Finally! I been hating this artificial/superficial style for a long time -- add the extremely shallow depth of field so to completely lose sense of space and endless sliders timed to cheesy music and you will amount to what's considered "professional" and "contemporary" these days.

I have both GH4 and A7s and only use A7s for low light or FF shallow DOF shots which isn't often. The ergonomics are horrible, it's just so much harder to use in all aspects (both physical and software). I feel GH4 is just perfectly sized and perfect weight, you get used to it very quickly and never look back. A7s is smaller, more difficult to handle and unbalanced because of the big and heavy FE or adapted Canon/Nikon lenses. However GH4 really sucks in the low light (I don't have speedbooster though), there is some noise at 800 but it's still usable -- anything above that and you're fucked. On A7s there is the rolling shutter issue as well, it's much worse than GH4. Generally, I feel GH4 is more rounded, thought out camera. The image might be less pleasing but it's a true workhorse that you can achieve great results with.

David,

"Documentary: 24-105 f4 Canon L Lens (has image stabilization and full aperture control with a Commlite EF to E mount adapter)"

Any reason to use this instead of Sony E PZ 18-105mm f4? What are the advantages? I can't find any unless you want to use Canon on other cameras as well..

"Local productions and co-productions will be able to access much needed US technology, from an Alexa Camera to a hard drive or editing equipment"

Except Arri is German company.

I dropped my GH4 bad and nothing happened, also shot in rain and dirt and in the warzone.. Great, robust, versatile and amazingly reliable camera is all I can say.