I am a fan of the Edelkrone gear for run-and-gun verite type work. Throw a GH4 on an EK Pocket Rig with their FocusPlus+ and you've got a compact, ergonomic, three-point stabilized setup with good follow focus capabilities. If you need it, put a Cavision 4x4 Matte Box on the front. If you need further stabilization, shooting 4K means that it's easy to do in post.

If you really need silky smooth footage, you could look into buying a gimbal, like the Varavon Birdycam, AllSteady-5, or even a CAME-7800?

How important is low-light performance for this project? The GH4 is limited in that regard. Most people don't like it, me included. The macro-blocking of ISO noise makes the picture fall apart quicker than a GH2, in my opinion. The ergonomics suck and the rolling shutter is worse than most current gen cameras, but on a gimbal the A7s could make a decent documentary camera.

Personally, I use the GH4 for documentary work and have it rigged out with a large cage setup with a matte box, follow focus, monitor, shotgun mic, dedicated sound recorder, hand grips, and a shoulder mount. It's very practical and surprisingly compact, but it's heavy as hell. Thinking about selling most of it and picking up a Pocket Rig + a gimbal for run-and-gun work, to be honest.

Opinions do differ, so as with all of these take this with a grain of salt, but the GH4 in 1080 has really minimal rolling shutter - I find it's a great handheld cam in 1080. 4k is another story, but it's not nearly as bad as the A7s in that regard. (To be fair, shooting the A7s in crop mode is said to help - I have no direct experience with that so can't really say, but it makes sense). The GH4 in low-light situations all depends on whether its noise characteristics bother you or not. It's certainly no A7s for low light (not even close, but nothing is). It doesn't bother me at all, but then I shot high speed stocks in 16mm and they didn't bother me either. The noise pattern up to 1600 feels organic, but there IS noise.

As to "how you rig it", with the GH4 in the kind of scenarios you describe, I either don't, use a monopod, or if practical a small stabilizer though that's not an option for long takes unless you have a high pain threshold of don't mind trudging about in the vest. But I'm from an experimental filmmaking background so approach everything in less-is-more mode. For sound, the shotgun-on-cam plus lav-on-subject, Bennett Miller style, is the tried and true (doesn't produce GOOD sound, but if you are solo with no sound person options are limited). I avoid the lav if I can, and have just started using the lav-to-pocket-recorder-on-subject trick to avoid wireless (so far so good), but that's personal again. I hate the sound of even the best/perfectly implemented lav mics even more than mediocre on-cam shotgun/cardoid sound unless the location's reflections make the lavs necessary, and I hate dealing with wireless.

But for run-and-gun verite its all about the ergonomics over all of these issues, and every filmmaker is going to have different needs for that. Personally, I find the GH series ergonomics (especially the 3 and the 4) better than other stills-body cameras, but I prefer the medium sized camcorder-with-handle ergonomics of the AF-100s and even the cam in a box Sonys (as long as dealing with menus is kept to a minimum). Again, its all personal - most doc folks I know love having the camera on their shoulder when it goes off of sticks, and I can't stand shooting that way. I also like to stay minimal and fast, so when a camera needs too many extras (eg your BMPCC handheld rig) I go to another camera, regardless of image quality. With verite doc work, magnificent technical specs are meaningless if you can't get to the right controls immediately without warning, can't see the viewfinder/LCD or have to worry about your external monitor crashing into something while following a subject down an unexpected narrow passage (alas, there goes the BMPCC), or have to focus on tech issues at the expense of on-the-fly composition.

@arnarfjodur -- yeah, the Tascam DR-60D is a very good sound solution for the price. I use one in the same manner that you describe, although I would add that you get a better readout of the levels on the device's screen than on a GH4, with peaking indicator lights, multiple channel monitoring, etc. Dual mono / dual stereo option does indeed serve as a safety feature, where another track is recorded at anywhere from -1 to -12dB. This has saved my skin in the past. I would say that the DR-70D looks like a significant step up from the 60D, offering 4 XLR channels in a more compact body. I'll be replacing my 60D as soon as it's released, supposedly this month.

