Mark Romero 2

Arri does tend to have a green push. 

For the Tom Antos tests, I had my prefered list as pretty similar to what everyone else had (except switch around alexa and Red)
1) Ursa Mini Pro
2) BMPCC 6K
3) Red
4) Arri
Mind you, I was looking primarily at skin tones.
Maybe I am losing my mind, but the Arri skin tones just looked so green in that test.

Thanks for the compliments everyone! Means a lot from people on this forum as I know we are all pretty picky when it comes to this stuff. 😂😄
For the Z-cam I used a set of Rokinons 24, 34, 50, and 85 
Everything on the Panasonic was shot on a Rokinon 35mm 1.8
We also used a Sigma 14-24 2.8 for a few interior wide shots where we need that ultra wide FOV. 

I have a set of Canon FD lenses which I would have used had I owned them last year. The Rokinons do the job though. I really love Minolta lenses though they can't be adapted to EF so only some cameras can use them. 

I'll do a little breakdown for you if I can remember perfectly. 

0:05 Rokinon 35mm 1.4
0:12 Rokinon 85mm 1.4
0:15 Rokinon 50mm 1.4

0:18 Rokinon 50mm 1.4 (1.8 crop in post)

0:19 Rokinon 50mm 1.4

0:22 Rokinon 35mm 1.4

0:31-0:47 Minolta 35mm 1.8 (shot mostly wide open) 

0:50 Mavic 2 pro 

0:53-1:03 Minolta 35mm 1.8

0:52 Rokinon 24mm 1.4

1:06-1:20 Rokinon 35mm 1.4

well you get the idea at this point 

You have a better battery than I do.:) Mine lasts rather 2h. Nothing close to a GH4 or even GH5.

Shot mostly on the Zcam S6 with some Panasonic S1 in there too. I feel like the trailer was harder to make than the actual film. 😅

I am guessing that the original author @GURN is hoping for an ETA on version 5 of the EOSHD Pro Color for Sony a7S III.
Although I agree with others that it would be difficult to make the OP's post more vague than it already is.

Thanks for clarifying. My friend is going through a nightmare right now because Russian trolls have filed takedown notices on a documentary he self funded. They'll falsely claim a clip is being used illegally, which pulls down his video for the 30 or whatever days they have to file legal actions after he refutes it. Then when the video is finally restored another troll will do it all over again. It has happened 3 times so far, all because it documents Russian atrocities in Syria. It has made it pretty much impossible for him to recoup the tens of thousands of dollars he spent making it and he has no recourse other than going through YouTube's process since he's not an outlet like VICE that can reach out to YouTube easily and put an end to it. 

I should have included commentary/satire in my post, but that's not something that someone would pull my content for. My content is usually used when someone is talking about a specific vehicle and they don't have proper footage. So they grab mine. That use is absolutely not covered under Fair Use. 
I've been in publishing and production for 20 years and my application of the copyright tool is completely within legal guidelines (and YouTube has always agreed with my claims.) Even if my forum posts are as comprehensive as they should be. 😉

If you're doing this commercially and making money from it (which is the only type of person who should buy an FX6, unless you're a rich playboy getting a toy, in which case price doesn't matter... just get the FX6!), then the price gap between an a7S mk2 + basic accessories vs an FX6 is under two grand. In the long run, seems like a slam dunk decision to go the extra cost for the FX6. 

