PannySVHS

Your questions have already been answered here. You're simply just trolling at this point, and not very well at that. Not sure what exactly is is you ARE looking for..

Below is an approximate comparison of transfer curve for various Log and Sony's three versions of HLG.
From the Bolex PDF above:

The three versions of HLG that Sony cameras support (from https://xtremestuff.net/sony-and-hybrid-log-gamma-hlg/ ) - HLG3 (upper curve) is the closest to the Rec. 2100 standard :

A chart of various Log formats from https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64243940 (note the 3 EV spread in the high EV limit between the various curves). The highest DR curves look to be C-Log2, S-Log3 and V-Log - but of course they do that by being flatter in the important mid-range area i.e. fewer levels per EV, increasing the chance of banding if pushed too far in post. Note this chart is -10 to +10 EV vs. IRE 0 to 110%, the other two are -8 to +8 EV vs. 10-bit digital code values.

This is a fundamental split in the camera communities - those who like the look of cinema and those that like the look of video.
Yes, the video that @mercer posted was low-contrast / desaturated / greenish.  That's the look.  It's also the look of a great many feature films and high budget TV shows.




Notice the similar colour palette?  This one even includes it 🙂 

Some consider it THE look of cinema.
You might be thinking that you're interested in a neutral look because you aren't making action / thriller / horror movies, and that's fair, so where is the look with the natural skin tones?
To that, I ask, which look with natural skin tones are you talking about?






But, you meant a neutral look!  Sorry.
You must mean an image that has only been technically converted to a correct image...  like these.

 



But these don't look the same either  ...and yet they are shot with neutral lighting by professionals and even have test charts in them to ensure that the image is correctly exposed and balanced etc - these are literally test images!  If these images don't look the same then how the hell can any image be correct?
This is what I'm saying.     There is no neutral image.
The lighting angle changes the look.

The lighting ratio impacts the look.

Time of day impacts the look.

High key vs low key.


Just kidding!
Lenses impact the look.

Filters etc etc.
This is why I emphasise working in post.
Take the above image for example.  A little work in post, and voila - now you have a "more accurate" match!

Or what if you over exposed your camera drastically?  No problem if you know what to do in post..


(Source: https://cinematography.net/alexa-over/alexa-skin-over.html)
This is why trying to get the look you want by only looking at the camera and ignoring the other aspects, when they can completely override the differences between cameras is misguided.
Hell, with a simple transform you can turn one capable camera into another anyway:

(credit: Miguel Santana ILM)
I truly do understand the temptation of the camera body.  It has the most buttons, it's the thing that everything connects to, it's the complicated thing that everyone talks about, it costs lots of money etc.  They're also super cool, absolutely.
But they're not the defining object when creating the look, even if you literally buy one with a lens attached and only shoot in a 709 profile, then you're still shooting things that look different based on the lighting and composition and how you expose etc etc.
But what if you just want to shoot what is there and have it look nice.  Absolutely.  This is literally what I do.  I shoot travel with my GX85 and mostly a single lens, and it only shoots in rec709 profiles.
However, because of all the above factors, the footage will vary from shot to shot.  So in order to make it more uniform in the edit I learned to colour grade.  Let alone the absolutely horrific lighting that is around...  
Take this image I've shared previously:

Look at the sleeve of the jumper - it is a single colour - the lights are just very low-cost LEDs and although they looked white in person they are very different hues to the cameras eye.  Notice how that yellow is bleeding into his hand near his wrist and also into the lower part of the ladies face?
If you want good skin-tones - oh boy you better hope that you get good lighting!  Otherwise, colour grading is there to fix what your camera did, rather than ruin it.  Getting a neutral 709 video-style look with lighting like this would require a huge amount of work in post.
That's why these "which camera to buy to get good skin tones" always have a silent assumption before the question that say "assuming the world doesn't exist or if it did exist then assume it's perfect", which obviously isn't a very useful assumption.

