Michael Coffee

I had the camera for half a year and used the hell out of it. I had no problems exposing etc.  You can gargle numbers at me all you want but I test the shit out of all my cameras and really found no discernible difference in DR. And ergonomics are subjective of course but the LCD/viewfinder were inferior to even my lx100 ( and I was using the mark ii not I)

I was like you - I switched Canon to Sony (a7s, a7r, a7rii, a6300).  I have a small handful of native Sony lenses but heavily invested in Canon glass.  The Metabones adapter works ok but many times it'd lock up and I'd have to power the camera off and on again.  Some compatibility with Sigma EF mount lenses (it didn't work at the time with the Sigma 150-600 C for longer than 1 minute of video).  Random error codes, et al.  Twice this year my a7r2 had an issue that required it to be sent into Sony for repair.  My 5d3's never had this issue and I ran Magic Lantern.  Despite all of this, I never liked the Sony colors esp. skin tones.
So I started going back to Canon - got the 1dc and liked it, but didn't really shoot C-log nor understand how to grade it that well, so for me it wasn't worth keeping it.  So I shot pics with the 1dx for a while (I have since changed my mind about the 1dc now that I'm shooting C-log.  I will admit I was wrong there!)
Then I bought a C100 Mark II.  I figured out after reading and teaching myself how to expose and color (well, getting much better at it) C-log and I'm super thrilled with the results.  Built in ND, proper XLR audio, waveform, 1080p60 that isn't soft (a la 1dc), in camera over/under crank, quick access menus, good EVF.  Specs won't blow you away but the image is stunning.  It's like the 5d3 with Magic Lantern in C-log (provided you get close on exposure) and I love the battery life, form factor and reliability.
My son's spring travel baseball ended last week, so I picked up another 5d3 (and sold the 1dx).  So I've come full circle after 4 years ago buying my first 5d3.  At the end of the day it may not have everything (lower dynamic range, no 1080p60 or faster) but it's plenty fast enough for casual use, has gorgeous colors that need little tweaking in Lightroom. 
All I have to say is if you shoot people, stick with Canon.  Landscapes or something else perhaps not, or the 5dsr.
One more thing - the c100 is really, really, really good in low light.  In my eyes as good as the Sony a7s original or pretty close.  The Sony can crank up higher with less noise, but man, up to ISO 12800 the Canon retains a shit-ton of color detail and the Sony doesn't.

Add into it the tendency to evangelize and thus rationalize one's camera purchase... which is a pretty big inclination among enthusiast (and even pros) and you get opinions that are clouded with so much subjective attitude they're sort of worthless.
Bottom line, if it works for you, have at it.

You can also set up AF-s to the rear AF-s button and use that when in manual mode. Set the manual zoom-in box to the smallest size and you can move that around with your thumb too. Press the rear AF-s button to focus.  
Not as accurate as the smaller AF-s focus box on the Olympus but works for me. Just wish that you could Punch-in zoom in for manual focus while recording.
I always liked the Olympus JPEG output much better than what I got out of my Panasonic cameras. Also the fact that Olympus gives you a (non intuitive) raw processor to get the same Olympus look from raw files is also great.
Panasonic Jpegs were not as good in my opinion and the raw files need work in Lightroom which by default makes them quite dull...
The gx80 JPEG processing is much better though. I like the look, although raw files are still is a bit dull in Lightroom.
 

Just got an email from my local major chain of computer stores about this interesting looking device (is going to be going on sale for only NZ$309+gst, or about US$200ish):

http://www.pbtech.co.nz/index.php?z=p&p=KVMATN0809&utm_source=WatchListenPlay0708&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Retail&utm_content=0709_watch-listen-play-A_37&qr=ec_0709_watch-listen-play-A_37

https://www.amazon.com/Aten-VE809-HDMI-Wireless-Extender/dp/B00B7FSDLA
 

Is meant to do 1080 at up to 30m! 


