Cinegain

I just want to add, the D750 is the best stills camera I have ever used. Shot a wedding with it last week and I am just blown away with the file versatility and high ISO performance. Nikon knocked it out of the park. And the video quality has been a pleasant surprise. I feel like the D750 is everything the 5d3 should've been when it came out. 

It feels like bashing Andrew is a new sport? He is controversial for sure, but guys... it are his top cameras of the year 2014? Why are people arguing over this nonsense when this is subjective thing? If Andrew states that the 1DC is his camera of the year it his genuine thing to do so - you dont have to agree. Just build your own top list.

​You're right that the way the 5-axis stabilization works can change my look on handheld shooting. I mean: it would be great to have it, this feature seems really unique and its implemented very well. Olympus did a great job.
I quickly looked at Olympus cameras and some EOSHD's reviews and it looks that the only reasonable choice is OM-D E-M1. I thought for a second about E-M5, but improvements made in E-M1 such as focus peaking, better codec, mic socket and crop mode are really important while talking about serious video production.
 However, apart from great features, the price is way out of my budget. Sorry!
Thanks. 
I agree with you that sensor IQ is only part of the story.There's more than that. There's the feeling. The way you work with the camera, the way you experience it.
For example, one great thing with my A35, which is a SLT camera, is EVF/LCD. Back then, three years ago, I couldn't even think that in traditional DSLRs AF in viewfinder mode is different than in live view (phase detection vs contrast detection). I know basic technical limiations behind it, but for someone who grew up with modern technology, it looks just obsolete. And the comfort when I'm shooting that the AF performance is always the same - no matter if I'm using EVF or LCD - is huge. I don't even think about it, "it just works".
And this is also why I'm skeptical about D5300 or some APS-C Canons. They can offer maybe better quality in terms of video, but you know - I really like the functionality of Sony A7/A6000. I haven't had a chance to try A7, but I played with A6000 twice and it was nice.
I checked some videos shot on D5300 (there aren't many right know) and to be honest, wow, video quality and low-light performance is really great for such a (relatively) cheap camera. But I'm really, really worried about functionality for video...
Talking about cinematography, I recently watched Inception for, I don't know, 5th or 6th time and analyzed camera work. And I discovered that sometimes, I just use shallow depth of field too much. Many scenes in films - not only in Nolan's Inception with DOP Wally Pfister - are shot with pretty "deep" depth of field. However, there are also scenes with shallow depth of field, typically while trying to show viewers' some details, try to make the scene more intimate. But we saw an enormous usage of shallow depth of field when 5DM2 came and it revolutionized the filmmaking industry (mainly indie). 
​Hard to explain that. Probably I should look for a better store, not the generic "big" one with tons of electronics 

​Just look really really hard at it. Also, do the skin tones look a little off to you?

Would be ideal if you'd happen to know someone with a GH4 and/or A7S willing to let you borrow it... but I guess that's not the case?
Well... then renting is always a thing of course. Or purchasing and sending back the one you don't like, if the store's policy allows that sorta thing.
The E-M1 isn't thát bad. But for video, even though the E-M1 has IBIS, I just find the GH4 to be a much nicer tool.
(Expat NL-er. )

Seems like everybody is still a little hungover from all the eggnog. We get sidetracked and offended by these little things a little easily.
Actually Andrew is quite right. Color IS subjective and as long as you end up with something you like and that's what matters, then that's what matters. Atleast, creatively speaking. If you're gonna show it to the whole wide world and want to be as accurate as possible, whatever that means, then what you think 'looks nice' may indeed not be all that likeable to your general targeted audience. My feedback would be the same as the peepz above and prefer the GH4 in this particular 'test'. To my taste the A6000 footage is too bright/washed out, too desaturated/flat, too magenta/blue. In contrast, the GH4 seems a bit too saturated and tends to be rather yellow/orangy. This also isn't much of a test if you don't try to match the footage. Also you have some very mixed lighting going on which doesn't help the cause. Putting your test footage side by side is nice, but now try to make 'em the same. Shoot using comparable settings and profiles, then look at the vectorscope(w/ skintone indicator)/waveform and get 'em as close as you can. Some quick correcting like this youngster kid did in the video shown here will do (2:02+ just so happen that the base video was too yellow as well and the camera to be matched was a little too bright/washed out, much like your A6000 footage was imho). Now compare the two to see which has the slight edge. Because the GH4 and A6000 have to be much closer than I'm seeing back in your video.
Anyways, it's not an easy subject and I'm still in the process of figuring this all out myself too. Just keep playing around and try a bunch of stuff. And don't forget. Sometimes we look at our screens too long. Sometimes it helps bringing a loved one or friend in for a 2nd opinion. They might not know much about tech and parameters, but they know what they like! Also just having a good night sleep and look at it with fresh eyes in the morning helps a lot. I know it all too well that I look at something the next day and go 'dear lord, what was I thinking?'. xD

