Michael Coffee

Ford makes a Ferrari, the new $400,000 GT, and its absolutely amazing. Almost 7,000 have applied to buy one of the 500 being produced.
https://www.ford.com/performance/gt/
Panny's pricing is going to bite them in the rear. This looks like a fantastic lens, but they aren't going to sell many, especially when the 12/2 is half the cost.

You can see some clips I shot with a "no brand" chinese adapter in the download and share thread.

I've been shooting "generic" and "dumb" Chinese focal reducers for awhile.  EOS & FD mounts.  As mentioned before they're not perfect and might not give you infinity focus on shorter lenses, but I tend to shoot standard lens focal lengths for 90% of my stuff where the infinity focus isn't a problem, so they've been a bargain and, thus, pragmatic for me.  For short lens shots I just switch to my native m43 12mm prime.
It really depends on what you're trying to accomplish.
Based on how I shoot, I just figured it didn't make much sense to overspend on Metabones.  Besides, a few years ago I was burned on a shoot with a Metabones adapter that failed (the electronics more or less hijacked the controls of the Sony FS-700 I was using) so I was unwilling to chance re-visiting that experience.

Viewfinder is helpful outside in bright light, handheld shots are more stable (3 point contact when using viewfinder + handle + mass), Canon Log 2 highlight roll off (much better than even CLog on the 1DC), and most importantly, when using the 'ARRI' config, post grading is super fast and skintones look great with little effort. While this episode was shot in 4K, when 1080p is desired (for faster edits and smaller files), the C300 II's 1080p is much better than the 1DX II's (soft, aliased). For stills, stealth video, and 4K60, the 1DX II is superior.

Yeah, the audio out of the zoom goes into the external recorder..  I'm saying to go from a zoom/preamps to the camera rather than sync later, for camera's with an input that is.
It's not so quick if you're dealing with 100 clips or so:)
Yeah, this is what I meant - perhaps I wasn't clear enough

Yeah, the audio out of the zoom goes into the external recorder..  I'm saying to go from a zoom/preamps to the camera rather than sync later, for camera's with an input that is.
It's not so quick if you're dealing with 100 clips or so:)
Yeah, this is what I meant - perhaps I wasn't clear enough

I use an Atomos Ninja Star with my GX8 and the sound quality from the internal mic is actually quite good (but I still only use it for synching purposes).
I think these cameras apply horrendous amounts of compresion to the audio, which is why the internally recorded audio is so bad.
You can connect a zoom straight into the Ninja Star which gives excellent synched audio and video quality, at least with the GX8. Maybe this is the dream setup for your GX85 that you mentioned

I really don't see the big deal in syncing...
During the shoot, I would spend about the same amount of time setting up an external recorder versus a wired or wireless option.
Throw the files on the computer. Ok... this takes the most time. Depending on the file size, it could take as long at 1 minute for a big 24-bit audio file.
Syncing in FCPX: Select both files. Right-click and select: "Synchronize clips"... 15 seconds later... voilà... works like magic.
In the timeline: Expand audio. Select audio from camera and press "v" to disable audio. Adjust your levels and you're done. 10 seconds.
So, what we're really talking about is 2 minutes (maximum) of extra time, but you get a fantastic audio file and it costs much less. If your time is worth that much, I'll argue that you wouldn't have asked the question on this forum. If fact, the only "hard" part of this whole thing is keeping track of which audio file goes with which video file. The only real negative that I can think of to this method is during the recording. You can't adjust and monitor an external recorder (placed next to your subject on-set) if the sound becomes too loud... audio ruined. So care needs to taken when setting the levels.

