jcs

some small adjustment  (to the sony footage ?) and you can't keep them apart.

oh cool i missed this. so is this correct jcs? clearly the sony is on the left lol. look at that magenta lipstick! still, in spite of that skin tones are v reasonable

they definitely can. good work, thanks for sharing this
so which canon is which? id be interested in knowing which take on the lipstick color/reds/oranges is most accurate

Cool, thx for the feedback. Looks they can work together for multicam shoots without too much post work.

This was our test to see how easy it would be to match these cameras. How would you make the camera settings more equivalent?

JCS - You look attractive with a blonde wig and glossy lipstick.  Just kidding. 
Only see differences if looking closely.   Dress 2 and 3 - close color match.  Pink bracelet - closer match on 1 and 2.  And so on.  Vast majority will not see any differences.  Keep up the good work.  Cheers.

A7s II, C300 II, 1DX II.
motivation: lipstick of 2 an 3 have the same color. 3 best detail.

Did some tests with the 1DX II today. We plan to use the 1DX II with the C300 II for multicam shoots (and with the A7S II as well).
After testing the builtin profiles and getting close to something I liked with a modified Faithful profile, I created a custom picture profile using Canon's Picture Style Editor. The goal was to emulate CLog: boost shadows and pull highlights (and look decent straight out of camera). I tried a few variations and below is the result I felt was a good start:
Lens: Canon 24-105, 1/50, F5, ISO 1600, Highly Tone Priority On, custom picture profile. Full frame IPB 23.98 1080p, PADF, internal camera mic, mixed lighting (challenging LED practical lights (green bias/spike), monitor lights, and a decent LED in the background).
Thoughts: I like the camera. It does a nice job in mixed lighting, it looks pretty good out of the box and even better with a custom picture profile. RS is present but low. 4K60 plays back fine in PP CC. Transcoding to much smaller H.264 IPB 4K files at 250Mbps looks decent when not pixel peeping (mostly loses noise detail), might try to optimize further. Currently everything we create is for online 420 IPB delivery (YouTube, Vimeo).
I haven't done low light tests yet, however pulling up the shadows is very clean, and the noise grain is pleasing. Canon's full frame 1080p isn't as good as Sony's full frame (4K 100Mbps downscaled to 1080p in post). It's not just the downscale where the A7S II is better, the Canon is doing lower quality pixel binning/skipping as there is aliasing and moire (see my glasses frame edges). The 1DX II looks amazing in 4K, however it's a 1.33 crop. Thus for full frame 1080p the A7S II looks better (when RS won't cause an issue). For internet delivery and the average viewer, the difference probably isn't important. If the quality difference becomes important, we can shoot in 4K with a 1.33 crop (and purchase more hard drives). We're currently shooting with the C300 II in 50Mbps 1080p IPB- quality is more than sufficient, including for green screen (I'll post technical details and a clip in another thread).
The 1DX II uses new batteries, which are proprietary and very expensive compared to 5D3 batteries (and not currently available- should be available soon). Size wise, the 1DX II is like a 5D3 with the battery grip built in.
The AF is pretty good, it keeps tracking even when the head is turned sideways: their face detector is trained beyond just straight on, which is cool. AF noise is somewhat loud; less of an issue when not using the built in mic (same for C300 II). Canon's EF-S STM lenses can't be mounted to full frame cameras without modification, so there's currently limited options for quiet AF FF EF lenses (e.g. the Canon 40mm F2.8, 50mm F1.8, and 24-105 F3.5-5.6 EF STM)).
In summary: with a custom picture profile to boost shadows and pull highlights (attached to this post) along with Highlight Tone Priority enabled, it's possible to get close to CLog, and image quality, noise quality, skintones, RS, and AF are really nice.
 
1DX2e_Logish.pf3

This was done by eye- I don't know how Canon implements CLog internally. I created a low-contrast S-curve and a few minor color tweaks. This boosts the shadows and flattens the highlights, similar to how CLog looks (not really a log gamma, more log-ish). I can try to match CLog more carefully using the C300 II as reference. Max DR for the C300 II requires Canon Log 2, which is basically Arri LogC (along with Canon's Cinema color and "Production" matrix emulates ARRI (can use ARRI 3D LUTs etc.)).
The DR seems similar to the C300 II (haven't shot them side-by-side yet). Based on the noise so far, the 1DX II might be better than the C300 II for low light. The DR and low light performance on the C300 II and 1DX II are better than 5D3 RAW, however the 5D3 RAW can look amazing when processed with ACR, Resolve, etc. The newer cameras have lower RS vs. the 5D3. A 5D4 with 10+bit very high quality 1080p and the same DR as the 1DX II (and PDAF) would be more useful than 4K for our needs.

