Asmundma

The Zoom F4 is indeed much better than the H4n (I have both and both are for sale! (also have a DR100 MKII for sale)). The noise floor is now usable on the F4, though still not as good as Sound Devices. If that's all that matters, then sure, they are close on noise, even more so with highly compressed online streaming listening.
When it comes to sound quality, especially with decent speakers/headphones, any Sound Devices is in another class compared to the Zoom F4/F8! If you can't hear the difference, what headphones or monitors are you using?  I'm using the amazing-deal Focal Listens (closed back) and the best-bang-for-buck Stax SRS-3100 w/ Ultra mod (Socas adapter plates and Brainwavz Hybrid Memory Foam pads (also have thick ZMF Lambskin angled pads, though currently prefer the thinner Brainwavz)). Previously: Sony 7506 and Audio Technica ATH-M50 (old model): both are also excellent for the money (and both still used for recording/location monitoring). Headphone amp is Sound Devices USBPre2 (excellent). These are pretty good demos which illustrate the sound quality differences: 
It's not always about price, sometimes is preference. I always found the RME Fireface 800's mic preamps a bit sterile and digital sounding (harsh). I replaced it with the comparatively cheap Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 (over 10x cheaper) which has nicer preamps- smoother, more natural, and more analog like. While the Scarlett has sufficiently quiet and smooth mic preamps, the Sound Devices USBPre2 mic preamps are much fuller and more detailed across the spectrum.
Finally, a professional life-saver feature of the Sound Devices products is the analog limiter- it's basically unclippable. Even if you're very careful and set levels safely (e.g. -12 dB), sh*t happens and you're going to get clipping, especially for live/location/doc work. Using a safety track can help but that's more work in post and still not as good as SD (or higher end) analog limiters.
For the price difference between the F4 and MixPre6, there's no way I'd recommend the F4, even if I was a brand ambassador for Zoom. If one needs more channels and doesn't have the budget for equivalent Sound Devices or similar gear, the Zoom F8 makes sense. For indie/hobby work, digital limiters (or no limiter) recorders work fine, as it can be no big deal to go back and re-record once you have reviewed the recordings and find you've got some problems. If time is important or one is paid by someone else, analog limiters are really helpful.
Regarding Brand Ambassadoring for Aputure: it's cool to promote products one is compensated for, however as others have noted there are some issues with the current Deity: noise floor and off-axis rejection. While it does sound similar to a 416, it's much noisier, and side & rear rejection is much worse than the 416 and NTG-2. I've only listened on YouTube, however this review says the Deity is noisier than a $249 NTG-2. It appears Aputure tuned the Deity with high gain (hotter, more sensitive) and the budget ran out to keep costs and noise low at the same time. It's a fair compromise, and in noisy environments the noise won't really matter, or noise can be removed in post (FFT/spectral or simple expander/noise gate).
Regarding mic placement and usage: there are NO RULES! There are guidelines, however what matters is how the mic and placement actually sound for the conditions- that's it. Mic on camera? Absolutely for run&gun and it can sound great. It's totally fine to use a shotgun indoors in a non-reverberant room. The 416 is also an excellent VO/indoor mic. As long as the room's reflections aren't causing the shotgun to 'phase out' (sh*tty sounding phase effects), they can work great. It only took one time after many years of using the NTG-2 as my main mic to hear nasty reverberant phase effects to finally add a hypercardioid. I picked up both the Audix SCX1-HC ($500) and the Schoeps CMC641 (a lot more). If I 'squint my ears'  maybe I can hear a difference between these two mics. I ended up keeping both to do stereo recordings. Even though they aren't matched, they work pretty well together (all the indoor Cosmic Flow shoots use both these mics as a stereo recording on booms above talent. Can you hear the difference?). At that time I also finally upgraded to the CMIT5U, which works well outdoors, indoors, and on camera too! Someone criticized plugging a Schoeps directly into the C300 II- as if it could only be mated with a Sound Devices or better lol. When I'm running both camera and audio, simplicity and reliability are first priority. For critical location shooting for playing clients, the higher quality preamps and analog limiters of a Sound Devices mixer would totally make sense.
Here the NTG-2 sounds better indoors than the normally excellent Audio Technica 4053b (one of Curtis Judd's favorites): 
The 4053b and SCX1-HC tested for dialog here: http://www.4kshooters.net/2016/06/28/five-affordable-boom-microphones-for-capturing-high-quality-indoor-dialogue/
Cables: Neutrik connectors are great and after using cheaper cables really appreciate Mogami quality.
Over the years I started out with the best low-cost gear I could find (Rode, Audio Technica, Zoom, Tascam) and slowly upgraded to better gear (Sound Devices, Sennheiser, and Schoeps). You really appreciate the quality of the higher end gear after learning on the budget gear. The Audix SCX1-HC is a special gem- fantastic quality for the price. For internet streaming and listening on a cellphone (where most people consume low-budget/indie/free content), the budget Rode and Audio Technica gear is plenty good!

Well it is like someone already said on here. Don't steal music and you will have no problems. How hard is that. This isn't some new concept. If you have dumbass directors that falls on your shoulders doesn't it.
This is why being a business owner sucks ass, why you lay awake at nights. YOU are responsible for Everyone that works for you good or bad, now or years ago.

I think this camera is a disaster, except for the fact that it makes the best looking footage. Best color, best tonality, but the specs are terrible. I guess if all you care about is the best looking footage then it's great.

Camera fanboys are as bad as Trump fanatics.

