IronFilm

The fact Dual IS was on and you could still get maybe 2 hours continuous is impressive.   This camera really has me interested. 

But a general guide doesn't exist, unless your general guide is a discussion about the pros and cons of each camera for the situation. A poll provides no context. What's best for a feature film? Well, what's your budget? What sort of film? Is it a sci-fi involving green screen and VFX, or a gritty drama? Is it a studio set-up with jibs and dollies and steadicams, or will you be handheld for the whole thing? What's the intended output (i.e. do you need 4k)? Do you have the budget for a lighting and grip package? There's so many variables that it's impossible to say 'Blackmagic Cinema Camera'. The BMCC, for example, is a worse choice for low light than say an A7sII or a 5DIII. So is your film being shot at night without lighting, or on a set with a full lighting setup?
The premise of the thread is not a bad one, but it should be as a discussion, not a poll with a definitive, or 'general' answer.

Personally if I had to choose a ~$1000 1080p camera, I'd go with the F3.

They do deliver... I've had my eye on these for some time, was just waiting for the "plus" version (with V-mount plate).
 

No, it's not like that. It's like saying you can't expect a $3,000 2016 model Ford to perform like a top of the line 2010 model Ferrari. 
My point is Sony already rivals, and in some cases beats Arri, depending who you're talking to. The F65 is a very different camera to the Alexa, of course. But $3,000 cameras, despite being expensive to some, are still built to a price point. 
Let's not forget the F3, lauded by many as the 'mini Alexa' - a camera that also happened to hit the market in 2010, and also cost ~$16k - cheap! 
If Sony could and/or wanted to, they could put that sort of sensor into a $3,000 camera. But they won't. They'd rather you spend $10k+ on an FS7, F5, F55, F65 etc.
The fact that the Alexa still sells at the price point that it does is the reason you can't get an Alexa image in a $3,000 body. If Arri brought something new out, and decided to offload Alexas for $5k, you can bet your bottom dollar that other companies would be selling their Alexa-matching sensors for $3k.
Take a look at the VaricamLT. It has dual-ISO, and an amazing picture, all for ~$20-30k. It can even come with an EF mount. Cheap!
I'm just saying - the reason you can't get an image that rivals an Alexa for $3k is not because no-one can figure it out, or are not allowed to...

Why should they have to? Why should a consumer camera have to match a $50k+ high-end cinema camera? I would argue that the F55 matches, and the F65 beats the Alexa in many areas - of course both have differing looks to the Alexa.
I just don't really understand the comment. Of course a $3,000 camera doesn't 'match' the Alexa.

Seems like the GX85 would be okay.  
You stay in M43, shoot 4K, and you get a nice little camera that can stabilize your hand held shots.  I wouldn't nessecarily invest in a bunch of new glass if you don't really have to.  However, only you know how much low-light you're trying to deal with.  Personally, I've never had too much trouble with LUMIX cameras in low light, but I also have a f1.2 lens with a speed booster for darker shots, which helps tremendously.
As for the "pro"ness of it all, here's my anecdote:  During my wedding I gave my GM1 to my 16 year old nephew.  It had the Oly 45mm 1.8 lens on it.  With the f-stop wide open, aperture priority, and everything else set on automatic, I told him to go to town, frame up faces at eye level from 5 feet away, and shoot stills of everyone at the reception.  No flash, available light.  Because of those simple rules, the nice magic hour light that was filtering into the ballroom, and his personality of being willing and able to effortless socialize with strangers and warmly interact with him, he got twice as many good photographs of the reception than the wedding photog that was paid thousands of dollars to be there and was running around nervously with a Canon 1D, 5 different lenses, and a flash.  Our wedding album is half of my nephew's shots.
And we got all those pictures simply because he was curious about the little camera I was carrying around so I thought I'd let him use it and see what happened.
This incident just shows that photography is more about how one interacts with the environment they're in and takes advantage of it rather than the gear.  (Although the gear does help if you're also good at the craft of it all.)
Anyway, something to consider.

Kinemini 4K? Rock solid camera, great image quality, 2K Cineform, competent hfr, the ability to add a speed booster, and decent low light performance. 

I'm also looking to upgrade from the D750, which indeed has nice colors & DR but is soft (a la 5D III) and can't be pushed much in post. i tried the ursa mini 4.6k (which btw is useable up until 1600, it's the regular 4K that has base iso 400) and has by far the best image for the asking price. 4K 10-bit internal Raw/Prores recording with 15 DR stops gives you a crazy good image that's super flexible in post. BUT the camera weighs a ton once it's rigged up with just handle, v-mount battery, evf. no ND filters and those CF2 cards cost a leg. It's really a RED/ARRI type cine camera, not meant for small crew run&gun.. The C100II is i find way overpriced for essentially a 2012 cam with added dual pixel AF. the image it spits out is nice and sharp but that 24meg AVCHD codec is weak and of course no 4K. The best investment today for run&gun video imo is the A7S2 / FS5 & 1DX2. But in september it could be different since Canon should be announcing the 5D4 and hopefully C100 III (with 4K). Sony is also rumored to come out with the A9 and perhaps A7R3. These new Sony's would have equivalent or better dual pixel AF (which i feel is the current/next big thing to have in video). So if you can wait it out, there should be some interesting products coming out by the end of this year..

