Help me decide: Canon C300 Mark III or Sony FX9

[eatstoomuchjam]

16 minutes ago, PPNS said:

i think spending more than 4000 on a camera is a bad decision for people who make money using cameras, so i think that decision is even worse for those who dont do it professionally.

 

Theres literally millions of things in life on which money could be better spent.

Cool story, but nobody's asking you your opinion of how they spend their money.  If the OP has more than $4k in their pocket and wants to buy the best camera for what they're doing, that's their choice.  They don't need some toxic internet person yelling at them about other ways they could spend the money.  Not everybody bases their spending decisions on purely utilitarian criteria.

Keep in mind that I'm not saying I'm a Roger Deakins or a Hoyte von Hoytema (and not even close), and it's likely that the OP isn't either, but please do go lecture either one of them on how dumb they are to shoot with multiple $100k Arri kits and $50k Venice setups.

Anyway, there are also "literally millions" of other ways that you could spend your time, other than criticizing other people's hobby budgets.  Maybe you should find some of them.

[eatstoomuchjam]

In more positive terms, speaking for myself, I just sent off a bunch of stuff (older drones, my Sigma fp and fp-l) for trade-in and I'm planning to get a C70 back.  It will probably spent most of its life with the Canon-branded speed booster screwed in and with EF glass (which I have a lot of).  I'm not saying it's the dream camera for the OP, but since one of the original cameras being considered was the C300 Mark III (same sensor, I think), I'll bring it up.

My use case is a bit different, though - I tend to work on low-ish budget short film stuff where we frequently have fairly minimal time to shoot since paying for the location eats up 70% of the budget (if there is a budget at all).

My reasoning:
- Broadest dynamic range of any camera < $10k (at least where I can find good tests published online - it's possible that some of the 8K RED's are better, but cined (and similar sites) never tested them with Xyla 21) (also note that the Sony A7 IV comes close (!))
- Built-in ND filter (not vari-nd like the Canon mount adapter)
- Will autofocus very well with my EF lenses when I want it to, eye detect seems reliable for close-ups of actors who don't hold still enough to stay in focus at f/2 (and tracking by hand tends to look like a mess)
- On multi-camera shoots, the colors will match nicely enough with my R5
- Speed booster bolts to the camera so things won't get too wobbly with FF EF glass, even with a focus motor (like when using my Canon CN-E set or my SLR Magic APO Microprimes)
- Decent RS (15ms or so)
- 4K is enough for anything I do (and a lot of it gets delivered in 2K) - more is nice for cropping in post, but I can switch to the R5 for stuff where that is expected (at the loss of a lot of dynamic range 😢 )
- Shoots raw
- Batteries last a long time
- Inexpensive v90 SD card media (and dual-slots to mitigate risk of media failure)
- mini-XLR inputs (and I'm told decent enough preamps) for shoots without a dedicated sound person

Bummers:
- No built in wifi director's screen on iPad (Z Cam and Komodo are both great for this) (I'm gonna try the Hollyland Mars M1 so that I won't need to stick an extra transmitter box on my monitor)
- No small first-party EVF that is powered from the camera (at least none that I can find!)
- 6K would be nice for reframing in post
- Only recording options are raw and H.264 - would be nice to have ProRes (or H.265, though maybe it has that and I missed it)
- Inexpensive v90 SD cards max out at 256GB, I think, unless that's changed recently - if so, I expect that >256GB lose the "inexpensive" qualifier
- It was announced in November of 2020 so there's a nagging voice in my mind that Canon will release an updated model that fixes all of the bummers about 3 days after mine arrives

[Tim Sewell]

10 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

I partly shoot on an Alexa for work simply because I can and want to. So I get you. Though if you get a bigger camera setup like a C300 or FX9 you may get annoyed with it overtime. It's just bigger and if there is any element of travel involved to what you shoot, the heavier it is the more of an annoyance it is. 
 

Certainly has to be considered, but 'proper' video cameras are just so much nicer to shoot with. I'm a mere hobbyist, but I just far prefer the ergos of a decent dedicated video camera. In fact I'm currently eagerly awaiting the 370hrs FS& I just magaed to pick up for GBP695 (trading in my Lumix G9)!

