Snowfun

Even with magic lanern:
No XLR, no EVF, poor live-view when recording raw (it's practically unusable in 3.5K), huge data rates, limited dynamic range...
Not to mention using raw on a paid shoot would be a risk most wouldn't (shouldn't) take. I've done it.. but I'm not into those risks anymore.
It's a great camera - Amazing image, built like a tank, pleasing skin tones. I may never sell mine.
But, ultimate? No way.
 
Also, please top approving your own posts. Every forum post in the history of the internet has been approved by the author of said post, or they wouldn't hit submit.

Heavens above! They’ll be making them without film next!

I thought we'd all agreed with Andrew to keep things on topic as a cinematography forum rather than a vehicle for vox pop "I've read Wikipedia" opinions about life, the universe and other trivia? 
C'est la vie.

In response to the “one camera” for life post, I thought it might be fun to ask the same question for a lens. In some ways a more realistic situation as lenses do not become obselete at the same rate as camera technology. 
Me? I’d love to say a Cooke Anamorphic. But I’ve never used one (and am never likely to although it is always added to the Christmas list!). I do like my little Voigtlander 35mm Leica lens - possibly sentimental rather than artistic reasons.
So, you’re allowed a lens. Which one & why?
Tim

Why not just be happy to keep the A7S rather than waste emotional energy "wanting" a sports-journalists still camera? The A7Siii might offer more of what you require for a video upgrade but until then you have a camera you "love" so it's a good place.

Following Mattias I'd suggest three - if it's good then your audience will let you know that they want more. 
Making it too short and having an enthusiastic audience is much better than making it too long and risk everyone getting bored.
Once you've introduced one idea or joke or theme don't assume the credits last - you'll need to keep them coming (your "black eyes" will result in an initial one-off "wow" but you won't get the same reaction in episode 9!) This comment based on experience of live productions rather than film.
"I wish I'd done more" is inspirational and a motivation to keep going... 

There is a guy that sells Canon LP-E6 to Sony NPF adapters for use on the BMMCC. It'll solve the problem, but I find it quite bulky :s
http://www.starvingartist101.com/ 
 

It's easy for everyone to agree that the out of box settings are not optimal. Less easy for everyone to agree what they should be. And that, presumably, is the problem facing Sony, LG, Panasonic et al. I know several people who have bought new 4k TVs only because the picture looked so good in the shop (including a couple who assumed that it was the TV which made things "4k" rather than the broadcast...)

JCS: I think you need to step back and reflect a moment. As, I suspect, you well know, there is no way to answer your question - it is impossible for "me" to prove anything to "you" if you are suggesting that everything exists only in your imagination. Reductio ad absurdum. That isn't profound philosophical discourse, it is merely rather silly. Not dissimilar to a child asking "why is the sky?" Why do you ask the question here I wonder. Why not join a philosophy forum and debate the issue (although simply quoting Cogito ergo sum might not impress!). If you are genuinely interested in this and similar questions why not study on a mooc or enrol on a philosophy programme? (Yale offer one which is closely linked to cognitive science which is, I recall, another interest?)
To some extent you actually do answer your own question - the very fact of posting such a (in my opinion, ridiculous) question indicates a need you have to receive external stimuli. The "fact" (it's not really a fact because you are imagining it) that you ask the question presupposes that there is an "outside".
Or, rephrase your question - If nothing external to "me" actually exists then does anything matter? (So why post?)
Jonesy asked you a question - are you alive yes or no?

Not opting for the reincarnation option after 54 years? 
Isn't "truth" a social construct almost invariably used by one section of society as a mechanism of control, authority or influence over others? Perhaps even just to promote a common bond.
Trivial example: look at the oft stated mantra about "Canon colours being the best" - that is almost certainly true IFF the community defines it to be.
Some things we colloquially say are "true" (e.g. 2+2=4) are merely tautologies. 
The really interesting things such as love, beauty, harmony (or the opposites) are much more difficult to describe by any form of objective scientific description - perhaps this is where & why the truth of artistic expression is so important?

Not opting for the reincarnation option after 54 years? 
Isn't "truth" a social construct almost invariably used by one section of society as a mechanism of control, authority or influence over others? Perhaps even just to promote a common bond.
Trivial example: look at the oft stated mantra about "Canon colours being the best" - that is almost certainly true IFF the community defines it to be.
Some things we colloquially say are "true" (e.g. 2+2=4) are merely tautologies. 
The really interesting things such as love, beauty, harmony (or the opposites) are much more difficult to describe by any form of objective scientific description - perhaps this is where & why the truth of artistic expression is so important?

