Lintelfilm

I suppose you can use it as a reference, but I've never done it myself. I mainly trust my eyes when it comes to color... I just compare it to natural light (all my big lights are 5500k), or use my good old Canon dslr as a reference, and I do a skin tone test (my biggest obsession... skin tones). My older Yongnuo YN600 is clearly off, with a strong magenta cast. Now I use the Aputures as a reference (they all match perfectly), and when I bought the Excelvans I did a side by side comparison... and their light looks identical too. But like I wrote before, the problem is the warm filters, they don't match. So I'll just buy warm gels for both lights.

Hi Dustin, I bought the YN 600 (partly because of that same video), but it has a huge flaw no one talks about enough... its fan is very noisy! A dealbreaker for interviews! That's why I bought the Aputures... they're completely silent, and that's when I realized the huge magenta color cast the Youngnuos had. But Lintelfilm said the new versions are cri95... so just make sure you avoid that fan.
All depends on your style and what you do with that light. For interviews I mainly use soft light, so a powerful LED in a softbox does the job. And I would say I've needed the batteries 60% of the times I've shot something the last 5 years (try start asking for power sockets, and start connecting cables everywhere in the middle of a wedding), and it has made my life easier 99% of the times. When it comes to lumen/lux... The Excelvans 1040S are 10000 lux each, not too far from a classic 1K. And they're going for 199€ right now.
I've used plenty of gear these past years, and I can say LEDs make my day... All depends on your needs. But the days LEDs where seen as less "pro" have passed.
 

There's always a downside - lighting is a compromise. In this case it's lumens. A YN300 has less output than ONE 55w biax lamp. Not one fixture, but one tube (biax tube 2900 lumens, YN300 2280 lumens, according to their site). You'd need three of them to surpass one dual biax fixture.
I know people really love the idea of LED panels, but... I really like having a lot of light available. We're just now seeing panels with a really useful output, and they're in the $1k range. I can get a 575 HMI for that if I shop around. "But you can't run that on a battery". True, but in the last 5 years of shooting, I've never shot an interview or a project where I needed battery lights - there's always been power within reach, and when I've needed light outdoors, 2000 lumens wouldn't even register on the sensor.
If I were doing news or something, maybe - there are careers where LED panels can make your day easier, I'm sure... but I get at least a few minutes setup time in my kind of gigs. If you generally shoot within an extension cord's reach, you can get a lot more light for reasonable money. I'm not an LED hater, but it seems like every kid who buys a DSLR starts shopping for LEDs when they really could do better. (Not saying the OP or contributors are "kids", but LEDs have become a newbie lust item it seems - think it through before buying!)

The moire in camera on the NX1 is not as bad as it looks there, but there is definitely less in the VA. But hmcindie is right, it's really hard to tell from those pictures since they are cruddy stills. If you want me to test something, let me know, it will help me learn the camera!

This happens to me on Ipad, I just have to click a couple of times on the text field after that it will work.
My problem is that when logged in on my PC I can't see images posted by people.

So the moire in the net curtains is completely eradicated by the VA (or caused by the UHD transcoding)?

The Micro Studio Camera is not good to pair with anything "in the field". It's for a studio, period. It's not a camera to try rigging and hacking for other uses - you'll be disappointed if you do. 

I wouldn't bother with the Micro Studio, its DR is very limited.

Weird. It looks too clean of a line to be optical to me. Have you tried adding filters and flags/hoods to see if that changes anything? Perhaps also using the internal ND's? If this changes things it might indicate that it is an optical issue I guess.
It's clearly caused by the blown light areas (the two guys' heads on the bus in the other thread are crazy). If it's natural light coming in the bus window it's not flicker that's the problem. My guess would be that this is a processing issue of some sort. The line just looks too clean and uniformly horizontal to be flaring to me. I don't know what you can tweak on the C100II - I'd try turning off/down any auto functions (e.g. noise reduction) to see if that changes things. Are there any auto DR settings?

Feedback with closed-back cans in a non-amplified environment? I have no feedback issues in my studio space with monitors blaring and big-capsule cardioids. It's a non-issue on set. WTF?? "blow your hearing"??
My experiences day to day with bluetooth is that it can be a real "ghost in the machine" technology. Stuff lags, disconnects, one device decides it just doesn't like the other anymore… I'd guess acceptance of it is more of a "why add more complexity?" issue. 
But for indie, small-gig corporate - people do some weird things that happen to work perfectly for them. I was once derided on a forum for mentioning my "400 watt mogul HIDs with an aquarium ballast in a Starlite softbox". But damned if it's not my most-used interview light… 1200 watt tungsten equivalent with no-gel daylight in a really nice box with grid that pulls 3 amps? It works and looks like pro gear (no duct tape or PVC pipe involved), so laugh your heads off! 
If I were having cable issues, I'd likely give it a try, but I'm usually the interviewer and I ditch the cans once levels and placement are set. And boom ops are usually physically connected to the recorder. Maybe for dialogue scenes it would be handy for a director or DP/director. The only way I know of to remotely trigger video on an NX1 is with a phone app, so Bluetooth may be something we'll all get used to in the sub-Alexa/Red market.
 

This.. ^
You can get such amazing color with an IR cut filter. It really makes the imagine just that much nicer. I wish there was a moire/IR cut internally...

I'd say battery life is a big one. Connectivity, interference and range another. Quality of the stream. Possible lag. It all adds up.
You could do it, but you'd risk running out of juice, dropping connection, suddenly pairing with your phone or another source, hearing different levels than being recorded etc. And that's not something you want to have when you need to monitor a live recording. A cable is so simple 'n stupid that you can hardly go wrong. What you hear is what you get. If there was like a solid aptX DSP signal without issues and it could last for ages on a charge, then sure, but I wouldn't really use my Jabra REVO or Sennheiser HD 25-SP II w/ Bluedio i6 with a BT TX hooked up to the recorder for example right now. BT range isn't everything either, so for mobility I don't find it too tricky to use a corded set-up.