My impression was that people like the Alexa image for everything.  The DR only matters if you're filming something that is high DR, and even then if you're watching it on a 709 display then the Alexa images have the same DR as every other camera.
I also find that Alexas look green in camera tests, but probably the main reason for loving the Alexa look is that when used on big productions or by people that know how to use it, the images look great.  However, the Alexa is just a very high quality RAW camera - the files that come out of it are as neutral as you can imagine.
It's the paradox of modern camera discussions.  The best looking images come from the most expensive cameras because the people who know that production design and colour grading is what makes great looking images are going to all that trouble anyway and so may as well rent an Alexa (or RED).  Would the production have looked as good if they shot it on a P4K or S1H?  I'd say maybe 95% as good - maybe 100%.  But, because the people using the P4K or S1H aren't using them in situations where they've put as much effort into production design or colour grading, those images don't look as good.
Not really my tastes.  Riza does a lot of work to light herself really well, but the diffusion and colour grading aren't to my tastes.  The image is too diffused and too cream and pastel green/brown for me.  Most of that is in her production design, considering that the blue and yellow in this shot looks relatively normal:

It's the "aesthetic" look that is trendy right now on YT, but Riza takes it to a whole new level.
In a way it's similar to this palette:

But compare the two shots above and notice that the bottom one is a lot crisper - Riza uses a huge amount of diffusion so everything looks hazy.
Maybe it's just my associations..  when I grew up the interiors that were the right age to be old and shitty were the Mission Brown ones, and compared to the colour schemes of the time it just looked drab and dull, which combined with the fact it was old and falling apart, really didn't enamour it to me!
I suspect that for the cultural references of the people making this content right now, this probably balances out the previous aesthetic choices in a way that makes them feel better about themselves and about life etc.  In times of change people get pretty stressed and going for a soft brown and green palette it's probably unconsciously evoking nature and naturalness in some way - which makes sense if you think about the existential threats of climate change and AI that we are currently facing.  People of this age are having climate anxiety in a big way, so it's a real thing in their world.

Here's a few images from the GF3, not exactly the best video camera in the world, but even it has some nice colour.  These are all shot with the Mir 37mm f2.8 with speed booster and wide open, and all shots are SOOC:



Obviously these are very challenging conditions with mixed colour temps and low light so the ISO probably wasn't at its native setting either, but not bad.
These all look a bit flat to me, even from such an old camera with a low DR compared to now, but my literally my first thought is to increase contrast and then evaluate the saturation.
I've analysed GX85 colour before in this thread: https://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/59121-gx85-alexa-conversion-and-colour-profile-investigations/
 
The default profiles are like most modern profiles, and bear a resemblance to some of the best colour in the business...
GX85 Natural Profile:

Alexa:

To get a sense of how similar these are, if they were technically correct those lines would go straight to the middle of the reference boxes on the overlay.  Obviously they're way off, but in a relatively similar way.
Obviously this is a dramatic simplification of the whole colour science, but it gives a sense of it.
My experience of the GH5 is that it it a real work-horse and that everything has been thought-through so that it quietly does the job and stays out of your way.  The image was practically indestructible, even if you tried.  I've posted these previously, but here's what happens if you try to break the image..  Here's the flattest image I could find - SOOC HLG:

With the most extreme amount of contrast you can make with the curves tool (literally a vertical line):

I think that was the 150Mbps IPB codec too - the 400Mbps ALL-I might be better again.
When I had the XC10 and was shooting 8-bit C-Log I was trying and failing to get good colour from it and trying to learn colour grading and colour management etc, and I was watching all these colour grading tutorials of people grading RAW Alexa and RED and BM footage and there was this smoothness and elegance in how it all worked - they adjusted this control and that control and the footage just glided around like it had infinite subtlety and richness in the files, but the XC10 footage was just the opposite.  
Then I bought the GH5 and the files felt exactly how all those colour grading tutorials looked - the files were just like velvet.  Of course, it's not quite as good as the high-end cine cameras, but the footage is seriously malleable and if you know what you're doing then you can really extract great images from it.
All modern cameras are like hypercars and most film-making uses only a tiny fraction of their potential.

