mat33

Its the big problem with the internet in that most people don't want to pay for information to be created. So we see sources that should be unbiased or impartial (or at least be biased towards providing for and protecting their readers) having a higher level conflict of interest in that while their readers are important long-term, in the short term they aren't the ones keeping the lights on. The video the DPreview article mentioned is actually old news -was released by Canon in August. ScottDW has done canon PR videos in the past -he did a pretty good one using the XC10, and this was another canon sponsored video. Most of his non-PR stuff is shot on a RED, and I'm pretty sure he is not ditching his RED for an 80D. I am not a subscriber but there are ReidReviews and Luminous Landscapes which have a subscription model for quite in-depth and supposedly unbiased still camera reviews. Not sure if there is anything for cinema.

You can get separate c-mount, passive m4/3 mount or a PL mount which are user changeable (although not something you want to do often or on the fly). I have m4/3 so can use speedbooster (BMPCC works well) and use a m4/3-PL for s16 glass.

The best camera for 2016 for me was the camera you bought that was released in 2014/2015. Sure there were a few glimmers of something new, but really only small improvements and then usually pretty piecemeal -slightly better IQ but still crappy battery life or ergonomics or build quality or something. Its been a slow year if you like buying cameras,comparing tech specs and shooting test after test, but quite refreshing to escape the endless quest for better IQ and to focus on film-making.

I think you can get a clean look from the D16 -the D16 really highlights the characteristics of the lens used more than other cameras I've used, and a lot of the stuff shot with the D16 have used vintage C-mount or s16 glass. I think if you used more modern, sharp & neutral glass like Sigma (or Arri Zeiss master primes), you would get the look you want. RED is very nice as well-more $$$ but if you want 4K or need higher frame rates then a good way to go. I don't have any personal experience with RED but it seems they have their own share of downsides as well, and I'm not sure if their colour science is as nice as DB (especially skin tones). But if I found a RED Scarlet-W under the Christmas tree I wouldn't be unhappy :-)

I've had a D16 for about a year, and I have had no crashes or freezes and no dropped frames. My general impression is the camera is very stable with the latest firmware. Digital Bolex has recently stopped making any more D16's but the company the actually made them in Canada and Digital Bolex are still going, so the warranty and servicing is still there. There are still a few new ones that pop up at retailers now and then, and the occasional used one on eBay, Facebook etc. The latest firmware was a pretty big upgrade -added a published wide gamut colour space with log transfer function, false colour exposure aid, new iso scheme, new display colour gamuts & gammas, uncompressed 10bit 4:4:4 HDMI output.

Personally I would stick with a RAW capable camera, having gotten used to RAW it is hard to imagine going back to a thinner image. IMO at this price point, I think the D16 has the most 'cinematic' image, both colour and especially motion cadence. The D16 just nails skin tones, and handheld looks so nice with the global shutter. It is also very versatile -can use it 'barebones' with the handle and an evf for run & gun or rig it up for more organised shoots. Its not a low light monster (and there is no in-camera noise reduction) but the noise pattern is very nice -if I have to I usually lightly remove any chroma noise and leave the luminance noise in neat video. With speedbooster or fast glass its more than capable in low light. Its also a very complete package -versatile m4/3 mount (PL available), can use BMPCC speed booster, good pre-amps, XLRs and no expensive media. It biggest weakness is that it doesn't look like the other 'serious' cinema cameras -if it was a black box, had skulls on it and was called the D16 raptor, then it would be way more popular :-) I would also carefully consider the 5D mark iii with ML as the RAW on this is also quite beautiful in a small package. This was shot at a narrow shutter angle with no NDs, early firmware version, has a nice global shutter whip pan: This was vintage c-mount lenses and natural light:

The E-M5 series is meant to be the more video focused of the OMD line than the E-M1, so will be interesting to see what the E-M5 mark iii brings to the table. Despite this, with the processing power in the E-M1 we could see some nice improvements with video AF, log profile and maybe some higher frame rates with future updates. I'm sure John Brawley is giving Olympus some good feedback on what they need to do from a video perspective.

