M Carter

Ummm... the GH4 keyed nicely in comparison to the BMC because it has almost twice the pixels and can hold more detail.
The BMC4K gives you the extra pixels and much more color data.
If you're really set on the GH4, add an NX1 to your tests. Don't know how it keys, but (my opinion) it smokes the Panasonic for IQ. Really remarkable little camera and you also get APS-C vs. the little GH sensor. 
I've pulled hundreds of keys as far back as the Panasonic HMC 150, not even a full-raster chip. But we spent 2 hours just prepping and stretching lighting a very big screen, and lit our subjects properly. (and delivered 720 as i recall). It can be done, but I'd prefer as many pixels and all the bit depth I could get.

Just say no to the belts. You can get rings for $15-$20. Get one for every lens.

I've often found my synch audio on Nikon bodies and the NX1 to be useable in the final edit. 
My chain is (insert really really nice hyper mic here - I use the AT4053) to a Tascam DR60d, which records the audio track and a safety track at minus-6 DB; camera-out to the camera's mic input. And then I really take care to dial in the gains staging - maximum safe gain on the Tascam, set the DSLR input at around 70-80%, and use the camera-out gain on the recorder to get a proper but strong level to the camera.
It's not just compression (and there are two kinds of compression, audio limiting and compression of the digital file, such as MP3), it's minimum-circuit to do the job as far as preamps go; and cramming a tiny preamp into a mess of other circuitry isn't optimal. And throw in so-so 1/8" connectors and cables and an unbalanced signal path. But most camera's audio compression (limiting or auto-gain) is horrendous (but can usually be turned off). Digital compression is generally very good.
As I said, if I'm very careful with my synch audio, I can sometimes use it in the edit, but this also depends on the camera. The NX1 can sound punchy and crisp with a good preamp and optimal levels (and a great mic). But once I'm rolling, I can't mess with anything but the input level on the recorder. As interview subjects get comfortable or you get to the meat of the story, they can get louder. So often it's the DR track, with sometimes bits of the safety track cut in.
Synching is a non-issue these days, with FCPX or PluralEyes. And I can manually synch even long multi-cut interviews in a couple minutes, it's not really an issue for many projects. But if you don't want to buy a pro recorder, at least get a pro preamp. And probably the most full-featured value/budget preamp is the one in the DR60D, so you might as well just get a recorder (mine shipped with PluralEyes for free, too). I'm not crazy about the zooms that I've seen, but there may be good ones out there. DR60D's can be found really cheap used, too.

If a manufacturer makes a product and instructs me in the proper use of the hardware... and then "the internet" finds out that some bit isn't robust and won't work as advertised (IE "even though the manual says to charge via USB, this will trash the camera over time"), I don't think it's user error - it's manufacturing error.
(Even worse is when a manufacturer makes an amazing and robust product and then leaves the market... FU Samsung. What an amazing camera you dropped.)

I get a lot of drone footage from clients. And the drone guys don't seem to have a clue about frame rates and shutter speeds, I get lots of 60p and even, like, 40p stuff. So generally I have to retime it all. I usually use Timewarp in AE and the blur looks pretty legit; but these are aerial landscapes and so on. If you really examine the blur from Timewarp, you can see it's more of a "replicated pixels" thing than a true blur, but I doubt the average viewer would notice. And it does apply blur naturally, not just globally. Really takes the drone stuff to a higher level and allows me to retime and even do keyframed retiming. (In AE, you really have to remember to label the frame rate on the raw footage before you drop it into the comp - say it's 60p and your comp is 24p. Make sure you check the footage info - like, shift-command G or similar - and enter the framerate of 60p before you drop in the comp, or you'll get flicker.)
If you're doing important scenes and shooting very crisp for keying or stabilizing, I'd say, shoot a take at the correct speed and decide which works best.
I never shoot "wrong" shutter speed for stabilizing though - as long as I get decent marks in the frame, the software is moving the whole frame, motion blurs and all - the only reason I could see to shoot at a higher shutter speed would be if tracking marks were getting blurred. 