Can be DC powered (and even USB powered perhaps?).

http://www.aten.com/global/en/products/professional-audiovideo/wireless/ve809/#.V38x0bh97RY

Quick balance with my normal Panasonic workflow Premiere Pro - Neat Video with a little sharpen, .4% guassian blur, Film Convert gh4 profiles, about 40% grain and 80-90% film colour, quick balance in the lumetri panel on this one to kill the highlights/whites a bit - then to Resolve for RGB curves, more highlight/contrast/black balance, lum/sat and sat/sat curves.. this one I cooled the colour temp a bit, no windows or sharpening in resolve - barely touch the colour wheels anymore, prefer to play with colour temp and saturation curves only these days. Quick worklflow now it's up and running, even with this rescue job a few minutes got me to a good starting point.. having to squash the highs on these cams tends to kill the mids alot too..
Source footage definitely way overblown:) was fun to try and tame the highlights on this one!
 

I loved it.. really amazing. Revolutionary in the way it was made, and sold too! Louis talks at length about the production here 
 

I loved it.. really amazing. Revolutionary in the way it was made, and sold too! Louis talks at length about the production here 
 

Horace and Pete? One of the best things I've seen.. truly groundbreaking I reckon
 
Wow, I watched all of Horace and Pete, and loved it. Truly groundbreaking I reckon!
 

The footage slightly clips, besides that here is my go at it.

 
@Michael if all other grades look completely weird to you, you might want to check your monitor as your grade doesn't look like the describtion you gave on both my monitors.

The question was about about grading, not how the shot was exposed. Although I do agree with what Dave said.
I kept it warm as it's a sunny day, reduced saturation slightly, adjusted the greens and reds and I hate crushed blacks so..

Such conflicting opinions. I primarily use vintage lenses and one thing I did notice with the G7 and now with BMMCC is that the crop factor sometimes crops out some of the character of the lenses and since I will primarily use vintage lenses for stills as well, I wonder how much that will come into play? Honestly, I am completely in the middle on this one. I also have a couple small paid gigs at the end of the summer that will affect my decision based on the video side of the camera. 

You photos look like those taken from early phone cameras with resolutions running in 1 and 2 Megapixels. Even the one from the GX7. What could be the secret?

I was very doubtful ref my commitment to M4/3s after the G6 - useability great - but photo quality - wasn't convinced with - just didn't like the output much, dull, seemingly not great DR, and files didn't seem to like much post-processing Lightroom
GX80 was cheap enough to take a punt on - at a minimum would make a great video recorder
But .. GX80 from initial tests seems much better photo wise vs my G6 - photo ouput seems very similar in IQ to my Nex 5n - and that is a VERY good thing - the sensor to me seems much much improved

Thanks for the input Michael. I would seriously doubt if a 50d or 5D III would knock the socks off a GX80 in terms of anything, when talking about the final product of a print or "getting the shot" experience. Not saying they would do poorly either. Photography tech is at a point today (even 5 years ago) at which the "problem" is no longer the camera. Medium-sized wall prints can be had with amazing quality and ease- probably rating up with the medium format cameras of yesteryear. Back then, if just one part of the process went sour, your print would suffer. Now, the process has been perfected. It would be crazy to say MFT can't take an exposition quality photo; hell, if a phone can do it, why couldn't MFT?  

I'm so thankful to this forum. Its a place where I can get honest amazing feedback and a place that is open to thinking outside the box.
I am DP for a pretty high profile web doc in Mexico and we are going to some exotic locations next week. I asked your opinion on what to get and I went with my gut. I got a used 1D C and I am so stoked to finally own a camera again instead of renting stuff. My B Cam operator will be rocking the C100 and we will have an a7S II that is there specifically for slow motion and thats it. A-Cam 1D C. We have a sound guy who will be recording and booming everything separate so the crappy internal audio isn't a problem with the A Cam. Just more syncing in post for the editor
Im bringing my CONTAX Zeiss primes and will be prioritizing those over the typical Canon zooms. I get so bored with docs I see on Netflix and on VICE and I realized its cause everyone uses the same boring Canon Zooms. There is nothing sexy about the 24-105. Of course its practical and if we are in a run n gun situation, I will pop it on. But lens character is just as important as the Camera! I am so excited to pair my vintage CONTAX Zeiss lenses with the 1D C sensor. I have a feeling its going to be gold. 
I shot a doc in Nicaragua two months ago with the GH4 and it was nice and I was surprised by the IQ of it...but the 1D C has some sort of mojo about it that I can't explain. I shot with one in Haiti about 3 years ago when it was way out of my price range and loved it. Im stoked to be able to use it and to own one.
As soon as I get home I will be directing a medium sized budget music video that has VFX and very fun lighting. I will use the 1D C for that too. So in the next month, I will have two very different experiences with it. Im pumped. 
Sure it will take up a ton of storage on this trip...but I can buy 2 5TB drives on amazon for like $300.
Like Andrew said on this forum a while back when he got his 1D C:

