Shirozina

Lots of 'news gathering' video setups have a 416 on the camera. It's been used for years and it sounds 'right'. When you hear it against a cheaper mic in an ideal setup you will instantly be able to tell it's better. It will suit your purposes and be a good investment. A camera mounted mic is not ideal  / really bad idea for good sound capture  but for a one man operation you don't have much choice. Also be aware that shotgun mics are very sensitive to wind / air movements so also budget for a good wind shield. Even moving a 416 about in still air can cause rumble. There are lots of good sound repair  / noise reduction tools in NLE's these days but it's a lot of extra work when editing - a lot of extra work! When you add it all up in cost and time it's just better to pay a sound recordist to work with you and ensure you have good clean audio.  The fact that you are making a significant investment in a camera for this job suggests this is a serious project so skimping on audio may be unwise.....

Lots of 'news gathering' video setups have a 416 on the camera. It's been used for years and it sounds 'right'. When you hear it against a cheaper mic in an ideal setup you will instantly be able to tell it's better. It will suit your purposes and be a good investment. A camera mounted mic is not ideal  / really bad idea for good sound capture  but for a one man operation you don't have much choice. Also be aware that shotgun mics are very sensitive to wind / air movements so also budget for a good wind shield. Even moving a 416 about in still air can cause rumble. There are lots of good sound repair  / noise reduction tools in NLE's these days but it's a lot of extra work when editing - a lot of extra work! When you add it all up in cost and time it's just better to pay a sound recordist to work with you and ensure you have good clean audio.  The fact that you are making a significant investment in a camera for this job suggests this is a serious project so skimping on audio may be unwise.....

To be clear - unless you can get the 416 close and on axis then it's going to be 'sub -optimal' to say the least. If you are building up a sound capture system the 416 is a good investment. If you can hire an assistant you can get it off the  camera and on a boom pole over or under the subject out of frame. Shotguns are close distance tools like macro lenses - they are not like telephoto lenses where you can stand back and focus in on the sound.

+1 and make sure you get the camera as close as possible to the subject. Off axis sound on these mic's ( all shotguns) is not nice as is any room reverb. Make sure you get the 48v and not the T power  416.

Not especialy - the bodies can be found very cheaply but to get a good set of lenses will set you back quite a lot of money. If I were starting a MF digital system from scratch on on a budget I'd be looking at a 645 system.

Could be useful on the GH5 then......

The rule in audio is that a cheap mic close to the subject is better than an expensive mic further away. I'd go for a Lav if you are on a budget. 

Not true - bit rate is just data rate and not data quality. I've seen Sony XAVC from my A7R2 (not even log) and even 10 bit internal from my GH5 fall apart in grading when trying to transcode to 422HQ (banding appears in the skies) when I had wrongly assumed that Prores was making copy without any data loss. Transcoding to a lossless codec works but the data bloat is unworkable (which shows how much compression is used even in ProRes). 

Transcoding to ProRes is not lossless -  use a proxy workflow to get footage you can easily manipulate in your NLE  but still generate your final output from the original footage. That’s the whole point of a proxy workflow.

Transcoding will almost always lead to information loss. Depending on the codec it can be tiny or very large. 
Thus, if you are working with Resolve I would use the built-in proxies: Generate optimized media. 
You can control which clips are transcoded,  the quality of the proxies & have them removed at the end. Also the final render always runs on the original media optimizing quality. 
 

8 bit is not the cause of banding - it's the high compression 4.2.0 internal codec. 8 bit HDMI out to an ext recorder won't band unless you really abuse it ( and that's the only way I use S-LOG on my Sony's). 8 bit (RGB)Tiffs generated from RAW stills are very hard to produce banding in unless you do very aggressive tonal changes  but output a highly compressed jpeg from the same RAW and it can have banding even without touching it. Also with a video camera we are not talking RGB but YCbCr which should be better than RGB in this regard as most of the data is in the Luma channel but due to the massive compression found on internal codec's it bands oh so easily. 
 

Sony release a high end stills camera with some video capability but astonishingly it's not a video orientated camera with some stills capability added on......................

Sony release a high end stills camera with some video capability but astonishingly it's not a video orientated camera with some stills capability added on......................

Sony release a high end stills camera with some video capability but astonishingly it's not a video orientated camera with some stills capability added on......................

