tupp

By the way, one good site to go to for documentary tips is http://doculink.org/   The Doculink "mailing list" is their forum.

Also check out something like speed scriber if you are in a Mac as it uses AI voice recognition to transcribe to text with markers. It can also import into most NLE and with FCPX you can search for words and find the clips when the people said those words. Also you can export to PDF or SRT for subtitles.
the latest FCPX grill podcast talks with the guy who made speed scriber.

Those seem very expensive.  Maybe I can build you something.  Are you in the U.S.?  Optimally, how far above tripod head (clearance) would you want camera to be?  

For now, just looking to solve a problem   Here's where I'm at now.  I can already think of some improvements.  PM your address if you'd like to try it out and give me some feedback.  Don't want any money!  

You beat me to it!  I was also going to suggest a cheap base rig with rails with this one that has adjustable height on the camera platform.
 
Op, you might as well get a cheap rig such as this that additionally gives you rails to attach a matte box or lens hood, a follow focus, etc., if you ever want to use such items.
 
On the other hand, you could also just slide the camera to its most forward position on the Manfrotto 502.

what about this one?
https://www.amazon.com/Sevenoak-Universal-Alluminium-Extension-Mirrorless/dp/B01IB7XI98/ref=sr_1_38?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1506705545&sr=1-38&keywords=sevenoak

Not sure I agree here.
 
 
Actually, Dalsa and Thompson were in the video megapixel wars before RED existed.  Dalsa had its Origin (4k) and Thompson had its Viper (9.2 MP).
 
 
Exactly.  There is no optical problem using any one of the current popular shallow mounts (M4/3, Sony E, Canon EF-M) with S35 sensors.  Personally, I don't care about sensor cropping (auto or otherwise).
 
 
Using an MFT mount (or Sony E or Canon EF-M) doesn't preclude the use of EF lenses (nor any other deep-mount market to which Panasonic would like to pander).
 
It is very simple to start with an MFT mount, and merely provide an smart MFT-to-EF adapter that, after it is locked into place, additionally bolts onto the front of the camera for reinforcement.  Said adapter could taper seamlessly and organically from the front of the camera body down the the EF mount, and none of the clueless EF shooters would realize that there is actually an adapter in place.
 
 
I would guess that they dismissed the MFT option out of hand, because of hubris, laziness, and because solutions such as the organically integrated adapter scenario mentioned above would never occur to them.
 
 
Some manufactures can actually see past their noses and beyond the immediate "bottom line."  Such camera makers seek to make money in the long term and to proudly innovate in their industry while developing loyal, solid customer base.  I would agree with you that Panasonic (and Canon and Sony) is not that type of manufacturer.
 
 
Sadly, with the huge surge of production people in the digital age, many camera buyers seem less sophisticated than those of the pre-digital age , so legions of new digital shooters happily gobble up whatever a huge manufacturer provides.

... Not to mention that Panasonic could customize the external housing of the smart adapters to follow the form of the camera, employing a extra reinforcement flange that bolts the adapter to the camera body.
 
Clueless EF shooters would mount (and electronically control) their lenses with no wobble... and they would be none the wiser that they were actually using an adapter!

Consider renting.
 
A $7000 budget for a camera package sans lenses seems rather excessive for a short.  I've worked on shorts in which the budget for the entire project was a fraction of that of  your camera (sans lenses) package.
 
Plus, renting gives you more flexibility/recover-ability.  If you rent a camera that has a problem (such as fpn) or if you just don't like it, you can return it and get another camera.
 
Also, for a narrative short, you probably don't even need 4K, which could greatly reduce your budget.

Consider renting.
 
A $7000 budget for a camera package sans lenses seems rather excessive for a short.  I've worked on shorts in which the budget for the entire project was a fraction of that of  your camera (sans lenses) package.
 
Plus, renting gives you more flexibility/recover-ability.  If you rent a camera that has a problem (such as fpn) or if you just don't like it, you can return it and get another camera.
 
Also, for a narrative short, you probably don't even need 4K, which could greatly reduce your budget.

Consider renting.
 
A $7000 budget for a camera package sans lenses seems rather excessive for a short.  I've worked on shorts in which the budget for the entire project was a fraction of that of  your camera (sans lenses) package.
 
Plus, renting gives you more flexibility/recover-ability.  If you rent a camera that has a problem (such as fpn) or if you just don't like it, you can return it and get another camera.
 
Also, for a narrative short, you probably don't even need 4K, which could greatly reduce your budget.

There is no absolute image circle size for a C-mount, nor is there an absolute image circle size for the various focal lengths with a C-mount.
 
Furthermore, one can use an adapter to mount APS-C and full frame lenses to C-mount cameras.
 
You just have to determine the image circle of each lens on an individual basis.

Hey Ed, maybe do the test again? Even one scene where everything is constant (except camera) would be good.

I think that the mechanical shutter makes a more noticeable difference with significant movement and with handheld shots.  The mechanical shutter probably also reduces noise.
 