Even at 5K (gbp) this is hardly a camera anyone would buy that doesn't have a business making enough money to justify it's cost. As a business owner getting a new fs7 would be a much better investment for just a bit more and you can write off the tax. It might not take pretty pictures but you'd have a production ready camera. I also never would buy second hand gear for that amount of cash because you don't get any warranty, if something would malfunction repaircost could be a nice surprise as well.
I"m also not surprised why the 1dc starts to show up at half the new price, any photoprofessionals I have worked with all work with 5dIII and they often either have a second mark3 or a mark2 as b-cam and videoprofessional rather invest in canon's c-line. Anyone doing professional work and one who needs a 1dc for either photo or video buy's it new, they have to sell it at least with a 50% loss when they replace the camera's because they know no other professional will buy it second hand if it's only 20 to 30% cheaper and no amateur has that amount of cash to spare, they have to go a lot cheaper just to get rid of it, then it might become interesting for a pro who just needs a b-cam backup or a enthusiast amateur but I"m sure there are not many that are willing to cough up 5K GBP for a second hand camera, not if there are alternatives for a lot less money.
Ofcourse if you buy this camera just for the sake of putting other camera's up against it you can inform your readers better about the real value of other, much cheaper camera's. You might even be able to add a 26th point to your list of why the a7s/shogun is a better option then the 1dc. 
 
 

​Then get drawn back in. I remember some forums where I just hot headedly stayed away for a couple of days, intending to never return, then after a few days of cooling down period, realized that I was overreacting and it would suck not being able to join in. A forum is a community thing, so the content is what you and others (including Andrew, but not exclusively) make of it. So what it's all about around here for the greater part reflects the user base. If you feel like something's missing... then add to it.
And just coming back to the blog and reviews itself, remember, blogs are always opinionated and subjective to a certain degree. What makes a blogger succesful is a very strong own opinion. You can check out CNET Reviews and everything's great about everything and they list you the specs... that's nice and all, but I want someone to really give me their thoughts on it, get to the nitty gritty of it all and backing it up with reasoning why that's how they feel about it in a certain way. This way a blogger earns my trust. If you don't trust someone, well, that's just too bad. If you do trust Andrew, then what's with all the fuzz to begin with?
I'm pretty sure nobody wants to see anybody leave. Everyone should be welcome here, even if visions don't align. Listen, I understand you probably have the best intentions and to a certain degree you can always speak your mind freely, but you can't demand something of a person, claiming he has some kind of responsibility to do something, when he in fact does not. Well anyways, you got it out, you got your answer, now just put it behind you. No reason to stop being a part of the community because of that.
To end this comment, I'd just like to point you to Andrew's mission statement:
If you can identify with that. Then what's the problem here?