Review with test shots - looks nice, would like to see more... be aware the presenter is being filmed on a FS5 with Sigma lenses (and a speedbooster)
 

Thanks everyone.  My biggest takeaway from all of these replies is that it can work in a pinch but I shouldn't be the basis for every shot.  I'll stick with NDs.

well i guess i'm fucked cuz i just bought that c100 today! seriously though i can tell you none of my clients have yet required 4K and i've got some pretty damn big clients on the corporate side (i'm not in the US though). and i doubt i'm the only one left delivering 1080p in 2016. in 6 months or a year things could be different. my mate has an A7S2 and has only yet delivered 1080p with it. if i need 4k tomorrow i can borrow or rent whatever 4K camera the budget allows. as for Ursa Mini 4.6K, did you read my previous post? cuz i state quite clearly it's the best IQ for the money. but a rigged up UM 4.6K will run you $7-8K minimum, has a native iso of 800, no ND's etc... and that's without counting the magenta issue plaguing 99% of the units out there. weight wise, i'm sorry but with the EVF, handle and V-mount battery it weighs a ton and would be super impractical for a wedding type event..  i got the C100 for run & gun. stripped down it's friggin tiny yet offers NDs, waveform assist etc..  got it for dirt cheap too so i couldn't pass on the deal (basically the price of a nice lens) at some random camera store that had no clue about video stuff.. they didn't even realise it had dual pix upgrade. i'm not oblivious to the fact i'll probably outgrow it sooner then later, just didn't wanna drop loads at this point on gear i'm not 100% feeling (i.e current Sony / BM products). that's just my opinion though, to each their own...

Thank you everyone for the great feedback you guys are really helping out !

The combo I use is the Nikon D750 + Tamron 24-70mm F/2.8 and in terms of lighting everything is Aputure.

The C500 I have yet to find one in that price range, but then again if im going to invest so much in a new camera id much rather get a new unit with warranty, and somewhere close in case there's any problem I can just hop to the place i bought it and get it fixed.

 
Yeah size is a concern, Id hate to have something like excess weight slowing me down.

Starting to lean more towards the C100 II but haven't really made up my mind yet.
 

Haven't used the mini, but to this day, the C100 has been the most pleasant "get out of the way and shoot" camera I've ever used.
A joy to work with. Quality was always great, despite the weak codec. Doesn't need much tweaking in post because the Canon color is so pleasant out of the box.

Which lenses do you have?
This is true. The C100ii is the most hands-off camera I've ever used. If you're in situations where you don't have time to make adjustments then it's a life saver.
Yes I forgot to put low light as an advantage for C100. It's incredible. The 4K ursa is mainly usable at 400 ISO but the 4.6K is perfect at 800 ISO and usable at 1600 ISO. That is still a far cry from 10,000 ISO but if you're using fast lenses it's not a big problem.

I'm also looking to upgrade from the D750, which indeed has nice colors & DR but is soft (a la 5D III) and can't be pushed much in post. i tried the ursa mini 4.6k (which btw is useable up until 1600, it's the regular 4K that has base iso 400) and has by far the best image for the asking price. 4K 10-bit internal Raw/Prores recording with 15 DR stops gives you a crazy good image that's super flexible in post. BUT the camera weighs a ton once it's rigged up with just handle, v-mount battery, evf. no ND filters and those CF2 cards cost a leg. It's really a RED/ARRI type cine camera, not meant for small crew run&gun.. The C100II is i find way overpriced for essentially a 2012 cam with added dual pixel AF. the image it spits out is nice and sharp but that 24meg AVCHD codec is weak and of course no 4K. The best investment today for run&gun video imo is the A7S2 / FS5 & 1DX2. But in september it could be different since Canon should be announcing the 5D4 and hopefully C100 III (with 4K). Sony is also rumored to come out with the A9 and perhaps A7R3. These new Sony's would have equivalent or better dual pixel AF (which i feel is the current/next big thing to have in video). So if you can wait it out, there should be some interesting products coming out by the end of this year..

Actually for a long time after I got my GX7 I was an advocate of using iDynamic. In fact even now I wouldn't say "dont use it". But just be aware of what it does. It raises shadows and midtones in a different way than if you were to use the shadow curve or adjust the contrast slider. The end result is that the contrast in your image can look a little "washed out". It's hard to explain..  but for example if your subject is a person, then their skin wont have the same range of tonality, even after grading. This could be desirable if going for more of a low-fi look.
There is no definitive. Sometimes the Nikon looks better, sometimes the Panasonic does. But the Panasonic is far more usable as a camera.
Nikon mount lenses have a physical lever on the rear mount which controls the aperture directly. There are adapters you can buy which have a ring around them that controls this lever. I'm talking about electronic Nikon lenses btw, not the old manual aperture ones. The one I use is the Metabones, but there are cheaper alternatives too.

