newfoundmass

Twice the price? No. $2,000? Yes. I'm really that not obsessed with auto focus. 

I get why people love the a6500 but at the end of the day these are deal killers for me and why I went with the GH5 and the G85 for my b-cam:
The battery life. Unless you set up some kind of external battery the number of batteries you'll eat through on an entire wedding day is ridiculous. This alone is a huge killer for me. 
The overheating. This scares the hell out of me, as someone that has never, ever had to worry about a camera overheating. Especially if I'm shooting an outdoor wedding on a hot day. It's probably more of a mental thing for me, but still, I like knowing that I'm not going to have to worry about my camera overheating, needing a break, or even shutting off when I really need it. 
The record limit. Not an issue if you're not shooting long form, however if you are, the recording limit can become a real pain in the but, especially if you're doing any external audio (which, for a wedding, you should for speeches, the actual wedding itself, etc.) Not a total deal killer but it's just a minor thing I'd prefer not to deal with. 
The rolling shutter. I don't mind a little rolling shutter but the a6xxx cameras have way too much. On a wedding shoot it's probably not a deal breaker, but overall, for me and my work, it's just too much. 
The 1080p is truly awful. I know a lot of people might not care because they will always shoot in 4K, but I still shoot regularly in 1080p for some projects and in my opinion it's unusable. 
The color science is not pleasing at all. Probably the worst out of all the major companies in my opinion. 
The form factor. This is obviously a much more personal issue, but I HATE the form factor. BLAH. 
Lens selection. It has gotten better, obviously, but still, it's still limited compared to other cameras and they come at a premium. Again though this is getting better. 
The menu system. Blah! 
All the other little issues others have raised. 
Overall I get the appeal of the low light performance and the auto focus. But they aren't enough for me personally to deal with all the other things that drive me nuts about these cameras. The A7iii does a lot to improve upon these issues, thankfully, and I think Sony will inevitably get better with this series of cameras. But right now they aren't for me. 

Yeah but with Gimbals now and Run n Gun doable because of IBIS, I think the Need for a large Cine camera is going the way of the Horse and Buggy. If they come out with ND's in a mirrorless, whether mechanical or electronic, I see no real need for a large camera body anymore for the average person. Sure Hollywood is using the Panavision stuff, but they are over the top, mega money cameras, that in reality you can't even buy.

I am not sure how / why they'd put 4K 60p internal into the A7S III when they didn't / couldn't with the FS5 II. Same with 10 bit. 
The A7 III really makes this a head scratcher, in terms of what they can pull out of their hat. I'm guessing that's the delay; one, letting the A7 III sell a ton and two, putting in the extra development time to make it a worthwhile successor. They have to have SOMETHING planned. But what? Some of these ideas people are throwing around  sound too fanciful / unrealistic, but at the same time, what else could justify the increase in cost that will inevitably come with it? Improved battery life, less overheating, better colors, and even better low light isn't going to be enough I don't think. The A7 III has made it so that the it's going to need SOMETHING big. 

To be fair, its an easy hack for the unlimited record time and the USB powering means you can run it for as long as you have space on the memory card.
Or until it goes on fire, which ever happens sooner.
 

I get why people love the a6500 but at the end of the day these are deal killers for me and why I went with the GH5 and the G85 for my b-cam:
The battery life. Unless you set up some kind of external battery the number of batteries you'll eat through on an entire wedding day is ridiculous. This alone is a huge killer for me. 
The overheating. This scares the hell out of me, as someone that has never, ever had to worry about a camera overheating. Especially if I'm shooting an outdoor wedding on a hot day. It's probably more of a mental thing for me, but still, I like knowing that I'm not going to have to worry about my camera overheating, needing a break, or even shutting off when I really need it. 
The record limit. Not an issue if you're not shooting long form, however if you are, the recording limit can become a real pain in the but, especially if you're doing any external audio (which, for a wedding, you should for speeches, the actual wedding itself, etc.) Not a total deal killer but it's just a minor thing I'd prefer not to deal with. 
The rolling shutter. I don't mind a little rolling shutter but the a6xxx cameras have way too much. On a wedding shoot it's probably not a deal breaker, but overall, for me and my work, it's just too much. 
The 1080p is truly awful. I know a lot of people might not care because they will always shoot in 4K, but I still shoot regularly in 1080p for some projects and in my opinion it's unusable. 
The color science is not pleasing at all. Probably the worst out of all the major companies in my opinion. 
The form factor. This is obviously a much more personal issue, but I HATE the form factor. BLAH. 
Lens selection. It has gotten better, obviously, but still, it's still limited compared to other cameras and they come at a premium. Again though this is getting better. 
The menu system. Blah! 
All the other little issues others have raised. 
Overall I get the appeal of the low light performance and the auto focus. But they aren't enough for me personally to deal with all the other things that drive me nuts about these cameras. The A7iii does a lot to improve upon these issues, thankfully, and I think Sony will inevitably get better with this series of cameras. But right now they aren't for me. 