Here's another video on the firmware that should be coming out within the next few hours:
 

M43 must come up with capable small bodies- PDAF and 4k 60fps. Instead, we've got very capable FF-sized bodies. I've still got some decent lenses for the system, but my patience is running thin as used M43 gear keeps going up (the opposite effect of what you'd think, but the need for small systems has skyrocketed).
I'm very curious to see what the new S5ii firmware does. Sure, it still has some limitations with regard to FF 60fps, but it makes up for it in other ways, especially tools.
I don't think Panasonic was expecting so many options for L mount APS-C. Sigma is going to start taking some market share from M43 IMO.

🤷‍♂️ 
It looks great to me. I'm not looking for an image that looks exactly like reality. It's definitely desaturated, but I don't agree that it's low contrast.
No offense to the photographer of that shot, but that looks like it could have been shot with any standard profile from a camcorder in auto mode.
As far as... how can I judge the image... look at the skin tones... the weight of the image. It looks and feels like a real movie.

And I'd be remiss if I didn't post this video from a British filmmaker named Paul Cook. It was the video that made me buy my 5D3 and install ML Raw on it and never look back. After 7 years, I'm still chasing what he was able to capture in an afternoon...
 

Good points. I guess it depends on what you're planning on shooting, or do shoot? I am only interested in narrative filmmaking, so I have a specific look I like. It's definitely a filmic look. I've always said that most cameras from 10 years ago could "essentially" and convincingly achieve a 70s film look.
But the look of modern cinema isn't really close to a film look. It looks nice but it doesn't seem like they're trying to emulate that like the original Alexa attempted.
Even on this forum, you'll get dozens of opinions about it. Many want the most resolution they can get. I'm still happy with the 1080p magic lantern raw from my 5D3.
But I'm probably a weirdo, I'm seriously considering buying an old camcorder to get a specific "cinema" color filter that Canon had on their older models.
Back in the day, Canon was known to have the "best" color. The original Panasonic mirrorless cameras also had very nice color. Sony was considered the worst. Now with the different log profiles and color space transforms, any camera can be made to look good. But if you can find a camera with a good rec709 profile, that you like, why not? Log and CSTs and LUTs are great and some will help to eek out an extra stop or two of dynamic range, but in a lot of cases, you can get by with the 8-10 stops that rec709 offers.
Here's another film that I was highly impressed by shot on the OG BMPCC by a British brother team called Cosmos. What's interesting about this is that they were able to make a Hollywood looking film that was released in theaters. They also decided to shoot in ProRes LT to save storage space using only one lens for 90% of the film. It's amazing what you can accomplish if you try. It's not the tool, but the craftsman using it.
 

I agree. His Sony work does not respond to me, neither in the edit, premise, lengthyness, choice of focal lengths, camera movement nor framing nor color palette and contrast. @mercer That Sigma 30mm is a thing I had been keeping in my mind. I am a sucker for 28mm on S35. Kendys Canon work was magic, his Sony uploads on his channel are video imo. Besides colour, movement, framing and lensing are not in the same league as his Canon library imho. I can relate to the impact of a camera on freewheeling video essay work. I still hold a G70 in high regard for the mojo it has in HD 24p. The only two pieces I shot with it are still oozing color magic and forced me to design my shots and movements instead of gimbleing through the world rather effortlessly. No effort means no magic in most of the instances.

I agree. His Sony work does not respond to me, neither in the edit, premise, lengthyness, choice of focal lengths, camera movement nor framing nor color palette and contrast. @mercer That Sigma 30mm is a thing I had been keeping in my mind. I am a sucker for 28mm on S35. Kendys Canon work was magic, his Sony uploads on his channel are video imo. Besides colour, movement, framing and lensing are not in the same league as his Canon library imho. I can relate to the impact of a camera on freewheeling video essay work. I still hold a G70 in high regard for the mojo it has in HD 24p. The only two pieces I shot with it are still oozing color magic and forced me to design my shots and movements instead of gimbleing through the world rather effortlessly. No effort means no magic in most of the instances.

