IronFilm

I own the GH4 and just rented the GX85 to have a B cam for a wedding. I used to love the image the GH4 produced, until I used the GX85!!! It is sooooooo much cleaner, and the IBIS is a lifesaver.
Let's put it this way: When I went through the 180GB worth of video for the deliverable, 95% of the content I shipped was recorded with the GX85, as at the high ISO (1600-3200) the GH4 was undeliverable.  If the G85 is anything like the GX85, 4K delivery will be awesome.

Just have one setting: "Unlock Pro Video Settings"

Default send it shipped out set to "Off", but then users can switch it to "On" which will enable several more pages and submenus worth of video settings to be viewable.
Well.... I reckon Nikon are ahead of Canon in the video DSLR game, but the gain is not really large enough for everyone (it is for some though) to make it worth switching, as if you're going to switch away from Canon.... why not just go to Sony or Panasonic instead? That is Nikon's problem in attracting video shooters away from Canon, they can't just moderately beat Canon by little bits (like they have with the D5200, D750, D500, etc).  
They need to also bring out a higher end above that is focused on video to complement their video DSLRs (such as the C100/C300 and FS5/FS7 does).

In a world in which the market share for dedicated stills cameras is massively declining each and every year, Nikon can not survive by focusing on only one or two niches, they need a broader platform to support themselves. The video/film world is an obvious and natural next step for them.
 

Depends where you live, you'll need to look up your local situation. 

Great minds think alike! ;-) 

Some of the features of the FS5 (such as its new ND filter, and the slimmer body), and not needing the XDCA (yet still having all its features), would both be nice

Absolutely. 
There's a certain type of freedom of expression you get with a camera like the FS5 - it can do pretty much everything you want it to, it doesn't look like a bazooka and leaves you and your post skills to get it to shine. I like the individuality of this and the grading work pays big dividends with your skill set. 
On the lower cost end of the scale, the upcoming GH5 seems like the ideal choice (on paper). I honestly don't think anyone could need anything else for a very long time. Having both these units would have you covered for everything. 
We all love our gear, and new gear announcements (especially cameras) can be very distracting - especially for Sony owners. When you have a camera that does pretty much everything you'll ever need - the distractions aren't even worth it. 
I'm with you on the Terra 5k - it looks awesome. I'd only get one if I was absolutely rolling in cash though. I could get all sorts of cool lenses that last decades instead!  
 

If you're comparing the two of GH3 vs GH4 then clearly you're somewhat budget restrained otherwise you'd have just got the GH4, thus I highly recommend you buy the Panasonic G7 instead! :-D 

I watched the trailer. And I am blown away... It looks great. Honestly I don't think 4K would have helped the look of this film at all.
Congratulations on a great looking trailer. I look forward to watching the film!!!
Damn, I wish the D5500 would drop just a little bit in price. If you are considering a 4K upgrade for your next film... I suggest you stay within the Nikon ecosystem... Maybe a D500. 
Btw, I would love to hear some production notes... More about camera choice positives and negatives, lenses used, lighting, sound equipment... Anything really. 
Thanks and good luck with the film. 

And it would cost twice as much as a GH5 would!

There is also a third model which I think Sony has taken (it's also quite a new approach). Don't you think Sony delivers features but a lot of the time they're not 100% reliable like on Canikons? They're unreliable to the point that some people after initial OHs and WOWs switch back. The third model is based around Lean startup method in which you intentionally release lower quality products in order to improve them later on.(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lean_startup). The idea is to get a "good enough" product on the market ASAP and improve it over time (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lean_startup#Minimum_viable_product). This way you can release cutting edge technologies earlier and more often, cut the costs (less testing time etc) and get feedback from customers earlier. The downsides we all know, don't we ;)? We're all unpaid beta testers all the time in a way. There is also something called split testing in which "different versions of a product are offered to customers at the same time" - sounds familiar, doesn't it? 
It'll be interesting to see which model will come out first in the end, though!

Not saying it can't be done, though there is no point coming up with a whole new form factor for a slight change in resolution. Sony seems to have made a decision with all the current sensors to optimise for video, and 6K -> 4K downsample seems to give a mighty fine image. Is 6.5K -> 4K going to be any better? 
The 24MP APS-C sensor is already the same pixel size as the 42 MP FF sensor, i.e. pretty high resolution. My guess is that down the line the 42 MP sensor will be developed into an 8K video sensor. There is a logic behind these numbers, not just picking a high number for the sake of it.