By the way, Panavision modified a few F65s by removing the mechanical shutter.  They called the modified version the "F65 Mini," and they usually live in France:
http://panavision.fr/produits/sony-f65-mini/
www.vimeo.com/197192795
 

Didn't know that, saweet!
Co-incidentally saw this one:
 

That feature has existed in other tripods for a long time.
 
I think that the Manfrotto 058B appeared at least 15 years ago:
 
I think Manfrotto has several models with this feature, including one with video legs.  They also have a similar small version of this with separate release buttons at the top of each leg.  To release all the legs at the same time, you just wrap your hand around the smaller base, and squeeze all the buttons.
 
I suspect that there are other manufacturers with tripods that have a similar feature.
 

Determine what your time is worth for each day, and add 10% for contingency.  Add/list expenses, plus 10% contingency.
 
Hint:  don't list the contingency amount separately -- just include it in the amount you list for your services and also in the amount for the expenses.
 
Have fun!

Determine what your time is worth for each day, and add 10% for contingency.  Add/list expenses, plus 10% contingency.
 
Hint:  don't list the contingency amount separately -- just include it in the amount you list for your services and also in the amount for the expenses.
 
Have fun!

I included the manufacturing operations in the list.  The design costs are essentially the same, as the only extra cost is creating another Autocad file and adding two to eight threaded holes -- the front tube to the EF lenses has to be designed, regardless.
 
 
Again, your list is fine for those who don't want to stray outside of the box.  However, creative pros will often want more versatility than that list (not to mention great Cine lenses which only come in PL.
 
 
The short-sighted intentions of Panasonic's management/marketing/sales people have no bearing on what they should have done.  Furthermore, outside speculation on some company's intentions is not exceptionally relevant.
 
 
Well, not too typical shooters are putting old Schneider cinema lenses on Alexas either, but they can if they want to!
 
I was helping someone on a commercial a few months ago, and the DP had just hit the big time.  She is already sitting in on panel discussions with ASC and BSC members.  She was using old Crystal Express lenses on an Alexa, and they were distinctively beautiful.
 
Shooters on that level usually seek alternatives to typical run-of-the-mill EF glass, as they are usually more sensitive to the subtleties of lenses' looks and effects.
 
 
Then neither is an EF mount.  However, cinema lens mounts don't need to be as rugged as PL or PV -- we have lens support for that.
 
Furthermore, Panasonic didn't have to commit to a M4/3 mount.  They could have just made a shallow interchangeable lens plate, as I have described.
 
 
The EF mount offers only a small fraction of the possibilities available with a Micro 4/3 mount, an E-mount (there are ways to make this work) or an EF-M mount.
 
 
That is a risky adapter as there are plenty of lenses that won't into it.
 
On the other hand, a simple PL adapter for M4/3 will take almost every PL lens.  In addition, some M4/3-to-PL adapters also allow TILT/SWING movement!:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/TILT-adapter-ARRI-Red-One-Arriflex-PL-lens-for-Micro-Four-Thirds-4-3-cameras-/322240061177
http://www.ebay.com/itm/ARAX-TILT-adapter-ARRI-PL-lens-MICRO-4-3-Camera-Camcorder-pl-tilt-micro-adapter-/271523819029
 
Tilt/swing adapters are impossible with the EF mount and any full-frame or smaller lens.
 
 
FTFY:  There are countless lenses and adapters that won't work with an EF mount!
 
 
No.  Regardless of speculation for whom the EVA1 is designed, a lot of the top cinematographers use PL/PV glass and also seek out all kinds of unusual optics and adapters (probably not Veydras) that will give them an edge.
 
Panasonic could have easily accommodated such high-end shooters (and even some of the lowly shooters who know better) while also catering to the typical EF people.
 
 
Actually, I think that every cinematography camera should have either a shallow mount or an interchangeable lens plate.  We're experienced and creative pros -- we need versatility, not protection from FUD.
 
 

This has been known for a while now. They are developing it with input from cinematographers and post houses. It's going to take advantage of Sony X-OCN compressed raw format in order to bring file sizes under control. One of the Achilles' heels of the F65 was the fact that the file sizes were massive. And with 8K, it's even more important to provide efficient compression.When data rates go into the terabytes/hr range, data management becomes feasible for only the really big productions.
Word on the street is that it will be compatible with Sony's R7 raw recorder, which indicates that the camera will share the F5/F55 form factor and that's a big step forward. Those are well-sized and shaped cameras. The F65 was an ungainly beast.

http://www.newsshooter.com/2017/06/03/sony-to-launch-a-full-frame-36x24mm-sensor-cinealta-camera-next-year/
Could give the Alexa 65 some competition, especially if it has F65-level color and sensor sampling, and would be even more amazing if it's the first cinema-level camera to include DPAF-level AF.

So a lot of people strangely seem to argue in defense of Panasonic! :-/

Yes that is obvious,  but it really isn't a reason why Panasonic had to go EF with the EVA1

Video cameras never need the long flange distance, as they don't ever use a mirror.
Exactly! Buy Nikon over Canon lenses.

Wait... Panasonic had to go EF with the EVA1?