 degree video has the downside of you lose the freedom of movement, you are instead constrained to take the same path of movement through the environment as the filmmaking took during capture. It is like you're on an amusement park ride, once you're strapped in then you're going to go through it the same way the rides are going to go, following the tracks. 

But the upside is 360 degree video has the benefit of looking waaaaay more realistic, as you're filming real life itself! Also 360 degree video has the benefit that it is relatively "easy"-ish to create content. Well...  still quite tough! Just check out my other thread where I'm discussing hardware requirements:

Then you have software needs as well! Which are themselves quickly a very complex issue, and can be very expensive to purchase. 
A slight tweak to this 2nd approach is to do 3D 360 videos, this gives you stereoscopic vision in your VR headset, rather than seeing just a "flat" looking video. A potential big improvement for sure! However.... this means double as many cameras, which means more the double the hardware complexity, and more the double the difficulty in post production.
But all of this is a walk in the park compared to trying to do "proper VR" in a truly photorealistic manner. For that you need a capture rig kinda like the bullet time rig from "The Matrix", but even more complex and comprehensive. Then a vastly more complex software step to turn each capture into a moving 3D model with the filmed texture overlayed on top. 

Another big downside of this approach is you can't do large/complex scenes at once. For instance if you wanted a VR experience of a party via this method, you couldn't just a capture a crowd of people drinking, dancing, and having fun. Nope, instead you'd need to do each person one by one, then insert them one by one into the scene you're creating in the computer. On the upside, it does make it heaps easier to edit the scene in post if you wish to move or even remove elements from the scene! Want to move that idiot with the jerky  spazzy dancing to the back of the scene instead of at the front? Done!  

Maybe the promise of "The Edit Button" will come true one day... 
 
The other downside to this approach of using videogrammetry is that currently the quality you get is usually absolute rubbish, here you can see one I took of myself last month (it is a moving 3D model, which you can fly around it as you wish, or place it anywhere within a 3D space you create in Unity):

As you can tell, the quality looks like absolute trash compared to what we're used to from our BMPCC / URSA / Sony FS7 / Samsung NX1 / etc cameras!! However, that was just a very rough and quick test capture I did (for instance I didn't bother with lighting it at all), and I could significantly improve this. But it still is at best rather bad, unless you wish to pour millions into this! And even the companies which have tens of millions of dollars of funding behind them still are not hugely better than this, and have a looooong way to go. But I expect "soon" this approach will be mainstream (it is an open question as to when "soon" is, maybe just a couple of years away? Or maybe a decade away.... ).

So each of these three approaches have their own serious pros/cons list to consider, and I wouldn't consider any one "better" VR than the other. They're just different tools to use, depending on the task at hand to complete. 
 
Looking into the future, I think that although the 3rd approach is clearly the most undeveloped of the three, as tech improves it will likely become the main choice for creating high quality VR content. But all three approaches will remain valid approaches to VR creation for years to come. 

Don't forget - the FS700 cost the same as the FS7 when it was released, and the firmware upgrade was paid as well.
The FS5 is $3k cheaper than an FS700 at release + paid raw upgrade.
In addition, Sony aren't going to give you F5 quality in a $5k camera + raw/recorder. Their plan with the FS700 was to get people to buy their off-board raw unit and that didn't work out so well. 
I think that's also why the form factor is the way it is. It's a C100 competitor at its core. 4k is a bonus. Not only that, Sony has 4k TVs they want to sell, and by bolstering their entire camera range with 4k, it gives an extra incentive for people to buy 4k TVs. 
If you want proper 4k acquisition, Sony want you to buy an FS7, F5 or F55

I disagree personally. I would rather shoot ProRes if I'm doing the editing - but hey, to each their own. I'd prefer to shoot Alexa at 2k ProRes 422HQ than the RED One's Redcode @ 4k - but hey.
I'm not sure how you would leave it on when you need to change a battery..? I'm not sure what you shoot, or how you shoot, but it is annoying/takes some getting used to, to plan your battery changes, and swap out when a battery may still have up to 25%+ left to ensure you won't need to swap between takes, or just before a take. Not to mention it sucks significantly more power than say an Epic.
Also, sure you get a picture... but there's a big ugly RED logo on top of it - hardly easy to frame, expose and set focus...
Anyway
Is the F3 too big as well, or just not interested because 'Sony'?
So why not go for one of the many other options? Or still too big?
I'm not sure if this is to direct your purchase decision, or just a general discussion... I don't mind the FS700 coupled with a Shogun (though I don't like the image straight out of camera) but overall I'd probably go with the A7sII. Personally have never had an issue with Sony colours.