I hate wireless too, but shooting documentaries solo without it is a really hard sell. On-camera shotgun for main sound is almost never a good option. It severely limits your composition options (no shots from further than 5', which is a weird aesthetic), you're going to get more background noise, and it's very likely that even with the best shockmount, you'll get some handling noise. You should have an on-camera shotgun feeding into your camera since it's better at least than built-in mics, but it shouldn't be your primary audio. It's annoying and imperfect, but I really believe that wireless lavs are the least bad option for shooting documentary sound solo. Used Sennheiser G2s and G3s sell for reasonable prices on eBay, and if you keep an eye out you may score an even better deal on a used Lectrosonic set. Just watch out for used units with banned frequency blocks, since a lot of people are selling those for dirt cheap. Shure and Sony makes decent wireless kits too, but I wouldn't leave those brands. Beware of cheap Azden units, especially. I've thought about using a compact field recorder placed on the talent instead of a wireless setup, but the obvious problem with that is that you can't monitor it. That's just as bad as not being able to look at your screen / monitor while filming. You could double team it with a lav feeding into a wireless recorder which is also sending the signal out to a wireless transmitter for 2nd system recording / monitoring, but that's an added level of complexity where it isn't really needed, provided that you can afford a decent wireless kit.

To answer your other question, there are different opinions here but I find that follow focuses help a lot with ergonomics. Maybe I'm just used to shooting that way, but rotating something on the camera's z axis feels weird to me. The benefit of the Edelkrone unit I mentioned is that it's integrated into two hand grips, which is very nice when combined with a basic shoulder support system.

I also am not a huge fan of shoulder support, being as that I'm freakishly tall and that puts the camera too high up for most shots, but if it weren't for that reason I think I'd use it a lot more.

With the GH4, I just flip out the screen to the side, and use that for monitoring picture. The focus peaking and zebra stripes are both very well implemented, and I only use a field monitor when I can afford to have a heavier camera rig, in which case I use a 7" articulating arm to place it on the right, in front of my follow focus.

What about a small gymbal like this: http://shop.chdntech.com/nebula/nebula4000-lite-gyroscope-gimbal-stabilizer-bmpcc-gh4-nex-eos-m-a7s.html

See demo:

Does it make any sense for my situation? Will it be ok to use for long period of time, can I pull focus and operate and keep it stable? I've never touched a gymbal before, so I don't know anything of the practicality of it.

I love the idea of a gimbal this size with a gh4, but doubt it would stand up to much rough treatment, which is inevitable with run and gun. I think you're better off with a shouder rig, which would allow you to mount your audio stuff when you're flying solo. You don't need to spend a fortune - I built mine out of parts from different vendors on ebay and from some of the deals on offer here. I use a scuba diver's belt weight screwed and epoxied to a 15mm railblock as a counterweight for instance - a regular one will run you 90$ and above.

Those gimbals might only be good for a few shots. I'm pretty sure you'll get tired. The pocket rig isn't bad, I've been using the knock off. It's very compact and you can shoot all day if you improvise it was shoulder mount.

@IronFilm The suggestion makes sense in many ways. The ergonomics and the price point fits, for sure. My only concern is that the footage might stick out a bit from something shot on C300 (which is the benchmark the client has), it has a limited dynamic range and is a bit contrasty and sharp directly from camera. I'm not saying it's bad, but it will be a bit different, even though it is not a production where the look is everything.

Good suggestion though.

@IronFilm I have a friend who owns one and have used it on several occasions. I'm not dissing it, it can be great in the right hands, it's just that after having gotten used to big dynamic range and high bitrate, flat capturing, it's hard to go back - shooting with the AF100 in some ways requires more skill and precision.

I thought the EVF on the GH4 was OK, is there a big benefit using the Kamerar over the built in EVF directly?