I guess if all you need is web-sized images? If instead of "eliminate the need for a DSLR" your headline was "eliminate the need for a phone camera" it would make more sense (to me anyway).
I've seen this thread about 50 times on various forums. I have a 4K mirrorless camera. I can't use screen grabs for print advertising, I can't color correct them to use for most commercial web work, I can't use all my Speedotron strobes in video, and so on. I can't use a 4K screen grab for a billboard or vehicle wrap gig.
If all you need is a tiny shot that's really compressed and is difficult to correct, to isolate and retouch, and you don't mind shooting video at higher shutter speeds (not knocking ya, if that's "all you need", then I can't see a flaw in your methodology). If someone wants an 11x14 print, you're a little hosed. 
If you're shooting video and someone wants a still, then it's better than nothing (I have one client that still hires me for events, and I continually have to remind them that if they want stills AND video, they need to tell me which one has to actually be good".) 
There's a massive difference between the mindset for shooting stills and shooting video. In stills, you're looking for the perfect moment, and adjusting everything you do to get it captured. In video, you're looking for a temporal sense of what the moment felt like and how it evolved (that's the best i can explain it).
So what gets me is the idea that a need is "eliminated" or a technology is "replaced". It's focusing on hardware and not on the final results that the hardware can deliver.
This shot could have been a video frame, it only used reflectors - but it would not have had the impact it got from methodically thinking through a still setup. And (she's my granddaughter), I really kind of want a 16x20 iris print of this on, like, watercolor paper... 

Thanks - I'm not a videographer or a photographer - I'm a marketer who can shoot and edit. The three things that have kept me self employed for two decades:
Think like a marketer;
Be a partner, not a provider;
Don't be a dick. 
(That last one - many times my clients have said "you're so easy to work with, we can drive you nuts with changes and edits that are our stupid fault and you fix it fast with a smile, it's always a pleasure to have you on the team" and so on). When I worked for big retail and planned a shoot, my first criteria in booking the team was "people I really loved spending a day with". Yeah, they were great at what they did, from shooters to makeup to models to stylists and scouts - and I always made sure the day would make great shots but that it would also be a really, really enjoyable day (or days or week). I had no space for catty models or shooters who treated me like a king but dissed their assistants. I think it's massively underrated to have your emotional shit together in business. It can be what tips the scales for someone deciding on suppliers. It can be what keeps the same clients for years or decades. I once mentioned to a client that I had just gotten stiffed by a new client who went under and left me holding a huge lab and printing bill - the guy excused himself and came back with a big check and said "I know we'll do this much business this year, just give me a credit for it". I'm not a perfect human being, but man, I appreciate the people that keep me working and I treat them that way. If anyone is the kind of person that keeps losing friends and lives with all kinds of personal upheaval, loses clients (and friends) over stupid things - step back and suss that stuff out!

There's way more to this than the drive brand. How is it connected? An SSD in a $15 USB 3.0 enclosure is pretty dang fast on my cylinder Mac Pro, unimpressive on my tower (which is USB 2). 
You also have to research what the software wants - Adobe's techs recommend the following to maximize After Effects, for instance (AE is where I personally need speed) - 
Application and system files on your boot drive; Scratch disk on a separate and very fast drive (internal SSD on PCI for instance); Footage on a very fast drive (external RAID 0 for instance on a fast buss like Tbolt2 - but then, spinning-drive raid may not need TB2 while an SSD raid might use the extra speed - but enough SSD raid space for three or 4 4K projects in production at any given time, and the associated graphics and audio and so on may be wildly expensive); Graphic card that works with AE; Fastest processor you can get. Two of their techs specifically told me that even 12-16GB of RAM was fine for that time, do the drives and graphic card first. So there's three separate drives/busses (for AE anyway) - and the scratch drive is really where max speed is needed. And I generally have anywhere from one to three terrabytes of active work (not completed and ready to archive) at any given time, so a spinning drive raid (and a big disk to back it up on at night) is the most cost-effective thing for me.
FCPX is crazy-efficient on a mac system - even on a 2009 Mac Pro it'll edit 4K smoothly with an internal spinning raid, on my newer cylinder I can edit files that are on a networked raid (gigabit, but that's gotten stupid cheap now, $15 for a switch). Resolve is another story, and if you can't afford a mega system you may have to work at proxy resolutions and so on.
You really need to figure out where you need speed, research the best solutions for each software, figure out where the best value is if you can't afford the best, and THEN figure out what configuration works best for, say Resolve and Premiere (and also any 3D or effects software you might use regularly).

