TwoScoops

Prediction- they'll put even more cool stuff in for a great price, and people who use it to shoot flower videos will still complain about it. 

Everyone knows you need 8K RAW for flower videos..  I mean, they're flowers, right?

Prediction- they'll put even more cool stuff in for a great price, and people who use it to shoot flower videos will still complain about it. 

Somewhere between 0.95 and 1.4 - definitely no more stopped down than that. The EXIF says ISO 200 and 1/6400th so probably closer to 0.95.
I had some video tests I shot with a model a couple of a years ago with the Voigt 17.5 vs the Pana 12-35 at 17ish, both at 2.8. The difference in 3D pop was quite remarkable but I can't find the files now. 

@blondini No, perspective distortion is only affected by distance from the camera to the subject. No matter what sensor/lens combination you use, if the camera and the subjects don't move, then the ratio of the size of two subjects will remain the same. I did a quick and dirty test to illustrate. It's a little imprecise (the camcorder would NOT focus on the guy in front...)
For all three images the camera is in the same place. I suspect the small discrepancies in ratio (2.2% error) are mainly due to moving parts inside the camcorder when it zooms, which changes its actual distance from the subject. But this is an easy thing to test yourself.
First image is a 4mm lens on a 1/4 type sensor

Second image is a 55mm lens on an APS-C sensor

As you can see, the ratio of the figures is the same. You could even use a wider lens and the ratio remains, because the distance has not changed:
Third image is a 2mm lens on the 1/4 type sensor.

 
Quote from Wikipedia:
 
 
 
Yes, it would. As long as the camera is in the same place, the relative size of the plane compared to the people will remain the same regardless of the lens or sensor. If you don't believe me or my Legos, go try it yourself!

This is a portrait I took with the Voigtlander 17.5mm and GH4 a couple of years ago. With all these cool M43 cameras out/on the horizon I wish I'd kept the Voigty set now. . . and added the 10.5.

The Voigt is much better than it looks in that comparison, it's an incredible lens. One of the few I really regret selling.
I posted a still from my portfolio taken with the GH4/Voigt 17.5 here: https://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/6396-lenses/?page=162&tab=comments#comment-233871 I felt like the Voigts coupled with the GH4 had the most mojo of any non medium format camera I've used for raw stills, and they made the video look a lot nicer too.
 

Wonder if he thought A Serbian film was the feel good hit of the year..

Great article.
To me it has always been about if there are lenses to match though I have never actively tried to match systems and have just tried to use what was appropriate for the system I am using/used (FF, APSC, M43 and Pentax Q).
In the last couple of years there has been an increasing number of faster options for smaller sensors (and FF too).
  I am sure there will be situations that I would have to go higher ISO with FF than M43 but not as many as is often implied and is focal length and subject dependent and sometimes it might just mean a different shutter speed.
The thing that I sometimes have an issue with is "matching DOF".   
FF lenses get infinite DOF pretty quickly with wide angle lenses so in many cases there will be nothing to match once you are at infinity anyway.
Longer lenses like 300mm also I find the typical subject will have enough DOF even at 2.8 FF
Maybe around 50mm FF versus 25mm M43 for my uses there could be an issue FF for me with very fast lenses but while I like fast lenses, I use them wide open fairly rarely (at times a few 50 1.2 and an 85 1.2 and a 24 1.4) but then it is pretty hard to match those fast speeds FF with M43 anyway.
 
 

The Shining, Scarface and Terminator got mild reviews when released too. haha

Haha, seriously?! Sometimes I really think all of the talk about this camera or that camera, is a bunch of nonsense... I visit this site and watch most online videos on my phone, like 95% of the rest of the world and since I knew you shot ML Raw, I just assumed that scene was shot Raw as well. Crazy.
Either way it looks awesome, man! All of it does. Those screengrabs are epic. I love the choice of making some of your lighting practical... SMART!!!
Did you use the same Leica Rs with the Raw shots as you did with the h.264?
Hmm, that’s pretty cool. I’ll have to give it a try when I upgrade to 15. But to be honest, I’m shooting 2:35 at 1920x810, and I’m still blown away by the detail with the right lens, so I don’t even know if taxing my MacBook Air with the higher resolution is worth it to me... it would just fall on deaf ears I think. 

The Shining, Scarface and Terminator got mild reviews when released too. haha

A couple more shots from the Canon 28mm 1.8. I got this lens for an insanely low price and it's quickly becoming one of my favorite lenses. Even without IS, I am able to go handheld on FF, which will make this lens indispensable going forward.

