IronFilm

So reduser just deleted all my posts because of my thoughts that brand loyalty is bad for film making - and also that reduser is bad for red.  The moderator told me that posting on reduser is like coming into red's living room and talking poorly about Red's wife.  They are so crazy there.  But it's good because spending all day on a message board is a waste of time.
Part of what is great about EOSHD is we can praise or trash talk any camera, lens, light, or anything and no one seems to care too much.  They are all just tools and objects - sure someone might get mad if you make fun of their brand new car but really - this isn't about cars it's about a thing that records footage to tell stories.  Like do you think people got upset if you made fun of their typewriter back in the day?  No, you talk about what their typewriter writes.  

​Well, if a junior technician says it's possible, then "hooray!" good enough for the internet.

Not for now, I think we have to wail to next AMD R9 300 cards for full hardware support.
Release on April-June 2015.

Between shoots, it might be wise to air-out all of your camera gear in a room with low humidity.  Lens fungus is no fun!
 
Lacking an area with low humidity, you could keep your gear in a dry container/case along with plenty of new desiccant packets (or some other form of desiccant/dehumidifier).  Avoid leather cases, as leather tends to harbor fungus more than most synthetic materials.

Two words: liquid nitrogen. No more noise, cool & sexy 'fog', and they can sell their own brand in a can (dewar). For super high frame rates you can switch to liquid helium, to get the sensor down near absolute zero. Liquid helium gets the sensor so cold it can then actually hit 16 stops of DR. This is achieved by running the sensor in Quantum qubit mode .

From my blog, eddavid.tumblr.com
 
On a recent thread on an unnamed camera nerd user-board, a user, I will call "Johnny-Five," wrote a beautiful little message about how brand loyalty doesn't work in the world of cinematography.
At the end of the day, you have a camera, lenses, and accessories, and grip and lighting and sound and they all come from different companies, from different countries.
Your lights can be German, American, French - all different brands and you mix them together and they work great just as you can mix HMI with fluorescent with tungsten fresnels.  Same with your lenses or monitors - on some jobs I use English lenses and on some German or Japanese lenses.  I don't look at brands, I look at how good something is.
"Johnny-five" got flogged on the board.  "What? How can you say that?  I love my company - it's my family."  This is because these nerds have spent thousands of dollars and hours of time on their camera toys.  Thousands of dollars investing in products.  And they don't want to hear this.  Imagine if someone told you that your car or your house could have been made differently.  You don't want to hear it.  You just spent a lot of money so don't tell me the windows can be switched out with better windows.  No thank you.
But it's important to hear.  And hence why rental houses are so important in cinematography.  Because not every camera or light or lens is the right one for each job. These companies own a variety - and they are prepared for how it all changes.  Ten years ago Zeiss Standard speed lenses and other uncoated vintage glass were not as desired, but now with super sharp sensors, they rent like hot-cakes.  Who would have known back then?
Now part two.  Everyone is drooling about two new cameras - one is named a "weapon" -  the other a "mini".  Both cameras don't exist.  Well the mini is a prototype.  But why drool until that camera exists?
The same thing happened a few years ago with a few screengrabs of a camera named after a fictional mythic creature - which I will call the "Lockness Monster."  It was promised to have 16 stops of dynamic range and beautiful new color and make it the greatest camera ever made. 
I drooled.  "This is it," I mumbled to myself as I typed on internet camera nerd forums.  But it wasn't.  
It had low light issues and the color isn't that much different than the original camera. 
But the biggest problem with the Lockness Monster is the same thing that plagued that camera company since they switched to a smaller body - the fan. 
It's loud - it's on really loudly when you rehearse takes.  This is when you need intense concentration to think - to light, to block, to work with actors.  You don't need a giant fan on.  When you shoot a long beautiful interview at minute 20 it gets loud - really loud - and it's over - the moment.  And you can't focus and concentrate because it's blowing in your ears.  Who would thought the thing that makes me the most upset is a minor issue that probably could have somehow been solved?
The Lockness Monster's fan may be better once the Weapon comes out - but for me, I don't care right now because it doesn't exist.  
I rather just keep my money and buy an older camera on ebay and figure out how to make it good.  It's a lot cheaper to not be an early adopter.  To let other people figure out the quirks.  
Because at the end of the day, any camera that can shoot log - you can make it look good with the right composition, angles, creativity, and grading.  Some will look better, but at the end of the day, it's not how good something looks - it's whether there is a good story, good acting, and if you have something to say.  Cinematography is always secondary to story.  So please weapon, fix that fan noise.