[gt3rs]

55 minutes ago, PPNS said:

you are also doing that (and judging quite poorly imo). i can only find your stills which is why i’m asking for your reel of moving images.

 

i think spending more than 4000 on a camera is a bad decision for people who make money using cameras, so i think that decision is even worse for those who dont do it professionally.

 

Theres literally millions of things in life on which money could be better spent.

Wow now you are even a life coach..... 4000 for you maybe a lot of money for others maybe pocket money... but sayin that he cannot take advantage of a better camera I find it again rude and not called for.

[PPNS]

im not yelling? i could make the argument that this consumerist driven attitude is more toxic? 

i think the 50/100k arri/venice setups are actually necessary for the context theyre made for, and i think there’s a decent argument to be made in regards to getting those and making a profit from renting those out.

Almost every camera now performs almost exactly the same. this means that theres no little to no difference in image quality between the lower budget options (pockets, fx30s) and the mid tier (canon c-whatever, fx9, red). you’re not going to see that price difference in the end result.

if you’re going to be shooting basic stuff in nature where you dont need a bunch of bells and whistles, you might as well get the lower cost options that let you record in a good or decent codec, which also happen to be light. your back will be much happier afterwards. you can save some money with which you could buy a decent set of lenses, nds and a great tripod.

[eatstoomuchjam]

20 minutes ago, PPNS said:

Almost every camera now performs almost exactly the same. this means that theres no little to no difference in image quality between the lower budget options (pockets, fx30s) and the mid tier (canon c-whatever, fx9, red). you’re not going to see that price difference in the end result.

If you can't tell the difference in a camera with about 14 stops of dynamic range at SNR=1 and a camera with 12.1 stops of dynamic range at SNR=1 - or you can't see the difference in 28ms of rolling shutter vs 9ms of rolling shutter when the camera moves, then you probably shouldn't be dispensing camera advice to anybody, ever.

It's not to say that a camera with only 11 stops of DR and 30ms rolling shutter is unable to produce a nice-looking image.  I was thrilled with my 5D Mark II at the time and compared with modern cameras, it had terrible DR and RS.  Especially with ML, you could shoot with that camera today and come up with something that looks better than half of what I see entered in local film contests.  Similar things could be said of the GH2 or GH5.  However, the question asked by the OP isn't "what low-budget camera can I buy and find ways to work around its limitations to get the results that I want?"

Also, some of the nicer options suggested (including the C70 that I was just talking about) are already pretty light and remove the need to buy a decent set of ND's.

[gt3rs]

1 hour ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

- Only recording options are raw and H.264 - would be nice to have ProRes (or H.265, though maybe it has that and I missed it)
 

All recent C cameras including the C70, other than C200, have XF-AVC that is a really good 10bit codec with a good balance in size and quality. If I recall correctly is based on h264. Is imo a better capture codec than h265 10bit. The most common NLEs can edit XF-AVC natively.

[ade towell]

The problem with using these smaller 'cinema' cameras such as c70, fx6 for outdoor nature doc type stuff like the OP is interested in is they don't have an integrated evf. That and internal ND's would be imho 2 of the most important factors in deciding on a camera for the OP's particular use. Also wanting to use cinema lenses makes the larger body of camera such as the Canon C200, C300iii, C500ii, Sony FX9, Ursa, Varicam etc probably a better choice. Even the Sony f55 could be a good older contender

[IronFilm]

3 hours ago, gt3rs said:

@IronFilm telling people to buy pocket 4k in 2023 is like me telling people to buy RODE wireless GO (the original one) you will scream at me 🙂 

The Rode GO has never at any point performed on par with pro equipment, not even previous generation equipment. 

But a reasonable case can be made for the Pocket 4K being broadly on par with the professional class of cameras. 

Note how I'm not specifically focusing on saying they must only get the Pocket 4K, you seem to be obsessing over just one particular specific camera I've mentioned out of a huge wide range of them. Sure, I think the FX6 or C70 are also great ones to check out, or at the other extreme even ARRI ALEXA Classic or Varicam LT. 