The guy joins the forum, looking for pointers to clips that in the forums' users' opinions are cinematic-looking and he gets greeted like that by one of the moderators. Wow - I bet he'll be recommending EOSHD to his pals as a real friendly and helpful place.

To be fair Jon, that was a totally, absolutely, ridiculous reply... ?
Here is one of my favorite cinematic a7s videos...
 

Looking forward to watching hipsters jumping off cliffs into azure seas with their $1000 iPhones on selfie sticks, later telling the insurance company that renowned DoP @Ed_David 'said it was a GoPro killer'.

Variation...
The dream recording facility record Jewel's dreams as above. But rather than the (too predictable?) sex based fantasy they find... nothing. Absolutely nothing. Devoid of soul, emotion, thoughts or apparent consciousness whilst asleep. Jewel is fine when awake - she displays the full plethora of human emotions and functions entirely normally. 
But when asleep: nothing. 
Almost as if... (but that's as far as I got...)

I am finding this incredibly useful at the moment:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nosleep/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WritingPrompts/
There's some real amateur talent on these subs, and occasionally an idea surfaces that sparks off all kinds of brilliant writing.
I suggest if you are feeling creative and want to write film ideas, to join in.
I am writing one at the moment, which is partly inspired by Black Mirror: San Junipero.
I found the build up in that episode a bit too cliched, but it turns into an absolutely killer idea by the end. Watch it. Very very moving!
---
Here's my (rather long) film writing prompt if anyone wants to pick up on it...
"DREAMS WE DON'T REMEMBER"
A technology arrives which records our dreams and allows us to interact with our deepest unconscious characters and situations. Jewel, a student, joins a research company’s paid trial. It is disguised in the ads as a drugs trial but turns out to be run by the corporation behind the dream-recording technology. Jewel is invited to test a new version of the technology and after a particularly disturbing dream we don’t know the contents of and Jewel can’t remember, she is forced to reenact it vividly using a new experimental brain-machine interface which accidentally sends her into a coma. In the problematic dream Jewel is being turned from a human into a machine by a primitive 1970's computer engineer who stabs a screwdriver and soldering iron around in her open chest torn apart, her skeleton rearranged into a box-like shape to accommodate a rack of circuit boards and wires.
Now inside the life-threatening coma, Jewel comes to believe she’s truly a computer. She feels the currents running through various wires inside her, her vision feels digital, like a flickering virtual reality headset and when she’s touched by the user, she feels their hands on her, pressing physical buttons and keys, to give her instructions on how to behave. She starts to develop an emotional and physical attachment with her 'owner', the man who is using her as his computer.
She wakes from her coma and unbeknown to the doctors helping her, the corporation has been recording her hallucinations in the coma - all the disturbing details of it. They use the data to reconstruct a virtual version of Jewel in the form of a feminine machine, a cyberpunk replicant, to be used to satisfy the sexual urges of their own computer scientists behind closed doors. After weeks of abuse the replicant escapes into the real world and tracks down Jewel’s home where she’s recovering in the company of her close family and boyfriend.
In front of her family, the replicant tells Jewel everything that happened in the coma and what the company has done to create the ‘virtual’ Jewel. The details of her deepest unconscious thoughts and upsettingly dark hallucinations create serious problems with her family and boyfriend, and it appears for most of the coma she’s fantasising about having passionate sex with her boyfriend's boss. Jewel is embarrassed and distraught, eventually alone and shunned by her family and boyfriend. With suicidal thoughts one evening, she steals the dream-recording machine from a research lab and tries to influence her dreams to repent for the sins in her unconscious.
She fails to have a more positive dream and feels disgusted when watching back the recording, whilst immersed in the futuristic VR brain-machine interface, a tear falls cinematically down her cheek, just as the replicant Jewel puts her hand on her shoulder in a gesture of comfort...
TBC

The problem with this is that there is no definition of the "we". There are a plethora of groups who claim to know a (if not "the") "better way". There is, of course, neither evidence that any one of these is any better than any other nor, indeed, an improvement over the current state. By whose criteria might this be judged? Obviously "my" ideas are the best IFF the criteria are my own. And ultimately that's all that is being said here.
One of the intriguing aspects of this is that, unlike  a clinical trial, there is no control group - you can't test things empirically under identical conditions. In the UK, for example, it can never be tested whether Brexit will make things "better" (whatever that means).  So it is all speculation. And speculation dressed up as "evidence" or as a means to legitimise a minority interest is equally as dangerous as the flaws of our current system.
Yes, "we" (a collection of individuals satisfies the condition - we don't need a label) must strive always to change things for the better. But let's not perpetuate the myth that there is one defined "better way" nor, worse, that any one individual knows what that is.
It's like colour grading - yes we can all try to improve but we'll never agree on the "best" outcome or style or "look" (this sentence added in the illusionary hope of making this relevant to a filming forum!)
Tim

iPhone (because I always have it)
Sony rx1004 (for convenience)
BM Micro (my preference but very inconvenient - I bought the Olympus 9mm body cap and that's great fun).

