fuzzynormal

Don't feel silly. The extremely narrow "DSLR" DOF is kind of ideal for interviews. The key to getting good interview shots is to always have as much depth/distance in the background as possible and have the bacdrop behind the talking head be about 2 stops darker than the subject. If you can arrange the space and subject to accomplish that you'll get decent interviews everytime. FYI, I always turn off the lights in office space then do my own. Office lighting is horrible and almost never flattering.

I use B&W ND. No complaints other than they're a bit more expensive than others.

The Nikon D750, The Sony A7s, the Nikon d810...all cameras costing more than triple what a $500 GX7 goes for. Just saying. The Lumix's IQ competes well too. Not that those other cameras mentioned aren't nice pieces of gear, but that GX shooting exceptional 60p on the cheap is pretty sweet. I just used the GX7 with that frame rate on a job last week and I'm using it again tomorrow. Anyway, that's my testimonial. Good luck!

40mm FF equiv is too short a lens for interviews I think. I did that set up once with my Gx7 and it's just not very flattering for faces; too close and distorted. You can get a 45mm f1.8 prime for M43 at a decent price. I use that alot for talking heads. If you want something really cheap and just plan on using it for interviews in controlled lighting, you might even consider a used 5DII with a used 85mm lens.

"Surely, you can't be serious..."

I've been very pleased with my gx7 @60p 1080. The camera is below $500 in the U.S. now so it's not much to give it a try. Impressive IQ as far as I'm concerned. It's nice and clean.

Doesn't have to be ideal to be effective. Besides, a small 5-10% crop to fix some wonky framing is not going to reveal too many flaws. I know many strive to have perfect pixel peeping portraits present in their productions. Possibly, particular people present partake polar preferences. Potential poll, perhaps? Point is, 4k is a good development. Why so many nay-say it is weird.

Mock it if you must, but when shooting 4K for documentary, corporate, or "low-pro" jobs this ability is an effective tool to have.

Color grading a down coverted 4k to 1080 clip. As you say, that's nice, to have that little extra push and pull. And, yeah, reframing if required. --In case you need to salvage a visual "motif" on a misframed shot ...for those of us plebes that do lowly documentary and run n gun corporate stuff. Now supersize it and give me toy with my happy meal.

If it was, say, a mug falling to the ground on a busy street, and you had control of the set, I'd film the background on a lock down shot with everything and everyone faking moving in slow mo. Then green screen the object off the same camera lock down. In post you can use a twixtor type plugin more effectively when the object has clean/no-overlapping edges. Once you got that set, you could composite the two shots. You probably only want to hold a shot like that for a second or two before you cut to another... But I don't know what you're going for ultimately, so that might be a worthless suggestion ;-) Anyway, here's a fun website for cool compositing techniques. Just keep in mind, if you're new to all this it's gonna take a lot of hours in post to make it happen. http://www.videocopilot.net/tutorials/

"What is the point of 4K" Ignoring the difference between DR and IQ in various cameras, which isn't what the OP asked anyway: More resolution gives you more flexibility with the image in post. 4K is suddenly affordable and pretty decent in low-light. What's not to like about that reality?

Yes, the lens choice needs to be paired directly to the sensor size for the poll to make any sort of logical sense. For example, I like a 30mm lens on a MFT as an all-around lens, but wouldn't use a 30mm to shoot a head shot with a FF sensor.

As I said, there's alot of fundamental information about how all this knowledge ties together. It's not that most of us are unwilling to try to explain stuff, but there's an essential foundation and grasp of basic theory you'll need before you can successfully implement practice. And typing ALL that out would be near impossible in an abbreviated way. Although I'm sure you'll get help here on this forum. As I can tell from your questions, you don't really understand the nature of light and camera exposure. So, to go from the basics of grasping that --to the comprehension of applied practice on an impressive special effects shot is a long haul, but if you're willing you should definitely give it a try! Trying and failing is one of the best educations. Here's a real simple start explaining some basics: http://wolfcrow.com/blog/understanding-camera-shutters-and-the-shutter-angle/ If that GoPro software is free, I'd suggest you try that first.

That chart is kind of pointless. Viewing distances for everyone is variable. I can't shoot at 480 and tell people to stand on the other side of the room to watch my video.

I like it. I shot a lot of similar footage and locations for a client. Kekak fire dance, Mt. Bromo, etc.. I never edit the footage once it's delivered, but after seeing this I'd like to do something similar. Good stuff.

What attitude? You have to know this stuff and admitting you might be ignorant about some stuff is no big deal. My ignorance is astounding. As you mentioned, you're probably going to use 50fps because that's what your camera is capable of. I'm guessing you can't really accomplish what you want to do all in camera at that frame rate, and the "why" about it is a big answer. If you decide to use a different camera have you considered what you'll have to do about exposure at high frame rate? Are you shooting indoors or outdoors? Day or night? Is HMI rental a possibility? Regarding software solutions, you have to shoot in a very very particular way so you can make something akin to super slow mo via Twixtor or something similar. Twixtor is not a magic plug-in that invents moments in time that never existed on the footage --so you have to shoot your subject under very narrow guidelines in order to make it work in a somewhat useful way. The limitations of the plug-in might make your shoot impractical. Only you can decide if that plug-in will work for you that 'kuz we don't know what you have in mind. I've shot slow-mo productions on the FS700. If you need to rent something cheap, that might be your best best. Still, maybe 240fps is still too fast for you? The faster frame rates the fs700 does is cool, but the resolution is pretty bad when you push the rates high. Does that matter or can you live with a softer image?