This is a nifty idea for when you're brainstorming or if you hit writer's block:

http://filmflap.blogspot.co.nz/2015/02/write-your-script-with-short-film-idea.html

Add the Nikon D5200 too for an option to consider at the low end, a nice matching/complementary camera to your D600 too.

​Bingo.
The full frame DOF at f1.2 on an 85mm is so insanely thin as to be impractical for recording objects in motion. Sure, it's nice to have the option available, but the applications of that 'full frame look' are so niche, I don't think it should be a major consideration for the majority of video shooters.
Stils are another story.

​Most medium format cameras, digital backs and lenses are designed by and sold to people while they are drunk.  If sober, they'd just go for aps-c and not spend £20k on digital backs.  :).

Bigger formtas are totally useless, specially medium format. Don't buy any lenses for it, its totally crap, expensive and complicated. Largeformat cameras are only sold to rich people and fashion photographers who need to appear professional with big cameras. The obvious differences you can see in comparisons between different formats are only in our minds.

Thanks for the link but I'll keep the $1500   I'm not keen on adding more adaptors than absolutely necessary as they can add chromatic aberration, softness etc.
The comparison shots of the woman  are a bit misleading because the majority of the background being the cityscape is so far away its going to have much the same blur no matter what its shot on. The railing thats closer the difference is more apparent.
I agree with what your saying but I love my A7s more than my F5. I can't believe I would ever say that after 18 months with the F5 and about 8 months with the A7s. 
Friday I had a shoot in the city and I'd lent out the A7s and I remember thinking "I'll have to use the F5"  Have to!! as if its a sad thing to have to use the F5.. How interesting is that. To me the F5 was about the most perfect camera I could imagine and bam along comes this little A7s and the F5 gets left behind.  Its not full frame vs super 35 why I like the A7s. Its the speed I can work with it. How customisable its menus, buttons and the function page are. How small it is. How well the Shogun works with it. And how beautiful its photos are. How I can remove it from its cage, put a 20mm pancake lens on it and slip it in my pocket. How accessible the SD cards are compared to SXS.  The F5 is technically better (although visually indifferent to me) but the A7s is more fun to use. Faster, less menus to dig through to change anything.

Perhaps a silly idea, but wouldn't LEGO stuff work? As a kid I used to play around with that kind of stuff.
'Cause kinda thinking of it, you need a motor with gearing, a controller and them some way to mount and drive it. Should work? Not sure about powering the whole thing. If I remember correctly, the power for the motor comes from the controler that takes like 4 AA batteries. Also not sure if the motor would be powerful enough. Professional looking it might not be either, lol. But it could be a working and cheap option.

​f5.6 on s35 is a common preference for people (narrative fiction cinematographers) that actually do this stuff for realsies.  So I find that the "FF" aesthetic argument is pretty indulgent for the most part.  
On the other hand, technically, you can get some great low-light capability...and that's something practical to actually consider depending on what you want to do.
That said, I still carry around my 5D and an old 50mm Nikon f1.4 lens for making easy and great looking corporate interview type shots.  If anything, using FF for talking head documentary type work is my idea of FF's strongest aesthetic "feature."

You know, I've been binge-watching a whole bunch of movies on Blu-ray this past week. From classics like Princess Bride to modern blockbusters like Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy.
Not once have I gone, what nicely isolated background blur is in the scene.
In fact many of the movies I liked don't even use that much shallow depth of field, and it's clear that the lens has been stopped down some. I think on the whole we're looking at 5-10% of the scenes at most?
What's really more obvious to my perception I think, in the technical aspects of the camera itself, are things like dynamic range and colour response (as we all know, with this will affect the final grade and compressed footage makes this even more challenging), how camera movement is handled, and skill taken in focusing (1080p is not forgiving for errors in older films, 4K is going to be less so).
The example above illustrates my point: The one stop difference in DoF, if not placed side-by-side, wasn't going to be something I would have commmented about, and wouldn't have made me prefer one image over the other.