​Then get drawn back in. I remember some forums where I just hot headedly stayed away for a couple of days, intending to never return, then after a few days of cooling down period, realized that I was overreacting and it would suck not being able to join in. A forum is a community thing, so the content is what you and others (including Andrew, but not exclusively) make of it. So what it's all about around here for the greater part reflects the user base. If you feel like something's missing... then add to it.
And just coming back to the blog and reviews itself, remember, blogs are always opinionated and subjective to a certain degree. What makes a blogger succesful is a very strong own opinion. You can check out CNET Reviews and everything's great about everything and they list you the specs... that's nice and all, but I want someone to really give me their thoughts on it, get to the nitty gritty of it all and backing it up with reasoning why that's how they feel about it in a certain way. This way a blogger earns my trust. If you don't trust someone, well, that's just too bad. If you do trust Andrew, then what's with all the fuzz to begin with?
I'm pretty sure nobody wants to see anybody leave. Everyone should be welcome here, even if visions don't align. Listen, I understand you probably have the best intentions and to a certain degree you can always speak your mind freely, but you can't demand something of a person, claiming he has some kind of responsibility to do something, when he in fact does not. Well anyways, you got it out, you got your answer, now just put it behind you. No reason to stop being a part of the community because of that.
To end this comment, I'd just like to point you to Andrew's mission statement:
If you can identify with that. Then what's the problem here?

I appreciate all the insight from everyone. In the end the I decided to go with the.....GH4! While the LX100 would have served my family needs well (for the most part), I think the GH4 will be a better long-term investment. Plus it really is designed for more intensive video use, where the LX100 is not necessarily optimized for that (i.e. shorter battery life, potential heat issue for extended shooting, short clip length, etc...). I really like the idea that the GH4, with it's longer battery life and "unlimited" video recording length, can basically be setup and forgotten about, say during a long interview or conference. That makes it much more "C100-like" in terms of video usability. Plus with the "dumb adapter" I bought, I can throw on any of my Canon glass. I bought the cheap Panasonic 14-42mm f/3.5 -5.6, mostly to have something with useable OIS. I'll start saving my pennies again and eventually graduate to the Speedbooster, if it becomes necessary. 
I also bought the EOSHD GH4 Shooter's Guide and look forward to learning all about my new GH4. 
Thanks again!
***EDIT - I forget to add 96fps, too!

Good read that was!
Enjoy shooting with it and putting it to the test!
Wish someone could borrow you his/her FS7 as well, but looking forward to the shootout nontheless.

My FS7 review is coming in January if I fit it in. Disclaimer...Sony are lending me one! Why? Because I'm skint now!

Andrews reviews are so personal and so far away from that kind of product advertisment type of reviewing that if he gets anything from manufacturers you would have to congratulate him.
If you ever see him talking in a review about how stressful his week has been flying from LA to Bejing and back to London after a short stop in Vancouver to shoot some super secret VIP stuff, and that he has made this review about the new overpriced follow focus in the airport hotel room, and make you feel like that if you buy that shit it will make you suck less, maybe then it will time to ask questions or stop giving a shit.

In my GH4 book two of the three EOSHD profiles are CineLikeV based not CineLikeD  They deliver the best skintones. The CineLikeD one is a reserve one for when you want to sacrifice colour accuracy to save a shot, one that needs the most possible dynamic range, or for a shot that needs grading more than usual.
So for those who think CineLikeD gives strange skin tones (well, it's designed to be graded...) try the other two.

Cine-D gives strange skin tones. I tested it first some time but I have later shooted with natural profile contrast reduced. Cine-D makes orange parts of skin too yellowish like a person suffering some liver desease.

FYI - There's another one on eBay (in the UK) for £4899 with two batteries here.
The 1D C is a camera that has been the source of both great wonder and bafflement for me since it was released but it is time to bring it into the EOSHD family and shoot with it!
Read the full article here

It's definitely not as good value for money at £7k new as the FS7.
It's not as good value as the NX1 or GH4 if you just want 4K.
My reasoning was... £4999 was a good price so hard to turn down, compared to the £10,000 it was new just a few months ago, and it will replace quite a few of my stills cameras, especially the 5D Mark III so can use it for that quite long term, and it would be a great benchmark for a lot of other 4K cameras and the A7S with Shogun. Plus sometimes it is nice to use a camera just bare bones without the recorder especially in bad weather, the Shogun isn't weather sealed. NX1 is good for this too but you need to transcode and keep it under ISO 1600, plus I have such a lot of Canon glass I can't control the aperture properly on it with.
Part of me thinks I should have just got an FS7!!
But I do love the 1D C's image and stills.