Thanks - I'm not a videographer or a photographer - I'm a marketer who can shoot and edit. The three things that have kept me self employed for two decades:
Think like a marketer;
Be a partner, not a provider;
Don't be a dick. 
(That last one - many times my clients have said "you're so easy to work with, we can drive you nuts with changes and edits that are our stupid fault and you fix it fast with a smile, it's always a pleasure to have you on the team" and so on). When I worked for big retail and planned a shoot, my first criteria in booking the team was "people I really loved spending a day with". Yeah, they were great at what they did, from shooters to makeup to models to stylists and scouts - and I always made sure the day would make great shots but that it would also be a really, really enjoyable day (or days or week). I had no space for catty models or shooters who treated me like a king but dissed their assistants. I think it's massively underrated to have your emotional shit together in business. It can be what tips the scales for someone deciding on suppliers. It can be what keeps the same clients for years or decades. I once mentioned to a client that I had just gotten stiffed by a new client who went under and left me holding a huge lab and printing bill - the guy excused himself and came back with a big check and said "I know we'll do this much business this year, just give me a credit for it". I'm not a perfect human being, but man, I appreciate the people that keep me working and I treat them that way. If anyone is the kind of person that keeps losing friends and lives with all kinds of personal upheaval, loses clients (and friends) over stupid things - step back and suss that stuff out!

Thanks - I'm not a videographer or a photographer - I'm a marketer who can shoot and edit. The three things that have kept me self employed for two decades:
Think like a marketer;
Be a partner, not a provider;
Don't be a dick. 
(That last one - many times my clients have said "you're so easy to work with, we can drive you nuts with changes and edits that are our stupid fault and you fix it fast with a smile, it's always a pleasure to have you on the team" and so on). When I worked for big retail and planned a shoot, my first criteria in booking the team was "people I really loved spending a day with". Yeah, they were great at what they did, from shooters to makeup to models to stylists and scouts - and I always made sure the day would make great shots but that it would also be a really, really enjoyable day (or days or week). I had no space for catty models or shooters who treated me like a king but dissed their assistants. I think it's massively underrated to have your emotional shit together in business. It can be what tips the scales for someone deciding on suppliers. It can be what keeps the same clients for years or decades. I once mentioned to a client that I had just gotten stiffed by a new client who went under and left me holding a huge lab and printing bill - the guy excused himself and came back with a big check and said "I know we'll do this much business this year, just give me a credit for it". I'm not a perfect human being, but man, I appreciate the people that keep me working and I treat them that way. If anyone is the kind of person that keeps losing friends and lives with all kinds of personal upheaval, loses clients (and friends) over stupid things - step back and suss that stuff out!

You're approaching this the wrong way. It doesn't matter what product or what media. The question is, "what are you really selling?".
BMW doesn't sell cars - they sell status and they sell based on the consumer belief that owning a BMW will make everyone think they're wealthy, classy, demanding only the best, and so on.
Tires are a practical item that most everyone needs, or they're a desirable performance item for a niche market. They're expensive ($700 next week for my vehicle, damn it!) and a hassle to purchase and take care of. They're something you forget how much you rely on until you have a problem with them. They can be the difference between life and death. 
The fact you've said nothing about the business - what's their market position, who is their market, why should a consumer choose them over the competition - makes me think you're approaching this as a creative project and not a marketing project. That's great, but you need to deliver a product that meets the business goals of the owner. Do they want attention, do they want to seem cooler, do they want their market to realize something about them that isn't apparent (better price, good service, fastest installation)? 
A tire shop ad can range from the owner in his terrible suit shouting "CHEAPEST TIRES IN TOWN" with bad interlaced footage of the shop, up to the very best commercials from Michelin or Pirelli and so on. But this guy is a dealer, not a manufacturer - straight-out marketing suggests you get across the reasons a consumer should consider them over their car dealer or a big chain store (could be done with humor or action or any of a dozen directions). I'd resist the knee-jerk reaction to sell tires - Michelin sells tires - what does a local business actually sell to their market? A market that's about to purchase tires and deciding where to go for pricing and service? This can still be creative as hell, it can be viral, etc. But you probably don't need to sell the product itself.
Remember the ad for some local gym? A buff girl is walking around in her panties and approaches a bowl of nuts. She sticks a nut between her butt cheeks and we hear a CRACK - the's so tough, she can shell nuts with her ass. The camera pans to her gym bag, which has the logo of the gym on it. Not a single word spoken. That's pretty damn creative, legitimately funny (and went viral and was shared, like, 10 million times). They didn't talk about their pricing or classes or schedule or locations, but got massive attention. One actress in one location, too. 
Step back and think about the market and what the business wants to achieve.