My original core recommendation back a few pages ago was that @Jedi Master should borrow / rent a wide range of cameras, to get hands on experience with using them to better be able to decide for himself. 

And of that wide range of cameras, I suggested one of them should be "a Pocket Cinema Camera", and if it is the 4K, or 6K, or 6K G2, or 6K Pro (or heck, the new L Mount one, even though that isn't technically part of the Pocket range according to BMD??) doesn't matter. So long as they get some bit of experience with it, to see how they like it. 

 

4 hours ago, gt3rs said:

You guys imo are missing the point , he has the funds and maybe is instead of buying a good drees, smoking 2 packs of cigarettes per day, buy a very expensive car, and so on he wants to buy the best camera that it is in his budget and enjoy it. 

Even if they wish to spend $XXX amount on filmmaking, why does all $XXX have to go only towards the camera body? Why not also to microphones and recorder? Why not accessories like filters? Why not even better lenses? Why not various support equipment like a motorized sliders or a better tripod? Or on travel to new filming locations? 

Very little of this has been discussed. 

4 hours ago, gt3rs said:

Again can he achieve the goal with a pocket 4k? Yes.

Am glad we agree on something 

4 hours ago, gt3rs said:

So why settle to something less great if you have no problem to afford it.

It's a mistake in the first place to think of the Pocket series of cameras as "less great". 

There are people who prefer a Pocket even over cameras 2x or even 4x the price. 

Thus it is worthwhile giving the Pocket a try out, to see if it gels with the person or not. 

4 hours ago, gt3rs said:

I think is fairly rude for @PPNS to tell to someone that he is wasting his money and that for him a pocket 4k is already too much, do you guys know him? Did you guys saw his work and can you guys judge his potential learnings and growth?

1) it was clearly said tongue in cheek, please locate your sense of humour 

2) it's a fair point being made in jest, after all most of us commenting in this thread couldn't squeeze 100% out of the Pocket 4K. Most of the modern cameras being released today are "beyond our capabilities". 

4 hours ago, gt3rs said:

 

But why should you use a more expensive FF or S35 cine lens on a smaller sensor.

Nothing wrong with using S35 lenses on a P4K sensor, it's closer in size after all than all those people who use FF lenses on S35 cameras (yet I don't hear people complaining about that as much). 

Plus, if they wish, they could always just go with the S35 or LF versions of the Pocket instead. 

 

4 hours ago, gt3rs said:

The other option buying 4/3 lenses and then you realize you want to move up to a better camera even within BMD and guess what there are no better cameras with a 4/3 sensor (debatable if the GH6 is). So there we go, what you saved up front you will need to invest in time and effort to resale and hope to get enough back to buy other mounts lenses.

 

4 hours ago, gt3rs said:

Actually BMD released in 2023 fantastic cameras NOT with a 4/3 sensors and a couple of entry level studio cameras refresh with 4/3....

That studio camera is packed with new features, it basically is BMD's new generation of the Micro Cinema Camera!

4 hours ago, gt3rs said:

DJI did not release any 4/3 camera or drone recently, and insta360, Kandao don't sell any 4/3 cameras. 

But DJI has in the past, it's an example of a company that has supported MFT.

And the DJI Zenmuse X5S is still a current generation camera that they sell, and I'd still happily do shots on a X5S! (or X5R)

And ditto, all of Insta360 and Kandao etc have made and sold MFT cameras as well. 

MFT has very wide support (more so than any other mirrorless mount!). I don't see this mount going away any time soon. 

[eatstoomuchjam]

54 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

All recent C cameras including the C70, other than C200, have XF-AVC that is a really good 10bit codec with a good balance in size and quality. If I recall correctly is based on h264. Is imo a better capture codec than h265 10bit. The most common NLEs can edit XF-AVC natively.

XF-AVC on the C70 is, unless I'm mistaken, a 10-bit 4:2:2 version of H.264 in a fancy wrapper.  I think there's an all-I mode so it should be alright, but it won't stop editors from giving me an unhappy look when I hand over footage.  Regardless of technical merits, people really like ProRes.  🙂

For a lot of stuff, I'll probably use the lighter of the two raw formats that it offers (except for overcranking past 60fps where it's not available).   It's just not good for quick turnaround (like 48 hour film project stuff).

