Hitfabryk

​I love the IBIS and with some effort the EM1 can deliver nice video especially for close up's (at least for my needs) But the Sony A7S took over the leading role and I am very happy with that..but ohh I would like to see a stronger codec and 24p on the EM1..The EM1 is smal, light and easy, great for traveling and playing second violin. In a few weeks I am on my way to Berlin, it would be nice to have some new firmware in the EM1. 

​Not vist the internet anymore?.......that's....that's not possible. 
 

With Sony you never know, they breed like rabbits but in the end you can't wait forever, if you are planning to get the a7s tomorrow and it does what you expect from it just start using it and don't visit the internet anymore so you won't be disappointed if the a7sII is announced in 2 days.

Last February I made the first EOSHD video quality charts 2014. This was an at-a-glance chart of image quality delivered by every camera I can possibly think. This year I've decided only to include the cameras I've direct experience of shooting with in my own filmmaking projects, with only a few exceptions such as the Sony F35 and Canon C300. I've also removed cameras that have been superseded by very similar ones (such as the GH2 by the G6, sharing the same sensor).
Here are the results...
Read the full article

indeed.  you need 64gb cards for xavc-s.  they donlt actually need to be crazy fast.  but have to be sdxc cards.
avchd on the a7s is pretty good since it's originating from a full sensor readout.  however xavc-s is around twice the bitrate so theoretically it should be better quality.  I imagine very few people have done a direct comparison between avchd and xavc-s, and I'd bet there isn't much difference.  the fs100 and fs700 recorded to avchd and their images always looked good to me - as do the c100 avchd files.

​
All comes when grading and detail of scene, with heavy motion (water) avchd would definitely show more artifacts vs xavc-s as well noted earlier when grading. If doing a normal talking head with your camera on sticks in a controlled setting, no one could probably ever tell.... If shooting a long 4+ hour even I would probably use avchd for space saver, but anything short and best image quality I would shoot all my material in the highest form (Xavc-s)

​Good choice.
I'll leave the art part up to you rather than lecture on that like certain other members like to do...

​1080p 30/24 fps is excellent in the camera, 60fps in FF mode does have some aliasing though (wide shots). If doing wide shots in 60fps I would put the camera is APS-C mode which is almost perfectly clean.
 
A7s is a beautiful camera with great dynamic range, a very very good balance of price vs quality, especially when compared to much more expensive cinema cameras.

I remember vividly 4K was rumored by that very site to be coming. Just to backpeddle on that stating the source however may not be that legit. Finally, it was taken back but things looked as if the video mode would be approved quite significantly... well, in the end all we got for video ironically was a dust & scratches filter... such a pity, the E-M1 is a dream of a camera in most aspects and I wouldn't require 'em to give us 4K at all, but we've yet to see 24 and 25p which kinda was anticipated by quite a few people... and perhaps they could squeeze a little bit more out of the sensor performance (bitrate/codec) wise. But I have a feeling they have a fear of being known for great video...

​Thanks Andrew, and all the other members who took the effort to give me advice..I decided to buy the Sony A7S and will start with my old (FD, 28, 35, 55) lenses.
I have a good feeling that I made the right choice, maybe someday I will film in 4K, but for now I will use the 1080. Happy!
 
​

​Thanks Andrew, and all the other members who took the effort to give me advice..I decided to buy the Sony A7S and will start with my old (FD, 28, 35, 55) lenses.
I have a good feeling that I made the right choice, maybe someday I will film in 4K, but for now I will use the 1080. Happy!
 
​

Looks like the EM5II will get 25p so how about an upgrade for the EM1?

​Thanks Andrew, and all the other members who took the effort to give me advice..I decided to buy the Sony A7S and will start with my old (FD, 28, 35, 55) lenses.
I have a good feeling that I made the right choice, maybe someday I will film in 4K, but for now I will use the 1080. Happy!
 
​

Why's that?  Off topic?  Look, y'all can moderate your site anyway you see fit, but here's my defense:  The original poster is asking about what it takes to make "filmic" images and what's a good camera to do it.  I say it's not that simple.  What's the big deal?  
I know this is a tech-centric website, but since film making is an art created by the craft of technology, is it unhelpful to encourage people to explore other aspects of the craft, such as "painting with light," rather than the technology?  After all, knowing how to naturalistically use light in a shot is going to be many more factors of importance than the camera body it's shot with.  It's also hard to do.  You do it wrong and whatever camera you use will not look great.  How's that opinion "unhelpful?"
So many new creatives are entering this world of film making through DSLR and mirror less, and I've unfortunately known a few people that believe solving the film-look issue is possible with one simple purchase of a camera body.  I just disagree with that notion.  Is that truly unhelpful or do you just not like reading my opinion?  If it's the latter, just say so and I'll skidaddle.