Not sure if you've ever used a RED One, but it is one of, if not the most, frustrating camera (that was) around :P.
Seriously - waiting up to two minutes for a camera to boot up every single time is... frustrating to say the least. On paper, it looks like a pretty viable option, but in reality....
Plus, at least the URSA can shoot to ProRes.
I don't personally think the RED One is worth it in today's camera environment. URSA's at least relatively current technology - and current model, so there's more support.
You'd be better off with a Sony F3 IMO unless you desperately need raw or 4k...

D750 is probably the best hybrid for the hobbiest imo. The NX1 is a great video camera and great at stills in daylight. In dusk, dawn and darkness it fails in AF and its no monster in dark video either.
A true hybrid needs to work 24h/day imo.
I doubt you could tell good HD uspcaled from true 4K on places like youtube, and TV don't want no 4K. And I doubt you will shoot for 4K cinema on a hybrid. I can somewhat get the "future" thing but no one will care in the future. I still watch my favorite shows captured in SD and they are just as good today. Regarding personal stuff like travel videos and such, no one is going to watch it in the future anyway.

Im with you. You could also get 2 x A7s or 1 x D750, 1 x 5Dmkiii and a BMPCC.
Im getting the LS300 for three weeks starting today

May sound stupid, but I would not want any of them for this price. I'd rather have a used FS100 or AF100 (or equivalent) and spend the remaining cash on lenses, mics and lighting.
I'm not in that 4k or High ISOs race anyway.

Something getting released in July?
(BTW, the LS300 should be here on Wednesday. Its in the same price bracket and might upset things. Bought a vintage 35mm for 20 bucks this weekend just for the occasion.)

Despite the recent global shutter disappointment the BMMCC is still very tempting. Add in the essentials of a speedbooster and decent monitor/ EVF and it's the same sort of price range as the other cameras mentioned. 
5dMk3 raw makes sense in theory but I've just never seen anything from it that really wowed me. As someone who is fairly inexperienced and hasn't played with a lot of cameras that counts for a lot. Same goes for the 1DC. The two C300 Blue movies are a couple of my faves of the last 10 years, and despite knowing it's the talent and story that really makes it, you can't help but feel swayed! Currently happy shooting Vision colour on my 6D, but don't feel like I'd miss the full-frame look and would gladly swap it for the "cinematic" motion of the BM. The 1.75x crop (I think..?) of the Speedbooster might mean rethinking my 35, 50, 85 prime lenses though, which is something that gives me pause.  
 

We are talking about Canon. Remember about the "see the impossible" marketing campaign for a useless website ? Remember the "revolutionary" XC10 ? Remember about the "great for video" 80D that can do 1080/60p with AF in 2016, which also required an additional $200 "Power Zoom adapter" ? Should I go on ?
I personally remember the day I choose to invest in Canon gears, I'm only waiting for the 5Dmk4 now before switching definitively to Sony and Panasonic.

Take raw stills! But not raw video.
And yes, no matter what you pick, bringing along an RX100 as a back up in a wise idea.

Then definetelly dont raw.
Not because raw isnt good for Hobby, but if a c100 is overkill it sounds like the lx100 is a better fit.

Panasonic G7 with 12-32mm pancake lens (this lens weighs and costs less than a quarter of the 12-35, if you buy new separated from a kit on eBay).
There are a few differences with the twice the price GH4 which stop some people getting it like headphone input. Better low light video on the G7 (which has been mentioned once or twice here recently), which might lead to lower used GH4 prices soon/already? The GH4 doesn't weight too much more and feels great in your hands compared to something like an RX100 or A7.

Hello.
Here's some more DNG's for downloading. There's a mix of evening and dusk shots here with tricky and mixed lighting. Compressed RAW as well. 
https://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/…/ursa-mini-4-6k-carnival/

Really? I got a Pocket about 5 months ago. No real grading experience. Only Panasonic, Sony, and Canon cams before this. I've found it simpler and easier to learn the pocket than any of those, and MUCH more flexible to push around in post. All it takes is contrast and saturation, and it looks as good or better than any Canon footage I've ever seen. 
The highlight roll off is nicer on the 5D, but overall DR is higher on the Pocket. Plus, Blackmagic has better flexibility and an easier workflow with 2:1 CDNG and 4 flavors of ProRes, along with the best lens compatibility on the market and rock solid reliability. On the other hand, the 5D has that slick crop mode, slow motion, and 2.5K, as well as the good (not amazing) 22MP stills.
I wouldn't call either camera a clear winner. Both are RAW classics, but each has its pitfalls. As usual, it all depends what you need. 
Once the used prices dip, I'm strongly considering a 5D3 to compliment my BM and Panasonic cams. Or maybe a D750 with Voigtlander glass. Then again, this NX1 hack has me all hot and bothered...
Spoiled for choice, aren't we?

