mkabi

In my opinion, look at the other subject matter in this forum and other forums -> see where the industry is headed.
If I were you... I would go for the Panasonic S1H. 
I know the arguments about AF and lack of 4K/120fps.
But, if your impressed by Sony Venice and Red Cams <- remember they don't have proper AF either.
You can't argue with the higher Resolutions, Anamorphic Modes and its Netflix approved (this is actually the number 1 reason why I would recommend the S1H over the other cameras). Just so you know Netflix is planning on expanding on ABQ studios.... just saying... 

Meh.... not worth arguing over.

True of most things as you get older.....

I don't know if our thoughts diverge that much. I agree with what you said. I'm saying that streaming is supporting a cultural shift away from more thoughtful movies, towards lower quality (imo) content. Like I said, it's not that streaming is inherently making movies worse, but that the audience is less invested in their content since it's on in the background, or literally stays on after they fall asleep. Quantity over quality. Of course some people still critically watch their streamed content (myself included), but we're in the vast minority.
(The other issue I brought up, of concentrating wealth in fewer people is a separate problem.)

You're over simplifying.  I can happily watch many things without consulting my phone.  My wife though is another matter and will happily chat with friends, message, talk to me, insist I help her with dinner.... plus the odd occasion of someone at the door.  Not so frequent this year, but still... so even if you're well behaved, others in the household are not. 
There is still a place for cinema.  Of course its always competing against TV.  Hence one of the reasons why movies went wide-screen when TVs first entered peoples home; to open the cinema experience out.  Unfortunately its hard to find something unique to cinema that can't be easily replicated at home.  3D was one such method, no doubt why cinemas tried to push it over 2D releases, but its waned since the peak a decade ago.  
Obviously 2020 has been hard on cinemas, but prior to that, there was no evidence that cinemas were on their way out.  Box office numbers in 2019 were good.  I've seen a few larger cinema complexes built in the last decade.  I've been in quite a few packed out cinema screenings.  So I'd say its too early to predict the demise of cinema over streaming.  Both have their place in delivering movies to the audience.  
Whilst I've go fewer times now than I did 10 years ago, I still go half a dozen times a year and enjoy the experience.  Yes, the adverts are annoying, and you get the odd bad experience with other members of the audience, but I enjoy the larger screen and sound system.   Its nice to hear the movie loud without the neighbour bashing on your wall to turn it down, and my wife behaves much better too at the cinema...  😅😅😅

As opposed it going to the studios??? And, movie theatre chains???
Look... Scorsese’s Irishmen went straight to Netflix...
Dave Chappelle got a 60 million dollar - 3 special deal with Netflix...
Joe Rogen signed a $100 million dollar deal with Spotify.
Just saying... as much as you think that the artists are not getting their pay... just not completely correct.
Music industry went the way it went because people were pirating the music online anyway.

I feel that all of it is going to implode on itself eventually. The billionaires are not going to get on their knees to clean every room in their 1000 room mansion... nor will they build their own homes by themselves. Even if there are layoffs in the middle class area where reasonable knowledge is required... what I often witness is that there is deep regret afterwards, because they have to waste money and time finding a reasonable substitute, or whoever takes on the duties is overwhelmed and overworked then the company pays in the long run from letting go not one but 2 (even if the guy goes on vacation is like all hell broke out). Even if we are talking about automating and Netflix... at the end of the day... there is always going to be something in this world that you can’t automate... such as creative endeavours, food prep (gourmet foods), etc.
And, if you are one of those people that lost their job for whatever reason... it’s time to learn new skills and find an opportunity that is irreplaceable... 

No one expects a fresh high school grad to make CEO or even middle class pay, but I think it's not healthy for our society to decrease the number of middle class people, have a larger number of people in poverty, and concentrate wealth in fewer mega-millionaires and billionaires. When a trend applies to 350 million people, I don't think it's the result of "everyone is just not working as hard."
I agree. I hope that in 30 years, you've got a respectable amount of wealth and power in your business ventures! What I don't like is that given 1000 random people who all put in the average amount of work, the percent that will be in poverty in 30 years is larger now than it was when America had a booming middle class, through no direct fault of their own.
Like we agree, it happened or is happening in all industries and ultimately it's worse for a large number of people, and better for a small number of people. Technology has increased that trend. Here's an example:
Theaters employed thousands of low paid cashiers, janitors, middle class managers, owners. A streaming service might employ a few dozen highly paid software engineers instead. This is not the fault of the software engineers and ideally they should be rewarded for doing skilled labor and increasing efficiency. But if we don't figure out a way to deal with the large number of displaced workers, wealth disparity will grow. More people fighting over fewer low paying jobs means the wages of those jobs will go down. And of course it's simply impossible to expect everyone to work harder or become a software engineer, because A) there aren't as many jobs required B) we don't have the resources to educate everyone as software engineers and C) not everyone has the aptitiude.
I guess that's straying a bit off topic, but it is related.
It's not anymore.