If you have watched Sony's sensor development for any time, you would notice they don't change resolution that often. They establish a sensor form factor and gradually evolve it. The current batch (apart from the 24MP full frame which is a throw back to the A99, Nikon D600 series etc) are optimised for video resolutions. The 42MP is an 8K sensor that gives a cleaner line skip result for 4K. The S35 crop of the 42MP sensor is essentially the same as the APS-C 24MP sensor which can do full 6K readout. And 12MP on the A7S obviously works well for 4K. Anything in between will be a mess for video resolutions (see Canon). The question is whether the 24 MP full frame sensor has reached the end of its potential.

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

Just because I'm somewhat "anti" Canon doesn't mean I won't use them! After all I just this moment got back home from shooting a music video with a Canon C100 ;-) Will post my thoughts soon, but for now... it is saturday night and I'm heading out to town!

Why can't everything have an interface like the Blackmagic cameras?

Yes we do know Sony won't license E mount. 
And Canon EF mount has been around long enough it no longer has the same level of IP protect as E mount has, thus others can use it. 

The Mafia. 

Further to my post today, I've just fond out that the Shogun Inferno WILL be able to match the 7Q in recording features: 
Continuous HFR in 4-5 weeks.  4k120fps burst in next firmware update.  RAW to ProRes up to 4k60p available now.  The only thing it won't do is DNG at 240fps, however I wouldn't use that anyway as the files sizes would be ridiculous. 
I used the FS5 bare bones on a shoot the other day, and the image is fantastic if your grading and exposure is decent. It seems like the most versatile package on the market - great for point and shoot/ run n gun and beastly for higher end commercial work with the external. 

and we still don't know how many people are "a lot"(or someone really has reliably numbers of the percentage of broken units?). The voice of those complaining about a supposedly broken product will always be much louder than those who are outside actually working with their product of choice. Then we always seem to have so many people joining the discussion without even owning the camera. Plus beginners like me who suddenly got a professional camera, but have no idea yet how to work with it. All this gives a really fishy picture when it comes to info's and reviews on certain products or manufacturers. I say grab a camera go out and shoot...if not happy sell it and buy another one until you are happy with it. Then post about this camera and why it's great. That might actually help others to make a choice. Because what are we looking for after all? A great camera or a broken camera? Of course we can also do what everyone else is doing...only complain and highlight everything we think is broken?

Idk, when I was using my Micro, the most fun I had with the camera was using c-mount lenses. Fujinon TV lenses are often compared to Super Speeds for pennies on the dollar... I mean those suckers are sharp lenses. I have an old set of Cosmicar lenses that added just the right character. The Bell + Howell Angenieux lenses are gorgeous and pair beautifully with the Pocket and Micro, as do the Kern Paillards.
They really give you the ability to use fast lenses without a speedbooster/lens combo monstrosity on BM's smaller cams.
I'm selling my Micro and hoping to eventually pick up a Pocket and I will only view the camera as the S16 cam it is... So only native M43 lenses with OIS (when I want to go handheld) and S16 glass/TV lenses for everything else... probably in c-mount.
Sorry, I know this wasn't exactly the discussion you were having, but I don't think c-mounts are that obscure an option for a lot of BM users.

I think it is more like 10% Sony (but that greater complexity largely comes from them packing in so many features... you wouldn't have that problem if they did less! But  you wouldn't want that) & 90% a meme created by Canon shooters.

No problem I'm a bit of a location sound recordist nerd, so have a good handle on all the various low budget sound recording options ;-) 

The key point is all the ones I listed have headphone jacks (even the Shure on camera mic, and those wireless receivers) so while you can't monitor what is actually being recorded inside the camera (thus whenever you can and have a spare moment, you should still check playback for issues), you can at least easily monitor the audio feed (which is the next best thing!). Plus all of those listed (except for the Saramonic & Sony wireless kits) are recorders as well, which gives you a back up recording as well as an emergency fail safe you can resort to if need be.
If all you need is an on camera mic for scratch audio / extreme run & gun, then go for the Shure VP83F.
If you use wireless a lot and you want a very minimalist set up without an extra bulk, then go for Saramonic UwMic9 (or the Sony UWP-D11 if you want the fancy-ish "brand name" of Sony rather than Saramonic, of if you need a different frequency range for your region other than what Saramonic can supply at the moment).  
if you want an actual proper recorder go with Tascam DR60D mk2 (I've seen it for as low as US$135 on special!! Insanely cheap for such a good little recorder), get the Tascam DR70D only if you need the extra XLR inputs.
Get the Zoom F4 (or even F8) if you have aspirations in the near future of taking location sound recording seriously to a semi pro level or higher and specialising in this as a sound recordist. (like I am doing myself: http://ironfilm.co.nz/sound/)

Get Zoom H1 (or Tascam DR22WL, which is kinda similar ish... but has WiFi!) if you have very low audio requirements (don't even want XLR) and just want something nice but is ultra small and compact with built in mics.