Did some tests with the 1DX II today. We plan to use the 1DX II with the C300 II for multicam shoots (and with the A7S II as well).
After testing the builtin profiles and getting close to something I liked with a modified Faithful profile, I created a custom picture profile using Canon's Picture Style Editor. The goal was to emulate CLog: boost shadows and pull highlights (and look decent straight out of camera). I tried a few variations and below is the result I felt was a good start:
Lens: Canon 24-105, 1/50, F5, ISO 1600, Highly Tone Priority On, custom picture profile. Full frame IPB 23.98 1080p, PADF, internal camera mic, mixed lighting (challenging LED practical lights (green bias/spike), monitor lights, and a decent LED in the background).
Thoughts: I like the camera. It does a nice job in mixed lighting, it looks pretty good out of the box and even better with a custom picture profile. RS is present but low. 4K60 plays back fine in PP CC. Transcoding to much smaller H.264 IPB 4K files at 250Mbps looks decent when not pixel peeping (mostly loses noise detail), might try to optimize further. Currently everything we create is for online 420 IPB delivery (YouTube, Vimeo).
I haven't done low light tests yet, however pulling up the shadows is very clean, and the noise grain is pleasing. Canon's full frame 1080p isn't as good as Sony's full frame (4K 100Mbps downscaled to 1080p in post). It's not just the downscale where the A7S II is better, the Canon is doing lower quality pixel binning/skipping as there is aliasing and moire (see my glasses frame edges). The 1DX II looks amazing in 4K, however it's a 1.33 crop. Thus for full frame 1080p the A7S II looks better (when RS won't cause an issue). For internet delivery and the average viewer, the difference probably isn't important. If the quality difference becomes important, we can shoot in 4K with a 1.33 crop (and purchase more hard drives). We're currently shooting with the C300 II in 50Mbps 1080p IPB- quality is more than sufficient, including for green screen (I'll post technical details and a clip in another thread).
The 1DX II uses new batteries, which are proprietary and very expensive compared to 5D3 batteries (and not currently available- should be available soon). Size wise, the 1DX II is like a 5D3 with the battery grip built in.
The AF is pretty good, it keeps tracking even when the head is turned sideways: their face detector is trained beyond just straight on, which is cool. AF noise is somewhat loud; less of an issue when not using the built in mic (same for C300 II). Canon's EF-S STM lenses can't be mounted to full frame cameras without modification, so there's currently limited options for quiet AF FF EF lenses (e.g. the Canon 40mm F2.8, 50mm F1.8, and 24-105 F3.5-5.6 EF STM)).
In summary: with a custom picture profile to boost shadows and pull highlights (attached to this post) along with Highlight Tone Priority enabled, it's possible to get close to CLog, and image quality, noise quality, skintones, RS, and AF are really nice.
 
1DX2e_Logish.pf3

This was done by eye- I don't know how Canon implements CLog internally. I created a low-contrast S-curve and a few minor color tweaks. This boosts the shadows and flattens the highlights, similar to how CLog looks (not really a log gamma, more log-ish). I can try to match CLog more carefully using the C300 II as reference. Max DR for the C300 II requires Canon Log 2, which is basically Arri LogC (along with Canon's Cinema color and "Production" matrix emulates ARRI (can use ARRI 3D LUTs etc.)).
The DR seems similar to the C300 II (haven't shot them side-by-side yet). Based on the noise so far, the 1DX II might be better than the C300 II for low light. The DR and low light performance on the C300 II and 1DX II are better than 5D3 RAW, however the 5D3 RAW can look amazing when processed with ACR, Resolve, etc. The newer cameras have lower RS vs. the 5D3. A 5D4 with 10+bit very high quality 1080p and the same DR as the 1DX II (and PDAF) would be more useful than 4K for our needs.