"Yes I may still regret it but you only live once.
I believe at it's current used price it's a bargain, bonafide Hollywood cam."
Honestly...seeing that these two hollywood films were shot on it...sold me on the camera. Im looking forward to getting it and doing some tests soon! I have it overnighted so I should receive it Friday. Cheers! 
 
 

@mercer @John Matthews @Michael Coffee etc..
I have shot with a plethora of cameras including Fuji's, Panasonics, Sony's, Nikons (crop and full frame). In terms of JPEG output, the Fuji and (extremely surprisingly) the Sony a6300 have for me been the most pleasing. But in terms of RAW, they're all as good as you ever need them to be. What matters more than anything is the scene and the lens. If you don't believe me you can look through my photos http://www.sebcastilho.com/people/ The images can be downloaded too and EXIF data is in tact. Theres stills from all the cameras Ive used there including some film cameras.
What matters a lot too is ergonomics and in this regard I find mirrorless cameras to have a big advantage over DSLRs due to their live-view autofocus capability, allowing you to get angles that are very difficult with a DSLR. 
@sanveer The write up probably won't happen for at least a few weeks because I want to shoot and edit some videos first. But if you have any questions you can message me.

I love netflix as a happy medium. Everyone has netflix, it's not illegal, money is exchanged, comes with tons of films. I used to torrent, but since netflix, I don't think I have at all (though I also have hulu, amazon prime, directv, and hbogo /: ). Netflix's recent price increases have me nervous if they ended up being the only one in the game.. also netflix has also made me less eager to go to theatres and made me never want to try louis ck's new show.. so mybe the same torrent-minded entitlement.
Not sure what I'd prefer as the filmmaker... I guess just for money to fall out of the sky

I find that the vast majority of people who pirate movies would never see the film otherwise. It's the reason I laugh when studios used to trumpet about how much money they "lost" to piracy, when in reality the actual amount lost would be a small fraction of it.
I would be ecstatic if I made a film that was heavily pirated because in the end, people will have seen my material and might tell someone else about it.
And more to your point, it's a very valid view point. The video game industry is the same. There are tons of old DOS games that would be lost forever if they weren't ripped and put up for free. Archival is important and nobody else is stepping up to the plate so...

In my experience with the gf1 and gx7 on the stills side, I like the results with vintage lenses, and they have bags of character, and a "snap shot" smaller film format feel.. a real still guy could probably get amazing results, but when I had even a aspc Canon 50d for a while, even with a crappy old canon kit zoom and on full auto, the pics coming out of that thing blew away anything I have been able to get with the Panasonics! Again, I'm no stills expert, but it seems you have to be a pretty serious photo guy to pull amazing images out of the Panasonics.. love them for video, apart from the motion.. can work around the colour.. but for stills - I would almost reach for my el cheapo $100 Samsung Galaxy J1 phone! MFT stills always just seem congested within the frame somehow for me.. the can't touch even the aspc Canon's for my tastes! I love the look of medium format stills even more
Tons of options for stills, built in intevalvometer.. good burst rates etc - all the stills features, but no where near the Canon's etc for me!
Sure the Panasonic can take ok photos, but all the photo's that make me say wow, and look like you could reach into the frame have usually been on a 5d or medium format cam.. never really seen an MFT still that really wowed me! Again, I am not a huge stills shooter in any way, just my two cents worth

