salim

Maybe it is there to show a size comparison between the two cameras?? I guess tomorrow we will find out?

The JVC LS300 was great, a lot were sold to wedding and event shooters, we even use one for a documentary series (the cable station cut our preferred C100mkII because of the codec, by the way) and it brought a lot of innovation to the table. If any of the big players had such a camera (sold a little bit less than a A7Sii, at the time) it would have been a huge hit. EVF unusable, monitor close to unusable (using external one at all times and Zaccuto EVF). Some people still use one together with their GH5 cameras.
The main issue we have(had) was the severe crop in slow motion (I used my NX1 cameras exclusively for 100/120frames), the not so great J-log, and the sensor was quite noisy above 800ISO, or we were spoiled by the C100. Definitely reluctant to use on 1600ISO (which I believe is a sane expectation to have in the end of the century). All the rest were amazing.
Seriously waiting to something above LS300, what we lack are cameras near 5.000euros. C200/FS5ii are (will be) expensive for my use. EVA/UrsaMP also. Panasonic fit everything one needs on a (huge) hybrid body, why not have similar features and specs on a slightly bigger cine/video form?
Very excited about the Atomos 5", but for people wanting only monitoring, I doubt a recorder will ever bring the same portability and ease of use. I used the BlackMagic 5" once and it was nothing like the Focus. For everyone else, it will be an instant hit. Especially for a price close to SmallHD Focus monitor.

Where/when can I send my money?

For me BMPCC was/is the most beautiful (cinematic) learning tool above all specs/quirks. I just hope new one will somehow retain that special distinctive DNA profile... although perhaps it is more or and more hard to keep such position.

Where/when can I send my money?

Just for @BTM_Pix, there are now pics floating around of a banner showing the new Atomos Ninja V - a 5", 1000nit, recorder/monitor that does 4k60p and Prores raw. I've held off on a external recorder because I want it to be somewhat future proof and do 60p, and the 7" screens are too big for my shooting style, but this might just fit the bill. 

Let's put all this on rest, OK? Let's focus strictly on the topics please. This is Andrew's house.
His good efforts simply don't deserve it. Nor your past contributions and fellowship, Jon! I'd still appreciate to follow your posts and juicy insights over these boards (your readers need you! : ) so refrain yourself to write any personal attacks addressed to others, I guess we all beg you.
We are all human beings. Opposite POVs can be written without offending the other side. No one likes to be publicly attacked, isn't it? As much as it is really unpleasant to see you or anyone else to be attacked here too.
Only goodwill may able to be considered welcome.
 
Regards to everyone,
E :-)

Banned @RedWineMogul
I am much more interested in BM Pocket 4K on this topic, than shit slinging

ProRes RAW to tape

I hope it doesn't mean I have to have a rig like this one to use it!!! There is a Sony A7s mk II in there someplace believe it or not.
http://www.icgmagazine.com/web/next-level-filmmaking/
 

Here's the thing that makes ProRes so slick for us (and I'm guessing many people.)
Shooting in ProRes HQ delivers a really solid "negative" that plays back in real time even on small MBPs in the field - and it's really fast to edit.
There's someone here that's ranting about Apple and ipods and whatever makes them see Mac as a scary clown face thing, but really they just deliver solid creative tools for a lot of professionals.

Looks like Apple is spending a lot of time to creat a great pro system for the real pros. A whole new Mac Pro is coming in
2019
https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/05/apples-2019-imac-pro-will-be-shaped-by-workflows/

Looks like Apple is spending a lot of time to creat a great pro system for the real pros. A whole new Mac Pro is coming in
2019
https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/05/apples-2019-imac-pro-will-be-shaped-by-workflows/

The Pro Workflow Team cited in that article is interesting - Apple has hired a bunch of creatives to put its hardware/software to work in real world production scenarios in order to see how various workflows are structured, and how they can design to make them more efficient. The eGPU with a MacBook Pro working on a 8k stream in real time was also really interesting. 8k editing, grading and effects on a MBP, nice.
Chris

I mostly use two settings :
1. cine2/pro ~+10sat 5red color depth 
2. slog2/sgammut3.cine ~+25sat +5red color depth . That is for high contrast scenes. 
I mostly do manual WB with a boost in warmth for outdoor shots. 
Cine1 is the same as Cine2 but using the full 0-255 range. Cine3 is great for skin but is more contrasty than any other gamma, Cine4 is also pretty good but I feel it needs more adjustments in post than Cine2. Avoid Slog3. 
The nice thing with the Picture profiles is that you can play around with the settings until you find something that works for you and how you like the colors.  I mostly use Pro/Cinema/sgammut3.cine but you can get good results with other profiles as well. 
Here is a brief description:
http://helpguide.sony.net/ilc/1420/v1/en/contents/TP0000435736.html
And here is a more detailed one:
https://docs.sony.com/release/Help_C198100111.pdf
 

I'm not sure that conclusion is correct. 

A - Apple could maintain their pro lines for professional. 
B - Apple might even advance further that intel on CPU performance. Just looking at their progress on mobile chip, they basically beat everyone else. 
C - By "Professional Market" you probably mean anything that needs a GPU acceleration. They might still use any of the GPU makers that optimizes image/video processing while use their on CPU for most optimize way of managing the device. 