Thanks for this. It needed to be done. I'm not sure for the color-shift upon uploading. However, you might want to try the Standard Profile instead. I've had good luck with that... but in the end, it's just a matter of personal preference. I'm finding your GX85 sample too pink in the skintone, but then again, I don't have a perfectly calibrated monitor and, as you mentioned, Youtube might be doing something to your file. Personally, I've just decided to use Standard (-3,-5,-5,-3), with shadows at +2... It seems good to me. I think the most important is to turn off all sharpening and noise reduction- you can tweek the rest in post. Also, I just leave it at something that suits the project to keep the look consistent. Finally, I've been choosing only from sunny and incandescent WB and just letting the colors do what they want- again, consistency being the goal.

You may as well shoot 4K and do the Ex-Tele in post by cropping a 1920 x 1080 box out of your 4K frame.
This way you can activate it at any time and in any part of the frame.
Also your normal shots will be oversampled from 4K to 1080p, rather than pixel binned 1080p straight off the card, which looks far worse.

The Kinefinity Terra 5k has a global shutter.
I get picked for jobs for what ideas I film with a camera, rather than what I own... so the Terra, on paper, is more than ideal. 

Is the Terra really "out this year" and how many? I have trouble believing such a small company will be able to ship in large numbers. The 6K also suffers from the worst rolling shutter you have ever seen unless you shoot it in "sport mode" and a lower resolution. And what about warranty service with Kinefinity. Does it have to go back to China every time something goes wrong?
I'm certainly intrigued by the Terra 5K with its switchable global shutter. I currently have a Raven on order (which I might switch to the Scarlet-W for the 5K). The only thing that would make me reconsider is if Kinefinity announced a U.S. distributor or if Canon announced the 1DC II. While I love the C500, the available recorders may be too large of an addition for the type of portability I am looking for in a 4K camera. With all the wires going everywhere and a big screen attached to the camera, it may become a little unwieldy.

another boring test clip... this time the gx80 has wheels!!    testing it and my riding abilities on an electric skateboard...
 

The panasonic 20 would be my dreamlens if it wasnt a fly by wire lens. Seriously, if one could mod that lens to manual focus i would pay a premium for it, dont care about the AF.
20mm on m43 is just about perfect in my opinion and the pana20
is a stellar performer!
I had the suggested canon 35 2.0 is - but you would have to use the expensive metabones xl speedbooster to turn it into a 22mm lens. Yet the awesome thing about the canon glas in general would be that you get AF *and* nice manual focus. Especially for street this is quite nice. As much as i love my voigtländer and MF, stil there are moments in time were AF is quite handy.
the sigma 20 and rokinons are just too big for my taste, but that is totally subjective.

My opinion is that IS within a lens isnt anymore important in the future, since IBIS will do it. The gx80 does it already extremly well and it will even get better.
your choice boils down to:
- do you accept fly by wire focussing lenses?
- is size an issue?
if you hate fly by wire as I do, basically all olympus and panasonic lenses are out.
if you want it small, have a look at the voigtländers.
if size is not an issue, go with any speed booster and any lens you like.
if you need AF it gets tricky - either you accept fly by wire or you need to go the EF route with a metabones speed booster.

Sorry for the lack of tact.  I was heavy on the rhetoric.  Good on you for calling me out on it.  To be fair, I've done exactly the same thing in the past to feel out new gear, and made a bit of a mess of it. 
https://vimeo.com/122338262 password="password"
But, I did mention "user error" because I do think it's important that folks understand viewers may be seeing that rather than limitations of the camera. 
On the other hand, I do agree it's great to shoot wild with something and see what happens.  Sometimes, as an online viewer, it's difficult to discern if it's the gear making mistakes or the shooter.  Sometimes it's both.  Anyway, it's not a knock against anyone's craft and ability, just a reminder to understand that what you see online is not always what you get.  

Here are a couple of shots, OOC. Looks quite fine to me as a starting point for grading.