Ok, so the E-M1ii is expensive but it is Olympus's flagship and has quite a few nice photo features other than the 4K video (which looks like quite a nice improvement over the prior cameras). The 2 sec RAW video could be quite fun as well for certain uses. I don't know if the E-M1ii is as bad an investment as being made out -Olympus does support their flagship camera for quite a few years and the E-M1 received 4 major firmware updates, so I think its fairly certain the E-M1ii will be improved in time (and there won't be an E-M1 mark iii in 6 months). Panasonic certainly has good bang for the buck, but as pointed out, the Olympus's are very nice to use and a good overall package. I see the E-M1ii as a bit like a m4/3 1DX mark ii -no dual pixel AF or 4k60p but can shoot up to 5sec stills handheld and great IBIS for video. If you don't like m4/3 for stills, then yes there might be better value options for you, but the E-M1ii is still a nice camera.

If only the alexa mini was £4000.....

Digital Bolex D16

I think most of these cameras are capable of achieving your clean digital or a more vintage look with selection of the right glass, filters, lighting and grading to suit a specific project. I would look at each of your options for motion cadence, highlight roll-off, skin tones, DR sweetspot and see what works best for your type of projects.

Sure the D16 is not an A7S or C100 in low light, but if its being used for narrative as per the original post with presumably some control over lighting then the D16 is more than capable. I also think that while the BMPCC is also RAW and has a similar sized sensor, the D16 has quite a different mojo. If you want a 'soft, clean, smooth cinematic feel' straight from the sensor then it should be on your list.

F3 would be a good pick. Another option for 'cinematic' on a smaller budget is the Digital Bolex D16 -some of the best colour and motion cadence out there. Its a pretty complete package with 12 bit 4:4:4 internal raw and HDMI output (bolex log), global shutter, good DR, XLR's and there is a lot of nice s16 glass out there.

Just prepare yourself for emotional fallout when the A7500 is announced in Feb, rendering the A6500 completely obsolete and worth nothing on the 2nd hand market :-)

The D16 has a lot of magic -its really the closest we have to a more affordable s16 alexa imo.

Some nice D16 colour.....

I think the E-M1ii is looking pretty great the only downside is the price. Olympus have also been very good with firmware updates for the E-M1, and we should see further improvements to the E-M1ii as well. The E-M1ii still has a slight bob when walking, but I have found putting the E-M1 on a photo tripod, and then hanging this upside down with legs collapsed and hanging open, gripping the centre pole -helps largely eliminate this when coupled with a good walking technique. The E-M1ii should be better still, and a hell of a lot quicker than setting up a gimbal when you want a tracking shot.

Yes, its the digital bolex. Pretty crazy image in the right hands....

Ok, this might be getting old but what the heck. Not my own footage (by the very talented Arsen Sarkisiants -who I suspect could make anything look cinematic) One hint- the camera does have a log color mode...

I think the D750 and XC10/15 are up there for 1080p image quality. My pick for colour if you don't need high frame rates is digital bolex with global shutter, otherwise 5D mark iii raw.

If you are used to shooting on Canon and have a well developed post workflow, then I'd stick with Canon. I'm assuming you are not shooting extreme low light with the M1 and a 2.8 lens, so the XC10 might be your best bet to keep it small and unobtrusive. Otherwise a C100 + ninja star, or 1DC.

I think that is the XF200

Interesting. The XC15 doesn't include a CFast card or reader like the old XC10 bundle. but not too crazy a price with the audio box. The XC10 is showing at B&H as backordered with more coming in October -given the naming I would expect the XC10 to continue to be available but I wonder if the price will drop a little?

I'll be very very surprised if there's anything more than the audio connector - I just can't see Canon adding 4K 60p, or even DPAF without more of a redesign of the body and so soon after initial release (was available for sale June 2015) -this is Canon not Sony we are talking about.

I'll be surprised if the XC15 replaces the XC10. If the photos are legit, then there's a XLR input but probably no HD-SDI that I can see. I would think if they had added a new sensor with DPAF it would be an XC20 but we will see. However, photokina seems a strange time to release a new professional camcorder so I imagine it will be released at IBC. I agree that the lens is much better than reported -I too would not want to give up the size, range, IS and parfocalness for a constant 2.8. Maybe the XC10 is selling better than we know. When I brought mine the store mentioned that Canon had said to them that they had been moving quite a few recently, maybe the news guys are seeing a role and the XLR will help cement this.