Salim...Not to speak for Don, but he did state the following in his post. Hopefully he can clarify further.
 

There are few reasons for that.
First, different input-output curves can compress different parts of the histogram. For example you can have the same dynamic range from HLG or Slog or even a normal jpeg gamma. Slog3 is also worse than Slog2 because it compresses a huge chunk of the histogram even more. 
Then you also have the color space. rec709 is a much smaller area than sgammut and in return you get better sampling & tonalities with rec709 that D750 has for the same colors (sky, skin..). 
Finally, compression (and spatial color undersampling) also affects banding but with the same codec there is not so much of a difference as you get with different color space or gamma. 
So Slog by itself is not problematic. Even slog with 8bits is fine as long as you don't use the original sgammut. For example, with the slog & 8bits you can get excellent results with no banding if you use a slightly reduced color space such as sgammut3.cine/pro/cinema (which are still much larger than rec709), and boost saturation (without any color clipping of course). The problem is that most Sony users don't know that. Even myself when I first got the A7rII, influenced by all the slog hype I set my camera to slog2/sgammut only to kick myself few weeks later for ruining the footage. Sony has allowed so much flexibility that is great for professionals, but they should have be more careful when explaining all these to the average consumer. 

The chart shows the DR curve of the A7s in s-log. The native ISO of the A7s in s-log is 3200, so that explains the behavior there. 
I wish I had more hard data on hand, but anecdotally Panasonic have heavily marketed their dual native ISO tech in every camera they put it in. It is a big deal and a real selling point. Kinefinity has it and now so does RED, and they all market it heavily because it's a big deal. So, I doubt that Sony (or any company) would just stick this feature in there and not shout it from the rooftops.
This is interesting and does seem to fit into the real definition of dual native ISO.

I actually would consider other options... as non of your picks make it to the usual suspects ND quality rankings (think: Breakthrough Photography, SLR Magic, Tiffen, Formatt-Hitech, B+W, Singh-ray, Heliopan, et cetera). Also. People could generally point out that you're better off with a set of fixed value NDs, rather than one vND. But you must have your reasons (like having store credit to spend and finding ease of use of having variable ND outweigh any possible downsides).
This has always been a hot subject in the past, so for more: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=variable+nd+eoshd+site:www.eoshd.com&hl=en . Concerning the mentioned filters... I suppose it's doubtful you'll find much opinions on some of these.

the new A7III has a dual ISO pathway: 
 
https://***URL removed***/articles/3389926460/sony-a7-iii-dynamic-range-and-high-iso-improve-over-its-predecessor

excellent point

I see this micro stuttering when you were panning. I wonder if the OIS is not that good in video mode. It like the OIS is trying to hold on stability and then they let go and it catches it again. 

Am reviving this zombie thread to say... I've got a CS1 now! Was at a price I couldn't resist 

If you are fine with the Rode sound (and why you shouldn't), then I would advise you to get rid of the Sennheisser, get an NTG-3, and later on buy the Audix. The 3 is very different than the 2, it doesn't replace it per se, and you can always do with a backup mic anyway (I always take 3 boom  mics with me on any job, and at least a lav more that I should, plus a stereo mic just in case).
NTG3 is different than the 416, I do not know how this rumor is sustained, it took me less than a year of 3 different jobs to realize that.
Obviously the Rode has a wider polar pattern and less frequency sensitivity to the two extremes (especially the low end is less pronounced than the 416). So, if two microphones have different patters and different acoustic qualities, then they are different in my book. I do not say that it is a bad microphone (it is excellent for the price), but that it is different. I would say that it favors more amateurish behavior on set, as it is more forgiving than the absolute 416.
After working a full 2 years on 3 TV documentary series with the Rode mic (and blimp) and various other jobs in the middle, I went and bought the 416 with the Sennheisser basket/blimp. Since then I am avoiding the Rode even if I have to offer my 416 for free; not because it is bad, I just prefer what I am getting from the 416. Also, the Sennheisser blimp is night and day against the Rode. I can't even stretch that enough. The new Cyclones are really bad at the moment, they are not ready to compete with the classic zeppelin design yet. I would say Sennheisser -> Rycote (classic design) -> K-Tek -> Rode 
If you have the power module, ME64/ME66 can be an excellent two way system for exteriors and interiors the same time. That used to be my main set when I started with sound. 
Since then I followed a bit the hype of the Rode microphones, but if I managed to get rid of the cheap NTG (they sell extremely low for new), I will go for a MKE600 for crude sound work, when the delicacy of the 416 doesn't cut it. Wish I could afford the 30 & 40, which are the mics I usually rent when I have the budget and the time.
The warmth that you are mentioning is the forgiveness of the polar pattern and less dialogue orientated acoustic quality of those mics. They are just different. Mics are like lenses, of course you can do a feature with a 50mm, but it is probably better to have a few more options. For indoors you need different microphones that those mentioned. A 64, a 40, an Oktava, the Audix, Schoeps (if you can afford them), a DPA e.t.c It is like to do an interview on a 1.5m wide room with only a 300mm lens; you probably need a 35mm for that..