You're approaching this the wrong way. It doesn't matter what product or what media. The question is, "what are you really selling?".
BMW doesn't sell cars - they sell status and they sell based on the consumer belief that owning a BMW will make everyone think they're wealthy, classy, demanding only the best, and so on.
Tires are a practical item that most everyone needs, or they're a desirable performance item for a niche market. They're expensive ($700 next week for my vehicle, damn it!) and a hassle to purchase and take care of. They're something you forget how much you rely on until you have a problem with them. They can be the difference between life and death. 
The fact you've said nothing about the business - what's their market position, who is their market, why should a consumer choose them over the competition - makes me think you're approaching this as a creative project and not a marketing project. That's great, but you need to deliver a product that meets the business goals of the owner. Do they want attention, do they want to seem cooler, do they want their market to realize something about them that isn't apparent (better price, good service, fastest installation)? 
A tire shop ad can range from the owner in his terrible suit shouting "CHEAPEST TIRES IN TOWN" with bad interlaced footage of the shop, up to the very best commercials from Michelin or Pirelli and so on. But this guy is a dealer, not a manufacturer - straight-out marketing suggests you get across the reasons a consumer should consider them over their car dealer or a big chain store (could be done with humor or action or any of a dozen directions). I'd resist the knee-jerk reaction to sell tires - Michelin sells tires - what does a local business actually sell to their market? A market that's about to purchase tires and deciding where to go for pricing and service? This can still be creative as hell, it can be viral, etc. But you probably don't need to sell the product itself.
Remember the ad for some local gym? A buff girl is walking around in her panties and approaches a bowl of nuts. She sticks a nut between her butt cheeks and we hear a CRACK - the's so tough, she can shell nuts with her ass. The camera pans to her gym bag, which has the logo of the gym on it. Not a single word spoken. That's pretty damn creative, legitimately funny (and went viral and was shared, like, 10 million times). They didn't talk about their pricing or classes or schedule or locations, but got massive attention. One actress in one location, too. 
Step back and think about the market and what the business wants to achieve.

You're approaching this the wrong way. It doesn't matter what product or what media. The question is, "what are you really selling?".
BMW doesn't sell cars - they sell status and they sell based on the consumer belief that owning a BMW will make everyone think they're wealthy, classy, demanding only the best, and so on.
Tires are a practical item that most everyone needs, or they're a desirable performance item for a niche market. They're expensive ($700 next week for my vehicle, damn it!) and a hassle to purchase and take care of. They're something you forget how much you rely on until you have a problem with them. They can be the difference between life and death. 
The fact you've said nothing about the business - what's their market position, who is their market, why should a consumer choose them over the competition - makes me think you're approaching this as a creative project and not a marketing project. That's great, but you need to deliver a product that meets the business goals of the owner. Do they want attention, do they want to seem cooler, do they want their market to realize something about them that isn't apparent (better price, good service, fastest installation)? 
A tire shop ad can range from the owner in his terrible suit shouting "CHEAPEST TIRES IN TOWN" with bad interlaced footage of the shop, up to the very best commercials from Michelin or Pirelli and so on. But this guy is a dealer, not a manufacturer - straight-out marketing suggests you get across the reasons a consumer should consider them over their car dealer or a big chain store (could be done with humor or action or any of a dozen directions). I'd resist the knee-jerk reaction to sell tires - Michelin sells tires - what does a local business actually sell to their market? A market that's about to purchase tires and deciding where to go for pricing and service? This can still be creative as hell, it can be viral, etc. But you probably don't need to sell the product itself.
Remember the ad for some local gym? A buff girl is walking around in her panties and approaches a bowl of nuts. She sticks a nut between her butt cheeks and we hear a CRACK - the's so tough, she can shell nuts with her ass. The camera pans to her gym bag, which has the logo of the gym on it. Not a single word spoken. That's pretty damn creative, legitimately funny (and went viral and was shared, like, 10 million times). They didn't talk about their pricing or classes or schedule or locations, but got massive attention. One actress in one location, too. 
Step back and think about the market and what the business wants to achieve.