I had a c100 ii for a couple months and I don't think the image is anything to write home about. It's definitely very sharp but the d750 has better colours and similar/better DR. 
If you can afford the Ursa mini 4.6k then you should be able to afford the Sony FS5. I would make a decision between the two and plus the kinefinity. Surely you can import one?

Ls300 could be worth a look too

I have one of these lights, but just the mk II not the + version (+ version means v-lock battery option). I really like it and can also recommend it. It's about 1k at full power. Definetly get the mkII version. It's a lot more silent and a bit smaller than the first version.
Also good cheap fresnel adapter for the light is this:
https://www.amazon.com/Nanguang-NG-10X-Studio-Light-Filter/dp/B011HTRTUG?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B011HTRTUG&linkCode=as2&linkId=TOJXOS6VGXPT3Q6T&redirect=true&ref_=as_li_tl&tag=nitsapictu-20
Nitsan has reviewed same lights and recommended very much it.

For price get the Yi v2 4K for sure!

So my original plan here was to use the sunlight from the window as a key, and the 120t as a fill. Unfortunately it started raining so I had to use the 120t as the key, and use a white board as the fill bounce. It's really bright and definitely needs some diffusion with faces b/c of the hard shadows. My favorite 2 things are the dimmer and the running temperature. It runs cool the whole time and you can pick it up to store as soon as you shut it off. Hopefully the daylight version will be out soon!
 

It is fascinating. I remember his earlier stuff from years ago.
 
I don't see what is the big deal.
 
Just walking down the length of my local main street will get myself filmed by HUNDREDS of cameras! Permanent installed cameras.
 
Who ever complains about them? Nobody. Ever.

Perfect for photogrammetry!

It is fascinating. I remember his earlier stuff from years ago.
 
I don't see what is the big deal.
 
Just walking down the length of my local main street will get myself filmed by HUNDREDS of cameras! Permanent installed cameras.
 
Who ever complains about them? Nobody. Ever.

Have a Terra 5k on order - pending a trip to bejing to test it out - end of July they informed me - pushed back a month...so far....will let you know how it goes.

Actually the Terra has ignored me.
I'd love to try one out in Berlin at some point, I can't buy absolutely everything just to review it.

The 5k seems like the better model. 
Current Kinefinity users have little to complain about and recommend the cameras.
The Chinese thing puts people off, however the parent company making these cameras are absolutely massive. 
Andrew has reviewed and featured previous Kinefinity cameras but has so far ignored the Terra. 
It is intriguing - because if Kinefinity pulls this off, they wil have by far the most complete cinematic camera package considering its price point. 
I really do hope they pull it off. I really do. 
As for any Odyssey fuelled camera setup like the C500, it's just a little bulk too much. Worked hard to go very portable with my gear this year. 

It appears that it's only the action sports/skater guys who still use canon dslr's for movie making..  they're so busy enjoying their full throttle lives they don;t have the time to sit browsing the web for the latest and greatest gear.  The only other camera the action guys seem to know about is gopro and if they're happy with the ghastly image from that, a crippled 5dmk4 will be a dream.  If canon didn't reach out to this crowd then they'd not sell any dslr's for video stuff

Don't have footage right at the moment (my HDD just died on me ), but I'll tell you this. THe a7sII (and original) do give a great image. For 4k, they're your only option with the F3 tapping out at HD.
But man, that F3 footage... 10-bit 4:4:4, and even 4:2:2...
The a7sII doesn't match it IMO, especially in the grade. The a7sII has a lot of other things going for it, and still gives you a great image.

It's like an exaggerated response to what I often get at weddings

After using the BMPCC for a while, I still go back and forth on RAW and Pro Res. 
RAW is of course, fantastic. But I do think the Pro Res is underrated, and the workflow is such a delight.

I am afraid, most of us here, has never had an XC10 in their hand.
But we can still exchange views and ideas, that’s the forum about.
I don’t buy a camera, like my wife chooses a car.
-Look honey, I want this one, it has such a nice color :-)
If a camera’s specifications are not good enough, why should I use time to test it???
For me the XC10 is a monster, clear mistake from product management.
Not good for photography.
No RAW. It could be a firmware update but Canon would for sure not do it.
The lens is so-so
Weak continuous shooting
No IR flash-sync
No autofocus lamp
Few manual adjustments, everything is in menus
No B shutter
 
Not good enough for professional video work.
The lens is so-so…
There is a On/Off ND-filter, but no control over it.
There is no powerzoom.
No XLR
Strange solution for viewfinder
The bitrate (305 Mbs) is more a sign of bad codec
 
Not interesting for the amateurs either.
Too expensive, especially with the memory cards.
Too much data to work with
Probably very high loss of value.
Too big and strange ergonomics
Too weak for the competition :-)
I doubt, the video file of the XC10 is better than the GH4 with the 14-140 kit lens, and the Panasonic is way better for photography. And, don't forget to check the price.
That is my view on it :-)