 

5 minutes ago, ade towell said:

The problem with using these smaller 'cinema' cameras such as c70, fx6 for outdoor nature doc type stuff like the OP is interested in is they don't have an integrated evf. That and internal ND's would be imho 2 of the most important factors in deciding on a camera for the OP's particular use. Also wanting to use cinema lenses makes the larger body of camera such as the Canon C200, C300iii, C500ii, Sony FX9, Ursa, Varicam etc probably a better choice

Yeah, the integrated (or small first-party add-on) EVF is really nice to have.  I'm sure that Zacuto make some sort of rubber band contraption that can go on the integrated screen for like $3,000, though.  Then you can pretend you have an EVF and lose all use of the touch screen.

As far as the cine lens size/weight, I've used CN-E's a lot with my E2-F6 which is smaller and lighter than the C70.  By the time you add a handle and screen to the body and put rails on the front for your focus motor, etc, the "small" cinema camera bodies become "not so very small" and I haven't found the size/weight of CN-E to be a problem, at least.  If OP wants to use Arri Master Prime, that might be a different calculation.  😉

[eatstoomuchjam]

14 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Even if they wish to spend $XXX amount on filmmaking, why does all $XXX have to go only towards the camera body? Why not also to microphones and recorder? Why not accessories like filters? Why not even better lenses? Why not various support equipment like a motorized sliders or a better tripod? Or on travel to new filming locations? 

OP is shooting nature stuff and explicitly said, I thought, that sound wasn't a major concern.  They also said that they plan to pair the camera with cine lenses so presumably they are already factoring expensive lenses into the budget to pair with their expensive camera body.
But in general, I'm with you on buying better lenses vs better camera.  If you invest in good lenses, they will be with you through several or many cameras.  It's also why I tend to suggest to people that they go with EF glass for a lot of stuff unless they really need something about a native lens for their mirrorless.

"What if next time when you're buying a camera, Canon went back to being Canon and has spent 3 years releasing the same sensor and processor in 5 different bodies with almost no differences, but Sony has innovated and released some groundbreaking new camera with all of the features you want?  Will you sell all of your RF lenses for a loss and buy Sony lenses?  Or will you buy an adapter for $500 or less (probably a lot less) and just keep using the excellent EF lenses that you already own?  And in the next round, what if it's Panasonic that has the camera that you want?"

[IronFilm]

2 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Keep in mind that I'm not saying I'm a Roger Deakins or a Hoyte von Hoytema (and not even close), and it's likely that the OP isn't either, but please do go lecture either one of them on how dumb they are to shoot with multiple $100k Arri kits and $50k Venice setups.

They are also on productions which on these film sets need a tonne of features and have a lot of expectations that simply is not needed by a husband and wife team strolling through the outdoors to take a video clips to compile together. 

It's a radically different situation that you can't compare directly with. 

And on those productions, the image quality is merely one out of a wide range of reasons as to why they choose the cameras they choose. (or have we already forgotten the shootout which the Panasonic GH2 won?) 

2 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

- It was announced in November of 2020 so there's a nagging voice in my mind that Canon will release an updated model that fixes all of the bummers about 3 days after mine arrives

It is at all a reassuring thought, then my guess is that Canon will first update one of their EF Cinema Cameras (the C200 / C300mk3 / C500mk2 / C700) to RF Mount (my guess is the C300mk4??? Maybe) before it released "a C70mk2". 

 

2 hours ago, PPNS said:

im not yelling? i could make the argument that this consumerist driven attitude is more toxic? 

i think the 50/100k arri/venice setups are actually necessary for the context theyre made for, and i think there’s a decent argument to be made in regards to getting those and making a profit from renting those out.

Almost every camera now performs almost exactly the same. this means that theres no little to no difference in image quality between the lower budget options (pockets, fx30s) and the mid tier (canon c-whatever, fx9, red). you’re not going to see that price difference in the end result.

if you’re going to be shooting basic stuff in nature where you dont need a bunch of bells and whistles, you might as well get the lower cost options that let you record in a good or decent codec, which also happen to be light. your back will be much happier afterwards. you can save some money with which you could buy a decent set of lenses, nds and a great tripod.

