bamigoreng

4K is overrated. Especially since you started taking videos last week I wouldn't jump into a new camera just for that. For example I found the stabilization that EM1 offered was far more important in creating nice looking videos since my style is handheld with manual lenses. Others might have a need for good AF during video, or ability for a shallow DoF or lowlight performance or large dynamic range or ....
All these things take time to find out and in the meantime 6D is a very capable camera that you can use to learn a lot. Shooting technique, framing, audio, editing etc can make a much much bigger difference than 4K.
New cameras are always going to come and get cheaper & cheaper so no need to rush for something that you want but might not need...
Anyways G7 is a great camera.

So... yes... what was the surprise now?! That there's nothing anyone is interested in for some months more?

Two to three seconds (9:20): 
 

Tiffen Digital Diffusion/FX 1/4 or 1/2 (20:56) 
 

Good call. Put an ef-m mount on this bastard and sell it as a body only camera for $1500. 

Exposing skin tones by numbers can get one into trouble.  In the first place, skin tone varies.  Consider a shot in which an exceptionally pale skinned person and a very dark skinned person are standing next to each other in the same frame -- which one's skin do you set to 70% IRE?
 
Secondly, what if the shot is supposed to be low key, with the subject darker than normal?
 
Generally, the exposure should be as high as possible to reduce noise, without undesirably blowing out areas and/or without making it difficult to regain normal looking highlights.
 
Use your eyes (and your lighting skills) to determine the relative values of the subject/set, and use the zebras to determine the highest feasible exposure.

I'd rather deal with soft footage and aliasing then have leaves, plants and limes look like they have been grown in a radioactive wasteland!

Yeah,agreed.
And if one wants just image quality. Not ergonomics, NDs, features, bla bla, just image quality and time isn't of the essence.
The IMO, we passed it along time ago. All these new cameras pushing and pushing.
But at the end.... and I might get trolled for saying it... I think the Raw images out of the D16, BMCC 2.5K, Red One MX and the 5D Mark iii Raw are the most good looking images ever. Nothing can beat them.
If its all about image and nothing else then screw 4K etc, go raw. 
But cameras like this is about a "good" or even "great" image, coupled with ease of use, tools for speed, audio, you know what I mean.
Its a Rally Car and the raw shooters are an old classic Aston Martin from the first Bond movie.

 

This is all great and dandy and good for fuji for finally stepping up the video quality for once...but by no means should anyone go buy this camera only for video. Photo is another story obviously because this camera is a beast for images...but if anyone here is reading this review and is thinking to themselves to go buy this camera for video alone should definitely consider the fact that you can buy a Canon C100 used on eBay for essentially the same amount. The C100 is a camera people seem to dismiss and forget about. Sure its older and has a less powerful codec than others and doesn't shoot slow motion...but the skin tones it produces and the ease of shooting it gives you in a professional environment is hard to dismiss. 
POINT OF THIS POST
Don't forget there are SO many options out there and please rent and do camera tests before you make any purchase decision. 
RESPONSE TO ANDREW'S FUJI POST
I really loved the article and am genuinely excited about the possibility of a 4k capable, more video suited Fuji X camera. They are the sexiest looking digital cameras right now and they make a gorgeous image without a doubt. I just dont think X Pro-2 has what it takes in 2016 when it comes to video. If it was 2012 it would be a different story. 

I think it's a social experiment to see who's sensitive to suggestion... it's kind of a placebo effect. You kinda want to see it work, so you do.
Sure there are some truths here and there. But they're greatly exaggerated and most comes across as hipster talk to me.
- Sorta reminds me of the mocking that Chris did in that A6300 video:
 

French Bulldog.

The issues I have with the other Cine profiles is the highlight rolloff. It's much better in Slog2. I guess it depends what situation you are shooting in. 
Other than that, I experimented with the dodgy white balance and Cine, Slog2 profiles on a shoot.
I've found that the white balance reading is at least 600k off each Kelvin. Also, there seems to be this green look floating around each setting. So you have to go into the manual grid to correct it, however the highlights get an ever so slight magenta tint. You can't win and must correct it in post. 

Bought the blanket for the GF for christmas. Its one of those super sized. Easily covers the whole family.
Only downside with the dog liking it is that it gets so charged with static that I get a shock when touching it 

Kind of fell in love with this guys BMPCC footage and just wanted to post one. I almost dont believe he shot it with the pocket
 
 

Ed is right. I had to switch to BMPCC with my speed booster because the low light. Also, I shoot weddings in ProRes LT so the image isn't as strong as the 2k 12 bit raw from the Bolex. 
Realistically, it's a terrible camera to use practically for a wedding or doc. I think the c100 is the best wedding camera. All day battery life. Great high quality compression. Perfect skin tones.
 Ed is also right about the fact that most the stuff shot on Bolex is purposely narrative. Which means more care has gone into the lighting and composition. A good DP can make any camera look good just like a good musician can make any instrument sound good. My buddy just got back from Nicaragua where he was going to shoot a doc on C300. They wouldn't let him bring his camera rig into the country so he shot an entire professional project on an iPhone and a Nikon point and shoot camera and the client was actually happy with it. Don't forget that these numbers bit rates and sensors are honestly not as important as you think. If you make a killer film using whatever and a producer sees it and hires you, you'll have budget to shoot on Alexa or whatever you want and it won't matter what sub $3,000 camera you purchased.  Just get something that is the best workhorse for you and will make you happy. 
To me, I prefer the look of Bolex to any RED camera. So I rent the Bolex on my higher budget stuff and I usually have tons of room left over for crew and lighting because a Bolex is super cheap to rent. Having grip and gaffers who know what they are doing is the real secret.  