I switched from the Pocket and BM 2.5 cinema to 2 Micros. Really happy with the setup (smallHD and BMVA for monitors mounted on smallrig cages).
Olympus 12-100, Panasonic 15, Olympus 9mm (the body cap lens).
But hobby use only!

I switched from the Pocket and BM 2.5 cinema to 2 Micros. Really happy with the setup (smallHD and BMVA for monitors mounted on smallrig cages).
Olympus 12-100, Panasonic 15, Olympus 9mm (the body cap lens).
But hobby use only!

I switched from the Pocket and BM 2.5 cinema to 2 Micros. Really happy with the setup (smallHD and BMVA for monitors mounted on smallrig cages).
Olympus 12-100, Panasonic 15, Olympus 9mm (the body cap lens).
But hobby use only!

@jcs
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3902221/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2642860/
Just 2 papers which question the wisdom of blindly applying animal models to a human context. UG stuff. Totally irrelevant to these fora but you did ask.
The fact that you "studied" something is irrelevant. I have studied the spec sheet of a Red epic. Does that make me an "expert" in the art of  cinematography? On your logic, yes. I wish! 
Your approach to the scientific method is flawed. A good scientist presents evidence FOR his or her proposition. They do not demand that someone produces evidence to the contrary. (Unicorns exist. If you don't accept that prove that they don't. Reductio ad absurdum).  And evidence in this respect isn't a collection of random copy'n'paste from a variety of sources (rarely peer reviewed).  
You mention refraining from alcohol. Generally good advice (as witnessed elsewhere by Kaylee's story). But remember
http://www.tate.org.uk/context-comment/articles/drink-fuelled-nations-art
Always a counter-example!
But this is impinging on my day job and it's dull. I apologise for treating your posts like one of my student essays! 
On a not totally unrelated note - you don't by any chance have direct experience of comparing high ISO footage on the C200 compared to your C300ii do you? (I think you have the latter?) I'd be interested to learn more about that as I'm thinking of a C200.
Tim

@jcs. No.
The vox pop report you quote refers to an animal study based on the effects of THC. It is easy to copy'n'paste "scientific evidence" - less straightforward to apply and interpret research findings in an appropriate way. 
Of course, such substances (THC and CBD) may benefit creativity in a variety of other ways!

Absolutely right about the "forum for friends"! I used the term "demand" as in "require" not in any aggressive or confrontational manner. Apologies if that didn't come across.
Thank you for the video link - it's on topic insofar as it's about learning! But, granted, tenuous at best. I know the advice given here is frequently "rent before you buy" but it's not always that easy so engaging with users is possibly the next best thing.
Tim

@jcs
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3902221/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2642860/
Just 2 papers which question the wisdom of blindly applying animal models to a human context. UG stuff. Totally irrelevant to these fora but you did ask.
The fact that you "studied" something is irrelevant. I have studied the spec sheet of a Red epic. Does that make me an "expert" in the art of  cinematography? On your logic, yes. I wish! 
Your approach to the scientific method is flawed. A good scientist presents evidence FOR his or her proposition. They do not demand that someone produces evidence to the contrary. (Unicorns exist. If you don't accept that prove that they don't. Reductio ad absurdum).  And evidence in this respect isn't a collection of random copy'n'paste from a variety of sources (rarely peer reviewed).  
You mention refraining from alcohol. Generally good advice (as witnessed elsewhere by Kaylee's story). But remember
http://www.tate.org.uk/context-comment/articles/drink-fuelled-nations-art
Always a counter-example!
But this is impinging on my day job and it's dull. I apologise for treating your posts like one of my student essays! 
On a not totally unrelated note - you don't by any chance have direct experience of comparing high ISO footage on the C200 compared to your C300ii do you? (I think you have the latter?) I'd be interested to learn more about that as I'm thinking of a C200.
Tim