Hi, I have extensive experience with RME and had the rme 400 , now UFX II. The drivers in RME is rock solid and you can record with low latencey (the is now way the Zoom will be that stable). If you record music, the RME is the way to go as it much better for that purpose (DsP with EQ, compressor, auto level of recording, high impedance input for guitar, etc.) , recording video sound the F8n will do well. Sound Devices will benefit from analog limiter, slightly less noise. 

I have both the 1dx2 and c200, it defenetly a step up from 1dx2. Way more DR, cleaner footage etc. 

I will never buy a video camera with out good AF if you like to film things that move. Assuming one man crew. If you do, you risk static senes and boring videos. That means only Sony and Canon for the moment. 
All extra you put on the camra is a hassel for field work or if you travel. 
The best tool contains what you need as part of the camera. I have gone through all these phases and to day I have:
A7r3, 1dx2 and C200. So I am not using my Atomos any more..C200 shoots raw to CFast cards..... have the SmallHD, maybe on the Canon if on tripod. Its a good monitor. 
 

You assume that a good camera operator has control over their environment.  Try doing any documentary work outside in direct sunlight and it won't matter how good an operator you are - if your camera doesn't have enough DR you're going to be clipping highlights or crushing blacks or both at the same time in the same shot.

A real world test .........Raw 50P

I've noticed this a few times from people, that although DPAF is great it can sometimes be noisy. Which would annoy the hell out of me as a sound recordist if I came across this. 
 

haha, yeah "noiseless" is totally different for photographers than video folk!!

A small bit of noise is ok for a stills guy shooting in a church for a wedding, but would drive me nuts.
 

Here you will find a comparison. If you want good AF there is one choice. 

Should be a thunderbolt to hdmi dongle for a few bucks.

Running for months. Use FCPX, Aurora hdr, Luminar, Resolve, Photoshop, Lightroom. Not Premier. Rock solid. And lately Canon RAW Light development SW.

Sorry to say, but this film and pictures look bad to me. Maybe it’s distroyed putting them up here? The first one in the thread look better.

We need a simple bus system for roles, and the ability to put a limiter on the main output, without creating a compound clip.

Your translation is maybe wrong. More like; white men that blames others that they are losers, and voted on the latest president because they belied he will save them. 

Your translation is maybe wrong. More like; white men that blames others that they are losers, and voted on the latest president because they belied he will save them. 

I was on a construction site shoot this weekend where a perfect shot materialized suddenly after we had just packed up the camera for the day. I pulled out my iPhone 6s and recorded it in 4k 100mpbs with Filmic Pro. Add a little simulated motion blur in after effects and you are golden. I've cut in filmic pro iphone footage to videos before and no one has ever noticed. Great iPhone gimbals are $130 now. These kinds of situations are where I see a phone being useful for filmmaking. 

You sound a bit like what we is Sweden call a "vit kränkt man"

Take a look at RED webpages, a lot of films are shoot with RED Cameras. So I guess, if you really are professional, RAW is the thing. Those who are not there yet, are still on the 8 or 10 bit track.  Soon you can head over to Apple Store and buy a RED Raven.

Frankly I think it's ok if this camera is not for everyone. That's why other options exist. You can't be all things to all people.

google translate 
"he who can do more can do less"  Unfortunately this is not the case here, as usual …Since the time we understood the lesson…

(Panasonic, sony, canon are a Japanese company that shares the market with well-established strategy, there is no competition between them
And the two new camera of canon and panasonic demonstrates it very well)
 
From this imposed logic, for me the C200 is the competitor of the RED  and not the PANA EVA 
When you buy a red it is for the RAW, It should be the same for the c200 
Generally the must used compression in REd is the redcod 5.1 in 4k it gives 30 min of video in a card of 128G
It's very very manageable for a fiction This is one of the great big advantage of red, the compressed RAW Redcode
The c200 record in 4K RAW " light " 15 min of video on a 128 card, is double! Of an RED.
The advantage of the c200 on the RED is the price ! (camera body and Recording  card media) Autofocus and canon optics , low light performance ,built-in ND Filter, Weight Size, ergonomie.

Unfortunately the c200 does not record in Raw 2K otherwise it could record 30 min of video on a card of 128G " Of course, It's cool to have the optional 4k :p "

I worked on movies participate in festivals such cannes Berlinale venise, all the projection are always in 2K even in cinemas at the distribution .
And many are waiting to go directly to the 8k, and will not invest in 4k DCP projectors

And I can tell you that the most important in an image is the color dynamic range and (Organic noise, if there is)
And the C200 canon She has this, "in theory"

  

I am getting used to the 1dx2 files size, so not too scared. The C-fast card offload quite fast (with a reader)  so that's not a big concern and a 20-30 terra raid stores quite much. The jury is still out how efficient the raw will be, or the new codec comming next year. For me the AF is very important, so I will defenitly look closer on this camera. 

Looks like a massive offensive from Canon on the video side: DPR sponsored content, potential firmware upgrade and now they send you a unit.The 5mk4 sales figures must be bad !
Anyway, too little too late for Canon. The lack of innovation was the last drop for me, I already bought a GH5. It would take more than a moderate crop factor and reasonable codec to convince me to spend $3500 in this body. Plus, does the mk4 have the hardware to handle proper 4k ? Let's see at NAB...

Nothing can beat FCPX for me. 
So easy and fast to do what I want. Time remapping is the best of any software and I use time remapping all the time.
Who cares about Native lut support when you just need Color Finale the best grading tool ever with way better integration of LUT management than Premiere native shit. 
I am not saying Resolve is shit. I used FCPX then switched to Premiere for the After effects integration. Switched back recently to FCPX and it's just that much better. 
Tried the last year Resolve for a project. It did not work for me