I too love the look of Canon and Blackmagic cameras. I have owned both and currently own the A7Rii. It's a great camera, but I've yet to find a picture profile that really excites me. I plan to do some extensive fooling around this weekend to see if I can happen across anything that has that "spark" to it. In any case, I caved and purchased the Canon 1DX Mkii so I will have something to fall back on that delivers that magic straight out of the camera. I did consider the Blackmagic Ursa mini 4.6k, but from my past experience I'm certain that camera will be filled with bugs and quirks and will be awful in low light. So I'll skip the Mini for now. Besides, knowing Blackmagic it will be another year before the Mini 4.6 is released. 

I hope that color improvement will find its way to the A6300 as well! Though, it's like Erik Naso said somewhere around here: 'I don't get the Sony skin tone argrument really. I like most of you shot in LOG modes and grade the image to what you want it to look like. I shoot with a lot of cameras. C100, C300, A7s, GH4, FS7 and they all get graded to look the way I want'.
It probably just depends on the effort that has to go into it. That's why I mentioned Canon just makes it seems so effortless, which is something people keep on saying... you pick one up, there's no fuzz, it just works. A slight curve adjustment would probably suffice in a lot of conditions. That's pretty neat and saves you a lot of time in post because with Sony, if something just still looks a little off and you've looked at the footage for way too long already you need to take a break and come back later with fresh eyes. And then it can have all the features in the world, but then you gotta hand it to Canon... for what it is, it's really good.
Perhaps the 5D4K... but until that time, there's no denying the rich featuresets of these mirrorless cameras that anno 2016 can give you new creative possibilities... which could be the only way to go in some situations and all the digital aids does make things a whole lot easier on you during shooting. There's no best of both worlds yet. Well, I guess maybe Blackmagic's schtuff is pretty darn close.

X-Pro 2 4K - 80% said they don't need it, so Fuji didn't flick the switch in firmware. They ask a bunch of hardcore stills people if they want video and surprise surprise most of them don't.
How are Fujifilm supposed to expand their customer base with new people if the keep asking their existing ones what they want?
This is why camera companies keep serving up the same-old same-old every year... they never reach out new markets, because they only listen to the needs of their existing one.

Hi Andy,
I picked up the Nikon 80-200mm AF-S a few months ago after doing some research and coming across your original thread about the lens. Thank you - it's a special lens. I combine it with Brian's Metabones ULTRA and use it with the GH4 in 1080p and it performs admirably.
I actually owned both the Nikon and the Olympus 40-150mm for a few months, then came the financial decision to sell one. I did some testing and the Olympus is sharper (damned sharp) and it didn't ghost like the Nikon when pointing directly into light sources. My brain was saying keep the Olympus; it's newer, it's sharper, more contrast, is smaller, is lighter and has autofocus for day job and can double-up as a handy photographic lens for my m43 bodies.
But my heart wanted the Nikon; the colour, the contrast and mojo of the Nikon were just more appealing. Also, and sometimes we forget this, the handling of the lens was better. I enjoyed using the Nikon more. That combined with F2.0 with speedbooster and just had to sell the Olympus. I doubt I will ever sell the Nikon. I use it for wedding/commercial filming at the moment, but it's part of my Nikon "cinematic' set for when I find time to make a narrative film. Hope to add the 28-70mm to the set down the line!
Thanks to Andy for actively sharing all your knowledge, thanks to Brian for designing something that allows us to combined these beautiful optics with our preferred camera bodies! And as always thanks to Andrew for hosting this space to share the love.

The more I watch it, the more I really love the overall style and color! Great!

New short film from Macgregor shot on Sony F35 is simply mouthwatering. I dare to say that I haven't seen anything better imagewise in digital camera world, but I have to admit that great grading also helps in this case.
 

Think this era in mass media will be known as the BS "listicle" trash era?
I do wonder if culture will grow out of the nonsense and the tone of this junk will sound as ridiculous in a generation or two as dialog from 1930's movies.  
Then again, as conditioned consumers, we're trained to believe that the choices we make in purchases somehow represent our success in life.  What better way to justify one's self worth than to find like minded opinion as a way to say "See, I knew I was right!  I'm smarter than everyone else!"?  Listicles give people that affirmation.  Perhaps they'll never go away.  Tabloids have been selling for centuries after all.
Criticism of this guy is somewhat ironic to me since there's over a dozen pages of comments in the a6300 thread... Oh well, that's my stream of consciousness pop psycology anyway.

I am surprised companies equate the touchscreen with lower end products. Also, Canon has the speed control om focus on it's autofocus cameras. I wish touch screens also has the focus speed controls. They could effectively help smaller Indie Crews focus far more easily and perceptively.