I'm familiar with those videos, although they were from a different time, when 2K was still a mainstream thing.  The one I watched was more recent, and in the context of newer 4K / 6K and even 8K cameras.  Obviously the ability to track things in 3D space accurately is pretty crucial if you're doing heavy VFX work like in Hollywood action blockbusters with a camera moving through a scene (say, on a boom) and then having to insert dozens/hundreds of 3D rendered objects into that scene, even extending to entire characters in the film.  I've seen tracking and how it works in small proportions of a single pixel, which may have considerable impact on the location of something if the object is far away from the reference points.  Obviously in cases like that having RAW 8K would be far nicer for the VFX team to reference rather than a blocky-by-comparison 2K image.
This is, of course, talking about capture resolution, and not about final output resolution.
I think there's a spectrum of shooters ranging from people who get everything right in-camera and almost won't even colour the footage, through to those who shoot for complete accuracy and want to do as much as possible in post.  It will depend on your preferences, your budget (to hire a VFX team), and your schedule.   
He mentioned in the video that he applied a compression deliberately, in order to investigate what effects it would have on the image quality.  He said he chose something akin to what gets streamed to peoples houses, or is in DSLR cameras.  I'd guess something in the 25Mbps ballpark.  
It probably goes without saying that it's more difficult to tell the differences between resolutions if they're both going through a cheese grater at the end (or beginning!) of the image pipeline!
Downsampling is definitely advantageous to overall image quality, for multiple reasons:
a 4K sensor gives you a <4K image after debayering, so downsampling means drawing from more pixels on the input than you're pushing out the output, which helps random noise gets partially eliminated due to the averaging that occurs in the downsampling process One thing that is noteworthy though is that if you're shooting with a compressed codec, for example h264/5, that the artefacts are often X pixels wide (for example, regardless of the resolution, the 'ripple' on a hard edge is likely to be the same number of pixels wide) so in that instance you may be better off recording your files in-camera in a higher resolution and then downscaling in post, where the downscaling process can average out more of those artefacts.  
This is something that's likely to be situation and camera dependent, but is worth a test if you're able to.  For example, shoot something in 6K and in 4K and put them both on a 4K timeline and see which looks cleaner, or 4K and 1080 on a 1080 timeline.   
The downside of this is that even if both resolutions had the same bitrate, and therefore file sizes, your computer will have to decode and then downscale more pixels from the higher resolution clip, increasing the computational load on your editing computer.
Like with all things, do your own testing and see what you can see 🙂 

I can try to upwrap this portion of the video for you. Regardless of how much compression was used, his point was to show that, even with a 4k or 8k image, compression plays a significant role in the final image. Just increasing the megapixels isn't enough and would decrease the quality, not increase it. Concretely, a 4k image compressed to 10mbps will not produce a better image than a 1080p image at 10mbps. His point was to show resolution doesn't necessarily mean a quality image; there are many factors, compression being one of them.
IMO, the issue of Long GOP and ALL-I is mute with modern encoders, but, if looking for a formula, 50mbps long-gop is equal to 100mbps ALL-I. You'll get significant space savings and 99% the quality in most situations. I cannot comment on working with Raw... I'd never do that for my purposes.

Regarding Compression Question I asked Above ^:
It starts at the 38:16 mark of the Part 2 video.
I guess what he is doing is trying to emulate what a highly compressed codec does when applied to a UHD or above resolution (spoiler alert: it leads to banding).
It was difficult to understand because 1) I have no idea how nuke works, and 2) he wasn't really explaining what he was trying to show (just showing it "with compression" as well as "without compression").
At least I guess that is what he is trying to show.
I don't know whether those compression artifacts are also caused by using Long GOP as opposed to All-I compression, or whether it is just a matter of bitrate and / or bit depth.
So would using a "consumer camera" like an S1 but recording externally in ProRes HQ or DNxHR HQX avoid that compression?
Or does one have to export RAW to avoid the compression artifacts?  

Link is valid for 72 hours, and the file size is 700MB. Music video has a NSFW due to language.

The other link is trash. Best to download the file instead of playing it, as my upload bandwidth is severely limited. Let's see if you can tell where the quality takes a dump, and that is where I went from shooting from H.264 to H.265.
https://www.myqnapcloud.com/smartshare/6g774717np2m262q22u220y2_6CkDTsX
Password: NOLIES
 

Everyone has always known the S5/S1/S1H take the full sensor and down-sample to 4K. The S1R is the only one of the bunch that does line skipping. That different feel from 4K is because it is recorded in H.264 while the 5.9K is in H.265. The only source I have is the over year old dpreview.com review articles on the S1 and S1R, and that I own the S1 and S1H.
And yes, my S1H has a fan.
4K is not noisier in my test. What you are seeing is more captured detail because the H.265 codec has a much softer image and is only 4:2:0 instead of the H.264 4:2:2. 
I recorded a music video for a client that had a mixture of 4K 24p H.264 and 4K 60p H.265 captures. I though I missed a focus pull or that something was wrong with my S1H when I looked at the clips side by side in the edit. The 4K 60p is so much softer, but if the whole video was shot in H.265, I might have missed it.

I don't know if you noticed @Lux Shots but there's banding in your picture? A big grey bar right through the centre. Or should that be gray and center? Anyway, I spotted it.