I have used both in commercial projects, mostly digital content for brands. The C300II since it came out, the same for the C200.
Both are great cameras for low budget production, it's the step before a RED or the Alexa. Both also are great in hands of good colorist for matching with high end production cameras like RED or Arri. That's my experience.
Talking about the C300II vs the C200, I think that the C300II falls with the inclusion of 4K60 RAW in the C200. The color science are a little better, but definitely the game breaker it's 4K60. The DPAF it's better, the monitor it's better, dynamic range and low light are better on RAW, and the body it's better. Since we were shooting commercial jobs we always wanted the highest quality possible (and delivering 1080p final output!), so we are not concerned of storage or the cards we use, that's why we always shoot raw. Also the crop factor on the C300II its a big deal. My only concern it's the lack of interchangeable mounts for some projects when we were using PL cine lenses.
But now things are a little different since the C300II option to shoot external Prores RAW, but the lack of 60fps at 4K still hurts.
Now, if you're shooting in more run and gun situations and you need fast delivery or broadcast standards, the C300II it's the camera to go, but only in this situations. I feel that the C200 it's something like a "future proof" camera for at least a few years. 4K60 RAW it's a huge step for our workflow, and the DPAF works amazing. And don't forget the canon color science, you can almost start grading for yourself with the Alexa standard lut in premiere if you can't afford a colorist.

You got me wrong. I know all the tools like the back of my hand. Started with Apples Color, read the whole manual, bought a (Ripple? Lynda?) training, graded. Went on with Color Finesse (as part of AAE, in the short period of a year or so when I was pissed after FCP X launch), then learned Resolve 9, again with van Hurkmans Ripple and (also his) manual. I also entertain myself musing about the best workflows for grading.
It's just that the further I tweak the image the less confident I become as to whether what I'm doing makes things better or worse. I'd better just primary color correct, add a tiny bit of "mood" - and leave it alone. This is almost camera-independent.

I'm pretty sure that doctors talk about medicine when they're not doing surgery and pilots talk about airplanes when they're not flying.
And by the way...shouldn't you be recording and working right now

Make it 40... to me this camera doesn’t even exist. 
Eventually we’ll have footage from John Brawley or Frank Glencairn or Noam Kroll and the footage will look amazing. More people will love it but a few will find something wrong with it...
Eventually card info will be released, and more people will complain.
Eventually AF tests will show up comparing this camera to the PDAF of the a6500 and more people will complain.
Eventually low light tests will show up comparing this camera with the GH5s or the a7sii and more people will complain.
At the end, when it’s released, a bunch of people will complain because they hate that they have to use an IR Cut filter and they will complain that they only get 45-60 minutes of battery life and that they wish it had IBIS...
And eventually the usual suspects will be the only people that have the camera and the footage will be absolutely gorgeous.
The End.

@TwoScoops That's the write speed and resolution the 5D4 could achieve if it had magic lantern enabled, but it doesn't yet. Could be years before we see magic lantern on that camera.

I think it does.  RED Gemini also loses 0.5 stops of dynamic range when using the "low light" mode, but given they clearly say that the low light mode is for "low light only" and the fact that they generally overclaim their dynamic range, I feel like it's probably 1-2 stops as well.

Pro tip when passing through airports, or interacting with cops in general, do not refer to your BOOM pole or your SHOTGUN mic. 
(but me being me, I've done both of these things)

fwiw im doing everything on this list for an itty bitty lil 2 min no budget film

This is it. I remember when it came out there was talk about the unusual composition used, like all the headroom, etc. 
 
 

This is it. I remember when it came out there was talk about the unusual composition used, like all the headroom, etc. 
 
 

@TwoScoops bmOGcc... haha... love it. Lights Out was one of the reasons I first decided to shoot Raw with the Micro. I love the look of the BMCC. 

So, I’m at the point where I am about to start shooting dialogue scenes for my film. Being a one man band, guerrilla shooter, I need my set up to be as quick and easy and inconspicuous as possible.
I’ve used the H1 and the DR-05 but they’re both a little big for my set up. Right now, I have two Olympus LS-7 field recorders and I love the quality and how small they are. I can have one attached to the top of my camera with a small shotgun and then have another in my actor’s pocket with a lav. They will do fine if need be, but I figured I’d explore my options.
I always liked the size of the Zoom H2/H2N... small but not tiny with external controls. And I’ve heard/seen some filmmakers use the whole recorder attached to a boom pole using only the onboard mic. But I know they’re pretty dated and assume there are better options out there.
So I looked around last night and came across the Zoom H5. Anybody have any experience with it? I have acces to a couple Rode NTG mics, so the onboard XLR inputs seem interesting but as I understand it, the onboard mic unit is modular... will the recorder work without any of those modular units attached? Because it seems like the perfect size without it. I figured I could pick up one or two of their new pocket recorders for lav mics and then run an XLR shotgun and maybe an XLR lav from the other input on the H5.
I know this isn’t ideal, @IronFilm but I NEED the small footprint, so is it usable? If not, any creative ideas out there to get good audio with a cheap and easy workflow that one person can operate?
Also, does the old line in/out trick from external recorders really work to bypass DSLR preamps?