A7sII is CADF only, the faster AF achieved by Metabones and others is because of the PADF in the A7rII and a6300. The Fotodiox AF adapter is functional on the A7s, but it's awful compared to the A7rII. 
As far as AF during video, the Sigma MC11 has been shown to work with some lenses on the A7rII. Beyond that you will need a Sony lens if you want AF with video. 
AF-c doesn't work with my A7rII and MBIV while shooting video. 

https://***URL not allowed***/sony-a7s-ii-vs-a7r-ii-test-which-one/
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?342205-A7RIi-vs-A7SII-going-crazy-cannot-choose
 

The GH4 appears to be sharper 4K vs. the A7S II. I used to prefer the GH4 colors for skintones vs. the A7S, however the A7S II with SGamut3.cine and Slog2 or Cine2 gamma has better skintones vs. the GH4 (Natural or Portrait). Post-sharpening the A7S II looks similar to the GH4. I recently did a test trying to get the GH4 (Portrait) to match the A7S II for skintones (SGamut3.cine and Slog2/Cine2)- couldn't do it in a reasonable amount of time (colors seemed limited, perhaps related to DR, like comparing near-B&W to color). The GH4 footage looked very nice and detailed, however the colors were very limited compared to the A7S II. Cranking up the saturation or vibrance didn't help.
I use the ARRI Alexa SL profile Input LUT in Lumetri (PP CC) to get really nice skintones with the A7S II and SGamut3.cine+Slog2+16 Saturation (exposed 1.7 over). This combo is so nice for skintones, as good or better than 5D3 RAW, along with 4K, amazing DR, and tiny files. Doing a multicam shoot with the C300 II soon, it should match very well (static cameras; the A7S II has poor RS compared to the C300 II, and of course very poor AF compared to the C300 II's PDAF (A7R II's PDAF is much better than the A7S II's)). I wanted to use the GH4 for another camera angle, next I'll try the old A7S or FS700.
Without doing comparisons, the GH4 is a nice compact 4K camera, especially for outdoor, well-lit shots. With the Voigtlander 25mm F.95, it's not too shabby in lower light shots.

5D RAW is good enough for projection on a big screen. Made it several times with always good results. DCP in jpeg2k and you're done. Just have to upscale your size from the native 1920x1080 to 2K. Projectors accept only DCI standards and no 1080...
 
Concerning the project : a doc. For documentary for sure i'd go with an A7SII and not a 5D RAW... By far. I've got the two bodies at home and as jcs said, the only major drawback of the A7SII is the jello effect from the Rolling shutter technology... Too bad really. Annoying even on tripod with micro jitters. But when you know it you do with it. The A7SII has by far more little files, has better dynamic, and better low light abilities... Everything i would go with for a documentary. Get a power bank like an Anker astro E7 26800 mAh and you have more than 2 days of shooting with you.
 
After using the A7SII, i never use anymore my 5D for video... I only use it for pictures, where it shines a lot compared to the A7SII.

Hey Dave your A7S II footage looks better to me than the GH4 footage you posted here. I don't change Color Phase, Color Depth, or Black Gamma, and use Detail -3. The ARRI SL LUT in PP CC gets the skintones looking nice with one click (sometimes need to increase Exposure in Lumetri after this LUT). I expose in camera similarly (typically +1.7).
I still prefer the C300 II color, detail, and of course the PDAF, however the A7S II is very impressive considering the cost. Sony will probably have another A7x out by the time the 5D4 is released, and if Sony has further improved the color and PDAF (A7R II descendent), Canon will have its work cut out to compete. The 1DX II looks nice, but nothing I've seen so far is better than the A7S II in terms of skintone color (from my own tests side-by-side with the C300 II), highlights, and low light (A7S II has poor RS, AF is almost useless, can't do 4K60, though it does have IBIS (OK but not great)).

When we do our next shoot (vs. just me doing tests), I'll get some footage with the GH4 along with the A7S, A7S II, and C300 II.

