josdr

There are two main perspectives here:

Production Sound Mixer:
32bit is pointless, and non-standard.
Heck, there isn't even a single professional field recorder in existence that does 32bit!! Not one.
Needless it say it is not desperately needed by a PSM.

One man band videographer who does everything himself, including even audio post:
Their attentions are being pulled a million different ways during a shoot, as they're trying to do too much, and thus mistakes might be made. And they don't need to worry about surprises in the post workflow, as they're handling this all themselves. 
 
Have you done the latest firmware update for the F4? For its hybrid digital limiters.
(btw, note that almost everything on set is wireless.... so often by the time you hit the recorder, the limiters there are too late as the damage is already done)
In my opinion (note: this is from the perspective of a PSM):
It is a big step back to go from an F4 to a MixPre6mk1. 
Just some of the negatives:
No dual media recording
No safety track recording. 
Two less channels than a F4 if using TC
Inferior powering options
Ergonomics/design is a step back

An alternative opinion, if you're a OMB videographer:
The MixPre3/6 is a very compact form factor for mounting under a mirrorless camera, and worth the so called "upgrade" just for that alone. 

 

I find the F4 relatively easy to use on the go. I think that audio equipment in general has UI/UX issues since the general convention is to use a little knob to twiddle your way through expansive menus. You kinda have to memorize where things are, but it's not worse than other recorders. (I think the DSLR convention of a wheel built on top of 4 directional buttons is simply easier to use).
But the main UI of being able to toggle channels on/off with 1 click, adjusting gain directly on a knob, and soloing a channel with 1 click are nice. I like having all the controls on the front panel so that it's easy to see when hanging from a neck strap. The one thing I miss from the DR60 Mk2 is that little Mic/Line/Phantom switch. You have to enter the menu on the F4 to get to that. But you can press a button on the F4 to immediately access a channel's options, so day-to-day I don't have to hunt around. It's things like switching from 48kHz to 96, or changing the routing matrix, that are a pain because I only do them once every few months and forget where the options are.
The biggest issue F4 has for me is that battery life is quite bad using 8 AA batteries. I affixed a large 12V battery on top, but it's an ugly, heavy solution. However, most recorders have pretty bad battery life in my experience, especially older ones. The F6 is very attractive to me for the simple reason of having a built in NPF battery sled and (supposedly) really good battery life, along with 32 bit recording of course.

From the sounds of it, getting a blimp (be it a Rode brand or whatever) should be a much higher priority for you than an F4/F6/MixPre3/whatever

What exactly are you recording and how? If it is say sit down interviews outdoors, then getting a C Stand and boombuddy so you can position your shotgun right on the frame edge should be a high priority too. (again, a higher priority than replacing your Tascam DR60Dmk2 with anything else)

This is not good manners to say the least... If you can add something constructive to our conversation please do so  but not in this manner. Thank you. You are supposed to try and help me 😁😁

It’s not anybody’s job to help you. Some posters are giving you opinions. Some are giving you facts. Help yourself. 

From my perspective as a production sound mixer (note: my perspective isn't the same as everyone else! For instance in my eyes the F4 is clearly massively preferable to the MixPre3mk1, while for a solo OMB videographer they'd want the MixPre instead):

No.
 
Wind should be almost next to meaningless for your recorder itself. 
So the issue is your mic, so get proper wind protection. 
Do you have a blimp?
What exactly is the setup you're recording usually?

Yes, unless you can get lucky and score a MixPre3 for cheap. (and don't mind dropping down your number of max channels from four with the DR60D to three with the MixPre3)

I refuse to acknowledge that the so called Zoom "F1" is part of the excellently awesome Zoom F Series. 

Doesn't. Exist. To. Me.
 
Perhaps the Shure VP83F LensHopper fits your purpose better for a "camera mounted recorder/mic combo"?

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/966010-REG/shure_vp83f_condenser_shotgun_mic.html
  
The main "big" changes with Gen1 vs Gen2 of the MixPre recorders are:
1) internal timecode
2) Gen2 got a price drop
3) backs up to a USB thumbdrive (but this isn't true redundancy)
4) 32bit recording (which is overhyped in my opinion)
  
The Fostex FR2LE falls into the same category as for instance the Roland R44 I mentioned earlier.

In that, for its time (which was well over a decade ago!!) the Fostex FR2LE was an attractive kit for someone on a tight budget, because it could hold up to prosumer standards and thus for the low price of roughly around about £400inc it proved good value for money. 
But today in 2020, I don't think you can make a solid argument it is worthwhile swapping a DR60Dmk2 for a Fostex FR2LE instead, even though they sell for similar prices eBay. 
 

