noone

Not exactly what you are after I think but I think you might have fun playing around with a Pentax Q for video. Interchangeable lens camera with a tiny sensor so even a legacy 50mm lens is almost a super tele. I wish I had tried mine for video before it died.

Maybe not as many shooting a 50 2.8 lens on FF but many of those using a faster lens will stop it down to 2.8 (or f4 or even 5.6) in many cases. I like using my 55mm lens at f4 or 5.6 for portraits often enough. The 40 2.8 Canon STM lens is quite nice on FF cameras too (as well as on M4/3 and APSC). A lot will depend on the subject distance and size though. 50 2.8 FF at a subject distance of 9 feet will have depth of field from 8.25 feet to 9.91 feet (1.66 ft total) and that may be just what is needed. As for the other way around, if you stop down enough FF, you will reach infinity a lot sooner than many think. Lenses 50mm and under wont generally have diffraction issues before reaching infinity very often and lenses around 24mm and shorter would likely almost never. Someone might have diffraction issue with 50mm shooting very close in wanting infinity DOF but I haven't seen where that would happen yet. Sure if you are shooting a subject at closer distance with a longer lens that (diffraction) will happen more often. Having different sensor sizes just gives more choice

I think the A7s is a lot tougher than you think. I find its build quality to be as good if not better than most cameras I have used and have had no issue using lenses like a 300 2.8 on my A7s (and previously on an A7). I doubt I would do it for video unsupported though and if you own the lens or are going to use it much, I guess I would buy or borrow a collar. Of course, as usual it is at your own risk.

I wouldn't mind a drone to play around with. For Australians, it recently became a lot easier as the rules have changed so you don't need a pilots licence ETC anymore for commercial use as long as the drone is under 2kg. You still have to sign up and advise them before flying first and still have to play by the rules. Maybe around this time next year there will be even more choice of camera drones that come in just under 2kg. Most of the ones mentioned in this thread seem like they are well within the weight limits here.

I mainly use my A7s (original not ii) for stills but I have found the cheap(ish) 28-70 FE kit lens is actually a fairly decent lens for video and while the A7s is hopeless for AFC for stills, it is actually ok with the 28-70 for AF in video as long as the movement isn't too fast. The 55 1.8 is a very nice lens too. Apart from those, plenty of nice adapted lenses (I like Canon FD L primes mainly but I also love the Canon 17 f4 L TS-E lens though it is huge and expensive). Lots to choose. I do like using adapted Canon EF lenses on the A7s but not for auto focus in video (ok for stills in many cases but way to slow for video).

I have the first version A7s and have four different adapters. My Commlite doesn't even mount to my A7s (it did to my previous A7) but I think it is an older one. My Metabones IV I now use only with a manual focus lens, I have another no name adapter that I use with another lens for manual focus only (this adapter stopped auto focusing all together but now works well for manual focus with a lens that plays up otherwise). For my AF Canon lenses I now use a really cheap Fotga adapter and it works ok. AF is slow with all my lenses but is usable for stills. Useless for video though for AF. It would likely be a bit faster on the 7sii but how much faster? The Fotga cost me under $100 Australian (well under $100 US) and is by far the cheapest I have found but does work ok. Unlike all the others it is plastic and very light but still holds up well with my lenses. Focus is not fast enough for moving anything but is ok for a patient adult portrait. Face detect and even eye AF (AFS) works with it and even smile shutter works (camera will fire when a smile is detected without hitting the shutter button). There is supposed to be a faster AF adapter in the Saker Falcon lite which is an adapter that allows AFC even on the PDAF cameras (not the CDAF only ones like the A7s) but is still supposed to be faster for AFS. I can not seem to find out if it IS faster but I will be getting one (it is a bit down my "to buy" list though). http://www.deoinfinity.com/saker-falcon

Any lens that can be mounted on M4/3 can be mounted on E mount but not the other way around. M4/3 lenses CAN be adapted to E mount though for most there is little point. You do get vignetting issues with smaller mount lenses but even then you can overcome that using variable digitalzoom/clearzoom for video (or stills). With the FF E mount cameras at least you also get APSC and FF modes so I consider E mount to be much more flexible. I find I actually prefer the M4/3 Oly 15mm Bodycap "lens" on my A7s than on my GX7.

Another quick (and lame) demo of Clearzoom with A7s and 55 1.8 Sony Zeiss and short extension tube. I think it would come in handy for short quick takes. Maybe a lens like a 24 1.4 would be useful.

