ade towell

http://www.thecomingconvergence.com/
this was gh4

For a run around lens I prefer the 18-135mm stm lens to the 24-105 - wider, longer, cheaper, lighter, silent af and better i.s. The 24-105 also is closer to f5 than f4 and loses a lot of light as you zoom in so is only negligibly better in low light

Haha I love audio. Here's a big pile of ego: for my day job I wrote real-time audio DSP software for years and wrote the real-time audio engine for MySpace Music's Karaoke software. Also play acoustic and electric guitar and compose on keyboards (basic stuff using Logic X for our video productions; now hiring more experienced folks as I'm not fast enough at my skill level). Familiar with signal processing theory (and applications writing low level code) through music theory and intuitively understand what sounds good by ear.
Years ago a friend put a pair of Stax electrostatic speakers on my head through a Carver Magnetic Field Amplifier after utilizing certain plant compounds and it blew my mind! Later I listened through Stax headphones at NASA Ames Research Center through a Convolvotron 3D VR system with a Polhemus 3D tracker- another level of audio mind-blowningness. Finally, hearing Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus Speakers and similar in prepared rooms (including an anechoic mixing room at GTE Imagetrek) topped out the high-end audio listening experience. As time progressed, consumers got used to and were OK with highly compressed MP3/AAC audio on comparatively very low quality headphones and/or home speakers. I realized the 99% of people didn't care about ultra high quality audio and would never hear audio at these levels of quality. Additionally, listening to crap audio helps keep the high end stuff sounding killer. Otherwise there's a never-ending chase for more quality. Steve Martin summed it up here with the Googolphonic (note the proper spelling before Google bunged it up :)).
After years of software and product development, I'm focused on creating and using the simplest systems possible, where quality is balanced with cost and system complexity. For our own productions for Cosmic Flow (my current day job, software tech is now part time), in-camera audio is ideal. C300 II preamps are good enough, and so is the $500 Audix (I use it with the Schoeps for two channels vs. 2 Schoeps). Even the A7S II's preamps are good enough when using the Sennheiser G3 wireless on location. For separate audio I wouldn't use anything less than a Sound Devices 702 (and would hire a sound person). I used to use an RME Fireface 800 for computer audio, then replaced it with a $140 FocusRite Scarlet 2i2 (v1) which actually has better sounding preamps. After many years the budget 2i2 hardware crapped out and I replaced it with a Sound Devices USBPre2 I had purchased as a tool to get high-quality preamps into DSLRs years ago. The USBPre2 doesn't turn off when the computer is in sleep so I had to purchase a USB switch (not a big deal but was surprisingly hard to find a USB switch that cut power and handled data lines properly too- that was the only one I found that works).  
After so many years of going deep in tech, for the final product, and in the case of video, the story and emotion are far more important.
The C100 II with an Audix, Shure, Audio Technica, or Rode mic, and a Mogami or similar quality cable (tried budget cables- not worth it), will provide a perfect balance of good enough quality, low system complexity, and highly versatile usability to be just about perfect for the OP and others wanting to get things done quickly with low effort, low cost, low headache, and least time to produce something cool. Ultimately, we want the gear to just work and get out of the way of the creative process.

http://www.thecomingconvergence.com/
this was gh4

I thought I did read in a recent post that Zach was banned, but I sort of thought it was an off-handed joke, not really the truth. 
Truly, his worst sin, if you even want to call it that, was that he was wildly naive and earnest; dash in a heap of ignorance.  Quite honestly, after three dozen pages of this thread I think we all deserve some of his sort of youthful alt-reality.  I'd welcome some of those types of halcyon days at this stage of my life, believe me.
The wonderful insane messiness of all this stew we read here is why this site is actually interesting.  Banning Zach seems like a bit of a take-away from that vibe.  You don't get this sort of juice from sanitized corporate curated websites.

The game right now is empathy and patience.
Let's all hold back the comments until tomorrow.
If ES does mail the rangefinder, he will have done something probably none of us would have done - stayed on this forum, in front of a pack of wolves, and tried to do the right thing.

I don't understand why none of these one handed ones have the motor on the right so you can flip out the screens.

You know exactly what I'm trying to say, come on now.
What if I told you that in my opinion the Mazda CX-3 is the car to get rather than the McLaren 675LT Spider? Is it really a fact that the McLaren is the actual better car? Doesn't it depend on your own personal criteria of what makes a great car? So the 675LT Spider goes faster, well the Mazda has the better mileage, etc. How's it different when you talk cameras? You might have different criteria, hence different opinions. Non of the opinions are good as facts (albeit some opinions might be more reasonable than others) unless you make your conclusions quantifiable and post proof comparing results. He didn't present a fact, he even said it's his opinion... twice for crying out loud (based on his personal critera). He doesn't have to provide proof as he claimed it's his opinion. Just let the man have his opinion, already. Geez.
If you want to go against it... sure. Ask him about his actual criteria. Then you can come up with measurable results and compare it, proving you're right. But even then there's a question of taste. How do you quantify something that 'looks good' to you? That's different from one person to the next.
Not sure why you need everyone with the same opinion here. It's a forum. I value people that share their experience and opinions.

'shitlight' in this context is giostrante's 'test' not Zacuto which actually used lights - the Alexa would have looked shit with giostrane's test too

still have other options,, it's Sony's way or the black magic  way

I think the RS on this camera will make wildlife filming on a 600mm lens a horrendous wobble fest

After ejecting yet another Sony camera that looked great on paper (RX10ii) I thought I'd make a little comment about this...
its been replaced by a Canon XC10. On paper a crazy idea, but in reality it's an upgrade. No ultra high speed, but no problem TBH. Slow lens? Yeah, but great colour great battery life, brilliant menus and autofocus...
If you look on paper at the specs and the choice looks silly, but actually use the cameras and all becomes crystal clear.
Sony menus are so bad they ruin the experience of the cameras for me. The build quality is also questionable, probably partly due to an obsession with miniaturisation that is becoming counter productive.
The colour is so obviously Sony because it's always missing something. The F65 looks great, but once you get down to consumer/pro crossover level I'm afraid it's just a bit piggy unless you want a kind of odd bluish Kodak emulation on everything.
its not that you can't make it look nice, it's that it restricts you to a certain look that isn't always suitable, so I find unless the situation is very controlled I can't cut it with Canon C footage to my satisfaction.
its so disappointing because Sony specs are great, and their innovations like the memory CMOS for high-speed footage, as well as continuous ND are brilliant.
But every time I get one of these things into a high-pressure situation or back into post I just feel let down.
i actually WANT to like them, but I don't! So I'm venting.
ill add some XC10 footage to the pinned thread shortly...

this guys stuff is pretty good
 
https://vimeo.com/123625593

check out Macgregor's short

check out Macgregor's short

nice and constructive

I noticed that most of the China scaremongering is coming from RED fan boys. They should name their next camera "RED Neck".

and do you really want a successor to make the older version left with no support & obsolete, and then the same again next year - one year cycles for cameras is a nightmare, and Sony seem to be pushing that - be careful what you wish for

yes it's a great feature, makes apsc lenses like the pretty cheap sony 50mm 1.8 with image stabilisation useful in full frame mode