 

There's one on ebay from Adorama at the moment. I think it ships internationally
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Zoom-F4-Multitrack-Field-Recorder-with-Timecode-6-Inputs-8-Tracks-SKU1256834/254610621129?hash=item3b47f9c2c9:g:q2gAAOSw0Yxez7qE

Agree with Zoom F4, but in terms of the Zoom F series the one I'd avoid is the Zoom F1. It's brilliantly small but has a number of issues that make it a dealbreaker for me: 1) there's some sort of EQ going on in the plug-in power preamp (for lav mics or other mics); it seems optimized for voice which I guess makes sense since you'd mainly use a lav mic there, but makes it near useless for recording ambient sounds with binaural or omni mics that use plug-in power. 2) Gain is set only in steps; if you want precisely controllable gain you need to buy one of the Zoom mics (shotgun, M/S, X/Y, etc.) that attach to the front of the recorder. With these, recording quality is acceptable but nothing to write home about. I bought the M/S mic but regret having sunk more money into this recorder as I only use it when I need the small size and the ability to mount on camera (which I never do unless I absolutely have to). I've been spoiled by the sound quality from the MixPre series, so the F1 spends most of its time sitting at home in a box.

Can you not find any used first-generation MixPre for sale? Now that the second generation is available with 32-bit floating point, a lot of people have been selling their first-generation recorders. Having 32-bit float can be useful for location sound when level changes are unpredictable, but plenty of people managed just fine for decades without it. I'm still using a first-generation MixPre 6 and have no plans to upgrade to the new generation.

Zoom F4

I think it is a bit pointless getting anything else below that, especially when you already have the Tascam DR60Dmk2. 

As the Zoom F series (and the MixPre series too) offers so so so much value for money, they're leaps and bounds above anything else. (to give a camera analogy, would you bother with a GH5/a7S/5Dmk4 if an EVA1/FS7/UMP cost only a couple of hundred of bucks extra? Most commercial shooters would say "nope!" That's the case with the Zoom F series, they've brought features/specs/quality that used to be far more expensive, down to very very low and affordable prices. Why settle for anything less?)

The other issue, is that when you look in the world of non-F/MixPre series recorders and exclude them from consideration for a moment, then the Tascam DR60Dmk2 is damn good value itself in the "no budget" category. 

Sure, you could look around for something like a secondhand Tascam DR70D / Tascam DR680mk1 / Roland R44 / etc that could be found for only a little bit more money than a DR60Dmk2 but less than a Zoom F4 costs. 

However all of those other options merely give you extra channels over the DR60D, plus perhaps an extra little tweak or two, here or there, of benefits. But nothing at all which is a real step forward in features/specs/quality over your DR60Dmk2. 

So unless you DESPERATELY need "more channels" but can't afford a Zoom F4 (hint: you don't need more channels, not at this budget level), then I don't see why you should do anything else but stick with your Tascam DR60Dmk2 for longer into the future until you can afford a Zoom F series (or a MixPre series). 
 

Hi !
The eterna LUT is to use if you don’t have a color checker. You could actually use it before applying the color checker correction nod but there’s no point to it.
For the gamma question, I can’t remember what gamma there is in Resolve. You can try gamma input « slog2 » as it’s not far from flog gamma and I usually do a blackmagic 4k gamma output as rec709 crushes everything. But most of the time, I put the same gamma Space input and output so the color checker only corrects colors and put me back to some rec709 color Space, and I adjust the gamma curve myself in another nod, so I have more control.
But overall, if you don’t have to match your XT3 with other cameras, I’d suggest You apply the fuji WDR lut (the one which only affects colors, i can’t remember the exact name) so you’re back to a rec709 colorspace but with fuji’s touch. And then in another nod, you apply a custom curve. I have gorgeous results with this simple workflow.
and finally, another method is to use color transform and put « gamma input flog » « color Space input rec2020 » gamma output « blackmagic 4k (same as above) » « color Space output rec709 ».
There You go, 3 methods to normalize your flog image. I encourage you to use the second one if you wanna keep fuji colors.
 

Just to make it clear, I am talking about h265 4000mbps All intra files, which stutter. I never use long gop/200 mbps so cannot comment on that

Totally wild 100% guessing here, but doesn't the studio version do that?