Sony release a high end stills camera with some video capability but astonishingly it's not a video orientated camera with some stills capability added on......................

The A7r3 like the A7r2 is a very good / class leading stills orientated camera with added video capability. I bought mine solely for it's stills ability and only later started to use it as a video camera. If I was starting from the position of wanting a camera for primarily video use I don't think the MK2 or the 3 would make the list. As said previously the only way to properly exploit the full potential of the sensor is to use an external recorder which is not always practical - been there, done that, bought a GH5.....

I 'upgraded' from a shogun to a PIX-E but If I needed an external recorder again I'd get the inferno as it has a much brighter screen so it's usable outside and it can also do 60fps. Likely VideoDevices will upgrade the PIX-E's with a high NIT screen and 60fps at some point....

You are gaining 4.2.2 colour and a much better codec which won't show compression artefacts (which people wrongly assume is an 8bit problem) This will allow you to shoot S-Log and not have smooth tones like skies fall apart (banding) when you apply a LUT / grade it later like it does with the internal codec. It's a clumsy solution though......

Must be connected to 4.2.2 vs 4.2.0 rather than 8 vs 10 bit. Been banging on about this for ages though - nothing wrong with 8bit as long as it's not compressed to hell and has better than 4.2.0 colour. 8bit HDMI out from my Sony A7s/r2 is virtually unbreakable while the internal codec falls apart just looking at it. Still the 'voices' all demanded 10bit above everything else and that's what they got.......

I tried to like it.  The sets, fx and cinematography are certainly first rate.  The actors are good, the direction, the editing.  I was able to sit through it.
Then the scene with the Wallace CEO, head cataract guy, that was NOT a
Okay, I was a young guy once and can understand dropping a naked women out of a pastry sack and letting her writhe on the floor a bit.  I can even understand the actor with the cataracts blathering the most inane stuff  to his replicant!  (And we thought Gossling was lonely  ) But to knife her for no apparent reason put me into full annoyance mode.  Why do we need to hate him, and if we do, why doesn't he get killed at the end like the maker in the first movie?  
In the first Blade Runner, there is a simple, strong story that keeps that morose movie together.  Harrison Ford is in a sucky job, in a sucky city, hunting down merciless replicants.  His life is meaningless.  Then he falls in love with a replicant and begins to have doubts about his life values.  Meanwhile, Rutger Hauer, knows his lot in life and wants to understand why it was made for him.  So he searches out his maker.  In the end, even though he is bred to kill, he has compassion and let's Harrison Ford live.  The original Blade Runner put story first.
What is the story of Blade Runner 2049?  There is none, there are only pieces of story, none of which connect or make much sense.  My fear that it's just a vanity project with too many cooks in the kitchen was borne out, for me.  My favorite proof that  no one with common sense had any control over the script is when the Wallace replicant kills a police forensics guy THEN the police chief and says to Harrison Ford that they're going to take him off-world where they can torture him.  I'm wondering why they can't do it on Earth?  I mean, there is no sense of society, government, police power.  Again, just a mis-mash of half-baked story ideas.   And why kill the police chief.  Makes absolutely no sense.  
I never cared about any of the characters, except Gossling's hologram.   Though I keep thinking, if Wallace industries makes her, why don't they know what he says to her?  I guess someone got their "let's put in a little bit of 'Her' in BR 2049"  You're in trouble when the only good thing about your movie is the little bit you plagiarized from another
And the music.  I don't care how good it is, it did not fit the story most of the time.  There were many scenes that would have been stronger without it.  Film-maker children with sound synthesized sound-grenades.
I heard a young person leaving the theater saying it was "much better than the first one."  
On a bright note, I just finished "Trapped", the Icelandic series.  Great film-making isn't dead.  
 

Keep your delusions in check - 'full frame' is just another format and not a new standard.

A video 'style' but not a standard. Shallow DOF has lots of drawbacks as a film making device.

So I'm shooting an interior - how can I increase the subject distance without knocking down walls?

F11 on my MF digital back still has quite a shallow DOF compared to my smaller sensor cameras and means I have to shoot with high ISO or only in bright light - any advice on how I can resolve this now and in the future ?

If I had to pick one lens for life I'd get another life.