​
It's incredible how many people ignore the importance of lighting when making "filmic" images, or any images for that matter. Lighting is more important than the camera, it can make the image of a "sub-standard" camera look much better than "the best camera ever" that was used without additional lighting.  Obviously. 
Sony A7S is the best choice IMO (for your needs). Regardless of its's high sensitivity, don't ignore a set of lights either  

Sony A7s, Canon 5D III (RAW) or Canon C100 Mark II
I would not settle for anything less.........
 
Full Frame is Magical, I love it. Aps-C is the smallest sensor size I would use
Peace

Also check out this thread http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/7284-tiffen-ultra-low-contrast-filters/
The filter spreads light more evenly across the image and thus gives it more of a filmic feel.
 

​Current best matches for you are the Sony A7S, Nikon D750 or 5D Mark III ML.
Depending on your definition of easy workflow ML raw on the 5D3 might not work out for you.
The D750 is really easy to work with.
The Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera does have a nice image but it's a very different look to full frame, you might not get on with it. Depends on the lenses you already own or what you plan to buy for it. The lens is half the look of the camera.
Consider the GH4 as well because the 4K files make for great 1080p in post, the workflow is as simple as banging in 50% size reductions for the clips.

​That's so funny Ivar, I know you sent you're NX1 back, so did I.. and we are looking at the same footage from the A7s, I also like a lot what he does. Did you already decide?
Thanks,
​5D3 raw.I think not an easy workflow, and that's what I need..The BMCC could be interesting, I think it's also available with a M43 mount (2.3 crop factor?) But the media it writes on.. .mmm I don't know. Battery life, screen refelections..although I will use it most inside. But you do not mention the A7S, why? Thanks.

GH4 aeriels mixed with Sony F55 on steadicam.
The little GH4 is a wonderful camera.  And Yonder Blue Films do awesome aeriel cinematography.
 
 

Yeah, I've been putting off uploading the thing, but I'll place it online and add a link.
Ultimately I'm of the opinion that naturalistic lighting matters a lot --and how you take advantage of that light with your selection of lenses.  In my short film, the idea was that most of the movie shots are memories from the "unreliable narrators" so the images are deliberately pushed pretty hard to not look realistic.  Colors are exaggerated and stylized.  All decisions that add to the "filmic" look. 
But the camera body?  Kind of the least of the worries to consider, IMHO.  Just about any camera made in the past few years will do the job.

And here we go again. 

There is no mention in the OP's post about image quality he asks what camera setup would be best. Since I have no idea what he intends to shoot I gave general strengths and weaknesses for both in an attempt to give him some useful feedback.
 
No the night shots I have seen look rather odd to me and I am not a fan of them either. I am not saying that this camera is for shooting in the dark, I don't need night vision. I am saying that it can be used to shooting indoors or on city streets at night without the need to be wide open all the time. I have the feeling you are a someone who has seen all the hey the A7s can see in the dark videos thinking how ridiculous they are and never thought how that super sensitivity and clean images at high ISO's can be extremely useful in more practical situations.
 
 I will take the king and queen debate as sarcasm and only say that in English queen can have negative connotations depending on how it is used at least in reference to a camera. I am avoiding those since I think the A7s is an awesome little camera.

It's unfortunate not to see any mention of Final Cut Pro X in this article. 
The release of the new design troubled many Final Cut Pro 7 users, but the majority who were annoyed at the drastic changes seem not to have experienced what it is like today. 
You should definitely try FCPX as it's grown into an incredible program that is very intuitive, easy and fast to use, has top notch pulgin support and most of all - makes editing fun and leaves more time to be more creative.
I've also heard several editors mention that the quality of the exported files from FCPX are much better than those from Premiere. I know that Noam Kroll did a blog post about it. 
I recommend that you get into FCPX Andrew, as it sounds like you are not satisfied with Premiere. The bad press it got on release is irrelevant now. It is absolutely fantastic now. More editors need to wake up!!  

Haven't seen Birdman yet, watched the video above here, reading about it now. Awesome cinematography. Love the wide angle combined with the shallow focus. Have to see this!
It's shot on Alexa with a Leica 16mm T1.4 and Master Prime 12mm T1.3 mostly. That's some crazy stuff, if they shot wide open, that's even less dof than you'd get on fullframe usually - or you would have to be shooting with a 18mm f/2.0.
http://www.cinematographydb.com/2014/11/cinematography-birdman-emmanuel-lubezki-asc/
I also loved the cinematography of The Grand Budapest Hotel. Crazy combination of anamorphic wide shots and 4:3. Really suits the film.