Agreed. So long as you have variable digital zoom available. Not something for stills really unless focal length challenged (though it has its uses- but not needed to be parfocal) but for video, if I did anything other than record bands or had any actual ability to do it properly, I would certainly be using clearzoom with my A7s and 24 1.4/85 1.2 FD L lenses when I thought it would work. I posted a very lame demonstration of clearzoom on YouTube a couple of years ago (with a Nikon 50 at 5.6) but there are some better demos of it there.

For under $3000 you should now be able to get a used A7s and the beauty of that is you don't need a 2.8 zoom. Depth of field of a 2.8 zoom with micro four thirds is the same as f4 for APSC and 5.6 for FF. The A7s can easily deal with much higher ISOs and slower lenses (for a similar look). I would suggest at least trying/renting borrowing an A7s and any lens and see.

Primes can be (sort of). With cameras that have a variable digital zoom you can use that. May have its uses for video though. Sony cameras can use Clearzoom (which is virtually lossless variable to 2x. For 2x to 4x digital zoom is not so good and obviously lossy). For the most part though, you are right.

The Sony 28-70 FE (kit lens for the A7) is surprisingly close to being parfocal (it is for my purposes). On my A7s, I use it as a constant 5.6 lens for the most part. EDIT This might help too. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/03/mythbusting-parfocal-photo-zooms/ I actually only read it after posting. I think shorter range zooms may give greater consistency for those that are close to being parfocal.

Well Samsung has had a problem with washing machines setting fires as well!

They did say "Compared to its predecessor, the 5D Mark III , this is a massive improvement" (with the word massive in italics)! Otherwise I agree.

To be fair, they are only saying it is a massive improvement over other Canon's. At the end, they do say this- "How does the 5D Mark IV stack up against some of its other peers? Its performance is much better than any other offering from Canon, but it's still not quite as ISO-invariant as the Nikon D810 or D750 (refer back to widget above as you click links). You're unlikely to notice these differences from ISO 400 upward, but below ISO 400, the 5D Mark IV, while competitive, does fall slightly behind in performance". I m not an apologist for DPR and think it is not so much what they have said as what they have NOT said.

Yes, smart adapters cost more than dumb ones mostly (but not always). The thing is that the latest Nikon lenses ALSO need smart adapters to use on other cameras but for the most part there aren't any. There IS now one for Sony E mount (I am not sure what Nikon lenses it will work with though). Some dumb adapters cost as much or more as my cheapest EF to E smart adapter. I have four different brand EF to E smart adapters ranging from less than $100 (and that is less in Australian dollars so well under $100 US) to a Metabones IV, I have a Kipon EF to M4/3 smart adapter but I also have a EF to M4/3 dumb focal reducer and a Nikon to M4/3 dumb focal reducer both of which were quite cheap (and both of which I find to be not great and hardly use).. I have many dumb adapters for Nikon to E, FD to E, FD to M4/3, FD to Pentax K, MC/MD to E, K to E, K to M4/3, MC/MD to M4/3 lots of others too (some for cameras I no longer can use like FD to Pentax Q, K to Q). Some dumb adapters I have several copies. The cost of most of these to me is the cheapest I could find on Ebay but I could have paid a lot more for some. Some dumb adapters have aperture controls in the adapters - these tend to cost more too (I don't have any). Some dumb adapters also may have issues focusing to infinity- more so with the cheapest ones. You pay for what you get but for the latest Nikon or Canon lenses to work properly, you need a smart adapter- lots available for Canon lenses and to several mounts, one currently for Nikon to one mount. Older lenses depends- FD Canon is as easy as Nikon pre AI/AIS. EDIT The other thing is that with all those adapters to other cameras, there are very few that can be used to adapt others ON Nikon cameras. I even have a couple of adapters for M4/3 lenses on E mount (fun adapting the Olympus 15mm bodycap lens which is a dumb lens anyway and I think the lens is BETTER on my A7s than it is on M4/3)!

I don't find Nikon lenses any easier or harder or cheaper to adapt. When it comes to adapting lenses for manual focus without any communication they are all pretty much the same. I have many adapters for many systems and all are pretty much a wash. It is when it comes to smart adapters that communicate with the camera that (currently) there is no comparison. Even my cheap Canon APSC 18-55 IS ii kit lens works for IS and AF on both my M4/3 and A7s- even eye AF and smile detect (covers FF for part of the range as well as APSC mode). I have had the Nikon VR 1 and VR ii kit lenses and neither would work for me on any camera but my Nikon DSLR. As for the Venus 17 TS lens, didn't that turn out to be an adapter that will turn the 12mm lens into a 17mm TS lens? In any case, it isn't there yet and I doubt it will be as good as the current Canon (though I would expect it to be good for its price).