I agree. His Sony work does not respond to me, neither in the edit, premise, lengthyness, choice of focal lengths, camera movement nor framing nor color palette and contrast. @mercer That Sigma 30mm is a thing I had been keeping in my mind. I am a sucker for 28mm on S35. Kendys Canon work was magic, his Sony uploads on his channel are video imo. Besides colour, movement, framing and lensing are not in the same league as his Canon library imho. I can relate to the impact of a camera on freewheeling video essay work. I still hold a G70 in high regard for the mojo it has in HD 24p. The only two pieces I shot with it are still oozing color magic and forced me to design my shots and movements instead of gimbleing through the world rather effortlessly. No effort means no magic in most of the instances.

@PannySVHS A kid in the toy store! haha Loved the (whole ; ) analogy, Marty! LOL
And I will add now something very straightforward to it... People here, there and everywhere tend to love the wrong ones... Feeling ourselves strictly excited for corporations sound to me like a man to have fantasies with the neighbour's wife rather than praising and paying attention to the wife who is the housekeeper and takes care of the children at home... ; ) The example of the recent purchase of RED by Nikon is the fine example of it, like to see some family business, after all, to be gone, this may occur in something good for the whole indie world... * Sigh * : X 
I believe " a bit " : D of education about what filmmaking actually is, I guess, it wouldn't hurt at all...
It is what it is! :- )

Whenever I start thinking about the beginning of the DSLR revolution or the Digital Revolution, I take my own advice and go back to look at some old videos that I love from those forgotten cameras.
This first round of films, from Kendy Ty and his t2i, I have linked to countless times, years ago, but I think they could be helpful or relevant to the OP's topic...
If I remember correctly, he used the t2i and the old Sigma 30mm 1.4. I believe he even created his own picture profile, in camera, for his earlier films.
Like so many others, he eventually moved onto a Sony 4K camera, but many people commented they preferred the look from his trusty, old t2i.
If there's a lesson here, it's simple... sometimes less is more. Sometimes the tool that gets the job done and is simple to work with, is better than wading through the minutiae of features and tech finding the best camera.

I got two Micro Cine Cameras and one Pocket OG. And the best thing is, I have hardly shot with them. So I feel every day like a kid in the toy store! The panel looks super exiting. How about a whole lotta love for it! 🙂 
 
 

Recently shown at NAB... What about to show a little bit of love for the most interesting brand for indies maybe ever? ; )
 

I highly recommend going to the source if you're interested in going deeper, here are a couple of interviews with Jill on Joker that I found to be fascinating and thought-provoking:
...and this interview with Jill on John Wick and other films where they even talk about specific shots etc:
Lots of info out there if you search and go looking for it 🙂 

The thumbnail of the XH2s and the profile picture of the guy look IR heavy indeed. It seems like he actually likes this look.😊

I want one!

I've been mentioning this before,that I found the GH5 much easier to grade than the S series. It has 709 as colour space vs V-Gamut on the S cameras, also two to 2.5 stops less dynamic range. For lit scenarios I was very fine with the full curve and gamut as contrast and color was much more stylized and designed. The GH5 in MK II alteration is still a camera I wanna check out with its creamy high resolution image. It's more classic and organic compared to the crispier image of the MK I. I have only seen one person ever with the MKII. It has 10bit in 60p 4K as well. And from the Mark I the beloved S16 crop or optional 2/3" mode via 2x digizoom. Is the latter without heavy aliasing and moiré on the GH5? @kye

Looks like it's only a problem with the nisi vnd 

Here's my recommendation for SOOC shooting - Sony AX100.  As Dave says "Sony AX100 looks better than your camera".
Just look at the nice contrast, saturation, and above all...  skintones!  and in mixed lighting no less!
Good luck getting that with a "better" camera - they all have far too much DR to give you a punchy image from their 709 LUTs or profiles.

I especially love the second shot. @mercerLooks fantastic. I have not come around filming anything for almost a year now unfortunately. All my colabs have moved themselves into the shady hideaways of oblivion and my aspirations to be a full time crewmember have been very low after my accident I had on a job. But your posts are some of the very few on this forum which inspire me to start filming again. S35 is fine for me on my S1H btw.:) Also waiting for some more fine reads from @QuickHitRecord  😊

They are not even dreaming of the same game, nor the craft, the passion or the work connected to a 3min narrative or a short experimental visual etude.