Ever watch Shark Tank or Dragon's Den?
The point of the game, for any company selling any products -> 1 product (cost to make XX amount) but sell for 3 to 4 times XX amount. But, if you are selling it for 3 to 4 times XX amount, that amount has to make sense to the customer.
At the beginning the iphone was like $699 (top end model - and yeah times and part prices have changed too over the last decade or so) - nonetheless, its slowly climbed to $1199 and customers deem it worthy to pay that... 
So, if Nikon isn't selling it for 3 to 4 times the amount to create it... whose fault is that??? May be they feel that if they put in 6K @ 60p into their camera and charged $6K for it, nobody would buy it?

I think that the copper heat spreader only is by far the best mos practical solution, and also good enough to keep it cool.

Sweet. I've never made a product, but could the copper part be sent to a manufacturer as a prototype? I would happily use this mod - warranty be damned.
I probably wouldn't even bother with a fan as it'd likely cover my needs as a B-cam on its own.

If all these influencers are buying professional gear, why is Nikon in dire straits? Part of it is because Nikon was late to the mirrorless market. Part of it is that influencers and content creators are just using an entirely phone based workflow from shooting to editing. Might be a tablet in there at most. How many D850 shot Tik Tok videos are out there compared to the number shot on smartphones? Maybe 0.00001%?
The industry has fucked itself.
They have not been in the game. It is the fault of elderly out of touch Japanese management in their 80's.
They haven't even yet got proper touch screens and OS. Let alone a successful App Store and foolproof connectivity.
Some companies quite frankly deserve to be swept away in the change.
I just hope the better, more deserving ones survive. Especially Sigma.

Did you see how many shitty compact cameras Nikon used to make? Masses and masses of them, for the masses. The market has practically vanished. They did nothing about it. Of course the market is getting smaller. Professional tools are a niche compared to consumer cameras. It is only high margins and expensive price tags that keep them from being completely unviable. Now that the camera companies have backed out from bothering to compete in massive consumer markets, they have dug themselves an even larger hole. Also remember with Nikon it is not just cameras that are the problem.
Their outdated chipmaking business is about to hit the wall as well.
It has about one customer.

I would complain

Granted the Mac Pro might not be for mass consumers, but there's a much wider market than just filmmakers. And It's not actually a niche product; it's just a high-end version of a product nearly every home and office uses. Any professional who needs a powerful desktop for any reason might consider it. And many more people with more money than sense will go out and buy it simply because they think "it's what professionals use and I want the best". The real genius of Apple products is in the styling and marketing, not in the design or features.

It's worth noting that if Apple put out a cinema camera they would likely not be able to include ProRes raw recording internally - they already challenged Red's patent in court and lost.

And being Apple, they would probably have a proprietary lens mount with very limited, overpriced lenses. You would have to buy an ipad or iphone as the monitor, there would be no headphone jack, the audio inputs would be some new proprietary type, everything would be touchscreen only, and the mounting threads would be 1/2" instead of 1/4" so that you have to buy a special Apple baseplate for $2499 just to put it on a tripod. Plus it would probably have an internal media and an internal battery that cannot be removed and which does not last for a full 10hr production day (and the charger would be sold separately).

Apple are the last company I would want to see release a cinema camera.

I'm sure a lot of us feel the same.
Nikon name is legendary, just as legendary as Canon.
I like the design and look of the Z cams - just the inside don't match the outside. Z6 II & Z7 II should have had more than what they offered - they should've aimed for what the R5 was offering, instead they were offering less than what the S5 was offering.

I think he is using regular Canon EF to RF for the Sigma 18-35; its in the pictures.

Yeah. I don't have patience like you bros. Just thinking about rewatching 300+ clips (from point 1) straight for another 8 hours (or less; from point 4) is making my stomach turn. Each to his/her own...
But, this shows the dedication you need to remain happy in this industry. Do that 15 to 20 times a year, just for weddings.... and you will know if that is what you want to do.... even if its for short term.
Thanks for the heads up; ordered.