You're approaching this the wrong way. It doesn't matter what product or what media. The question is, "what are you really selling?".
BMW doesn't sell cars - they sell status and they sell based on the consumer belief that owning a BMW will make everyone think they're wealthy, classy, demanding only the best, and so on.
Tires are a practical item that most everyone needs, or they're a desirable performance item for a niche market. They're expensive ($700 next week for my vehicle, damn it!) and a hassle to purchase and take care of. They're something you forget how much you rely on until you have a problem with them. They can be the difference between life and death. 
The fact you've said nothing about the business - what's their market position, who is their market, why should a consumer choose them over the competition - makes me think you're approaching this as a creative project and not a marketing project. That's great, but you need to deliver a product that meets the business goals of the owner. Do they want attention, do they want to seem cooler, do they want their market to realize something about them that isn't apparent (better price, good service, fastest installation)? 
A tire shop ad can range from the owner in his terrible suit shouting "CHEAPEST TIRES IN TOWN" with bad interlaced footage of the shop, up to the very best commercials from Michelin or Pirelli and so on. But this guy is a dealer, not a manufacturer - straight-out marketing suggests you get across the reasons a consumer should consider them over their car dealer or a big chain store (could be done with humor or action or any of a dozen directions). I'd resist the knee-jerk reaction to sell tires - Michelin sells tires - what does a local business actually sell to their market? A market that's about to purchase tires and deciding where to go for pricing and service? This can still be creative as hell, it can be viral, etc. But you probably don't need to sell the product itself.
Remember the ad for some local gym? A buff girl is walking around in her panties and approaches a bowl of nuts. She sticks a nut between her butt cheeks and we hear a CRACK - the's so tough, she can shell nuts with her ass. The camera pans to her gym bag, which has the logo of the gym on it. Not a single word spoken. That's pretty damn creative, legitimately funny (and went viral and was shared, like, 10 million times). They didn't talk about their pricing or classes or schedule or locations, but got massive attention. One actress in one location, too. 
Step back and think about the market and what the business wants to achieve.

I bought an "indian" one when DSLRs started really taking off, figured I'd eventually replace it. Still use it every week though, guess I got lucky -it was like $250.
Look for:
At least two stages & at least one rotates;
Height adjustable;
Detachable flags that don't have gaps between the flags and the main hood assembly - and hopefully the front flag stays put when used without the side flags;
A swing-away front is really handy;
If you use different sized lenses (DSLR style shooting), I found it's easier to just get screw-on rubber lens hoods to seal the lenses against the matte box opening vs. nun's knickers or swapping out foam donuts. If you use cinema lenses it's not such an issue. (You usually need something though - the first time you get back to your NLE and see the reflections of focus gears in your ND - yeah, that bites!)

RX10-II users - can anyone give me a rundown of codecs? Are these common formats that can be dragged from the card clip-by-clip (like H264, etc)? Or more like the AVCHD style, where the entire card has to be read and translated vs. a folder full of accessible shots?
Any issues along the lines of Samsung/H265 encoding, or is this footage easier to access?
(I shoot a lot of Nikon DSLR and I can open clips right from the card to preview in QT player, and drag my favorites to an MPEG Streamclip batch, very easy. My "event" cameras are Panasonics, where I have to go through log & transfer in FCP to get prores clips, similar to C300 footage, etc. Those are my two transcoding paths I use daily).

I shoot some music videos at 30p, with the synch music sped up to match, and edit at 24p. It gives everything a little more "weighty" feel. Moving hair gets a little more float to it. I also tend to do steadicam shots at 30p if there's no dialogue - not every single one but if the feel of the edit calls for it, it makes things feel a little more "floaty" or adds some gravitas or emotion. Subtle but there. You can always speed it up since you're throwing frames away vs. creating from scratch.
Timewarp and Twixtor - when they work they work, and when they can't do it, it hurts. Great slowmo and suddenly someone's hand or hair turns to a deformed alien morph-thing. If you shoot specifically for those plugins, you need fallback just-in-case takes as well. 
I've gotten better results with Timewarp (I don't own twixtor) with 4K footage - more pixels for the software to chew on I suppose - it's all about detail with those. Motion blurs can be a huge problem, too. So figure on more light for those shots and up your shutter speed.
The micro cinema cam does 60p which slows down nicely, you might look into that, especially if you already own a pocket-specific speedbooster.