I'm going to take my time with this. I'm on the same page as you Ebrahim - I love the C100 Mark II image and usability. But right now it doesn't make financial sense for me. I'm going to wait until later in the year to see if business keeps coming in and it drops in price a little. 
I'm going to get myself a couple of M43 IS zooms in the meantime and see how I get on. 
While we're on the subject I wonder can anyone help me - I'm confused about working out depth-of-field equivalence for different sized sensors (i.e. calculating the equivalent f-stop).
Say I buy the 12-35mm f/2.8 for my GH4 - in UHD that's a 2.4X crop. Do I use the same formula for focal-length equivalence to calculate the full-frame depth of field equivalence? E.g. f/2.8 X 2.4 = f/6.7? 
How do you work out S35 equivalent DoF? 
Because I've always used speed boosters on my BMPCC (0.58x) and GH4 (0.71x) and both result in roughly the same (and quite close to S35) 1.7X crop, I've been lazy about understanding this. If I'm going to use MFT glass I need a formula, because without speed boosters the BMPCC and GH4 have less similar (and quite significant) crop factors.
Thanks guys.

Thanks man, this is really great info. What you say all adds up based on what I've seen of the C100. I think you're right about the MkII "splitting the difference" too. It's definitely better in low light - in terms of DR and colour. I'm wanting it mostly for documentary style stuff - so although good photography is very important to me, it's not the end of the world if skies clip etc. 12 stops is fine. I get frustrated with my GH4's under-12 stops of dynamic range (I don't use V-Log) next to my BMPCC. But With BMPCC footage I always crush it down to what is probably about 12 stops anyway because I like inky blacks and bold colours. As you say as long as I expose properly with the C100 I should be OK. The C100 stuff I'm grading at the moment has a noticeably more useable detail in the shadows than the GH4 (though I don't know what profiles the shooters used).
The C100 MkII by the way has had it's colour tweaked a little - the red/orange, blue/teal thing I'm familiar with from MkI footage is definitely less pronounced. I prefer the MkII colours a fair bit. They also stay intact into higher ISO's I think ...

Lets not forget he was also a very gifted film actor. His most compelling roles in films by auteurs such as Roeg and Lynch. His unnerving cameo in the Twin Peaks feature film is at the centre of one of the most quintessentially brilliant Lynchian scenes ever:
And of course there's the less high-brow but equally brilliant Labyrinth, for which Bowie chooses to play the role of 'Jared the Goblin King' as a deathly pale and emaciated Tina Turner tribute act:
Yesterday I put together a Youtube playlist of some of my old Bowie favourites (for a year or two in the late 90's I literally listened to nothing but Bowie and Dylan):
RIP Bowie. Thanks for falling to earth ...

I'll do it. I've acted in a few indie shorts and features. And if you need a woman's voice, my girlfriend used to act and is looking to get into voice work.

You can always make the edit with a comp track and share it around to online forums for people that do VO.  If your cut is impressive enough, maybe you can work out a swap wherein a pro agrees to help you out in order to have a cool new video on their demo reel.

I am looking at a few words only not a full speech that has to be learned and so on. 
A lot of amateurs doing videos like this use their own voice without any training or being big pros as you say. For some it looks nice for some not. 
Just looking for someone that has a nice english (unlike mine) and nice voice and is keen to do that so I just ask. As you say, probably no one will want to do it but you never know so I ask. 

LOL dude those are professional voice overs by professional actors or voice over artists. Recorded professionally. People aren't just born with a "nice voice" able to do that kind of thing, it takes a lot of training and practice, and then there's learning the script so it sounds natural and the emphasis is all in the right place. Sorry if this sounds harsh but if you want it to sound like one of those you need to hire a pro.

Gah wrote a big post and lost it. The jist of it was :
This Kowa 8.5mm looks nice:
And Tiffen Ultra Contrast and HD/TVFX filters do a lot to attenuate the clinical/digital look of Panasonic lenses:
Ultra Contrast on a 25mm 0.95:
 

Wow, OK. Good to know. Thanks.
Maybe I'll wait (and save up) for the Mark III. 
What I wish I'd done from the start is bought Canon Speed Boosters, then I could be buying Nikon (using EF-NF adapter) and investing in Canon lenses. As it is I'm stuck with MFT zooms if I want IS. As great as the 12-35mm 2.8 is, it makes the GH4 even less usable in low light. Perhaps the GH5 will have IBIS and improved low light ability. I can only dream ...
Or maybe my business will take off this year and I'll just buy every video camera I can find!

My experience with master ped over the years is: it's not more light. It's not like upping your shadow fill ratios.
But - with some compression schemes and some camera-tweaked looks/profiles… it can help to lift it a touch. It can be handy to bring two different camera a little closer look-wise on set. IN MODERATION...
You just really, really have to run tests. If there's time on set, run a take and slate it with the new master ped setting so you can see it on a real-world clip.
It's really the kind of thing that's too weird and specific to expect a useful forum answer. You have to see it on your gear with your style.

#2 is interesting. I hadn't thought of it like that before. I've always pretty much stayed away from the MP. 

True, the Ultra Contrast is awesome, especially on the voigtländer 0.95 - i regret selling that lens... the combo is plain awesome.

Yeah! Those filters can work some magic. We've discussed that a good year ago. Inazuma's post back then convinced me to get one as well!