Since 16.1 it's possible in the studio version. It's under Workspace -> Video Clean Feed.

Excellent. Thank you.

Hi, I thought we were talking about £800 wedding packages not 5000 euro ones. Even then I hardly think that they do need so much time in post no matter what they say.
I do think that both photographers and videographers ,with the former being the main culprits ,are very out of touch with what their output really costs. Doing two working days work for 2500-5000 euros is quite a lot of money. If it wasn't for the sentimental value that photographers/videographers take advantage of , the cost would be way down.
Nobody employs a photographer for a friday night pissup with their mates since alcohol will provide them with all the sentiment they need..
Sure you can spend too much time in trying to nail something that will definitely not be noticed by non experts. Brides like the shallow DOF, colour me like a princess look..
It can mostly be achieved by the right  light gear off the camera rather than tons of post processing.  Photographers are much lazier in setting up favourable lighting since they have so much latitude in post and if push comes to shove nobody looks bad in B&W  .  
The layman in the street cannot begin to fathom the amount of lighting required to shoot proper video. You are very correct in saying that we should always work with people that you can learn from and never stop the process of  learning.That is a great attitude!

With the gh5 and the new Sonys that are bound to appear BMD  cannot afford to stand still,nor we want them to... Software for a camera is an evolving process

Camera Store TV ahead of the curve as always

This guessing game is getting boring. Out with the truth!!!    P.S Why do people still upload and pay for vimeo... It can't stream to save its life and I dispute that the end result is better than YT.. Even if we had a little better colours here and there ,chopy videos are not going to win any favours..

This guessing game is getting boring. Out with the truth!!!    P.S Why do people still upload and pay for vimeo... It can't stream to save its life and I dispute that the end result is better than YT.. Even if we had a little better colours here and there ,chopy videos are not going to win any favours..

Certain useful items in the menus can be assigned to the fn button and you can set up one of the Memory positions with the proper settings for video (i.e 24p, X-avcs codec, Zebra and focus peaking on, etc- so there is no unnecessary menu dive.  Don't get too enamoured with the A7 series video, it is not as good as Sony would like us to think. The A7s ii has one party trick and that is low light performance, but at that price there are better cinema cameras around. We will see of course what the A7 iii series brings to the table.
A7r ii , it does have the better af of all as far as the photographical side is concerned and decent video but sony colour science is just not that good...  
If you really intend to spend A6300 money plus a good lens I would urge you to have a serious look at the Fuji XT2 which is probably the best APS-C camera at this time with colours  that will please her very much, great AF and excellent 4k video.. She will not need to upgrade. The XT2 also has  very good picture profiles that may be used in video .    If she is used to canon colours maybe this is a better choice for her. Sony RAWs have a lot of latitude to get the result you want but jpegs straight out of the camera are underwhelming as far as photography goes..   It all depends on your budget of course, that is why I mentioned the a6000 as a cheaper solution to start on.. For the full monty, the XT2 is a great choice, much better than the a6xx series in my opinion. 
As for filters, I guess you decide on the lenses you are going to purchase , see the upper filter size for all of them and then purchase accordingly. I suppose you start with Hoya filters and then the sky is the limit .Do not get the nasty £12 pounds one, it is a very false economy that will ruin your video.  A ND 8 or a ND 16 should be enough if you do not want to pay for a variable ND one. But do not get the nasty cheap stuff, they are cheap for an obvious bad reason. There are of course Heliopans , Tiffens and the like after that..  
Do discuss with her that video is quite a different discipline to photography and the skill-set of one and best practices do not necessarily translate to the other..  Good lighting makes a bad camera get decent results, it does not work the other way around....

Having seen most, if not all  of the available material for the GH5 I think Panasonic is to be applauded for what they created. They threw in the kitchen sink as far as specs are concerned and paired it with an espresso machine to boot.
I don't think many people expected so high specs in an industry whose larger players are reluctant to innovate in the consumer sector and are saved by their established colour science.
I cannot possibly agree with Andrew that  it is controversial that later firmware will enable more options/capabilities. Software always takes more time to catch up to hardware capabilities and this is not a practice individual to the GH5 camera . I would rather have some aggressive software development going on during the lifetime of the product. They also have to make sure that future sd card technology can keep up in writing the amount of data required. In essence, they have to wait for it as well..
I do not like the price tag of the camera  which I find too opportunistic for a M43 sensor, and not including vlog in the price tag. Hopefully competition from the other players in the following months  will drive the price down.