I will add one last point from my end.
In the video business - if you are doing it all alone -> There isn't enough talk about editing (well not much talk about it here) - and I'm not talking about editing equipment (monitor, cpu, software, speakers etc. - although that does matter to a degree) - just sitting there, reviewing the footage, transcoding, bringing it on the timeline, stitching it together, adding sound and/or music, adding effects, etc. <- fucken time consuming shit.
Your 1 day shoot, ends up being weeks of editing - nobody talks about that...
I know there are ads on kijiji/craiglist - wedding videographer - $500/$1000 - may be if you're a beginner and you want to build a portfolio to show future clients. But that quickly becomes a nightmare.  
Ask yourself, "What is my worth?" Are you worth $15/hr, $25/hr, $50/hr or more? Then add it all up.
8 to 12 hours of being on set filming.
Then 2 weeks of editing (average of 8 to 10 hours of sitting in front of a computer editing the video per day) <- practice your ass off to get your wedding videos down to 2 weeks of editing. Excluding weekends, we have about 80 to 100 hours. 
So, total time spent its about 88 hours to 112hours - at $15/hr - $1320 to $1680; at $25/hr - $2200 to $2800, and at $50/hr - $4400 to $5600. 
Again - keep in mind - your experience level, who is willing to pay those amounts for your experience level and you are doing this all alone (consider getting help - adding to your crew and the mark up in price). This is just for your labour. I'm not talking about equipment cost, etc.

This is a handy tool for automating that:
https://logger.ambient.de/

 
 

I will add one last point from my end.
In the video business - if you are doing it all alone -> There isn't enough talk about editing (well not much talk about it here) - and I'm not talking about editing equipment (monitor, cpu, software, speakers etc. - although that does matter to a degree) - just sitting there, reviewing the footage, transcoding, bringing it on the timeline, stitching it together, adding sound and/or music, adding effects, etc. <- fucken time consuming shit.
Your 1 day shoot, ends up being weeks of editing - nobody talks about that...
I know there are ads on kijiji/craiglist - wedding videographer - $500/$1000 - may be if you're a beginner and you want to build a portfolio to show future clients. But that quickly becomes a nightmare.  
Ask yourself, "What is my worth?" Are you worth $15/hr, $25/hr, $50/hr or more? Then add it all up.
8 to 12 hours of being on set filming.
Then 2 weeks of editing (average of 8 to 10 hours of sitting in front of a computer editing the video per day) <- practice your ass off to get your wedding videos down to 2 weeks of editing. Excluding weekends, we have about 80 to 100 hours. 
So, total time spent its about 88 hours to 112hours - at $15/hr - $1320 to $1680; at $25/hr - $2200 to $2800, and at $50/hr - $4400 to $5600. 
Again - keep in mind - your experience level, who is willing to pay those amounts for your experience level and you are doing this all alone (consider getting help - adding to your crew and the mark up in price). This is just for your labour. I'm not talking about equipment cost, etc.

And, from what I understand is that this guy wants to start in Wedding videos and move to doc and commercial work.
Blowing it all on just a body.... doesn’t make sense.
Equipment cost < Business Profit
Look at high end equipment later. Start getting customers first... start charging a rate that covers your hours put into it + equipment rental rate (estimate).
If you get enough customers then invest in equipment.

Lets be honest, its not that there aren't "halfway" decent or perfect cameras - its that our expectations are growing. The benchmark is moved slightly or completely every 3 months.
If we look back to 2008 - Canon 5D Mark 2 or even back to 2012 with the Canon 1DC, now if we threw the Fuji X-S10 into the past - imagine the uproar - imagine the type of monkey wrench that would have placed on the industry - for example, if we pulled that out - just 1 day before Canon announced the 1DC, with the same price it is today. I'm just using Fuji X-S10 as opposed to S1H, A7S3 or R5, because it is really a master of none for today's standards, but throw it back..... people would go crazy.

Lets be honest, its not that there aren't "halfway" decent or perfect cameras - its that our expectations are growing. The benchmark is moved slightly or completely every 3 months.
If we look back to 2008 - Canon 5D Mark 2 or even back to 2012 with the Canon 1DC, now if we threw the Fuji X-S10 into the past - imagine the uproar - imagine the type of monkey wrench that would have placed on the industry - for example, if we pulled that out - just 1 day before Canon announced the 1DC, with the same price it is today. I'm just using Fuji X-S10 as opposed to S1H, A7S3 or R5, because it is really a master of none for today's standards, but throw it back..... people would go crazy.

Okay but he's shooting too high ... He just needs a used gh5 ... to start ... lots of objectives and accessories out there cheap ...
Fx6 or c90 will not be cheap and not very far from 10k!