Or just stick the money into the bank, so then you can do a more frequent upgrade. Say in two years time when the "FX3mk2" eventually comes out as I suppose it will one day. Rather than buying a more expensive camera and being stuck with it for 5 years plus. 

There are lots of other perspectives to look at this, than to just max out the $XXX budget on only the most expensive possible camera body. 

1 hour ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

or you can't see the difference in 28ms of rolling shutter vs 9ms of rolling shutter when the camera moves, then you probably shouldn't be dispensing camera advice to anybody, ever.

Does OP need fast rolling shutter performance? Maybe I should be suggesting they definitely go for a Sony PMW-F55 huh? 

Nah, from the descriptions so far, it doesn't sound like rolling shutter performance is the top priority for them for what they shoot. 

Another thought: do you think the audience cares and notices the difference between a film shot with 28ms vs 9ms?? 

20 minutes ago, ade towell said:

The problem with using these smaller 'cinema' cameras such as c70, fx6 for outdoor nature doc type stuff like the OP is interested in is they don't have an integrated evf.

With their budget, they can easily get a high quality external EVF from a third party (if they haven't blown their budget already that is...). 

Or hey, Blackmagic makes their own EVF for one of their Pocket cameras:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1625667-REG/blackmagic_design_pocket_cinema_camera_pro.html 

But anyway, maybe OP would prefer to shoot with a high quality daylight viewable monitor? 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1468153-REG/smallhd_mon_702_touch_7_on_camera_touchscreen_monitor.html 

 

20 minutes ago, ade towell said:

That and internal ND's would be imho 2 of the most important factors in deciding on a camera for the OP's particular use. 

For the very slow paced types of shoot OP seems to be doing, I don't think internal NDs is a super high priority. A lightweight mattebox with a set of filters would do even better. 

[IronFilm]

24 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

OP is shooting nature stuff and explicitly said, I thought, that sound wasn't a major concern. 

They also think a Rode NTG2 is just fine. That was the context in which it was said "not a major concern". 

But yet, it seems like their partner quite likes the sound gathering aspects? Of what they do together. 

Seems odd to spend $10K on a camera body, but be recording with crappy sound equipment. 

Why not put just a few thousand dollars of that into a few bits of somewhat half decent audio equipment? 

The wife would like that? 

Happy wife, happy life!

 

24 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

They also said that they plan to pair the camera with cine lenses so presumably they are already factoring expensive lenses into the budget to pair with their expensive camera body.

Yes, but we've no idea if they think "a cine lens" is a $300 lens, and they're just going to get one of them. Or if they've instead got a plan to drop $200K on a full set of anamorphics. 

(probably they're planning on something in between those extremes)

 

24 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

But in general, I'm with you on buying better lenses vs better camera.  If you invest in good lenses, they will be with you through several or many cameras.  It's also why I tend to suggest to people that they go with EF glass for a lot of stuff unless they really need something about a native lens for their mirrorless.

I agree, except I personally went with Nikon F Mount lenses primarily. 

As you can adapt Nikon F to Canon EF cameras, but the reverse is not true! 

24 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

"What if next time when you're buying a camera, Canon went back to being Canon and has spent 3 years releasing the same sensor and processor in 5 different bodies with almost no differences, but Sony has innovated and released some groundbreaking new camera with all of the features you want?  Will you sell all of your RF lenses for a loss and buy Sony lenses?  Or will you buy an adapter for $500 or less (probably a lot less) and just keep using the excellent EF lenses that you already own?  And in the next round, what if it's Panasonic that has the camera that you want?"

That's why I like that a lot of manufacturers are allowing their mirrorless mounts to be swapped around by the user to another new mount instead (such as the Fujinon zoom lens, or the Sirui anamorphic lenses, or Meike , or etc)

If was to invest into another set of cine lenses then, it would have to be one of:

1) $300ish or less per lens, as then I don't care if the mount I'm stuck with or not 

2) be a mirrorless mount that can be swapped out 

3) be PL Mount (as that you can adapt to anything), quite viable now it has some very affordable options 

[gt3rs]

Maybe is good to go back to square one and ask what are the important aspects for a camera for shooting landscape?