GX7 with Minolta 28mm

GF1 with Olympus 25 2.8 4/3

 
Samsung Galaxy J1 smartphone

In my experience with the gf1 and gx7 on the stills side, I like the results with vintage lenses, and they have bags of character, and a "snap shot" smaller film format feel.. a real still guy could probably get amazing results, but when I had even a aspc Canon 50d for a while, even with a crappy old canon kit zoom and on full auto, the pics coming out of that thing blew away anything I have been able to get with the Panasonics! Again, I'm no stills expert, but it seems you have to be a pretty serious photo guy to pull amazing images out of the Panasonics.. love them for video, apart from the motion.. can work around the colour.. but for stills - I would almost reach for my el cheapo $100 Samsung Galaxy J1 phone! MFT stills always just seem congested within the frame somehow for me.. the can't touch even the aspc Canon's for my tastes! I love the look of medium format stills even more
Tons of options for stills, built in intevalvometer.. good burst rates etc - all the stills features, but no where near the Canon's etc for me!
Sure the Panasonic can take ok photos, but all the photo's that make me say wow, and look like you could reach into the frame have usually been on a 5d or medium format cam.. never really seen an MFT still that really wowed me! Again, I am not a huge stills shooter in any way, just my two cents worth

GX7 with Minolta 28mm

GF1 with Olympus 25 2.8 4/3

 
Samsung Galaxy J1 smartphone

In my experience with the gf1 and gx7 on the stills side, I like the results with vintage lenses, and they have bags of character, and a "snap shot" smaller film format feel.. a real still guy could probably get amazing results, but when I had even a aspc Canon 50d for a while, even with a crappy old canon kit zoom and on full auto, the pics coming out of that thing blew away anything I have been able to get with the Panasonics! Again, I'm no stills expert, but it seems you have to be a pretty serious photo guy to pull amazing images out of the Panasonics.. love them for video, apart from the motion.. can work around the colour.. but for stills - I would almost reach for my el cheapo $100 Samsung Galaxy J1 phone! MFT stills always just seem congested within the frame somehow for me.. the can't touch even the aspc Canon's for my tastes! I love the look of medium format stills even more
Tons of options for stills, built in intevalvometer.. good burst rates etc - all the stills features, but no where near the Canon's etc for me!
Sure the Panasonic can take ok photos, but all the photo's that make me say wow, and look like you could reach into the frame have usually been on a 5d or medium format cam.. never really seen an MFT still that really wowed me! Again, I am not a huge stills shooter in any way, just my two cents worth

GX7 with Minolta 28mm

GF1 with Olympus 25 2.8 4/3

 
Samsung Galaxy J1 smartphone

In my experience with the gf1 and gx7 on the stills side, I like the results with vintage lenses, and they have bags of character, and a "snap shot" smaller film format feel.. a real still guy could probably get amazing results, but when I had even a aspc Canon 50d for a while, even with a crappy old canon kit zoom and on full auto, the pics coming out of that thing blew away anything I have been able to get with the Panasonics! Again, I'm no stills expert, but it seems you have to be a pretty serious photo guy to pull amazing images out of the Panasonics.. love them for video, apart from the motion.. can work around the colour.. but for stills - I would almost reach for my el cheapo $100 Samsung Galaxy J1 phone! MFT stills always just seem congested within the frame somehow for me.. the can't touch even the aspc Canon's for my tastes! I love the look of medium format stills even more
Tons of options for stills, built in intevalvometer.. good burst rates etc - all the stills features, but no where near the Canon's etc for me!
Sure the Panasonic can take ok photos, but all the photo's that make me say wow, and look like you could reach into the frame have usually been on a 5d or medium format cam.. never really seen an MFT still that really wowed me! Again, I am not a huge stills shooter in any way, just my two cents worth

GX7 with Minolta 28mm

GF1 with Olympus 25 2.8 4/3

 
Samsung Galaxy J1 smartphone

I'm really big on 4k, but truth is C100 Mark II has a 4k sensor that simply downsizes to 1080p in camera and has beautiful quality. C100 Mark II recently dropped as most people are aware and I think it's as of today one of the better options http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=c100+mark+II&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=

I perceive this attractive "motion candence" in cameras that shoot raw. Maybe because the image feels "complete" and compression takes away a lot of the motion anyway.
It's subjective but those of us with more than an eye can spot it.  
Then on top there's:
- 24/25p 180 degree shutter. 
- Fast shutter readout.
- High dynamic range (smoother roll of frames). 
Lovely cadence:  Alexa, RED, D16, BMCC (raw), Kinefinity, Varicam LT, Canon 5d ML
Medium Cadence: Canon C series, Sony F55, FS7 (only just), X5R. 
Poor Cadence: All Sony mirrorless, FS5, Panasonic GH and AF, any cheap mirrorless, GoPro, DJI X3 and X5.