True, The AF is not dependable, but I am not personally convinced that you will be getting that much of an improvement shooting in RAW over the internal 10-Bit V-LOG codec.  Pretty much all the tests I have seen seem to show only minor improvements. 
It's a really good codec and in Resolve 17, just use DaVinci Wide Gamut and the HDR grading tools and you've got a ton of flexibility. 
As for autofocus...
 

I don't think I'll need another camera for the next couple of years.
I own 2x S1 and 1x S5 at the moment, and they are exactly what I  need at the moment.
The only 'downside' is that the camera's can't record 4:2:2 10-bit and full frame at 50 fps. But, I have now invested in anamorphic lenses and these camera's offer great anamorphic support. In camera desqueeze and even the IBIS takes the squeeze factor into account. Also nice is that the 4:3 crop of the sensor is a bit higher than the normal S35 / APS-C crop (and slightly narrower) and that means that the crop factor when shooting a 1.33x anamorphic lens is reduced with about 20% as opposed to shooting in s35 mode. That's close to APS-H territory which is IMO, all you need for video.
Add to that the great photo quality and decent AF (for photography), the relatively small filesizes, the great DR when shooting in V-LOG 10-bit and the price... I really can't complain.
Well if I have to complain, it's the lack of an OLPF. 

My Panasonic 24-105mm f4 is a bit 'clinical'.
It's not uber-sharp, but pretty sharp and a bit too 'videoy' in my opinion.
I'm not a fan of zooms anyway. Says the chap who recently bought this lens and ordered a Sigma 28-70mm f2.8
I have some more testing to do, but I believe the 1/8th mist will be my friend in this regard.
Also, the Sigma 65mm f2 I am looking at as a prime workhorse is supposed to be sharp, yet have characterful rendering, especially in the OOF areas. I've seen some fantastic results with it using a 1/8th mist so it bodes well...
Ultimately I'd rather have something more sharp than less sharp as it can always be reduced in post whereas if the lens is soft as baby poo in the first place...

Just an idea... why not use manual focus and let the person just go slightly in and out of focus? ...much less distracting than electronic pulsing.

No.
Please don't. 
The bare bare minimum should be the Deity S Mic 2. 

Same sensors maybe, but different bodies and company tech applied, different lenses, tweaked settings, filters, profiles/film sims/different logs, 10 bajillion LUTS (get my set for ONLY $17 from my on-line shop sorry sold out!!), differently calibrated screens, phones, tablets, laptops...
I couldn't tell you what end result came from what sensor only if I like the end result or not.

I assume you could as long as you use a program that has ProRes Raw support. There's no point in shooting raw if you can't adjust the raw data at the camera level.

I had the same problem when comparing the camera to my P4k. Even if sent at the exact white balance, the S5 had much different skin tones and had to have the tint/temp corrected.
Which leads me to the conclusion of this camera (Compared to the P4K)
S5 is a great camera that produces very sharp, clean images. Despite being shot in VLOG (With NR + Sharpness set to 0)  and with a Contax Zeiss 28mm, I still had to add blur to the footage to soften it a bit. At high ISO the grain is very fine, and pleasing. In the right settings it can produce a great image (Which can be said about a most cameras). IBIS is a plus. Huge plus. The 10bit codec holds up well, and I have no problem applying a grade via Dehancer. The LongGOP codec is not fun to work with, but then again nothing will edit as smooth as Prores/Braw.
So why did I return it. I feel something in the image is off. If you shoot a landscape / overview / nature, everything looks great. But as soon as you ad a person to the scene, something does not sit well. It is hard to explain. It has this look I am not a fan of, and I feel the motion is off. (I shoot at 25p and 180 shutter degree) Sunlight the camera is amazing. As are many. But as soon as you throw it in an uncontrolled light setting, it does retain the same nice look as the Blackmagic does.
The footage in the right settings looks great. But requires more massaging to get the look I want color wise.  
In the end I will be sticking with my P4K and will go down in a blaze of unstable shaky footage. 

There are definitely people who shoot with the likes of a FS7/FS5/FX6/EVA1/UMP/etc (what you'd call "a major equipment upgrade") who do the bulk of their bread and butter work shooting solo, and make a good living from it. But still.... you should at least be on the fringes of doing bigger crewed work, with a sizeable minority of your work of the scale that a gaffer / 1st AC / sound mixer / MUA / etc (perhaps not all four at once though, although even that still falls into the "very small crew" category) are being used as part of your work. And if not, do you really need that "upgrade"?