​Yes, clear advantage to shooting 4K for delivering 1080p.
Shooting 1080p in 2015 is a bit like shooting standard definition 720 x 480p in 2008.

Delivering in 1080 does not necessarily mean shooting in 1080.

Why don't you buy the KineMINI as a barebone 2K starter version for around $3K-$4K, you will be able to upgrade it to 4K and slow-mo in the future. 

Red (as all modern cinema cameras) are literally computers...pretty obsolete after a few short years and eventually phased out of service by changing OS or no firmware support (Assuming no electronic components die before then).
you can now buy a used Arri D-21 for cheaper than a used Red One. The D-21 is the Alexa's father and had a true optical viewfinder (this was pure magic at the time). But now there is hardly any interest in that camera at all.
People bang on about film being dead, when in reality digital has a much shorter lifespan in Product iterations.
a 100 year old film camera can be made to work like it was new, a 10 year old digital camera is probably going to go 'pop' the next time it is plugged into the mains.

I've used the Red1.  I don't want to use it anymore.

Don't be fooled by the RED model. Sure they are amazing cameras that have shot Hollywood films but those films also had a huge crew. The shoots I've done on RED have been very slow (as I didn't have enough crew) and technicalities then came before creativity. Also if you want more accessories it costs a fortune. It's a hardcore system. 
I would only buy RED if I had the money to fund more crew members, and I had consistent decent budgets to play with. You also have to consider post-production. The raw workflow is one of the best. But it takes a lot of work and time. Time is money. 
Personally I think a much better option would be the Sony FS7. It's the best "all-rounder" camera available. It's the same sensor as the F5. It has high FPS. Wide DR. Slog3. 10 bit. E-mount. Lovely ergonomics. Great price. Good low light. You can film anything with it brilliantly, pretty much out the box! (You need a mic, cards and batteries). Also you can upgrade it to shoot in raw and higher FPS. 

​Right, I'm aware of this. I also consider stills and in that area, D7100 offers some really cool features (better viewfinder, high speed sync with flashes), so I can live without 60p  
Also, I found really great video shot with D7100. To be honest, it is really hard to find good footage from the camera that isn't so popular among filmmakers.
https://vimeo.com/113947519 

I'm full of nikon lenses. Unless nikon comes up with something that can compete with NX1 - I'm sticking to a7s <3

Actually, DJI is just another Chinese Shenzhen company, so the thing is, you're not even really paying so much because of the 'brand'. They've just looked at the pro choices out there and made something that's just as much of a tool and brought it somewhat more of a consumer level. It's not popular because it's the cheapest choice out there, but because it works so well and has a very solid line-up of pro level multirotors. They know their stuff. Whilst all these cheap choices basicly just remain toys. The same way I would say 'don't go amature, gopro', I would say 'why? Just get the DJI!'.
I'm the last one to convince you not to buy cheap stuff from China, coming from years and years of buying audio gear, radio controlled stuff, flashlights, tablets, smartphones and all sorts of gadgetry from there. I even was in Hong Kong a few months ago to be close to the action, visiting the Hong Kong Electronics Fair and getting across the border at Lo Wu to visit Shenzhen. Just this very morning the postman dropped off a WLToys V931 helicopter. But as much fun as these things are to play around with, I wouldn't get something from these guys if I were to shoot aerial video... I would go with DJI, even if that meant saving up to it. I think they give you the best value for a fair price. If you want something to rely on, with a proven track record, is nice to work with, tilting capabilities, that gets you the results... I'd say they're the best bet.
But of course, if you have no other option than to go with something like the CX20... it's gonna be closer than nothing and New Zealand has to be one of the finer places you'd want to fly an aerial platform above for sure. I get that. Maybe over at RCGroups they've got some nice tips 'n tricks for you. Gd luck!
 

That is why I have had for the past year a smaller quad (with an SD camera on it) to practice on :-)