Its not important at all. Definetelly not if you are a beginner. Its better to learn the basics of exposure and then add a bunch of helping features.
Its nice to have, yes. I would love to have it in evert camera. But not important. People, both hobby and Hollywood have gotten on without it for years and years, and still do.
When I started out it TV some years ago, the wave form was read of a huge box sitting in the Studio. The vectorscope was in another. The camera only had zebra. No peaking, waveform, histogram or vectorscope.
But we got along 
So "important"? nope you should be able to expose without. "Nice to have"? Yes, very.

I have a few githubs for other projects and its a good idea. it would be more of a blog, the amount of data I have examined would be too much to try to make sense of, as I said, I was working on this for my own personal goals a few months before I even found this thread.
Ill see if I can create something tangible in the next few days github wise and Ill post up. Alas text cant convey how excited I am as I go through all this info. I had a want for it to be a good system and it has surpassed my expectations. Great things can be done with it. 

Actually John mateeee, can you ask the boys next time your over about a nikon mount turret please I've got a big bag of nikon G glass that has no F-stop dials sitting on my shelf for the last five years doing nothing ... and pass along a thank you for a great job on getting stuff done in the way they do. 

ps: you missed the most iconic shot of that house on great ocean road mate.. a nice MW shot to show off the cliffs would of been sweet as... just to show the world how crazy us aussies can get ! ( was this place yeah ?) 

Just because the couldn't get gs working as well as they would like for the current cameras doesn't mean you won't see it in the future, like for example the over due Ursa 4.6K turrets ?
I think BM had to draw a line and ship the UM4.6K because for the vast majority of users the RS is perfectly acceptable for most users, while they keep optimising it.
jb
 

This looks like the best image you can get under 10K without buying into Red's ecosystem. This, coming from a former Red owner and operator - and I sold that once I saw how the very first blackmagic camera handled low-light noise. 
The Rolling Shutter, oh so what. Hey look, I'd rather have a company that tries to do something really amazing and fall short, rather than a company that intentionally cripples cameras to sell you the next model 6 months later, or are trying to protect their tiered market strategies. 
There is no false advertising or bait and switch. Because you technically didn't buy anything. It was a pre-order. And BM was upfront about the issue and now they're releasing the camera. They're actually pretty damn responsive without the attitude (RED). 
Yeah there was a delay - like other small companies in any industry. That's what happens when a company is driven by innovation and don't have billion dollar resources. A world without RED and Blackmagic would be immensely damaging to the independent film community. They've changed the market for the better.
The crazy sense of entitlement, construing this as some unethical business practice is hilarious. "I will never again buy a blackmagic product" - Ok, enjoy your hacked 5D or franken dslr, or whatever you shoot with. Because blackmagic doesn't owe you anything. If you sat in front of your computer hitting refresh for the past six months, you have every right to be angry. But not at blackmagic. You sad, sad little man.
I hope everybody cancels their pre-orders, so please! Keep complaining. 
 

I really think the D750 is the best option unless you feel the need for RAW. Great image, 60p, very little RS, and small files that grade very well. Also Nikon glass can be adopted to anything, so if you get another camera in the future you won't have to sell your glass. The BMMCC needs an external moniter and can't be used for stills at all, which seems to strike your interest. 

Yes they do.
2.5K in the NX500, Sonys lens road map, Red announce entire cameras.... The list goes on and on. Its not unique.
The only thing that is, is the products BMD offer for the price they are asking. 

I think Arri Alexa is the way to go, you just hire one of those peruvian sherpas.

The PIX could be very nice if you want the best sound with this add-on http://www.newsshooter.com/2016/03/15/video-devices-pix-lr-audio-interface-adds-xlr-inputsoutputs-to-the-pix-e-series/
Basically it makes it a Sound Devices recorder, an industry standard in filmmaking. Those start at $3k while you can get a PIX-E5 for $1k (the HDMI version) and the PIX-LR for $500
It also seems much more durable than any other monitor/recorder out there

I guess you could argue that if they never actually shipped anything....And if there was something else that compared with the very first camera they made....
JB