Yes, all makers have some great lenses. The thing is though that currently at least, Canon lenses adapt better than others do. I use M4/3 and FF E mount currently and like to use the same lenses on both and I am amazed that Canon lenses (some anyway) work so well even for AF and IS on both my cameras. I still do have a Nikon DSLR but an old one I no longer use. I had a Canon DSLR last year but sold that and sold my last Pentax DSLR this year. I have sold/given away/thrown out a lot of lenses and broken a couple as well. Only a few Nikon lenses left -and older ones at that. There is a smart adapter now for Nikon lenses on E mount but only the one and I don't think there are any for M4/3 yet. Older Nikon lenses adapt well for dumb/manual focus use but not for "smart" use yet. Then there is no lens I like as much as my 17 f4 L TS-E and nothing like it elsewhere (as yet). My kit will end up being- A few Canon EF mount lenses, a couple of Canon FD L lenses, a couple of native Sony E mount, a couple of M4/3 native lenses a few old adaptall lenses and some other odds and sods. My old Nikon 50 1.8 F lens will be kept but as a backup only. Nikon lens mount is going to be their issue I think as you will be able to put together a decent system but just not adapt many other lenses because of the registration distance..

What I love about Canon- Lenses! What I hate about Canon- Cameras!* * not really but I do prefer Mirrorless FF now (IE Sony A7s).

There is that 135 1.4 Mitakon that you can buy for Nikon DSLRs. Very limited edition and manual focus though (100 only in all mounts). The new Nikon should be a very nice lens though wont be quite as shallow for depth of field as a Canon 85 1.2 (for the same framing) - not that it wont be more than shallow enough anyway. Now that the Nikon 105 1.4 is going to be around soon, it should be nice to see what it can do.

AF with Canon lenses on M4/3 can be quite quick depending on the adapter/lens/camera. I use AF with my A7s and a couple of Canon AF lenses and while slow can have its uses (AFS only for me). The same lenses (18-55 IS ii kit lens and 40 2.8 STM currently but have had others too) work nicely for fast AF (again, AFS only) on my GX7 and Kipon adapter. My Sigma 150 2.8 in Canon EF, I use for MF only on the A7s but is nice for fast AF (AFS) on my GX7. Very different angle of view but that is partly why I have both. For video, my main used lenses with my A7s are the manual focus anyway 17 f4 L TS-E and native Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 and 28-70 FE kit lens. AFC is surprisingly good (for video- not stills) with the two native Sony's for my uses but I really just shoot bands where the subject doesn't move far very often or too fast.

Isn't the issue that many Canon EF-S lenses can not be mounted to FF Canon cameras (not without modification anyway)? Third party APSC Canon mount lenses can be mounted I think. Canon APSC lenses can be used in both FF and APSC modes on Sony E mount (and some can be used FF for at lest part of the range without vignetting the cheap 18-55 APSC kit lenses do from about 24mm and up).

What do you want to do with it? I don't have that camera but would use the same lenses as I do with an A7s with maybe the exception of the 28-70 FE kit lens. The Sony Zeiss 55 1.8, the Canon 135 f2 L more for stills. The Canon 17 and 24 TS-E lenses for wide angle. The cheap little Canon 40 2.8 STM and the cheap A mount 85 2.8 SAM are all lenses I like. For my limited amateur video (I am just recording live music) I would just use either of my Canon TS-E lenses. Sometimes straight and sometimes slightly shifted.

While I would love an A7Rii I will be happy keeping my A7 and A7s pair instead. 42mp is a bit much for my current computer and I use ISO 51200 often with the A7s for stills and video even above that. I find setting auto ISO to 102400 for video, the camera will often go to something like ISO 80,000 and that is still quite good. I just use it to record bands using either a 17mm f4 or 24mm 3.5 Canon TS-E lens often at f5.6 with the camera on a tripod or even table and get all the band in focus and turn it on and let it run (let the band do the work). I don't need 4k for this and full HD from the camera FF is nice. I would therefore not get as much use out of the A7Rii with ISO limited to 25600 for video. The A7s also auto focuses to a lower light level than the A7Rii (or anything really) for stills at least in AF-S (DMF).

For photography yes, for video not so much. The little 40 2.8 STM works great on an A7s for stills. Slow AF but somewhat useable. AF-S only. On the GX7 with the Kipon AF adapter, AF is almost native fast but again, AF-S only and it distorts quite badly. It is also always trying to focus if the camera is on (though not AF-C) so needs to be turned off between using or the battery will drain. AF is also not always accurate on the Kipon either and it seems to me needs brighter light than the GX7 otherwise needs. For manual focus and video it should be fine on E mount. Ok on the GX7 and Kipon as long as you can avoid showing the distortion.