I shoot some music videos at 30p, with the synch music sped up to match, and edit at 24p. It gives everything a little more "weighty" feel. Moving hair gets a little more float to it. I also tend to do steadicam shots at 30p if there's no dialogue - not every single one but if the feel of the edit calls for it, it makes things feel a little more "floaty" or adds some gravitas or emotion. Subtle but there. You can always speed it up since you're throwing frames away vs. creating from scratch.
Timewarp and Twixtor - when they work they work, and when they can't do it, it hurts. Great slowmo and suddenly someone's hand or hair turns to a deformed alien morph-thing. If you shoot specifically for those plugins, you need fallback just-in-case takes as well. 
I've gotten better results with Timewarp (I don't own twixtor) with 4K footage - more pixels for the software to chew on I suppose - it's all about detail with those. Motion blurs can be a huge problem, too. So figure on more light for those shots and up your shutter speed.
The micro cinema cam does 60p which slows down nicely, you might look into that, especially if you already own a pocket-specific speedbooster.

I'm amazed that not one response here has included the word "impedance". Generally, (in the realm of microphones) XLR gear is expecting a low impedance signal; and mini-plug gear is expecting a high impedance signal. I'd at least get a barrel-style XLR to 1/4 transformer adapter, and then add a 1/4 to 1/8 (though these days someone may make an XLR to 1/8?). The other issue is that those three pins each do something. Most camera-in jacks are TR (tip ring) for a mono input, or TRS (tip ring sleeve, three conducters) for a stereo input. I believe most DSLRs have a stereo mic input, but could be mistaken? So you have the potential for grounding problems as well.
The design of the XLR connector is "purely for the stability of the connection" - it's pretty robust - but most XLR mics - and any you'd really want to use on-set - will be XLRs that are using the three pins to carry the standard low impedance signal. You can do low impedance with any three-conducter setup (1/4 TRS is popular) but mics for on-set audio (ecluding lavs) will use the full-sized XLR, will require phantom power, and will be low-z.
Speaking of phantom power - some mics have an internal battery, but if not, you're limited to using dynamic mics which generally aren't used for film sound for a host of reasons.
There's another current thread here dealing with this exact subject. Unless this is just a hobby for the OP, I'd say at the very least get a decent preamp that converts the XLR input to a preamped 1/8 output. And for probably the same money, you could get, say, a Tascam DR60D ($169 if you shop around, and showing up used all over), which has phantom power, mic power, meters, headphone and camera out level controls, minus 6DB safety tracks, low cut, a limiter, slate tone, etc. Far as I know it's about the best budget solution to beginner's audio needs, and the adjustable camera out allows you to stage your gain and at least try to get a clean and strong signal to the camera if you don't want to synch in post (and still have a nice clean recorder track if the camera audio isn't optimal). I imagine it would really up the quality of something like a blade as well.
I know some of the monitor/recorders have audio ins and meters, but you're missing a lot of really necessary features - features that can really save your butt - and you're not talking investing thousand of bucks to get those features. If you're planning to charge money, I'd really recommend a pro solution, even something entry level like the DR - it will outlive your next ten cameras.

How close can you get the Zoom with a capsule stuck on it to the actor's voice? I'm not super-familiar with that setup, but I'm thinking it's for ambient sound or recording concerts and such. If you're doing narrative work or interviews, you need a decent mic as close as possible to the subject. And optimally it's a mic that captures as little extraneous sound as possible. A Sure 57 2 feet from the talent is going to trump a zillion-dollar hyper across the room - much less a Rode videomic on the hot shoe. Think about getting a hyper on a stand, or a quality lav on the chest, while you're trying to shoot with a lens long enough for the look you want - usually 5 or 6 feet away for starters. Work backwards from there - what's it take to get up-close audio, with as little ambient sound as possible, into your edit? Not necessarily into your camera, but on your timeline?
There's no super-secret formula you'll find that beats a hyper mic just out of the frame. Plug that mic into a proper recording chain (balanced low impedance cables, decent preamp, decent recording medium). Stage yout gain so you get the max signal to noise with no distortion. Find a way to synch it to the camera (even FCPX has auto-synching built-in, or synch by ear). And it will synch to the built-in mic on about any DSLR - your synch track doesn't need to be amazing. Get a clapboard if you're worried.
That's it. A $1500 Schoeps mic is just icing on the cake. The basics are the basics and they work.

And can I throw in one more rant-ism - what the f*cking F*CK is with all the "unboxing reviews". I really, really don't give a rat's what the corporate packaging department came up with. It's just more clickbait, by people who only now how to open a damn box.
Whhew. I feel much better now.