In my opinion you are completely missing the whole point of this blog and the enjoyment of shooting with the mirrorless cameras.
Yes for many it is a job and the C200 will be perfect as a workhorse for them.
But the great thing about affordable mirrorless cameras is that it gives everyone the opportunity to wrangle a £1000 toy so that it produces images that rival a £8000 workhorse.
Shoot something artistic and have fun.
And for work, jobs, clients, there's the C200.
I am not going to become like C5D, NewShooter, etc. and start aiming the site solely at pros.
I get that a lot of pros read EOSHD but they will forever be a minority in the overall audience of 'cat shooters' as you so dismissively put it.

Conformed might be a better word than compress, but yes.

I wouldn't expect it to be the same quality as the SmallHD Focus. But if the monitor is 85% as good at much less than half the cost, then that is good enough for me!

Your lowlight test in the church with posted framegrabs shows enough of a basis to say: there are a lot of GH4 videos showing much, much, much better low light quality than that. Same sensor is not enough at all, if implemented badly. EM5 Mark 1 has the same sensor as GH4 and its HD material is even much worse than GH1 quality. GH4 has better lowlight than a A6000 or a Nikon D5300 has, to compare it with cameras of its time.

It's... adequate. Everything is fit together just fine, my NP-Fs engage and disengage nicely, and the HDMI jacks seem sturdy.
But I doubt it'd survive a drop onto cement, and the 1/4-20 mounting sockets wiggle a bit in the casing so it's a bit wobbly when you grab it to reposition it, and the Velcro on the sunhood is not all that velcro-ey... but come on, it's $150, none of this surprises me.
I haven't handled an A6/F6 or an F570 so I can't compare directly unfortunately. Whichever one of those has the metal casing is almost certainly better built than the A5, but they're also larger and heavier, which were minuses for me.
I shot with it again tonight and it's doing all that I need from it for my A7iii, meaning mostly just a higher-res display with better peaking.
LUTs, a touchscreen with a nice UI, and a brighter screen would all be real nice, but even if those were available in a 5" 1080p monitor right now, I don't think I'd want to spend for it anyways (assuming it would be at least $300-400), as it would depreciate so much once the NinjaV comes out. Even if I can only get $50 for the A5 at that time, it's worth it. And for $50 I'll actually just keep it as a backup.

Despite owning it for two years I've never done 120 fps with it, and I don't have it near me right now, but I'm guessing the 120 fps is slowed down in camera, so 50 mbps isn't actually being used for true 120 fps but the slowed down version that plays at 24/30 fps because 50 mbps would definitely be too little for actual 120 fps video. It'd be 1/4 the quality of 30 fps at 50 mbps and 1/2 the quality of 60 fps at 50 mbps. 

I've debated chiming in, because the variable ND I use is a low budget option, but I've been using a Tyfoto variable ND after a friend recommended it to me almost a year ago. I've only really seen Nigel Barros review it since I've owned mine, so I'm not sure how well known they are, but I've been pleased with mine. I'm admittedly a sucker for budget gear, though! 
 

As far as VNDs go, I have always used them and have always been happy with them. But I have two points of criteria after testing a lot of cheap VNDs and a couple moderately priced ones...
1. I will only use VNDs that have hard stops.
As most on here know, due to the nature of VNDs, if you push them into no man’s land, you can get the dreaded X pattern and in most instances you won’t notice it until after you get the footage into the computer. And strangely enough, there aren’t that many brands that offer the hard stops.
2. Color neutrality - most VNDs will have a color cast, especially the cheaper ones.
With some cheap ones, like the Fotga, you’ll get a crazy greenish/brown color cast but you do gain a very specific look that is interesting in its own way, so for the price and a specific shoot, the Fotga is worth the $10.
But most of the time I don’t want any color cast.
So there are really only two brands I use now... 
• Bower - cheap around $30 a filter with neutral color and hard stops.
These were shot wide open with an f/2 lens or faster and a Bower VND...