These are imo the ones that I would care the most:

DR

Sharpness

NDs

Slowmotion (60 fps maybe enough)

Lowlight, if doing time-lapses, night sky etc.

RAW if he wants to play a lot with WB in post

Battery life

Maybe transportability

 

 

And these is what I would care a bit less:

Shallow DoF

RS

AF

Audio

Gimbal compatibility

Form factor

EVF

TC port

 

@Jedi Master should do a similar list and prioritize the list. Then we can help in identify, considering his budget, what camera is covering these at best.

Then I agree with the suggestion that he should rent it first.

[Jedi Master]

Lots of great discussion, which I find very helpful--thanks guys!

I thought I'd offer some clarification of a few things.

First, let's avoid too much talk about wasting money and motives. As I've said, I'm just a hobbyist and spending $10K on a new camera is not a financial burden at all.

As I originally stated, my main application is scenics. Not necessarily wildlife, except where wildlife happens to be present--we don't go out of our way to shoot birds and other wildlife, hence we have no need for long lenses.

Weight and bulk aren't too big a concern either as most of our work is done close to the car or within a mile of the car. I have a cart that I use to carry things when walking more than a hundred yards from the car. My prior still photography experience is large format, so I'm used to carrying big, bulky things.

Several have mentioned budgeting for other equipment. I already have most of this covered as I have a nice Sachtler fluid head and tripod, a Zoom sound recorder and Rode shotgun mic, filters, etc. Sure, I could upgrade some of this, particularly the microphone as some suggested, but I think I have most of the basics covered.

Regarding sound, most of what we record near the camera is unusable due to crowds of people talking, cars passing on the road, wind noise, etc. I end up replacing 95% of recorded sound with music anyway.

For lenses, I plan to start buying cine lenses in PL mount. I wish I could afford ARRI Signature Primes or Zeiss Supreme Primes, but that's not in the cards. I'm looking more along the lines of the DZO Vespids, so in other works, around $1000-1500 per lens. I'll probably get these in FF even if I end up with a Super35 camera, just to make them a little more future-proof.

One big want is reliability. I try to buy the most reliable things I can. As a private pilot, I'm especially sensitive to reliability concerns--I've never had to make an engine-out emergency landing on a golf course or highway, and I prefer it that way! I want my camera equipment to be just as reliable.

Covering some of the other points people raised:

• Slow motion. Don't need it. I think it looks too cliché in nature videos.
• DR. Yes, important.
• Sharpness. Important.
• Low-light. Somewhat less important. Twilight yes, nightline shooting, no.
• AF. Absolutely not needed.
• TC. Not important.
• Gimbal compatibility. Not important.
• Shallow DOF. Not important. I prefer lots of DOF.
• RAW. I think I'd like having RAW based on experience grading RAW footage I've downloaded.
• Rolling shutter. Not an issue as I shoot on a tripod 100% and do slow pans.
• Battery life. Not a big deal as I'll have spares close by.
• Internal ND. A real plus, but not a dealbreaker. 
• Anamorphic. Nope.

[PPNS]

^ in that case i can still safely recommend a pocket 4k 

[Jedi Master]

1 hour ago, PPNS said:

^ in that case i can still safely recommend a pocket 4k 

Thanks, but I’ve never been a fan of the BM pocket cameras. I don’t like their form factor or pretty much anything else about them.

[eatstoomuchjam]

6 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Does OP need fast rolling shutter performance? Maybe I should be suggesting they definitely go for a Sony PMW-F55 huh? 

Nah, from the descriptions so far, it doesn't sound like rolling shutter performance is the top priority for them for what they shoot. 

Another thought: do you think the audience cares and notices the difference between a film shot with 28ms vs 9ms?? 