An FS5 will get him work too, as B cam to FS7/F5/F55 jobs, and A cam for lots of similar jobs you'd do with C100. 
Plus the FS5 has a level of diverse versatility that the C100 can not come close to matching with 4K option, raw recording, and slow motion.
He has only a very small selection of lenses, thus luckily he has no (or only very low) lock in to the Canon ecosystem, and he can keep using them with an FS5.
As for color, just apply LC709a. Easy, now you're sorted for low budget / quick turn around jobs. For higher end coloring you can go with raw. While the C100 can't even do 10bit!

No problem I'm a bit of a location sound recordist nerd, so have a good handle on all the various low budget sound recording options ;-) 

The key point is all the ones I listed have headphone jacks (even the Shure on camera mic, and those wireless receivers) so while you can't monitor what is actually being recorded inside the camera (thus whenever you can and have a spare moment, you should still check playback for issues), you can at least easily monitor the audio feed (which is the next best thing!). Plus all of those listed (except for the Saramonic & Sony wireless kits) are recorders as well, which gives you a back up recording as well as an emergency fail safe you can resort to if need be.
If all you need is an on camera mic for scratch audio / extreme run & gun, then go for the Shure VP83F.
If you use wireless a lot and you want a very minimalist set up without an extra bulk, then go for Saramonic UwMic9 (or the Sony UWP-D11 if you want the fancy-ish "brand name" of Sony rather than Saramonic, of if you need a different frequency range for your region other than what Saramonic can supply at the moment).  
if you want an actual proper recorder go with Tascam DR60D mk2 (I've seen it for as low as US$135 on special!! Insanely cheap for such a good little recorder), get the Tascam DR70D only if you need the extra XLR inputs.
Get the Zoom F4 (or even F8) if you have aspirations in the near future of taking location sound recording seriously to a semi pro level or higher and specialising in this as a sound recordist. (like I am doing myself: http://ironfilm.co.nz/sound/)

Get Zoom H1 (or Tascam DR22WL, which is kinda similar ish... but has WiFi!) if you have very low audio requirements (don't even want XLR) and just want something nice but is ultra small and compact with built in mics.

Nooooo...... the video is now set to private and I can't view it!! :-/ 

No problem I'm a bit of a location sound recordist nerd, so have a good handle on all the various low budget sound recording options ;-) 

The key point is all the ones I listed have headphone jacks (even the Shure on camera mic, and those wireless receivers) so while you can't monitor what is actually being recorded inside the camera (thus whenever you can and have a spare moment, you should still check playback for issues), you can at least easily monitor the audio feed (which is the next best thing!). Plus all of those listed (except for the Saramonic & Sony wireless kits) are recorders as well, which gives you a back up recording as well as an emergency fail safe you can resort to if need be.
If all you need is an on camera mic for scratch audio / extreme run & gun, then go for the Shure VP83F.
If you use wireless a lot and you want a very minimalist set up without an extra bulk, then go for Saramonic UwMic9 (or the Sony UWP-D11 if you want the fancy-ish "brand name" of Sony rather than Saramonic, of if you need a different frequency range for your region other than what Saramonic can supply at the moment).  
if you want an actual proper recorder go with Tascam DR60D mk2 (I've seen it for as low as US$135 on special!! Insanely cheap for such a good little recorder), get the Tascam DR70D only if you need the extra XLR inputs.
Get the Zoom F4 (or even F8) if you have aspirations in the near future of taking location sound recording seriously to a semi pro level or higher and specialising in this as a sound recordist. (like I am doing myself: http://ironfilm.co.nz/sound/)

Get Zoom H1 (or Tascam DR22WL, which is kinda similar ish... but has WiFi!) if you have very low audio requirements (don't even want XLR) and just want something nice but is ultra small and compact with built in mics.