• B+W Vario ND - they’re more expensive with less stops of ND but they are better built with a really nice coating... gotta love Schott Glass. And the less stops actually keeps me honest... forcing me to stop down my lens sometimes.
These were also shot with an f/2 lens or faster using the B+W Vario ND...

I got my Lilliput A5 last week, used it on a quick gig the next day with my A7iii. I'm satisfied with it, happy even, considering the price. I like the size, resolution and super low weight. The buttons and menu are a little fiddly but not too bad. Can't figure out how to re-assign the single function button. The brightness was better than I was expecting. It'll do just fine for me until the NinjaV comes out.

That monitor really has gotten rave reviews from everyone. The skeptic in me though always hates it when everyone releases reviews around the same time, indicating they all got their free shipment for review at around the same time, ha ha. 

@newfoundmass, exactly! And I'm sure I'll get more than three years usage out of a sub $200 monitor, even if worst case scenario it gets downgraded to a secondary monitor. 

It was one person shooting like 12 musicians moving around in a disorganized manner, in not ideal conditions, while trying to feature every one of them. Ya'll have really high expectations given the circumstances. ?
Looking at his portfolio, the guy that shot it has done work for Adidas and ASICS in Germany, as well as music videos, so he seems to be doing pretty good for himself

Nah, a hobbyist would have used a slider, drone, and some sort of other unnecessary tool. 
This is well shot and very intentionally feels candid and on the fly. Any cuts would also ruin the feel they are going for. 

How can anyone tell how many stops of DR this camera has or doesn’t have under the shooting circumstances? 
Between the gazillion reflective surfaces, the white roof, the most annoying cloud coverage for shooting a wide angle with people, and the awesome YouTube compression, I’d say the video turned out fairly well under the circumstances.
I didn’t even mention the patterns that dominate the frame at every single turn.
And if you look up the shooter’s web site, there is quality work there.
If I have to guess what camera was used... the colors look like a Panasonic to me, but I’m unsure to be honest.

The Lilliput A7S has some latency but most monitors using hdmi do, don't they? I can't think of one that doesn't that I've used, though some are worse than others. I'm guessing their 5 inch is similar but manageable. 
For nailing focus, exposure, framing, playback for a client, etc. these budget monitors are well worth it, in my opinion. If I get 3+ years out of a monitor, that cost me $150, that does everything I need it to do then I'm happy. My personal opinion is, while it's great that a lot of these monitors are built to last even longer, the way technology is constantly evolving and moving forward it's hard to justify spending tons of money on it when there's a good chance it'll be obsolete before long. I say this as someone that has an Atomos Ninja 2 I bought in 2014 that become pretty obsolete pretty quickly as the 4k era came rushing in. I'd be lucky to get $175 for it on eBay, so I just use it now as a recorder for old footage I'm transferring. 

I'm Jewish, does that count? And my grandparents met while living in Scotland! So maybe. 
Anyway, monitors last for years but also tech advances pretty quick. Would suck to buy a SmallHD 502 only for a Samauri V to be announced the next day. 
Additionally, why spend money I don't have to? When I can put it instead towards something more important: sound gear. 
Finally, if I'm working on the camera side of things I'd often be working on very low budget shoots so I'd rather not bring expensive gear to the set anyway!
Having cheap gear is nice sometimes, I could for instance do a long term loan of my Feelworld FW759 to a DoP for a feature film and not have any worries over it because it is so cheap anyway if the worst was to happen. (It didn't, I got it returned just the other week at the wrap party)

"Compact" is super vague, to some people the Nikon D7500 is a "compact 4K" camera (certainly is next to a D850 or D5! Or any 4K cinema camera), while there would be vlogs who think the RX100 is too bulky as it isn't as compact as their 4K smartphone!

 

Yes, it is better a manufacturer errs towards doing "too much" with their promo videos than "too little". 

In fact, I'd argue it is near on impossible for a camera manufacturer to go over the top with their promo videos! They could do a full on next Avatar or Lord of the Rings productions purely to promote their new camera and it still wouldn't be too "over the top"! ha
I'm guessing they leaked these out purely by accident, it wasn't intentional?

Edit: nope, I browsed around the videos and I see comments and replies from the YT channel, this wasn't any "accidental" uploading, very intentional!
 

Exactly. 

It is great to improve the camera after release and push it forward. BUT you still at least have to start from a fairly high level of competency! 
 
At the very least they should have been unlisted videos, to help indicate this. 

Thanks Man.. Looks Like If I strip my NX1 down to nothing and use the PWR Zoom or my Pancakes it's a go.