IronFilm

I have a Pentax 645 to Nikon F adapter, so then I can put my medium format glass on a speed booster :-) Only get a 0.71x of course, but is something! And waaaay cheaper than buying a Pentax 645Z! (though I'd love to own one)

You make an interesting point... except the analogy is flawed as many many blind taste tests show people can not tell the difference between Coca Cola and its competitors.

If you live somewhere with a decent film school which is free, or at least low cost, then sure.... go for it! But if it is an option of spending several years at uni while you get deeper and deeper in debt vs.... working for even very low pay (but not getting in debt) while gaining several years of experience, then I'm skeptical if uni is the better choice here?

Absolutely keep your Nikon F lenses! Nikon F mount is a great mount, which is easily adaptable to whatever new camera you get. I have most of my lens collection in Nikon F mount. If I was in your shoes I'd simply get a Nikon D5200 and call it a day. Maybe get a wide angle lens too for it (Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 and Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 is what I have), and/or an external monitor too (a tripod would be handy as well, as I doubt any of yours has fluid head). Getting the D750 is also a good option, but I really think it is a better idea to go with a much cheaper camera (D5200 is going new for just US$399 at the moment) as you're just starting out with video then in a year or two pick up a better one. (as technology improves so fast, and prices come down so quick) Plus the D5200 is a very fine camera (I am using it professionally at the moment for video work): http://www.eoshd.com/2013/02/nikon-d5200-vs-canon-5d-mark-iii/ http://www.eoshd.com/2013/02/nikon-d5200-review/ http://rungunshoot.com/nikon-d5200-studio-and-documentary-footage/ A couple of other options to consider, is the Sony A5100 or A6000 (I just picked up a near new A5100 for just US$330! Thank you Black Friday!). http://www.eoshd.com/2014/04/surprise-sony-alpha-a6000-video-mode-huge-improvement/ Or Sony A7s or Panasonic GH4 (which are the top two at the moment, well and maybe the NX1), but again as I said earlier because this is your first video camera I'd go with something cheaper.

Schnorgie, is it not PAL/NTSC switchable?? **Sony Cyber-shot RX100 II M2 Wi-Fi Digital Camera 32 GB SD Card Case Bundle, US$389** http://www.ebay.com/itm/311156217623 Hmmm..... I'm getting really tempted to get one myself now! Anything else I'm missing instead? The RX100mk3 doesn't seem like it is worth it for the extra price, and as lovely as the LX100, it too is also a lot more expensive.

As a *showreel* it absolutely needs to be shorter.

Impressive. Interesting to read how they were using a camera which only got released the week before they started shooting!

I totally agree it *could* be better. But nooo... Canon hasn't done that. I'm sure if Canon had, then we'd be hearing about it in the blogsphere from a million Canon fanboys.

That "kit lens" however adds an extra $1.3k! That is one damn expensive kit lens. :-o Which very very strangely is *more* than it costs to buy that lens by itself: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1022903-REG/samsung_16_50mm_f_2_2_8_s_ed.html What the heck is the pricing/marketing guy at Samsung smoking.... !

Shows how m4/3 is the strongest of all the mount systems! Panasonic, Olympus, Blackmagic Design, Kodak, and now JVC are all backing the system! Plus many third party manufacturers such as SLR Magic, Sigma, Tokina, etc...

Why did you shot half in crop mode? (as you say rolling shutter wasn't an issue for you)

rndmtsk: ha! The Alexa 65 makes the Sony FS7 look CHEAP! So yeah, don't think that is an option here for most of us.

I just don't like how people constantly state Canon was "first", which reinforces people's misconceptions about Canon. As not only is not technically true (as that is the D90, which I too started out with), but also the general gist of it isn't true either. As Canon didn't *bring* video to the indie filmmakers, not at all. They accidentally stumbled across it. (as can be seen in how they acted with their subsequent DSLRs, more or less no video improvement. As they were not "bringing it", was just a fluke)

I'll vote for the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 too, I use it on a RJ Lens Turbo on my BMPCC.