I watched 70D internal H.264 projected on the big screen (major theater) and it looked fine. 5D3 RAW will look even better.
After a bit of matching the A7S II to the C300 II in 4K, 5D3 RAW is finished for me. I can now get better skintones with less effort (and tiny 100Mbit/s files) on the A7S II with SGamut3.cine+Slog2+16 Saturation and ARRI Alexa SL LUT in PP CC (plus additional tweaks which are easy once learned). The C300 II is of course better, but not by much for YouTube delivery (AF, RS, audio, and post gradability are vastly better on the C300 II. A7S II can't AF any Canon lenses in video mode (also not usable for stills: the 5D3 rules for stills)). For ultra gradability in post, 5D3 RAW is still a player with amazing performance for the cost. It will look great on the big screen (full 1080 ML RAW capture).

The GH4 appears to be sharper 4K vs. the A7S II. I used to prefer the GH4 colors for skintones vs. the A7S, however the A7S II with SGamut3.cine and Slog2 or Cine2 gamma has better skintones vs. the GH4 (Natural or Portrait). Post-sharpening the A7S II looks similar to the GH4. I recently did a test trying to get the GH4 (Portrait) to match the A7S II for skintones (SGamut3.cine and Slog2/Cine2)- couldn't do it in a reasonable amount of time (colors seemed limited, perhaps related to DR, like comparing near-B&W to color). The GH4 footage looked very nice and detailed, however the colors were very limited compared to the A7S II. Cranking up the saturation or vibrance didn't help.
I use the ARRI Alexa SL profile Input LUT in Lumetri (PP CC) to get really nice skintones with the A7S II and SGamut3.cine+Slog2+16 Saturation (exposed 1.7 over). This combo is so nice for skintones, as good or better than 5D3 RAW, along with 4K, amazing DR, and tiny files. Doing a multicam shoot with the C300 II soon, it should match very well (static cameras; the A7S II has poor RS compared to the C300 II, and of course very poor AF compared to the C300 II's PDAF (A7R II's PDAF is much better than the A7S II's)). I wanted to use the GH4 for another camera angle, next I'll try the old A7S or FS700.
Without doing comparisons, the GH4 is a nice compact 4K camera, especially for outdoor, well-lit shots. With the Voigtlander 25mm F.95, it's not too shabby in lower light shots.

A series pilot. Pretty edgy stuff. 
No, the spot version. This is because I need the greater "concentrated" power going through the diffusor. Personally I never put LED panels on people without large diffusion, unless the light is supposed to be weird or effect-ish. Even a 12"x12" panel is really too small to not be a hard light. The bomb factor is the way the umbrella mount is already built into the standard included mounts Aputure includes with these lights.
Now, the 43" shoot-though diffusor umbrellas - those were really expensive....$13 each, heh...
 
EDIT: The lightstorm has great power, but the separate power supply would be too much of a problem for this application. A 1000-bulb panel runnning on V-Mount batteries would also work, but I'd have to rig up a different mount to get the umbrellas to quickly and easily sit in the right spot. We rigged up a little extra hardware to use both 672's next to each other behind one umbrella when we need more power. works absolutely perfectly.
As long as you don't drop them on concrete, the 672's are just KILLER tools.

http://petapixel.com/2016/04/28/sony-patents-contact-lens-camera-joins-google-samsung/

We use the LS-1S, LS-1/2 (97 CRI), 528W, 528S, and H198, in daylight color. They all work great, especially for skin tones (better than our more expensive Dracast LEDs, which are only used for bounce/back fill now). Look forward to seeing the variable spot/Fresnels from Aputure (we use a Fiilex P360EX- very nice but not variable beam angle or very bright (can swap in/out the plastic Fresnel insert).

1 Dracast LED1000 Pro Daylight and 1 Dracast  LED1000 Pro BiColor . Solid construction however the Aputure render skin tones better.

We use the LS-1S, LS-1/2 (97 CRI), 528W, 528S, and H198, in daylight color. They all work great, especially for skin tones (better than our more expensive Dracast LEDs, which are only used for bounce/back fill now). Look forward to seeing the variable spot/Fresnels from Aputure (we use a Fiilex P360EX- very nice but not variable beam angle or very bright (can swap in/out the plastic Fresnel insert).

Getting people to watch and love your movie is easy. Simply make a great movie. This will result in the movie getting shared (word of mouth, link via email, text, Facebook, Twitter, etc.), and if the viral coefficient is greater than 1.0, the movie has a chance to become exponentially popular and thus successful ("viral").