How close can you get the Zoom with a capsule stuck on it to the actor's voice? I'm not super-familiar with that setup, but I'm thinking it's for ambient sound or recording concerts and such. If you're doing narrative work or interviews, you need a decent mic as close as possible to the subject. And optimally it's a mic that captures as little extraneous sound as possible. A Sure 57 2 feet from the talent is going to trump a zillion-dollar hyper across the room - much less a Rode videomic on the hot shoe. Think about getting a hyper on a stand, or a quality lav on the chest, while you're trying to shoot with a lens long enough for the look you want - usually 5 or 6 feet away for starters. Work backwards from there - what's it take to get up-close audio, with as little ambient sound as possible, into your edit? Not necessarily into your camera, but on your timeline?
There's no super-secret formula you'll find that beats a hyper mic just out of the frame. Plug that mic into a proper recording chain (balanced low impedance cables, decent preamp, decent recording medium). Stage yout gain so you get the max signal to noise with no distortion. Find a way to synch it to the camera (even FCPX has auto-synching built-in, or synch by ear). And it will synch to the built-in mic on about any DSLR - your synch track doesn't need to be amazing. Get a clapboard if you're worried.
That's it. A $1500 Schoeps mic is just icing on the cake. The basics are the basics and they work.

Amazing value in a hyper mic - AT4053b. Yes, it's $600 new, but it's the last mic I'll buy other than specialty needs. It's just simply luscious. Sparkly highs, as much bass as you'd desire for voices, a really great, silky, crisp and "present" sound. Sounds great in a blimp, too (though i often remove the front cell if possible). if you ever see one used for a good deal, don't think twice. Evey time I mix interviews I think "holy crap this sounds great".
OST lavs are pretty spectacular values as well. I got a side-address (801?) which has a high-end bump and use it for hiding mics. Works great in the point of a shirt collar. All three of his mics are pretty highly regarded.
Favorite purchase of 2016? XLR barrel-style adapter that fits my lavs (sennhesier screw-on mini) and converts phantom power to mic power, and converts the mic signal to a balanced signal for a standard XLR cable. Makes it easy to use a lav when you don't actually need wireless but need a lav. Also make me use the lav more often, even when I have a mic on a stand, just to have a 2nd source to play with.

The D3 is an interference tube "shotgun" mic, regardless of what they compare it to - Aputure calls it a shotgun as well. Where did I "write it off"? My comment is that there's been a lot of fairly affordable (even cheap as hell) shotguns out there, but it's interesting we're finally seeing hypers get democratized.
ADK A-51s are under $200 and a pretty spectacular value, so I won't write it off til I hear it.
There's no "video mic" that has some magic wind-proof power - you need wind protection. A blimp has an internal shockmount, a shell that has some wind cut properties, and (the Rode for instance) comes with a "dead cat" - the fur cover. None of that will allow you to shoot in wind over 20mph or so with total quiet, but they go a long way. 
My son does some on-set audio - his blimp doesn't have a removable front cell. The Rode does - I use that indoors if there's AC we just can't shut off (big office buildings) and remove just the front - that does seem to help deaden room noise even more. In fact, I never take my mic out of the blimp and transport it that way (I have sort of a foam rubber "donut" that I stick in there to keep the shock mount cords from having to "work" in storage).
Another good trick - if your blimp is designed for shotguns, it may be hard to get a hyper all the way up to the front - so essentially you're sacrificing 2 or 3 inches of mic placement. Get one of the XLR barrel on-off switches, tape the switch to "on" and plug it onto your mic and stick the whole thing in the shockmount - basically makes your mic about 3 or 4" longer.
The Rode NTG 2 and 3 are shotgun mics. Unless all you do is shoot outdoors, I'd start with a hyper. Shotguns can really pick up a lot of room reverberance and noise - their design makes the pickup from the rear of the mic very strong, it's a problem inherent to the interference design that makes the front more directional.

I bought an "indian" one when DSLRs started really taking off, figured I'd eventually replace it. Still use it every week though, guess I got lucky -it was like $250.
Look for:
At least two stages & at least one rotates;
Height adjustable;
Detachable flags that don't have gaps between the flags and the main hood assembly - and hopefully the front flag stays put when used without the side flags;
A swing-away front is really handy;
If you use different sized lenses (DSLR style shooting), I found it's easier to just get screw-on rubber lens hoods to seal the lenses against the matte box opening vs. nun's knickers or swapping out foam donuts. If you use cinema lenses it's not such an issue. (You usually need something though - the first time you get back to your NLE and see the reflections of focus gears in your ND - yeah, that bites!)