As a twist of fate would have it, found a used 1D C for £4999 and it arrives Tuesday. C U next Tuesday 1D C
Now we will see what it's really made of vs the A7S and Shogun.

Saw this last night and while it wasn't as bad as how people were saying it would be it was definitely watchable with a a few decent laughs here and there. 

I don't drink coffee. What on earth am I supposed to film now?
In all honesty though, that's really a great place to start, just filming a routine. Maybe you get a new lens or a new camera and you want to just get something for the sake of testing. Filming yourself (or someone else) making coffee is a great way to get different shots/angles, different lighting situations etc to check out how something holds up... or just to familiarize with operating. Added bonus is of course that at the same time it gets you to work on your cuts/edits.
You can also theme your shoots. I believe lately I've spotted some themes in Andrew's shared review footage. Like putting focus on reflections (puddles, windows, etc)... making it a recurring theme during the video or in a similar way putting focus on people using their hands. You could also use a color or just anything really. It breaks 'the random' of seemingly random footage.
A great tip from Dave Dugdale I've come across recently: find someone in your life who's interesting/does something interesting and ask them if they'd be up for an interview, then just sit down with them and see where it goes.
You probably have a favourite movie, try to shoot something and end up with the same look. You can even try to make an exact copy of a certain scene.
Enter a contest. If you need a little bit of a push, there's like Film Riot's Monday Challenge that reoccurs from time to time. You get an assignment, so you don't have to come up with the whole idea yourself. You do have to digg a bit in that creative mind of yours to come up with something unique of course. Sometimes it's all about participating and perhaps getting the honor of winning and getting your name mentioned, sometimes there's actually an incentive, like some gear you can win, so you've got a bit of pressure to do well, if that's just the thing you need.
There's a bunch of stuff one can do.

Uh-oh, it's still 2014 and I have another big moment   I saw a GH4 going down in price on CL and eventually bought it.  Didn't expect to like it, but a lot of people I respect think it a great camera.   The owner is putting all his money into an F7 for his documentary work (to simplify/improve audio).  Anyway, FINALLY, a freaking video camera that shoots a flatter more pleasing image to me.  I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE CineD.  It isn't RAW, but it's close to what I grade to anyway.  Also, the 4K is great for photography.  I take a frame grab in VLC and process normally in PS.  99% of all the photos people see of mine are on Flickr and for that, 4K is enough.  
Here's a photo of my daughter to give you an idea.  GH4 / Olympus 17mm, I think was as 5.6, at 200 ISO.  Cine-D.
I now need to go back and learn more from Andrew's GH4 guide
 

Have a great one, and cheers to my EOSHD friends wherever you are

Happy Christmas Andrew and  Happy holidays to all at EOSHD .....I hope Santa brought you all lots of lenses
 

Great thread everyone, really wonderful stuff.
I recently got a Nikon 28-105mm F3.5-4.5 AF-D. Not an expensive lens it cost 150 euros.
If you are looking for an affordable full frame zoom, this thing is astonishingly good. Really surprised with it.
It's sharp, very little distortion considering the range. Less distortion than most £600 modern Canon or Nikon zooms.
It's parfocal, so focus doesn't shift when you zoom out. Very rare trait in such a cheap lens and great for video shooters.
It's macro abilities are INSSSSAAANE!! 2:1 macro at 105mm at the flick of a switch. Macro range goes from 50-105mm. What modern zoom does this? The only downside is that it doesn't focus as closely at the wide end, 28mm.
F3.5-F4.5 becomes a much more attractive aperture on a Speed Booster. On a full frame sensor it's fine because you're still getting a very shallow DOF and these sensors tend to have very good higher ISO performance as well - in that respect F4-ish isn't too far off F2.8 if compensated by raising the ISO a bit.
It has a manual aperture ring so you can use it via a cheap passive adapter on pretty much anything, even my Samsung NX1 likes it.
I use it on my Nikon D750 the most, often for stills where the AF isn't too shabby for an older lens. It dates back to 1999.
Highly recommended.

​The 28-70mm is ****ing incredible. Just picked up a second copy. I can't believe how cheap people are willing to sell them for.