Sorry, that was off-topic for the OP.  That was more addressing the comments that any consumer camera was indistinguishable from other consumer cameras.
Also, the audience doesn't know or care what ms the rolling shutter has, but they tend to notice fan blades that are all flooby and/or the feeling of sickness that they get during some handheld scenes.  They also notice it in cars that are all slanted, etc.
Similarly, the audience doesn't know or care how many stops of DR the camera has, but they may notice blown out highlights or the fact that they can't make out anything in the shadows.  On the other hand, I could only make it through about 1/3 of a full length film that another local filmmaker made before I had to stop because the production/lighting/etc was so bad, but others watched it and said that they thought it looked nice.  🤷‍♂️
 

6 hours ago, IronFilm said:

With their budget, they can easily get a high quality external EVF from a third party (if they haven't blown their budget already that is...). 

Most of the third-party EVF's don't have a direct way to attach a battery so now you're also looking at a v mount adapter or similar.  I know my Z Cam EVF doesn't have one and from what I remember, the Portkeys one doesn't either.  Strangely, the cheap cruddy ones that are like a 2" monitor with an eyecup that attaches with magnets DO take batteries...
 

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

I agree, except I personally went with Nikon F Mount lenses primarily. 

As you can adapt Nikon F to Canon EF cameras, but the reverse is not true!

It gets trickier if you want to be able to support usable autofocus!  I can get PDAF with my EF mount lenses on Fuji cameras and Canon RF (and I think the S5 II does it too).  Last I checked, most Nikon AF adapters didn't do that.  Plus everything is weird and backward on Nikon lenses.

Beautiful picture from a lot of 'em, though.  I lust after their 100 or 105 f/1.4.  Sigma makes one that fits EF mount, I think, but their lenses just rub the the wrong way.  I'm not sure why.

[kye]

2 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

On the other hand, I could only make it through about 1/3 of a full length film that another local filmmaker made before I had to stop because the production/lighting/etc was so bad, but others watched it and said that they thought it looked nice.  🤷‍♂️

The more you look at something, the more you notice.

When I first started doing video, I couldn't tell the difference between 60p and 24p, now I can tell the difference between 30p and 24p!

BUT, having said that, my wife is pretty good at telling very subtle differences in skin tones and has spent exactly zero time looking at colour grading etc, so we all start off seeing things differently as well.

[eatstoomuchjam]

2 hours ago, Jedi Master said:

For lenses, I plan to start buying cine lenses in PL mount. I wish I could afford ARRI Signature Primes or Zeiss Supreme Primes, but that's not in the cards. I'm looking more along the lines of the DZO Vespids, so in other works, around $1000-1500 per lens. I'll probably get these in FF even if I end up with a Super35 camera, just to make them a little more future-proof.

Covering some of the other points people raised:

• Slow motion. Don't need it. I think it looks too cliché in nature videos.
• DR. Yes, important.
• Sharpness. Important.
• Low-light. Somewhat less important. Twilight yes, nightline shooting, no.
• AF. Absolutely not needed.
• TC. Not important.
• Gimbal compatibility. Not important.
• Shallow DOF. Not important. I prefer lots of DOF.
• RAW. I think I'd like having RAW based on experience grading RAW footage I've downloaded.
• Rolling shutter. Not an issue as I shoot on a tripod 100% and do slow pans.
• Battery life. Not a big deal as I'll have spares close by.
• Internal ND. A real plus, but not a dealbreaker. 
• Anamorphic. Nope.

I'd suggest renting/trying a Panasonic S1H or BS1H depending on the form factor that you like.  I think that the S1H DR comes really close to matching the C70 (13.8 or so stops at SNR=1 vs C70's 14 or 14.1) and I think the BS1H is the same sensor.  If sharpness is important to you, the C70 is not ideal as it's a fairly soft 4K.  The S1H has a pretty sharp 6K.  They won't do raw internally, but you can hook 'em up to a Video Assist 12G and record raw there.

Basically, it's pretty much everything that you listed as need/important and weak on a number of the things you don't care about.

Otherwise, some of the RED models with a VV sensor can be found used for just a bit over $10k and they'd meet pretty much all of the requirements except maybe reliability (and have better DR than the C70 or the S1H).

I don't know a lot about the DZO film lenses, but if you're spending $5k for camera+recorder, as others have pointed out, you could put some of the rest into glass.