False, and very unfortunately an extremely commonly believed falsehood. But it was Nikon who was first to implement video in a DSLR. With the Nikon D90.

tomekk, that would indeed be sadly (and unsurprisingly) true based on this and what we know about Canon.

Well, the obvious answer for you then is to get the Sony A5100. Though personally for a newbie I'd recommend they get the Panasonic G6 as their first camera (if they have the budget for it, otherwise a Panasonic GH1 or Sony NEX-5N is the way to go). I wouldn't worry about the sensor size of APS-C vs m4/3, you often have to stop down anyway to get enough usable DoF, so that cancels out any benefit there of having APS-C. Plus, once you use a cheap RJ Lens Turbo (it is great, I use one!) on your m4/3 camera, you've got Super 35mm / APS-C FoV now.

zenpm, yes you can film in APS-C mode.

Surely if he got this "AMAZING" and very expensive Nikon camera, he must have lots and lots of very nice Nikon lenses? (well.... he should, but I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't?) Thus logically a good camera to get is the Nikon D5200, it will be a huge leap up in quality (can match stills from full frame from only a few years ago, while matching 5DmkIII for video) while still being very cheap. Or more likely, the D7100 as I bet his lenses don't have an AF motor built into many of them. Another option is go mirrorless, and he can keep on using his lenses with that. Such as the Sony A7, which can be found for under US$1k on special. If you want to go down the path of a fixed lens camera (rather than an intechangeable lens one, which I reckon is a way better idea), this article lays out good reasons to go for the RX10: http://www.oldmaninmotion.com/four-great-still-shooting-feats-my-sub-1k-mirrorless-can-do-that-my-3k-dslr-cant/ I'm curious as to what camera he got back in 2003, I would guess a Nikon D100? (which isn't so terribly terrible is it? I started out on D50, which is much newer but only marginally better if that)

If you have budgetary constraints (don't we all!), and this is your first camera, then certainly don't get the GH4 or A7s. I'd get a cheaper camera, and learn on that (will be a steep learning curve! But that can be a good thing). But I wouldn't pick the Sony A3000. it is a very cheap and decent camera, there is worse choices a person could make. But I'd recommend you instead go with a Panasonic GH1 or Sony NEX-5N for about the same price. Then get perhaps a couple of native mount lenses (such as the kit lens, and a normal FoV prime, as each would be fairly cheap and versatile). Then invest the remainder of your budget in Nikon F mount lenses and a focal reducer. Then in 18 months from now (or who knows what time period, more or less, whenever you feel ready), you will be able to pick up the Panasonic GH4 or Sony A7s super cheap, or get whatever the latest hot new thing is (GH5/D7300/A8s/5DmkIV/NX2/EM-2/K-4/etc, or who knows what!) and you'll be able to take along all your Nikon lenses to your next platform! :-)

Is it still coming or have I somehow missed it? Really looking forward to more info from you on the A7s, it is looking like a very tempting camera. Am trying to decide between getting the A7s to shoot a feature film with, or using the BMCC EF and BMPCC which we already have.

How beneficial is the Shogun for the GH4? If I am planning to buy the Ninja Blade right now, and I have no 4K camera, but I know I will be buying a GH4 in six months from now, does it still make sense to get a Shogun instead of a Ninja Blade??

So 43rumors linked to this in reference to a possible raw recording firmware update for the GH4. http://www.43rumors.com/atomos-and-panasonic-confirm-raw-4k-444-could-come-on-the-gh4-via-firmware-upgrade/

Last update to this was a month ago, wondering if any progress/news has happened recently? (especially from Sony, or firmware updates)

http://***URL not allowed***/sony-f55-review-music-video/ Oh my goodness wow, once you see it... it can't be unseen! I'm amazed that something like that (the blue being over exposed and clipping) is allowed and regarded as acceptable on such an expensive camera as the Sony F55.