I shoot remote places from time to time. I'd place mobility of gear at a premium to catch wildlife as one has to scramble (quietly) to get into position. So, I'd lean to any new mirrorless 4K cam. The Samsung looks interesting. After all, the unofficial motto of National Geographic shooters getting accomplished shots is: "f8 and be there." I'd trust their insight. A great shot is all for naught if you're not good enough or flexible enough to capture it. Now, if you just want the best pixel peeping product, that's another story... http://philipbloom.net/2013/10/10/4kraw/

I made more doing less 15 years ago than I do today. That's the reality. And since the gear is cheap, more creative fresh people give it a go --and have skills doing it. Can't stop it. If the solution is being a group of trades folks that are snobbish and cloistered about their skills, not sharing their enthusiasm for creation...then I'll just do something else. Bottom line, if you're good in a valuable way you can rise above the floor "talent" and make a living. For instance, maybe youre not the most creative dude out there but you have fun, are cool to hang out with, are always are reliable, and beat deadlines by a day. Someone's gonna value that and give you work.

I'd suggest you "do the maths" for your answer. Understanding why or why not the effect you're attempting is practical is also critical for understanding how motion picture capture is created (aka: "good quality footage") in a more generic sense. Now, that said, if you shoot your ultra slow mo shots in a very particular way, you can effectively simulate the illusion of superslowmo with a post production plugin such as twixtor. But...you HAVE to comprehend completely how that plugin does what it does too, and why, for good results. Bottom line, you got some studying to do. Good luck

Moving the camera closer to the subject for tighter shots and moving away from the subject for wider shots is too complicated?

For a guy, like Bloom, getting really nice images has a lot to do with talent and skill. It's not necessarily about the camera. People that know what they're doing can make most cameras look wonderful. Owning the same gear they do isn't a guarantee of much.

Yeah, I have a client that always needs 60fps. If this cam would do it, I'd buy it tomorrow.

Nope, that's for sure. It's always a compromise. Not that internal lighting can have an interesting look, but control of the light, if possible, is always a good way to go.

My company just finished a documentary shoot with a GX7 and the GM1 was the b-cam. Their image IQ is the same from my experience. We put a loupe (a cheap Hoodman) on the GM1 for focus assisting. Not a bad solution. Looks ugly as hell, but it works. It's my stealth camera. We use it to shoot clean and impressive video in locations where we need to fly under the radar. We also do a lot of run and gun small business work; shoot lots of restuarants. One of my main gigs in the past was filming restaurants and galleys on cruise ships. Most of that was done on NTSC cameras and 2/3" CCD sensors. That said, if there's an attractive evenly lit small business on the planet I've yet to find it. Here's my easy solution to make the lighting in businesses look better: Turn off their lights. Always. Then utilize the natural source as best you can and supplement with your own sources only if needed. 2 or 3 good LED's will do the trick since most cameras these days are decent in lower light. Many times just having some natural light pouring in with good drop off into the distance is enough to get by. Hitting your subject with some side rim/back light makes a ton of difference. Strategizing effective angles that take advantage of that new light is the final step. It's fast, simple, and effective. You do that and your work will look better, doesn't matter what camera it's shot on. If I could pound one sentiment into the heads of video and photography enthusiast it would be this: Stop worrying about camera bodies and lenses until you understand light and learn to control it. An education in this stuff is free on the interwebs. You can become a better shooter than most overnight with an earnest ambition to apply good lighting to your work...but since knowledge is not something you can purchase from B&H not as many people rant about it online.

For what you're trying to accomplish, my guess would have me starting with a GH4 with a longer prime lens (85mm)? Not sure how wide of a field of view you'd want. Not too close, not too wide; covering about 1/4th the field all the time? I'd also suggest you study up on the concept of resolution. Unlike what a make believe Hollywood narrative suggests, you can't zoom in during post, hit a button that goes "bloop, bloop, bzzzzz" and "enhance that there!" "Yeah! We can read the label on his pocket! We solved the crime!" You CAN post-zoom in on a 1080 image, but it might be too blurry for your uses. If you want impressive close ups you have to use optics or move your feet and get closer to the action. Now, since you can't move, you better shoot the highest resolution you can with an appropriate lens. 4K for sure. I've found that many stadium lights will give you a decent exposure around f5.6 and 800iso. Of course, that depends on the stadium. Smaller organizations' fields tend to be not as bright. Modern cameras like the GH4 tend to deliver a good picture at 800iso. Most slower zoom lenses are still in the 5.6 f-stop range. You'd want to stop down for better sharpness anyway. And old prime lenses are cheap. Whatever you do, try to test out your gear beforehand. If you're setting yourself for a long run at all this and plan on using the gear for awhile, maybe rent and test for a few days to find the right solution.